Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2006-01-26 MinutesCity of Miami City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33133 www.ci.miami.fl.us Meeting Minutes Thursday, January 26, 2006 9:00 AM PLANNING AND ZONING City Hall Commission Chambers City Commission Manuel A. Diaz, Mayor Angel Gonzalez, Chairman Johnny L. Winton, Vice Chairman Joe Sanchez, Commissioner District Three Tomas Regalado, Commissioner District Four Michelle Spence -Jones, Commissioner District Five Joe Arriola, City Manager Jorge L. Fernandez, City Attorney Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 CONTENTS PR - PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS MV - MAYORAL VETOES AM - APPROVING MINUTES CA - CONSENT AGENDA M - MAYOR'S ITEMS D1 - DISTRICT 1 ITEMS D2 - DISTRICT 2 ITEMS D3 - DISTRICT 3 ITEMS D4 - DISTRICT 4 ITEMS D5 - DISTRICT 5 ITEMS PH - PUBLIC HEARINGS SR - SECOND READING ORDINANCES FR - FIRST READING ORDINANCES RE - RESOLUTIONS DI - DISCUSSION ITEMS The minutes are transcribed verbatim. Periodically agenda items are revisited during a meeting. "[Later...]" refers to discussions that were interrupted and later continued. PART B PZ - PLANNING AND ZONING ITEMS Ciry of Miami Page 2 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 9:00 A.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Present: Chairman Gonzalez, Vice Chairman Winton, Commissioner Sanchez, Commissioner Regalado and Commissioner Spence -Jones On the 26th day of January 2006, 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 by Chairman Angel Gonzalez at 2:25 a.m., recessed at 10:36 a.m., reconvened at 11:00, with Commissioner Winton absent, recessed at 12:27, reconvened at 2:39 p.m., with Commissioners Regalado and Spence -Jones absent, recessed at 8:04 p.m., reconvened at 8:10 p.m., and adjourned at 8:19 p.m. Note for the Record: Note for the Record: Note for the Record: ALSO PRESENT: Commissioner Winton entered the meeting at 9:39 a.m. Commissioner Regalado entered meeting at 2:53 p. m. Commissioner Spence -Jones entered meeting at 2: 56 p.m. Joe Arriola, City Manager Jorge L. Fernandez, City Attorney Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk Chairman Gonzalez: Welcome to the January 26, 2006, meeting of the City of Miami City Commission, in the historic chambers. The members of the City Commission are Joe Sanchez, Tomas Regalado, Michelle Spence -Jones, Johnny Winton, Vice Chairman, and myself your Chairman, Angel Gonzalez. Also on the dias are Joe Arriola, the City Manager; Jorge L. Fernandez, the City Attorney; and Priscilla Thompson, the City Clerk. The meeting will be opened with a prayer by Commissioner Sanchez. Prayer and pledge of allegiance delivered PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS PR.1 06-00097 CEREMONIAL ITEM Name of Honoree City of Miami Department of Fire Rescue Carlos Rodriguez Fausto Callava Liza Gallardo Walton Haydee Regueyra Presenter Mayor Diaz Commissioner Regalado Commissioner Regalado Commissioner Regalado Commissioner Regalado 06-00097 Protocol Program.pdf Protocol Item Commendation Salute Certificate of Appreciation Certificate of Appreciation Certificate of Appreciation 1. Commissioner Regalado honored Officer Eduardo Diaz and Al Arias, Supervisor of Florida Power & Light, who went beyond the call of duty in providing extraordinary service to the residents of Silver Bluff during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina; he further recognized Eloy Villasuso, spokeman for Florida Power & Light. 2. Commissioner Regalado presented Certificates of Appreciation to Liza Gallardo Walton, West Little Havana NET Director; Haydee Regueyra, Coral Way NET Director, and Fausto Callava, Flagami NET Director, who went above and beyond the call of duty in spending countless hours City of Miami Page 3 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 MAYORAL VETOES working with the members of the Commission and the community during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. 3. A salute was presented by Commissioner Regalado to Carlos Rodriguez, of Las Culebrinas Restaurant, who provided hot food for residents of the Flagami area, during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Chairman Gonzalez: Now we will have the presentations and proclamations. I believe Commissioner Regalado is the only Commissioner that has presentations today; is that correct? Commissioner, go ahead. Presentations made. NO MAYORAL VETOES Chairman Gonzalez: Do we have any mayoral vetoes? We don't, I think. We don't have any mayoral vetoes, right? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): No, we don't, sir. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. APPROVING THE MINUTES OF THE FOLLOWING MEETINGS: Motion by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, to APPROVED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Winton ORDER OF DAY Chairman Gonzalez: OK. We need to approve the minutes, and what we're going to do today is, instead of going meeting by meeting, I'm going to read all the meetings that we need approval, and then we're going to make one motion to approve all at one time. I'm going to ask a motion to approve the special Commission meeting of June 24, 2002, the regular meeting of May 8, 2003, regular meeting of June 12, 2003, a special meeting of June 18, 2003, a special meeting of June 24, 2003, regular meeting of June 25, 2003, regular and planning and zoning meeting of July 17, 2003, the regular meeting of December 15, 2005, the planning and zoning meeting of December 15, 2005. Do I hear a motion? Commissioner Sanchez: So move. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second All in favor, say "aye. If The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Motion carries. Chairman Gonzalez: Now I will have the City Attorney, who will read the procedures to be followed during this meeting. Mr. City Attorney. City of Miami Page 4 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, members of the audience, any person who is a lobbyist must register with the City Clerk before appearing in front of the City Commission. A copy of the code section about "lobbyists" is available in the City Clerk's Office. The material in connection with each item appearing on the agenda is available for inspection during business hours at the City Clerk's Office and on-line at www.miamigov.com <http://www.miamigov.com>. Formal action may be taken on any item discussed or added to this agenda. All decisions of the City Commission are final, except that the Mayor may veto certain items approved by the City Commission within ten calendar days of the Commission action. The Commission may override such veto by a four fifth vote. Anyone wishing to appeal any decision made by this City Commission for any matter at this meeting may need a verbatim transcript or record of the item on which the appeal will be based Absolutely no cell phones, beepers, or other audible sounds or ringing devices are permitted in the Commission chambers. Please silence those devices now. Any person making impertinent or slanderous remarks or who becomes unruly while addressing the Commission, shall be barred from further attending Commission meetings, unless permission to continue or again address the Commission is granted by a vote of the Commission. No clapping, applauding, heckling or verbal outbursts in support or opposition to a speaker or a Commissioner are allowed. No signs or placards are allowed in the chambers. Persons exiting the chamber shall do so quietly. Persons may address the City Commission on items appearing on the public hearings portion of the agenda, and on items where public input is solicited by the Commission. Persons wishing to speak should inform the City Clerk as soon as possible. At the time the item is heard the person who will speak should approach the microphone and wait to be recognized. Any person with a disability requiring auxiliary aids and services for this meeting may not jy the City Clerk. The lunch recess will begin at the conclusion of deliberation of the agenda item being considered at noon, and this meeting will end either at the conclusion of deliberation of the agenda item being considered at 10 p.m. or at the conclusion of the regularly scheduled agenda, whichever occurs first. The items will be heard in the numbered sequence on the agenda, except for the PZ (planning & zoning) items, which will begin in their numbered sequence after 10 a.m. this morning. The following items are withdrawn from the agenda; please take note: Public hearing number 2 is being withdrawn from the agenda and will not be heard today. Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. "[Later...J" Chairman Gonzalez: Now I'm going to ask you to please bear with me. What I would like to do now is to state the -- hold the blue pages of the Commissioners for the end, and then go ahead and do the agenda, follow the regular agenda, and then, at the end, take the blue pages. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. "[Later."' ' Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Now, we're going to move to the PZ (planning and zoning) agenda. Before doing that, Mr. City Attorney, I believe you need some time. You're recognized. Mr. Fernandez: If I can impose on the Commissioners for a five-, ten- minute break recess. There are some items that I need to review to be ready for you to go through it very fast, so -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Fernandez: -- time now is time gained later. Chairman Gonzalez: Let's take a ten-minute recess. Yes, sir. City of Miami Page 5 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, before we recess, I see some residents of an area who, 30 days ago, were told that it would be here in this agenda today, but it is not in the agenda, and I don't think that they should stay here. Leo, the item that you're interested is not in the agenda. Anything that is not in the agenda will not be heard -- Mr. Fernandez: No, not at all. Commissioner Regalado: -- so, you know, we'll -- I guess it would appear in the agenda, whenever it appears. Maybe next month, but you don't have to stay because the item of your interest is not in this agenda. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): So are we -- ? Mr. Fernandez: In recess for ten minutes. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Let's take a ten-minute recess. Mr. Fernandez: Microphone. Chairman Gonzalez: Pardon me? Mr. Fernandez: You declare a recess for ten minutes? Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir, ten-minute recess. Mr. Fernandez: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. City of Miami Page 6 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 CA.1 05-01504 Office of the City Attorney CONSENT AGENDA RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY CHARMAINE HUDSON, WITHOUT ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $50,000 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 CHARMAINE HUDSON VS. CITY OF MIAMI, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, CASE NO. 03-16373 CA (15), 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. 653. 05-01504 Legislation.pdf 05-01504 Cover Memo.pdf 05-01504 Budget Memo.pdf This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Winton CA.2 06-00047 Department of Capital Improvement Programs/Transpor tation R-06-0042 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. 04-05-109, THAT THE FIRMS MOST QUALIFIED TO PROVIDE SERVICES FOR THE VIRGINIA KEY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND REMEDIATION, IN RANK ORDER ARE: (1) INTERCOUNTY US LABS, (2) CAMP DRESSER & MCKEE, AND (3) WRS INFRASTRUCTURE & ENVIRONMENT, INC.; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH INTERCOUNTY US LABS, THE TOP -RANKED FIRM; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SECOND -RANKED IN THE EVENT NEGOTIATIONS FAIL WITH THE TOP -RANKED FIRM, OR UNTIL A CONTRACT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY NEGOTIATED; DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PRESENT THE NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL. City of Miami Page 7 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 06-00047 Legislation.pdf 06-00047 Summary Form.pdf 06-00047 Memo.pdf 06-00047 Memo 2.pdf 06-00047 Synopsis.pdf 06-00047 Parking Forms.pdf 06-00047 RFP Cover Page.pdf 06-00047 Pre Public Notice.pdf 06-00047 Scope of Work.pdf Motion by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-06-0050 Chairman Gonzalez: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: CA.2 is a resolution. I respectfully request that it be pulled for discussion; just have some questions pertaining to this item. It is an item pertaining to the Department of Capital Improvements, and if we could have the executive director step up to the mike. This contract, my understanding, covers everything from the assessment to the entire clean-up, but it's my understanding that the funding -- there's only funding for assessment now. I want to know what's going to be the steps. How is this going to be done? This is -- it's my understanding, it's a total of $45 million for the clean-up, correct? Mary Conway: Mary Conway, CIP (Capital Improvements Program). The total of 45 million is the worst case estimate that DERM (Department of Environmental Resources Management), in conjunction with the City, have determined may be the cost for the total clean-up at the Virginia Key site. The item that's before you today is simply approving the rank order of the firms that went through a competitive selections process, and then what will be brought back before you is only phase I, which is estimated to cost no more than a million dollars, which is the assessment - - all of the environmental testing and the assessment -- to determine the extent so that we'll know exactly how much the cleanup will cost. There is an option in the contract to actually have the selected firm, once the assessment is completed, also do the cleanup on site. Funds will have to be identified, and we'll work in partnership with DERM. Alicia Cuervo Schreiber (Chief of Operations): Commissioners, Alicia Cuervo Schrieber. The County is paying the $650, 000 for the assessment and has passed a resolution identifying up to $45 million for the clean-up. They broke that down earlier last year. The details of that have not been ironed out, but that is a funding source that we would be seeking. Commissioner Sanchez: But different phases are going to have an estimated cost, so in other words, what I'm requesting from this resolution, being that worst case scenario, you're talking about $45 million, I want to see more transparency as to the amounts as we go along the process, especially when it comes in front of us on a consent agenda item, so that's all that I'm asking for. We want to be more informed as to the numbers pertaining to the entire process -- Ms. Cuervo Schreiber: Commissioner -- Commissioner Sanchez: -- because you have a resolution right here, and basically, you know, thanks through gathering information, meetings through you, we estimate that possibly the costs for the assessment will possibly be around the ballpark figure, about $750,000; yet, it's not stated in this resolution. City of Miami Page 8 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Ms. Cuervo Schreiber: And Commissioner, I apologize. I will clarifi, it. This resolution is only to select the firm. However, the dollar amounts will come in a subsequent Commission meeting, where we will outline the costs, the negotiated amount, and the entire cost of the project. This is just for the selection of the firm. Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Need a motion to approve. Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, so move. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion to approve CA.2 and we have a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. CA.3 06-00048 RESOLUTION Department of A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH Police ATTACHMENT(S), ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS NO. 04-05-054R, THAT THE FIRMS MOST QUALIFIED TO PROVIDE TOWING SERVICES FOR POLICE/FIRE DISPATCHED TOWING AND WRECKER SERVICES FOR PRIVATE VEHICLES, AND TOWING OF CITY -OWNED, LEASED, OR RENTED VEHICLES, FOR THE DEPARTMENTS OF POLICE AND GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTATION ARE: NU -WAY TOWING SERVICE, INC.; MIDTOWN TOWING OF MIAMI, INC.; DOWNTOWN TOWING COMPANY; BLANCO TOWING, INC., D/B/A FREEWAY TOWING; DIAZ TOWING, INC.; BANOS TOWING SERVICES CORP.; TED & STAN'S TOWING SERVICE, INC.; AND MOLINA TOWING, INC.; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TOWING/WRECKER AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM(S), WITH SAID FIRMS, FOR A THREE-YEAR PERIOD, WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND FOR TWO (2) ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, FOR AN INITIAL ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $182,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET OF THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE , ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.290201.6.270, IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $100,000, AND FROM THE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET OF THE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 503001.420905.6.340, IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $82,000, WITH FUTURE FISCAL YEAR FUNDING, SUBJECT ONLY TO BUDGETARY APPROVAL. City of Miami Page 9 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 06-00048 Legislation.pdf Exhibit 1.pdf Exhibit 2.pdf Exhibit 3.pdf Exhibit 4.pdf Exhibit 5.pdf Exhibit 6.pdf Exhibit 7.pdf Exhibit 8.pdf Exhibit 9.pdf Exhibit 10.pdf Exhibit 11.pdf Exhibit 12.pdf Exhibit 13.pdf Exhibit 14.pdf Exhibit 15.pdf Summary Form.pdf Summary Fact Sheet.pdf This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Winton CA.4 06-00049 Department of Solid Waste R-06-0043 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF WAUSAU TILE, INC., RECEIVED AUGUST 22, 2005, PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 04-05-128, FOR THE PURCHASE OF 400 LITTER CONTAINERS (MODEL NO. MF3022), FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF SOLID WASTE, FOR AN INITIAL TWO (2) YEAR PERIOD, WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR TWO (2) ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $266,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $146,000, FROM THE FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ("CIP") ACCOUNT NO. 353019.329401.6.840-B73206, AND AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $120,000, FROM THE FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006 CIP ACCOUNT NO. 353018.329401.6.840. 06-00049 Legislation.pdf 06-00049 Summary Form.pdf 06-00049 Memo.pdf 06-00049 Award Recomendation.pdf 06-00049 Tabulation of Bids.pdf 06-00049 Bid Security List.pdf Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-06-0051 City of Miami Page 10 Primed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Direction to the Administration by Commissioner Spence -Jones to pull together the departments of Public Works, NET, other appropriate staff, and neighborhood associations, to establish a strategy for cleaning up the neighborhoods. Chairman Gonzalez: Commissioner Spence -Jones. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yes. CA.4. I just have some questions for Solid Waste just on this item. First thing, could you let -- give me an idea about how many additional -- how many cans are already currently in District 5? I know that we had a discussion about it, but I'm just trying to get a better sense of it. Mario Soldevilla: Mario Soldevilla, director of Solid Waste. Commissioner, right now I have at least 95 cans in District 5. I know that there are more. We have a total of 648 in the City. The City is divided basically in the north and south. The north area, which really covers most -- you know, most of your district; most of District 1 and District 2 also, has around 300 -- yeah, 300 cans total. The south end has about 398. It's because it's a little bit larger -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Mr. Soldevilla: -- and also because of the different corridors, so in District 5, at least 95 and possibly more. We're currently doing a physical inventory of all of the cans in the City's four locations. I'm hoping to put that in the computer so that we can get a map (UNINTELLIGIBLE). Commissioner Spence -Jones: As I stated earlier, when -- during our discussion on this, one of the concerns that I have in District 5, with all the abandoned lots, abandoned houses in many of the communities throughout my district, one of the things that I'm finding that is a true problem is the amount of trash that's in the district, and in order for me to attract, you know, home buyers, which we had a -- just a wonderful home buyers' ribbon -cutting ceremony recently where new homeowners was coming to Model City. That's a discouraging fact to come to a neighborhood and it's trash everywhere. Now, I have to commend you, though, because I can say to you that the corridors in the major avenues are being kept really well and very clean, so at least I want to acknowledge you and your team for doing that, but I also would like to direct the City Manager to at least maybe perhaps pull together some of the major departments, like Public Works, NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team), and all of those individuals to look at a strategy on how we address cleaning up the neighborhoods, because the corridors are great, but as you explained to me -- I just want to be clear -- that you don't really go inside the neighborhoods -- Mr. Soldevilla: That's correct. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- right? Mr. Soldevilla: Correct. Commissioner Spence -Jones: And many of my homeowners, you know, complain that, you know, there's trash around. Mr. Soldevilla: Um -hum. Commissioner Spence -Jones: You do a great job of picking up the garbage cans, but we just need to come up with a strategy to address neighborhood, and it's just not city government; we need to also try to figure out a way to -- Mr. Soldevilla: Right. City of Miami Page 11 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- get neighborhood associations involved in that -- Mr. Soldevilla: Yeah. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- but I want to commend you on at least keeping the major roadways clean, and hopefully, we can work together to come up with strategies to clean them up. Mr. Soldevilla: Thanks. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez.: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: I have a question on this item also. The funds for this particular item, it says it's coming from CIP (Capital Improvements Program) account number whatever. How did the money get into the CIP account? I mean, is this general fund money? Mr. Soldevilla: No, sir, these are impact fee monies. Vice Chairman Winton: Impact fee money. Mr. Soldevilla: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. That's all I wanted to know. I just wanted to understand. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Any further questions? Hearing none, we need a motion. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion and we have a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Motion carries. CA.5 06-00055 RESOLUTION Office of the City A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE Attorney ALLOCATION OF FUNDS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $49,000, FROM FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006 BUDGETED FUNDS OF THE OFFICE OF HEARING BOARDS, ACCOUNT NO. 001000.820101.6340.25019, FOR PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION TO SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD, INCLUDING ANY REQUIRED RELATED LITIGATION SERVICES. 06-00055 Legislation.pdf 06-00055 Cover Memo.pdf 06-00055 Budget Memo 2.pdf This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda. City of Miami Page 12 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Winton R-06-0044 CA.6 06-00056 RESOLUTION Office of the City A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE Attorney ALLOCATION OF FUNDS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $39,000, FROM FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006 BUDGETED FUNDS OF THE CIVIL SERVICE OFFICE, ACCOUNT NO. 240101-250, FOR PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION TO SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, INCLUDING ANY REQUIRED RELATED LITIGATION SERVICES. 06-00056 Legislation.pdf 06-00056 Cover Memo.pdf 06-00056 Budget Memo.pdf This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Winton R-06-0045 CA.7 06-00057 RESOLUTION Office of the City A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE Attorney ALLOCATION OF FUNDS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $15,000, FROM FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006 BUDGETED FUNDS OF THE OFFICE OF HEARING BOARDS, ACCOUNT NO. 001000.820101.6340.25019, FOR PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION TO SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR THE NUISANCE ABATEMENT BOARD, INCLUDING ANY REQUIRED RELATED LITIGATION SERVICES. 06-00057 Legislation.pdf 06-00057 Cover Memo.pdf 06-00057 Budget Memo.pdf This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Winton R-06-0046 CA.8 06-00058 RESOLUTION Homeless Programs A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), ESTABLISHING A NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "HOMELESS EMERGENCY MOTEL FUNDS" AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,000, CONSISTING OF AN AWARD RECEIVED FROM MIAMI-DADE COUNTY THROUGH THE MIAMI-DADE COUNTY HOMELESS TRUST, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENHANCING THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI HOMELESS PROGRAM AND SPECIFICALLY FOR EMERGENCY MOTEL City of Miami Page 13 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 FUNDS FOR HOMELESS FAMILIES WAITING FOR BED AVAILABILITY AT AN EMERGENCY SHELTER OR TRANSITIONAL HOUSING; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, TO IMPLEMENT ACCEPTANCE OF SAID AWARD. 06-00058 Legislation.pdf 06-00058 Exhibit 1.pdf 06-00058 Exhibit 2.pdf 06-00058 Exhibit 3.pdf 06-00058 Exhibit 4.pdf 06-00058 Summary Form.pdf This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Winton R-06-0047 CA.9 05-01433 RESOLUTION Homeless Programs A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ESTABLISHING A NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "HOMELESS IDENTIFICATION FUNDS" AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,000, CONSISTING OF A GRANT AWARD RECEIVED FROM THE MIAMI COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS, INC., FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENHANCING THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI HOMELESS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND SPECIFICALLY TO PROVIDE STATE OF FLORIDA IDENTIFICATION CARDS FOR HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO IMPLEMENT ACCEPTANCE OF SAID GRANT AWARD. 05-01433 Legislation.pdf 05-01433 Summary Form.pdf 05-01433 Letter .pdf This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Winton R-06-0048 CA.10 06-00059 RESOLUTION Homeless Programs A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), ESTABLISHING A NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "HOMELESS PROGRAM DONATIONS 2005" AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $13,500, CONSISTING OF AN AWARD RECEIVED FROM MIAMI-DADE COUNTY THROUGH THE MIAMI-DADE HOMELESS TRUST, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING THE POSITION OF FEEDING COORDINATOR TO THE HOMELESS STREET FEEDING PROJECT; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, TO IMPLEMENT ACCEPTANCE OF SAID AWARD. City of Miami Page 14 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 06-00059 Legislation.pdf 06-00059 Exhibit 1.pdf 06-00059 Exhibit 2.pdf 06-00059 Summary Form.pdf This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Winton R-06-0049 Adopted the Consent Agenda Motion by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, 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, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Winton Consent Minutes Chairman Gonzalez: Do any of the Commissioners wishes to have any of the items removed from the consent agenda? Commissioner Sanchez: For discussion -- Chairman Gonzalez: For discussion. Commissioner Sanchez: -- CA.2 Commissioner Spence -Jones: CA (Consent Agenda) -- Chairman Gonzalez: CA.2. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- 4 I'd like to discuss, too. Chairman Gonzalez: Which one? Commissioner Spence -Jones: CA.4. Chairman Gonzalez: CA.4. Commissioner Sanchez: CA.2, CA.4, which one? Chairman Gonzalez: Any other items? Mr. Manager, wants to pull any items? Joe Arriola (City Manager): No, sir. Chairman Gonzalez.: All right. We need a motion to approve the balance of the consent agenda. Commissioner Sanchez: So move. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion and we have a second. All in favor, say "aye." City of Miami Page 15 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Motion carries. City of Miami Page 16 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 MAYOR AND COMMISSIONER'S ITEMS CITYWIDE HONORABLE MAYOR MANUEL A. DIAZ DISTRICT 1 CHAIRMAN ANGEL GONZALEZ DISTRICT 2 VICE CHAIRMAN JOHNNY L. WINTON DISTRICT 3 COMMISSIONER JOE SANCHEZ DISTRICT 4 COMMISSIONER TOMAS REGALADO D4.1 06-00094 DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PROPOSED PLACEMENT AND RENDERINGS OF THE CUBAN MUSEUM PROJECT AT ROBERT KING HIGH PARK. 06-00094 Memo .pdf 06-00094 Submittal Proposal.pdf DEFERRED A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Winton absent, to defer Item D4. I to the City Commission meeting currently scheduled for February 9, 2006. Chairman Gonzalez: Now we can go back to the blue pages. Do we have anything from the Mayor? No. I don't have anything myself. Commissioner Rega -- I'm sorry. Yeah, Commissioner Regalado, you have anything? Commissioner Regalado: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I do. I have an item regarding the Cuban Museum project at Robert King High, and we went on several times under discussion on this matter and the members of the Museum had met with the Administration. I know that they have met with Alicia Cuervo and the City Manager, and my understanding is that the City is ready to proceed. They have the funding from the GOB (General Obligation Bond) bond issue from the County, and I just don't know if, Alicia, what we know -- what you need from the Commission to proceed is just a -- to confirm the will of the City Commission to enter into a tri party agreement with the County and the Cuban Museum, provided that the City does not provide money to build the museum, and that they maintain the facilities throughout existence, is that -- that's my understanding of my conversation with you. Alicia Cuervo Schreiber (Chief of Operations): Commissioner, Alicia Cuervo Schreiber. The County did award dollars to the Cuban Memorial Museum for a location that should be coordinated between the Museum and the County. The County has been approached by the City of Miami Page 17 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Museum; that they would like to put it at the Robert King High location, which the County would need some kind of confirmation from the City of Miami that the City does approve that location. We did scope the site just to see if there was any deed restrictions, and we found none, and to allow the Commission to make that decision, if that was a desirable location, to allow them to proceed. The City would not be constructing this museum. It's a County project with County dollars, which are available, starting this year. Commissioner Regalado: OK, so my motion will be to direct the Administration to continue the conversations and to confirm the will of the City of Miami Commission to enter in an agreement to build the Cuban Museum at Robert King High Park. Is that, Mr. City Attorney -- Mr. City Manager, are you OK with that? Joe Arriola (City Manager): No. You know, obviously, I do whatever you guys tell me to do. I have said from the very beginning that I'm totally against putting a museum in this park or any park. We're talking about constantly more park space, more park space, more park space, and now we reverse ourselves and we put a museum in a park that doesn't make any sense. I do whatever you guys tell me, but you're going to have to tell me to put it in here because this is not a good idea. Commissioner Regalado: OK, so -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Sanchez: There's no second. Commissioner Regalado: -- I think what the City Manager is important -- because what he said is important because I was told that the people from the museum had met with you and you have said that you support the project. Mr. Arriola: That's not what I said (INAUDIBLE) -- Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Regalado: They lied, so what this mean is that we are also reversing the City Commission's decision to build museums in Bicentennial Park, right? Mr. Arriola: No, Commissioner. You know, you always want to change things. Commissioner Regalado: No, no, I don't want to change things. Mr. Arriola: Yes, you do. Commissioner Regalado: You said in any park, sir. Mr. Arriola: No. I said -- Commissioner Regalado: In any park. Mr. Arriola: Yeah, you always change things. Your demagoguery is really exciting here. Let me tell you something. Commissioner Regalado: Sir, you don't have to in -- Mr. Arriola: They brought me -- City of Miami Page 18 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Regalado: Mr. City Manager, you don't have to insult me. Mr. Arriola: Excuse me a second I'm speaking. Commissioner Regalado: You don't have to insult an elected official. You are an employee, a hired hand. Mr. Arriola: Not yours, not yours, and not a hired hand. Commissioner Regalado: Of course -- Mr. Arriola: OK. Commissioner Regalado: -- you're not my employee, sir -- Mr. Arriola: OK, but let me tell you -- Commissioner Regalado: -- but -- Mr. Arriola: -- a little something. You pushed this park -- this museum into this park I originally said there's no way. I follow the lead of the Commission. This is a huge mistake putting a museum park at Robert King High. Nobody at Robert King High is agreeing with it. This is insane. This has nothing to do with any other park This museum at a park that has zero traffic, and it's called a Cuban museum. It's totally insane. You guys want to put it there, you put it there, but I have the right to tell you that this is a huge, huge mistake, and I've been against the project from very beginning. If you're going to put a Cuban museum, put him on Southwest 8th Street, you put it on Flagler, you put it anywhere you want, but don't put it where nobody goes to, at a hidden park where kids go play every day. This is a totally, totally out of place, and I've expressed this all along. You've been pushing all along for this thing, and I'm not agreeing, and you guys do whatever you want, but I have a right to tell you, this is a huge mistake. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Sanchez, recognized. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Look, we all want to help them get a site. They're a great organization. We want to work with them to find a site. They're receiving money from the County. We want to assist them to succeed in the funding. The site in itself, really that site -- and I have looked at it because before you got involved, I had worked with them on trying to find an ideal site. It's about location, location, location. I visited the park to see where the museum was going to be at. If there's no other alternative, no other site, I'm prepared to support him on that site, but I think there's an opportunity for other sites in the City where they're closer to the community, especially they're closer to the community they're going to showcase with the history, which is the Cuban community, and there has to be an avenue for us to try to find a location somewhere in the heart of Little Havana, whether it be 8th Street, Flagler, Flagami. You know, once again, it's about location, and if we cannot find another site closer to the heart of Miami, then I am prepared to support the park site, but I think that we need to be prudent on this, to make sure that if we work together, the funding is not lost, it's not about the location. The County has already committed the money to them. It's about the City, the County, and the organization working together to find a site, so let's focus on finding them a reasonable site. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, if 1 may. City of Miami Page 19 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: Commissioner Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: That's precisely what I have been follow. In fact, I have only had one single meeting with the museum people after they met with the Manager, and they told me that the Manager had met with them and told them, for Robert King High, go see Commissioner Regalado. We met. They met back again with the Manager, and as early as yesterday they told me, Mr. Diego Suarez and Mr. Ofelia Tabares -- Dr. Ofelia Tabares that they had the support of the Administration. Had I known that they did not have the support of the Administration, 1 would just have said now, well, let's try to look for another alternative, but apparently, things change or the people from the museum just lied to me, simple as that. They lied to me about what the Manager have told them, but these are very respected individuals in the community, and I thought that they had met -- in fact, they met with Alicia; they met with the Manager, and -- so I will just try to defer this item to go back and talk to them. In fact, I think that what -- Commissioner Sanchez says makes sense. If there is no other alternative -- they do have $10 million, which they have to start using in the next three months because they're going to lose the GOB bond issue. Ten million dollars, which is enough to build a building of the size that they wanted, 10,000 square feet, and on their group, they have the money to maintain and support the museum at no cost to the City, so I guess that I will defer the item to the next Commission meeting to see if they can come up with the other items. Chairman Gonzalez: OK We have a motion to defer. Mr. Arriola: Commissioner, they wouldn't be losing the money. Chairman Gonzalez: Do I hear a second? Mr. Arriola: The money -- they wouldn't be losing the money. The money would just be moved back one year. They would not be losing the money. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion to defer. Do we hear a second? Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: And we hear a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Motion carries. D4.2 06-00095 DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION ABOUT MODIFYING THE CRITERIA CURRENTLY USED TO CALCULATE PENSIONS FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION BY UTILIZING SALARY ONLY AS OPPOSED TO SALARY AND BENEFITS. 06-00095 Memo.pdf DISCUSSED Direction to the Administration by Commissioner Regalado requesting a report detailing the impact of utilizing salary only for the calculations of Commissioners' pensions. Note for the Record: For discussion relating to Item D4.2, please refer to minutes located under Item FR.1. Chairman Gonzalez: Do you have any other items on your blue pages, Commissioner City of Miami Page 20 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Regalado? Commissioner Regalado: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I have the discussion about the criteria used to calculate pensions for members of the City Commission, and this goes back to the original discussion, and I ask Larry Spring yesterday about it, and what I would like to ask from the Administration is a report for future consideration on the impact of a -- of these calculations that are being done. That doesn't even need a motion; just -- from the Finance or the Budget Department to come and report. DISTRICT 5 COMMISSIONER MICHELLE SPENCE-JONES PH.1 05-01497 RESOLUTION Department of Public Facilities PUBLIC HEARINGS A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), DECLARING SURPLUS AND APPROVING THE SALE OF THE CITY -OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 301 SOUTHWEST 1ST STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED, TO RIVER DRIVE PARTNERS, LLC., A FLORIDA LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION ("PURCHASER"); FURTHER ESTABLISHING EIGHTY-SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($87,000), AS THE AMOUNT TO BE PAID TO THE CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY") BY THE AFOREMENTIONED; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT ("AGREEMENT"), IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, AND TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO CONSUMMATE SUCH TRANSACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT, WHICH TERMS MAY BE AMENDED BY THE CITY MANAGER AS MAY BE NECESSARY IN ORDER TO MEET THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY. 05-01497 Legislation.pdf 05-01497 Exhibit 1.pdf 05-01497 Exhibit 2.pdf 05-01497 Summary Form.pdf 05-01497 Public Hearing Memo.pdf 05-01497 Public Hearing Notice.pdf Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-06-0052 Chairman Gonzalez: So I'm going to call PH.1, which is a public hearing. PH.1. Do we have anybody from the Administration on PH.1? All right. Laura Billberry (Acting Director, Public Facilities): I'm sorry. Lori Billberry. Chairman Gonzalez: Good morning. City of Miami Page 21 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Ms. Billberry: Got a little bit of a cold. A little bit under the weather. This is a sale of a remnant piece of property to River Drive Partners for $87, 000. This is a property that is exempt under the Charter because it was -- came to the City pursuant to the list of lands -- taxes of properties available from the list of lands available for taxes, and the price is $80 a square foot, which is comparable to other properties in this area. Vice Chairman Winton: And it's -- how many square feet is it, Lori? Ms. Billberry: Approximately 1,086. Vice Chairman Winton: Which means no one else could do anything with this property ever? Ms. Billberry: Correct, and it is a landlocked parcel. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. So moved. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion and we have a second. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishes to address the Commission on this item, please come forward. OK, seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. We have a motion and we have a second. It's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Motion carries. Ms. Billberry: Thank you. PH.2 06-00050 RESOLUTION Department of A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH Public Works ATTACHMENT(S), ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED "GROVE GARDENS," A REPLAT 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. City of Miami Page 22 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 06-00050 Legislation.pdf 06-00050 Exhibit 1.pdf 06-00050 Exhibit 2.pdf 06-00050 Exhibit 3.pdf 06-00050 Summary Form.pdf 06-00050 Legal Description.pdf 06-00050 Public Hearing Memo.pdf 06-00050 Public Hearing Notice.pdf 06-00050 Public Works Memo.pdf 06-00050 Public Works Notice.pdf 06-00050 Legal Description 2.pdf WITHDRAWN Chairman Gonzalez: PH.2. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): It's been -- it's -- Chairman Gonzalez: It's withdrawn. Mr. Fernandez: -- deferred. It's been pulled from the agenda, rather -- Commissioner Sanchez: It's been withdrawn. Mr. Fernandez: -- so it will not be considered this morning. Commissioner Sanchez: It's been withdrawn. Mr. Fernandez: Withdrawn, correct. Chairman Gonzalez: Withdrawn. City of Miami Page 23 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 PH.3 06-00052 Department of Capital Improvement Programs/Transpor tation RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY 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 EMERGENCY FINDINGS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 18-89 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED; WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCEDURES AND APPROVING AN INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF THE CONTRACT WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES, FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "HADLEY PARK COMMUNITY CENTER," IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,732,356; RATIFYING THREE AMENDMENTS TO THE CONTRACT INCREASING THE CONTRACT AMOUNT BY A TOTAL OF $1,554,636, WHICH TOGETHER WITH THE CURRENT AMENDMENT INCREASES THE CONTRACT FROM AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $2,400,000 TO $4,132,356; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 331391 AND 331411; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, AND ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENT(S) FOR SAID PURPOSE. 06-0052 Legislation.pdf 06-0052 Exhibit 1.pdf 06-0052 Exhibit 2.pdf 06-0052 Summary Form.pdf 06-0052 Memo.pdf 06-0052 Memo 2.pdf 06-0052 Public Hearing Notice.pdf 06-0052 Service Agreement.pdf 06-0052 Scope of Services.pdf 06-0052 Project Budget 1.pdf 06-0052 Proposed Schedule.pdf 06-0052 Agreement 1.pdf 06-0052 Agreement 2.pdf 06-0052 Project Budget 2.pdf 06-0052 Agreement 3.pdf 06-0052 Project Budget 3.pdf 06-0052 Agreement 4.pdf 06-0052 Project Budget 4.pdf Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Spence -Jones Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez R-06-0053 Chairman Gonzalez: PH.3. Commissioner Sanchez: Capital Improvement. PH.3. Chairman Gonzalez: PH.3. We need someone from the Administration. City of Miami Page 24 Printed on 2/21/1006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mary Conway (Director, Capital Improvements Program & Transportation): Mary Conway, CIP (Capital Improvements Program). PH.3 is an old housekeeping item. This is for Hadley Park, a project that was begun in 1999 via an interlocal agreement between the City of Miami and the State of Florida, Department of Management Services, whereby DMS (Department of Management Services) oversaw the construction of the project on behalf of the City. DMS approached the City a little over a year ago regarding a final change order request for work that had been completed previously for monies that were being requested by the contractor, Walbridge. The item that's before you is to approve that approximate $300, 000 final change order to close this contract out with DMS so that the contractor can be paid. In the process of researching the item, we discovered that there were three previous change orders to DMS that had already been paid, but had not been brought before the Commission for official action. That's part of this item also. Vice Chairman Winton: Wow. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: All right. Let me see if I get this straight. This was a project, $2.4 million. There was change of orders that went to 4.1. That change of order never came in front of this Commission, and we're here to rats it today. Ms. Conway: Yes, that is correct. That is correct. It goes back over three years ago. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I just have -- also have a question, too, Mary. What kind of -- and I know you kind of somewhat explained it to me because I had a true issue with almost doubling the cost. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I'm assuming these are all overruns, but what kind of assurance could you make available to us so that we don't have a similar case like this take place with one of our projects? What kind of things have you put in place to -- Ms. Conway: Since then? Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- assure it? Yeah. Ms. Conway: Certainly. This is actually an anomaly that the City would choose to contract with a third party to oversee one of our projects on our behalf. We're contracting directly for work that comes before us. We also have within the CIP office internal protocols in place so that no change order is authorized before -- without either having a director approval or our procurement supervisor approval, that's assuming that we have the contract authorityfrom the Commission already in place. If the contract authorityfrom the Commission is not in place, no work can proceed until the Commission approves a change order, so you would not see a recurrence of something like this. Commissioner Spence -Jones: So this is just a housecleaning issue? Ms. Conway: It's a very old project and a very old item where we were approached again over a year ago on some work that had been completed three years prior, where the contractor was stating that he was still due monies, and the Department of Management Services, the state agency has certified to the City that the dollars that are being requested are reasonable and the work was performed, and they have certified that to the City, and we're recommending the payment to DMS for that final change order on that basis. City of Miami Page 25 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, Commissioner. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Vice Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Did we get a bigger building? Did we get something more, or was the original project that was projected to cost $2.4 million, it -- did it just actually cost 4.1 instead of 2.4? Ms. Conway: A combination of both. There were items within the building itself, within the Black Box Theater, things that were changed that dealt with the theater equipment, the drapes, the curtains, the seating. There were also a lot of miscellaneous items associated with the park and existing improvements in the park that were also requested to be done as part of this project. That isn't necessarily something that's standard or conventional with a capital improvement project; they were more operational in nature, so it was a little bit of both. Vice Chairman Winton: Do you know the dollar differential between just plain cost overrun versus legitimate change orders where the public got something more than we thought we were getting? Ms. Conway: No, I don't. This is so old that we haven't gone and done that analysis. I have a notebook here that has over 31 change orders that, from the first time that this project began to the time that it was finally completed, the contractor had sent to the Department of Management Services, from things that ranged from providing additional labor and materials to clean, strip, and wax vinyl floors, providing additional security services. It runs the gamut. Vice Chairman Winton: Who approved the change orders? Ms. Conway: The change orders, on an individual basis, were approved by the Department of Management Services. Who on the City staff actually authorized those, there were a variety of people and most of which are no longer with the City. Vice Chairman Winton: So -- OK, so it went from this outside consultant that approved them first, but it did have to ultimately come to the City, and we had City employees signing off on them as well? Ms. Conway: And Pm not sure whether all of those approvals were in writing or some of those approvals were in -- were verbal because, technically, at least with the first -- and that's where the history here becomes a little bit fuzzy -- technically, the contractual arrangement was between the City and the Department of Management Services, so the Department of Management Services had the responsibility to oversee the contract. Any changes to it that required additional monies, like the three prior purchase orders that were already executed, we were not able to locate all the paperwork documentation that showed where the authorization was, and again, it didn't come before this body -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well then, what -- Ms. Conway: -- previously. Vice Chairman Winton: -- liability does this Department of Management Services have? They have no liability? Ms. Conway: As a fellow state agency, they were responsible for the oversight of this. Whether City of Miami Page 26 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 the City could actually pursue them for restitution on this amount, that's something that we'd have to discuss with attorneys -- Attorney's office, but would be possibly questionable. I will tell you that the final change order amount that was requested by Walbridge, the contractor, and what DMS submitted to us are -- is a much lower amount. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): It requires a four fifth vote. Vice Chairman Winton: What's the -- what happens if we don't approve this? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah. Vice Chairman Winton: What's our liability then? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah. Vice Chairman Winton: I mean, what's the repercussion? Ms. Conway: If I might, I think the City could anticipate that Walbridge would then have litigation against both the City and the Department of Management Services for work that is documented that was performed and that they are -- that they believe and that we agree that they are due compensation for, then -- that they would most certainly seek to get paid for the work that was completed, where there is documentation that the work wasi completed at the park Vice Chairman Winton: So we'd end up paying, plus penalty, plus -- Mr. Fernandez: Exactly. Vice Chairman Winton: -- legal fees. Mr. Fernandez: Exactly. Commissioner Sanchez: Now, do you feel comfortable that they have performed all the jobs that they were -- Ms. Conway: Yes, 1 do. Commissioner Sanchez: -- that they stated? Ms. Conway: Yes, I do. Commissioner Sanchez: So, as executive director of that department, you feel comfortable in us approving this? Ms. Conway: Yes, I do. I'm not comfortable with the protocols and the process by which this occurred by any means -- Commissioner Sanchez: Well, neither am I. Ms. Conway: -- but I am comfortable that the amount that you are approving is legitimately for work that was completed at the Hadley Park site, and that they are reasonable amounts for the work that was completed. Vice Chairman Winton: I'd move the item. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second City of Miami Page 27 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishes to address the Commission on this item, please come forward. All right, seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. It's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Motion carries. City of Miami Page 28 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 ORDINANCE - SECOND READING SR.1 05-01501 ORDINANCE Second Reading Office of the City AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER Attorney 40/ARTICLE IV/DIVISION 3, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "PERSONNEUPENSION AND RETIREMENT PLAN/CITY OF MIAMI GENERAL EMPLOYEES' AND SANITATION EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT TRUST," TO IDENTIFY CERTAIN EVENTS AS REEMPLOYMENT OF RETIREES; MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTION 40-255(L), TO CLARIFY THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH RETIRED EMPLOYEES CAN RECEIVE COMPENSATION FROM THE CITY OF MIAMI; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01501 Legislation SR.pdf 05-01501 Cover Memo FR/SR.pdf 05-01501 Memo FR/SR.pdf 05-01501 Legislation FR.pdf Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones 12753 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Let's go to SR.1. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Yes. Mr. Chairman, this is an ordinance on second reading, and this is an amendment to the pension retirement plan of the City of Miami general employees to clar5 the circumstances under which retired employees can receive compensation from the City. We briefly discussed this with you on first reading, and this is to clam an ambiguity in the ordinance with regard to the status of any person receiving a pension, what kind of work and to what extent can they perform any work for the City. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second Chairman Gonzalez: -- and we have a second. Does this require a public hearing or no? Mr. Fernandez: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Anyone from the public wishes to address the Commission on this item, please come forward. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed; back -- Commissioner Sanchez: What item is that? Chairman Gonzalez: -- to the Commission. All in favor, say "aye." Mr. Fernandez: Well, I would have to read the ordinance first. City of Miami Page 29 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: Pardon me? Vice Chairman Winton: It's an ordinance. Mr. Fernandez: I would have to read it for you. Chairman Gonzalez: OK, I'm sorry. It's an ordinance. You're right. Mr. Fernandez.' Certainly. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Madam City Clerk, roll call, please. 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 adopted on second reading, S/0. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. City of Miami Page 30 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 ORDINANCE - FIRST READING FR.1 05-01563 ORDINANCE First Reading Office of the City AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER Attorney 40/ARTICLE IV/DIVISION 4, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "PERSONNEUPENSION AND RETIREMENT PLAN/CITY OF MIAMI ELECTED OFFICERS' RETIREMENT TRUST;" MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTION 40-296, TO DELAY THE RIGHT FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS IN OFFICE TO BEGIN RECEIVING PENSION BENEFITS UNTIL AGE 55; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01563 FR/SR Legislation .pdf 05-01563 FR-SR Cover Memo.pdf Motion by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Noes: 1 - Commissioner Winton Note for the Record: A motion to was made by Vice Chairman Winton to amend Item FR.1 to the age of 65, but said motion died due to lack of a second. Chairman Gonzalez: FR. 1. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Yes. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, this is also a pension -related item. It's an ordinance of the City of Miami where you look at the issue of the elected officers' retirement trust. This is the retirement trust for, in essence, the five of you, where you're making a particular change. You're amending a section of that ordinance to delay the right for elected officials in office to begin receiving pension benefits until age 55. In other words, up until now any Commissioner who vested and left office was able to immediately begin collecting his pension. By passing this item, any Commissioner who vests, leaves office, and is not of age 55 will have to wait until he turns -- he or she returns 55 to begin collecting on that pension. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Sanchez: Make a motion and a second, then we'll discuss it, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: I need a motion and a second to -- Commissioner Sanchez: So move. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion and we have a second. Discussion. Commissioner Sanchez: Discussion, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, you're recognized. Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think if anyone is affected by this City of Miami Page 31 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 ordinance here, it's me, but I believe that leading by example is something that we need to do here in this City. I strongly believe that reform needs to start somewhere, and if you look at our nation today, you see that pension costs have gone from $81 billion dollars to $121 billion dollars; that's just pension payouts, not to mention a crisis on a national level. Vice Chairman Winton: That's only in the private sector. That is not -- Commissioner Sanchez: In the private sector. Vice Chairman Winton: That's not government. Commissioner Sanchez: No, it's not government, but I could tell you -- Vice Chairman Winton: The government's double that. Commissioner Sanchez: -- and just on figures itself that there are just about 23, I believe, cities in the United States that have had to either cut back on employment or expenses to meet their pension costs, not to mention major cities who have had to file for financial relief on emergencies because of the pension, so if we are going to step forward and work with everyone to find a solution for the betterment of this city, 1 think it needs to start here, so this legislation, I'm fully support of and will ask you to support it even though it doesn't affect you; it affects me. Commissioner Spence -Jones: And me. Commissioner Sanchez: I believe it's the right step -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: And me. Commissioner Sanchez: -- in the right direction. Commissioner Spence -Jones: And me. Commissioner Sanchez: And you. It affects both of us, yes. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yes. Commissioner Sanchez: All right, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Any further discussion? Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes. Vice Chairman, you're recognized. Vice Chairman Winton: I don't remember how many years ago this was, but there was a point at which elected officials -- we had a big debate about elected officials getting a pension in the first place and I voted against it because, philosophically, I'm opposed to the concept of us sitting in office for eight years and the taxpayers get to pay us money for the rest of our lives. 1 was opposed to it then; I'm opposed to it today, but that's not what's before us today. What's before us is the point at which an elected official could begin drawing his or her pension, and Ifeel strongly that if we're going to lead by example, then we ought to, at minimum, follow the private sector example, and in the private sector, you cannot begin drawing a pension -- you can withdraw -- you can begin drawing a reduced pension at 62 in some circumstances, but most people can't draw their pension until they're 65. We don't have a dangerous job. Our life isn't on the line everyday. We don't have to climb ladders. We don't have to do all those things that City of Miami Page 32 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 may give rise to the need to pay out a pension to certain employees before they turn 65, but that ain't us, and 1 think if we're going to lead by example, the example ought to be that we don't draw a pension until we turn 65, and so -- and I'm not trying -- you all know that we have a great relationship. I'm not trying to cause a problem here, but it's philosophically how I feel about this thing, and I think we could lead by example, but the example is move this to 65, not 55. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, the ordinance that's in front of us is for 55, and that -- Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Sanchez: -- ordinance I am prepared to support on that. The ordinance is not 65. Vice Chairman Winton: And so I'm going to make a motion to amend this ordinance to make it 65 as opposed to 55. It may not get a second, but I just have to do it. Chairman Gonzalez: But now -- but we have a motion on the floor and we have a second on that motion. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Oh, I thought we already -- Commissioner Sanchez: For 55. Vice Chairman Winton: And I'm offering an amendment -- Chairman Gonzalez: So you may -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- that may not get a second. Chairman Gonzalez: Exactly, you may offer an amount and see if they accept the amendment. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, how about 60? Chairman Gonzalez: All right. The -- Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, Commissioner Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: I had on my blue page an item, and I didn't know about this ordinance, and I think that it's the first step to recta and to set an example, and you know, I -- to opine one way or another, because Commissioner Sanchez and Commissioner Spence -Jones will be affected, it will be unfair, but I'll tell you something. I will support a compromise. 1 will support raising to 60, 62. I mean, 62 is -- 62, you can -- in fact, the Social Security pension, when you start drawing at 62, it gives you more money than if you retire at 65 because you will be gaining three years -- Vice Chairman Winton: Three years. Commissioner Regalado: -- and at the end of your natural life, you will be gaining more, so if you talk to a social security expert, they'll say go ahead and retire at 62 because you will be drawing 80 percent, but three years earlier, with the benefits of Medicare and all that, so you know, I don't know what you guys want to do, and this is a very sensitive issue, and because it is, City of Miami Page 33 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 I feel that since the whole Commission is trying to recta this, I will withdraw the other issue, which was the same, by the way, regarding the pension that I have in my blue pages, and discuss this, but -- Commissioner Sanchez: But -- would you yield, and I think your other issue pertain to the benefits -- Commissioner Regalado: Right. Commissioner Sanchez: -- which were never calculated in the retirement. The retirement, itself is based on our salary -- Commissioner Regalado: Right. Commissioner Sanchez: -- not the benefit, so we needed to clear that. Commissioner Regalado: No. Mr. Fernandez: W-2. Commissioner Sanchez: W-2, so in other words, that -- we need to clear that. I think -- you know, because of the sunshine violations, we can't discuss this. We only can discuss it in open meetings, and maybe on certain issues pertaining to such debate, if it gets to a debate, we could have whether it be work -- those work meetings that we get together and discuss this item. That's something we could look at, but your blue page is completely different than this. Has -- Commissioner Regalado: Well, it is. Commissioner Sanchez: Apple and oranges. Commissioner Regalado: It is and it isn't because if you -- looking at this, it becomes -- this will reduce the impact on the taxpayers of the City of Miami drastically in terms of retirement, and the other issue, what I was going to ask, is just a report because I don't know. I don't know what impact you have when you compound one of two benefits, so I was going to just ask for a report and the Administration to come back for us to discuss, because you know, I'm not going to throw something sudden like that, which impact everybody, so that would be the other issue, Commissioner Sanchez. I would -- just would ask -- Commissioner Sanchez: Oh yeah. Commissioner Regalado: -- for a report and come back. On this issue, well, I'm -- you know, I defer to you guys, because I think the standard procedure is in the United States, you follow it, and you know, the City has other rules -- 20 years or 22 years or something like that, I'm not sure, but I am ready to support any of this reform because I think the people deserve that we reform ourselves. Commissioner Sanchez: Well -- and that's exactly what we're doing here, and we're putting our money where our mouth is, so call the question. It's an ordinance -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Sanchez: -- on public hearing. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion and we have a second I'm sorry. City of Miami Page 34 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Sanchez: Public hearing. Chairman Gonzalez.: Any further discussion from the Commission? All right. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wishes to address the Commission, please come forward. All right, seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. It's an ordinance. Mr. City Attorney. Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call. Commissioner Regalado? Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Vice Chairman Winton? Vice Chairman Winton: No. Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Spence -Jones? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Sanchez? Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Chairman Gonzalez? Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, 4/1. City of Miami Page 35 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 RE.1 06-00051 Department of Capital Improvement Programs/Transpor tation RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), ACCEPTING THE BID OF WILLIAMS PAVING CO., INC., THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BIDDER PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 04-05-129, ISSUED OCTOBER 3, 2005, FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "AVALON STORM SEWERS PROJECT, PHASE I AND II, B-50685," IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $3,094,286, AS STATED ON THE FORMAL BID DOCUMENT AND THE DEPARTMENT OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT FACT SHEET, ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NOS. 352208, 341330 AND 352216; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, FOR SAID PURPOSE. 06-00051 Legislation.pdf 06-00051 Exhibit 1.pdf 06-00051 Exhibit 2.pdf 06-00051 Exhibit 3.pdf 06-00051 Summary Form.pdf 06-00051 Project Fact Sheet.pdf 06-00051 Formal Bid.pdf Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado RE.2 05-01509 Office of Strategic Planning, Budgeting, and Performance R-06-0054 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. RE.1. Mary Conway.: Mary Conway, CIP (Capital Improvements Program). RE.1 is a resolution before you accepting the low bid of Williams Paving for the construction of the Avalon Storm Sewer project, Phases I and II, in an amount of $3,094,286. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Sanchez: So moved -- second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second. All in favor, say „ aye. II The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING THE APPROPRIATIONS RELATING TO OPERATIONAL AND BUDGETARY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2006. City of Miami Page 36 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 05-01509 Legislation.pdf 05-01509 Exhibit 1 05-01509 Summary Form.pdf Motion by Commissioner Spence -Jones, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado RE.3 05-01444 Department of Parks and Recreation R-06-0055 Chairman Gonzalez: RE.2. Vice Chairman Winton: Larry. Chairman Gonzalez: RE.2. Do we have anybody from the Administration on RE.2. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Budget. Vice Chairman Winton: Isn't that Mr. Spring? No? Larry Spring: Commissioners, Larry Spring, chief of Strategic Planning, Budgeting, and Performance. Before you is a budget appropriations amendment for the fiscal year 2006 budget. The nature of this amendment is to appropriate the SAFER (Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response) grant proceeds that this Commission approved at the last meeting and adding the Fire personnel associated with that grant. We're also adding an additional six individuals to the Capital Improvement Department, preparing ourselves for our phase -out of consulting out and bringing in-house some of our program staffing. The total appropriation change you see before you, changing from 491.7 million to 492.1 in the general fund, and 70 -- appropriation change from the -- in special revenue from 170.8 million to 170 -- 172 million. Commissioner Spence -Jones: So moved. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second. Discussion. None. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: All opposed have the same right. RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), APPROVING THE CITY OF MIAMI'S OFFICE OF FILM ARTS, CULTURE AND ENTERTAINMENT'S ("FACE") RECOMMENDATION OF: (1) ALLOCATING FUNDS FOR SPECIAL EVENTS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $400,000, AS DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED AND (2) AUTHORIZING THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,000, FOR EACH OF THE FIVE CITY COMMISSION DISTRICTS, FOR A COMBINED AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $100,000, FOR FUNDING OF ADDITIONAL SPECIAL EVENTS WITHIN THE CITY OF MIAMI, CONTINGENT UPON THE PRESENTATION OF DOCUMENTATION FOR REVIEW BY FACE AND SUCH DISTRICT FUNDING COMPLYING WITH FACE RULES AND REGULATIONS AND AS DESIGNATED BY THE City of Miami Page 37 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 DISTRICT COMMISSIONER; DIRECTING FACE TO PRESENT THEIR FUNDING REQUESTS AND THE COMMISSION DISTRICT FUNDING REQUESTS, FOR SPECIAL EVENTS FOR THE CITY COMMISSION DISTRICTS, TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION; ALLOCATING FUNDS IN A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $500,000, FROM THE SPECIAL EVENTS FESTIVAL ACCOUNT NO. 001000.921054.6. 289. 05-01444 Legislation.pdf 05-01444 Exhibit 1.pdf 05-01444 Summary Form.pdf Motion by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado R-06-0066 Chairman Gonzalez: RE.2. I'm sorry, RE. 3. Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion and we have a second. Please, I need you to put something on the record. Commissioner Sanchez: State your name. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. Julie Mansfield: Hi. Julie -- good morning. Julie Mansfield, Parks and Recreation, Office of FACE (Film, Arts, Culture and Entertainment). Before you is a resolution approving the slate of funding for fiscal -- for the current fiscal year. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. All right. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Motion carries. Ms. Mansfield: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: That concludes the items from the regular agenda. City of Miami Page 38 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 DI.1 05-01124 Department of Capital Improvements Program DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION ITEM PRESENTATION BY MR. ROBERT FLANDERS, CHAIRPERSON OF THE HOMELAND DEFENSE/ NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT BOND OVERSIGHT BOARD CONCERNING THEIR ANNUAL REPORT. 05-01124 Cover Memo.pdf Bond Oversight Annual Presentation 1-26-06.ppt DISCUSSED Chairman Gonzalez: I'm going to call Mr. Flanders to do the report on the Homeland Defense projects. Robert Flanders: We need just a minute to set up. For the sake of brevity, we're doing a PowerPoint presentation. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Are we ready? Unidentified Speaker: Um -hum. Mr. Flanders: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Robert Flanders, and I live at 720 Palm Bay Lane, in Miami, and today, as the Chairman, I am pleased to deliver to you the Homeland Defense Neighborhood Improvement Bond Oversight Board's annual report for 2005. As we begin, let us thank your and the Mayor's board appointees, who have served with unwavering dedication and distinction, many for the past three and a half years that the board has existed Please recognize the board members present, and that would be Mariano Cruz. Mariano. In the three and a half years of the board's existence, we have been ably served by our outstanding City staff, from Frank Rollason to Mary Conway, Danette Perez, Zimri Prendes, and many other fine members of CIP (Capital Improvements Program), the Parks Department, the Police and Fire Department, Public Works and many others. For any city to ramp up from a prebond level of ten and a half million dollars in annual capital improvements to our current level of 50 to $100 million a year is difficult under the best of circumstances, but we have raised the bar, and as we have, our outstanding City staff has risen to the occasion. As we rebuild our city brick by brick, block by block, tree by tree, and park by park, we're also restoring the sacred trust to our citizens and showing them that we have returned integrity to this City. With our plans, Miami is preemptively prepared for the future, and with your vision we are building a lasting legacy that positively shapes the City's future for our current residents and those who will follow. Today, thanks to the efforts of CIP staff, we have a PowerPoint presentation that beautifully illustrates the significant highlights of our progress during the past year. It is broken down by City Commission district and finishes up with citywide improvements. Commissioners, District 1 is Chairman Angel Gonzalez. Northwest 14th Street improvements. It is completed. Fern Isle Park, we ran into a little trouble there because of DERM (Department of Environmental Resources Management) and what had been done in the past, but it will be finished in winter of 2007. Grapeland Heights. Again, fall of 2007. This is a major facility, which is absolutely spectacular. Commissioner Winton, Grand Avenue. We were there cutting the ribbon. We were there breaking ground, and what a pleasure it was to see that. Grand Avenue again, and it's interesting to note here that CIP staff originally had a menu of two items for swales. One was very expensive, and that was all grass, and the other one was asphalt, very unattractive. What they've done is they've actually extended the road projects that we have where those swales exist because they're using turf block, which is a much more attractive alternative; allows parking, doesn't put down asphalt and still has grass. Bicentennial shoreline. This is really citywide, but we're already completed with phase 1; phase II is underway, and phase III will follow right after. Again, CIP staff saved the City money here because as one City of Miami Page 39 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 phase was being constructed, the second phase was being engineered and designed, et cetera, et cetera, so that the constructors never left the site, and they were able to give her -- give us a better price. Downtown infrastructure improvement. Commissioner Winton, you may even want to build additional buildings in downtown. Virginia Key Beach. This is a park circular road. This public park is coming on stream. It will add, I think my memory says, 400 acres to the City's park system. Commissioner Sanchez, in your district -- and I'll bet we never thought we'd see this happen, but Cuban Memorial Boulevard is complete. The Orange Bowl. It's one of Miami's great icons and it was worth saving, and the cost of saving it is less than 50 percent of building new, and we were told by the City's engineers and staff that to build new would not be different than what we are doing today to restore this icon to its former status. Jose Marti gymnasium. We were handed a lemon; we're making lemonade. This was a very unique solution to a problem of the roadway and not being able to build this gymnasium, and if you look, you'll see it's kind of levered out over the road. It's absolutely spectacular. Commissioner Regalado. Coral Way beautification improvements. In spite of the hurricanes that slowed us down, this actually is almost completed, and if you'll just have a little patience, I'm told that the landscaping will be restored from the damage that we sustained during the hurricane. Bryan Park. Bryan Park new tennis center, which you'll be hearing more of shortly. Shenandoah Park improvements will be complete this year. Robert King High Park improvements. In District 5, Commissioner Spence -Jones. The black police precinct and museum. I was there for the ground breaking. It's going to be spectacular. Little Haiti Park improvements. This is the single biggest item practically in the Bond Oversight Board's purview, and it is proceeding according to schedule, and it will be spectacular. Gibson Park. Model City. Again, a major, major step forward in an area that was chronically underserved. Athalie Range Park, Buena Vista Heights, this is all the design district just north of Midtown Miami, and it will be on stream and ready as the rest of that area comes back to life. Again, the Design District, Northeast 40th Street. Now, these are citywide improvements: Traffic calming, the greenway. Almost more than anything else, this will transform the view of the way that Miami shows its face to its residents and our visitors. Many of these are completed or about to be completed. Flood mitigation. I'm sorry that Commissioner Regalado is not here. His district seemed to have suffered worst from floods than any other part of the city, but rest assured, we're about a third complete and we anticipate completion within the next year to a year and a half. OK. Citywide police projects. This is the Homeland Defense Neighborhood Improvement Bond, and the police projects are very close to our heart and to the essence of the bond. The most important step forward that we will take is with the construction of a police training facility, and that is definitely on the front burner on radar. Our Fire -Rescue Department. We have a plethora of projects, including two new fire stations, and again, this is an overview of some of the projects that have been complete, that are being completed, and that are in the future; over 200 projects. We have a Web site, and I invite you or any of your constituents to look on our Web site. It has a citywide map, and it's broken down by district, and you can plainly see the City's progress. We are -- we have completed or have in works well over -- this is the important slide here -- $100 million of the bond, and again, as I said, it's very d ficult to ramp up from scratch to this, and we've done it without overburdening City staff. We've used consultants. The City staff has used consultants wisely, as they are needed, and when they're not needed any longer, they're no longer on the City's payroll. A final word. At the end of every decade the Nelson Rockefeller Institute of Government and -- compiles an urban and metropolitan study. Some of you probably know about it -- ranking those metropolitan cities in order of highest urban hardship. In 1970 Miami was ranked number five nationally; in 1986 and in 1990, number one, and in 2000, also number one. This is the backdrop that -- against what you created the bond issue, and as you could see, the bond projects are spread citywide, and it is apparent, as I said before, that chronically underserved areas are being addressed first, but this series of bonds has only started the job of addressing 30 years of neglect, and it is the hope of your Bond Oversight Board members that once these bonds projects are completed that you will go back to the well and complete the job. We also applaud the efforts of the City's audit, and are not troubled with its determinations. To find roughly a hundred thousand dollars worth of errors in over one hundred million dollars worth of expenditures is a miracle. We welcome the audit oversight and its accountability and hope that City of Miami Page 40 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 it continues to be an annual event. Vince Lombardi, the famous football coach of the Green Bay Packers, once said, "People don't fail because of their lack of strength. They don't fail because of their lack of knowledge. They fail because of their lack of will." As long as this Commission and our Mayor have the political will and courage, Miami will continue to move forward to claim its rightful destiny as one of the world's great cities, and as we do this, your Bond Oversight Board members will continue to offer this board's worth and value to the City. We hope some day that this board will oversee all the capital improvements that are returning quality of life to the City of Miami. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Great presentation. Vice Chairman Winton: Good job, Bob. Thank you. Commissioner Sanchez: Bob, if I could just elaborate on -- let me praise you and your board members, and truly every project that goes out reflects on your board and all of us who work here at the City, but I think you also, your board has to focus on getting -- making sure that CIP is able to put together a better system of quality control on the projects. Let me tell you why. Some of the projects that are out there, especially the ones that I've seen in my district, there has to be a system where you have a check and balance as to the progress of the project, and to make sure that if it's not done to the best possible quality, we don't pay them, and we make sure that the company, if they're not doing what they were supposed to be doing, they don't come back and work for the City, and I think that's good management, and I know that the City -- I have to praise the City to be -- to have more than 200 projects out already in this short time -- period of time. It's something that's -- it's remarkable, but it is also your responsibility to focus on that, which is something that we all need to work together to make sure that they're able to get the final product out with the best possible quality. Mr. Flanders: Commissioner, we couldn't agree with you more. We actually agreed to the job order contract procurement basis because we saw that the system was broke, the system of a public bid, where you put out an RFP (Request for Proposals) and then these contractors come in and they lowball us, and then the doors fall off -- Commissioner Sanchez: Exactly. Mr. Flanders: -- you know, and we have addressed that. CIP just notified us of another advance. I don't know whether you know this or not, but not all the contractors who used to do business with the City, even as late as last year, had state contractors licenses, OK. They could get some sort of license from Miami -Dade County, but it doesn't carry the weight of the paper from the State. They no longer do business with the City, and that's made some people on City staff extremely unpopular, but you know what? We back them up, and we back up what you say, Commissioner. We're there. We are your eyes and ears on a monthly and actually even weekly basis, as our audit committee meets to chew up these projects for the oversight that must have been missing before you created the Board Thank you. Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: If I may real quickly. I want to thank Mary Conway and her staff You know, we passed this bond issue back in 2001, right? City of Miami Page 41 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: 2001. Vice Chairman Winton: Wasn't that when it was? November 2001, and we had a lot of fits and starts to this whole process, and they've done one heck of a job. You know, are we perfect? Absolutely not. Can we get better? Absolutely can, but I think that Mary and her staff has done one heck of a job getting this thing really ramped up, and we really are making progress. You can see the projects out there. Our constituents see the work being done, and I think she just got started. Wait till next year, so thank you. PART B Chairman Gonzalez: You ready, sir? Mr. City Attorney, are you ready, sir? OK. Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to resume the Commission meeting. We're going to go into PZ (Planning and Zoning), planning and zoning agenda. Before commencing, the City Attorney's going to read the rules of the meeting. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Yes. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, and members of the public, PZ items shall proceed as follows: Before PZ agenda is heard, all those wishing to speak will be sworn in by the City Clerk, and momentarily she will be swearing you all in. Secondly, staff will briefly describe the request, whether it's an appeal from the Zoning Board, a special exception, a vacation, a text amendment, zoning change, land use change, or a MUSP (Major Use Special Permit). The appellate or petitioner, according to the type of issue that's coming in front of the Commission, will then present the request. Staff will present its recommendation and the appellee, depending on who that is, will present its position. Members of the public will be permitted to speak on certain petitions, and the Chairman and the Commission reserve the right to establish the time period according to the number of speakers that have asked to participate. Petitioners may ask questions of staff or of any presenter. The appellant or the petitioner will be permitted to make final comments, and we will -- following those basic rules, we're ready to proceed, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. PZ 1. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): We need -- chair, we need to go ahead and swear -- Chairman Gonzalez: Oh, we need to swear the witnesses, yes. Ms. Thompson: -- individuals in, please. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Please, if you are going to be speaking on any of the PZ items, will you please stand and raise your right hand so we can swear you in. The City Clerk administered oath required under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons giving testimony on zoning issues. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. "[Later... J" Chairman Gonzalez.: (INAUDIBLE) zoning meeting of today, January 26, 2006. Madam City Attorney, could you please read the procedures? Maria J. Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): The Planning and Zoning agenda will proceed as follows. PZ (Planning and Zoning) items shall proceed in this order. Before the PZ agenda is heard, all those wishing to speak should be sworn in by the City Clerk. If anyone was not sworn City of Miami Page 42 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 in this morning, they should be sworn in by the City Clerk. Staff will briefly describe the requests, whether an appeal, special exception, vacation, text amendment, zoning change, land use change, or MUSP (Major Use Special Permit), or any other item, the appellant or petitioner will then present the request. The staff will then present its recommendation. The appellee on those items that are being appealed will then present a position -- its position. Members of the public will be permitted to speak on certain petitions. The petitioner may ask the questions of staff. The appellant or petitioner will then be permitted to make final comments. Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez.: Thank you. Madam City Clerk, I think we have some people here that weren't here this morning, and they need to be sworn in, people that are going to testes this afternoon. Ms. Thompson: Ladies and gentlemen, may we have your attention? If you are going to testify on a P&Z item, you've not been sworn in, you do need to raise -- stand up please and raise your right hand so that I can swear you in. The City Clerk administered oath required under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons giving testimony on zoning issues. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. PZ.1 05-01534 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, AS AMENDED, FOR THE OAK GARDEN HOMES PROJECT, TO BE LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3129-3159 NORTHWEST 11TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATE 17-UNIT SINGLE-FAMILY/DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT; 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 43 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 05-01534 Outside Cover.PDF 05-01534 Table of Contents.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab A - Introduction.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab B - Application for MUSP.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab C - Legal Desription.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab D - Disclosure of Ownership.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab E - Ownership Affidavit.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab F - Directory of Project Principals.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab G - City of Miami Zoning Atlas Map Pg 26.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab H - City of Miami Future Land Use Map.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab I - Aerial and Location Map.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab J - Ownership List.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab K - Project Data Sheet & Summary.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab L - Summary Of Approvals.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab M - Ownership and Tax Information.pdf 05-01534 Article I Tab N - Company Information.pdf 05-01534 Article 11 - Project Description.pdf 05-01534 Article III Tab 1 - Survey.pdf 05-01534 Article III Tab 2 - Site Plan.pdf 05-01534 Article III Tab 3 - Traffic Impact Analysis.pdf 05-01534 Article III Tab 4 - Site Utility Study.pdf 05-01534 Article III Tab 5 - Economic Impact Study.pdf 05-01534 Article III Tab 6 - Architectural and Landscape Drawings.pdf 05-01534 Legislation.pdf 05-01534 Exhibit A.pdf 05-01534 Exhibit B.pdf 05-01534 Analysis.pdf 05-01534 Zoning Map.pdf 05-01534 Aerial Map.pdf 05-01534 Miami -Dade Aviation Dept Comments.pdf 05-01534 School Impact Review Analysis.pdf 05-01534 PAB Reso.pdf 05-01534 Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: Major Use Special Permit for the Oak Garden Homes Project LOCATION: Approximately 3129-3159 NW 11th Street APPLICANT(S): Terra West Corporation APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Gilberto Pastoriza, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to City Commission on December 21, 2005 by a vote of 6-2. *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: This will allow the development of the Oak Garden Homes project. City of Miami Page 44 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Motion by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-06-0056 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Lourdes, good afternoon. Sorry. Lourdes Slazyk: For the record, Lourdes Slazyk, Planning Department. PZ 1 is a Major Use Special Permit for the Oak Garden Homes project. This is located at approximately 3129 to 3159 Northwest 11 th Street. The project will consist of approximately 17 units, single-family and duplex residential homes. It is in R-2 zoning. It has been recommended for approval with conditions by the Planning Department and approval with conditions by the Planning Advisory Board. The conditions associated with this project, you know, in addition to the standard conditions that are in a Major Use Special Permit for design is that the applicant shall -- the parking spaces shall be finished with a grass interlocking block semi pervious material; for all the parking plazas, terraces, patios and sidewalks have to be constructed of pavers on a sand base, and the entire interior driveway be constructed of asphalt or concrete with pavers at the entrance up to the building's edge. Because this is a PUD (Planned Unit Development) located in a low -density neighborhood, we feel, with these conditions, it would be consistent with the character of the area, and with that we recommend approval. Gil Pastoriza: Gil Pastoriza, 2665 South Bayshore Drive. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. We have read the Department's recommendations. I know you have a very long agenda. We have all of our experts here. This is a single-family duplex project in a duplex residential zone. With that said, I'm here to answer any questions if you have any. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Is there any opposition to this project? Anybody that wants to speak on this project, for or against it? This is a public hearing. No one from the public wants to address the Commission. Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Chairman Gonzalez: 1'll move it back to the Commission. We have a motion -- Commissioner Regalado: Second. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: -- and we have a second. It is a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Motion carries. Thank you. Mr. Pastoriza: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. PZ.2 05-01049a RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT, CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC USE OF AN ALLEY LOCATED EAST OF NORTHEAST 2ND AVENUE BETWEEN NORTHEAST 78TH STREET AND NORTHEAST 79TH STREET, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A." City of Miami Page 45 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 05-01049a Legislation.pdf 05-01049a Exhibit A.pdf 05-01049a Planning Analysis.pdf 05-01049a Zoning Map.pdf 05-01049a Aerial Map.pdf 05-01049a Public Works Analysis.pdf 05-01049a Public Works Letter.pdf 05-01049a ZB Reso.pdf 05-01049a Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-01049a Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: Official Vacation and Closure of an Alley LOCATION: Approximately East of NE 2nd Avenue between NE 78th Street and NE 79th Street APPLICANT(S): BHG-79th St. LLC, Lessee and Lubins Development Corp., Owner APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with a condition*. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. PLAT & STREET COMMITTEE: Recommended approval on October 6, 2005 by a vote of 4-0. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval with a condition* to City Commission on December 12, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: This will allow a unified development site. NOTE: This item is related to the previously approved Villa Patricia Major Use Special Permit project on November 3, 2005. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-06-0057 Chairman Gonzalez: PZ 2. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ2 is an official vacation and closure of an alley east of Northeast 2nd Avenue, between Northeast 78th Street and 79th Street. This is an alley closure in conjunction with the Villa Patricia project, which was already approved by the City Commission for the -- it's been recommended for approval by the Planning Department, approval by Public Works, approval by Plat and Street Committee, and approval by the Zoning Board. As the public purpose, the applicant is providing, as part of the Major Use Special Permit, a public open space and garden, as depicted in the applicant's site plan, which was approved in the MUSP (Major Use Special Permit). It's also for the facilitation of this affordable elderly housing project with the appropriate liner units, again, as reviewed and approved in the MUSP, so we recommend approval. City of Miami Page 46 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Lucia Dougherty: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board. Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue, here today on behalf of the owner and the applicant, and with me is Michael Cox and Gonzalo DeRamon and David Alexander from the Carlisle Group. This is a project that you actually approved a Major Use Special Permit about a month ago, and in connection with that Major Use Special Permit, we need to close and vacate an alley that goes right through the middle of the track. In fact, there are buildings built on this alley currently, and it is not actually opened to the street, and in terms of our public purpose, we are actually creating a beautiful landscape park here that is open to the public in connection with the Major Use Special Permit, and remember, this is an elderly project that $22 million was granted by the state of Florida and 3 million from the City of Miami, so with that -- Vice Chairman Winton: Move PZ2. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wishes to address the Commission, please come forward. Yes, ma'am. Your name and address. Nina West: Nina West, 3690 Avocado Avenue, in Coconut Grove, and I'm here as the communications director from Miami Neighborhoods United, and we are not against this project in any way, and it has nothing specifically to do with this particular project, which looks lovely. Basically, what we're asking -- and 1 think, in this case, it might be great -- that whenever something is given up by the City, which actually belongs to the citizens, that they are adequately recompensed We're talking -- I'm going to only speak once, so I won't get up on every item. Now, I want to talk about alleyway closures, easements, and things of that nature, so one of the things we ought to look at is the financial benefit to the developer and what is coming back to the citizens, so if a developer is doubling their profit, then we ought to think about -- sometimes they will, because they have doubled the FAR (floor/area ratio) in their lot or something of that nature -- we ought to be getting more than maybe 50, 000 for a public works project, and I would just like the -- whoever it is in the Planning Department or the Zoning Department who takes care of these things, maybe there should be a little bit of a financial look so that the City is adequately compensated when we give away our property. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, ma'am. Anyone else? OK. Seeing none, hearing none, it comes back to the Commission. Yes, Commissioner Spence -Jones. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I just want to commend you guys on this project. I think it's an awesome project. I'm very excited to have it in Little Haiti. The folks there, the seniors, definitely need places to live, and 1 welcome it, and anything from my office that you need -- you guys need on that, just know that you have my support, and thank you. Ms. Dougherty: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. City Attorney. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Mr. Fernandez: Just to address it for the record, because I see that the City Commission has not given any particular directions in that sense, the prior speaker made reference with regard to the City of Miami Page 47 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 financial considerations, skating on very thin ice. There's a whole lot of good law and as well as good public policy consideration, generally speaking, when you vacate alleys and things like that. Originally, they belong to some property owner, but it was given as an easement, or it was given as a public right-of-way, as long it was needed and to be used and the like. When it ceases, state statute provides that it reverts back to the property owners, and typically, the classical situation is that, you know, up to half goes to one and the other half goes to the other and the like, and so while it's very appealing from a fiscal perspective to try to exact some sort of compensation for the public, we need to be very careful that we are not doing violence to some other well established legal principles, as well as policy consideration, so I just say that for the record to make sure -- and I'll be very happy to meet with the speaker and try to sensitize her and the community to some of the legal constraints that we have to function under. Vice Chairman Winton: I think that'd be valuable to do, and I know -- Mr. Fernandez: Sure, it will. Vice Chairman Winton: -- Nina will carry the -- Mr. Fernandez: Oh, I know her very well too. Vice Chairman Winton: -- message back, so that -- Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Any further discussion? Hearing none -- is this a resolution or an ordinance? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Resolution. Mr. Fernandez: Resolution. Chairman Gonzalez: OK, it's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Motion carries. PZ.3 05-01510 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT, CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC USE AN EASEMENT LOCATED EAST OF SOUTHWEST 42ND AVENUE, NORTH OF EL PRADO BOULEVARD, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A." 05-01510 Legislation.pdf 05-01510 Exhibit A.pdf 05-01510 Zoning Map.pdf 05-01510 Aerial Map.pdf 05-01510 Public Works Analysis.pdf 05-01510 Public Works Letter.pdf 05-01510 ZB Reso.pdf 05-01510 Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-01510 Fact Sheet.pdf City of Miami Page 48 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 REQUEST: Official Vacation and Closure of an Easement LOCATION: Approximately East of SW 42nd Avenue, North of El Prado Boulevard APPLICANT(S): 3917 Le Jeune Road, LLC and Vicente E. & Jacqueline Ferrando APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Dean S. Warhaft, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: N/A. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. PLAT & STREET COMMITTEE: Recommended approval on September 1, 2005 by a vote of 5-0. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on December 12, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: This will allow a unified development site. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-06-0058 Chairman Gonzalez: Let's go back to the order of the agenda. Let's take PZ. 3. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ 3 is an official vacation and closure of an easement. It's located east of 42nd Avenue, north of El Prado Boulevard. This is an R-1 single-family residential district. It's not a closure of an alley or a right-of-way; it's an easement. It's been recommended for approval by Public Works, approval by Street and Plat Committee, and approval by the Zoning Board. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Yes, sir. Dean Warhaft: Good morning, Chairman, Commissioners. My name is Dean Warhaft, offices at 2841 Day Avenue, Coconut Grove. This is essentially the moving of an existing easement through a piece of property. Essentially, the easement runs through the middle of the property currently, so it affects the ability to build in the lot, and it's part of an overall replat for three existing lots that are being replatted into two lots, and as a result, the easement runs right through the middle of the property, so what's happening is, the easement is now being moved to the back of the property so that it allows the proper utilization of the land. Vice Chairman Winton: And it's being replotted from three plats currently to two? Mr. Warhaft: Actually, it's two and two-thirds lots. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Commissioner Sanchez: So this -- City of Miami Page 49 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Vice Chairman Winton: Good news. Commissioner Sanchez: -- isn't an alley closure, right? It's a -- Vice Chairman Winton: No, just an easement. Commissioner Sanchez: -- vacation of an easement? Ms. Slazyk: Right, it's an easement, which they're -- it's being relocated, but they have to vacate this one to do so. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved Commissioner Sanchez: Second Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second. It's a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wishes to address the Commission, please come forward. All right, Seeing none and hearing none, the public hearing is closed Is this an ordinance, Mr. City Attorney? Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): It's a resolution. Commissioner Sanchez: It's a resolution. Chairman Gonzalez: It's a resolution. All right. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Motion carries. Mr. Warhaft: Thank you. PZ.4 05-01511 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT, CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC USE OF AN ALLEY LOCATED NORTH OF NORTHWEST 13TH STREET BETWEEN NORTHWEST 9TH AVENUE AND NORTHWEST 10TH AVENUE, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A." 05-01511 Legislation.pdf 05-01511 Exhibit A.pdf 05-01511 Planning Analysis.pdf 05-01511 Zoning Map.pdf 05-01511 Aerial Map.pdf 05-01511 Public Works Analysis.pdf 05-01511 Public Works Letter.pdf 05-01511 ZB Reso.pdf 05-01511 Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-01511 Fact Sheet 01-26-06.pdf 05-01511 Fact Sheet 02-09-06.pdf 05-01511 Submittal Photos.pdf REQUEST: Official Vacation and Closure of an Alley LOCATION: Approximately North of NW 13th Street between NW 9th Avenue City of Miami Page 50 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 and NW 10th Avenue APPLICANT(S): Jackson Residences, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: A. Vicky Garcia -Toledo, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. PLAT & STREET COMMITTEE: Recommended approval with a condition* on October 6, 2005 by a vote of 6-0. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to City Commission on December 12, 2005 by a vote of 9-0. *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: This will allow a unified development site. CONTINUED A motion was made by Commissioner Spence -Jones, seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, and was passed unanimously, to continue Item PZ4 to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for February 9, 2006. Direction to the Administration by Commissioner Spence -Jones to meet with her regarding the proposed alley closure, and further provide her with a sense of what's happening in the area north of Northwest 13th Street between Northwest 9th Avenue and Northwest 10th Avenue. Chairman Gonzalez: PZ4. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ4 is an official vacation and closure of an alley north of Northwest 13th Street, between 9th Avenue and loth Avenue. This has been recommended for approval with conditions by the Planning Department, Public Works Department, Plat and Street Committee, and the Zoning Board. At the Plat and Street Committee, the recommendation for approval was with that condition that the applicant coordinate the physical improvements within the neighborhood that are beneficial to the general public with the Planning Department. The applicant had since come to meet with the Planning Department and met with the City's historic preservation officer, and proffers to repair two historical columns that are located at the corner of Northwest 10th Avenue and 11 th Street. This is part of a vacation that is required for the Jackson Residences project, which is a Class II Special Permit, located at 1311 Northwest 10th Avenue, and through the Class II there are a series of other design -related conditions that are going to be imposed on the applicant, and I'll let them present the project. Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Good morning. Chairman Gonzalez:: Good morning, counsel. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Vicky Garcia -Toledo, with the law firm of Bilzen Sumberg, offices at the Wachovia Center. 1 am here today, joined by Carlos Gimenez, my co -counsel on this matter, and we are representing and ATM Holdings, owners of the property. The property is located on Northwest 13th Street, between Northwest 9th Avenue and 10th Avenue, and it abuts directly right to State Road 836. It is zoned R-4, and we're before you for the closure of a alleyway that, while it has been platted, has never been improved and has never been used, and if ever was, it would dead-end also into 836. The purpose of this closure is to redevelop the site with a residential condominium ownership -type apartment building, approximately 170 to 175 units, Ciry of Miami Page 51 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 and 10 stories in height. As Ms. Slazyk represented to you, we have brought some posters that have the concept of the building. The building will not look like this. We have had three meetings with the Internal Design Review Committee of the Planning Department. We are committed willingly, and by condition of the Plat and Street Committee, to work with the Planning Department in the design of the building. We will be required to get and obtain a Class II for design review for this project, so we would request that you support our request as the public purpose we are offering to improve, and Carlos will pass out photographs. Directly to the west, across loth Avenue from our property is a City of Miami portion of an abandoned right-of-way and city property, which prior to 836 being built, was represented with two historically significant columns that were the entrance to a turn -of -the -past -century home. That home has long since disappeared, but the columns are still there. They need repair. The area where they're located needs clean up, and my client has committed to the City, as his public purpose, to refurbish these columns; bring them back to their true glory, and to clean up that area and maybe even kind of create a small park -like atmosphere. We've noticed that there is a lot of individuals from the neighborhood that work at Jackson Memorial Hospital, which is just under 836 passway, and they walk to and from work, and this would be an ideal situation where they could just sit perhaps for a little bit and take a load off, so that is our commitment to you as part of our public purpose, and we would hope that you would support our request for closure. Chairman Gonzalez.' All right. Thank you. Is there any opposition to this item? All right. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wishes to address the Commission, please come forward Yes, yes, sir. Mariano Cruz: Yes. Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. I'm going to speak because this is a public hearing. I'm going to say like what many people say, I got nothing against Vicky. There's nothing personal or anything, but all these developers come, makes money because they get a -- vacate an alley, an easement, or whatever it is, and then they don't contribute anything to the neighborhood They don't find out, like the old people who plays there. I mean, do something. Go to the church. I mean, the guy is going to benefit greatly, big money with all these things. Oh, with change of zoning, and this what I got because people are working out there. They don't have the time to come here, but we are -- you're listing all these gentrification and all this. What is -- they say, let's put some affordable housing there or workforce housing in that development, that way people don't have to live in Biscayne Bay or under 1-95, because that's what contributing to that, because don't tell me that everybody can make the mortgage, insurance, tax payment, or $250, 000 condominium. You have to take care of the people out there. People are being displaced by all this construction there, and this gives me, as a public hearing, the opportunity to say so. You hear, you hear in the Ivory Towers, "Well, I am there in the trenches." Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Nina West: This is a question for the Attorney. Does -- ? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): I'm sorry, but I need your name for the record, please. Ms. West: I'm sorry. Nina West, 3690 Avocado Avenue, Coconut Grove. I'm the communications directors here on behalf of Miami Neighborhoods United. Commissioner Sanchez: Nina -- Ms. West: I'm asking the same -- Commissioner Sanchez: -- all questions go through the Chair. Ms. West: Oh. Mr. Chairman. City of Miami Page 52 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. West: Can you get a ruling from your attorney, if you do not know yourselves, does the same legal precedence and practice apply to alleyways that belong to the City of Miami as they do to easements? Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. City Attorney. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): We would have to look at it with regard to how it was originally platted, who owned it originally; you know, whether the City -- how the City acquired it, and how the City came to it, whether it was a public alley, a private alley. All of those issues we would need to look at. Ms. Garcia -Toledo Perhaps, I can try to answer that because -- Ms. West: Well -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: -- we do have -- Ms. West: -- I'm not against your project. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: -- an opinion of title as part of the application, which is required by the City of Miami Zoning Board, which states where does the land revert back to? It usually reverts back to whoever donated the land -- Mr. Fernandez.: Correct. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: -- and in this case, you have an opinion of title on the record that says that the land reverts back to the lots adjacent to the alley the same way they were offered for public use by those property owners who originally owned the land. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Did that answer your question, Ma'am? Ms. West: Well, it does in this case, and I'm speaking in a general nature. Mr. Fernandez: I offered to meet with you -- Ms. West: OK, and we can discuss this, too. Mr. Fernandez: -- and we can -- I can share with you the benefit of all our -- Ms. West: OK. Mr. Fernandez: -- knowledge and -- Ms. West: Thank you, because I think maybe in the alleyways we should look closer. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Yes, sir, good morning. Charles Cutler: Good morning. Charles Cutler, 706 Northwest 9th Avenue. What my concern is about these properties being used for development is that -- I think that we're sort of doing this backwards. I think that it's up to a developer to get with a City Attorney first so that when they do bring this stuff to the public, then we'll have a clearer understanding of exactly what it is that we're getting. I can understand the parks, but they're talking about some other things, which City of Miami Page 53 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 they're not specific about that, and in terms of the actual development, we need houses because some people just can't -- that -- just not going to be able to afford some of these houses, and I think that a more direct and a more -- a better tradeoff would be to sort of reduce the cost of some of these houses or to get -- to actually identify some people in the community that normally wouldn't even be able to afford houses, to give them an opportunity to go into some of these developments. I think that would be a more equitable tradeoff because with the parks, they're going to have to do that anyway because we need more green space, and from some legislation that I've looked, they're going to have to do that anyway, so by giving us something that they're going to have to give us anyway, I don't see that as being a viable tradeoff, so I think that really this whole -- with this whole thing, before they bring this stuff to the public and to the Commission itself, I think they need to work this out with Legal and not us, and I think that they need to have a more clear-cut definition about what it is that they're actually going to do for the community in terms of the land that they're acquiring. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Anyone else? All right. The public -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: 1 do. Chairman Gonzalez: -- hearing is closed; comes back to the Commission. Yes, Commissioner Spence -Jones. Commissioner Spence -Jones: This happens to be in my district. I just have a couple questions for you. Did you -- ? That's very close to the Spring Garden area, correct? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: It's -- this is east of 10th. It's not really -- it's -- this is north of the Culmer Station by about four blocks, and east of 10th Avenue, so it's a bit awayfrom -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Spring -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: -- Spring Garden. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Has the neighbor -- the local neighborhood associations in the area, have they been briefed about what you want to do there? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I don't -- I have not met with them, ma'am. This is -- we don't have a project yet to show -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Ms. Garcia-Toldeo: -- because we've been working with your staff and one of the difficulties: My client is in the workforce housing product. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: One of the dculties is in designing a project at today's land costs and construction material cost, that will stay -- that will have a better quality of design that the City is requiring, but that it will stay within the cost factor so that the individuals of the neighborhood are not displaced, and so that we have a product that is obtainable by those who work over at the medical center that can stay in the area, so that's the reason why we're working. What we -- what's be -- in front of you today is only the closure of that alley in order to develop the project. The development and design of the project will then be part of the Class II with the -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. I just want to add this -- and thank you for the explanation. I, myself had questions on the project, and the backup that I had on it didn't really provide me with the necessary answers on it, so if I can ask that we defer the item so that 1 can be further City of Miami Page 54 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 briefed by Lourdes and Otto on this in order for me to feel comfortable on it? Because, overall, I mean, I have no idea what's actually going to be happening within that area if we put that building there, so I would ask that we defer that and then come back to it to discuss it. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion to defer -- Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Commissioner Sanchez: Second Chairman Gonzalez: -- and we have a second All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: The item -- Ms. Slazyk: Can we have -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- has been deferred -- Ms. Slazyk: -- a date certain of the -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- for -- Do you want a time certain? Ms. Slazyk: February 23, I believe. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah. Ms. Slazyk: February 23? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah, we could do that. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Can we do it on the 9th? Chairman Gonzalez: The 9 is not a Planning and Zoning agenda. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I just don't want to delay the process if, at all, possible, and this is just for the closure of the alley, not for the building itself so -- Chairman Gonzalez: Do you want to do it on the 9th instead of the 23rd? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Can -- as long as Pm briefed prior to coming into a meeting, so yes, I don't -- if we can do it on February 9, I'm fine with that. Ms. Slazyk: OK, February 9. Commissioner Sanchez: And, counsel, could you come back with a better definition of the public benefit? Come back with a better -- how many trees you're going to plant? What is exactly that you want to do? By just showing this -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: On that site. Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, and I could basically -- you know, I could make arguments as to why it benefits the community and the quality of life, but I think there needs to be better definition as to how it's going to benefit the public. City of Miami Page 55 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Ms. Garcia -Toledo: OK. Commissioner Spence -Jones: And, Lourdes, if you can also, when we do meet, if you can give me a sense of what's happening in the area, period, because I'm sure there's a lot of home owners in that immediate area, correct? Ms. Slazyk: I don't know that for a fact -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah. Ms. Slazyk: -- because it's right up against the expressway, but -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah, but on the opposite side. Ms. Slazyk: -- I'll see if we can get -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah, I would like -- Ms. Slazyk: Right. -- a list of other developments in the area. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Thanks. PZ.5 05-01512 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT, CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC USE ALLEYS LOCATED WEST OF NORTH MIAMI AVENUE BETWEEN NORTHWEST 35TH STREET AND NORTHWEST 34TH STREET, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A." 05-01512 Legislation.pdf 05-01512 Exhibit A.pdf 05-01512 Planning Analysis.pdf 05-01512 Zoning Map.pdf 05-01512 Aerial Map.pdf 05-01512 Public Works Analysis.pdf 05-01512 Public Works Letter.pdf 05-01512 ZB Reso.pdf 05-01512 Application & Supporting Dcos.pdf 05-01512 Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: Official Vacation and Closure of Alleys LOCATION: Approximately West of North Miami Avenue between NW 35th Street and NW 34th Street APPLICANT(S): North Miami Avenue, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Adrienne F. Pardo, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. PLAT & STREET COMMITTEE: Recommended approval with conditions* on City of Miami Page 56 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 October 6, 2005 by a vote of 6-0. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to City Commission on December 12, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: This will allow a unified development site. Motion by Commissioner Spence -Jones, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado R-06-0059 Direction to the Administration by Commissioner Sanchez to ascertain that the City is receiving exactly what is being proferred by the developers in reference to alleyway closures. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. PZ5. Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Thank you. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.5 is another official vacation and closure request for an alley west of North Miami Avenue, between 35th and 34th Streets. This is within a C-2 -- R-2 and R-3 districts. This is coming in in conjunction with a project, and what the applicant has proffered for their public purpose is an open green space at the west end of the property to be developed and coordinated as part of the project when it comes in for the special permit. It's been recommended for approval with conditions by the Planning Department, approval with conditions by Public Works, approval with conditions by Plat and Street Committee, and approval with conditions by the Zoning Board, and the specific condition is that the open green space at the west side of the property must be included in the development approval document for the site, and the development of that open and green space must be coordinated with the Planning Department and the Police Department. Adrienne Pardo: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'ma. Good morning. Ms. Pardo: I have some boards for this item, but my architect hasn't gotten here to show you the rest of the boards, so if I could just ask for your indulgence? I also have Items 7 and 8. Could 1 take Items 7 and 8 now? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Excuse me. Ms. Pardo: And then he's on his way, and then I could -- Ms. Thompson: We do need your name for the record Ms. Pardo: I'm sorry. Adrienne Pardo, with law offices at Greenberg Traurig, 1221 Brickell Avenue. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Let's -- Otto Boudet-Murias (Chief of Planning and Economic Development): Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: -- take 7. City of Miami Page 57 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Boudet-Murias: We do have an 11:30 time certain on the Bond Oversight Board presentation. Just wanted to remind you. Chairman Gonzalez: Oh, yeah. Mr. Flanders is here. That's right. All right, let's -- Commissioner Sanchez: We'll bring that one back. Chairman Gonzalez: -- hold the PZ (Planning and Zoning) item for about 15 minutes. "[Later...1" Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Let's go back to the PZ (Planning and Zoning) agenda. PZ 5, are you ready, Counsel, for PZ 5 now? Ms. Pardo: Thank you for your patience. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Lourdes, please. Ms. Slazyk: I think I already presented -- Chairman Gonzalez: You did. Ms. Slazyk: -- PZ 5. This is the -- the public purpose had to do with an open green space require -- proffer at the west end of the property to be developed and coordinated with the Planning Department as part of the project, and it's been recommended for approval with these conditions from all the lower boards. Chairman Gonzalez: Is there any opposition to this item? All right. I don't see any. Go ahead. Ms. Pardo: Hello. My name is Adrienne Pardo, with law offices at Greenberg Traurig, 1221 Brickell Avenue. I'm here today on behalf of the property owner, and with me here today, as well as on behalf of the property owner, is Asi Cymbal and Suzanne Hollander. We also have our architect of record, Kobi Karp, and Jennifer McConey with us, as well as our landscape architect Bruno Cavalho with Kimley-Horn. We're here before you for a alley closure. We have a Major Use Special Permit that we have been working on with the City as well, and this particular project has gone before the Plat and Street Committee, where we have recommendations of approval, as well as we've gone before the Zoning Board, and to give you an idea as to what we're doing with this particular project. It's a residential building. It'll have 155 residential units. It's 12 stories, and we have retail along the ground floor, and also, I have a board right here that shows you that the parking garage is totally lined on all sides with live/work units, and what we're doing in this particular project with regards to the public purpose in the alley, which I know is on everyone's minds. There are -- currently, there's an existing alley, and this property -- excuse me. I failed to say that it's on North Miami Avenue, between 34th Terrace and 35th Street, so you have an existing alley that runs in an east -west direction, and an existing that runs in a north -south direction. Actually, there is a tree before you get to our property in the middle of the alley, so you can't -- even if you wanted to drive down this alley, you couldn't because there is a tree located there now, but what we're doing, we've designed this entire project so that you have the building here -- and it's very low -scale. You can see that the base of the building is only four story, and then the tower portion is above it, and the tower portion is moved towards North Miami Avenue, directly right across from Midtown, and what we've done is we've designed this project with a private park area, so we have a 50 foot -- actually, we've taken two entire lots and we're dedicating those to green space. We're keeping that as green space so it provides a buffer and also a public purpose, so we have two lots that are totally -- they'll be all green space, and they are 50 feet wide and 213 feet in City of Miami Page 58 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 depth, so the total area being closed is 5,600 feet, if you were to add up this entire area. However, the Fire Department has said, "We want a 15-foot easement to be able to drive our trucks through, so in essence, what we've done is we're dedicating a 15-foot area over here, so in essence, this alley here that we're asking to be closed is really moving over here. We're keeping that open, and in addition, we're giving more land with regards to the park because the total park area is 10,750 square feet. It's almost double of the area that we're seeking to vacate for this particular project, so we think it's a great addition. It'll be -- this park area, this green space will be open to the public, and we're requesting your approval on it. If you want, I could have the architect walk you through this particular project, and we think it's a great project. It's very innovative. We're working with -- Kobi Karp's office is working with architects out of New York and Mexico called Ten Architectos. They're very innovative, and we think it's a great project for the area, and we would hope that you would support it. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Yes, sir. Charles Cutler: I just need to get a point of clarification, Mr. Chairman. There was an ordinance that was passed that addresses green space, in terms of these developments coming up, and they have a responsibility to make more green space available and as a part of that particular ordinance, so what I'm hearing now is that we're getting a tradeoff for the same green space that's actually covered by our ordinance, so it seems to me that that point, in my mind, needs to be clarified because it seems as if we're actually getting something that we're going to be getting, and if they don't give it, they're going to end up paying a fine for it anyway, so if there's a real tradeoff here, then we need to see that because it goes back to the reality that in these developments, what we really need is housing for people that normally can't afford them, so I think that if we're giving up property, then it should be some type of tradeoff in terms of actually real opportunity of home ownership by -- for people that normally wouldn't have that opportunity, so 1 think that that would be a more viable tradeoff instead of giving us something that basically we're going to get -- we're going to have to get anyway. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Anyone else from the public? All right, the public hearing is closed; bring it back to the Commission. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I just wanted -- you offered the walk-through. I just have a couple questions on the drawings. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Pardo: Absolutely. Commissioner Spence -Jones: The project looks great, but I just want to have a clearer understanding of what I'm voting on. I'm waiting for you. Kobi Karp: What we basically -- Ms. Thompson: Excuse me. 1 need a name for the record, please. Chairman Gonzalez: Name and address for the -- Mr. Karb: My name is Kobi Karp, 2915 Biscayne Boulevard. As Adrienne has done such a nice job in presenting really what we have done is we have here an opportunity to create a commercial liner with a full residential liner all the way around the building, which is what this designates right here. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Um -hum. City of Miami Page 59 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Karb: We have worked with your staff for the past four months coming up with unique ideas in window sizes to make it a very lively building. Furthermore, what we do is we don't have a green space requirement; we do have an open space requirement here, which is about 80 to 100 square feet. It's on the zoning legend. We are matching and beating it. 1 think we are providing about ten thousand, seven hundred -plus square feet, and what we've done, in essence, with the exception of what the Fire Department requires for the access, we had an opportunity really on the -- this being North Miami Avenue, Midtown Miami; this being 34th and this being 35th, as you can see in the yellow is the liner wrapping all the way around the garage. We have created here a very nice 50-foot wide plaza/park, which is nicely detailed and landscaped. We have worked with your staff in detail as to what it should look like and feel like, and how traffic can move from 34th -- pedestrian traffic can move from 34th to 35th, and they really provide an amenity to the neighborhood that does not exist. The -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Can I ask you -- so, on the opposite side of the greenway, what is - - is it a street there? Yeah, that's a street? Mr. Karp: Yes. Commissioner Spence -Jones: What street is that? Mr. Karp: This is 35th Street and this 34th Street. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Mr. Karp: And there are existing structures here with an alley in the middle. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. I like the project. The project is -- Mr. Karp: Thank you. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- a great project. This is in the Wynwood area, right? This is in the Wyn -- The only thing that I would like to at least suggest on it is on the green -- because we do need more greenway space or green space in Wynwood We only have, I believe -- we have a shared park, right Commissioner Winton? Robert Clemente. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Spence -Jones: So it would be nice to definitely have more green space there. 1 would like to see, if possible, from a public purpose standpoint, that the people that live in Wynwood, from a design standpoint, if it's possible, to work on making sure that that particular community is considered in -- or that green space reflects the people that live there so they are a part of it, culturally or -- just -- I'm sure, as you design it, Mr. Kobi Karp -- Kobi Karp? OK -- just make sure that we keep in mind the folks that are living there currently because I know that's one of the biggest issues, is the development coming to the area and them being included in some of it, so if there's any way, from some sort of design standpoint, that the Puerto Rican community that lives there, you know, is included somehow. Mr. Karp: Yeah. One of the things that Ten Architectos and us and the developer are thinking about is to bring the artisans in the community and have them come up with some creative ideas and artwork in the public space and some of the features that we're looking to have there. Commissioner Spence -Jones: So moved Mr. Karp: Thank you. City of Miami Page 60 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion -- Vice Chairman Winton: Now, I will second, but for discussion. Chairman Gonzalez: -- and we have a second for discussion. Discussion. You're recognized, Mr. Vice Chair. Vice Chairman Winton: This really -- this has nothing to do with this project, my comment. I'm looking at the -- specifically with this project -- zoning map. What we're doing here is going to have a very, very dramatic impact, and I want to know from staff standpoint whether or not -- you know, we're going through Miami 21. We're trying to figure out where density goes, where it doesn't go. You have -- this entire area has exactly this "T" alleyway system, and with those alleys in existence, from a scale standpoint, you can't build that anywhere in this area. Every single one of these blocks has the same system, and from a scale standpoint, those alleyways require a lower scale, lower density development. As soon as we allow this, then the domino effect has started, and so I'm concerned -- personally, I don't know if this is the right answer, by the way. I don't know that we want to increase density for all of these blocks, and I don't know how far south this goes, and I'm going to guess that it goes from 36th to 29th, so we're making a policy decision that we're going to wipe out all of these alleyways from 29th to 36th and radically change the look and density of North Miami Avenue possibly back to 1st Avenue. Is that what we really want to do? Ms. Slazyk: I don't know if I can answer the question about, you know, a policy change for all them. We review each application on its merits when it comes in, and what we've been trying to do to be consistent with where we're going with Miami 21 is through the design review process ensure that there is appropriate transitions and scale. Sometimes an alley -- you know, the depths of a lot of these properties aren't adequate sometimes for the development, along with its parking and liners, and sometimes a street or alley, you know, would need to be closed, and all 1 can say is that we look at them case by case, and in this case, they did the appropriate transition and scale by putting their taller buildings on Miami Avenue scaling back into the neighborhood, and -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I think that's a problem because this isn't in an island or on an island. I'm telling you, if you all look at your own document -- Ana, you need to be looking at this also -- you are just now changing the scale of the neighborhood radically. I don't know that that's the right policy decision. I don't know that it isn't the right policy decision, but I'm terribly troubled that we're not thinking about the global implication on this particular project because all of these streets are exactly the same, so that said -- and -- sorry, I like the project, but this is a major issue here, and I'm going to withdraw my second because 1 think this issue has to be -- Ms. Slazyk: Looked at, yeah. Vice Chairman Winton: -- looked at consciously, and we have to make a decision. It's a part of Miami 21, and y'all are making a major decision here that's going to impact a very significant portion of that area in a vacuum and that's a big mistake, and that's the reason I'm going to withdraw my second. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Can 1-- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- just ask -- you mind if I just ask -- Otto, do you -- are you aware of -- have you been fully briefed on this particular project? You have any input on it, because this is the second time 1 would have been briefed on it? To me it looks like a project that could be great. This is right on the side of Midtown. Everything's within that same area of growth, but City of Miami Page 61 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 can you explain to me what your viewpoint is on this? Mr. Boudet-Murias: 1 have not been involved in the design review process for the project. I have been briefed, and 1 have seen the design of the project. The challenge we have is that we're looking at this area now, along with the balance of the first quadrant, and those are the type of decisions that we need to make as part of the Miami 21 process. What is the appropriate scale of a particular roadway neighborhood, and unfortunately, we're not at the point in that analysis where we can really say whether this is what's going to be recommended as part of Miami 21. We're not there at this point. I think -- I don't know if Ana can elaborate on the actual design of the project and her thoughts. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, but just understand, I'm not criticizing this project -- Mr. Boudet-Murias: Correct. Vice Chairman Winton: -- at all. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Um -hum. Vice Chairman Winton: It's not about my -- Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning and Zoning): I'm sorry. What was the question? Vice Chairman Winton: My comment isn't about this project. My comment's about a major policy decision we're about to make; that we're letting a project make a policy decision for us about what an area is going to look at when we're spending a million dollars on a master plan that's supposed to answer these questions. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I agree. I agree. Ms. Pardo: Could I respond with regards to the comments -- ? Vice Chairman Winton: There isn't anything for you to respond to. You can't respond because this is a policy issue. You're on the developer side. This doesn't have anything to do with the developer. This has everything to do with our policy. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Pardo: Well, if you'd like, we'd be happy to -- I mean, what we tried to do -- and we had talked with staff -- because there's been discussion, and I just wanted to make a reference to Miami 21. There's been discussion about Miami 21 for the past year, so you have a lot of developers out there who have projects, who had invested in land in the City of Miami, and they didn't know what to do with regards to their projects. It cost -- you know, they put money into Miami, and they invested in Miami, and we had met with staff, and we've discussed it with City administration and other people as to what does the -- you know, what do these developers do, and we had been told, design a project, keeping in mind everything the City has been seeking to accomplish, and we really feel that we did that here. We designed a project -- how often do you see four sides of a building, the garage, completed lined with residential units? So we did that here. The height of the C-1, we have some rezonings involved in it. The height of the C-1 is 120 feet or 12 stories. We are not seeking to increase that at all. We're staying within that height, and that portion of the height is on the North Miami Avenue side of the property that's existing C-1, and then what we did is we looked at the site and we said, yes, we do have alleys that we need to close, and yes, we do need a public purpose, and yes,• you do have some R-3 behind it and some R-2, so let's give ourselves a buffer, and that's where we came up with that green space; 50 feet wide and 213 feet long, and it was all in mind with, we need to design a project. City of Miami Page 62 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 We don't know what Miami 21 is doing. We still haven't seen anything, and we understand it takes a long time. We understand that, but that's why we really spent a lot of time, and the owner of the property, they got a local architect and they also got a New York architect so they could come up with something innovative, and if you really -- if you look at this project, it incorporates all the features that you've been looking for in the projects that are coming before you, and we're not -- with regards to lining the parking structures, with regards to having the retail, the pedestrian on the ground floor. There's been other development along North Miami Avenue because it's zoned C-1, you know, the first depth of it, and we really think that this is a great project. It's in line with what the City -- the direction that the City has been moving in, and so we would request your -- all right, and we're also giving back the fire easements, so in essence, there's -- one of the alleys that we're seeking to close is just being relocated, and we're provide -- we feel that we're really providing a better project. We're improving the area. Right now you've had a lot of other development a little further to the south along North Miami Avenue with other projects that have been approved. Vice Chairman Winton: When are you going to know -- when are we going to know, from a Miami 21 perspective, what our plans are going to be for North Miami Avenue on the -- across the street from Midtown? Commissioner Sanchez: That was going to be my question. Ms. Gelabert: I think -- we're working on the east quadrant, and we're hoping that in the -- we would like to say that by the beginning of the summer we would have it complete. As we're speaking, we have been working on some ideas, both DPZ (Duaney Plater-Zyberk) with the Planning Department as to what the proper transit would be, so -- Vice Chairman Winton: For that area. Ms. Gelabert: -- I would think -- yeah. What we have done is looked at everything, and we are both working. We have had meetings. There's one coming up, so the transit already is being laid. It just hasn't been finalized of where the proper -- what we're seeing throughout the City, which it was -- what we were just talking about is, we are creating a transition that we understand that is needed. Some of these lots on the commercial are narrow, and then throughout the City, as all of you know, what we have is it jumps from a C-2 probably to some R-3 in this case. There needs to be a transition, and what we do through design review is create that transition through massing, so that's on the analysis of design that we tried doing with the project, with the limitations of what the zoning allows today. Answering your question, what we are seeing on our first task as the transit on the east quadrant is that we're going to have a transition between what you see today and as existing C-2 to what you see on the R-3. We are also looking at the possibility that there -- it will be a new zoning category between the R-3 and the R-4 because there's a jump from density in height that does not exist today in our books, and that's another thing that we're looking into creating. In the many conditions throughout the City, Miami Avenue being one, and there's other ones, where we're actually seeing that that transition has to be placed, and we're doing that, so right now, I would say to you, that transition will have to exist. I don't think -- as we have it today, it will not go from what we have C-2 to the R-3. We are placing transitions, so does that answer your question about the policy and the alley? You know, I couldn't say yes or no right now, but as -- are we working on creating transition similar to what the project is proposing? The answer would be yes. Vice Chairman Winton: But why couldn't DPZ and you all get soon a better sense of what you think is going to happen here if you're already working on that? Ms. Gelabert: We are moving as quickly as we can, and on the creation of the transits and putting -- and working with the allowable height and the envelope of the building, as we tried to get away from the existing FAR (floor/area ratio), there is a back and forth on the conversation City of Miami Page 63 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 just to make sure that when we come out to the public in the presentation, we haven't -- it is -- it has been a process. 1 think we're close on having something, and as -- when we know exactly what we have agreed upon, then we might go through the review of the project, but right now we don't have any laws to tell the applicant this is the final word. I'm not sure if I've made myself clear. Vice Chairman Winton: No. Ms. Gelabert: The answer is -- well, I guess what you're asking is why -- we don't have a -- I said I couldn't tell you what transit is happening here in order for me to tell the applicant "This is what you need to do." What I'm telling you, as a Planning process, is that we know that when we do the transit, just because we've been doing it citywide, but we don't have a final version is, we are seeing that we place the transit, and there is a transition. Every time we have a condition like the one you're seeing with C-2 to an R-3, we are creating between those lots a transition, a new transit zone, in order to give us the same thing that we do right now through design process, so we will have a different in height and volume between what fronts Miami Avenue to what transitions back to 1st Avenue, but the transit, specific transit is not yet in place. It's the concept of where we're going. That's why I'm not able to give it to them right now. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, 1 can tell you, though, that your decision is made about that issue when you approved this. You made the decision. Commissioner Sanchez: The alleyway closure. Vice Chairman Winton: Absolutely, because they're all the same, and so you have made a decision with this approval. There isn't any more conversation that Miami 21. It's done, and so you'd rather the decision be made by approving one project, then figure it out from a Planning standpoint. That's what you're telling me. Ms. Gelabert: What -- we're doing that throughout the city. What I'm also saying and another component is in front of what is the SD-27.2, we have that height, and that's the -- on the Planning process, what we're trying to look at. This is citywide and that's why we had to do it by quadrant, is on these streets -- on the frontage, we're trying to be consistent with asking the same height so the street reach the same on both sides, so we're trying to move as quickly as possible on the transit as we both -- as the Planning Department reviews the -- all the applications that are coming in front of us, but in this particular case on Miami Avenue, I will tell you, from a Planning, I guess, general rule, we are not really deviating. If we have, for example, on the 27.2 on the Midtown, we had 120 allowed or the height, we're trying to maintain that same height in order for it to read as one. The other level is what we try doing through design review, which -- you know, do we have retail? Do we have activity? That sort of thing. On the streets that might be lower, those are the ones where we're trying to create that transition, but as we look -- the quadrant itself, we're looking to be consistent at what, you know, streets facing -- for example, zoning -- right now, you look at our maps and the zonings are everywhere. Some streets have an R-3; the other one has R-4. We're trying to bring down to a common denominator, if you will, so going back to your question, 120 would probably be consistent on Miami 21 at this frontage on Miami Avenue. Just because in front of it we just have it, which is the Midtown, which allows for that. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. City Attorney. Oh. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Jorge L. Fernandez: I just want to make sure that 1 bring you back into focus again. I want to remind you of two very essential elements that you need to keep in mind. Yes, Commissioner Winton has very appropriately identified the pickle that you find yourself in, vis-a-vis Miami 21, City of Miami Page 64 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 but I need to remind you that number one, there is no moratorium in place, and number two, that you do not have zoning in progress in place either, so the applicable law that applies to this application in front of you is what is existing in the books, not what will be in the books in six months or a year, so applicant is correct in front of you. The evaluation that staff has done has been based -- yeah, they're very futuristic. They keep in mind what's coming. You just heard Ms. Gelabert give you a very rational explanation of what may be, but they have evaluated the merits of this application, what's existing in the book, and that's what you're duty bound to do. You need to find competent, substantial evidence on the record from the evidence that's being adduced as to whether the existing criteria are met or not -- existing criteria. Furthermore, 1 need to remind you that in spite of what Miami 21 may or may not look like, any particular case that you handle does not create a precedential value. I know that in some ways it forces the hand and it lays, in the minds of some, a precedent that then therefore all of these would be the domino effect, but I'm telling you that from a legal perspective, it doesn't. It might from some other angle, community, civic, you know, perception, and that's all fine. 1 don't mean to fight against that. I'm just trying to clearly state for you the legal parameters. Vice Chairman Winton: But we don't have an obligation to approve an alley closure. Mr. Fernandez: No, you certainly don't, but in denying the alley closure, you need to establish the reasons as to why no public benefit and all the criteria that the code sets out for alley closure, and then you're no longer talking about the project. The fact that the project is inextricably tied to the alley closure, you know, makes it an easy one to understand; but for the alley closure, there wouldn't be a project. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, let me go back then one more -- one last question and make sure I understand this very clearly. If this project gets approved -- Mr. Fernandez: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: -- from a policy standpoint, it is not precedent setting. Mr. Fernandez: No. Vice Chairman Winton: We have no obligation to allow all the rest of the developers -- Commissioner Sanchez: No. Vice Chairman Winton: -- who are going to want to do the same thing right up and down the street -- Mr. Fernandez: Absolutely not. Vice Chairman Winton: -- to agree to that. Mr. Fernandez: Absolutely not. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Commissioner Sanchez: So -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right, so -- Commissioner Sanchez: -- you withdrew your second or you're putting it back on the table? Vice Chairman Winton: I don't know. I'm thinking. Y'all can keep going. I'm trying to figure it City of Miami Page 65 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 out. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I'm going to second it since you withdrew it, so I'll second the motion. Chairman Gonzalez: All right, so we have a motion and we have a second. This is a resolution, right? Ms. Slazyk: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez.: All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Ms. Pardo: Thank you very much. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. PZ (Planning and Zoning) -- Commissioner Sanchez: Now -- Chairman Gonzalez: We're going to go up to 12:30. We're going to take a break at 12:30 -- Commissioner Sanchez: Is this the last -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- if you don't mind? Commissioner Sanchez: -- alley closure that we have? Ms. Slazyk: I think there's one more, PZ 33. Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Let me just get this out of the way. On the alleyway closures, I want to emphasize and make sure that the Administration follows through on what is -- and I shouldn't say -- what the agreement between -- or what has been proffered by the developers, to make sure that we're getting exactly what they're saying because I've had some complaints from local residents that come here, and they see something on a picture or something's presented to them and at the final product, it looks nothing like what was proffered to them, so we got to make sure that everyone stands up and gives what they proffered to the City on these alley closure ways [sic]. All right. PZ.6 05-00078b RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), GRANTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, REQUIRING CITY COMMISSION APPROVAL, TO ALLOW SURFACE PARKING, WITH A TIME LIMITATION AND SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 6789 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA, ZONED "R-1" SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, "C-1" RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL, "SD-9" BISCAYNE BOULEVARD NORTH OVERLAY DISTRICT AND "SD-12" BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICT, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A." City of Miami Page 66 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 05-00078b Legislation (Version 1).pdf 05-00078b Exhibit A.pdf 05-00078b Analysis.pdf 05-00078b Zoning Map.pdf 05-00078b Aerial Map.pdf 05-00078b ZB Reso.pdf 05-00078b Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-00078b Plans.pdf 05-00078b Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: Special Exception Requiring City Commission Approval LOCATION: Approximately 6789 Biscayne Boulevard APPLICANT(S): Balans Biscayne Properties, LC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to City Commission on November 28, 2005 by a vote of 7-0. PURPOSE: This will allow surface parking for a restaurant and multifamily units. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado R-06-0060 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. PZ.6. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ6 is a special exception that requires City Commission approval. This is in order to utilize an SD-12 property for surface parking for a restaurant with multifamily units. This is at 6789 Biscayne Boulevard for the Balans Restaurant. It has been recommended for approval with conditions by the Planning Department and approval with conditions by the Zoning Board. The conditions are that the land -- the applicant actually did a wonderful job of landscaping the portion of the property that faces the residential street. We've asked them to consider a new landscape plan that includes landscaping along Biscayne Boulevard to add some more to the boulevard side with full specifications being review -- submitted for review and approval by the Planning Department, and also through this approval for the parking for the Balans, as the plans for the restaurant move forward, we have asked them to submit final color and material samples for review of aesthetic impact subject to, again, review and approval by the Planning Director prior to issuing a building permit, and -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Slazyk: -- with those conditions, we recommend approval. City of Miami Page 67 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: Lucia. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Mr. Fernandez: Just a point of privilege. We have just distributed to you a substitute agenda item. We have in further reviewing this item after the agenda went to publication -- and I apologize for this -- the item includes three conditions, as you see in the resolution. We're eliminating one because upon further reflection, 1 have concluded that the condition that states there, that this special exception runs with the operator only contravenes established case law. Land use decisions -- and special exceptions are land used decisions -- run with the land, not with the operator, so today's Balans, but tomorrow may be a Chinese or some other entity, and when you grant a special exception, as well as when you grant a rezone or when you make a comp plan change, you affect the land; you don't affect the owner because owners change freely, and that's a constitutional right, inalienable -- to be able to alienate propertyfreely. Commissioner Sanchez: So that would be an improper condition. Mr. Fernandez: That would be, in my opinion, improper condition, so I am removing it from the resolution that's in front of you, and the only two conditions are in essence the ones that Lourdes have stated on the record, which is the landscape condition and is also the material samples, review the colors, and the like. Ms. Slazyk: Right. I didn't read the operator condition. I removed that. Commissioner Sanchez: But all we would have to do is just amend the resolution. Mr. Fernandez: That's right, so -- Commissioner Sanchez: Strike one of the conditions out. Ms. Slazyk: Right. Mr. Fernandez: That's right. Instead of A, B, and C as it shows in what's in the packet -- Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Mr. Fernandez: -- you only now have A and B because the old "A" has disappeared -- Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Fernandez: -- and the Clerk has a copy of the most recent -- or of the one that I just distributed Vice Chairman Winton: I thought we had a half dozen conditions or more? Wasn't there an issue on parking also? Ms. Slazyk: Well, what you saw several months ago was the actual zoning change, where they got the SD-12 and then they had to come back for the special exception in order to use the SD-12. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh. City of Miami Page 68 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Ms. Slazyk: From that time till now we've been meeting with the owners of Balans working out the design issues, and how they were going to do the landscape as the buffer between their parking and the residential area, and that's the plan that's before you today that we're recommending approval of What we've asked them to do is to include more landscaping on Biscayne Boulevard and bring it back because they did a great job on the residential side, and for the final building color and material sample so we can review the aesthetic impact. Vice Chairman Winton: So the original conditions back several months ago, they were -- those are already in -- Mr. Fernandez: Those are in place. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, OK, I see. Mr. Fernandez: Those are in place. Vice Chairman Winton: I'm -- I got it. I'm with you. Ms. Slazyk: And what is -- Mr. Fernandez: These are just conditions that go to the special exception. Vice Chairman Winton: I got it. Ms. Slazyk: Right. Vice Chairman Winton: I understand Ms. Slazyk: And that's what they've -- we've been working on with them since then. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. So moved. Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Chairman Gonzalez. OK. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have -- wait a minute. Do we have -- ? This is a public hearing. Do we have anyone from the public that wishes to address the Commission on this item? Yes, sir. Come forward, please. Your name and address for the record. Ken Whiting: Yes. My name is Ken Whiting, 742 Northeast 68th Street. I own three properties on 68th Street, and Balans Restaurant has my full support. 1 think it's a good project. It's within the confines of a charrette we did a couple years ago. It's a -- (UNINTELLIGIBLE) 30-foot, 40-foot building, and I think it's a good project. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Anyone else from the public? Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. We have a motion and we have a second. It's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye. " The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Meeting is going to stand in recess City of Miami Page 69 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 until 3 o'clock. Lucia Dougherty: Thank you very much. Chairman Gonzalez: It's 12:30. You want to make it at 2:30? OK, so let's recta that. 2:30. We will be back at 2:30 this afternoon. PZ.7 04-01438 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 244 AND 252 SOUTHWEST 6TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "INDUSTRIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL"; MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 04-01438 Legislation.PDF 04-01438 Exhibit A.PDF 04-01438 Analysis.PDF 04-01438 Land Use Map.pdf 04-01438 Aerial Map.pdf 04-01438 PAB Reso.PDF 04-01438 Application & Supporting Docs.PDF 04-01438 FR Fact Sheet 02-24-05.pdf 04-01438 FR Fact Sheet 04-28-05.pdf 04-01438 FR Fact Sheet 06-23-05.pdf 04-01438-Submittal . pdf 04-01438 FR Fact Sheet 11-17-05.pdf 04-01438 FR Fact Sheet 12-01-05.pdf 04-01438 SR Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544, from "Industrial" to "Restricted Commercial" to Change the Future Land Use Designation of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan LOCATION: Approximately 244 and 252 SW 6th Street APPLICANT(S): Neo Holdings, Inc.; Legacy Asset Holders, Inc.; Tavmar Investments, LC; Mahlberg Investment Holdings, Inc. and Ibiza Properties, Owners APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on December 1, 2004 by a vote of 5-2. See companion File ID 04-01438a. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to Restricted City of Miami Page 70 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commercial. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton and Sanchez Absent: 2 - Commissioner Regalado and Spence -Jones 12754 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. PZ.7. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Thank you. For the record again, Lourdes Slazyk, Planning Department. PZ.7 and 8 are companion items. It's a land use and a zoning change for the property at approximately 244 and 252 Southwest 6th Street. The request is from industrial to restricted commercial, with a companion zoning change, a request to SD-7. This has been passed on first reading by the City Commission. On PZ.8, which is the zoning item, the applicant has proffered a covenant, limiting the FAR (floor/area ratio) to a 4.25, and with that the Planning Department has no further objections. It was recommended for approval by the Planning Advisory Board and approval by the Zoning Board. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. Good afternoon. Adrienne Pardo: Good afternoon. For the record, my name is Adrienne Pardo, 1221 Brickell Avenue, and I can make a full presentation or -- Commissioner Winton is shaking his head no. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, no, because we're -- I'm going -- if -- after the public hearing is -- Chairman Gonzalez: OK. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wishes to address the Commission in reference to this item, please come forward. All right, seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. It comes back to the City Commission. Vice Chairman Winton: Move PZ.7. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion and we have a second. It's an ordinance. Madam City Attorney. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Assistant City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call. 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 adopted on second reading, 3/0. PZ.8 04-01438a ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 36 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 AND "C-1" RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL TO "SD-7" Second Reading City of Miami Page 71 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 CENTRAL BRICKELL RAPID TRANSIT COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 244 AND 252 SOUTHWEST 6TH STREET; 219, 233, 243, 253 AND 257-259 SOUTHWEST 7TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 04-01438a Legislation.PDF 04-01438a Exhibit A.PDF 04-01438a Analysis.PDF 04-01438a Zoning Map.pdf 04-01438a Aerial Map.pdf 04-01438a ZB Reso.PDF 04-01438a Application & Supporting Docs.PDF 04-01438a FR Fact Sheet 02-24-05.pdf 04-01438a FR Fact Sheet 04-28-05.pdf 04-01438a FR Fact Sheet 06-23-05.pdf 04-01438a FR Fact Sheet 11-17-05.pdf 04-01438a FR Fact Sheet 12-01-05.pdf 04-01438a Submittal.pdf 04-01438a SR Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from I Industrial and C-1 Restricted Commercial to SD-7 Central Brickell Rapid Transit Commercial -Residential District to Change the Zoning Atlas LOCATION: Approximately 244 and 252 SW 6th Street; 219, 233, 243, 253 and 257-259 SW 7th Street APPLICANT(S): Neo Holdings, Inc.; Legacy Asset Holders, Inc.; Tavmar Investments, LC; Mahlberg Investment Holdings, Inc. and Ibiza Properties, Owners APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on January 10, 2005 by a vote of 7-2. See companion File ID 04-01438. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to SD-7 Central Brickell Rapid Transit Commercial -Residential District. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton and Sanchez Absent: 2 - Commissioner Regalado and Spence -Jones 12756 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. PZ.8. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ8 is -- this is the companion. City of Miami Page 72 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Chairman Gonzalez: Anybody from the public that wishes to -- Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: -- address the Commission, please come forward. OK, none. Seeing none, we have a motion and we have a second. It's an ordinance. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Assistant City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Madam City Clerk, roll call, please. 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 adopted -- Adrienne Pardo: Thank you. Ms. Thompson: -- on second reading, 3/0. PZ.9 05-00296a 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 ARTICLE 6, SPECIAL DISTRICTS, IN ORDER TO AMEND SECTION 627 MIDTOWN MIAMI SPECIAL DISTRICT, MORE PARTICULARLY THE SD-27.1 MIDTOWN MIAMI EAST SPECIAL DISTRICT; SECTION 627.1.6 IN ORDER TO MODIFY PROVISIONS RELATED TO UPPER LEVEL BALCONY ENCROACHMENTS INTO SETBACK AND BUILD -TO AREAS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-00296a Legislation.pdf 05-00296a Attachment to Analysis.pdf 05-00296a PAB Reso.pdf 05-00296a FR Fact Sheet 11-17-05.pdf 05-00296a FR Fact Sheet 12-01-05.pdf 05-00296a SR Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000 Text APPLICANT(S): Joe Arriola, City Manager FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on October 12, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. PURPOSE: This will modify provisions related to upper level balcony encoachments into setback and build -to areas within the Midtown Miami City of Miami Page 73 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 East Special District. Motion by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton and Sanchez Absent: 2 - Commissioner Regalado and Spence -Jones 12757 Chairman Gonzalez: PZ 9. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.9 is a second reading ordinance. It's a cleanup to the Midtown Miami East Special District in order to adjust the encroachment allowance for balconies to match the same as awnings. This is encroachment in the setback area. It's not right-of-way, and it's been recommended for approval, and approved by the City Commission first reading in December. Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. P -- Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. We have a motion and we have a second. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wishes to address the Commission, please come forward. Seeing none, hearing none, we have a motion and we have a second. It's an ordinance. Madam City Attorney. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Assistant City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call, please. 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 adopted on second reading, 3/0. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. PZ.10 05-00651 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 ARTICLE 6, SECTION 601, SD-1 DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT; IN ORDER TO MODIFY THE INTENT OF THE DISTRICT, ADD REQUIREMENTS FOR STREETSCAPE AND FACADE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE REQUIRED BY CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT FOR EXTERIOR WORK INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE THE "DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. BOULEVARD STREETSCAPE BEAUTIFICATION MASTER PLAN AND FACADE STANDARDS", HERE AND AFTER REFERRED TO AS THE "MLK BOULEVARD STREETSCAPE PLAN AND FACADE STANDARDS;" CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City of Miami Page 74 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 05-00651 SR Legislation Modified by Staff.PDF 05-00651 SR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-00651 FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-00651 PAB Reso.pdf 05-00651 Map.pdf 05-00651 Analysis.pdf 05-00651 FR Legislation.pdf 05-00651 Submittal Presentation.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000 Text APPLICANT(S): Joe Arriola, City Manager FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on June 29, 2005 by a vote of 7-0. PURPOSE: This will add requirements to the SD-1 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard Commercial District. Motion by Commissioner Spence -Jones, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones 12760 Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.10. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ 10 is a second reading ordinance, amending the SD-1 Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard Commercial District, and we have our consultant here to make a presentation to you on that. Vice Chairman Winton: We didn't see it before? Ms. Slazyk: We didn't have the presentation at first reading, so we have it now, if -- Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Chairman Gonzalez: 1 wonder if Commissioner Spence -Jones is back in the office yet because this is in her district. Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning & Zoning): I understand she's coming. I under -- Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Ms. Gelabert: I've been told that in 10 minutes, she should be here. Chairman Gonzalez: Let's hold PZ 10 until the Commissioner of the district is here. "[Later...J" Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Let's go back to PZ 10. We have -- City of Miami Page 75 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Sanchez: Congratulations. That's a beautiful project. Chairman Gonzalez: -- Commissioner Spence -Jones here now. Yeah, beautiful project. That's right. Commissioner Sanchez: PZ (Planning & Zoning) what? Chairman Gonzalez: PZ 10. Commissioner Spence -Jones: PZ 10. Commissioner Sanchez: 10. We're supposed to be going forward, not backwards. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I know. Ms. Slazyk: We -- we're going to do a presentation for you on the SD-1, Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard commercial district. This is the improvements plan that -- the beautification master plan that led to the text amendment that's before you, and we also have Greg Gay and Jose Casanova from the Planning Department here. Gregory Gay: Chairman, members of the Commission. Gregory Gay, with the Planning Department. We're here to present to you today for a second reading consideration the ordinance to amend SD-1, and we're providing you with a presentation of the design guidelines and standards, which will be included as a part of the SD-1. We have with us, as a part of the presentation, Bruno Carvalho, who's with Kimley-Horn and Associates. They've worked very extensively with the community in making a lot of these presentations and the images that are going to be before you, so I present to you Bruno Carvalho to make his presentation. Bruno Carvalho: Thank you, Gregory. 1 can see it on my screen, but 1 don't see it up on the wall. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a problem with the -- Mr. Carvalho: There it is. Chairman Gonzalez: They're trying to -- Mr. Carvalho: It's on. Chairman Gonzalez: Now, there you got it. There you -- Mr. Carvalho: Good afternoon, everybody. Bruno Carvalho with Kimley-Horn and Associates, 1691 Michigan Avenue, Miami Beach, and it's an honor to be here today in presenting a terrific project that we've been working on with now the current Commissioner Spence -Jones before she was Commissioner, working in the Mayor's office sort of as a day-to-day manager of this project and several other projects that spun from the boulevard, and I must say it was that early leadership and the continuity of the leadership on Commissioner Jones's part that really made this project happen and what it is today. This is a collaborative master plan that focuses on streetscape beautification and facade standards for the Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. We begin with a vision statement, and I'll be brief on that. Basically, it says we want to create a great street, a street that's been neglected over the years, but now we want to make it an active place, opened to people of you know, all generations, cultural backgrounds, economic statuses; a place where they can come and shop, dine, and interact with the urban environment; a place that focuses on the unique cultural heritage of the area and emphasizes that through its architecture. This master plan is only a small part of a larger economic initiative called City of Miami Page 76 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 "Reclaim the Dream," and I'll touch base on some other projects that are part of that, because it's of two primary components: the right-of-way beautification and the facade standards, and as 1 said, there's additional projects that we'll touch base on. The boundaries are 62nd Avenue from -- 62nd Street from 1-95 to 12th Avenue, and part one was the streetscape beautification, and what I really going to say about this is that it's getting built. It's -- the initial planning started in June of '04 and shovel has already hit the ground, so in a year and a half, we're already starting to get a streetscape and that's really unprecedented. Working with the County, we also designed several linear parks with a lot of input from the community, and that's another critical aspect of this master plan, with all the community input that was gathered through the planning process. The SD-1, the Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard amendment was passed by the City Planning Advisory Board back in June of '05, and since then has just taken off It will become a part of the Miami 21 Smart Code, and always a strong emphasis on community input. The main components. Things we all want to see in our neighborhood, what is really lacking in this place, encourage interaction with the street, promote unity and cohesive design language; give it some identity, and enhance the African -based identity of the neighborhood; creating places, as you see up on the screen, that shops that have transparent fronts as opposed to gates and bars; that people can see what's going on inside the stores and are able to engage the store while walking down the street vice versa, enhancing the landscape, the lighting, the hard scape. Part 11 also focused on unity, promoting unity in all the different aspects of a facade so that we enhance that character, the distinguishable character of the neighborhood. This included awnings, signage, window treatments, materials on the buildings, and enhancing the African -based identity of the neighborhood with particular motifs and designs. Great care was taken to making sure that this was culturally correct and appropriate, and I'm again proud to say that several of these projects are already underway. 1 mean, the implementation focus of this master plan is really astonishing. The joint City and County Facade Program is under implementation, where you have an architect, Derrick Smith, who many of you know, developing many of the construction documents, and CD's (Community Development) already getting ready to permit many of these buildings. The Floyd House is one example, as you see here, before and after shot, as is the Pall Bearer's building, as well as the Scott building is a good example of what many of these buildings are soon to become. Some additional projects that happen as -- in congruent to the corridor improvement. One of them was the Tacolcy Center improvements that Commissioner Spence -Jones were originally worked on when she was in the Mayor's office and then spearheaded that. Here's -- this was -- well, the opening with Alonzo Mourning and the Mayor is a great event, and a lot of great improvements, including landscape and hard scape was done to that community center. It's a great place. We got a lot of artists involved, local artists and local kids. The footsteps offreedom is the next in line. Conceptual design is completed, and again, it was presented in a public presentation, and that's set to begin its implementation round. The transit village is next in line, and the County's really spearheading that. That's going to become a major transportation hub in that community; bring a lot of focus for that corridor. You're already starting to see private sector development happening. Edison Marketplace now under construction, right there in the center of MLK (Martin Luther King) Boulevard, so with all those things happening, it's really an unprecedented project, and again, Commissioner Spence -Jones, it was a pleasure working on it and we're excited to see things coming off the ground so quickly. Thank you. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez.: Thank you. Mr. Gay: Commissioners, as a part of the SD-1 overlay that is presently being changed, and as we add these standards to it, there are some modifications that we did make between the first reading and the second reading as far as some of the language as a part of the vision statement. We made those necessary adjustments and you should have those within your package. Other than that, we do present this as is, and if there are any questions at this time, we would like to entertain them. City of Miami Page 77 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: No questions? Commissioner Spence -Jones: So moved, yeah. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: A11 right. We have a motion and we have a second. This is an ordinance. Mr. City Attorney. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Before doing roll call, this is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wants to speak on this item, please come forward All right. Seeing none, the public hearing is closed. Roll call, please. 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 adopted on second reading, 5/0. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you for the presentation. 1t was real nice. PZ.11 05-01090 ORDINANCE Second Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING THE . FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT OF ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BY AMENDING CERTAIN POLICIES OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, HOUSING ELEMENT, PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT, COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT, AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT TO INCORPORATE LANGUAGE NECESSARY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MIAMI21 PROJECT; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO STATE AGENCIES AS REQUIRED BY LAW; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01090 Legislation.PDF 05-01090 PAB Reso.PDF 05-01090 FR Fact Sheet 10-27-05.pdf 05-01090 FR Fact Sheet 11-03-05.pdf 05-01090 SR Fact Sheet 01-26-06.pdf 05-01090 SR Fact Sheet 02-23-06.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544 Text APPLICANT(S): Joe Arriola, City Manager FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on September 21, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. PURPOSE: This will incorporate language necessary for the implementation of City of Miami Page 78 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 the Miami21 project. CONTINUED A motion was made by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioners Regalado and Spence -Jones absent, to continue Item PZ 11 to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for February 23, 2006. Chairman Gonzalez: Let's do PZ 11. It's going to take only 10 minutes, so let's do PZ.11 first, please. Sorry. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): The -- Commissioner Spence -Jones had some questions, I know, on PZ.11, so -- Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Ms. Slazyk: -- since she's not here, could we move to PZ 12 and we'll come back? "[Later...r Ms. Slazyk.' I was just told that we're going to request a continuance on PZ 11 to February 23 so that we can do some more briefing on that item. Commissioner Sanchez: So move to defer the item. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Commissioner Sanchez: That's PZ.11. Ms. Slazyk: PZ.11 to February 23. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. We have a motion and we have a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. The item has been deferred. PZ.12 05-01222 ORDINANCE Second Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ARTICLE 9, SECTION 917.14 OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY MODIFYING REGULATIONS RELATED TO PARKING LIFTS IN ORDER TO AMEND THE TITLE OF THE SECTION FROM "PARKING LIFTS" TO "AUTOMATED PARKING"; ADDING PROVISIONS FOR ROBOTIC AND OTHER MECHANICAL MECHANISMS TO PROVIDE PARKING BY SPECIAL PERMIT; PROVIDING FOR CRITERIA, PROVIDING FOR AN APPLICATION AND APPROVAL PROCESS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01222 SR Legislation.PDF 05-01222 PAB Reso.pdf 05-01222 FR Fact Sheet 11-17-05.pdf 05-01222 FR Fact Sheet 12-01-05.pdf 05-01222 FR Legislation.pdf 05-01222 SR Fact Sheet.pdf City of Miami Page 79 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000 Text APPLICANT(S): Joe Arriola, City Manager FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on October 12, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. PURPOSE: This will amend the title of Section 917.14 from "Parking Lifts" to "Automated Parking", and add certain provisions for robotic and other mechanical mechanisms. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton and Sanchez Absent: 2 - Commissioner Regalado and Spence -Jones 12758 Chairman Gonzalez: Let's do PZ 12. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): OK, perfect. PZ 12 is a second reading ordinance. This is the one on the parking lifts. Commissioner Winton had asked for some changes at first reading; we made them, and it's been recommended for approval, and the changes are already incorporated. We removed the 24-hour a day valet requirement, so -- Vice Chairman Winton: Good. Ms. Slazyk: -- it's here on second reading. We recommend approval. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wishes to address the Commission, please come forward. OK, seeing none and hearing none, it's an ordinance. Madam City Attorney. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Assistant City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call. A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above. Ms. Thompson: The ordinance is adopted on second reading, 3/0. Ms. Slazyk: OK. Chairman Gonzalez:: All right. PZ.13 05-01224 ORDINANCE Second Reading City of Miami Page 80 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, IN ORDER TO ADD NEW PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE STATION USES WITHIN SUCH ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ALLOW FOR SUCH USES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01224 Legislation.PDF 05-01224 PAB Reso. pdf 05-01224 FR Fact Sheet 11-17-05.pdf 05-01224 FR Fact Sheet 12-01-05.pdf 05-01224 SR Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000 Text APPLICANT(S): Joe Arriola, City Manager FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on October 12, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. PURPOSE: This will add new parking requirements for fire station uses within certain zoning districts. Motion by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton and Sanchez Absent: 2 - Commissioner Regalado and Spence -Jones 12759 Chairman Gonzalez: PZ 13. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ 13 is also a second reading ordinance. This is adding new parking requirements for fire station uses within the commercial districts. It's been recommended for approval by the Planning Advisory Board and passed by the City Commission first reading on December 1. Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. We have a motion and we have a second. It's a public hearing. Anyone in opposition or in favor that wants to speak on the item, please come forward. All right, seeing none, hearing none, public hearing is closed. It's an ordinance. Madam City Attorney. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Assistant City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call. City of Miami Page 81 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above. Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 3/0. Ms. Slazyk: OK. PZ.14 05-01230 ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), 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 7205 NORTHEAST 4TH 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. 05-01230 Legislation.pdf 05-01230 & 05-01230a Exhibit A.pdf 05-01230 Analysis.pdf 05-01230 Land Use Map.pdf 05-01230 & 05-01230a Aerial Map.pdf 05-01230 School Impact Review Analysis.PDF 05-01230 PAB Reso.pdf 05-01230 Application & Supporting Documents.pdf 05-01230 FR Fact Sheet 12-15-05.pdf 05-01230 FR Fact Sheet 01-26-06.pdf 05-01230 Submittal Maps.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 7205 NE 4th Avenue APPLICANT(S): 7205 Holdings, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on October 19, 2005 by a vote of 5-1. See companion File ID 05-01230a. PURPOSE: This will change the above property to General Commercial. CONTINUED A motion was made by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Sanchez absent, to continue item PZ.14 to the Commission Meeting currently scheduled for April 27, 2006. City of Miami Page 82 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Direction to the Administration by Commissioner Regalado to provide Commissioner Spence -Jones with all the information necessary regarding the issues surrounding the building of warehouses in the west part of Miami -Dade County and how this may affect District 5. Direction to the Administration by Commissioner Spence -Jones to work with the merchants in the area as well as with the Police Department and look at ways to enhance the area in order to provide a clean and safe environment for the merchants. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Let's go to PZ 14. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): I was just asked by Commissioner Spence -Jones office, 14 and 15 are items that she had continued for additional conversation; she'd like to be here for them, so can we go to 16? "[Later."' Ms. Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Did you want to go to 14 and 15? Chairman Gonzalez: PZ 14, yes, ma'am. Ms. Slazyk: OK. PZ 14 and 15 are companion land use and zoning change. This is for the property at 7205 Northeast 4th Avenue. The request is from industrial to general commercial with a companion zoning change to C-2. The Planning Department has recommended denial, the Planning Advisory Board has recommended approval, and the Zoning Board has recommended approval. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wants to address the Commission. Commissioner Sanchez: Madam Director, this is a zoning change, right? Ms. Slazyk: Correct. Commissioner Sanchez: Not a MUSP (Major Use Special Permit). Ms. Slazyk: Correct. This is not a MUSP. This is a land use and a zoning change from industrial to C-2. We have recommended denial of this because we are currently in the process of -- through the Miami 21 process, we've hired economic consultants who are looking at this very issue in this quadrant of the City for us now, as we speak, and we believe that this is a premature change. We'd really like to wait for the results of that study before changing land use and zoning in this particular area. Commissioner Sanchez: And as previously stated in an earlier PZ (planning and zoning) item, it would have been, what, June or July when you would have -- Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. I think we were talking about very early summer. Commissioner Spence -Jones: That we would have the actual -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yes. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- results back, right? Ms. Slazyk: That's when -- yeah, that's when we anticipate. I hate to give you a date certain -- City of Miami Page 83 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Spence -Jones: I understand. Ms. Slazyk: -- but we're -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: I understand. Ms. Slazyk: -- anticipating early summer. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, counsel. Lucia Dougherty: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue, here today on behalf of the owner and the applicant. Selig Sacks is the principal and is with me this afternoon. The property is located in Little Haiti in District 5, the west side of the FEC (Florida East Coast) railroad tracks, at 72nd Avenue -- I mean, 72nd Street and 4th Avenue. We're seeking a downzoning from I -industrial to C-2 in order to allow a recycling of the existing warehouse building for a live/work project. We want to make it clear that this application is only for this one site, which we think is very unique because it is in between these particular railroad tracks, and we think it's not -- it's a very large warehouse. It is 750 feet long, 150 feet wide, and 128,211 square feet. It's currently occupied primarily by rag merchants, and we're seeking to actually renovate this building. We have an economic and a feasibility study done by an engineer that basically says that we can turn this warehouse facility -- and Iris, if you don't mind showing some photographs of it, but here's a copy of it. This is a photograph of the existing condition. We can change this warehouse facility by popping up the top and making a live/work loft project. In other words, the roof would come off we'd have a second story; downstairs you could have your merchandising. You could have an artist studio you could live above, and we think this provides a really unique product for the City of Miami. I don't think there's any place in the City of Miami that has this. It also allows us to recycle a building which is obsolete in today's market. In other words, you have a warehouse that is too small for your 18-wheelers, the loading dock doesn't exist -- I mean, it doesn't fit the new trucks, the roofs are too short for all -- to make it a really viable industrial warehouse facility, and there's so many industrial warehouses in Dade County. In fact, this last urban development boundary amendment, there was three applications in West Doral Commercial Park alone; one for 250 acres, one 793 acres. These were all recommended for approval, not the ones that weren't recommended for approval by Armando Cordinas, so there's plenty of new warehouse facilities in Dade County that have the infrastructure already there in terms of trucks and highway systems and stuff to get in and out. This is no longer a viable warehouse facility, so we have now taken -- we are now proposing that we amend this Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance to allow one thing: residential. We're not changing the height that can be there. The height is exactly the same. You could put an office building at 120-foot high, as of right, without having to have any internal design review or any kind of design review process today. That's allowed today. All we're asking to do -- I mean, we're not changing -- by this change, we're not changing the FAR (floor/area ratio). We're not changing the height. We're not -- the only thing we're asking to do is to put residential, and we would agree to only rehabilitate this building so that we can actually have a live/work facility in there. We have several folks in the neighborhood who are in support of this application. We went to the Planning and Zoning -- we went to the Planning Board and the Zoning Board Both of them recommended approval of this application. Both of them thought that they recognized -- and it's interesting that -- what's happening is that at one point, this was a viable warehouse district before and after. This was the center of the garment industry. It's no longer that, but something else is very -- is happening in the neighborhood. People are moving their dentist's office there. They have a modeling agency photographer place now. 1 went inside of it. I happen to see a kitchen. I saw something that could have been a bedroom. We do have people who are living in the warehouses currently, illegally. You see lawn chairs out in the front. You see flowers in the flower beds out in front, City of Miami Page 84 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 but it's a warehouse facility, so people are actually living there right now. Pericone's has bought a piece of property right here, and he is proposing to put a bakery and a flower shop. We have Mango's who have bought property in there. We have Fullei Foods that is in there, so we have a lot of recycling of these warehouse buildings. Though, the one thing you don't have is residential, so let me just show you the residential we do have around here. We have residential all up on Biscayne Boulevard. This is C-2, which is what we're asking for. This is exactly the same zoning classification that we're asking for across the tracks. This is all residential. This is a church. This is all residential, so is this a -- in this one particular facility, is this the place that you're going to encourage -- and that's what I'm hearing -- that maybe you want to have a really fine industrial thing? It's never going to happen in this area because it's -- there's -- it's completely land blocked; you can't get to it, so you're never going to have a pristine industrial site at this location, but you can have something that will service the people in Biscayne Boulevard. You could have something that is actually going to anchor this neighborhood. You could have people buying products on Biscayne Boulevard and using the restaurants. You can have something that doesn't promote what's there now, which are crack addicts in the night. The folk who -- the fellow who actually maintains this facility, about six months ago he was held up by gunpoint, but that wasn't good enough for them; after they took his money, they wanted to run him over, as well, so this is not a great neighborhood. All this can do is bring better things for this particular neighborhood, better things for these residents who live around it, so with that, I'd like Larry Mizrach, who is an industrial real estate broker, an expert in industrial properties to kind of give you a overview as to whether or not this is an industrial site as opposed to whether or not this would make sense from a land use standpoint. Larry Mizrach: Good afternoon. As 1 stand here in this room, I see a lot of people that 1 know, especially Commissioner Winton, who is a good friend This -- I don't -- you have to see this property to really understand it and realize how landlocked it is. It's difficult to get to. It's sort of a little industrial area surrounded by -- like -- residential. I sold a building a few years ago directly to the west of this building, and the guy is still in there and he's -- he fixed up the building and it's still. He would like to eventually rezone it, too. This building is over 50 years old, and there is no other use for it as a warehouse. It's just an antiquated warehouse. Either tear it down; put up another warehouse, which doesn't make any sense, or you upgrade it to C-2 and make it better for the people in the neighborhood and better for the industrial community. You all know that 50 or more artist groups have moved to the Wynwood area and north of Wynwood into Little Haiti. We -- they are always looking for these small 1,500 foot places to move into. This is what they want. That's what I get calls for, and there aren't any. There is very little live/work in the -- of course, you've got some illegal live/work as Lucia said, but there's not any legal live/work, except a few units that have been -- already been rezoned as a matter of fact, so this is nothing new, but it's not a lot of rezoning. Yeah, eventually, I think they'll probably rezone the whole area. 1-- my family goes back to the 1940s in this neighborhood, and I could remember when they were all -- almost all residential, which is gone now, and it was rezoned industrial probably 50 years ago, and now it's industrial, and it needs to be changed to the current use. I'm the vice president of the Bakehouse Artist Complex. We have artists all the time looking for small spaces to move into, and I don't have them. We've got some big, old warehouses, and other people eventually are going to come looking to get rezoned too, and I can only say that this will upgrade the neighborhood Please pass this ordinance, and it can only help the neighborhood as Midtown Miami has helped Wynwood, and I thank you once again. Larry Mizrach, Mizrach and -- the broker of Mizrach Realty on 2399 Northwest 2nd Avenue, and I thank you. Ms. Dougherty: I just have one question. Mr. Mizrach: Yes. Ms. Dougherty: Are you being compensated for your time today? City of Miami Page 85 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Mizrach: No, no I'm not. I'm not a lobbyist. Ms. Dougherty: Thank you. I would like to call Hivo Gonzalez, who is our next door neighborhood, next, but before 1 do, I want to give you photographs of the subject property first. I'll let Iris send them arouna and then I'm going to show you a few examples of what's happening in the neighborhood. This is the casting director of Spanish commercials, but this is my favorite one. This is where somebody is actually living there, living in a warehouse, and I think it kind of speaks volumes for what we're talking about. This is Hivo Gonzalez. Hivo Gonzalez: Good afternoon. My name is Hivo Gonzalez. I own Van Teal Incorporated, which is a lighting manufacturing company, and we're at 7240 Northeast 4th Avenue. I've been working around this vicinity for 30 years. First time 1 moved there was at 344 Northeast 70th Street. I've been a tenant for twenty -something years. Five years ago I had the opportunity to buy building where we're located now and where we have small manufacturing lighting company. The reason 1 didn't want to buy in this area before was because of the crime. It was very risky. It was very dangerous just to move out there. At night, every time -- and I used to be at 7201 and 7205 where they're requesting the zoning change. For twenty -something years I was a tenant at that building, and many times we used to work there until 7, 8, 9 o'clock There were bushes. It was very risky, very dangerous. We were very concerned and afraid. We never went there by ourselves. We were broke in three, several times in that building, but still I live on North Bay Village, and this was close to me and that's why I took the chance to buy where we are located. I improve this building. I renovate it. I'm very, very proud of the building that I own. I landscape it. 1 clean it, and it's a beautiful building. Still, there is dumps on the street. This is a dead end street. In front of my building, in the morning you see the people have been there overnight having sex or whatever. Two nights ago a car was burnt in back of our building. It almost burnt our building. We're very fortunate nothing like that happen. This morning there was a poor man on the parking lot of our buildings. Police had to come and pick him up. He was a drug addict. There are homeless, that they have shacks behind our building. This morning I guess they were trying to remove them and help them. We never have problem with the homeless, but it's very, very sad to see the way they live. They have to come in front of or building or the other buildings there where you see that they try to open the water spigots to take some fresh water, even to bath there, so once I saw that they were going to try to change the zoning on this particular building and do a beautiful project, I think that we are in favor of that. Biscayne Boulevard is changing. All the neighborhoods from Biscayne to Northeast 4th Court, the houses there are over 2 or $300, 000 now. Before, you could buy a house there for nothing, so we need to go through some changes in the area. This is a small industrial park and I think this will make it look very, very nice. It would be a lot safer for all of us, so we're in favor of that. Thank you. Ms. Dougherty: Before the public talks, I'd just like to point out to you that Little Haiti Park is four blocks away, right here, and it's surrounded by industrial, and what is the point of putting $25 million into Little Haiti Park and not have residences around it who can enjoy it? So with that, I'd like to close our presentation and reserve some time for rebuttal. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. OK. This is a public hearing. Yes, sir, you're recognized. Your name and address for the record. Bennett Pumo: My name is Bennett Pumo with Pumo Properties. Our office is located at 7327 Northwest Miami Court. We've been in that location for over 50 years. We built these buildings many years ago. As far as the project is concerned, as far as -- I think she presented this at the last hearing as a work/live operation; now she's calling it a live/work operation. Live/work operation requires of course more of intense residential zone. As to the master plan, comprehensive master plan, she's not in compliance of the master plan at all. Master plan's calling for this area to be industrial. What she's going for is a C-2 zone. Nowhere within our Zoning Code that we have to deal with now -- as our City Attorney told us earlier today -- as City of Miami Page 86 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 written now, we can't go on what's going to happen on Miami 21. She's going for a C-2 zone for a live/work. Live/work doesn't exist in C-2. Does not exist. She's going for something that does not -- cannot be put in that zone. Why is she doing it? I don't know. She could go for an overlay. There's been several examples of overlay industrial zones throughout the country. In San Francisco alone they found in live/work and work/live in the '80s through the '90s did not work It drove the jobs from the neighborhood. If you look at our census that was given -- the City of Miami census that was given or done, this area is the lowest per capita income, besides Overtown, in the City of Miami. It also has the lowest rate of -- that has the lowest residential values, and the people that are in this district need the jobs. It's historically found out that the live/work, work/live lofts drive jobs out of the neighborhood. They're a single purpose building. In fact, live/work is even more restrictive to where it can't have many employees; maybe only one employee allowed. As far as the land -- the -- and I'm not short on time. The park has eaten into part of our industrial zone as it is. To spot zone this zoning -- this particular parcel is wrong. You want to maintain a historical, an industrial preservation district. You can create what they want to do, which I'm not objecting to what they want to do. It's how you get there, like the City Attorney says. There's always an end, but there's a different path you can take. Their path could be an overlay of work/live, live/work to the industrial zone. If the City of Miami wants to take this northeast quadrant of area, which is the only -- the largest contiguous parcels of industrial property in the northeast section, why not -- why tear it apart, spot zone it, and start tearing it down? It's a domino effect, and if you preserve it with an overlay of work/live, it can only enhance the district. They presented this as a derelict area with $3 an hour work crews, crack heads waiting to get a fix of abandoned buildings. I'm a hundred percent rented. I've got close to 600,000 square feet and 150 tenants in that neighborhood over. I'm a hundred percent. I've been a hundred percent for a long time. It's a viable industrial area. If you start to tear it down by spot zoning, you are going to decrease the job base. If you think it's devaluing, look at my tax bill. My tax bill went up 126 percent, so Dade County must think something's good for the neighborhood. A hundred and twenty-six percent increase in assessment, jeepers. It's really a depressed neighborhood. I'm a hundred percent rented. Oh, yeah, it's a derelict building. Yeah, we don't have businesses. I've got businesses. They've got businesses. Yeah, he's got a dog of a building that needs to be repaired. It was a dog of a building 20 years ago when I bid on the building, you know. It's a bad built building. It's got slip beams in it, whatever, but they'll sit there and put glass things out the top of it with terraces in an industrial zone, that's completely nonconforming to the master plan, the land use plan. You can't have it. If you want to do something, defer it. Let them come up with an overlay that will take work/live, live/work into an industrial zone. SD-28 in your Code already adopts work/live and live/work over an industrial zone down in the 20th Street area. If they would -- if you would do that for them, they could build their project with no problem at all, but to take an industrial zone, downgrade it to a general commercial, which I don't even think they could fit in -- live/work is not a listed use, approved use in C-2 or general commercial. It's only found in SD-28. If they would take SD-28 and maybe change it and adopt it to live/work on 1-1, it would work, and they could do their project with no problem. You're the guys here that are supposed to support the job base in Miami; make it work The jobs there -- we've got jobs. Don't tear it down. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Next speaker. Anybody else? Ms. Dougherty: Let me just respond to that while the other speakers are coming up. The C-2 district allows for home occupation. Up to 50 percent of the unit itself can be work situations, so that was amended about six months ago, and it's 906.5.2. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Selig Sacks: I'm Selig Sacks, and 1 would -- firstly, I want to thank those members who are coming out today to support us. My neighbor, Hivo Gonzalez, and others who you will be hearing from as well. I think I have a bit of a different vision of -- for the area in part than -- and for that location than Mr. Pumo expressed I see something which I call the creative City of Miami Page 87 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 community, people who are involved as software engineers, as architects, as people who are manufacturers, as suppliers of goods, people involved in the arts, who, as Mr. Mizrach mentioned, are looking for places where they can both live and work. What excited me about this project and why 1 went to buy this project as opposed to a building on Biscayne Boulevard in the '20s was the fact of being able to do something which I thought was very exciting and beneficial for the City itself, and to be part of this process of this wonderful vitalization that is happening in this City. I saw the proximity to Biscayne Boulevard and what Sinuhe Vega is doing there and Sandra Stefanie (phonetic) and others. I saw the fact of houses that are now priced at 300 to $400, 000. Yes, 1 saw a rail line, but what I saw were effectively a large corridor, which allowed light to come into it as well, and 1 saw the opportunity to have quality development, low -density development come into a location which would be a good transition to the residential itself where you would have live and work and create net jobs, having 50 or so different entrepreneurs who will be able to have a product that not -- that really is not available in Miami as far as 1 could tell from the discussions that I have had. People who are now renting in one place to live, renting in a place to work, and who would like, at the end of the day, to be able to own something in Miami and effectively consolidate where they live and work, not to do it illegally, but where they could effectively proudly hang their shingle and create a meaningful existence for themselves and also jobs that they will create for other residents currently in the community itself and that is the vision that I've been attempting to implement when I went to contract 18 months ago on this location. We -- I had the encouragement from the City Planning Department. They were very excited at this time about this particular project; other people that I have talked to, and I think it'll be an exciting vision as part of the overall bosaic (phonetic) of the City. I will say this, too. I don't believe that a location like that, which is dead ended and surrounded by railroad tracks, no matter if every building looks as beautiful as Van Teal's building does, if it -- if the sidewalk rolls up at 5 o'clock in the evening and you don't have the area being policed by a vehicular traffic to the north or pedestrians because it's locked in, it'll go over and -- and during the evening, all these different elements will again take over as they have and they continue to that area, and 1 think to be able to make that a safe and vibrant area so that people will feel that they can cross those railroad tracks and continue to Biscayne Boulevard, support the businesses there and enhance the neighborhood, that is our goal about this particular location, given the uniqueness and the qualities of it. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Yes, sir. Mallory Kauderer: Is it appropriate to speak in favor and -- concerning the general area -- Chairman Gonzalez: Sure. Mr. Kauderer: -- from this podium? Commissioner Sanchez: Please state your name and address for the record. Mr. Kauderer: My name is Mallory Kauderer. Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Kauderer: I live at 3701 Chase Avenue on Miami Beach. I own properties on Miami Beach and I own properties in Miami, both in the neighborhood that he's -- is of discussion right now and some other neighborhoods. Two of my properties in Miami were photographic studio complexes. The clients at those properties were people like Victoria Secret, Pottery Barn, Gap, Gap Kids, a high -end clientele. I employ people in that profession at those properties, at least one of them that 1 still own. The other one I sold down at the Edgewater area because I can't have people working in a dust bowl when the light's blocked out and that was the issue down there, which makes a lot of sense, so I sold the property, and we focused on our property, which is just on the block from this presentation on 71 st Street, and when I heard that there was City of Miami Page 88 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 something going on in the area, a project like this, it perk -- piqued up my interest. I thought this is interesting, and 1 was interested in what 1 found about the project and pleased to hear that it was happening because it does improve the area, and I had always planned for a larger production facility in the future when time came providing more to the industry. As an industry that I'm familiar with, 1 was in it 20 years ago as a fashion model for a long time, and as I've been in the property business, I've kept some level offamiliarity with it over the years. The -- but in my inquiries I found something that was extremely disturbing that was going on in the City of Miami. There was an effort being made, it appeared to me, at the staff level or at City level, to blight the area, and to turn the area into something that it was coming out of. Now, I have four large dogs on that property; two of them are German Shep -- sorry. Two of them are Dobermans, one's a German Shepherd, one's a Rottweiler, so no one goes on the property anymore, but prior to that, they did, and my equipment is valuable to my business. 1 don't want it stolen. I don't want my customers in danger. I don't want my staff in danger. I've had incidents at the property over the years. I have an ongoing policy where we, you know, bring the cars in inside and park them, where when people are leaving, we have a vigilant effort at the doorway to ensure that the area continues to -- that our customers are safe, and I'm extremely concerned because I was getting feedback that possibly this project was something that wasn't wanted; that the City was going to turn down, and continue this trend in the area, and dumping's a reality. We deal with that. I've had my staff you know, going to and from work bothered. Unfortunately, not hurt; though there have been a weapons use in those sorts of things over the years, and recently, knock wood, in the last 12 months I've had no incidents and I'm pleased 1 read something in the newspaper -- Chairman Gonzalez: We need you to conclude your presentation because -- Mr. Kauderer: I will. Chairman Gonzalez: -- you've been speaking for -- Mr. Kauderer: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) just the other day, and what I read was that crime was up dramatically in this area; yet, it was down in the rest of Miami Beach, so I ask this Commission beyond this issue, and I hope you approve this man's project, though I don't know him. I never met him. I spoke to him on the phone once because I was curious, and 1-- and it seems like a nice project to me. 1 ask you now, are you individually for the continued situation in that area in this proposed change to industrial use that will limit development and promote what appears to me to be a crime -- an area that -- where crime is rife and where it continues to be rife, contrary to the rest of Miami? Is that what the five of you are for? I don't think so. I couldn't imagine if you were. Vice Chairman Winton: Pretty preposterous anyway. Mr. Kauderer: If you were, you wouldn't be certainly sitting in the chairs that you're in. Vice Chairman Winton: It's a pretty preposterous suggestion in the first place. Mr. Kauderer: I beg your pardon? Vice Chairman Winton: I said pretty preposterous suggestion in the first place and offensive. Mr. Kauderer: I'm sorry that you're offended but nonetheless, I want to make sure the point is made and the point is made clearly, and that my time coming down here and being at this podium is not wasted. Either -- and I if offend you, 1 offend you. I offend some people; I please others. My point is not to be anything other than brutally honest in how I feel and what I think. Chairman Gonzalez: And we appreciate that, but you're going to have to conclude. City of Miami Page 89 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Kauderer: Thank you very much for your time. Chairman Gonzalez: You have been at this podium for more than five minutes. Mr. Kauderer: OK. Thank you very much for your time. Chairman Gonzalez: Madam City Clerk I need you to set the clock and I need to invoke the two -minute rule because otherwise, 1 mean, we'll be here until next month, OK, so two minutes is more than enough for anyone to make a statement and to make a point. Yes, sir. Yes, ma'am, I'm sorry. Sylvia Wong: Good afternoon. You know me, Sylvia Wong. My husband, Manny and I, own a business and property on Northeast 67th Street and Northeast 4th Avenue, just a few blocks south of 7205 Northeast 4th Avenue. Like many other concerned citizens and taxpayers in this area, we advocate live/work as a means to revitalize Lemon City and Little Haiti. Right now we would like to publicly thank our new Commissioner, Michelle Spence -Jones, for taking the time from her busy schedule last Friday to tour this area, and she saw for herself how this area could benefit from projects such as this one. It is important to note that the City of Miami's position is to encourage live/work throughout the City. In fact, the City has approved many live/work projects in many neighborhoods, such as in downtown on Brickell Avenue, in Wynwood, in Overtown, and Park West; so Lemon City/Little Haiti cannot be the only area of Miami that is being denied the benefit of the live/work concept. In addition, changing the subject property from industrial to C-2 is not incompatible with the immediate area, and I take exception to Mr. Pumo on this, and 1 know I will be backed up by our capable attorney, Lucia Dougherty, who can very well describe the differences between industrial and C-2 as it applies to our immediate area. You will see that -- most of the business in the 80 acres in our area do not need industrial designation, and C-2 will permit a residential by special exception component to this area. In fact, while planning for the Little Haiti Park currently under construction, City officials favored more residences around the park for this big, beautiful park not to be over run by the area's homeless, prostitutes, and drug addicts, some of whom Commissioner Spence -Jones did get to see during last Friday's tour. We did see drug addicts right up the street on Northeast 4th Avenue between our property and the subject property. Chairman Gonzalez: Ma'am, your two minutes are up. Ms. Wong: OK. We need mixed -use pedestrian friendly development, which will result in more residents and more jobs, so we do feel that granting the C-2 designation is compatible with giving -- with the goal of giving this area more energy and more life, and it is compatible with the goal of revitalizing Lemon City/Little Haiti, especially along -- Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Ms. Wong: -- Northeast 4th Avenue. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Ms. Wong: Thank you all very much. Yes, sir. Two minutes, please. Del Bryan: Thank you Mr. Chairman, and good afternoon to everyone. Del Bryan, 201 Northwest 7th Street, Miami 33136. 1 have been a resident of District 5 for over 15 years. Over that time I've seen very little change in many social and economic ills. This project will be a major catalyst. It does have the potential to do that in that area of our district that needs this type of an input. It needs courageous persons to step forward with their own pockets to start it and then, of course, whatever help they can get from the City or other sources would be helpful, City of Miami Page 90 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 but this location being so close to the proximity of Biscayne and the revolution or the evolution that that has taken on that entire area, the economic impact, the jobs, everything like that, it's a natural progression to move from there. It's not displacing anyone and it's not going to be exclusive or (UNINTELLIGIBLE) for anyone. That will bring higher paying jobs. It will bring people who work and live there. It means they will spend their money in our district and in the City, which will have a spin-off effect. This is -- could be -- it's a catalyst for further economic development and job development, and these are better and higher paying jobs than the minimum work job -- minimum paid jobs that many of our residents are having to get by on. Clearly, this being good for the area, and clearly with a commitment to spread the prosperity of Miami through different areas, District 5 really needs it and I ask that you approve this project and others like this that brings a positive net plus to us. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Mr. Bryan: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Anyone else? Yes, sir. Anthony Cho: Good afternoon. My name is Tony Cho and I'm the broker/president of Metro One Properties -- Chairman Gonzalez: We need your address for the record. Mr. Cho: --120 Northeast 27th Street. I was involved in the sale of this property and had been living and working in the Biscayne Corridor for the last five and a half years. I've witnessed the dramatic transformation of the Boulevard and the surrounding areas. Rail 72 is a project that I'm proud to have been involved with and can personally tell you that since its inception, the community's response has been overwhelmingly supportive and enthusiastic. This is a product that is not available in the City of Miami, and the response has been overwhelmingly amazing, and the amount of people that are interested in a product, in this price range, in this area, and I can tell you we have awaiting list, and you know, in comparison to all the luxury product that's being offered on the market on Biscayne Boulevard and on the Bay, I think this is a great alternative and addresses some of the issues that which need to look at for the urbanizing City of Miami. The City of Miami has changed so much in the past five to ten years, but many of the laws that govern its actions remains the same. One of the reasons why Miami 21 has been introduced is to address the many problems the City faces due to its population explosion and the urbanization. Live/work is a new concept in this young city, but has been in the zoning books of many other great cities for decades. We've been waiting for a project like this for a long time, which will not only transform an industrial wasteland, but will also provide alternative and more affordable living options in the dozens of luxury products that Biscayne Boulevard offers. We may be considered pioneers by looking west of the FEC (Florida East Coast) tracks, but Midtown Miami years ago transformed all of Wynwood and has been applauded for their efforts by many people, including the City of Miami. In that same vein, Rail 72 endeavors to unite the east of the tracks with the west of the track and the northern corridor in an attempt to make a better and higher use of this land in our urban core. It also addresses the issue of spreading density into the core where traffic is less and attempts to use a thoroughfare that is completely underserved, the FEC. I'll be brief Rail 72 is the right project in the right place at the right time, and 1 encourage you to support this project. Thank you for your time. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you so much. Thank you. Next, please. Yes, sir. Mike Wilson: Mike Wilson, 250 Northwest 13th Street. I'm a business owner in District 5. What a great opportunity this would be if I was able to move work/live in the area. I urge y'all guys to support this project. City of Miami Page 91 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Yes, sir. Dean Luis: Good evening. I'm Dean Luis, principal architect of D. B. Luis Architecture and Design, and we specialize in mixed -use urban development projects. Our urban redevelopment work here has received honors and awards in -- as well in cities, such as Paris, London, Washington, DC (District of Columbia), and Baltimore, and the reason I'm bringing that up to you tonight is to sped that there are three constants or datums for projects of this nature and they are the following. One is the site location. Typically, post industrial warehouses along railroad spurs, adjacent to loading ports, literally on the other side of the tracks. The sites are large. This site is over three football fields long and almost 75 yards wide. It is, in fact, the lost anchor of the Upper Eastside. The developer is the second datum or constant. He sees the light and is willing to take all the extra effort to rezone a plat for mixed -use development rights and offer incentives, which all boils down in many cases to taking less on the bottom line in exchange for pride of accomplishment and contributing more to the City and its residents. Finally, the third component is the architecture. It is urban in nature. It addresses the street and public first with its live/work mixed -use program, then integrates the resident in a vibrant, edgy composition which is rich in history, such as Flagler's Eastcoast Railroad, and strong image presence, strong enough in fact to transform the area into a renaissance of urban living. Our project, Rail 72, is commensurate with the above precedence. All cities faced with these previously external now inner urban or fringe sites built to a previous decades demands required redevelopment to alternate reuse programs compatible with the urban growth patterns already present in the surrounding neighborhoods. This is again truly the case here at Rail 72. Our design transforms an existing single house story warehouse shell of 125,000 square feet into a two-story live/work mixed -use development. In closing, eyes on the street, most important, 24-hour presence, great industrial materials, steel framing, tinted glass, crushed lime rock from the railroad tracks, reconstituted railroad ties and other components are a pallet offinishes. Imagine -- Chairman Gonzalez: Your two minutes -- Mr. Luis: -- nightscape lighting and activities. Chairman Gonzalez: -- are up, sir. Mr. Luis: Thank you very much. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Anybody else from the public? Irby McKnight: Irby McKnight, 1600 Northwest 3rd Avenue. I am also the chairperson of the Neighborhood Assembly for the Empowerment Zone, and we made a loan to a small business person who was housed in that area, but because of a lack of security and a lack of eyes on the street, his business was burglarized several times, costing us lots of dollars. There would have been a different outcome had there been live/work at the time. As a matter of fact, it actually was, but as the attorney pointed out, not yet legal, so we had to move this business away from there. However, this is a concept whose time has come. It is very important that we do something to provide opportunities for small businesses who cannot afford to pay two rents; one for resident and one for business. Now, we will welcome your changing in a positive matter here today in allowing the arts community, particularly the craft community in Little Haiti, that could benefit tremendously from this project. You will do wonders for small business and alleviate a crisis in affordable housing. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: He's already -- Chairman Gonzalez: You already spoke on the -- City of Miami Page 92 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Pumo: Oh, go ahead. Chairman Gonzalez: -- item. Mr. Pumo: I can't rebut him? Chairman Gonzalez: No, sir. Mr. Pumo: I just want to remind you that there's other avenues to get to what they want to do besides a change of zoning. Chairman Gonzalez: No, sir. Mr. Pumo: OK. Overlay district will be it. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Mr. Pumo: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Sinuhe Vega: Hi. How are you? My name is -- Chairman Gonzalez: You have two minutes. Mr. Vega: -- Sinuhe Vega. I own Uva 69 on 69th Street and Biscayne Boulevard, and we are in support of the project, and also to say that I think that a small industrial area, like this region, like in New York, Chelsea, and Soho are too valuable, once they're so close to the downtown area, and I think this is an excellent proposal for the area. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Anybody else from the public? All right. The public hearing is closed. Rebuttal. Ms. Dougherty: I think you've heard from the people who has testified here today that there's a new energy happening in this area, and I would only urge that you encourage it and don't try to stop it. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Commissioner -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: -- you're recognized. Commissioner Spence -Jones: This is definitely in my district, and -- as a matter of fact, the last time 1 asked for this item to be deferred. There's a couple of things that I want to address. First of all, I want to make it very clear that I definitely, definitely want to see development and things happen in the area. We know the area is very depressed. We know that things have to change, that -- I mean, the pictures show it. I went out last week; I toured the area. Everything that you're saying is true, on one note. My concern, however, in all of it, is that I have a responsibility to the residents of District 5 in that particular area, Little Haiti and Lemon City, and when you make a decision like this that can perhaps affect the residents there -- because I'm assuming that once this building comes -- and again, Mr. Attorney, you explained that -- earlier that one situation does not matter against the next. My issue and concern is centered around who's going to be affected from it later on, from a resident standpoint, their tax bases in the City of Miami Page 93 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 area. Now -- let me go on just to say a little more. Now, yes, when 1 rode around last week I saw that there was a issue with crime. I saw that there was a issue with drugs and prostitution, all those things, but to me, those things were things that, from my perspective, is really put on the City. It means to me we have to focus on enforcing -- enforcement in the area to clean up the area. Even if they put a beautiful building there, if the City is not involved in cleaning up the area, cleaning up the crime, we're going to have a nice building there with the same situation centered around it, so to make the comment -- I'm just going to -- I live in Liberty City. I was one of those individuals that decided to go back into one of those places that you described today as Little Haiti, and if I didn't make the decision to go back home to clean it up, then things will never change, and to make comments about --1 mean, personally, I -- everyone that stepped up to the mike, I don't know how many people actually live in the Little Haiti/Lemon City area, probably none of them, you know, and you know, to make a judgment or to make a decision based upon people that don't live in the area, that aren't going to really be affected by it is a pretty big decision. Now, 1 do agree with the fact that the jobs are very important for the area, and while on one note I'm hearing there's issues around -- there's nothing happening there. Well, I rode around and I -- it appeared to me that there were a lot of businesses in operation there, so it's -- if I was just listening to this presentation -- which I'm so glad that I went -- I would have thought that I was going to an abandoned -- and all the pictures that I see -- area, and that simply was not the truth. They may be small businesses. They may be struggling businesses. They may be Haitian businesses that are employing people in the area, but they're doing the best that they can. Now it becomes our responsibility to work to try to change the conditions in that area, which we will, but to make it -- it's really shameful to hear the description of the area the way that it was, and not to say that it doesn't need to be cleaned up, but you can say that about every area in my district, if you want to know the truth, and you could say it about Overtown; you can say it about Liberty City. I mean, you can say it about several areas, but does that mean we give up on it? Does that mean we don't try to clean up what's already there? So, 1 really ask for staff to really give me a real -- give me their real input on this whole thing, and I love the building. I love the project. I'm an arts person. Most people know that I love the arts, so it's not even an issue, fellow Commissioners, about supporting it, but 1 have to make sure that I don't make a decision that's going to affect those small businesses, those homeowners that live close to it in any kind of way, and if there's a study that is currently being done that we spent about -- I think it was about $300, 000 to look at the area, then that makes me feel worse because I don't want to make a decision when we've spent $300, 000 of taxpayers' money and not even allowed for the -- us to get the study back, so I mean, it's just not right, so -- Ms. Dougherty: Could I just address that for a second? We have asked any number of times to be able to meet with the folks who are doing the study, and we'd be happy to meet with them. I think that -- we're suggesting that this could only encourage better things for the district. It's -- we're not saying leave it the way it is. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah. Well, I'm not saying that you're saying leave it -- I'm not saying that you're saying to leave it where it is, but there has to be a -- there's a level of respect that goes along with it, no matter what, and if you talked about my neighborhood the way that it was talked about today, I would have a real issue with it, so -- I just want to finish my thought, OK. I would prefer for us -- and I know I deferred the item the first time. I would prefer for us to get the study back that we spent $300, 000 of taxpayers' dollars on to get -- to actually get the results back from that. That study's going to tell us what is the best industry for the area. Quite frankly, I'm the one that's going to be affected. My constituents are going to be affected by it. That's -- this is the only industrial area that I really have left. Once I give that away, guess what? I have no other place to try to encourage jobs to come to the area -- Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- and that's important to me. It's really important. I went to visit Wynwood, and I love what they're doing with the live/work space. I think it's awesome, but City of Miami Page 94 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 again, that's another area that's now gone in a minute because it has that live/work space element going, which is great; I support it, but if I do -- if both things happen that way, then I'm not going to allow for -- I'm not going to provide myself with the opportunity -- Ms. Dougherty: So, you're suggesting we defer action for -- until that occurs? Commissioner Sanchez: Would you yield? Ms. Dougherty: Do we know when that will happen? Could we get the -- Commissioner Sanchez: Yield to me. Ms. Dougherty: -- economic people meeting with us? Could we have a recommendation sooner rather than later? Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: I'm going to yield to Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Could I just make a recommendation here? I mean, the project in itself, I like the project. The Commissioner who just got here, who hasn't been here long enough for the project in itself I think it would be in the best interest that maybe the suggestion will be we defer this. She'll provide the day that it'll be deferred, giving her ample opportunity to sit down with you and follow through with that study that has been presented, so she can make an intelligent decision based on the project itself. I mean, it's -- we owe it to her. It's just that she hasn't been here long enough to -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well -- Commissioner Sanchez: I think this is like the biggest project that has come up in her district. You know, for her to make a decision today not based on that study would be inappropriate in a way. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Vice Chairman, you're recognized. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. I'm -- I couldn't agree with Commissioner Spence -Jones more. I mean, that's exactly the point. We don't know what the right answer is. We're close to knowing what the right answer is, and we have -- we're not compelled to rezone this site, and there was a comment that by right they could build a 120-foot tall office building. Sure, they could. Nobody would rent from them, but they could do it. I think that we would be -- and I don't think there's anyone up here who dislikes the concept; no one, including me. I think the concept's terrific, and somewhere in this city, that concept works. Somewhere in this city, that concept belongs, but is it on this site, where you've got the rail line that goes north and south and east and west? Don't know, and for the record, I met with this developer before he submitted any plans to the City to talk about this project on this location, and I told him then the same thing. It was his decision to move forward, knowing what I had told him months and months and months and months ago. I like the developer. I like his concept. I'm happy that he's in Miami. I hope he doesn't get too discouraged -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: I'm happy he's in my area. Vice Chairman Winton: -- and he's in your area, and it's a -- there's a place and there's a right place, but today isn't the time to approve this. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman. City of Miami Page 95 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Regalado: Just a note -- and I think that here everybody agrees, and that our newest Commissioner needs all the input that she can get because she is going out there with passion. I've been reading in the media your tours, and it is a lot in a few days, but I would ask that she will be provided also -- because I have to follow the news, and I have to follow all the developments in the County, especially the UBD [sic] applications, and the new permitting process, and what you will see is that the County is being very aggressive on the warehouses issue, especially in the west. Actually, there are people that are building warehouses that withstand 185 miles per hour wind, and state-of-the-art, so she needs to know, and the staff needs to provide this for her, what we're up to -- against in terms of the west in terms of warehouses, because that's the only way to make an intelligent decision. I just wanted to mention that because, you know, I guess that everybody likes the project, and we all know that the only thing to deter crime will be to have a police officer every block, but if we don't have it, the next -- second-best thing is to have residents and lights and people working to deter crime, so she should be given all the information so she can make a judgment, and I am sure that she would make a good judgment, and 1 will support her when she does that. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. I have -- I also have to agree with you, Commissioner Regalado, because I have experienced that same problem in Allapattah. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Allapattah, yeah. Chairman Gonzalez: Right in the produce market, we have lost close to ten big businesses that have moved into the Doral new warehouses with better roadways, easy accessibility and new construction, so it seems -- and we have lost some of these businesses, and guess what? You know what is coming in to replace them? Affordable homeownership housing, so you know, it's happening. I mean, the market is going like that, and due to the way that that area was for many, many years, it's kind of hard to get investors to go in and demolish the old warehouses and build new warehouses. It's not happening. It's not happening, so in fact, I believe that you need some time to really analyze, you know, this situation and find out what's going on with the warehouses, and especially what's happening in Doral. You know, it's a lot of construction warehousing going on in Doral, and a lot of companies are moving over there. A lot of companies are moving there, but let me tell you. I agree with you. You made derent points that -- I was listening to you and I was listening to myself. When you get to represent districts like yours and like mine, what mine used to be, and you come from the people -- you come from the people. You don't come from a special interest. You don't come -- you come from the people. I come from the people same as you, and you know the needs of your neighborhoods, and you need -- and you know what -- that the people in your neighborhood hasn't seen affordable housing for many years, hasn't seen improvements, new sidewalks -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Decent jobs. Chairman Gonzalez: -- new roadways; that everything that no one else wanted have been dumped in your area. 1 have to congratulate you publicly because you are doing the right thing, and -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: -- let me tell you, I admire you for the things that you just said a few minutes ago because 1 was listening to myself representing my people, my people. You know, when I have an issue, I want to know what my people, the people that live in my district, the people that reside where I reside, the people that buy at the same grocery store where I buy, the people that go to the little restaurant that I go to, the people that go to -- that take their clothes City of Miami Page 96 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 to the same laundry that I take my clothes, the people that go and buy at the pharmacy store where I go and buy my medicine; those are the people that I want to hear from. Those are the people that really concern me when I'm going to make a decision, so I -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: -- really congratulate you. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I could have not said it better than you said it. Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah -- Vice Chairman Winton: So -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- so -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- defer till when? Commissioner Spence -Jones: The question really is how long before we complete the study, that portion of the study. Ms. Slazyk: We were just talking about that now. What -- maybe I should --1 can suggest is that we continue this to the April meeting -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Ms. Slazyk: -- which it may not be completed, but we hope to at least have maybe -- you know, bring a status report to you and some preliminary findings, or a draft report, so the April meeting, 1 think is not six months out. It's just a couple months, and hopefully, we can bring some update by that time and some guidance. OK, so the April -- Vice Chairman Winton: So move. Ms. Slazyk: -- Planning & Zoning meeting. Vice Chairman Winton: So move. Ms. Slazyk: We have a date -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion -- Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): 27. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: -- and we have a second. All in favor, say "aye. The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: So that means that we're also -- Ms. Slazyk: For the record -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- deferring -- City of Miami Page 97 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Ms. Slazyk: -- April 27. Chairman Gonzalez: -- PZ 15, right, which is a companion? Ms. Slazyk: Yes. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: Do we need a motion for that? Ms. Thompson: It's the same. Chairman Gonzalez: We need a motion to defer PZ 15? Vice Chairman Winton: Do we? Ms. Slazyk: Yes, 14 and 15 -- Mr. Fernandez: Yes. Ms. Slazyk: -- are companion items, so you can continue both of them to April 27 Planning & Zoning meeting. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. So moved. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Vice Chairman Winton: OK You want to (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Michelle wants -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yes. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I just have a comment, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, go ahead ma'am. Commissioner Spence -Jones: One of the things I'd like to do is direct the Manager or the City Manager's staff to really work with the merchants in the area in the meantime to look at the appropriate steps to enhance the area. I did speak to --1 believe it was Mary Conway, in reference to the streetway [sic] improvements, to see whether or not there's some things that we can do, and also to work along with the Police Department to help them because the merchants do -- I mean, they deserve to have a safe and clean environment, so if there's any way that I can direct the Manager's staff to at least convene the key people in that area to make sure something happens in that area, to give them some sort of relief. PZ.15 05-01230a ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 9, 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 City of -Miami Page 98 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 7205 NORTHEAST 4TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01230a Legislation.pdf 05-01230 & 05-01230a Exhibit A.pdf 05-01230a Analysis.pdf 05-01230a Zoning Map.pdf 05-01230 & 05-01230a Aerial Map.pdf 05-01230a ZB Reso.pdf 05-01230a Application & Supporting Documents.pdf 05-01230a FR Fact Sheet 12-15-05.pdf 05-01230a FR Fact Sheet 01-26-06.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from I Industrial to C-2 Liberal Commercial to Change the Zoning Atlas LOCATION: Approximately 7205 NE 4th Avenue APPLICANT(S): 7205 Holdings, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on November 14, 2005 by a vote of 5-2. See companion File ID 05-01230. PURPOSE: This will change the above property to C-2 Liberal Commercial. CONTINUED Note for the Record Item PZ 15 was also continued to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for April 27, 2006. Note for the Record: Please refer to Item PZ.14 for minutes referencing Item PZ 15. PZ.16 05-01515c ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), 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 7951 NORTHEAST BAYSHORE COURT, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "OFFICE" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL;" MAKING FINDINGS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City of Miami Page 99 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 05-01515c Legislation.pdf 05-01515 & 05-01515c Exhibit A.pdf 05-01515c Analysis.pdf 05-01515c Land Use Map.pdf 05-01515 & 05-01515c Aerial Map.pdf 05-01515c PAB Reso.pdf 05-01515c Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-01515c FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-01515c SR Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544, from "Office" to "Restricted Commercial" to Change the Future Land Use Designation of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan LOCATION: Approximately 7951 NE Bayshore Court APPLICANT(S): River Bait & Tackle, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Javier F. Avirio, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on December 21, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. See companion File ID 05-01515 and related File IDs 05-01515a, 05-01515b, 05-01515d, 05-01515e, 05-01515f and 05-01515g. PURPOSE: This will change the above property to Restricted Commercial for the proposed Oasis on the Bay Major Use Special Permit. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Chairman Gonzalez: 16. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): OK. PZs 16 through 21 are a series of land use and zoning changes for the Oasis project. This is a Major Use Special Permit, which you will see at the next hearing. PZ16 and 17 are a land use and zoning change for a portion of the property from office to restricted commercial. It has been recommended for approval by the Planning Department and approval by the Planning Advisory Board. The zoning change is for a C-1 that was recommended also for approval by the Zoning Board PZs 18 and 19 are another portion of the property where the change is going from medium density multifamily residential to restricted commercial with a zoning of C-1. This has also been recommended for approval by the Planning Department, the Planning Advisory Board, and the Zoning Board. The purpose of those two changes are to incorporate some restaurant and other commercial uses as part of the mixed use project, which again, you will see at the next hearing. PZs 20 and 21 are also -- the third portion of the property, which the request is from restricted commercial to high density multifamily residential. Here, they're actually asking for a downzoning from C-1 to R-4 for the purpose of additional height. As you know, the C-1 district has a height limit of 120 feet on the street, and then you have to setback at a 45-degree angle. The request to R-4 here is because R-4 actually allows taller heights. The Planning Department has recommended denial of the land use and zoning change from C-1 to R-4 because of the -- because the only reason for it -- if City of Miami Page 100 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 it's not a logical change on the land use and zoning map, it's only for additional height. However, those were recommended for approval by the Planning Advisory Board and the Zoning Board, so -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Counsel, you're recognized Lucia Dougherty: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, member of the Commission. Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue, here today on behalf of The Related Group of Florida, and I want to say first of all that before we ever put a pen to paper, before we ever went to any board, we met with our neighbors and we have support of our neighbors on this project. We worked with them very closely, and let me tell you that the zoning classification, we didn't try to fit the building into the zoning classifications. We designed the building based on what we -- by the input from -- we got from the neighbors and we designed the zoning around that, and let me just tell you what the changes are. This remains C-1. It always was C-1. This particular area here was an office district that we are changing to C-1 so that we can continue to have a waterfront restaurant here. In an office district, you can't have a waterfront restaurant, you can't have any kind of commercial, and that's something that the public wanted because it would be a wonderful addition right down 80th Street on the water, and this is the location of old Mike Gordon's restaurant, seafood restaurant. This area here is zoned R-3. We are going from R-3 to C-1 in order to be able to park for the waterfront restaurant. On the other hand, we are keeping this at the same height, and there's no density with the R-3. In other words, this area here is the same height that you would otherwise be able to have in an R-3, and what we're doing is we're putting all of the height on 79th Street Causeway, where we believe it ought to be, so if you look at the renderings again, it -- this would be 79th Street Causeway right in front here. This is where the R-3 was that we've changed to C-1 in order to be able to park in the -- in front of Mike Gordon's. Mike Gordon's would be down here. This is again a 20 -- I believe a 20 stories. That's what the residents wanted. Let me just show you one other thing that's of interest, I think. Had we -- we started out with a very, very large building right here straight on the water, straight up, no setbacks required, no water -- no upper level setback because you're on the water here, and it was, you know, 40 stories tall. The neighbors say, "We don't want that. We think this is out of scale with the rest of the neighborhood; bring it down," and that's where we came to this particular site. We also have a piece of property directly across the street on 79th Street that we're donating to the City, so this is going to be either a park or a fire station, but we don't care what it is. We're just giving it to the City of Miami once this Major Use Special Permit is actually approved. In terms of the site plan, again, this is the site planning of it. You come off 80th Street. This will be the waterfront restaurant. The street that used to be there would be here -- 79th Street is actually going to be closed here. Well, after FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) finishes, so that's essentially what we're requesting. I know it's very complicated, and I've explained all five of them at the same time, and 1 hope that it was clear enough, so with that I'd urge your approval of these requests. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wishes to address the Commission in reference to this item, please come forward. Maria S. Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Chiaro: These items have been grouped together for their presentation. Because there are ordinances included here on first reading, the input can be directed to all six items. There's no need to have a public hearing for each individual item on these first -- Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Ms. Chiaro: -- hearing items, so just by way of information, the input can be directed to the next City of Miami Page 101 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 six items, notwithstanding your vote will be individual on each of the items. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Anyone in opposition or in favor of these six items? Yes, ma'am, you're recognized Ginger Vela: Yes, I would like to speak please. My name is Ginger Vela. I live at 920 Northeast 86th Street, in Shorecrest, and I would like to say that I have no doubt that the developer thinks that everyone in the neighborhood was worked with closely. However, most people don't know about this project, and I would say last June, when it first appeared in the paper, I put a letter to the editor in the Herald and 1 mentioned that I was opposed to it because of the height and it being out of scale with the neighborhood At that time, our homeowners association president, Allyson Warren, was also not in favor, but she later came to be in favor of it, but she held meetings with the developer, which she did not pass on to the residents. Now, in November there was a homeowners' meeting called for -- an impromptu meeting called the week of Thanksgiving; about 10 or 15 of us showed up, and we were shown plans about this, which I already knew about it, but we were told, OK, this is what's going to happen, and it was almost as if there would be no hearings. That's what everyone else was told, and I mean, I felt I knew that there would be, and 1 remember that Commissioner Winton was quoted in the paper saying that "If the residents don't agree with this, it will not happen," and 1 don't know where the really tall height of 30 stories comes from because I never remember reading about that in the paper. I only reading about two 20-story towers, so if you just indulge me for a moment, I would just like to read the Comprehensive Plan items that support the opposition. That would be the policy HO-1.2.7, "The City will continue to enforce, and where necessary, to strengthen those sections of the Zoning Ordinance that are intended to preserve and enhance the general appearance and character of the City's neighborhoods." One thing I'd like to say is that in the very first article, we were cast in a very poor light as being a totally, completely depressed area, which only really applied to the few streets that surround where the project is meant to be, and so that was one of the reasons that I rebutted that in the paper, because selling real estate there, I know that I recently sold a 600 square foot house for $500,000, and that does not sound like a depressed neighborhood. The second policy would be NR-3.2.2, "Support those elements of the Miami -Dade County Comprehensive Development Master Plan that encourage use of Metrorail and Metromover by directing high -density new development or redevelopment first to areas nearest Metrorail and Metromover stations," and this project is going to be right on the west side of the 79th Street Causeway. We already knew we'd be fighting a lot of traffic in our neighborhood coming from all the development in North Bay Village, and come to find out, now there's a proposed very tall, 7 -- 474-unit building proposed where we don't even know how people are going to be able to drive on these roads. The infrastructure does not appear to exist yet, and I would like to direct question to the attorney -- is the attorney here right now? Do I have to go through you, Mr. Chairman? Chairman Gonzalez: To your left. Vice Chairman Winton: No, not -- Chairman Gonzalez: Talking about the -- Ms. Vela: No. I meant -- Chairman Gonzalez: You're talking about the City Attorney? Ms. Vela: -- the City Attorney. Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am, the lady sitting over there. Ms. Vela: Yeah. OK. Hello. I was -- my questions would be, what is the -- if you could ask City of Miami Page 102 Printed on 2/11/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 questions about the infrastructure, such as transportation and the streets and everything, right now 79th Street is set up so that it's three lanes going eastward, one lane going westward toward the interstate, which is where most people have to go to get to work and everything, and 82nd Street is a one-way street going through Shorecrest neighborhood We had hoped to have it back to two ways. We were told that it will be back to two ways, but this has been under study for so long and we've never gotten any results from it, so I don't know if it's going to be ready in time for this project, which, by the way, looks like a beautiful project, but I am really concerned - - and I expressed my concern about that, you know, at that one meeting we had in November. After that, I heard nothing more, and I just wanted to say that people in the neighborhood are, you know, concerned about it. There's another section of the Comprehensive Plan, which is Section 1305, which says MUSP (Major Use Special Permit) requirements. What are those? I'm not even sure what they are. Can someone tell me? Chairman Gonzalez: Lourdes, could you, please? Ms. Slazyk: The Major Use Special Permit is a process for special review of projects that reach certain thresholds. They either have over 200 units, over 200,000 square feet of nonresidential development -- Ms. Vela: Right. Ms. Slazyk: -- or a mix of uses with over 1,500 parking spaces. Section 1305 is the design review criteria that's associated with a Major Use Special Permit that requires all -- it lists all of the design review elements that we go through when we're reviewing one of those projects. Ms. Vela: Thank you. Well, now that everybody knows that, including myself it says here that those requirements will apply to the design character and scale and also apply to protect the public interest generally, adjacent properties, the neighborhood, and the City as a whole, and if something doesn't appear to be in scale, then it doesn't appear to be suitable, and I would also like to say that the City, for some reason now -- I live near the County as well, like a block and a half from Unincorporated Dade -- I get notices of things within 1500 feet, but for -- I mean -- yeah, within half a mile, I get notices of things that are happening in unincorporated, but the City, with something this large and this much of an impact, chose to do only 500 feet, and my question would be, the people who own properties or the property owners right around there who own the rental properties don't really even live there, so it would be easy for them to show up and say, "yeah, we think it's great," you know, because they won't be living -- looking up, you know, seeing the towers. Would it be -- Chairman Gonzalez: Ma'am -- Ms. Vela: -- possible for me -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- you're going to need to conclude your presentation because you have been -- Ms. Vela: Too long? Chairman Gonzalez: -- speaking for over five minutes now -- Ms. Vela: Oh, OK. I'm sorry. Chairman Gonzalez: -- so -- and we have other speakers, OK Ms. Vela: Seems a lot longer. Could I -- would it be possible to pass these around to you because this is what appears -- City of Miami Page 103 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: Sure, sure. Ms. Vela: -- on the website? Chairman Gonzalez: Give it to the City Clerk and she'll -- Ms, Vela: It's for you guys. Chairman Gonzalez: -- distribute it. Yes, ma'am. Ms. Vela: Thank you very much. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Have a good afternoon. Yes, sir. By the way -- Peter Padowitz: Good afternoon. Chairman Gonzalez: -- I want to establish a rule, that I'm going to be giving two minutes to each person that wants to speak on any of the items because we have a long agenda, and 1 think that in two minutes, unless you're an attorney or you have a full presentation to make, in two minutes you can state your point. Many times when people start talking more than two minutes, they become repetitive, and actually, you know, we don't need to hear things two and three times. Once that we hear is plenty. We can hear. Yes, sir. Mr. Padowitz: Good afternoon. My name is Padowitz, Peter Padowitz. I live at 7899 Northeast Bayshore Court, directly across 79th Street from the proposed project. I've lived there for 30 years. I've served the City in the past as its chief plumbing inspector, and first energy conservation official, and I was appointed to the Charter Code Enforcement Board, where I served six years as Chairman. I'd like to say that there seems little doubt that the project is out of scale and character with the area, but maybe that's not a bad thing. The 79th Street corridor has been troubled for many years, and this project would provide a great enhancement to the area. The buildings that it will replace were decaying and the neighborhood was falling into disrepair, and the project, if it's built as it's proposed, would be a great enhancement. The one reservation that I had was traffic coming over the 79th Street Causeway bridge. They had proposed closing Bayshore Court and that will alleviate a lot of back ups and accidents and near accidents coming off the Causeway. That's a very good thing, and they've offered two parcels of land on the south side as a park, and as I understand it, they've offered to landscape the park out. That would be a terrific enhancement for the area. I knew Mike Gordon for many years. He had great affection and respect for his customers. I think he'd be smiling on the fact that they're going to put a restaurant in there and that this is going to be an upscale project. I think he would be very pleased. The conduct of the work so far, they have demoed the buildings on all the parcels. I've observed them since approximately October 21. I have an extensive background in construction, and I saw some exemplary work; safe, professional, uniform people doing efficient tasks. If they continue the conduct of the work in that manner, I would have no reservations as to the conduct of the work. In short, I think it's going to be an enhancement to the area, and I would heartily recommend that you approve this project. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Anyone else? Allyson Warren: Good afternoon. Allison Warren, 650 Northeast 82nd Terrace. I feel like I haven't left here since yesterday. Chairman Gonzalez: You stayed here last night, didn't you? Ms. Warren: Very close, very close. City of Miami Page 104 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Sanchez: Past midnight. Ms. Warren: 12:30. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, my God. Ms. Warren: 12:30, and by the way, it was my birthday, so -- Chairman Gonzalez: Happy Birthday. Ms. Warren: -- scrambled at eggs at 2 o'clock in the morning was not what I was planning on. However, what Ms. Vela said was absolutely correct, the article came out back whenever it came out, listed the stories. 1 immediately responded, and the Related people immediately asked for a meeting with the board. I went under duress, kicking and screaming, but we met with them. My secretary, who is an urban designer, and talked about what they wanted to do, what we wanted, and it started at that point. This was in July. Our association meets every other month. In September, as some of you will remember, we had a food -tasting in between hurricanes. There was not a general meeting. We didn't have another meeting again until November. It was supposed to be a short meeting to catch everybody up on what was going on. Usually, it's a very poorly attended meeting; maybe five people, so to invite the Related people to do an entire presentation made no sense. They are coming to our meeting next Tuesday, however, with the traffic planners and everybody else. The board of directors specifically sat down over several hours with the project director, with the VP (Vice President) for development, with the traffic engineers, and hammered out what we thought was a pretty good deal. In spite of the insinuation that nobody saw a 37-story plan, 1 did, and my urban designer went to City -- to the MRC (Miami Riverside Center) and also saw the original plans on file. We were not thrilled, and I'm still not overly thrilled -- and these guys know it -- about 20 stories. It's way better than 37, and it is probably the only location on the corridor that doesn't block anybody, that is not a direct conflict. The information that I have received from my Commissioners office and from the Mayor's office, and from DOT (Department of Transportation) tells me that they're in the process of doing what we've been fighting for for about 20 years, and that is to return 79th Street to two lanes each way, and 82nd Street to one lane in each direction, returning it to a residential street. The plan that the Related Group put together before we even got there funneled all of their traffic onto that two-lane 79th Street. They have gone to bat for the neighborhood on more than several occasions with DOT, and I expect they'll continue to do so until it becomes a reality. They are donating the land on the south side to use hopefully as a park because I believe that the fire station's going some place else, a little further to the west. The public access bay walk is going to be perfect for the neighbors who live there. They are also agreed to clean the first two canals, which have been a major bone of contention for probably 30 years because nobody would claim ownership of them. We found out that it is the state of Florida who told us that they would never clean them, so as part of their replacing the dock for their waterfront restaurant, they're also going to clean the first two canals for the residents who live there. The people from the neighborhood, who have come to the prior hearings, are all people who live directly there, not absentee landlords. My board members, several of whom live right there, Manny Simon; Kim Kennedy is my vice precedent; Laz Garcia, who lives on that first cul-de-sac that is directly before the town houses, which abut the project; Angel Saqui, who is an architect. This is an -- a businessman on 79th Street named Fonsu Olivier. None of these are absentee landlords. These are all people who have come out in strong support of this project. There is a signed agreement that was signed by my board members where The Related Group put in writing what they planned to do for the neighborhood as part of this project, so I hope you'll support it. Thank you very much. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. All right, anyone else from the public? All right. Now, the public hearing is closed for items --from Item 16 to 21. I'm sorry. Six -- City of Miami Page 105 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Ms. Slazyk: No, that's correct. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): That's correct. Ms. Slazyk: That's correct, 16 to 21. Chairman Gonzalez: 16 to 21, so now we need to vote on each individual item, is that correct? Ms. Chiaro: That's correct. Ms. Slazyk: Correct. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. You want to add something to that? Ms. Dougherty: I just wanted to remind that you will be seeing the Major Use Special Permit, and on that Major Use Special Permit you'll see a public bay walk that will go across the entire front of the property; again, a public restaurant. We've donated land to the City. We're cleaning the bay crest [sic], north and south canals, and we're rebuilding the retaining wall on 81st Street, and planting trees and maintaining them as well. Commissioner Sanchez: How many marina slips? Ms. Dougherty: There are none. Commissioner Sanchez: There's some in that drawing there. Ms. Dougherty: Oh. I'm sorry. There are 20. Commissioner Sanchez: Oh, there are 20 of them. Ms. Dougherty: Twenty, yes. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Public hearing is closed. Comes back to the Commission. Yes, Mr. Chairman -- Mr. Vice Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: The comment that was in the newspaper was exactly the comment I made, and that was that if the Shorecrest neighborhood did not get behind this project, I -- and the City Attorney might wish I'm not saying this right now, but it was in the paper anyhow -- that I wouldn't support the project, and however, the Shorecrest -- and in all these homeowners association, there's always someone from the neighborhood who didn't go to the meeting, didn't hear about the meeting, and I -- you know, from my position, I can't help that. It is their association. They have an association to speak for the neighborhood; and it's the best vehicle we have for getting information, and we're never going to have a hundred percent of all the people in favor of anything at any time anyhow, but the Shorecrest Homeowners Association did spend time and is in favor of this, and as a consequence, I am moving PZ 16. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second. It's an ordinance. Madam City Attorney. City of Miami Page 106 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Number 16? Ms. Slazyk: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: 16, yes, sir. Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call, Madam City 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.17 05-01515 ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 8, 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 "0" OFFICE AND "SD-19" DESIGNATED F.A.R. OVERLAY DISTRICT, F.A.R. OF .45 TO "C-1" RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 7951 NORTHEAST BAYSHORE COURT, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01515 Legislation.pdf 05-01515 & 05-01515c Exhibit A.pdf 05-01515 Analysis.pdf 05-01515 Zoning Map.pdf 05-01515 & 05-01515c Aerial Map.pdf 05-01515 ZB Reso.pdf 05-01515 Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-01515 FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-01515a SR Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from 0 Office and SD-19 Designated F.A.R. Overlay District, F.A.R. of .45 to C-1 Restricted Commercial to Change the Zoning Atlas LOCATION: Approximately 7951 NE Bayshore Court APPLICANT(S): River Bait & Tackle, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Javier F. Avino, Esquire City of Miami Page 107 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on December 12, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. See companion File ID 05-01515c and related File IDs 05-01515a, 05-01515b, 05-01515d, 05-01515e, 05-01515f and 05-01515g. PURPOSE: This will change the above property to C-1 Restricted Commercial for the proposed Oasis on the Bay Major Use Special Permit. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Note for the Record: Please refer to Item PZ.16 for minutes referencing Item PZ 17. Chairman Gonzalez: PZ 17. Vice Chairman Winton: Move it. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion and we have a second. It's an ordinance. Mr. City Attorney. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call. 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, 5/0. PZ.18 05-01515d ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), 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 7921 NORTH BAYSHORE DRIVE AND 7950 NORTHEAST BAYSHORE COURT, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL;" MAKING FINDINGS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. First Reading City of Miami Page 108 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 05-01515d Legislation.pdf 05-01515a & 05-01515d Exhibit A.PDF 05-01515d Analysis.pdf 05-01515d Land Use Map.pdf 05-01515a & 05-01515d Aerial Map.pdf 05-01515d PAB Reso.pdf 05-01515d Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-01515d FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-01515d SR 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 7921 N Bayshore Drive and 7950 NE Bayshore Court APPLICANT(S): River Bait & Tackle, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Javier F. Avifio, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on December 21, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. See companion File ID 05-01515a and related File IDs 05-01515, 05-01515b, 05-01515c, 05-01515e, 05-01515f and 05-01515g. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to Restricted Commercial for the proposed Oasis on the Bay Major Use Special Permit. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Note for the Record: Please refer to Item PZ.16 for minutes referencing Item PZ.18. Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.18. Vice Chairman Winton: Did we do PZ.18 just now or 17? Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): That was 17. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): No, that was 17. Commissioner Spence -Jones: 17. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, I'm sorry. Ms. Slazyk: This is 18. This -- Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. City of Miami Page 109 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion and we have a second. It's an ordinance. Mr. City Attorney. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call. 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.19 05-01515a ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 8, 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 TO "C-1" RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL, FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 7921 NORTH BAYSHORE DRIVE AND 7950 NORTHEAST BAYSHORE COURT, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01515a Legislation.pdf 05-01515a & 05-01515d Exhibit A.PDF 05-01515a Analysis.pdf 05-01515a Zoning Map.pdf 05-01515a & 05-01515d Aerial Map.pdf 05-01515a ZB Reso.pdf 05-01515a Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-01515a FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-01515a SR Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from R-3 Multifamily Medium -Density Residential to C-1 Restricted Commercial to Change the Zoning Atlas LOCATION: Approximately 7921 N Bayshore Drive and 7950 NE Bayshore Court APPLICANT(S): River Bait & Tackle, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Javier F. Avino, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on December City of Miami Page 110 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 12, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. See companion File ID 05-01515d and related File IDs 05-01515, 05-01515b, 05-01515c, 05-01515e, 05-01515f and 05-01515g. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to C-1 Restricted Commercial for the proposed Oasis on the Bay Major Use Special Permit. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Note for the Record: Please refer to Item PZ 16 for minutes referencing Item PZ 19. Chairman Gonzalez: PZ 19. Need a motion. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, so moved. I'm sorry. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion and we have a second It's an ordinance. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Yes. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call. 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, 3 -- I'm sorry, 5/0. PZ.20 05-01515e ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), 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 1165, 1169, 1173, 1177 AND 1199 NORTHEAST 79TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL" TO "HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL;" MAKING FINDINGS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01515e Legislation.pdf 05-01515b & 05-01515e Exhibit A.pdf 05-01515e Analysis.pdf 05-01515e Land Use Map.pdf 05-01515b & 05-01515e Aerial Map.pdf 05-01515e PAB Reso.pdf 05-01515e Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-01515e FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-01515e SR Fact Sheet.pdf City of Miami Page 111 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544, from "Restricted Commercial" to "High Density Multifamily Residential" to Change the Future Land Use Designation of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan LOCATION: Approximately 1165, 1169, 1173, 1177 and 1199 NE 79th Street APPLICANT(S): River Bait & Tackle, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Javier F. Avino, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on December 21, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. See companion File ID 05-01515b and related File IDs 05-01515, 05-01515a, 05-01515c, 05-01515d, 05-01515f and 05-01515g. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to High Density Multifamily Residential for the proposed Oasis on the Bay Major Use Special Permit. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Note for the Record: Please refer to Item PZ.16 for minutes referencing Item PZ20. Chairman Gonzalez: PZ. 19. I'm sorry, 20, right? Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): 20. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): 20. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): 20. Chairman Gonzalez.: PZ.20. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion; we have a second It's an ordinance. Mr. Fernandez: Yes. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call. Ms. Thompson: Roll call. A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above. City of Miami Page 112 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, 5/0. PZ.21 05-01515b ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 8, 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 "C-1" RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL TO "R-4" MULTIFAMILY HIGH -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1165, 1169, 1173, 1177 AND 1199 NORTHEAST 79TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01515b Legislation.pdf 05-01515b & 05-01515e Exhibit A.pdf 05-01515b Analysis.pdf 05-01515b Zoning Map.pdf 05-01515b & 05-01515e Aerial Map.pdf 05-01515b ZB Reso.pdf 05-01515b Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-01515b FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-01515b SR Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from C-1 Restricted Commercial to R-4 Multifamily High -Density Residential to Change the Zoning Atlas LOCATION: Approximately 1165, 1169, 1173, 1177 and 1199 NE 79th Street APPLICANT(S): River Bait & Tackle, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Javier F. Avino, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on December 12, 2005 by a vote of 7-1. See companion File ID 05-01515e and related File IDs 05-01515, 05-01515a, 05-01515c, 05-01515d, 05-01515f and 05-01515g. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to C-1 Restricted Commercial for the proposed Oasis on the Bay Major Use Special Permit. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Note for the Record: Please refer to Item PZ 16 for minutes referencing Item PZ.21. Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.21. City of Miami Page 113 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Vice Chairman Winton: So moved Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion; we have a second Ordinance. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call. 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, 5/0. PZ.22 05-01506 ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), 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 2370 NORTHWEST 17TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES" TO "GENERAL COMMERCIAL;" MAKING FINDINGS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01506 Legislation.pdf 05-01506 & 05-01506a Exhibit A.pdf 05-01506 Analysis.pdf 05-01506 Land Use Map.pdf 05-01506 & 05-01506a Aerial Map.pdf 05-01506 School Impact Review.pdf 05-01506 PAB Reso.pdf 05-01506 Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-01506 FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-01506 SR Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544, from "Major Institutional, Public Facilities, Transportation and Utilities" to "General Commercial" to Change the Future Land Use Designation of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan LOCATION: Approximately 2370 NW 17th Avenue APPLICANT(S): YMCA Village Allapattah Phase I, LLC, Lessee and YMCA Greater Miami, Not For Profit Organization APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Javier F. Avino, Esquire FINDINGS: City of Miami Page 114 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on November 16, 2005 by a vote of 6-0. See companion File ID 05-01506a. PURPOSE: This will change the above property to General Commercial. Motion by Commissioner Spence -Jones, seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Chairman Gonzalez: PZ 3. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ (planning and zoning) -- Lucia Dougherty: Mr. Chairman, before you go on to PZ 3 -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yes. Ms. Dougherty: -- the same developer has 22 and 23 for an affordable housing project in Allapattah. Would you like to entertain that one now? It's a very quick -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am, I think I will, if 1 don't have any objection from my colleagues. Vice Chairman Winton: You're the Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: You're the Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: Is there any opposition to those items? Ms. Dougherty: No. Chairman Gonzalez: No, I don't think so. Ms. Slazyk: No. PZ22 and 23 are a land use and zoning change for the property located at approximately 2370 Northwest 17th Avenue. The request is from major institutional, public facilities, transportation and utilities to general commercial, and for 23, which is the zoning change, they're going from GI (Government/Institutional) to C-2. It's been recommended for approval by the Planning Advisory Board and the Zoning Board. The Planning Department had recommended denial because the change to C-2, we have no idea what kind of project they're going to bring forward It was not brought forward with a major use or any other special permit, and it's -- there's sort of an unknown there of what could happen, and we believe that if it had come forward with a project that we could have tied them to, we would have been able to ascertain the impact, so that was our recommendation. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): However -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Fernandez: -- again, I'd just like to, in a very professional and courteous and friendly manner, remind my staff and remind the Commission that land use determinations, comp. plan City of Miami Page 115 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 changes and rezones, as you have in front of you, arguably, consistently needs to be made on the basis of the merits, not necessarily the attached plan that it comes with. It's a land use designation that you're looking at changing in the comp. plan, as well as the -- in the Zoning Atlas, and while we have a history and a tradition of looking at the entire project as it fits within the newly established land use designation and zoning, I need to caution you that it can be done differently. I mean, the applicant has not violated the law by bringing this to you like it is now. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Dougherty: Thank you again. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Ms. Dougherty: For the record -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Dougherty: -- Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue, and joining me today again is David Alexander and Michael Cox and Gonzalo DeRamon, who are the developers of this affordable housing project, which is a really interesting project because it's a joint partnership with the YMCA (Young Men Christian Association). We have a 60-year lease with the YMCA, and just for the Commissioners' benefit, this portion here will be a YMCA with an elderly project; the middle portion will be a parking garage with the YMCA, and the last portion will be a family housing project where the YMCA is located in Allapattah on 17th, and in terms of the zoning, the current zoning is GI, and until you change the GI regulations dealing with the Grovenor house, this would have been permitted and more, so the current GI allows for a higher densi -- I mean, higher buildings, the same FAR (floor/area ratio), so we are actually just expanding the C-2 district just to the south, and there's C-2 across the street is actually this density here. C-1 allows for a higher height. This is going to be 120 feet in height. That's all we've asked for, and we have to get a Class II -- I mean, excuse me, we have to get a special exception anyway, so there will be design review, and in fact, we are going to be seeking a special exception this month prior to this zoning change so that we can get in the funding cycle in April, so with that, we would ask your approval of this request for zoning change. Commissioner Spence -Jones: So moved. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion. It's a -- Vice Chairman Winton: Second Chairman Gonzalez: And we have a second It's a public hearing. Yes, Mr. Cruz, you're recognized, sir. Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th. This is in my neighborhood, within my (UNINTELLIGIBLE), but I'd like to know one thing: Does the YMCA is part of this bill? Ms. Slazyk: It is. Mr. Cruz: They -- oh, so they lease? Ms. Slazyk: That's correct. Mr. Cruz: Oh, because -- Ms. Slazyk: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) year lease. City of Miami Page 116 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Cruz: -- I don't know. Where's the director of YMCA? Mr. Sanchez? Oh, OK, you know, because they just -- they terminate -- the long-time director of that YMCA was terminated after 20-some years, and that's something I don't like. Yeah, but that's (UNINTELLIGIBLE) because Mr. Sanchez probably will be long, too, you know, because he's now in the perfect dealing in things, whatever, but I would like -- I am in favor of this development, but the only thing I'd like to tell the City department to accelerate the permitting and the whole thing of all these projects, because I'm telling you. About a year ago, it was with one of those two or your project and still I go there by 13 and 24, nothing being done. Go by 17 and 34, nothing being done. No. Jose Perez come here, his people come here, and he get something. Right away you see coming up. Why (UNINTELLIGIBLE) housing get a better treatment than the people in Allapattah. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Mr. Cruz: Now, that's for the department there, OK. We pay taxes, too, in the City, and we live in the City. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Anybody else from the public? Seeing none, hearing none, it comes back to the Commission. We have a motion and a second It's an ordinance. Mr. City Attorney. Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call. 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, 5/0. PZ.23 05-01506a ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 19, 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 "G/I" GOVERNMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL TO "C-2" LIBERAL COMMERCIAL, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2370 NORTHWEST 17TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01506a Legislation.pdf 05-01506 & 05-01506a Exhibit A.pdf 05-01506a Analysis.pdf 05-01506a Zoning Map.pdf 05-01506 & 05-01506a Aerial Map.pdf 05-01506a ZB Reso.pdf 05-01506a Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-01506a FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-01506a SR Fact Sheet.pdf City of Miami Page 117 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from G/I Government and Institutional to C-2 Liberal Commercial to Change the Zoning Atlas LOCATION: Approximately 2370 NW 17th Avenue APPLICANT(S): YMCA Village Allapattah Phase I, LLC, Lessee and YMCA Greater Miami, Not For Profit Organization APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Javier F. Avifio, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on December 12, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. See companion File ID 05-01506. PURPOSE: This will change the above property to C-2 Liberal Commercial. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Note for the Record: Please refer to Item PZ.22 for minutes referencing Item PZ23. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. PZ23. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): 23 is the companion zoning change. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Slazyk: Same presentation. It's been -- Vice Chairman Winton: So moved Ms. Slazyk: -- recommended for approval by the Zoning Board. Commissioner Sanchez: Second Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second. It's an ordinance. Mr. City Attorney. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): The public -- Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Public hearing. Mr. Fernandez: -- has -- Chairman Gonzalez: It's a public hearing. Anyone from the public -- I thought that nobody objected to the -- Mr. Fernandez: To the other one. Chairman Gonzalez: -- zoning change, so -- all right, no one from the public. The public hearing is closed. Mr. City Attorney, it's an ordinance, please. City of Miami Page 118 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Fernandez: Certainly. The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez.' Roll call. Ms. Thompson: Roll call. Commissioner Regalado? Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Spence -Jones? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Sanchez? Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Vice Chairman Winton? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Chairman Gonzalez? Chairman Gonzalez: Before voting, I have a question. I think I heard you say that this is going to be an elderly project. Ms. Dougherty: Half of it's elderly and half of it's family. Chairman Gonzalez: The half is going to be home ownership or it's going to be rentals? Ms. Dougherty: It's rentals. Chairman Gonzalez: Rental. Both rentals; one -- Ms. Dougherty: Correct. Chairman Gonzalez: -- senior and one -- Ms. Dougherty: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Yes, ma'am. Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, 5/0. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Dougherty: Thank you. PZ.24 05-01514 ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 36, 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 First Reading City of Miami Page 119 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 FROM "SD-16.2" SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN-PARK WEST COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS TO "SD-16.2" SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN-PARK WEST COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS WITH AN "SD-19" DESIGNATED F.A.R. OVERLAY DISTRICT, INCREASING THE F.A.R. TO 4.6, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 530 NORTHWEST 1ST COURT, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01514 Legislation.pdf 05-01514 Exhibit A.pdf 05-01514 Analysis.pdf 05-01514 Zoning Map.pdf 05-01514 Aerial Map.pdf 05-01514 ZB Reso.pdf 05-01514 Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-01514 Fact Sheet 01-26-06.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from SD-16.2 Southeast Overtown-Park West Commercial -Residential Districts to SD-16.2 Southeast Overtown-Park West Commercial -Residential Districts with an SD-19 Designated F.A.R. Overlay District, F.A.R. of 4.6 to Change the Zoning Atlas LOCATION: Approximately 530 NW 1st Court APPLICANT(S): Urbana Development, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on December 12, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. PURPOSE: This will change the above property to SD-16.2 Southeast Overtown-Park West Commercial -Residential Districts with an SD-19 Designated F.A.R. Overlay District, F.A.R. of 4.6. CONTINUED A motion was made by Commissioner Spence -Jones, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed unanimously, with Vice Chairman Winton and Commissioner Sanchez absent, to continue Item PZ.24 to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for February 23, 2006. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We're going to move on to PZ24. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ24 is a request for a change of zoning. The property is located at 530 Northwest 1st Court. The property is zoned SD-16.2. The request before you is to add an FAR (floor/area ratio) overlay district, SD-19, for an FAR of 4.6. Yes, I believe there is going to be a request for a deferral on this. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah, but 1-- can I -- I have some questions on it, though, just -- Ms. Slazyk: OK. City of Miami Page 120 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- because I -- I'd like to have, and this is, again, in Overtown. This -- I mean, this particular project is in Overtown, correct? Lucia Dougherty: Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am. Commissioner Spence -Jones: How many -- ? What is it anyway? Because part of my backup did not include -- Ms. Dougherty: This is an office building. Commissioner Spence -Jones: It is an office building. Ms. Dougherty: It's an office building, and one of the very first you'll see in anywhere in downtown or in Miami. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Ms. Dougherty: As you know, office buildings have been selling for about half of what it costs to build, and that's why people aren't doing it, but this is a unique one because it's a condo/office, and it's been very successfully marketed In other words, we have people on a waiting list to buy this condo office, so it's an unusual product, and that's one of the reasons we're asking for this particular request, which gives us a bigger FAR because if you were -- am I going too much? Because I know you want to de -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: No. I just wanted to -- Ms. Dougherty: OK. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- and how tall is the structure? I'm just -- Ms. Dougherty: Thirty-one stories, which is not a big building in compared to office buildings, and it is in right -- let me just show you -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah, please. Ms. Dougherty: -- a -- I don't know if they -- we may have already taken our boards back because we knew you wanted to defer it, but -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Ms. Dougherty: -- you'll see just directly behind us the Dade County office building. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Ms. Dougherty: 1 mean, it's -- this is a -- 1st Avenue is a corridor on your master plan that shows big buildings on both sides of the railroad tracks. As you know, this is right catty -corner from the Police Department -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Ms. Dougherty: -- so we thought it was a good project. I know you want to defer it. I'm happy to -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah. I just want to be briefed more on it, so hopefully, Planning City of Miami Page 121 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 will brief me on it so 1 have a better understanding what it is. Ms. Dougherty: But you know what? Did they already take the boards? I think we already took the boards. I -- this would have been a good opportunity for me to show it to you, which I would have liked to have done, but we knew that you were going to defer it, so -- Ms. Slazyk: Right, and just for the record, when someone files for a land use and zoning change, they're not required to file their architectural plans. We had been meeting with the applicant on this, so we knew that they were coming with a project which is going to need a Class II, but they haven't filed it yet because they needed the zoning change first. That's why your package doesn't have the plans because on a zoning change, it's not required, nor should it be -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Ms. Slazyk: -- considered because once they get the zoning, they could, you know, sell it to somebody else or change their minds on what they want to develop. There's no way to tie a zoning change to a set of plans. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Ms. Slazyk: Although, they had been meeting with us about the project that they're going to bring forward. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Ms. Slazyk: So, did you want February 23? Yeah. The next Planning & Zoning meeting would be February 23. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Chairman Gonzalez: Commissioner, do you want to defer to February 23 meeting? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yes, we can. Chairman Gonzalez: All right, so we -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: I should be briefed fully by then, right? Ms. Slazyk: Right. February -- Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion -- Ms. Slazyk: -- 23. Chairman Gonzalez: -- to defer PZ 24. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We need a second. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: And we have a second All in favor, say "aye. " City of Miami Page 122 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Motion carries. The item has been deferred until the February 23 Planning & Zoning meeting. Ms. Dougherty: Thank you very much. PZ.25 05-00520b 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, SPECIAL DISTRICTS, IN ORDER TO AMEND SECTION 610, SD-10 "MEDICAL HEALTH CARE, HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH PARK OVERLAY DISTRICT", IN ORDER TO MODIFY THE UNDERLYING DISTRICTS TO INCLUDE THE C-2 LIBERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AS A QUALIFYING UNDERLYING DISTRICT; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-00520b Legislation.PDF 05-00520b PAB Reso.PDF 05-00520b FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-00520b SR Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000 Text APPLICANT(S): Joe Arriola, City Manager FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on December 21, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. PURPOSE: This will modify Section 610 to include the C-2 Liberal Commercial District as a qualifying underlying district. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We're going to move to PZ.25. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ25 is a text amendment to the zoning ordinance to the SD-10 Medical Health Care, Hospital and Research Park Overlay District. This is the Jackson Memorial/University of Miami area. What this does is allow the SD-10 overlay to be -- instead of just occurring as an overlay to GI (Government/Institutional), it will include the C-2 properties. This is important because the far eastern portion of the district up against 1-95 with a C-2 zoning would be able to be included in the SD-10 district. This is something we've been working on with the University of Miami in conjunction with a future biotechnical research facility. It's been recommended for approval by the Planning Advisory Board and by the Planning Department. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved City of Miami Page 123 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and a second. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wants to address the Commission, please come forward. Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz -- Chairman Gonzalez: Mariano, you're recognized. Mr. Cruz: -- 1227 -- No, 1 am in favor of this because we've been working very hard with all this, which is good. Chairman Gonzalez: Good. Anyone else from the public that wants to address the Commission on this item? Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed Mr. City Attorney, it's an ordinance. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Yes. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call. A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above. Ms. Thompson: The ordinance is passed on first reading, 4/0. PZ.26 05-01508 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 12, SECTION 1201, DUTIES OF CITY COMMISSION, IN ORDER TO CLARIFY THAT CITY COMMISSION REVIEW OF ZONING BOARD DECISIONS IS BY HEARING DE NOVO; FURTHER AMENDING ARTICLE 20, STATUS OF DECISIONS OF ZONING BOARD; REVIEW BY CITY COMMISSION; COMMISSION POWERS, ETC., TO PROVIDE GUIDELINES FOR A HEARING DE NOVO BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-01508 Legislation.PDF 05-01508 PAB Reso.PDF 05-01508 FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-01508 SR Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000 Text APPLICANT(S): Joe Arriola, City Manager FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommend approval to City Commission on December 7, 2005 by a vote of 7-0. City of Miami Page 124 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 PURPOSE: This clarifies and codifies the long-standing practice of the City Commission in conducting their review of Zoning Board decisions by hearing de novo at the City Commission level. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Chairman Gonzalez: OK, PZ26. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ26 is an amendment to the zoning ordinance, requiring -- for the requirements concerning appeals that come to the City Commission from the lower boards. This is to provide guidelines for the hearings to be de novo before the City Commission. 1 will let the City Attorney explain this. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Thank you. Ms. Slazyk: They're the applicants. Mr. Fernandez: Yes. Mr. Chairman, two of the items on your agenda today are related, that is, this item, Item 26 and Item 34, which is the actual substantive item that you would deal with in a few minutes, but before you get there, I need to lay the stage for you to understand what has happened. From the very beginning of time up until recently in the early '90s, Commissioners met and made all kinds of decisions on land use issues, and they were acting -- you all were acting in your legislative capacity. Commissioner Sanchez: Quasi. Mr. Fernandez: These were decisions that you made, and when they were reviewed by a court, the court looked at you as legislators, and they applied a test to review the decisions you made, and the name of that test basically is simply stated the fairly debatable. If it could be argued that there was a rational basis and it was logical for you to have made the decision you made, the courts would agree with you and uphold your decisions. Sometimes in 1990 -- and again, I'm not pretending to be scholarly about this. I'm just giving you a quick tour so that you get a sense of where we stand today. The courts said that when you act -- when you have items infront of you that are land use, your PZ (Planning & Zoning) agenda, they up the ante. They said that you needed to act more like judges than legislators, and they imposed this quasi-judicial type of proceeding that you have been hearing for the last 14 whatever years, which means that when a P&Z item comes infront of you, you need to pay particular attention to the evidence and the testimony, and you need to weigh it. You need to find competent, substantial evidence on the record. You need to afford due process, you know, all of these things that we have been advising you that you are very adept at doing. Something has happened recently. In the last few months, a decision of this Commission was appealed to the appellate division of the circuit court, and the case is what you have in Item Number 34. Both parties here are named Morningside, so for the sake of understanding each other, let's call the developer and the neighbors; both are Morningside. The case, very briefly, goes something like this, Ms. Gelabert approves a special Class II Permit. That decision of hers gets appealed to the Zoning Board. The Zoning Board agrees with her, and the neighbors appeal that decision and comes to the Commission. The Commission looks at it; hears evidence all over again because that's the way that it has always happened, and the Commission goes against the Zoning Board and Ms. Gelabert. The Commission agrees with the neighbors that that Class II Special Permit should not be granted, and therefore, the developer goes to court. When they go to court to challenge this Commission's decision, they were successful in convincing the court that this Commission did not act appropriately because you consider the matter de novo. You took evidence and you heard, and they made several other arguments, but the sum and substance of what has transpired -- and City of Miami Page 125 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 now you are literally under court order because we did not appeal it -- is that you have, when you're dealing with appeals from the Zoning Board to act in your quasi-judicial capacity -- you have to apply that test, but you have to act like appellate lawyers, not like trier fact laywers, which imposes an additional burden, which means that you cannot -- when it comes to you, you cannot listen to the case de novo. You cannot hear the neighbors. You cannot hear the experts. You cannot hear the developer's experts. You just limit yourself to the transcript, to the record that has been passed out to you by Teresita Fernandez of what the Zoning Board did. You will be limited -- when we get to Item 34, you'll hear me tell you more. You will be limited to hear arguments of counsel, and that's it. You didn't do that. When this item first came to you, even though it was coming to you with the recommendation of the Zoning Board to approve the Class II, the courts found that the whole process went awry. Now, what we are presenting to you in this item, in Item 26, is an amendment to the zoning ordinance because the court, in essence, told us that unless we clarify the ambiguity that we have in our ordinance, the courts are going to hold us -- going to hold you to acting like appellate judges. By passing this ordinance, you eliminate the ambiguity, and as soon as it passes, you can go back to continuing to hear the appeals from the Zoning Board on a de novo basis, affording everybody an opportunity to come in front of you and present the full case. If you don't pass this amendment to the zoning ordinance, you are casting yourself in the role of appellate panel, limiting yourself only to what the Zoning Board did and hearing arguments of counsel. Therefore, it is relatively straightforward, and my recommendation to you is that you consider passing this amendment so that you can continue business as usual, which is hearing the neighbors, hearing the developers on a de novo basis whenever there is an appeal from the Zoning Board. When we get to Item 34, then I'll give you more particulars and more direction on how to conduct that hearing as appellate judges, but get ready because when you get there, you're going to have, for the first time ever, act as appellate lawyers, but I'll be guiding you through that. Commissioner Sanchez: So -- Vice Chairman Winton: Do we get paid for being an appellate lawyer now? Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, the check is in the mail. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. So moved. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second. It's an ordinance -- I'm sorry. It's a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wants to address the Commission on this? I'm almost sure that no one wants to get into this. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. Yes, Mr. City Attorney. Mr. Fernandez: Yes. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call. 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, 5/0. Commissioner Sanchez: All right. PZ.27 05-00764 ORDINANCE First Reading City of Miami Page 126 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 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 1583 NORTHWEST 24TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "INDUSTRIAL" AND "MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL" (PARCEL 2) AND "MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO REMAIN "MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL" (PARCEL 1); MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-00764 Legislation.PDF 05-00764, 05-00764a & 05-00764b Exhibits A & B.PDF 05-00764 Analysis.PDF 05-00764 Land Use Map.pdf 05-00764, 05-00764a & 05-00764b Aerial Map.pdf 05-00764, 05-00764a & 05-00764b Miami River Commission Recomm.PDF 05-00764 & 05-00764a School Board Comments.PDF 05-00764 PAB Reso.PDF 05-00764 Application & Supporting Docs.PDF 05-00764 FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-00764 & 05-00764b Submittal Letter.pdf 05-00764 Submittal Letter.pdf 05-00764 Submittal Maps.pdf 05-00764 Submittal Photos.pdf 05-00764 SR Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544, from 'Industrial" and "Medium Density Multifamily Residential" to "Restricted Commercial" (Parcel 2) and "Medium Density Multifamily Residential" to Remain "Medium Density Multifamily Residential" (Parcel 1) to Change the Future Land Use Designation of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan LOCATION: Approximately 1583 NW 24th Avenue APPLICANT(S): Brisas del Rio, Inc. APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Ben Fernandez, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. MIAMI RIVER COMMISSION: Found the proposed Brisas del Rio project to be inconsistent with the Miami River Corridor Urban lnfill Plan on November 1, 2004. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on July 20, 2005 by a vote of 6-0. See companion File IDs 05-00764a and 05-00764b. PURPOSE: This will change the above property to Restricted Commercial (Parcel 2) and Medium Density Multifamily Residential (Parcel 1) for the City of Miami Page 127 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 proposed Brisas del Rio Major Use Special Permit project. Motion by Chairman Gonzalez, 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 Spence -Jones Chairman Gonzalez: All right. PZ27. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Plc (Planning & Zoning) 27 and 28 are companion land use and zoning change item. This is for the property located at approximately 1583 Northwest 24th Avenue. There are two parcels in this project. It's -- in this land use and zoning change. It is part of the Brisas del Rio Major Use Special Permit, which you will be seeing at the next hearing. This is only first reading on the land use and zoning change. The first parcel is being requested to be changed from industrial and medium density multifamily residential to restricted commercial, which is a C-1 zoning classification, and the other parcel is currently medium density multifamily residential and will remain medium density multifamily residential. The Planning Department has recommended approval of these amendments. The Planning Advisory Board recommended approval on the land use change, and the Zoning Board recommended approval on the zoning change. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Andrew Dickman: Mr. Chair, could 1 be recognized for one second? Attorney for the Miami River Marine Group. We would respectfully request that you de -- Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): I'm sorry. Can you put your name on the record? Mr. Dickman: Andrew Dickman, I apologize, 9111 Park Drive, Miami Shores. We would request that you defer this item for three particular reasons. One, there has been a recent court case and the appellate court decision, which determined that the Miami River -- Port of Miami River sub -element in the Comprehensive Plan applies to the entire river, not just to particular properties on the river. That has been -- requested a rehearing by the City. That is still pending. The mandate is still pending in court. It would have a big impact on how your staff and you all consider the river, and additionally, we have learned very recently that your staff is bringing forward to you text amendments for the Comprehensive Plan that apply to the river, and we have not had an opportunity to see any of that material. It will have a very direct impact, again, on how you deal with the river, and finally, our expert, Jack Luft, has a conflict today. We believe that he has important information to bring forward to you, and for those reasons, I would ask that you defer this item. I did provide, just for full disclosure, you all a letter to this effect yesterday, and I'll put that letter into the record, if I may. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. City Attorney. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, what Mr. Dickman refers to is that yes, in fact, there has been a ruling by the District Court of Appeals that grants standing to his clients to challenge decisions, but that in itself does not impair or has nothing to do with the merits of the application in front of you. The fact that the City is in the process of making amendments or modifications to the comp. plan, that in and of itself should not delay any form of application that's duly following course. If staff felt and believed that there was something that would not be consistent, they would have addressed that with the developer, and clearly, have brought it to your attention. With regard to the availability of his experts at this time to speak on either of these applications, that is a matter for your consideration with regard to the kind of deference that you would afford any party appearing in front of you. That's a matter of courtesy; no legal compunction involved in that. Chairman Gonzalez: All right, so your legal opinion is that we can hear this case. City of Miami Page 128 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Fernandez: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: All right, so we're going to hear it. I'm sorry about your expert witness, but if you would have been in any other case, I wouldn't had a problem with it. The reason that I do have a problem is that this item has been deferred by the Administration for I don't know how long, so you know, it's time to take it up, and what it is, it is, and let's move forward. Mr. Dickman: I understand, and I will make a distinction as to what the -- your good counsel made with regard to standing 'cause the court did make a much different opinion onto that. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Counsel. Ben Fernandez: Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the Commission. For the record, my name is Ben Fernandez. I'm with law offices at Bercow & Radell, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, here today on behalf of Brisas del Rio, Inc., and with me is Mr. Homero Meruelo, Sr., the principal of the company, Mr. Benny Benosch (phonetic), our project planner, Mr. Mariano Corral, our landscape architect, and my partner, Jeff Bercow. The property that is before you today is approximately 9.4 acres in size. It's currently zoned a combination of R-3 and R-4 -- and I'm sorry, SD-4, which is the marine industrial district. We're requesting a comp. plan amendment and a zoning change for the property, in conjunction with the Major Use Special Permit application that we believe is going to make this property much more compatible with the Durham Park residential area that, if you look at our aerial photograph, you will see is just south of this property. The requested amendment would bring more housing to a part of the river that is only -- only contains a minimal amount of industrial activity. If you look at the river from 22nd Avenue to 27th Avenue, there's really very little industrial activity in that area, just one site that we're aware of with industrial activity. This application will also open the banks of the river to the residential area to the south by providing a large, half -acre green space, which will connect the residential neighborhood to the south right here on our site plan. I realize you're not reviewing the site plan today, but it is part of our Major Use Permit, and what is labeled here as Parcel A is an open area that is to remain R-3, and which will provide a connection for this neighborhood to the south that you can see depicted here. These people will now be able to access -- have access to our riverfront and to the river, which is something that is really interesting because currently, if you live in here, there's no way to get to the south bank of the river. There's no opportunity to enjoy it, and these people live steps from the river, and that's -- we think that's really a shame. Another thing that this project will bring and this comp. plan amendment and rezoning will afford us the opportunity to do is to bring a marina to this property, which is of course a water -dependent and water -related use, and currently, there isn't a water -dependent use on this property; it's vacant land. In fact, the situation in this area currently is not a good one, not a good one at all. The subject property has been abandoned for over six years. You can see photographs of it. I've distributed photographs of it. It's really not a pretty site at all. It's easily a recognizable site because there are large sheds on this property that are an eyesore to the residential neighborhood, and they're also a visual impediment to anybody that lives in Durham Park They won't -- they cannot see the river. They -- all they see are these sheds. Immediately to the west of this property is the River Run residential development, which you can see in photographs over here, right next to the sheds, which has already been approved by this Commission. That's right here, where it says River Run. To the south, of course, we have the residential neighborhood of Durham Park, which is characterized by mixed -- a mix of duplex and multifamily apartment buildings, and to the north, you have Curtis Park Curtis Park, of course, being one of the largest parks in the City. It's one of only a few parks that are riverfront parks; really a very valuable asset to the City of Miami. The park features a pool, a river walk, and a -- and playing fields that are directly across from this industrial site, so if you are at Curtis Park and you're looking -- you're at the newly improved river walk, if any of you have been there -- I've been there. I didn't know that there was a river walk along Curtis Park, and it's relatively new, according to your Parks Department. Well, if City of Miami Page 129 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 you stand there, you wouldn't want to stand there because the view that you have are of these ugly sheds of a large industrial basin that really is a remnant of -- from days past, when larger ships went in there to be worked on, actually to be painted. This was never a shipping terminal, to our knowledge. It was only a repair facility, something that we think is incompatible with the residential area to the north and with Curtis Park -- I'm sorry, Curtis Park to the north and the residential area to the south. Now, to the east of the property is the only active industrial use in this segment of the river, and that's Detroit Diesel, and you can see it on our aerial there, and it's significant for you to note that Detroit Diesel is a mostly enclosed facility, and it's therefore quieter than many of the other industrial uses in the area. It's been compatible with the residential area all this time, and without many problems. In fact, it's not even a very water -dependent use. You can see from the photographs that they mostly work on trucks and buses, from our observations, so we think that our proposed land use change and zoning change is really going to be compatible and consistent with this existing industrial use. Now, the project, as I mentioned, is a Major Use Special Permit, and it's being recommended for approval by your staff and by your Urban Development Review Board. The project we think -- although, is not the issue today; just want to mention briefly -- we think it strikes a very nice balance by providing town homes up against the residential neighborhood, and condominiums over retail and some restaurant uses along the riverfront, right against the water. That would be what you would, of course, see from Curtis Park, but as I mentioned before, perhaps the most significant thing for you to take note of is that through this land use change and through this zoning change, you will be creating an open space, a green area where people from Durham Park can now access the south bank of the river, and it's a sizable community that lies between 14th Street and between the south bank of the river. It's really an enclosed community between 22nd Avenue and 27th Avenue, and this is their only recreational area. This is their only opportunity to appreciate the waterfront. We think that that's really significant because if you look at your Comprehensive Plan, your parks element, Objective PR-1.1 encourages the City to increase public access to all identified recreation sites, facilities, and open spaces, including the Miami River and beaches, and enhance the quality of recreational and educational opportunities for all age groups and handicap persons within the City's neighborhoods. What this is saying is that whenever you have an opportunity, you should try to encourage accessibility to the Miami River for your community, and we believe that our application is entirely consistent with that objective of the Comprehensive Plan. Another significant fact for you to consider with this application is that if this application were to remain the way it's zoned today, the likelihood is that it won't be developed at all because it hasn't been developed for years, for seven years. Another important thing is that if it stays SD-4, you probably won't get a river walk; you won't get the open space because those types of projects don't require any kind of access to the river. Your own -- the River Commission will tell you today that what they require of projects in this area is not a riverfront, but a greenbelt along what would be a public right-of-way here. I guarantee you, if you ask any of the neighbors that live in this area if they want or care for a greenbelt, they're going to say, "No, thank you." They already have a sidewalk, and they have some green spaces in between themselves and the river, and that's not the same as being able to access the actual waterfront. Another thing that's significant is that if this were to remain industrial, the type of traffic, of course, that you would get through the residential neighborhood isn't the type of traffic that would -- that is compatible with Durham Park and the existing residential neighborhood. It's also important to note that if you approve this amendment and rezoning, you will assure that a marine -related use will be on this property, and that is consistent with your Miami River port element, which encourages you to establish water -dependent and related uses on the river. We are bringing a water -dependent and water -related use to the river. By incorporating a marina into our design, we are bringing something to it that isn't there today. Couple more reasons, and I'll wrap up, is that if you approve this application and our MUSP (Major Use Special Permit) application, you'll be cleaning up, of course, an eyesore that's on the river, and an eyesore to the people utilizing Curtis Park, and you're going to bring more residents within walking distance to Curtis Park. Being one of the largest parks in the City, you should have people that can walk to Curtis Park. One of the biggest issues that Miami 21 is facing is accessibility to parks. We have many great parks -- your consultants will tell you -- but it's very difficult to get to them. Well, City of Miami Page 130 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 people are going to be able to get to this park They're going to be viewing the park, and they're going to be able to walk across the bridge and get to Curtis Park through this application. In conclusion, we'd like to note that staff is supporting our application, as Lourdes noted, the comp. plan application and the zoning application. We have a favorable recommendation on the comp. plan amendment from your Planning Advisory Board, and a favorable recommendation on the zoning atlas amendment from your Zoning Board. With respect to concurrency, the proposed changes meet all level of service requirements in your capital improvements element, and with respect to schools -- impacts on schools, it's interesting to note that the schools in this area are some of the most underutilized schools in the City, so there's -- this is a good place to increase density, and the very last thing I'll say is that we have support from area residents. They're not here today, but they did attend some of the lower board meetings and expressed their support for this project, and with that, I'd like to conclude and reserve some time for rebuttal. Thank you very much. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. OK. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wishes to address the Commission on this item, please come forward. Yes, Mariano. Mariano Cruz: Yes. Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. I am in favor of the change of zoning. One thing I think we need -- house --1 am not going to talk about now about the affordable housing or the workforce housing, all of that, because that will be reserved for another time, but talking about the -- I read here that the Miami River Urban Infill, that inconsistent. I know that neighborhood because I been on the street here since 1962. I knew that when that was Florida Job Base. Many years the people you know, used to warehouse their yacht there; nothing anymore. If you go -- the uses around the river and out in Miami maritime uses for yachts, the only thing remaining is Merrill Stevens, 12th Avenue and 11 th Street, there by the bridge. You go over there -- east from there, you used to have Allied Marine; it's gone. Used to be another one on 2055; it's gone. If you come here, right here, it used to be Merrill Stevens in Dinner Key, Santa Marina; they are gone forever, and you go to the Biscayne Boulevard, it used to be Dade Dry Dock, gone, too; so, I don't know why they say to keep the maritime when everybody's leaving because that's a matter of market. The same thing I used to go and pick up strawberries on 25 Street behind the airport. Now, I can't find it. You got to go way, way out there because that's the change. That's the changes that are happening, and I see good for the neighborhood now that 14th Street have been fixed. People will have -- you know, that's things that are happening in the neighborhood. We need more people in the neighborhood, and when the other issue comes about affordable housing and workforce housing, I'll be here, too. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Yes, ma'am. Ashley Chase: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Good afternoon. Ms. Chase: Good afternoon. Ashley Chase, Miami River Commission, with offices on 1407 Northwest 7th Street. I'm here today to read a letter into the record on behalf of our chairperson, Ms. Irela Bague, concerning agenda items PZ27 and 28, which impact the Miami River. The letter is currently being distributed On November 1, 2004, Mr. Ben Fernandez, Bercow Radell, presented the Brisas del Rio development to the Miami River Commission, including the proposed land use and zoning amendment. The MRC (Miami River Commission) found the zoning amendment in this upper river marine industrial area, from marine industrial to commercial, to allow the proposed 698 residential unit development, to be inconsistent with the Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan, by a vote of 7 to 6. The MRC noted the development would require partial filling of existing and irreplaceable water slips on the subject property, and is out of scale and character with the surrounding area. Thank you. City of Miami Page 131 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Yes, sir. Mr. Dickman: Once again, Andrew Dickman, for the Marina Association, offices at 9111 Park Drive, Miami Shores. We're going to withhold our presentation until second reading. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Anyone else from the public? Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed It comes back to the Commission. This is in my district, and let me tell you. We have -- that neighborhood was neglected for I don't know how many years. There were areas in that neighborhood that didn't even had sidewalks. We went into that neighborhood and we built sidewalks, new sidewalks, roads; we fixed the drainage. As Mariano Cruz mentioned, we did 14th Street, from 22nd Avenue to 42nd Avenue; not only that, we did landscaping. We work in -- with the neighborhood on a neighborhood watch. We have give life to that neighborhood once again. Even though the neighbors are very happy about what's going on in the neighborhood, they're eager to see something happening at this site because I know for a fact -- since I've been living in the neighborhood for many years, and in this City for I don't know how long, for longer than what I live in Cuba, three times -- that site has been empty for at least six years, underutilized for another four because what used -- what you used to see there once in a while was a boat being painted As a matter offact, I don't know how back then DERM (Department of Environmental Resources Management), you know, DERM is so picky about pollution and all that. DERM permitted these people to paint boat on plain air, and you can smell the paint and feel the paint all over the street and all over the sidewalk. As a matter offact, on the buildings across the street, you could get the paint. OK, so that was the activity that was taking place at that site ten years ago. We have -- right now, we have a linear park that is going to be connecting 14th Avenue to 17th -- I'm sorry, 14th Street to 17th Street, that is going to tie to the major road to this project, which is a project that is going to also improve this neighborhood and contribute to the quality of life of this neighborhood, and as a matter offact, two weeks ago I was walking around the area with the Manager and staff taking a look at the additional sidewalks that we're going to be doing and improvement that we're going to be doing to the neighborhood, and one of the concerns of the neighbors was this speck site. Going into details, they were concerned what was going to happen. We couldn't talk about the project because the project was being presented at the Commission for discussion, so I told them that I could not talk about the site, and I'd rather not talk about the site, but there is a concern. You can feel that there is a concern about this site and what is going to happen there, and I believe that rezoning this property and allowing something else to come into this neighborhood is going to be something very positive for the neighborhood. One thing that I like a lot is the fact that there's going to be a marina incorporated into this project, as you mentioned 1 know there is a concern about businesses being lose on the river, and 1 hear this all the time, but let me tell you. I'm going to give you -- I'm going to -- I don't know what the problem is with the industry. I know that west of 27th Avenue, there is a heavy, heavy, uncontested marine industrial area that is working 24 hours, you know. You can see the people working there. You can see that there is -- actually there is work on marine industry, but that's west of 27th Avenue. Right at 27th Avenue on the river, we have a parcel of land that has been empty for another 15 years, or maybe -- yeah, between 10 and 15 years. No one has bought that piece of land to establish a new industry, so I don't know what the problem with the industry is, but it's not happening. It may happen ten years from now; it may happen five years from now, but it's not happening, so you know, at this point, I'm going to move to approve the zoning change. Commissioner Regalado: Second Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second on the table. City of Miami Page 132 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Sanchez: Discussion, brief. I have -- Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: I'm glad that the attorney has decided to table his arguments for second reading, but let me just say that, as it is, there are many valid concerns. Vice Chairman Winton: Is your microphone on? Commissioner Sanchez: It is on. Is it? Vice Chairman Winton: Oh. Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah. There are many concerns that have been brought forth not only by the marine industry that are very valid, and we need to address, as the legislative body, so I will have those arguments prepared at the next time that this item is brought forth on second reading. Just wanted to state that for the record. Vice Chairman Winton: Any other comments? Commissioner Sanchez: Nope. Vice Chairman Winton: I'd like to put a couple of comments on the record. One is that, if you all remember, I don't remember when it was, but a month ago or two months ago, or whatever, when we approved -- Chairman Gonzalez: Five months ago. Vice Chairman Winton: -- the site to the east for residential, I put on the record that if we're going to approve that one, we need to change the zoning on every one of these because you do have a significant residential component around there, and it isn't going to make sense to have either/or. Chairman Gonzalez:: Correct. Vice Chairman Winton: It either needed to be all industrial or it needed to be all residential. It would never work long-term as both, and so we changed that one. I'm going to support this change, as well, for that reason, but the other part to the MUSP, I am concerned about the comments of the Miami River Commission in -- as it relates to filling of those slips and density, and this is Commissioner Gonzalez's district, and I defer to him at all times, but he also always encourages me to say my piece, which I do, and I think that y'all have to look long and hard about the density in this area where you don't have big roadways. These are all little neighborhood surface roads, and that sounds like a lot of units going on a little -- on these little, narrow surface roads that I think could create all kinds of new problems for the residents that are already there, and 1 will be looking at that carefully and commenting on it at MUSP time. Commissioner Sanchez: Second reading. Those are basically the same concerns that I have. Vice Chairman Winton: So, I think that -- it seems to me a little on the overkill side. Anyhow, so Chairman Gonzalez: Call the question. Vice Chairman Winton: -- we have a motion and a second. Any other comments? Is this -- ? Ciry of Miami Page 133 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: No. I do have a comment, Commissioner Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. Chairman Gonzalez: I was concerned because I remember when this came up -- as a matter of fact, it wasn't this project; it was the next project -- for discussion. You mentioned exactly the fact that you wanted to see the entire area, you know, with one zoning, and that was my concern. It has been my concern, and I have asked Lourdes three or four times what are we doing to solve this situation, and I want her to put on the record what she has been telling me. Ms. Slazyk: OK. What we did is we looked at the whole area, and it's the property in between the Coastal and Brisas property, which is the Detroit Diesel property that we were looking at a proposal for a change, but we went back to the Comprehensive Plan in the meantime, and we are looking at a cleanup of the language regarding the river, and then that is going to Planning Advisory Board this month, and you'll see it the following month before you. That's the first phase of what we were doing, and once that's done, then we're going to go back and apply the proper land use to the rest of this, but they kind of need to be done in a sequential order -- Vice Chairman Winton: OK, great. Ms. Slazyk: -- so you'll see it, and we've been looking at it, and we've been preparing the documents, and they're coming. Chairman Gonzalez.: All right. Vice Chairman Winton: Any other comments? Commissioner Sanchez: No. Chairman Gonzalez: No. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. City Attorney, read the ordinance, please. Mr. Fernandez: Yes, and prior to reading the City -- the ordinance -- and I know that there will be a second hearing, and we can explain that in greater terms. The testimony presented to you by the Miami River Commission and the references made to the Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan, you need to understand that while that may be important and significant, it's not jurisdictional. Those are not basis on which you may make a decision to deny or grant as it were because these have not been officially -- that plan has not been officially adopted by this Commission. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. 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. Mr. B. Fernandez: Thank you very much. PZ.28 05-00764b ORDINANCE First 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 Page 134 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM "SD-4" WATERFRONT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AND "R-3" MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO "C-1" RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL (FOR PARCEL 2) AND "R-3" MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO REMAIN "R-3" MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (FOR PARCEL 1), FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1583 NORTHWEST 24TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-00764b Legislation.PDF 05-00764, 05-00764a & 05-00764b Exhibits A & B.PDF 05-00764b Analysis.PDF 05-00764a & 05-00764b Zoning Map.pdf 05-00764, 05-00764a & 05-00764b Aerial Map.pdf 05-00764, 05-00764a & 05-00764b Miami River Commission Recomm.PDF 05-00764b ZB Reso.PDF 05-00764b Application & Supporting Docs.PDF 05-00764b FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-00764 & 05-00764b Submittal Letter.pdf 05-00764b SR Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from SD-4 Waterfront Industrial District and R-3 Multifamily Medium -Density Residential to C-1 Restricted Commercial (for Parcel 2) and R-3 Multifamily Medium -Density Residential to Remain R-3 Multifamily Medium -Density Residential (for Parcel 1) to Change the Zoning Atlas LOCATION: Approximately 1583 NW 24th Avenue APPLICANT(S): Brisas del Rio, Inc. APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Ben Fernandez, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. MIAMI RIVER COMMISSION: Found the proposed Brisas del Rio project to be inconsistent with the Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan on November 1, 2004. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on July 11, 2005 by a vote of 8-1. See companion File IDs 05-00764 and 05-00764a. PURPOSE: This will change the above property to C-1 Restricted Commercial (for Parcel 2) and remain R-3 Multifamily Medium -Density Residential (for Parcel 1) for the proposed Brisas del Rio Major Use Special Permit project. Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Chairman Gonzalez, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones City of Miami Page 135 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. PZ28. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): 28 is the companion zoning change, also recommended for approval by the Zoning Board and the Planning Department. Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Sanchez: Move on first reading. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): And 1 will read the ordinance. Commissioner Regalado: So move it. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion. Andrew Dickman: If 1 could just incorporate my comments -- Commissioner Regalado: You need a second. Mr. Dickman: -- from the other item into this item. Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry. Go -- put your name and -- Mr. Dickman: Sorry. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Mr. Dickman: Andrew Dickman, again. I'd like to incorporate my comments from the prior item, if I may. Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Mr. Dickman: Thank you. Commissioner Sanchez: So noted. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. OK. We have -- this -- Chairman Gonzalez: A motion. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a -- Is this a public hearing, too? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Yes. Mr. Fernandez.: Yes, it is a public hearing. Vice Chairman Winton: This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public would like to comment on PZ.28? Anyone from the -- comment on PZ.28? Mr. Fernandez: Yes. City of Miami Page 136 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Sanchez: Stipulate your record, same thing. Ashley Chase: I'm sorry? Just really quickly. Ashley Chase, Miami River Commission, with offices at 1407 Northwest 7th Street. I'd like to read a letter into the record on behalf of our chairperson, Ms. Irela Bague, on these items. On April 4, 2005, Ms. Lucia Dougherty, Greenberg Traurig, and Mr. Ed Llorca, Mouriz Salazar Architects, presented the Coastal on the River development to the Miami River Commission, including the proposed Major Use Special Permit, land use and zoning amendment. The MRC's (Miami River Commission) motion to find the proposal consistent with the Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan failed by a tie vote of 5 to 5. Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Any other comments from the public? If not, the public hearing is closed. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion from Commissioner -- Chairman Gonzalez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: -- Regalado -- Chairman Gonzalez: 1 second the motion. Vice Chairman Winton: -- and second from Chairman Gonzalez. Any other comments? If not, read the ordinance, please. Mr. Fernandez: Yes. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. 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.29 05-00620 ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), 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 2215 NORTHWEST 14TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "INDUSTRIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL;" MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Second Reading City of Miami Page 137 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 05-00620 Legislation.pdf 05-00620, 05-00620a & 05-00620b Exhibit A.pdf 05-00620 Analysis.pdf 05-00620 Land Use Map.pdf 05-00620, 05-00620a & 05-00620b Aerial Map.pdf 05-00620, 05-00620a & 05-00620b Miami River Comm Comments.pdf 05-00620 & 05-00620b School Board Review.pdf 05-00620 PAB Reso.pdf 05-00620 Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-00620 FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-00620-Submittal.pdf 05-00620-Submittal 2.pdf 05-00620 SR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-00620 Submittal Letter.pdf 05-00620 Submittal Petition.pdf 05-00620 Submittal Shipping Terminals.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544, from 'Industrial" to "Restricted Commercial" to Change the Future Land Use Designation of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan LOCATION: Approximately 2215 NW 14th Street APPLICANT(S): Riverside 22 Investments, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. MIAMI RIVER COMMISSION: Made a motion on May 23, 2005 to find the proposed Coastal on the River project consistent with the Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan, which failed due to a tie vote of 5-5. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on June 15, 2005 by a vote of 5-1. See companion File Ds 05-00620a and 05-00620b. PURPOSE: This will change the above property to Restricted Commercial for the proposed Coastal on the River Major Use Special Permit project Motion by Chairman Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones 12761 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. PZ29. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZs (Planning & Zoning) 29, 30, and 31 are related items. PZ29 and 30 are the land use and zoning change for the Coastal on the River project. This is located at approximately 2215 Northwest 14th Street. The request is from industrial to restricted commercial, with the zoning change going to C-1. This has been recommended for approval by the Planning Department, approval by the Planning Advisory City of Miami Page 138 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Board, and approval by the Zoning Board. The Miami River Commission vote was also finding this consistent with their plan. PZ31 is the Major Use Special Permit. This is for -- to construct two -building residential development ranging in height from 110 feet to 120 feet. The project will have a total of 633 multifamily residential -- Vice Chairman Winton: Whoa. Ms. Slazyk: -- units, recreational amenities, and 898 parking spaces. This was also recommended approval with conditions to the City Commission from the Planning Advisory Board and the Planning Department, and the conditions here -- there is a design -related condition that the applicant consider provision of some retail space within the ground floor of the project to serve future residents of the project given that there is a large amount of units proposed on the site. In addition to other developments in the area, and also we wanted to keep working with them on their landscape plan. We want them to submit a final landscape plan with all the specifications to the Planning director prior to a building permit for final review and approval. That's it. Vice Chairman Winton: Lucia. Andrew Dickman: One second. Mr. Chair, if I could incorporate my comments from 27 and 28 into 29, 30, and 31, and also add that while the attorney has told you that stand -- that case was just about standing, it is a case that was brought on Hurricane Cove for the zoning and MUSP (Major Use Special Permit) application, and the court did said -- did say, "We find that the Port of Miami River section is not limited to 14 unidentified companies." Rather, the footnote explains that the Port of Miami River is not a port in the traditional sense of the word. I don't think that a court will at all say that that ruling by a Third District Court of Appeals is just about zoning. They will pay attention to this, and I'd like to put --1 just want to have that on the record. Again, my name is Andrew Dickman for the Miami River Marine Group. Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Lucia. Lucia Dougherty: And we'll incorporate the City Attorney's response into the record, as well. Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I'm here today on behalf of the owner and the applicant, and with me is Tony Acosta, principal. The property is located just west of the 22nd Avenue bridge right here, and if you look at this map, the next property over, approximately right here, is the property that you -- that is Detroit Diesel, and then from here on is the property that you just now, on first reading, changed to residential or C-1. Then, if you look at the north side of the river, there isn't a single industrial classification on the north side of the river whatsoever, and again, this is Antillean Marine, which is the property that is adjacent to Durham Park that at one time caused significant problems in terms of noise to the neighbors of Durham Park. The request that we're asking for is to change it so that we can have a C-2 use, and the reason that -- actually, it's a C-1 use, but we are limiting ourselves to the exact same height that you can have today currently under the SD-4 regulations. We are not asking to supersize this building in terms of its height. We are asking to -- our purpose is to market this as affordable market rate housing, starting at $170, 000, so as Ben had suggested, this is an area which desperately needs residential uses, and Commissioner Winton, you said that there are residential uses there. This is the area of town where your master plan for the -- community development says at any given time there's only 450 residences able to be rented or purchased in Allapattah at any given time. There is a desperate need for residential uses in this area, and your school demographics show that. They are underutilized in this particular district. That's not the case anywhere else in the City of Miami. Meanwhile, you have 25, 000 jobs in the Civic Center every single day and no place to live, so that means they have to drive down Biscayne Boulevard to get here from Pembroke Pines, Cooper City, and wherever else they live. They are coming down your streets because there is no affordable housing -- and I don't mean, you know, federal government subsidized housing -- but there is no affordable housing for medium income City of Miami Page 139 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 folks who live in the Civic -- who work at the Civic Center either as doctors, nurses, jailers, bailiffs, whatever, so that's something that we think that is a public policy that you've decided in the past because that's in your comprehensive plan to support. We have 450 residential units in this property. The strategic plan, as I suggested, in the Civic Center shows that there is lack of housing. The land use is consistent with what is surrounding this property, and the interesting thing about the Detroit Diesel site, if you ask them if they will repair a motor, an engine from a boat, they will not do so. If you go on site, there is absolutely no way to raise a boat out of the water. There is no davits. It is particular -- it is only a facility that repairs motors, but it's a very nice facility. It's a great facility because it's quiet; it's mostly inside. It's not going anywhere, and it's not incompatible with residential use next door. We were recommended for approval by the IDR, the Urban Development Review Board, the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board, the Zoning Board, and the Planning Advisory Board. As the River Commission said, it was a tie vote, and a motion to approve this as being consistent. Ed Llorca is here, our architect; Richard Garcia, our traffic planner; Mariano Corral, our landscape architect is here. We do provide a public bay walk in the front of our property along the entire waterfront. We also have internalized all of our parking and internalized all of our loading. You can't see a parking spot anywhere because it is totally lined with residential uses, so we would urge your approval of this Major Use Special Permit and rezoning. Vice Chairman Winton: This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public like to comment on PZ29? Anyone -- Ashley Chase: I'm so very sorry, Commissioners. I just wanted to clarj for the record that -- Vice Chairman Winton: You need to put your name on the record, please. Ms. Chase: I'm very sorry. Ashley Chase, Miami River Commission, with offices at 1407 Northwest 7th Street. I just want to clam for the record, as stated earlier, on April 4, 2005, the MRC (Miami River Commission) made a motion to find the proposal consistent with the Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan, but the motion failed by a tie vote of 5 to 5. Thanks. Vice Chairman Winton: Didn't you put that on the record just a little while ago? Chairman Gonzalez: She already did that, but she -- Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Chairman Gonzalez: -- did it again. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Mariano Cruz: Yes. Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. Igo to that neighborhood once or twice. I go visiting friends that live right there next to the (UNINTELLIGIBLE). Maybe now they will do something to (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the problem that was created years ago with other Commissioners when they give the zoning change that made possible Antillean Marine to build a cargo facility next to 200 single-family homes there on the east side of 22nd Avenue. Now, maybe with this project on the way we compensate something because Antillean Marine -- I was going to say now they have become good neighbors there because they got a new administration. We don't have the problem there six in the morning and Sunday morning they were already working there, and I'm not going to talk about the affordable housing. That will be for the next one, or the next -- Chairman Gonzalez: That is correct. Mr. Cruz: -- the Class II Permit. City of Miami Page 140 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Agustin Abalo: Hi. Good afternoon. Gus Abalo, 1700 Northwest North River Drive. With me here today, I have Maria Campos, Aracely Milian, Elogia Alvarez; they are members of the board of Robert King High Apartments, a condo association on the river. I also have with me Mr. Carlos Reyes. He's the president of Isla del Mar, which is the condo association, if you look here -- Chairman Gonzalez: Right across the (UNINTELLIGIBLE). Mr. Abalo: -- on the map, it's right directly across -- Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): I'm sorry. Mr. Abalo: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) speak into the mike. Ms. Thompson: You have a portable there. Mr. Abalo: Yeah. Right directly across from the (UNINTELLIGIBLE). We all strongly recommend that, you know -- we all ask that you please consider approval on this item. We're all very excited about all the changes coming up and down the river, and we're seeing the benefits of it daily. We're seeing, you know, better people moving into the neighborhood We're seeing increased services, better businesses, and we also have collected 119 signatures from residents all along the river, and business owners, as well, all very excited to see this type of development in our neighborhood. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Mr. Abalo: Thank you very much. Vice Chairman Winton: Anyone else from the public? Fernando Menendez: Good afternoon. Fernando Menendez, 2081 Northwest South River Drive. I am here to show my support for this project. I believe in this project. I have had a house in that neighborhood for about a year now, and I see the property values increasing, and I think a project of this magnitude would further increase value prop -- property values in that area. Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Mr. Dickman. Mr. Dickman: Once again, Andrew Dickman, offices at 9111 Park Drive, in Miami Shores, representing the Miami River Marine Group. I'd also like to incorporate testimony from the Hurricane Cove hearing several years ago into this presentation, if I may. My client is a -- Ms. Dougherty: That is totally inappropriate. You can't incorporate testimony or witnesses from a entirely different application. Mr. Dickman: It was a -- Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. City Attorney. Mr. Dickman: -- public hearing. Vice Chairman Winton: Well -- City of Miami Page 141 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): They should have been here to testify. There is no opportunity to cross-examine or to delve into the nature of that testimony by Ms. Dougherty, so clearly, in my opinion, it is not contemporaneous with what's happening in front of you, and it should not be admitted into the record. Mr. Dickman: It's exactly -- Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Mr. Fernandez.: It can be proffered for whatever value it has, and you cannot prevent him from giving it, but your ruling is -- or my recommendation to you is that you rule it, in essence, inadmissible and not grant it competent substantial evidence status. Mr. Dickman: It's the exact same attorneys, exact same clients, exact same issue. Vice Chairman Winton: Maybe, but -- Ms. Dougherty: Totally different property -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- I'm -- Ms. Dougherty: -- different place -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- excuse me. Ms. Dougherty: -- on the riverfront. Vice Chairman Winton: 1-- Mr. Dickman: Understood. Vice Chairman Winton: -- excuse me. We're listening to the City Attorney's advice, so -- Mr. Dickman: I don't blame you. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Continue on, please. Mr. Dickman: OK. Once again, my client is a trade organization and port cooperative consisting of shipping and related companies working on the Miami River, collectively known as the Port of Miami River. I'm joined here today by Fran Bohnsack, the Marine Group's executive director; also with me is Horacio Stuart Aguirre, from the Durham Park Homeowners' Association. The proposed development requires this Commission to alter the City's Comprehensive Neighborhood Master Plan future land use map, rezone that property and grant a special permit to build a high -density residential projects on the property that is currently designated for marine/industrial uses on the Miami River. The City's Comprehensive Neighborhood Master Plan policies make it an obligation, not a suggestion, for you to protect the Port of Miami River, which uses are located within the marine/industrial land uses and the SD-9 zoning districts, located along the banks of the Miami River. Florida Statute Section 163.1387, paragraph -- subparagraph 2 states, "Comprehensive plans may only be amended in such way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan." Internal consistency means that the future land use map must be consistent with the goals and objectives, policies, which is the text part of your comprehensive plan. Within the Comprehensive Plan, Objective PA-31, which is part of the sub -element of the Port of Miami River, states the City of Miami, through its land development regulations -- the zoning -- shall help protect the Port of Miami River from City of Miami Page 142 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 encroachment by non -water -dependent and water -related land uses, and shall regulate expansion and redevelopment in coordination with the City's applicable coastal management and conservation plans and policies. Policy PA-311, the City shall use its land development regulations -- again, the zoning -- to encourage the establishment and maintenance of water -dependent and water -related uses along the banks of the Miami River and discourage encroachment by incompatible uses. Policy PA-312, the City shall, through its land development regulations, encourage the development and expansion of the Port of Miami River, consistent with the coastal management and conservation elements of the City Comprehensive Plan. Policy 313, the City shall, through its land development regulations, encourage development of compatible land uses in the vicinity of the Port of Miami River so as to mitigate potential adverse impacts arising from the Port of Miami River upon adjacent natural resources and land uses. Policy PA-331, the City of Miami, through its intergovernmental coordination policies, shall support the functions of the Port of Miami River consistent with future goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, particularly with respect to the unique characteristics of the Port of Miami River's location and its economic position and function within the marine industry, and the necessary -- necessity of cooperation with these characteristics and needs with the maritime industry and complements and often competes with the Port of Miami River. These terms "expansion," "vicinity" are not defined in your comprehensive plan nor in your zoning code. Expansion, according to the dictionary, reads "a period of increased economic or business activities; an increase in size." Expansion also means the act of increasing something in size or volume, or quantity and scope, and again, we're talking about the Port of Miami River industry. The word encroachment refers to to take another's possession or rights gradually or stealthily encroach on a neighbor's land, or to advance beyond proper or formal limits -- and again, this is referring to incompatible uses in the Port of Miami River -- entry into an area not previously occupied; and finally, vicinity, the state of being near or in space or relationship, in proximity; nearby, surrounding, or adjoining region. Again, these are terms that are found in the Port of Miami River sub -element, which is your adopted comprehensive plan stating what you must do when reviewing these types of applications. The City has consistently told you that that -- those policies -- and there are a lot of those policies -- specifically under the sub -heading of Port of Miami River sub -element -- doesn't apply to all of these properties that are coming before you, simply because there is a footnote on the sub -heading Port of Miami River, and this relates to the case that your attorney and I referred to, and that footnote says that it refers to only some independent, privately -owned, small shipping companies located on the Miami River, and is not a port facility in the usual meaning of the term, and again, staff and counsel for the applicants have all -- including Hurricane Cove -- said that the Port of Miami River policies that I've just read to you don't apply because they haven't been able to show that they're one of these 14, which are not defined. What did the case say at Third District Court of Appeals? This is Case 3D-05708, and this is November 16 opinion for Hurricane Cove. After reading and rereading the footnote, along with the Port of Miami River element -- the policies that I just read you -- we are left with the same unanswered question: Who are these 14 companies? We find that the Port of Miami River subsection is not limited to 14 unidentified companies; rather, the footnote explains what Port of Miami River is not port -- is not a port in the traditional sense of the word. What they said was that that was a reference to distinguish Port of Miami, other port authorities, as opposed to the river port, which is really a collection of industry — privately -owned industry on the river. It is not a definition to which those policies apply, and again, this is a legal ruling by the Third District Court of Appeals. Florida Statute 163 states that land development regulations must be consistent with the plan. Land development regulations, again, are your zoning code. Those policies that I read to you said through your land development regulations, your zoning. All over the city, you have SD (special district) overlays; Biscayne Boulevard, you talked about Martin Luther King Boulevard They're all over the city. They're identified that way because they're important places. You have adopted SD-4, waterfront industrial district, which is only on the Miami River. This is SD-4, and I quote, "The intent of the SD-4 is to limit principal and accessory uses to those reasonably requiring location within such district and not permit residential, general commercial, service, office, or manufacturing uses not primary related -- primarily related to waterfront activities, except for offices -- office uses in existing City of Miami Page 143 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 office structures, and this is Zoning Code 604-1. The SD-4 allows "manufacturing, assembly, and storage activities, and generally includes activities that would otherwise generate excessive amounts of noise, smoke, fumes, illumination, traffic, hazardous waste, or negative visual impacts, unless properly controlled " Residential uses are not permitted in this designation, except for rescue missions and live aboard and commercial marinas. What 1 want to submit to you is that -- take for example the SD-9 zoning district on Biscayne Boulevard, which was hotly contested What if someone came up with the bright idea that these -- this -- all these zoning codes under the SD-9 only apply to Soykas, only apply to Burger King, only applies to Wendy's, and then everything that came before you got through that exception; what do you think Morningside, Belle Meade, Palm Grove would do? They would revolt because they depend on that SD-9 to give them predictability to be able to look into the future to make decisions. Again, all across the city today, you have made decisions that have deferred items because you felt that they were premature because there were studies in the works. You have a plan that has been adopted, quite frankly, not only your Comprehensive Plan, but your 1992 Miami River Master Plan, which specifically talks about the -- how important the working river is and the marine industrial uses. You also have the Miami Commission's Urban Infill Plan, which counsel has told you is not jurisdictional because it hasn't been adopted, but you do have an adopted plan, which tells you directly further -- furthers what your policies say in your Comprehensive Plan. That is a controlling document. What needs to be done on this river is to be able to give predictability, to give all the stakeholders the ability to make decisions so that these things don't come to you case by case, and we end up with the same fight that we've been fighting for year after year. Since the year 2000, 50 percent of the properties designated for marine/industrial water -related and water -dependent uses along the banks of the Miami River have been lost forever due to the multiple small-scale land use amendments to make way for luxury high-rises. When I say small land -- small-scale land use amendments, that's key because when you bring these small properties that are under ten acres, it doesn't have the same scrutiny that a land use amendment would have because it doesn't necessarily have to go to the Department of Community Affairs in Tallahassee. In other words, you have been defeating the port industry by a thousand cuts. It has been dying by a thousand cuts, without having a complete analysis. If you want to change it, then do a full-blown land use amendment and say you want to change it. Come out and tell the world that you want to change it. Don't come forward with all these ten -acre case by case land use amendments and not say publicly what your agenda is -- to transform this river from a marine/industrial river to something else. As you know, the City has - - despite all of these land use amendments, the City and the County, and the US (United States) Army Corp of Engineers has entered into a multimillion dollar dredging project for the explicit purpose of improving navigation and the commerce on the river. The US Army Corp of Engineers does not do these types of projects to beautify rivers and to make it more developable for high-rises. Presently, shipping is limited to tidal patterns and reduced cargo, 50 percent. The ships can't come in. They can only come in 50 percent loaded because the river is so shallow. Once the river is open, the demand for shipping locations and related industries will be much greater, but where will they locate? The City's own market -- Miami River Market Analysis and Economic Development Study and the Biscayne Bay Economic Study, conducted by Hazen and Sawyer for the South Florida Water Management District, published in April 2005, demonstrate that the Miami River shipping activities generate $842 million in output, 427 million in income, and 7, 500 jobs, and $45 million in tax revenue. These are economic studies that are out there. They're available to you; they're available to your staff, and none of these things are being used for your decisions. The Port of Miami River is the fourth largest port in Florida and has been recognized by the City's Comprehensive Plan as a unique and vital to the City. As a matter of law, you must follow your policies that protect the port and encourage the expansion of the port. That's what your Comprehensive Plan says; yet, month after month you have approved small-scale future land use amendments and piece by piece you are slowly dismantling the river industry. These cumulative impacts -- and I want to point that out because when these things come forward to you, by law, under the state growth management act, you're required under comp. plan amendments to be looking at the cumulative impact. All of these things that you have approved in the last couple years, and the ones that are in the pipeline, you City of Miami Page 144 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 have to look at how much acreage is being lost. Is there a need or not a need for the industry locations? Is there a need for more residential housing on the river? You're not doing that in a comprehensive planning way. You're looking at these case by case. These case -by -case decisions are illegal, and they are, more importantly, improper long-range planning. For these reasons, we oppose the Coastal on the River and the Brisas del Rio developments, and ask that you establish a temporary moratorium on all such developments on the river until a rational plan, such as the Urban Infill Plan or the Miami River Master Plan, is adopted and used, and what I want to suggest -- and I've talked to counsel for the developer and Lucia on this, and even some of your staff -- why don't we put a stop to all of this conflict, and it can't just be my clients. It has to be the development industry. It has to be the City, and why don't we do what we did on the SD-9? Why don't we do what we're doing on Martin Luther King? Let's get a plan together. Why waste all of this energy -- negative energy, put it together into a positive energy and get something that every -- all the stakeholders can live with? My clients can live with the Urban Infill Plan. This Commission, for whatever reason, has decided it does not want to adopt that plan. Fine. Let's sit down and find what we like of it; put a plan together so that my clients, the industry, can predict what's coming down the road; can understand what the City's and your vision is for the river, and also understand the economics of people who want to build on the river. I submit to you that -- not as an attorney, but as somebody that has been up here for year after year dealing with these, and my clients will continue to deal with these in a legal matter. Unfortunately, they will have to until some type of planning document is adopted, and I hope you will give staff that direction. I'd ask that Fran Bohnsack and Mr. Horacio Stuart Aguirre be allowed some time to present. Vice Chairman Winton: Well -- yeah, Fran certainly because she's part of the industry, but I'm not sure -- we had public hearing. We've closed the public hearing, and Mr. Aguirre, unless he is one of your expert witnesses, he missed the public comment period. Mr. Dickman: I don't believe the public hearing has been closed. I'm part of the public hearing. Vice Chairman Winton: No, you're not. Mr. Dickman: Huh? Vice Chairman Winton: Did we -- ? What -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah. Mr. Fernandez: Madam Clerk would know. I believe that the public hearing is still open. You're still taking testimony -- Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, is that right? Mr. Fernandez: --from the public. Vice Chairman Winton: I didn't -- OK. Mr. Fernandez: The Chairman has not called it back yet. Vice Chairman Winton: Is that right? Mr. Fernandez: Now, however -- Ms. Thompson: That is correct. Mr. Fernandez: -- what the -- I -- you know, I would have interrupted, but otherwise, I didn't City of Miami Page 145 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 want to. The time limitation needs to be observed. We established clearly upfront that equal time would be afforded to the developer as to those who are opposing. Mr. Dickman has, of course, carried on for a good long while. It's up to the Chair and to you, in your good graces, to -- you know, certainly, you need to take public input, but you may limit, to whatever extent you deem appropriate, the time period for which they speak. Mr. Dickman: And I appreciate your deference to counsel for the -- but I'm sure they will stay under the time limit. Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Fran Bohnsack: I have a very brief presentation. My name is Fran Bohnsack. I'm the executive director of the Miami River Marine Group, which, as you know, is a not -for -profit trade association that supports the marine industry, that would be recreational, as well as commercial, marinas and boatyards on the Miami River. The mission of the Miami River Marine Group is to protect the working river, and that's why I'm here to comment. I shared, I want to say, Commissioner Spence -Jones' frustration a little earlier when she talked about how her neighborhood was characterized. I feel some of that is a perfect analogy for what takes place when our industry is characterized here in this forum, and that starts with certain inaccuracies. They may be little, and I'm sure, Lucia, that they're not intentional, but they are always there. For example, the idea that Florida -- Detroit Diesel -- and both of them were here, the general manager and personnel person were here earlier, but they had to leave. The idea that they don't do marine use is just simply erroneous. If you go to their Web site, it's the first thing that pops up on the page, but just because I heard it last time, I just didn't try very hard to do the research, but 1 did go into the offices where my office is, shared office space, and I just randomly pulled a bill. It's a tug -- it's a marine construction company, and I found a bill -- this one's dated March 23, 2001. It's for $25, 000 for the repair of two tugboat engines, so you know, it's a small thing, but correct -- giving the correct picture, I think it's important. I was checking the land use map because last time the land use map was incorrect, but I see it has been corrected We did speak to Lucia about that, so thank you. 1 appreciate that you did that. The property in question, Coastal, has been characterized as one that has not -- has been abandoned for ten years. This is from the first hearing. That isn't the case. Vice Chairman Winton: Fran, how much more time do you need? Ms. Bohnsack: Just -- please, just a little -- Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Ms. Bohnsack: -- bit more. That really isn't the case. It was owned by Coastal Tug and Barge, who operate from the Port of Miami. They used it as hurricane refuge for their tugboats. Coastal Tug and Barge, a couple of years ago, was purchased by a company called Trans Mundane -- Montaigne that does not do marine use, and that's when they decided to put it up for sale. Along with that, I heard complaints about debris and dirt, graffiti, et cetera. I just want to point out that those would be the responsibility of the current owner, not of its history of marine use. It had fully active marine use until it was sold Finally, I'd like to say, as you know, we believe this project is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. We know it's inconsistent with the Urban Infill Plan, which even though you didn't support it, you did pay for it, and the legislature did create the Miami River Commission, and finally, you do have a plan that the City adopted in 1992, a Miami River plan that supports this use at that location. Thank you for your time. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Horacio Stuart Aguirre: Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, and I will be brief Lady and City of Miami Page 146 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 gentlemen of the Commission, good afternoon. My name is Horacio Stuart Aguirre. I reside at the City of Miami at 1910 Northwest 13th Street, in Durham Park a peninsula by the Miami River and the Miami River south fork. I come to you as a private citizen, and also as president of Durham Park Neighborhood Association, and we are opposed to the land use change on the development at Coastal Marine property, and we oppose any further reduction of vitally important marine land uses on the Miami River. The Miami River is a working river, providing long-term jobs to the community, providing marine facilities to the commercial and recreational marine industries, and providing the facilities for the tremendous amounts of trade between the Greater Miami area, Central and South America. The commercial and recreational marine industries of Miami -Dade County, many of which are located on the Miami River, are vital to the South Florida economy and vital to the image, national and international, as the lifestyle of thousands of Miamians who proclaim to be living in the sun and fun boating capital of the world. Unfortunately, way too many commercial recreational marine waterfront properties have been rezoned to non -marine uses, and your constituents have begun to awaken to this, and have begun to voice their displeasure. The local and national media have reported these unwise changes. Employees and recreational marine boaters, who are also boaters, are concerned with the changes to the facilities on the river. The City of Miami committed to the federal government that the Miami River is a working river, and to be used for commerce, and as a result of these recommendations, the federal government committed huge sums of money for the dredging of the Miami River, so I ask, how can the City of Miami represent to the federal government that the Miami River is a working river, and yet, continually change the use of the Miami River to be nothing more but a decoration and backdrop to suit a handful of condominium developers? This inconsistency puts this City at risk with the federal government for misrepresentations, and I ask you, aren't there enough misrepresentations coming out of this building? Furthermore, the proposed change to a zoning -- Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. -- Mr. Aguirre: -- to a high-rise condominium -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- Mr. -- Mr. Aguirre: -- development is grossly inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan -- Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Aguirre, how much more time? Your two minutes are up. Mr. Aguirre: Oh, about another 15 seconds. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Mr. Aguirre: Thank you, kindly. -- which generates substantially greater traffic. I live in Durham Park. I go through the intersection at 14th Street and 22nd Avenue twice a day. It is a high -traffic area. It could not possibly tolerate another 100 cars. Thank you, lady and gentlemen. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Anyone else from the public would like to comment on this item? Anyone else from the public? If not, we will close the public hearing, and -- Mr. Fernandez: Ms. Dougherty, I think, as the applicant, under the rules would be entitled to some rebuttal -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Mr. Fernandez: -- then you close, and then you may hear -- City of -Miami Page 147 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Vice Chairman Winton: But -- Mr. Fernandez: -- testimony -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- she's not part of the public. She is representing -- at least for six years I've been here, and maybe we've got some new rules, but the public comment was separate from the two professional comments, so tell me if we got a new rule. If we got a new rule, 1 don't mind -- Mr. Fernandez: Well -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- applying that new rule. I just need to know what it is. Mr. Fernandez: -- we're perfecting them as we go along. You can follow whatever -- Commissioner Sanchez: Rebuttal. Mr. Fernandez: -- procedure you deem appropriate, so long as -- whether as this part of the hearing or the next part, Ms. Dougherty gets a short rebuttal, then you may go to Ms. Slazyk, who has some testimony -- Vice Chairman Winton: Great -- Mr. Fernandez: -- and comments to give. Vice Chairman Winton: -- so is the public hearing open or is it closed? Mr. Fernandez: If -- Vice Chairman Winton: OK, it's going to be open for this one -- Mr. Fernandez: Whatever she says -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- so how's that? Mr. Fernandez: -- would be part of the public -- Vice Chairman Winton: That'll make -- Mr. Fernandez: -- of the -- Vice Chairman Winton: There you go. Mr. Fernandez: -- record. Commissioner Sanchez: Or you close it and she rebuttal. Vice Chairman Winton: Lucia. Ms. Dougherty: Yes, sir. Thank you. One of the things that -- Vice Chairman Winton: Short, he said. Ms. Dougherty: -- Mr. Dickman said was that -- I'm always short, though. One of the things he said is that the lawsuit would prevent you from going forward because they made a City of Miami Page 148 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 determination of what the 14 facilities were, and in fact, that lawsuit dealt with only whether or not somebody had standing, and there was nothing in the record to determine or to tell the court what the 14 were, where they were, what they were about; because there was nothing in the record because the only issue was a legal argument, so with that, 1 would like Lourdes Slazyk, if you don't mind, to put on the record exactly what the Port of Miami is, what it referred to, what the 14 facilities were; were they in the City of Miami in the first place. Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. There are a couple of things I wanted to say. First of all, the Port of Miami River is a sub -element of our Comprehensive Plan. The City has consistently interpreted the Port of Miami River sub -element as being something that was applicable only to the properties that were identified in the Comprehensive Plan by the footnote definition of what the Port of Miami River was. If the interpretation had been wide open to the entire Miami River -- and Mr. Dickman read what those objectives and policies were -- it would have really precluded the City from ever developing or redeveloping any, if not most of the Miami River, and that was clearly not the intent of that section of the Comprehensive Plan. That section of the Comprehensive Plan was inserted into the Comprehensive Plan as a result of coop -- in the spirit of cooperation with Dade County. They actually provided us with the list of what the 14 shipping companies were, most of which were outside of the City of Miami, west of 27th Avenue. Ms. Dougherty: How many were in the City of Miami? Ms. Slazyk: I don't know exactly. 1 believe it was four of them. I believe there were four. Ms. Dougherty: Were any of them in this area? Ms. Slazyk: No, no. The Port of Miami River sub -element was something -- was a definition that was put together for the Port of Miami River in order to meet some coastguard regulations that they needed to qualms as a port. It was not the intention of the Comprehensive Plan to limit development and redevelopment of the Miami River. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1989. In 1992, the City prepared and adopted a Miami River Master Plan that clearly set out the different segments of the Miami River; the lower river being downtown, the middle river, up to 27th Avenue, and west of 27th Avenue being the upper river. That plan also clearly set out a vision for the Miami River of which the middle river was meant to be a transitional area, an area where mixed -use was going to be encouraged. We believe that the Comprehensive Plan section on the Port of Miami River was clearly not intended to apply to all of the properties on the Miami River or else we wouldn't have adopted a river master plan in 1992 after the comp. plan that would have contradicted what was in the Comprehensive Plan, and that's something that if you look at all of the changes that this Commission has approved along the Miami River, starting with the Royal Atlantic and Hurricane Cove, and several others that have come before you, the interpretation has been consistent from the beginning and is consistent with the 1992 adopted Miami River Master Plan. Vice Chairman Winton: And let me ask you a question. Mr. Dickman made a recommendation to us, and that is, let's figure out what we want and where we want it so that it isn't done on a piecemeal basis and everybody knows what the rules are. Are you saying right now that the middle river, which is the part from 27th Avenue back towards -- Ms. Slazyk: Towards downtown, yeah. Vice Chairman Winton: -- downtown is in fact an area that you, the Planning Department, has targeted for transitional uses, and is not intended to protect heavy marine uses? Ms. Slazyk: I think that, if you read the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety, the protection of existing industries or the -- actually, more the encouragement of expansion of existing industries is something that the Comprehensive Plan definitely does in the City, and the Planning City of Miami Page 149 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Department does. Merrill Stevens or any of the other current marine industries that are on the river, if they come to the City and they want to expand, and they want to buy the property next door and get a land use or zoning change in order to expand that business, we will work with them just like we do with any other developer because it is a valued industry. What I'm saying is that you can't take an interpretation of the sub -element that has to do with the Port of Miami River and say now it applies to the entire river, because that's clearly not consistent with the plan that this Commission adopted in 1992 for the Miami River -- Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Ms. Slazyk: -- and the two need to coexist, and I do believe that, you know, what he's saying and the fact that maybe it's time to refine our vision from 1992 is probably valid. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Ms. Dougherty: And I agree with that. At one point, we had a conference, a required mediation conference in connection with Hurricane Cove, and I suggested we sit down and look at this comprehensively and decide where we're going, from a comprehensive standpoint. At that time, it was rejected, and 1 want you to know that I believe that residential and these marine/industrial uses can coexist on the river. For example, Merrill Stevens is planning a wonderful new enlarged facility. There is a brand-new marina and boatyard going on next to Hurricane Cove, and they've told me that the reason for their -- that renovation of that marina is because Hurricane Cove, hopefully, some day will go in, so it's -- they can coexist. There is no reason why they can't, but at this particular time, to say to a landowner that you should land bank this just in case some marine/industrial industry wants to come here in the future is really not the right thing -- Vice Chairman Winton: Are you completed -- ? Ms. Dougherty: -- especially when you have a countervailing policy that says you need residential and you need it badly in this area to support the many jobs that you do have currently. It's the largest job base anywhere in the City. Mr. Dickman: Mr. Vice Chair -- Vice Chairman Winton.' Concluded? Mr. Dickman: -- I need to ask -- Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. Mr. City Attorney, didn't -- Mr. Fernandez: Again, a record is being made, and if I read the cards, we -- this is not going to be the end, even though, for your purposes, this would be second and final reading, but we need to be fair and open, and if you limit Mr. Dickman to his comments, then you can proceed, but I would think that he would be entitled because the -- Ms. Slazyk brought up issues that he may -- Vice Chairman Winton: Got it. Mr. Fernandez: -- want to address. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Mr. Dickman, briefly, I'm assuming. Mr. Dickman: Ms. Slazyk, you answered a question from counsel that -- her question, I believe, was how many of those on -- those companies were in the City, and I believe you answered "no"? City of Miami Page 150 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Ms. Slazyk: No. Vice Chairman Winton: No, that isn't what she said. Ms. Slazyk: I know there are some in the City; I didn't remember how many. Vice Chairman Winton: She said -- Ms. Slazyk: I believed it was four of them. Vice Chairman Winton: That's what she said. Ms. Dougherty: But we will -- Ms. Slazyk: I don't have the list in front of me, though. Ms. Dougherty: -- agree to put this in reference -- Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. You're not -- Mr. Dickman: No, no, no, no. Ms. Dougherty: Sorry. Mr. Dickman: Is there a list of the 14 companies? Ms. Slazyk: Yes, there is. Mr. Dickman: Is that list incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan, meaning is it available in the Comprehensive Plan for people to see? Ms. Slazyk: It is not in the Comprehensive Plan. It is -- it's -- it came from the County. Mr. Dickman: Do you have that letter with you -- that list -- letter with you today? Ms. Slazyk: No, I do not. Mr. Dickman: Have you ever produced that list at any of the Comprehensive Plan amendments on the river? Ms. Slazyk: I don't understand that question. Mr. Dickman: When asked about this list, Royal Atlantic, Hurricane Cove, did you produce the list for anyone to examine so that they can verb your testimony? Ms. Slazyk: I know that there were several depositions on those, and we did not have the list at that time. Mr. Dickman: When you were deposed during the Royal Atlantic, did you produce that list, as required through the subpoena duces tecum? Ms. Slazyk: I don't recall, but I don't think I had it at the deposition. I saw it afterwards. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. City Attorney, are -- is this a deposition? Are we on trial? City of Miami Page 15! Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Rafael Suarez -Rivas (Assistant City Attorney): I think that Mr. Dickman is -- no. I think what he can ask about is the sum and substance of her testimony. That is your right in a quasi-judicial hearing, not to conduct a full-blown deposition of the witness, Mr. Dickman. Ms. Slazyk: I was just -- for the record, I was just handed the list, and there is a map attached to it, and I believe 1 was correct. 1 think four of them are in the City, and the rest of them were outside the City limits. Ms. Dougherty: Were there any in the middle district? Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. Ms. Dougherty: I'm sorry. Vice Chairman Winton: I don't think -- you know. Ms. Dougherty: Sony. Vice Chairman Winton: I don't have a trial going on here. Mr. City Attorney just made the point. Mr. Dickman -- Mr. Dickman: This is -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- you need to be very direct here, and we're not having any further cross-examination of our staff. Mr. Dickman: Candidly, Commissioner, this is a quasi-judicial hearing that counsel --1 have an obligation to my client to ask these questions because this list has -- Vice Chairman Winton: I think our -- Mr. Dickman: -- somehow miraculously occurred -- Mr. Suarez -Rivas: Mr. Dickman, we -- I tell you that in a quasi-judicial hearing, you may ask, as you know, about the testimony in chief. You are not to delve into whatever questions and everything else that you want to ask the witness. That is not your right, sir. Mr. Dickman: 1 want to put down on the record that counsel -- excuse me. Where did you get the list just a moment ago? Vice Chairman Winton: Well, excuse me. Why are you going back there again? Mr. Dickman: Because I need to understand where this list came from because it's very germane to how the policies and objectives -- Vice Chairman Winton: I think you can do that -- Commissioner Sanchez: Through the deposition. Vice Chairman Winton: -- back in court, not in this -- Mr. Dickman: She -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- Commission chamber. City of Miami Page 152 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Dickman: Mr. Commissioner, this is the basis of her testimony about how the policies and objectives for the Port of Miami River are applied. I need to know how she's coming up with that determination. Vice Chairman Winton: No, you don't; not here. You can do that somewhere else. Mr. City Attorney, does he have a right to demand to know how she came upon that? Mr. Dickman: Yeah. Vice Chairman Winton: Is that -- ? Mr. Suarez -Rivas: I think that because she spoke of the list, he may ask her how she got it factually, but not get into all -- you know, and did you say at a deposition, and did you -- I think he may ask her that, yes, sir. Mr. Dickman: I'm sorry, but she has brought a list -- Vice Chairman Winton: Just ask the question, please. Mr. Dickman: Where did that list come from, and can I have a copy of that list? Vice Chairman Winton: Well, it's public record, so surely you can have that. Ms. Slazyk: Yes, yes. The list was -- it's from the Dade County Planning Department, and it was handed to me by the attorney for the Coastal on the River project right now because I didn't happen to have my copy with me today, but when we prepared our Port of Miami River element, the City of Miami, we went to the County for information, as we did for our natural resource element, our coastal management element, because the County was the resource for the data that we used for a lot of the preparation of the data and analysis of our Comprehensive Plan, and the County is the one that provided the City with this list when we created our comprehensive plan, and -- Vice Chairman Winton: And so, yes -- Ms. Slazyk: -- this is from the Miami -Dade County Planning Department, and -- there, you have a copy. Mr. Dickman: One final question. Has the public had an opportunity for -- to review this list for this application? Has it been made a part of the public record prior to this hearing? Has it been at the Hearing Boards or any place else for the public to examine? Ms. Slazyk: To my knowledge, this list is not in the file for this item, although it is available in the City of Miami, but it's not in the file for this particular item. Ms. Dougherty: Mr. Chairman, just -- may I ask Mr. Dickman a question? Vice Chairman Winton: I don't know. Mr. Dickman: No. I mean, I'm -- Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. City Attorney, I don't think so. Mr. Dickman: -- not being -- City of Miami Page 153 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Vice Chairman Winton: I'm not -- Mr. Dickman: -- cross-examined here. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Ms. Dougherty: I mean, if he's acting like he's never -- Vice Chairman Winton: No, excuse me. Ms. Dougherty: -- this list before. Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me, excuse me. Mr. Dickman: I haven't, honestly. I haven't seen this list before. Vice Chairman Winton: Well -- Ms. Dougherty: That is an -- Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse -- Ms. Dougherty: -- out-and-out lie. Vice Chairman Winton: -- excuse me, and you, too. If you've got another question, ask it. Mr. Dickman: That's it. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: I'm glad (UNINTELLIGIBLE). Mr. Fernandez: Is this list now part of the record? Ms. Dougherty: It is part of the record, and it is also part of the record of the Hurricane Cove case, of which he's the counsel for. Mr. Fernandez: Fine. All right. Vice Chairman Winton: This -- Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman, you may now proceed to close all comments and bring the item back to yourself. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Dickman: I'd like to put this letter in the record so the Clerk can have it. Vice Chairman Winton: So, it's in the record -- Mr. Fernandez: That is -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- right now. Mr. Dickman: It's in the record. Vice Chairman Winton: Great. City of Miami Page 154 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Fernandez: And we'll give your copies. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Mr. Dickman: I appreciate that. Do I give it -- Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Mr. Dickman: -- to you or the Clerk? Vice Chairman Winton: The -- Mr. Fernandez: To the Clerk Vice Chairman Winton: -- anyone else -- Mr. Dickman: Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: -- from the public want to comment on this item? If not, the public hearing is closed. Mr. Fernandez: And nobody else can speak but you guys. Commissioner Sanchez: Wow. Chairman Gonzalez: And Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. Chairman Gonzalez.: I'm ready to make a motion to approve. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion -- Commissioner Sanchez: Second, and I just want to briefly discuss something, if -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- and a second. Commissioner Sanchez: -- I may, Mr. Chairman. I know it's late, and I know that the counsel took 25 minutes to build up his record for the court, but -- Chairman Gonzalez: Lawyers love to do that. Commissioner Sanchez: No. In his 25-minute statement -- Chairman Gonzalez: They charge by the hour. Commissioner Sanchez: -- he made the last -- the last statement he made was the one that got my attention, and I think that is that the City and the Miami River Commission needs to start working together to come up with a plan for the future of the river. I've been here seven years, and this has been a tug-of-war between the working river and the living river. It's -- you know, and I've only been here seven years. I could imagine how far it's gone back, and people are going to move to the river because it's a hot place to be now with things that are happening, but I also realize that -- the river, or the marine industry plays a very important role in the economy of the City and the river itself, and I've made it very clear in the past records that the City of Miami, City of Miami Page 155 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 in itself, is losing billions of dollars to the marine industry because we're really losing out on the mega yachts and a lot of the businesses going up to Fort Lauderdale, or going across into the islands, but that's something that the City could capitalize, but I truly think that we could coexist; that we could sit down with the Miami River Commission and this government and work something out where we both can agree on that agreement because if we don't do that, we're going to continue to have this back and forth, and all this is, this is going to end up in court; that's all it is. You know, the counsel was there 25 minutes building his record for court. We all know that, but we don't want to be in that situation because, at the end of the day, it is the river; it is the people that live along the river; it is the people that depend on the industry for services that are ones that are going to be suffering, and I've always said that as long as people move into the river, and you buy a condo on the river, you -- there's a good chance you're a boat owner because you want to be close to your boat, and you want to be in a place where you could get on your boat and get out quickly. You don't have to depend on a marina. Your boat breaks down; there's going to be a place you could take it in the river to get fixed, so I truly think that we could all coexist, but the first step is -- and I think that the City in itself and the government is going to have to sit down and discuss these issues. You have very good, valid concerns on retention of job -- marine industry jobs in the river. We don't want to lose them. We don't want them to go. I also have an extreme concern on losing slips and filling slips is going on. I am very concerned with that, but I think that what we need here is leadership to sit down with Miami River Commission and find a solution to this so we could, you know, meet at the 50-yard line, shake hands, and stop having these debates here that are not -- they're no good for anybody, so having said that, I second the motion. I'm prepared to vote on the issue now. Vice Chairman Winton: Any other comments? Yes, sir, Commissioner. Commissioner Regalado: Just briefly. That is the best thing we can hope for, what Commissioner Sanchez just said, but you know, as long as there is a need for housing near the water and people are willing to invest and people are willing to live in the river, inside the City, close to downtown, this fight will go on; simple as that, and the problem is that this river belongs to everybody. Homeland Security, Coast Guard, federal government, the State of Florida, Miami -Dade County, City of Miami, and no one has a design for the river like San Antonio. I mean, if you go to the city of San Antonio, the river belongs to the city. The city had a plan for the river; they did that, and that's -- that was that, and so everybody talks about how beautiful is the river in San Antonio because, hello, the local government did everything. I mean, I was there. I know the place, and so, you know, might as well make the best of it and approve whatever project is good for the river because, you know, at the end of the day, Homeland Security will be the one calling the shots in the river because this is the fact. This is an international river. People go -- come in and out, and if we -- God forbid, we don't have another terrorist act in this country, things are going to get worse in terms of security, and the river is going to be one of the collateral casualties immediately, so that's all l wanted to say, you know. Good ideas, but the reality is that we're going to have to keep fighting, piece by piece. Vice Chairman Winton: Any other comments? Chairman Gonzalez: No. Read the resolution. Vice Chairman Winton: Read the ordinance, please. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Vice Chairman Winton: Roll call. Ms. Thompson: Roll call. A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above. City of Miami Page 156 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 5/0. Vice Chairman Winton: Could I get a copy of that list also, please? Thank you. Unidentified Speaker: Yes. PZ.30 05-00620a 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 TO "C-1" RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2215 NORTHWEST 14TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 05-00620a Legislation.pdf 05-00620, 05-00620a & 05-00620b Exhibit A.pdf 05-00620a Analysis.pdf 05-00620a & 05-00620b Zoning Map.pdf 05-00620, 05-00620a & 05-00620b Aerial Map.pdf 05-00620, 05-00620a & 05-00620b Miami River Comm Comments.pdf 05-00620a ZB Reso.pdf 05-00620a Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-00620a FR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-00620a SR Fact Sheet.pdf 05-00620a Submittal Shipping Terminals.pdf 05-00620a Submittal Letter.pdf REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from SD-4 Waterfront Industrial District to C-1 Restricted Commercial to Change the Zoning Atlas LOCATION: Approximately 2215 NW 14th Street APPLICANT(S): Riverside 22 Investments, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. MIAMI RIVER COMMISSION: Made a motion on May 23, 2005 to find the proposed Coastal on the River project consistent with the Miami River Corridor Urban lnfill Plan, which failed due to a tie vote of 5-5. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on May 23, 2005 by a vote of 7-1. See companion File IDs 05-00620 and 05-00620b. PURPOSE: This will change the above property to C-1 Restricted Commercial for the proposed Coastal on the River Major Use Special Permit City of Miami Page 157 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 project. Motion by Chairman Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones 12762 Note for the Record: Please refer to Item PZ.29 for minutes referencing Item PZ.30. Vice Chairman Winton: PZ.20 -- Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): 30. Chairman Gonzalez.: PZ.30. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): 30. Chairman Gonzalez: 30. Ms. Slazyk: 30. This is the companion zoning change. Chairman Gonzalez: I'll move the item. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. We have a motion. Got a have a public hearing. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public want to comment on PZ30? Mr. Fernandez: Adopt by reference all comments made on 29. Andrew Dickman: Yes, please. Mr. Fernandez: Correct. Mr. Dickman: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 26th Street. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) I am for the change of zoning. I'd like to add one thing because they say Durham neighborhood is old. Igo to Durham Park neighborhood. I visit 211 14th Street. 1 know the people there. Dr. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) live there, and when they need -- and four years ago when the noise ordinance came, we collected signatures, remember, to change the noise from that Antillean Marine, and they always a big (UNINTELLIGIBLE) on Saturday, when the people go there to get merchandise to the island. You can see it's still a problem with that. Not all the neighbors belong to the Durham Park Association. Vice Chairman Winton: Any other comments from the public? If not, we will close the public hearing on PZ.30. We need a -- we have a motion. Chairman Gonzalez: 1 move it. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): We need a second. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion; we need a second. City of Miami Page 158 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second Any further discussion? If not, Mr. City Attorney, would you please read the ordinance? The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Ms. Thompson: Roll call. Vice Chairman Winton: Roll call, please. 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. PZ.31 05-00620b 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, AS AMENDED, FOR THE COASTAL ON THE RIVER PROJECT, TO BE LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2215 NORTHWEST 14TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO CONSTRUCT A TWO -BUILDING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT RANGING IN HEIGHT FROM APPROXIMATELY 110 FEET TO 120 FEET, TO BE COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 633 TOTAL MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH RECREATIONAL AMENITIES; AND APPROXIMATELY 898 TOTAL PARKING SPACES; PROVIDING FOR CERTAIN FLOOR AREA RATIO ("FAR") BONUSES; 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 159 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 05-00620b Outside Cover.PDF 05-00620b Inside Cover.PDF 05-00620b Table of Contents.PDF 05-00620b Article I - Project Information.PDF 05-00620b Letter of Intent.PDF 05-00620b Major Use Special Permit Application.PDF 05-00620b Zoning Write Up.PDF 05-00620b Zoning Atlas.PDF 05-00620b Project Data Sheet.PDF 05-00620b Computer Tax Printout - Deed.PDF 05-00620b Ownership List.PDF 05-00620b State of Florida Documents.PDF 05-00620b Directory of Project Principals.PDF 05-00620b Article II - Project Description.PDF 05-00620b Article III - Supporting Documents.PDF 05-00620b Minority Construction Employment Plan.PDF 05-00620b Traffic Impact Analysis.PDF 05-00620b Site Utility Study.PDF 05-00620b Economic Impact Analysis.PDF 05-00620b Survey of Property.PDF 05-00620b Drawings Submitted.PDF 05-00620b Legislation.pdf 05-00620, 05-00620a & 05-00620b Exhibit A.pdf 05-00620b Exhibit B.pdf 05-00620b Analysis.pdf 05-00620a & 05-00620b Zoning Map.pdf 05-00620, 05-00620a & 05-00620b Aerial Map.pdf 05-00620b Miami -Dade Aviation Dept Comments.pdf 05-00620b HEPB Reso.pdf 05-00620, 05-00620a & 05-00620b Miami River Comm Comments.pdf 05-00620 & 05-00620b School Board Review.pdf 05-00620b PAB Reso.pdf 05-00620b Fact Sheet.pdf 05-00620b Submittal Letter.pdf 05-00620b Submittal Shipping Terminals.pdf REQUEST: Major Use Special Permit for the Coastal on the River Project LOCATION: Approximately 2215 NW 14th Street APPLICANT(S): Riverside 22 Investments, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* of a Certificate of Appropriateness to City Commission on April 5, 2005 by a vote of 6-0. MIAMI RIVER COMMISSION: Made a motion on May 23, 2005 to find the proposed project consistent with the Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan, which failed due to a tie vote of 5-5. City of Miami Page 160 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to City Commission on June 15, 2005 by a vote of 5-1. See companion File IDs 05-00620 and 05-00620a. *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: This will allow the development of the Coastal on the River project. Motion by Chairman Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-06-0061 Note for the Record: Please refer to Item PZ.29 for minutes referencing Item PZ 31. Vice Chairman Winton: PZ 31. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): It's a MUSP (Major Use Special Permit), and it's the resolution. Chairman Gonzalez: I'll move PZ.31. Vice Chairman Winton: It's the MUSP. Have we heard the MUSP? Have we seen the -- ? Mr. Fernandez: Well, Ms. Lourdes -- Vice Chairman Winton: We have a public hearing. P -- Mr. Fernandez: Do you have any particular -- ? Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): I made our presentation on the MUSP. I read the conditions in the record way back at the beginning, but it's been recommended for approval, with conditions by staff and the Planning Advisory Board. Mr. Fernandez: And, of course, Mr. Dickman has stood up because he wants to incorporate, by reference, comments made on previous items to this one, too. Vice Chairman Winton: And we agree with that. Andrew Dickman: And I waive all the rest of (UNINTELLIGIBLE). Vice Chairman Winton: And we agree with that. Lucia Dougherty: And all of our comments are -- Vice Chairman Winton: And we agree with that, as well -- Mr. Fernandez: Of course. Vice Chairman Winton: -- so -- Chairman Gonzalez: I move to approve with -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- the public hearing is closed. City of Miami Page 161 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: -- the conditions. Vice Chairman Winton: We have -- Mariano Cruz: Oh, yes, public hearing. That's the one I was waiting for. Mariano Cruz, 1227 26th Street, and this got to do workforce housing and affordable housing. I wish all the developers did something to remember what the people can afford is the monthly payment, the mortgage payment, plus the insurance, and the tax for the escrow account. Remember that. They don't worry about the total cost in 20, 30 years, and that's one thing to get on that impression to put some affordable housing. They can piggyback with certain non-profit that are building affordable housing in the neighborhood. I belong to one of them, and it's important that we have that because, otherwise, gentrification, there won't be anybody left in Allapattah. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. The -- anyone else from the public? We will close the public hearing, and we have a motion. Do we have a second? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): No, we don't. You need one. Vice Chairman Winton: We need a second on PZ.31. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? If not -- Chairman Gonzalez: It's a resolution. Vice Chairman Winton: -- this is a resolution. All in favor, "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign, opposed. The motion carries. PZ.32 05-01535 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, AS AMENDED, FOR THE 1101 BRICKELL PROJECT, TO BE LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1101 BRICKELL AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATE 849-FOOT, 74-STORY HIGH MIXED -USE STRUCTURE TO BE COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 650 TOTAL MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH RECREATIONAL AMENITIES; APPROXIMATELY 269,000 SQUARE FEET OF EXISTING OFFICE SPACE; APPROXIMATELY 30,007 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE; AND APPROXIMATELY 1,529 TOTAL PARKING SPACES; PROVIDING FOR CERTAIN FLOOR AREA RATIO ("FAR") BONUSES; 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 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 05-01535 Cover Page.pdf 05-01535 Table of Contents.pdf 05-01535 TAB A - Letter of Intent.pdf 05-01535 TAB B - Application for a Major Use Special Permit.pdf 05-01535 TAB C - Zoning Write Up.pdf 05-01535 TAB D - Legal Desription.pdf 05-01535 TAB E - Aerial.pdf 05-01535 TAB F - Zoning Atlas Page 37.pdf 05-01535 TAB G - Project Data Sheet.pdf 05-01535 TAB H - Warranty Deed & Tax Forms.pdf 05-01535 TAB I - Ownership List & Mailing Labels.pdf 05-01535 TAB J - State of Florida Corporate Documents.pdf 05-01535 TAB K - Directory of Project Principles.pdf 05-01535 TAB L - Project Description.pdf 05-01535 TAB M - Minority Construction Employment Plan.pdf 05-01535 TAB N - Sufficiency Letter & Traffic Impact Analysis.pdf 05-01535 TAB 0 - Site Utility Study.pdf 05-01535 TAB P - Economic Impact Analysis.pdf 05-01535 TAB Q - Site Plans for Property including Survey & Photos.pdf 05-01535 Legislation.pdf 05-01535 Exhibit A.pdf 05-01535 Exhibit B.pdf 05-01535 Analysis.pdf 05-01535 Zoning Map.pdf 05-01535 Aerial Map.pdf 05-01535 Miami -Dade Aviation Dept Comments.pdf 05-01535 HEPB Reso.pdf 05-01535 School Impact Review Analysis.pdf 05-01535 PAB Reso.pdf 05-01535 Fact Sheet.pdf REQUEST: Major Use Special Permit for the 1101 Brickell Project LOCATION: Approximately 1101 Brickell Avenue APPLICANT(S): FAE Holdings, 361820R, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Ben Fernandez, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to City Commission on November 1, 2005 by a vote of 7-0. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to City Commission on December 21, 2005 by a vote of 8-0. *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: This will allow the development of the 1101 Brickell project. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. City of Miami Page 163 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton and Spence -Jones Absent: 2 - Commissioner Sanchez and Regalado R-06-0064 Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ32 is the Major Use Special Permit for the 1101 Brickell project. This is located at 1101 Brickell Avenue. The project will consist of an approximately -- Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. Ms. Slazyk: -- 849-foot, 74-story -- Vice Chairman Winton: Could I interrupt you for a minute? Ms. Slazyk: Sure. "[Later...]" Ms. Slazyk: Project will consist of an 849-foot, 74-story high mixed -use structure. It's going to have approximately 650 total multifamily residential units, with recreational amenities; 269,000 square feet of existing office space, 30,007 square feet of retail space, and 1,529 parking spaces. It's been recommended for approval with conditions from the Planning Department and the Planning Advisory Board. We had a few conditions -- actually, no design -related conditions other than the standard Major Use Special Permit conditions, but it does include the archaeological conditions, as presented to the HEP (Historic and Environmental Preservation) Board, so -- Chairman Gonzalez: I would like to ask a question. Is there opposition on this item? Ms. Slazyk: No. Chairman Gonzalez: Is there someone in opposition -- anybody in opposition here? OK. We don't have any opposition. Yes, sir. You're recognized. Ben Fernandez: Thank you. Ben Fernandez, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, here on behalf of FAE Holdings and LeViev Boymelgreen, the property owners. 1 know the hour is late, so I'll be very brief. Chairman Gonzalez: Good idea. Mr. Fernandez: We're here to answer any questions that you have. This is a wonderful project. It's the right place for it. It's where Brickell Bay Drive and Brickell are furthest apart from one another, which provides a very large lot area to build on. It's also one of the only areas where the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) will allow this sort of building within the City, and it's near mass transit, near a Metromover station. It's a beautiful design that's going to activate Brickell Bay Drive, as well as Brickell Avenue. We have restaurants fronting on Brickell Bay Drive, and we're totally redesigning the existing office structure on Brickell Avenue, and Kobi Karp is here, and can answer questions about the design, but staff has been very supportive of it. The UDRB (Urban Development Review Board) recommended unanimous approval of it. Planning Advisory Board recommended approval of it, and your department is recommending approval of it. The portion -- a portion of the property is currently vacant right now, behind the exist -- parking -- Vice Chairman Winton: Can 1 ask you a question, Ben? City of Miami Page 164 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Fernandez: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: Is that Brickell Bayview Drive [sic] right there? Mr. Fernandez: Yes, it is. Vice Chairman Winton: OK, and so -- and then this is, too, right down here, the corner, right? Mr. Fernandez: (INAUDIBLE). Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, OK. Mr. Fernandez: And so -- Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Mr. Fernandez, can you get the mike, please? Mr. Fernandez: I can talk from here. The -- this would be Brickell Bay Drive. Vice Chairman Winton: I'd like to move PZ.32. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: -- and we have a second. It's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Ms. Thompson: The public hearing. Chairman Gonzalez: I'm sorry. The public hearing. Anyone from the public that wishes to address the Commission? Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed Madam Clerk. Ms. Thompson: Yes, thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. That concludes the regular agenda and the Planning & Zoning agenda. PZ.33 05-01227 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT, CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC USE THAT PORTION OF AN ALLEY LOCATED NORTH OF NORTHEAST 39TH STREET AND EAST OF BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A." City of Miami Page 165 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 05-01227 Legislation.pdf 05-01227 Exhibit A.pdf 05-01227 Planning Analysis.pdf 05-01227 Zoning Map.pdf 05-01227 Aerial Map.pdf 05-01227 Class II Special Permit Final Decision.pdf 05-01227 Public Works Analysis.pdf 05-01227 Public Works Letter.pdf 05-01227 ZB Reso.pdf 05-01227 Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-01227 Fact Sheet 11-17-05.pdf 05-01227 Fact Sheet 12-01-05.pdf 05-01227 Submittal-1.pdf 05-01227 Fact Sheet 01-26-06.pdf 05-01227 Submittal Photos.pdf 05-01227 Submittal Power Point Presentation.pdf 05-01227 Submittal Presentation.pdf 05-01227 Submittal Service Diagram.pdf REQUEST: Official Vacation and Closure of an Alley LOCATION: Approximately North of NE 39th Street Between East of Biscayne Boulevard APPLICANT(S): 39th Street Investors Group, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Patricia M. Baloyra, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. PLAT & STREET COMMITTEE: Recommended approval on April 7, 2005 by a vote of 6-1. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to City Commission on October 17, 2005 by a vote of 6-2. *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: This will allow a unified residential property. Motion by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton and Spence -Jones Absent: 2 - Commissioner Sanchez and Regalado R-06-0062 Vice Chairman Winton: And Mr. Chairman, if I may, there's one other neighborhood group here, and that's on PZ 33. Do you mind if we take up PZ. 33? Chairman Gonzalez: Sure. City of Miami Page 166 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Sanchez: Let's get them home. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. PZ.20 -- Vice Chairman Winton: 33. Chairman Gonzalez: -- sorry, 33. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): 33. Yes. PZ 33 is a request for an official vacation and closure of an alley north of Northeast 39th Street and east of Biscayne Boulevard. This has been recommended for approval with conditions by the Planning Department, Public Works, Plat and Street Committee, and by the Zoning Board. This is part of the street -- an alley closure that's required for the Tivoli project. Through the subdivision -- through the Plat and Street Committee, when the property is being replotted, the applicant basically proffered to move the location of the right-of-way in order to continue to allow the emergency vehicle access. This was seen as a benefit because of how it was accomplished. The Fire Department actually said that they preferred the new configuration because it was going to be more -- it would provide safer access for the emergency vehicles, and we recommend approval, as presented. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Yes, sir. Good afternoon. Santiago Echemendia: Good evening. Santiago Echemendia, 1441 Brickell Avenue, on behalf of the applicant. Just give us a minute to set up. Thanks. We're handing out an appendix. It has a number of documents for purposes of -- referential purposes, as well as a copy of the PowerPoint presentation for your convenience. I'd be happy to get started as soon -- Chairman Gonzalez: Are you ready? Go ahead. Mr. Echemendia: -- as you guys have a quorum. Yeah. Chairman Gonzalez: I'm going to give each attorney equal amount of time. I'm going to be checking out the time, and then to the public, we're going to give two minutes to each person to put their facts. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): And -- I'm sorry, Chair. Are we sure that everyone has been sworn in? I don't know -- Chairman Gonzalez: Has everybody -- OK, yes. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, go ahead and swear them in. Ms. Thompson: May we have your attention, please. If you're going to be speaking on the remainder of the P&Z (Planning & Zoning) items and you have not, I repeat, have not been sworn in, I need you to please stand and raise your right hand so 1 can swear you in at this time. The City Clerk administered oath required under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons giving testimony on zoning issues. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Go ahead, counsel. City of Miami Page 167 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Echemendia: Mr. City Attorney, do we start? I'm not sure we have a quorum, Mr. Chair. Yes, we do. Thank you. Santiago Echemendia, with Tew Cardenas, on behalf -- Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): You have three. Mr. Echemendia: -- got it. Thank you. I'm accompanied by my colleague -- Mr. Fernandez: Four. Mr. Echemendia: -- Suzanne Beszi, and the clients, 39th Street Investors Group, Tom Fawell and Stephanie Herman, and VOA (Vickrey Ovresat & Awsumb) Architects of Chicago, represented by Richard Fawell and Dean Huspen. By way of background, we have an approved Class II as far back as August of 2005. We settled with the sole appellant of the Class II at the time, which is important, Bay Point Homeowners' Association, which is the association of the abutting property owners to the north, and the -- Vice Chairman Winton: Would you repeat what you just said? I'm sorry. Mr. Echemendia.' The Bay Point Homeowners' Association, the abutting property owners to the north, we settled with the association relative to the Class II. There is a settlement agreement in your packet. It's the last item in your packet. This is a private alley vacation, as opposed to the typical ones you have infront of you, which are public alley vacations. There was a question in our mind as to whether we were even subject to the criteria, but since we go well beyond it, we were going through the process. The last time that we were in front of you, December 1, Commissioner Winton, you deferred the item. You know the history, and asked us to meet with the neighbors, which we did last night, after a number of times of going back and forth. To orient you a little bit regarding the alley, you could see it -- and if I can get some help from the architects -- bisects the property going north and south. It's been closed for 60 years. It's a 14-foot alley that is not useful for purposes of emergency vehicles; they require 20. There's a 90-degree turn radius at the end, and it's been basically closed and private for the last 60 years. It can't be used by the Fire Department, as I said. It's recommended for approval by all of your staff, the Plat and Street Committee, the Planning Advisory Board, and the T plat has been approved by the County Commission. The benefits that we're providing include extensive green space improvements, including shade trees, sidewalks, decorative lighting, and benches in the public right-of-way. The standard of review, which is important, is cited from the Omnipoint 3 case, which basically says that you're limited to the criteria -- and you all know this, and I just need to go through it for the record -- that's actually in the code, enacted by yourselves. What is that criteria? The first of four is that it's in the general public interest, or would have a general public benefit from vacation of the right-of-way or easement. The Assistant Planning Director, Lourdes Slazyk, at the December 1 hearing, and I quote, indicated that "moving the easement from the Fire Department and making it something that's usable for circulation for Fire was seen as a benefit. They also included street trees and furniture, and some other things above and beyond the minimum requirements by Code, and those are the things that were looked at and deemed to be in the public interest." Again, they include -- I apologize for being a little repetitive, but public streets, trees, benches, public sidewalks, pedestrian walkway lighting, and street planning in the parkways. You have infront of you the public benefit site plan. We've transmitted that to the City for their review, albeit a little bit late. We just finished doing it -- what I -- or finalizing it, I should say. What I'd like is for, maybe at this point, Rick Fawell, who's the architect who prepared it, to walk you through those improvements a little bit more thoroughly. Rick. Richard Fawell: Thank you. My name is Rick Fawell I'm a principal with VOA Associates. We're the architects for the project, and very quickly, I just wanted to point out that part of what Santiago has been talking about is the entire length of 39th Street here, and what we're doing is landscaping on both sides. These trees here are all new, with the exception of a few that are City of Miami Page 168 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 existing or to be transplanted. We're planting those in the parkway, so we have the -- the street is the same width, essentially, and then directly adjacent to the street is the parkway. We're planting that on both sides with street trees. We're also, in that parkway, proposing to put pedestrian scale lighting to increase security and safety and lighting, the perception of that, on the street, and also benches along the entire length of that street. What we have done, as well, beyond then the sidewalk, which will be improved as well, is mimic essentially what is happening in the neighborhood on the other side. In other words, beyond the sidewalk, there's a fence, and then the private yards of the residents. We've done the same thing here, setting back, and right at the sidewalk, we have a fence, and then beyond that, the private yards of the residents, so it creates -- well, along -- and along those private yards then, entry points to the units, creating that sort of life and vitality on the street, the desire to mimic the same scale that happens along the street, and part of what I'd like to sort of -- in section, you can begin to see, you know -- here is the street. Here is the parkway, both sides; benches and benches here, lighting, the trees that we're planting, and then mimicking sort of that private yard space here that you see on the residential side, the existing residents, then doing the same thing here in our front yards, so it has that same type of character and scale on both sides of the street, and then what you see as you walk along the street -- I'm going to hold up -- we have three renderings that demonstrate, and in these renderings, what we've done is photograph the existing trees and montage those into our renderings for the project, along with the street trees that will be planted, and these trees are being -- in the plan, they're being planted per the City of Miami and County of Dade requirements, so we aren't planting them right up to the edge. We're holding back the required distances from major streets, from entries here and then entry to the project, but nonetheless, you can see that the intent in what we're trying to do -- and let me just show you one other here. The intent is to create a canopy of street trees over the street and develop, again, that pedestrian character along the entire length of the street. The street, essentially, is being thought of as another room for the community. It affects the neighborhood, but it also affects, you know, what we're planning to do on the residential side of the project here, but that gives you a pretty good character idea, and again, this is a photographed tree montaged on, along with some of the trees that we've put in, and this is a -- the rest of this is representational exactly from the drawings perspectives created and rendered so that it represents exactly what you'll see when this is built, so you could take these photographs and compare it to what will actually be built. Mr. Echemendia: If you will notice, we also have -- there's a legend on the diagram that we will be proffering into the record that includes the type of tree, the quantity of tree, so it's all before you. This is a model of the project, as approved, by the Class H. It's important for you to have it in front of you because one of the concerns, one of the historic policy concerns regarding vacations of alleys is what is going to be in the project if we allow the assemblage of a unified development, vis-a-vis, the vacation and closure, and in like some of the cases that you approved, where you've seen the project, this is one of those, and this is what the project looks like. Going ahead a little bit with respect to the public interest, there's fire access improvement. There's a 12-inch water main serving the 39th Street neighborhood. There's a removal of unsightly telephone and FPL (Florida Power & Light) lines. There is underground utility service to Tivoli and Bay Point; landscaping on both sides, which you've seen. There are new fire hydrants along the street, and there's new self-contained storm water management system. The second criteria is the general public no longer using the right-of-ways, including public service vehicles, such as trash, garbage trucks, police, fire. It's never been used by those vehicles, nor the general public. It's a private alley that's been closed for a very, very long time. Would there be no adverse effects on the ability to provide fire -- I'm sorry, police, fire, emergency vehicles? The alley currently cannot be used, as was confirmed by Lourdes and the Fire Department, so vis-a-vis, the new circulation design is much better. Would the vacation and closure of the rights -of -way or easements have beneficial effect on pedestrian vehicular circulation in the area? Yes, the vehicular circulation is greatly enhanced for life safety, which it currently doesn't have, and yes, with respect to the second visual and structural improvements create greatly enhanced pedestrian friendly environment, which Rick has shown you. What are some of the other cases that you've approved? You have the Paramount Bay on 21st and Biscayne. There City of Miami Page 169 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 they had a number of improvements regarding benches, widened sidewalks. We have a vast number of improvements. All of these improvements, by the way, are in the public right-of-way. This isn't one of those cases where what's being offered up is open space on a project that's required by the Code. These are all over and above what's required by the Code in the public right-of-way, which is -- you don't see a lot, but like the Paramount Bay case. Filling Station Lofts, there the issue was economic development. It was justified -- this was on Northwest 17th Street and North Miami Avenue. There were negative recommendations from staff and what the Commission focused in on is the economic development value and the fact that this was a blighted area. As you will see from the next slide, our photo of blight in the area; the other second photo of blight. This is what the site looked like before. These are pictures of the site. Vice Chairman Winton: 1 don't think you can call it blight, though. 1 think that's a stretch. It may not be neat and clean; I don't think it's blight. Mr. Echemendia: Commissioner Winton, I think it's more than economic development component, if you don't want to call it blight. There is Northeast 17th Street and North Miami Court. There they had negative recommendations, and again, the Commission focused on, in that case, on the policy concern of not being able to ascertain what would be built on the site, and it approved because there was a Class II that showed you what was going to go on the site. Earlier today, you guys had a bit of vacation and closure activity. There's BHG (Biscayne Housing Group) - 79th Street, LLC., on Northeast 2nd Avenue, between 78th and 79. There the public purpose was the landscape park open to the public and the facility providing affordable housing for the elderly, both of which are inherent to the project, unlike here where we're actually doing the improvements in the right-of-way, and -- the over and above improvements. There was Jackson Residences, on Northwest 13th Street, between 9th and 10th Avenues. There the public purpose was the reparation of two historical columns, and no Class II had been approved, and it was approved. North Miami Avenue, between 34th and 35th, the public benefit there was open green space at the west end of the property. There was no Class II approved The Commission's concern was that the project may be out of scale in light of Miami 21 and the assemblage of the properties because all of the alleys in that area are the same, and it was approved with no Class II approved, so from a precedential standpoint, we think our case is actually quite distinct in that all of these substantial improvements are in fact in the public right-of-way, and also the circulation relative to fire access, meeting all of the criteria. Bay Point Homeowners' Association -- just to give you a little background on the opposition -- and we filed a Class H. We settled with them. We gave them a number of concessions, limiting it to 50 feet, burying the utilities, the landscaping, et cetera, et cetera. Tucker Gibbs, I believe, is here. He represented the Bay Point Homeowners' Association, the settlement agreement. You will hear tonight that there is -- there's a faction -- there's a number of neighbors that are here in opposition from Bay Point who are trying to disavow the settlement agreement, impeach it. We believe that's really kind of irrelevant. We're just bringing to your attention that the settlement agreement -- that we think that we appeased the neighbors, which is important. Now they're having a dispute among themselves. We don't want to get too much into that, but just kind of giving you a preview of what's to come. The individual Bay Point homeowners, at this point, they don't have any standing to challenge the alley closure and the claim under the 1916 second amended plot is invalid, and with respect to the Magnolia Park residents, there's a statutory language --1 won't bother you all with it. It's been a long day and long evening, but it's there. It's part of the record. We don't believe they have any standing. One of the things that's important is what can we do as a matter of right, and this was asked the last time, and Commissioner Winton, you focused in on this because you didn't quite understand what the nature of the opposition was, and the -- and Lourdes summarized it, but I'll summarize it very briefly. It's up on the PowerPoint, but approximately on the C-1 side with the SD-9, it's 114 units, 95 feet height that -- with the City no say in the design. On the R-3 parcel, separated by the alley from the water, 71 units, five stories; City, no say in the design, and then on the R-3 parcel between the water and the alley, a Class II for five stories, so we're talking about approximately 250 units where we're somewhere in the vicinity of under 90, under 100, as a City of Miami Page 170 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 matter of right. Now, in conclusion -- but before Igo to the conclusion, a second -- what -- just, again, to give you a preview anticipating what is going to be argued is I would urge the City Attorney, who is an excellent city attorney and knows the zoning law very well, that you stick to the criteria. They're going to go into the Class II issues. These homeowners that live in Bay Point that are not part of the settlement, they've lost their point of entry. The Class II is over; it's dead. It wasn't preserved;; it's closed. There's no way to appeal that. They're trying to use this as a vehicle to argue transfer of FAR (floor/area ratio). We went through that the last time. I think you all told them, folks, let's stick to the vacation of this private alley. Just wanted to kind of remind you, so in light of all the improvements, in light of the fire safety circulation, in light of meeting the code, in light of the efforts to settle with Bay Point homeowners, which wasn't easy -- this developer started this process over two and a half to three years ago. The efforts that he has made to bring up a project that's compatible with the area, with all of the landscaping and public improvements, we would urge you to approve this application, and sorry for being so long-winded. I know it's been a long day, and would like to reserve some time for rebuttal, a short rebuttal. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Yes, sir. Mark Raymond: Good morning. Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry, Chairman. Just for the record, that was 15 minutes. Chairman Gonzalez: Fifteen minutes, OK, ma'am. Mr. Raymond: Good evening, Commission. Mark Raymond, 545 Sabal Palm Road, Miami, Florida. Mr. Echemendia: One second. We have a number of neighbors in support. Can we just do our side? Could we finish our side, and then the opposition goes? Does it make more sense to do it that way? That's the way it's typically -- the way I'm used to doing it, if we could. If we could have the neighbors in support -- Chairman Gonzalez: We'll call you right back. Mr. Echemendia: -- Bay Point, et cetera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. George Auflick: Good evening. Chairman Gonzalez: Now, I will allow each one of your witnesses two minutes. Yes, sir. Mr. Auflick: Thank you. Good evening. My name is George Auflick I'm the president of the Bay Point Homeowners' Association board of directors. We have 12 of those that manage the day-to-day care of Bay Point. Vice Chairman Winton: You're the president, you said? Mr. Auflick: Yes, I am, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Mr. Auflick: At our September 19 meeting of the board of directors, we requested that Mr. Fawell and his crew come in and do another briefing. We had had several over the last year, year and a half. We invited our residents, and the board of directors heard the briefing; discussed the issues, and voted in support of moving forward with a settlement agreement in support of this project, and that occurred -- we signed the agreement on September 29 in support City of Miami Page 171 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 of the project. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Mr. Auflick: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Next. Good evening. William O'Malley: Good evening. My name is William O'Malley. I live at 4250 Bay Point Road. I've been a resident of Bay Point for 22 years. I am very excited about Tivoli. Knowing the Boulevard for all these years, you can appreciate where we're coming from. I'm sorry that some of the neighbors feel the way they do, but I think it's an exciting project, and the proximity of it, the airport, the beach, and downtown, I can't wait for it to get started, and thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Next. Mr. Echemendia: I believe that's it. Chairman Gonzalez: That's it? OK, sir. Mr. Raymond: Thank you. Again -- Chairman Gonzalez.: You're recognized. Mr. Raymond: -- Mark Raymond, 545 Sabal Palm Road, Bay Point, Miami, Florida. I have the privilege of speaking on behalf of fellow neighbors, both of Bay Point and Magnolia Park, and I think we should start with addressing ultimate facts, not what we call montages. I'd like to present to the Commission, and for the record, pictures of the actual street because what has been represented to the City in these montages are fraudulent with respect to scale and perspective. The street is an extremely narrow street. The street -- and I would like to first pass these around, Commission, if I may. Chairman Gonzalez: Just give it to the City Clerk, please. Mr. Fernandez: While the speaker is passing this around and coming back to the microphone, I'd like to refocus the Commissioners' attention to the criteria for closure. All issues relative to the kind of development and the Class II Special Permit and all of that is, in essence, immaterial to your consideration of the criteria, which includes public benefit, use, et cetera, and if you will like to, 1 can review for you the criteria that you must take into account in making this decision. Mr. Raymond.: I am not going to revisit those issues. I am going to address Section 55-15, which is the controlling provision of the Zoning Code that you are considering with the four elements that must be considered here. Namely, we start with public benefit, but with respect to the presentation made by the developer, this is the street. This is 39th Street. Cars are allowed to park on it. It becomes a one -lane street. The quote from the architect is the street is another room, pedestrianfiendly. That's not a true statement. It is anything but. Traffic in the area of 39th Street off of 36th Street, off of 195, as a result of construction, has only gotten heavier. The closure of the alley will dramatically negatively impact the citizens. It only benefits the developer. As a result, this Commission is duty bound to reject that which the developer's asking you. There is no public benefit, Commissioner Winton and the rest of the Commission. The fact of the matter is that the trees -- with respect to the trees, they talk about these trees that they're going to take down, so now we're learning they're going to take out beautiful, mature trees, and why would they take out beautiful, mature trees and put in these trees that they claim they're going to put in? It doesn't make sense. What they're not proposing is what's the reason why you must vote against this. They're not proposing to widen the street. They are not proposing to City of Miami Page 171 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 make it so cars can park on one side and two cars can go by. Without a widening of the street and the alley closure, there's no public benefit. Under the mandate of 55-15, they've got to show you that. They can show no way that the traffic flow improves. The traffic flow gets worse because you don't have a place to put the trucks. You don't have a place for the rest of the cars. You have a one -lane road, and all of the traffic that's coming off of 38, when people are trying to get around the construction on 36th Street, ends up there, as you can see there, Mr. Chairman. Where are the cars going to go? They can't go anywhere. What are the other bases that demonstrate there is no public benefit? You've seen the pictures. How about no longer using the rights -of -way? The only reason why that alley hasn't been used in the last year and a half -- it was always used prior to that, and you have a picture of the alley, and it's wide, and it's 34 feet wide -- it's because the houses were knocked down. No one was using it because there was nothing there. It is absolutely suitable for use. It is, in fact, part of the alleyway structure of the 39th Street area, where -- by closing that, you benefit the developer. You do not benefit Magnolia Park residents who live right there. You do not benefit my family or the families who live near me who look back at this project, and where will the traffic have to go? There's only one other place it can go, the north -south alley behind, where they say that they've cut a deal with Bay Point. We disagreed with Bay Point, and what weren't you told here today, there was a committee with respect to the developer's proposal, a Bay Point committee appointed by the board. Those board members are here. Those board members were 3 to 1 against. What you also weren't told is Tucker Gibbs did not make a presentation to the board of directors when they went to vote. They were not told that the agreement says if the City approves nonuse of the back alley, the north -south alley -- the east -west alley, we won't use it. The City can't approve it because the firefighters have to use that alley, and so do service vehicles. Again, there's a lack of full disclosure. You have actual pictures. You don't need montages to see that -- to scale. To scale, they're suggesting that it's going to be three or four cars wide; it's anything but that. I reserve time to respond. I'm prepared to answer any questions. I thank you for your time. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. You want -- yes, ma'am. Kay Hancock Apfel: Hi. Chairman Gonzalez: Good evening. Ms. Hancock Apfel: I'm Kay Hancock Apfel. I reside at 550 Sabal Palm Road. I was one of those three committee members appointed by the board having to do with Tivoli, and we were against this, and it was done -- we were not even invited to the meetings. In the numerous meetings that I've attended with the developer, I've had one question and one question only, and my question has always been the existing alleys and how they will be used after the development is completed, and the impact on my neighborhood. I assure you that if I'd had an answer, heard an answer that was logical or practical, I would not be here today. Johnny knows that I've always been pro good development. I am not against this development, but one of my concerns was the east -west alley that runs the parameter of the property along the Bay Point wall. This alley was rarely used, if ever, by the previous owners. Well, the development -- developer has signed an agreement with Bay Point that it will be used only for emergency vehicles. That sounds great until you realize the situation with my other concern, the north -south alley and the impact to that closing. The developer plans to close the alley so that he can build a swimming pool and a couple of additional parking spaces in the partially submerged garage under the buildings. The north -south alley, or from 39th Street to Bay Point wall, was used prior to this developer owning the properties. I heard the attorney state tonight that for 60 years it hasn't been used. Well, I'm 62 years old. I've lived in Bay Point and owned the property for 40 years, and 1 will assure you there were two apartment buildings there. The garbage trucks, the moving vans, the service trucks always used that alley, and I'd also like to point out that, to the east of this proposed development, there are two other apartment buildings; one is one story and one on the bay is two stories. You will never see delivery trucks, parking vans, or garbage trucks on the streets in front -- with those projects. They always go onto the property of those projects to City of Miami Page 173 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 service them, but now we're going to close this alley, and when I've asked that question, well, what happens if I buy the apartment at the very eastern end of the building that's one and a half blocks, or 500 feet, from where the entrance is, which is -- they supposedly -- that's what they're saying is their service area, and I have FedEx (Federal Express) deliveries. I have -- which I have all the time at my house -- UPS (United Parcel Service). I buy a new TV (television) from BrandsMart, even when 1 move in. They tell me that it's going to all be done from the entrance. I've never yet seen a FedEx man walk a block and a half to deliver, and 1 certainly have never seen anybody rolling a big -screen TV 500 feet, a block and a half, to deliver it to somebody's apartment, and -- Chairman Gonzalez: Your two minutes are up, ma'am. Ms. Hancock Apfel: OK, thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you very much. Next. Please try to stay within the two minutes. I would really appreciate it. Next. Yes, sir. Steven Ruggieri: Hi. Steven Ruggieri, 507 Northeast 38th Street, Magnolia Park I will try to keep this brief. I see very little -- I see no public benefit. There's talk about above and beyond what is required. How much above and beyond? Can we answer that question, please? I depend -- when I bought property in this neighborhood, I depended on the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan to defend the integrity of my neighborhood. I expect everyone in the neighborhood to play by the same rules. When this alley is closed, you will have created a parcel -- you have -- will have assembled six lots, and if created a monstrosity in our neighborhood. It is totally out of scale and out of context with what's around it. We have many other issues, but I want to stress that more than anything, that we've assembled six lots -- actually platted -- I think eight platted lots. We're bringing Biscayne Boulevard 600 feet into our neighborhood. Please build Biscayne Boulevard on Biscayne Boulevard, and keep Magnolia Park as it is. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Next. Good evening. Robert Apfel: Dr. Robert Apfel, 550 Sabal Palm Road, Bay Point. Like to point out, I -- my practice is on Miami Beach. When I get off the Julia Tuttle Causeway, a lot of times the actual exit to Biscayne Boulevard is backed up way around the curve. A lot of cars, myself included, a lot of times figure we'll take a shortcut through 39th Street, only to find out the cars are parked on the lefi-hand side. I'm trying to get to Biscayne Boulevard There's a car coming down; it's a stalemate, so cars are backed all the way back up to the causeway again. This street is so narrow you cannot pass two cars against each other, especially if there's a truck there. It's a block; no one moves, and I mean, this is a beautiful graphics. It is not real. It's absolutely not real, and it's designed to mislead. The other thing, you're giving -- this is a public alley. It's not a private alley. It's been part of Magnolia Park's alley structure, like the alley structures throughout the City. This is public. What they're asking you to do is give them a million and a half dollar or a million dollar piece of property to increase the value of their property, with no guarantee that they're going to build Keep this in mind. Just like Ice and other organiza -- other developers have been around, there's no guarantee they're actually going to build this, and that's something you have to keep in mind. You don't give away public land for what they claim is increased benefit to the community, which it's not because we have gorgeous trees (UNINTELLIGIBLE). It's a narrow street. The writing is there. They're only, I'm sorry, giving you a very false picture of what they intend to do, like they gave Bay Point a false picture of what they intended to do, and the contract they gave Bay Point is worthless. Chairman Gonzalez.: Thank you. Next speaker. Geoffrey Bash: Good evening. My name is Geoffrey Bash, and I reside -- I'm a property owner City of Miami Page 174 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 at 448 Northeast 39th Street. I live directly across the street from the proposed project, right smack in the center of it. I abut the alley that we're discussing this evening, so good evening, members of the Commission. I would like to speak about the alley closure and the four criteria that are related or required to be considered in an alley vacature [sic]. Is it (UNINTELLIGIBLE) public interest, or will the general public benefit from the vacation of the rights -of -way or easements? And the answer is no. Is the general public no longer using the rights -of -way or easement, including the public service vehicles, such as trash, garbage trucks, police, fire, or other emergency vehicles? I am under oath here tonight, and I heard an attorney speak that the alley has not been used in 60 years. I live directly across the street from it, and as recently as 2004 -- the reason it's not used now is because the property is vacant; buildings have been torn down, and the Hamilton Risk Insurance Company no longer is a tenant at 3915 Biscayne Boulevard. However, when they were, they used this alley for service vehicles, for large vehicles. They even opened the gates, which I cannot find a permit for the presence of those gates on the alley, that -- to use it as a daily entrance and exit for their employees' cars. Would there be no adverse effect on the ability to provide police, fire, or emergency services? The answer is yes, there's an adverse effect. When you vacate this alley and you are transferring the service vehicles from the alley, the network of alleys in our neighborhood, which there are -- it's a substantial network of alleys. They use the alleys everyday — the extension of this alley next to my house, and when you vacate this alley, the service vehicles that normally would use the alley are transferred to Northeast 39th Street, where I live. When you add those vehicles on there -- just today, UPS delivered to my home. The truck stopped, and all of the traffic had to stop in both directions, OK, so when I have an emergency or a distress vehicle needs to get to my or my neighbor's home and they can't because the street is blocked because you've vacated this alley, that poses a problem. Yes, there's an adverse effect. Number four, would the vacature [sic] and closure of the rights -of -way or easements have a beneficial effect on pedestrian vehicular circulation in the area? And the answer is no. Also, this building, as I remind you, is an assemblage of eight parcels. It is 490 -- Chairman Gonzalez: Your two minutes are up. Your two minutes are up. Mr. Bash: OK, but one of the very most important items is that this alley is 14 feet wide with a 10 foot easements on both sides, provides a 34-foot break in this 497-foot continuous structure in a neighborhood abutting single-family homes. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Mr. Bash: We ask that you deny the vacature [sic] of this alley. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Next speaker. Mr. Echemendia: I believe that's it -- Chairman Gonzalez: Is that it? Mr. Echemendia: -- Mr. Chair. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Rebuttal. Mr. Echemendia.' Rebuttal. Very quickly. 1 don't know where they come up -- oh, I'm sorry. Andrew Boros: I -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Mr. Boros: -- tripped coming -- City of Miami Page 175 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: You're recognized. Mr. Boros: Andrew Boros, 535 Sabal Palm Road I'm against the closure, and I adopt the argument of Mark Raymond. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Anybody else? Timothy Wagner: Timothy Wagner, 448 Northeast 39th Street. I live there, as well, and I agree with everything that was presented this evening with my neighbors. I oppose the closure. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, thank you. That's it? Mr. Bash: 1 have a question for Mr. Winton. At the December 1 public hearing when we were last here discussing this, Mr. Winton, you -- we explained to you that the R-3 limitations were being exceeded in our R-3 lots, and you conferred with Lourdes, and you directed to me that I was wrong, and I brought a diagram tonight to illustrate to you, with the exact figures, using the developer's numbers from the Class II plans, and 1 would like the opportunity to show you that illustration. Will you allow it? Vice Chairman Winton: What -- you need to give it to Lourdes because she's going to determine whether you're accurate or not. I don't have any way of knowing by me looking at it, so you need to give it to her, and she'll look at it and tell me whether or not your interpretation is accurate, as opposed to hers. Mr. Bash: OK, and -- Vice Chairman Winton: Would you -- Mr. Bash: -- shall we do that here? Vice Chairman Winton: Huh? Yeah, she's right there. Chairman Gonzalez: She's right there. Vice Chairman Winton: If you have it with you. Mr. Fernandez: And whether it is or not, Commissioner, 1 continue to refocus your -- Vice Chairman Winton: Oh. Mr. Fernandez: -- attention on the criteria for closure, not any Class II Special Permit. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Time for rebuttal. Mr. Echemendia: Mr. Chair, just very quickly, just to clam the record. I don't know where they come up with the 34 feet. We've submitted an opinion of title. It's in your -- it's in the plat; it's in your packet. It's 14 feet. There are no easements. We don't know where they got that from. Vice Chairman Winton: What 14 feet? Mr. Echemendia: The alley is 14 feet wide, period. That's all it is. It's not 34 feet. The plat is -- and I'm reading from the plat. It's a little difficult. 1 don't have my reading glasses, but -- City of Miami Page 176 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Vice Chairman Winton: Well, excuse -- let me ask, so they're saying that the alleyway is 34 feet wide? Mr. Echemendia: That's correct. They -- Vice Chairman Winton: And you -- Mr. Echemendia: -- said it's 14 feet plus two 10 foot easements, but 10 foot easements are not reflected in your packet. They're not reflected in the title that we saw, unless they have some title expert that we don't know about. It's a 14-foot easement -- 14 foot private alley. The -- it's private -- and I'm reading from the actual plat, and I'm sorry, I don't have my reading glasses, but -- and maybe Susie can help me, but it's parks -- and they're not dedicated in any wise to the public, but to the Magnolia, et cetera, et cetera. This is from the plat. It's not a publicly dedicated right-of-way. It's a private alley, as determined by your staff as confirmed by our real estate counsel in our law firm. Now I'll talk about fraudulent renderings. These renderings are all to scale. This is something that we're submitting as part of the record as a condition of this approval, with a legend that has the quantities and the species in accordance with the Dade County manual. It's interesting -- and rather than rebut everybody, just a little history. Johnny, you -- Commissioner Winton, I'm sorry, you wanted us to visit with the neighbors. Very interesting because in the 20 years that I've been doing land use and mediating land use disputes and doing land use disputes, this is the first time that I've come across a group that says answer our ten questions or we're not meeting with you, and by the way, the ten questions related to the Class II, the transfer of FAR, this and that, and parking, and what have you, or we will not meet with you. We finally convinced them that they should visit with us anyways. They were invited to see the improvements, so they came to my office last night. After steering them away from the Class I1 issues, the Apfels, who are very nice and bright folks, said, well, our concern relates to the garbage vehicle, the garbage disposal and vehicles. That's our concern because we own apartment buildings, and we're concerned that it's going to traverse through here, this being Bay Point. Mind you, I asked them last night -- there wasn't one of the disgruntled neighbors that owns one of the abutting lots abutting the property. They all are dispersed throughout Bay Point, so my understanding is that they recruited a few of them to come here tonight, but as of last night when I asked the question, not one of them lived in any of these abutting lots, but they're concerned about the garbage trucks going through here, so we said, OK, that's an issue that we can discuss. This alley -- and they suggested the loss of service relative to this alley. I've heard a lot of conflicting testimony that it's been used, hasn't been used. There's a tree trunk here that is about five -- how many feet in diameter? Five feet in circumference, and it was determined -- I don't know that Tom is an expert on the years that it takes for the circumference to build out that much, but it doesn't look like it's been used any time soon. In any event, a little historic aspect of this. Firstly, it can't be used for emergency vehicles, so if all we're limiting this discussion to is the garbage trucks -- I would first like to point out, before I bring Rick up to discuss the traffic cir -- the garbage truck circulation and the fact that they're going to come in through here and come out through here, which is preferable than doing something in the middle of the street, it was the very neighbors who told us that they wanted us to locate all of the loading and unloading over here in one place. That's why it's here. Fire wants this to go through here because they can't come in through here, so in effect, all we're really doing is we're shifting this private alley, which doesn't work from a fire safety standpoint, over here to increase circulation. The garbage trucks. Rick, 1 think it's -- at this point, if you can weigh in on the garbage trucks, wherever you are. Walk them through the circulation. Mr. R. Fawell: What I'd like to just talk briefly about is this alleyway. Effectively, what we've done is essentially provided a way that emergency vehicles can wrap all the way around. There's really not much use for the alleyway. In fact, this whole thing is designed so that it can be serviced from this one point, which by the way, was something that the residents had asked us to do to avoid the fact that service vehicles were on the alleyway when we started this process of discussing it with them. Right now, a service vehicle -- if it's garbage, for instance, comes in, City of Miami Page 177 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 backs around, and parks here, and this is the required 12 by 35 loading dock that we were required by the City to have, and that sits right here, and it pulls directly out, so the maneuvering takes place right here, and it's designed to take place there. Likewise, any vehicle that's dropping off whether it's a television, a washing machine, or whatever, the only way for anything to get into these units is via these elevators that actually come from the garage on up. That means that the service vehicle that would park anywhere else, including the street, would then have to walk down the street, come into the project, go down the ramp, go through parking, and get to the garage elevators. That simply doesn't make any sense. Likewise, if you're moving in or moving out -- and the other thing to point out is that a FedEx truck or a service vehicle that services the residents is, in all likelihood, going to park on the street if they can't get into the driveway, or on the driveway. In this case, we're completely on the property. A moving van that comes here, residents will probably have to sort of coordinate that because moving vans are going to do the same thing. If they park on the street, if they park in the alley, they're going to have to wheel things all the way around by hand truck through the garage and come up via the elevators. Think that's the key, is that the project has actually been designed and laid out so that all the service takes place off of this court between the Hamilton and the Tivoli project itself. That's the reason the two don't join and touch because we need to take care of that service in this location. It's where all our utilities are. It's where they, in fact, asked us to locate all of this information -- all of this service, so it is actually inconvenient to try to use the street or try to use the service drive. This is nothing more than shifting this alley to that location to allow Fire and emergency vehicles to circumnavigate the entire site. A 20-foot wide road with 50-foot turning radiuses, all per City Code; worked out in great detail with the City. Mr. Echemendia: Thank you. Just two final comments, and I'll close. The -- if you didn't close the alley, the circulatory system would still be the same, so if you kept the alley open, which has been closed for, arguably, 60 years, 40 years, whatever, the private alley, we still wouldn't use it for purposes of service deliveries or anything of the sort because there's the internal that Rick told you about and the fire trucks have to go through here, so you don't really accomplish anything. Lastly, I don't -- let me characterize this this way. They very smartly honed in on the garbage truck issue because our settlement agreement with Bay Point says that the garbage trucks can't go through, and they thought we were somehow stuck in that they had to back out, and that's not allowed by Code, and our Class II doesn't allow it to back out, so they were trying to get us in a catch-22 with Bay Point regarding whether -- in other words, to the extent they're not allowed -- Vice Chairman Winton: You need to use the microphone. Chairman Gonzalez: We need you to speak on the mike. Mr. Echemendia: That is -- the ploy is let's get them in a catch-22 whereby the agreement with Bay Point says the garbage trucks can't come in through here, and the Class 11 says they can't back out, so how do you guys address that issue? Well, the way we address it is they turn around inside, and they come back out this way. Mr. R. Fawell: One last thing that I wanted to bring up, because I think there's been a lack of clarity. This road that we have here is 24 feet wide, which allows us to park a moving van and still have traffic go in and out of our garage, so that's our own space. Here's a typical parking bay, and you can see it's 60 feet across, but this drive aisle is 24 feet as well. That's required, again, by code. If you look at the street then, you notice that the street -- they've been talking about how narrow the street is. The street is, in reality, you can see quite a bit wider than the two-lane road here, and you can see by the scale of actual size cars that there's really a lot more width to this street than they would have you believe. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. City of Miami Page 178 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Mr. Fernandez: What that site -- what the applicant has done is what's called rebuttal -- Chairman Gonzalez: Rebuttal. Mr. Fernandez: -- and rebuttal ends the case. It is at your discretion, but my advice to you is that it's all concluded, and you need now to take it back -- Vice Chairman Winton: We agree. Mr. Fernandez: -- to you and make a decision -- Chairman Gonzalez: And let me tell you -- Mr. Fernandez: -- unless you have questions and you want to reopen it and allow other people to speak. Chairman Gonzalez: And let me tell you -- Mr. Fernandez: I don't want to interfere in the exercise of your prerogative, but I'm trying to advise you strictly as to the rules of who speaks when. Chairman Gonzalez: Let me tell you, some time ago, long time ago, I learned to take your advice, so I'm taking your advice. Mr. Fernandez: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: The public hearing is closed at this point, unless any of the Commissioners have any questions. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, we definitely don't want to get a Ping-Pong ball going here. Is what you have to say something new? Mr. Raymond: It is. Vice Chairman Winton: And how -- it will take how long? And I will only accept one, not everybody getting to come back to the microphone, so y'all figure out who it is, in short. Mr. Raymond.' It is me, and it'll be short; three minutes, if not less. Vice Chairman Winton: And then they're going to get another opportunity, as well -- Chairman Gonzalez: Another three minutes. Vice Chairman Winton: -- because that's -- yes. Chairman Gonzalez: They will get another three minutes. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Mr. Echemendia: We won't -- Mr. Chair -- through the Chair, we won't. 1 mean, as long as he's limited to surrebuttal and not addressing issues that were adduced as evidence by the architect, et cetera. If it's limited to that, I suspect that we're not going to need any more time. Thanks. City of Miami Page 179 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Raymond: Thank you very much, Commission. Begin with you heard a statement that there was a stump in the middle of the alley. Again, we have pictures, pictures of the actual alley. Commission, there's no stump in this alley road The statement made to you was not true. There is no stump in this alleyway. This alleyway has been used for many, many years, until the buildings were put down in 2004. Any representations to the contrary are false. There's no stump in the road That representation -- if they continue to appear before you and make misrepresentations -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, excuse me. Excuse me. Mr. Raymond: Yes, Mr. Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: But I'm looking at this also. I don't know precisely where the alley is, but I see a very large tree right here that could easily, as far as I'm concerned -- because 1 don't know where the alley is in this picture, so I'm looking at this picture. I'm assuming that this curb is one edge of the alley. I don't know where the alley ends over here. There's a tree right there that could be in the alley -- Mr. Raymond: It's not in the alley. Vice Chairman Winton: -- so I don't know. Mr. Raymond: The alley is the paved area right in front of the tree. Vice Chairman Winton: But if you're -- if -- OK. Mr. Raymond: They said the stump was in the middle, Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: But your alley, then, is not 34 feet wide. Mr. Raymond: No, it's ten -- it's 14 feet plus ten feet easement on each side, as required by Code. Vice Chairman Winton: Easement? No way. Mr. Raymond: Yeah. Vice Chairman Winton: That is not -- trust me, I've heard a ton of these. Is there anything in the Code that requires a ten foot easement on either side of an alleyway? Mr. Raymond: This is the -- Mr. Echemendia: I think he may be talking about -- Vice Chairman Winton: Hold on. Mr. Echemendia: -- a setback -- Vice Chairman Winton: Hold -- Mr. Echemendia: -- sorry. Mr. Raymond: 1 am talking about the setback. City of Miami Page 180 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Ms. Slazyk: Right. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, so -- OK, well that's different Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. I'm not sure if a setback is required on a private alley or it's public -- yeah. If this is a private alley, there may not be a setback requirement -- Vice Chairman Winton: And that's what — Ms. Slazyk: -- which is very different than an easement. Vice Chairman Winton: Would you please put that on the record, just so everybody knows? I mean, because he's -- we're trying to get the real -- the facts. Orlando Toledo: Orlando Toledo, Zoning Administrator. You don't need setbacks on a private alleyway. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. OK, keep going. Mr. Raymond: With respect to the other statements made by -- with respect to their rebuttal, they made the statement that the people here are not residents. 1 was surprised to hear that from Mr. Echemendia. Vice Chairman Winton: He didn't -- Mr. Raymond: He's been to my home. Vice Chairman Winton: -- say that. Mr. Raymond: My home is here. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, OK. Mr. Raymond: Mr. Boros' home is here. The Apfels' residence is here. All the people in Magnolia Park that spoke, their home is right here. We are the affected residents. We received notice because we are the affected residents. The fact is this is not in the best interest -- and it -- they cannot show public benefit. The street pictures are the pictures. They're claiming otherwise. You have direct evidence contrary to their montage. The fact of the matter is they have not demonstrated on this record public benefit because they can't. They used the phrase that this street will become pedestrian. That's not true. It is not pedestrian now. It'll get worse with what's going on 36th Street and what they proposed. We renew our statement that you please do not approve this alleyway being vacated. It only benefits the developer, and that is not permitted under 55-15. Thank you so much for the time. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Now -- Mr. Echemendia: Mr. Chair, just one factual issue, and it's just for the record, otherwise, I wouldn't come up. Chairman Gonzalez: And this will be the end. Mr. Echemendia: What I asked last night specifically of Kay is, Kay is there anyone here that lives in the lots abutting the wall, and the answer last night to me was no, and Mark's wife was present at the meeting, so Mark, I think if you live in the vicinity -- I didn't say you don't live in Bay Point. I said are there any representatives of the abutting lots, and the answer was no. City of Miami Page 181 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Raymond: My home -- Mr. Echemendia: That's it. Mr. Raymond: -- looks directly into it. Mr. Echemendia: OK. I'm just saying what they -- Mr. Raymond: 1 am an affected property owner. Mr. Echemendia: We shouldn't be talking to each other. Chairman Gonzalez: No, no. Mr. Echemendia: You need to go through the Chair, but that's -- Mr. Raymond: I walk out my front door, Mr. Boros walks out his front door, we would see this. We are not in favor. We oppose it, and thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. All right. This conclude the public hearing. It comes back to the Commission. Commissioner Winton, you're recognized, sir. Mr. Vice Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: I have a question here, and could y'all take the renderings down so I can see everyone? I'm going to repeat some of what I said the last time because I get to deal with whatever comes at whatever time, and I don't know -- and I've got to tell you all -- you're my friends; I don't know them. You know, I don't know them, but I have a responsibility here to look at these issues as fairly as I can look at the issues. I also have a responsibility to try to protect whatever we're doing long-term, and I don't understand frankly -- because I've heard you all. I don't get the opposition. I don't understand it because I know that we run this guy off you know; he gives up; he sells the site. Somebody else can come and build something that 1 know is going to absolutely be offensive to us, and they could do it by right, and don't wiggle your finger no at me. They can. Our Code will allow it. Would you like to put on the record again, if we keep these sites all separated, with the different zones that are in place, what kind -- what height can you build on these d fferent -- we've got R-3. Ms. Slazyk: C-1 with SD-9 -- Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Ms. Slazyk: -- and then another R-3. There's a center portion of R-3. Anything between that public alley and the water would need a Class II. Anything right on the boulevard would need a Class II, but the rights are 50 feet in height, 65 units per acre; on the boulevard, it's a hundred -- I think it's 120 -- oh, no, seven -- 80 -- it's SD-9; 85/95, 150 units per acre, but that center piece of R-3, if the alley is not relocated or closed, they could build, by right, 65 units per acre, 50 feet in height, with no design review, and that's where -- that's the piece that they could just go get a building permit for tomorrow without any design review, you know. How they designed it, how they built it, I don't know. There could be blank walls on the street. There's no say; that's the issue. Vice Chairman Winton: And what's the height of this? Ms. Slazyk: I believe it's combinations of four and five stories. Mr. R. Fawell: Yes, and the R-3 -- City of Miami Page 182 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Vice Chairman Winton: Feet? Thomas Fawell: In deference to the staff and the community, we did not go 95 feet. We limited it to 45 -- to 48 feet on Biscayne Boulevard, rather than 95 feet, with a one-story turret, and on the back piece, we limited that to, in this area, three stories -- I'm sorry -- Vice Chairman Winton: How many feet? Mr. T. Fawell: -- which is -- Ms. Slazyk: They're not allowed to exceed 50, and they're not requesting variances. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Mr. T. Fawell: It's 40 -- no, 48 feet on one end, and about 38 feet in the middle piece -- Ms. Slazyk: Right, yeah. Mr. T. Fawell: -- so we've not reached the limit anywhere even close to it on Biscayne Boulevard. Ms. Slazyk: Right, and 50's the max on the back, and they've got no variances, so you know whatever it is, it's under 50, and my recollection from the Class II is combination of four and five stories. Vice Chairman Winton: This is awful because -- and I don't know what I'm going to do just yet, so I'm kind of thinking this through, because I really don't get it. I really honestly don't. I think this is -- I'm looking at this, 1 think it looks terrific. I mean, 1 think the design's fabulous. I think -- I'd like to see that in a lot of places in Miami over a lot of the junk we've ended up with, and I'm -- and I know that there's a great chance that we could get something much worse than this if I say no, and so I'm struggling over what I think long-term is going to be better for us with the whole thing of my friends are sitting here on this side, and the developer that I don't know is on this side, but I think it's the right development, and I have to make a damn decision. Ms. Apfel: Well, keep the alley open. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, but keeping the alley open, I think -- let me go back to another question, which is, in fact, related to -- and maybe this was the point and I just missed it, but it is the public purpose associated with the closing of the alley. Now, I heard what counsel put on the record, and that is we're doing a lot more than blah, blah, blah, but you know, I didn't really focus on what it really is. Can you tell me what we're really getting? Ms. Slazyk: I think it's a combination of things. There's an alley there today that's a private alley, but it can't really be used by the emergency vehicles. It's just -- it's not of a configuration - - at the Plat and Street Committee, the technical people that were there reviewing it said that the proposed alternative was much better. It puts it in a location at a width and with diameters that they could make their turning radius, so there's one public benefit that, yes, they're technically vacating a private alley, but they're giving back an easement that is bigger and better, and more usable for the emergency vehicles; that's number one, and number two goes to the additional greenscape [sic] and trees and landscaping above and beyond what a code would normally require for the whole street, and we believe that the combination of the two things -- Vice Chairman Winton: But tell me what that is. What -- I mean -- City of Miami Page 183 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Ms. Slazyk: I know. Well, what I'm trying to say is that if you don't abandon this private alley, it's not going to be any better for the emergency vehicles than it is today, and they'd still be able to develop the property. They'd just reconfigure it in a way that they'll do, you know, something different on each side of this private alley, rather than moving the easement to the end of their development, so you know, that in and of itself was very important to the emergency -- you know, to Fire Department and the emergency vehicle access, you know. In addition to that is the, you know, other stuff that was proffered, you know, by the applicant. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Commissioner Winton, I just have a question so that I could have some clarity. Vice Chairman Winton: I think we don't -- oh, do we have a -- OK, yes. Mr. Fernandez: Yeah. Vice Chairman Winton: Please. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Oh, I can ask the question? Vice Chairman Winton: No, please. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. I just wanted to have clarity on -- I mean, I've been down this street, so I mean, I know that it's a pretty tight street. My question, though, is how -- when I look at the photograph that you guys gave us a copy of -- Mr. Fernandez: Madam Commissioner, the question is addressed to staff, right? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Oh, I -- that's the -- Mr. Fernandez: Yeah, staff Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK, to staff Yeah, that's fine. Mr. Fernandez: No. If -- the public -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: I don't know who -- who am I supposed to be addressing? Mr. Fernandez: -- hearing is closed. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Can I address it to you? Who do 1 address it to? Vice Chairman Winton: Any -- yeah. Any of us -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Oh, anybody. Vice Chairman Winton: You're the Commissioner. You can address it to anybody you want. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK I can address it to anybody I want. Mr. Fernandez: Then you will have to open up -- if she expects an answer from a member of the public, you would have to open up the public hearing portion again. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK, so I'll ask Lourdes. Mr. Fernandez: Please. City of Miami Page 184 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Ms. Slazyk: I may not know. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Don't get me in trouble, Commissioner Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I'm just trying to understand, Lourdes, if the -- once this development actually happens -- because I think it's a great development. I think it's wonderful. I'm just trying to understand, once people are actually parked on the street, I mean, will the park -- the part of them being able to stay -- be parked on the street, is that still going to happen when the development takes place? Like, are people still going to be able to park on the street? Because, I mean, I've been -- I've honestly been in the situation where I've been down this street and I've had to wait for another car to pass, so 1 was assuming that this would allow additional space, or is the parking now coming off the streets? Vice Chairman Winton: No, this road doesn't widen. Ms. Slazyk: 1 actually don't know the answer to that question. If there's currently -- Vice Chairman Winton: The road doesn't widen. Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. I don't foresee how a vacation of a private alley would change what -- if there's currently street parking allowed, I think it would continue to be allowed The vacation of this alley has nothing to do with the zoned right-of-way of that street, so -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Right. I -- Ms. Slazyk: -- I would assume it would continue to be allowed, but I really don't know the answer to that. Commissioner Spence -Jones: 1 guess -- OK I guess my question was -- because now you're going to have about 250 new bodies, and is this building abandoned at this point? Is anybody living in the building? Unidentified Speaker: It's raw land. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Raw -- OK. Unidentified Speaker: Yeah, it's raw land. Commissioner Spence -Jones: It's raw land, so you're going to have 250 new bodies -- Mr. Fernandez: No testimony from the public, Commissioner. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Oh. Mr. Fernandez: I'm trying to maintain a -- Vice Chairman Winton: I didn't do it. Mr. Fernandez: -- semblance -- City of Miami Page 185 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Vice Chairman Winton: I didn't do it. I didn't do it. Mr. Fernandez: Correct. No. Commissioner Spence -Jones -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yes. Mr. Fernandez: -- if I may try to address this. It is extremely difficult, 1 understand, for all of you to overcome the temptation to visit on all other related issues of the development with regard to size and height, and -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: I understand. Mr. Fernandez: -- you know, situation and all of that. That is not the issue in front of you. Commissioner Spence -Jones: The issue is -- Mr. Fernandez.: You have a very narrow -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- the alley. Mr. Fernandez: -- issue. The issue is the alley -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: The alley. Chairman Gonzalez: The alley. Mr. Fernandez: -- and so, for the alley, you have a report in front of you that all the technical considerations have been made by professionals, and that comes to you certified as competent substantial evidence. In addition to that, the Code gives you what you may call a little bit of wiggle room because it says in addition to the review for technical compliance -- and here is when you come and you exercise your discretion -- you have these four components, which both sides have alluded to, and there's plenty evidence on the record from both sides with reference to what -- the four criteria. You know, is it in the public interest, or would the general public benefit from the vacation of the right-of-way? Is the general public no longer using the right-of-way; garbage trucks, Police, Fire? Would there be an adverse effect on the ability to provide police, fire -- you know, and so all the criteria that both sides have alluded -- one side says no, no, no, no; the other side says, yes, yes, yes, yes, and then they give you whatever they think would support their position. This is where your balancing act comes, and this is a little, tiny wiggly room that you have to make a decision for or against. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Mr. Fernandez: It's simply stated like that. Good development, bad development, parking on the street, height, all of that is like interesting; makes it very confusing, but please focus on the closure. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Got it. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, if -- that's all well and good, but the fact of the matter is, when you focus on the closure, at the end of the day, there's an end result of the closure -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Closure. Vice Chairman Winton: -- and so -- City of Miami Page 186 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Fernandez: Exactly. It's cyclical. Vice Chairman Winton: -- as the guys who, at the end of the day -- and I -- at the end of the day, if this closure is denied, then we're going to be back here again with another battle. Mr. Fernandez: Sure. Vice Chairman Winton: Another battle, maybe an uglier battle, and what I've got to decide tonight is if it's in the long-term best interest of all of us to do this or to get ready for the next battle that could be worse; that we may lose. Question, if we vacate this alley -- and the opposition made a real good point about this. We think about it a lot. What would be tragic is if we vacated the alley; the developer didn't build; sold it to somebody else, and I've got an even worse problem. Ms. Slazyk: Let me ex -- let me -- if you vacate this alley and they let their Class 11 expire and go away, by vacating the alley, you ensure that anything that happens here would require a Class II Mr. Fernandez: Yes. Ms. Slazyk: -- because you have now vacated that right-of-way, and that means anything between the water and Biscayne Boulevard would require a Class II. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh. Mr. Fernandez: Mandatory -- Vice Chairman Winton: Oh. Mr. Fernandez: -- which is higher standard, bigger scrutiny, more difficulties. Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. If you don't close it, that center piece, they could build whatever they want. Mr. Fernandez: Oh, jeez. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I -- Ms. Slazyk: Did I make it worse? Vice Chairman Winton: You know, y'all are the neighbors; many of you are close friends. I still have to make the decisions, and I'm going to apologize to you, but 1 think it's in our best interest to approve the closure, and I apologize, but it's the way Ifeel, and it's -- you guys all elected me because I'm willing to make hard decisions. I will make decisions sometimes like tonight that I don't want to make, but I think it's the right decision, so therefore, I will move to whatever I'm doing, whether I'm for or again -- I'm -- but to close the alley. Mr. Fernandez: Yeah. The motion is for vacation and closure. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: -- and we have a second It's an ordinance, right? Mr. Fernandez: It's a resolution. City of Miami Page 187 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Ms. Thompson: A resolution. Chairman Gonzalez: It's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Motion carries, and now we move into -- Mr. Echemendia: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: -- PZ (Planning & Zoning) -- Vice Chairman Winton: Sorry. Mr. Echemendia: Thank you, Commissioner. PZ.34 05-00014 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), DENYING OR GRANTING THE APPEAL BY ANDREW W.J. DICKMAN, ESQ. ON BEHALF OF THE MORNINGSIDE CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC., ROD ALONSO, RON STEBBINS, SCOTT CRAWFORD AND ELVIS CRUZ, AFFIRMING OR REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE MIAMI ZONING BOARD, THEREBY APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS OR DENYING THE CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION NO. 04-0198, TO ALLOW FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION ON THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 5301-5501 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A." City of Miami Page 188 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 05-00014 Legislation a (Version 2).PDF 05-00014 Legislation b (Version 3).PDF 05-00014 Exhibit A.PDF 05-00014 Zoning Map.pdf 05-00014 Aerial Map.pdf 05-00014 ZB Appeal Letter.PDF 05-00014 ZB Reso.PDF 05-00014 Class II Appeal Letter.PDF 05-00014 Class 11 Final Decision.PDF 05-00014 Class 11 Referral.PDF 05-00014 Drawings.PDF 05-00014 Fact Sheet 03-10-05.PDF 53&55 COMCC 10MAR05.ppt 53&55 PPT for COMCC.doc 05-00014-Submittal 1.pdf 05-00014-Submittal 2.pdf 05-00014-Submittal 3.pdf 05-00014-Submittal 4.pdf 05-00014-Appeal 5.pdf 05-00014-S u bm itta l 6.pdf 05-00014 October 18, 2005 Circuit Court Order.pdf 05-00014 CC Reso R-05-0155.pdf 05-00014 Sec 1305.pdf 05-00014 December 13, 2004 Zoning Board Transcript.PDF 05-00014 Legislation (Version 4).pdf 05-00014 Legislation (Version 5).pdf 05-00014 Fact Sheet 11-17-05.pdf 05-00014 Fact Sheet 12-01-05.pdf 05-00014 Fact Sheet 01-26-06.pdf 05-00014 Submittal Letter.pdf 05-00014 Submittal Transcripts. pdf REQUEST: Appeal of a Zoning Board Decision of a Class II Special Permit Appeal LOCATION: Approximately 5301-5501 Biscayne Boulevard APPLICANT(S): Morningside Development, LLC APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Doug Halsey, Esquire APPELLANT(S): Morningside Civic Association, Inc., Rod Alonso, Ron Stebbins, Scott Crawford and Elvis Cruz, Adjacent Property Owners APPELLANT(S) AGENT: JoNel Newman, Esquire and Donald J. Hayden, Esquire FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial of the appeal and uphold the Zoning Board's decision of the director's decision. ZONING BOARD: Denied the Class II Special Permit appeal on December 13, 2004 by a vote of 7-1. City of Miami Page 189 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 PURPOSE: The approval of this appeal will not allow the new construction of a mixed -use structure. NOTE: On October 18, 2005, the Circuit Court ruled to quash the City Commission's decision and remanded this case for proceedings. REMANDED TO ZONING BOARD R-05-0155 A motion by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed unanimously, with Chairman Gonzalez absent, to remand Item PZ34 back to the Zoning Board. Vice Chairman Winton: 1 know there are regular citizens here that are interested in PZ 34. This isn't one of them that the public's going to be sitting around here waiting on, so I would like to take PZ34 so that -- they've been waiting a long time. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ34 is an appeal of a Zoning Board decision of a Class 11 Special Permit. Class II number 04-0198. It was approved with conditions by the Planning director on October 27, 2004. It went to the Zoning Board where the Zoning Board denied the appeal, and then the City Commission granted the appeal and reversed the Zoning Board on March 10, 2005. On October 18, 2005, the Circuit Court ruled to quash the City Commission's decision and remanded this case for proceedings, and I'll let the City Attorney. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. City Attorney. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, I'd like to read two statements; one addressing the public, and then another one addressing you because of the nature of this proceeding is quite different from what any of us have done before, I feel it's fair to give the citizens or the audience a sense of what the rules are. Please be advised that during the following hearing, the City Commission will sit as an appellate board, as ordered by the Circuit Court for the Eleventh Circuit. This means that the following hearing involving the Morningside Civic Association and Morningside developers will not be heard de novo, as has been traditionally done, which means the City Commission will not be taking evidence or testimony from members of the public. They're sitting as an appellate court, as it were. Instead, the City Commission will sit as an appellate board, whereby it will review the Zoning Board's decision pertaining to the aforementioned parties. As such, the City Commission may not consider any evidence which was previously not presented to the Zoning Board for review. As an appellate board, the City Commission will conduct the following hearing accordingly: the scope of review is limited to the record of the Zoning Board hearing below. No other new evidence may be considered Only parties to the appeal or their counsel would be allowed to speak. The only individuals allowed to speak at this hearing would be the named parties and/or their attorneys, and then when I instruct the City Commission, 1 will be instructing them to give them equal time. The homeowners will be allowed to speak first because they are the appellants. They are appealing the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals. The developer will go second and they will speak actually for the length period of -- same length of time that the appellant will. Upon conclusion of the appellate hearing, the City Commission has options. The City Commission may affirm, reverse, or modem the decision of the Zoning Board if they undertake to take all of that, or they may simply remand the matter back to the Zoning Board to make appropriate findings. If the City Commission decides the matter, they must make appropriate findings right here and now, so that's for your benefit. Now, turning to the City Commission, as ordered by the circuit court, you must sit as an appellate body, and you're limited to the traditional appellate review of the Zoning Board's decision based on the record that was actually presented to the Zoning Board. You have received a copy of that transcript, and you're limited only to make City of Miami Page 190 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 reference to that. The matter has been remanded back to you because the court concluded that you departed from your own code by reviewing the Zoning Board's decision de novo. You heard it completely rather than just limited yourself to that. Also, the court determined that neither you nor the Zoning Board made any written findings and determinations in support of your decisions -- of your respective decisions. Two things; you heard it the wrong way, and neither you, nor the Zoning Board before you, made the appropriate findings. Hence, there was not competent substantial evidence supporting either decision. Such written findings, with regard to the seven different design criteria, are required by ordinance number 11000, Section 1305. These are what we call the seven or eight criterias [sic] of Section 1305. They are site and urban planning, architecture and landscape architecture, pedestrian -oriented development, street and open space, vehicular access and parking, screening of parking, and signage and lightning [sic], and preservation of natural features. The specific design review criteria for 1305 is attached to the record that you have for your convenience in making reference to it, if you so choose to hear this matter on the merits -- on the record in front of you, so Commissioners, right now you have the following options: you may choose to open this hearing and hear arguments of counsel, and refer to the record from the Zoning Board and make the follow -- and put that through the filter that I'm about to give you. The filter that you must put all of this through is three fold. First, you need to establish whether the Zoning Board granted or afforded procedural due process to all the parties involved That means that you have to determine from the record that, in fact, it was an open hearing, that notice was given, and that everyone that appeared had a fair opportunity to present their case. The second filter through which you much put what you hear here from counsel, as well as the record from below, is whether the essential requirements of the law have been observed. That means that you must determine whether the Zoning Board applied the correct law, code, or ordinance in reaching its decision, and the third filter through which you must put the record from the Zoning Board and whatever you hear today from counsel, is whether the administrative findings and judgments of the Zoning Board are supported by competent substantial evidence. You must determine that the Zoning Board's decision was based on such good evidence that will establish a substantial basis of fact from which the fact at issue can be reasonably inferred. That's the definition of competent substantial evidence, and also that the Zoning Board's decision was based on such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind would accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Those are the three filters that you need to apply today if you're going to review the record from the Zoning Board and listen arguments of counsel. Alternatively, you have another option, and that option is that now that the appellate court have constituted you into an appellate body, you may do the same thing they did to you by remanding this to the Zoning Board for them to make appropriate findings because, in fact, the appellate court found that they hadn't made appropriate findings, and in fact, in making -- in giving you that option -- that is the recommendation that I would make to you, that that option of remanding this for appropriate findings by the Zoning Board Vice Chairman Winton: And when it comes back before us again, it comes back before us de novo? Mr. Fernandez: No, no. It comes back to you again, and you continue to sit on this matter as an appellate body. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, God Getting a headache. Mr. Fernandez: Notwithstanding the fact that the ordinance that you passed on first reading might already be in effect, the matter -- the fact remains that for the duration of this issue, of this application, we are bound to deal with it in an appellate capacity. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. 1 understand Now -- but -- and it's clear to me that we have to follow your recommendation tonight because the fact is that I got this, I don't know, two hours ago, while I'm sitting at a Commission meeting, and I've never even seen it, so we -- City of Miami Page 191 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Spence -Jones: I know. Vice Chairman Winton: -- don't have the ability to actually conduct the appellate kind of procedure that we would be required to do, so we don't have that ability tonight, and so, I think that the appropriate thing is to, in fact, remand it back to the Zoning Board and let it come back through here. Mr. Fernandez: The assumption was made that, in fact, the record was traveling in your book. It was at all times available through Legistar and the computer, but be that as it may, perhaps another option that you would have is to continue this meeting or this item to a future meeting to give you a chance to become familiar with the record below, and then exercise the option of applying the three filters that I gave you. Vice Chairman Winton: I think that we need the Planning Board to -- I mean, the -- Mr. Fernandez: The Zoning Board. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Zoning Board. Vice Chairman Winton: -- Zoning Board to do what they're supposed to do -- Mr. Fernandez: Correct. Vice Chairman Winton: -- and in doing that, in our own code, in Section 1305, they are in fact responsible for looking at items such as responding to neighborhood context and creation of transition in bulk and scale. They're required to look at all of these things when they make their decision -- Mr. Fernandez: Correct. Vice Chairman Winton: -- that comes back to us, and so I think it's appropriate that we do remand it back to them and give them -- and I hope that you, Mr. City Attorney, or someone -- I think they're going to need a little legal -- Mr. Fernandez: Guidance. Vice Chairman Winton: -- coaching as well so that they pay attention to the right things -- Mr. Fernandez: Correct. Vice Chairman Winton: -- that are clearly in our Code. Mr. Fernandez: Yes, and we sit with them, and we will be advising them throughout this entire proceeding -- Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Mr. Fernandez: -- unique and different to all of us. Vice Chairman Winton: So, how do we do this? I mean, do we -- Mr. Fernandez: Well -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- make a motion? City of Miami Page 192 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Fernandez: -- this item then -- you -- Commissioner Sanchez: Make a motion for option two, which is to send it back to them. Commissioner Spence -Jones: To remand it. Mr. Fernandez: Correct, to remand it. Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Vice Chairman Winton: So -- Mr. Fernandez: If that is -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Mr. Fernandez: -- if there is a motion. Commissioner Sanchez: So move to remand. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second Do we have any further discussion? If not, all in favor, "aye. " The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairperson Winton: Like sign, opposed. Motion carries. Mr. Fernandez: Fine. Now, as a matter of courtesy at this point, the counsel for both Morningsides, the development and the neighborhood, are here, and while I have informed both of them of what my position was going to be in front of you, as I was going to try to guide you through this, they understood where I was coming from. I have done exactly as I represented to them I would do. I think that even though you've already made a decision to remand, they would like to speak to the record, and they should be afforded a short equal amount of time, perhaps to speak of the issue of remanding, which is the only thing that you have done. Vice Chairman Winton: All right. Then we will follow your -- Mr. Fernandez: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton.: -- counsel again. Yes, ma'am. Jonel Newman: Good evening. My name is Jonel Newman. I -- University of Miami, School of Law, 1311 Miller Drive, in Coral Gables, and I represent the appellants in this case. We agree with the City Attorney that the appropriate matter is remand to the Zoning Board so that the Zoning Board can then conduct the proper de novo hearing that we believe is required by -- very clearly required by the statute at Section 1806, and thank you, and it's been a long evening for everyone. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Mr. Fernandez: While the other party is standing up, this is the issue of contention that we will deal with when we get to be the counsel for the Zoning Board. You will hear White and Case make absolutely the opposite recommendation that prior counsel made. City of Miami Page 193 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Vice Chairman Winton: Your -- you have also, I would guess, a minute or two. Mr. Fernandez: Two minutes. Douglas Halsey: Couple minutes, yeah. Douglas Halsey, at the law firm of White and Case, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, on behalf of Morningside Development, LLC. The principals are here with me today, Solomon Yuken and the co -owners, Ruben and Isaac (UNINTELLIGIBLE). Basically, the issue is exactly as the City Attorney has identified it. Given the mandate of the court, it would be, in our view, clearly contravening the court's order for this tribunal to direct a de novo hearing all over again. There's already been a de novo hearing, and I'll read you the language from the mandate. I won't characterize the court's decision; I'll read it to you. It says, on page 7, based on the foregoing, the City Commission's scope of review is limited to a tradition appellate review of the Zoning Board's decision. It's already been made. Consequently, the Commission exceeded its scope of authority under the Zoning Code by conducting a de novo hearing and considering new evidence that had not been presented before the Zoning Board. What the association is advocating is nothing but -- other than a thinly veiled and transparent effort to evade that prohibition of the consideration by this board of new evidence by presenting it to the Zoning Board, so we think it's beyond the scope of the court's mandate if you allow new evidence. They've already had their opportunity. They had a de novo hearing right; they appeared. There is a record, a transcript and a hearing. To reopen it, we believe is contrary to the court's mandate, and would put us in a position of having to go back to court to enforce the mandate limiting the scope of this Commission's review. Thank you. Mr. Fernandez: Wonderful. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Mr. Fernandez: Wonderful arguments; another time, another place. These arguments will be made by respective counsel in front of the appropriate body, which would be the Zoning Board, and at that point in time, the City Attorney's office advising the Zoning Board will then guide them accordingly to what we deem to be the appropriate interpretation of the law. Certainly, all of these arguments are extraneous to your decision as an appellate body to send this back to the Zoning Board Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Mr. Halsey: Just like to put something in the record, just a summary of the arguments we presented In the interest of time -- Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Mr. Halsey: -- we'd just put it in the record. Mr. Fernandez: 1-- he may do so, as he proffers them, but it would be totally inappropriate. I mean, there -- it's not relative -- it has nothing to do with your remanding this to the Zoning Board. Mr. Halsey: Well, we disagree, but that's OK. Vice Chairman Winton: There you go. OK. Thank you very much. PZ.35 05-00076a RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), DENYING THE APPEAL, AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF City of Miami Page 194 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 THE ZONING BOARD AND THEREBY GRANTING A REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION ORIGINALLY GRANTED ON JANUARY 10, 2005, TO PERMIT RESIDENTIAL USES WITHIN THE "C-2" DISTRICT AT A DENSITY OF "R-3" OR HIGHER, FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 5600 NORTHEAST 4TH AVENUE AND 368 NORTHEAST 57TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," PURSUANT TO PLANS ON FILE , A TIME LIMITATION AND SUBJECT TO A CONDITION BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT. 05-00076a Legislation (Version 2).pdf 05-00076a Exhibit A.pdf 05-00076a Legislation (Version 3).pdf 05-00076a Exhibit A.pdf 05-00076a Zoning Board Appeal Letter.pdf 05-00076a Zoning Ordinance, Section 1305.pdf 05-00076a ZB Reso No. 2005-1109.pdf 05-00076a Extension of Time Letter.pdf 05-00076a ZB Reso No. 2005-0966.pdf 05-00076a Analysis.pdf 05-00076a Zoning Map.pdf 05-00076a Aerial Map.pdf 05-00076a Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 05-00076a Fact Sheet.pdf 05-00076a Plans.pdf Motion by Commissioner Spence -Jones, seconded by Chairman Gonzalez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 2 - Commissioner Gonzalez and Spence -Jones Noes: 1 - Commissioner Winton Absent: 2 - Commissioner Sanchez and Regalado R-06-0063 Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): You want 32 or 35? I think that's all that's left. Chairman Gonzalez: Let's take 30 -- Ms. Slazyk: 35? Chairman Gonzalez: 35. Ms. Slazyk: 35, all right. 35. Commissioner Spence -Jones: No. Ms. Slazyk: Why not? PZ. 35 is an appeal of an extension of time for a special exception that was granted by the Zoning Board on January 10, 2005. These -- this is for a residential project within a C-2 zoning district. The Zoning Board heard the testimony for the special exception; they granted it. The address is 5600 Northeast 4th Avenue and 368 Northeast 57th Street. The applicant was unable to get the building permit within the one-year time and requested a time extension, and this is an appeal of that time extension, which the Zoning Board granted. City of Miami Page 195 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Vice Chairman Winton: So -- I'm sorry. Lourdes. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah, which one are you -- Vice Chairman Winton: Lourdes. Ms. Slazyk: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: I was still thinking about the last -- Ms. Slazyk: All right. Vice Chairman Winton: -- decision -- Ms. Slazyk: I'm sorry. Vice Chairman Winton: -- and didn't hear one single word you said Ms. Slazyk: All right. This is an appeal of a time extension that was granted by the Zoning Board. The Zoning Board granted a special exception on January 10, 2005. The applicant has one year in which to get a building permit, and if they're unable to, they have the right to request a time extension on that. They did, and the Zoning Board granted it, and what you're hearing today is an appeal of the Zoning Board decision to grant that time extension. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, got it. Ms. Slazyk: OK. Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. City Attorney, would you enlight [sic] us? Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Yes, certainly, so again, put back your appellate cap. You have a very limited presentation by the principals or the attorneys representing either side, and you need to focus only on the criteria for the extension of time. Chairman Gonzalez: Question. Ms. Slazyk: Right. Chairman Gonzalez: I think the last appeal was sent back to the Zoning Board? Ms. Slazyk: Remanded back. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Remanded Mr. Fernandez: It was remanded. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Ms. Slazyk: Right, but this -- Chairman Gonzalez: Can we do that on this one, too, or not? Mr. Fernandez: No. On this one, actually, the record is very clear. The criteria for the appeal is on your record, and you should hear argument of counsel and determine the sufficiency of that City of Miami Page 196 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 finding by the Zoning Board. Ms. Slazyk: And let me remind you, you're not here hearing the project. The project has been heard; approved by the Zoning Board. Chairman Gonzalez: Right. Ms. Slazyk: The only thing that's before you is an appeal of a time extension -- Chairman Gonzalez: Extension of time. Ms. Slazyk: -- not the project or how tall it is, or anything like that. It's time extension. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Yes, sir. Good evening, you're recognized Elvis Cruz: Thank you, sir. Elvis Cruz, 631 Northeast 57th Street, here on behalf of the Morningside Civic Association. I have some neighbors here that I'd like to stand and be recognized that are here in opposition to the extension of the special exemption [sic]. Thank you. We had a few more earlier, but the day has been long. Commissioner Spence -Jones, this is in your district. 1 would assume you've been to the site because I know you like to see the area prior to ruling. This extension would allow the construction of the 120-foot tall building in an R-2 neighborhood. It has the potential to displace many of the longtime low-income residents. Tony Recio: Excuse me, Mr. Chair. I need to object at this time. He's attempting to go into the substantive merits of the special exception -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Supposed to be -- Mr. Recio: -- which -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- about the -- Chairman Gonzalez: Right. Mr. Recio: -- you've already been explained. Ms. Thompson: I'm -- Chairman Gonzalez: I mean, what we're discussing here is the extension of time -- Mr. Cruz: OK. Let me just speak to the -- Chairman Gonzalez:: -- so let's go to the extension -- Mr. Cruz: -- extension of time then. Chairman Gonzalez: -- of time because -- you know. Mr. Fernandez: And all parties need to identify their self before they speak, and I will make sure, Mr. Chairman, that I bring your attention back to the issue in front of you -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Fernandez: -- but Mr. Cruz is -- City of Miami Page 197 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Cruz: Cruz. Mr. Fernandez: -- entitled to make his presentation however (INAUDIBLE). Mr. Recio: Thank you. Mr. Cruz: Question for the City Attorney -- Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry. 1 need to interrupt. I did not get the name of the speaker who's at the other podium. Mr. Recio: Oh, I apologize. My name is Tony Recio, with law offices at 2665 South Bayshore Drive. I'm here on behalf of Pinnacle Housing Group. Mr. Cruz: Question for the City Attorney. We came to realize, in between the Zoning hearing and today, that the project appears to have conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Is that something that I'm allowed to speak to today? Mr. Fernandez: Absolutely not. Mr. Cruz: OK. In that case, Commissioner Spence -Jones, Commissioners, I would ask that you deny the extension of time or approve it under conditions. Mr. City Attorney, am I allowed to enumerate my conditions that I'm requesting? Mr. Fernandez: Enumerate the conditions? Mr. Cruz: Yes. I'm asking the Commission to either deny the extension of time or approve it with conditions. Mr. Fernandez: Well, I will -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: But based on what? I'm just -- Mr. Fernandez: I will not pretend to tell you how to present your case, but you need to refer to the criteria in the Code as to why they should deny, specifically referring to why it took more than a year to get going on it, and then if you want to make suggestions as to how they could limit it, feel free. Mr. Cruz: So I can -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Mr. Cruz: -- ask for approval with conditions? OK The project has had a year under the special exemption [sic]. They have not proceeded for whatever reason. I'm sure they'll tell you shortly. I would ask that you deny or approve -- even better yet, approve with the following conditions: that the project be limited to a density of R-3, with a height limit of 35 feet -- Mr. Recio: Mr. Chair, may I object here? Because even the conditions are arguing the substantive merits of this application. Chairman Gonzalez: Right. Mr. Recio: He's trying to get around the prohibition on arguing the merits. Chairman Gonzalez: I don't know. Mr. City Attorney, I don't know if I'm understanding this City of Miami Page 198 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 correct, but we cannot change a project that has been approved on the accepted conditions, right? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Right. We can only -- Mr. Fernandez: Correct. You -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- can vote -- Mr. Fernandez: -- in front of you is a request by the applicant -- Chairman Gonzalez: To deny an extension of time to obtain a permit. Mr. Fernandez: Correct. Chairman Gonzalez: I understand that once a project is approved, you have, I believe it is a year to obtain a permit. Now when that year expire, you may ask for an extension of time. Mr. Fernandez: The Code provides for that. Chairman Gonzalez: What is being debated here is if we give the extension of time or not. The gentleman is opposing to give the extension of time, but it doesn't have anything to do with the project -- Mr. Fernandez: Not at all, only -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- or the zoning. Mr. Fernandez: -- with the reasons why the delay occurred. Is it justified for this Commission to take into account whatever the applicant, the -- Mr. Recio's client would have to say why they couldn't get the permit within a year. Vice Chairman Winton: Then we ought to hear him first, and then hear Elvis. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah. Can we hear why -- Chairman Gonzalez: No. We need to -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- they couldn't get it? Chairman Gonzalez: -- hear the -- Commissioner Spence -Jones.' That might help. Chairman Gonzalez: -- appellant first. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Mr. Fernandez: Well, but in this case, it's an appeal from the Zoning Board -- Chairman Gonzalez: So -- Mr. Fernandez: -- so the appellant has the burden to go forward -- Vice Chairman Winton: Oh. City of Miami Page 199 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: Right. Mr. Fernandez: -- and put his position on the paper with regard to the criteria for the extension of time. Mr. Cruz: Mr. City Attorney -- Mr. Fernandez: I'm not a party. You need to address me through the Chair. Mr. Cruz: I understand. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question of the City Attorney? Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Go ahead. Mr. Cruz: Thank you, sir. Mr. City Attorney, I was under the impression that a very short while ago, you told me that I could ask for the extension to be either denied or approved with conditions; is that true or not? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, he did say that. Mr. Cruz: It is, and then when I tried to set forth the conditions, the opposing counsel objected. Mr. Fernandez: Yeah, and then -- when -- you know, my suggestion is wait until Mr. Cruz puts his case on, then you can put your case on. Then I'll guide the Chair and the Commission in making proper rulings with regard to whether the issues go to the extension or to the underlying approval. Mr. Recio: Mr. Chair, my only objection was that the conditions relate specifically to the time extension itself, not to the merits of the application, not to the project. Mr. Fernandez: And that's what I said the conditions should apply to. Chairman Gonzalez.: All right. Mr. Cruz: OK. May I ask another question of the City Attorney? Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Go ahead. Mr. Cruz: I believe 1 have read in the Zoning Code that the Commission has the power, on an appeal of the Zoning Board, to either grant the appeal, deny the appeal, or modi -- grant and modify with conditions; is that true? Mr. Fernandez: Yes. You read correctly, but the conditions are not conditions to the special exception, but conditions to the extension of time. Mr. Cruz: OK, so I guess it's a little bit semantic. Can those approval, denial, or approval with conditions be applied to an extension? Mr. Fernandez: Only to the extension, yes, but not to the underlying special exception. Mr. Cruz: OK. Well, in that case, let me do as you suggested earlier, Mr. City Attorney, and let me go ahead and mention the conditions that we're asking for, and then you can decide whether or not they're applicable. Mr. Fernandez: Correct. City of Miami Page 200 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Cruz: Is that OK? OK. We ask that the extension be approved with the conditions that the property be limited to a density of R-3, with a height limit of 25 -- excuse me, of 35 feet, and an FAR (floor/area ratio) based on net lot area instead of gross lot area. Mr. Fernandez:: Are those your conditions, Mr. Cruz? Mr. Cruz: Yes, and -- Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, your -- my recommendation is that you rule those conditions totally out of order because they go to the underlying grant of the special exception, not to the reasons for the delay in time. Mr. Cruz: Very well. In that case, let me conclude my initial presentation by saying that I would ask that you deny the extension because it would be in the public's best interest, and certainly, in the neighborhood's best interest to do so. Mr. Recio. Chairman Gonzalez: That conclude your presentation? Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Mr. Cruz: Yes, but I believe I am allowed rebuttal. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Mr. Fernandez: Of course. Mr. Cruz: Thank you. Mr. Recio: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes. Mr. Recio: Thank you, Commissioners. For the record, Mr. Cruz did not put anything in the record against the actual time extension itself. No arguments have been advanced, but to the extent that we need to defend the time extension, this is an affordable/workforce housing project. It's 137 units, very valuable in that regard. They require -- they tried to get state funding for these projects. They -- the deadline is February 1 of each year. The -- they were not able to obtain -- it goes by a lottery process. They were not able to obtain that financing last year. That's why we're requesting this additional year so that we can resubmit an application so we can bring this affordable housing project -- this workforce housing project to the neighborhood and to the city. That concludes my presentation. Mr. Fernandez: That is -- he has advanced, if I may, Madam Commissioner, a reason why he wasn't able to meet the one-year requirement. You need to exercise your discretion in considering whether that has weight and validity, and the like. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Sorry. I'm yielding to you. Chairman Gonzalez: Madam Commissioner, go ahead. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK First of all, just speaking to what the issue is, and I don't know if I can even address Barbara Rodriguez on this. Can 1 do that, staff on it? Just because I City of Miami Page 201 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 want to get clarity on -- Mr. Fernandez:: Yes. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- the tax credit issue. Mr. Fernandez: You may call any member of staff to clam -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK Mr. Fernandez: -- any issue for you at any time. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Barbara, just so that 1 have clarity on the project that we're speaking of tax credits -- is it -- sometimes in an extremely competitive process -- Barbara Gomez -Rodriguez (Director, Community Development): It's a very competitive process, and sometimes it takes two and three years to be awarded tax credit. Once you've gone for the first year and you rule out the issues that you have, you try again. You will not find a developer that tries more than twice on a project, so it is very important, from our point of view, from Community Development and affordable housing, that this is their second year. We -- and we have committed ourself [sic]. There is funding from the City in order to help them get the tax credit. Commissioner Spence -Jones: And if we deny it today, then that means they lose this tax credit, right? Ms. Gomez -Rodriguez: They'll lose the opportunity to apply for tax credit this year, which means that we would have to wait until next year -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: And we're not sure if we -- Ms. Gomez -Rodriguez: -- which might not be something that will be feasible for the developer. Commissioner Spence -Jones: So, if affordable housing is something that we truly need -- and I'm assuming that this -- I know you're speaking on behalf of Morningside, correct? Mr. Cruz: As well as the neighborhood immediately behind it. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK, but that neighborhood is not here. Mr. Cruz: Not that I'm aware of. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Right. That little neighborhood right behind it would be considered Little Haiti, correct? Mr. Cruz: Possibly, yes. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah, and one of the things I'm really, really trying to do is really make sure that 1 take care of the residents that live in those areas, and you know that I have a serious affordable housing issue in my district, and many of those people in the surrounding areas are living in below conditions, so this is going to provide them with the opportunity to upgrade where they're living. I agree -- you know, I definitely -- I'm always open to anything that -- any information you have to share for me, but I would hate to leave -- lose a project that's so valuable to my community because of it, especially there might be an oppor -- I may not get the opportunity again to get it, so I'm going to move that we give them the extension. City of Miami Page 202 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: And I'll second the motion. Mr. Cruz: Mr. Chairman, I was waiting for my chance for rebuttal. Vice Chairman Winton: I'm chairing, 1 guess. I just got the gavel, so your -- Mr. Cruz: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: -- opportunity to rebut. Mr. Cruz: It is very important that you understand the history of how we got to this point. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Mr. Cruz: The first time that the developers came to the Zoning Board asking for the special exception, they told the Zoning Board that this was going to be an affordable workforce housing project. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Um -hum. Mr. Cruz: There was, 1 believe, a deferral. They came back a second time and they told the Zoning Board -- I take it back. The first time, they wanted a variance, and that didn't work out. They came back the second time; they said, we do not need any variances. This is a market rate project. Mr. Pastoriza told the Zoning Board this was a market rate project, and now today you're being told it's affordable workforce housing. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I just want to -- so can staff speak to that because that is really important to make sure that it is affordable housing. Ms. Gomez -Rodriguez: 1 can tell you that the papers that we have received in Community Development -- because we got to cert5 them -- that it is an affordable housing project. They did ask -- at one time they were looking for some variances, and to accommodate the neighborhood, they decided not to ask for parking variance and other types of things that they could ask under affordable housing. They choose not to do that to accommodate the residents of the neighborhood, but I can tell you that the information that we have obtained in Community Development, it is an affordable housing, and we have certified to that effect. Mr. Cruz: And -- may I continue, Mr. Chairman? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Mr. Cruz: OK. If the -- this extension is granted, does that lock them into having to make it affordable workforce housing because that is how they presented it to you today? Ms. Gomez -Rodriguez: If they -- if it is a -- if it's a tax credit -- Mr. Fernandez: Let me answer -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah. Mr. Fernandez: -- that question, please. If the extension is granted, they are able to proceed under the original grant of the special exception, whatever their original grant of the special exception gave them, which is not the subject of today's hearing, so what did they have when they got that special exception? Whatever they get -- if this motion that's pending passes, that's what City of Miami Page 203 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 they'll be able to have for another year. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK I -- Mr. Fernandez: If another year passes and no permit is pulled, then they struck out because the Code doesn't provide for a second -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Mr. Fernandez: -- one-year extension. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Mr. Attorney -- and I just want to make sure it's very clear and I put this on record One of the reasons why I would even make this motion is because we need the affordable housing, so I would like to make sure that we verify that the first -- the original time that it came, it stated that it was affordable housing. Are you saying to me that it did? The original -- Ms. Gomez -Rodriguez: What I'm certjing to you is that the information we have obtained that it is an affordable housing. They will be competing for tax credit. If they are -- obtain those tax credit, it will be affordable for 50 years. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Cruz. Commissioner Spence -Jones: So -- Mr. Fernandez.: It is -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- because I want -- Mr. Fernandez: -- it's a valid line of inquiry, and you should have testimony on the record from the applicant with -- to your question. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK Mr. Recio: OK, if I may, Commissioner. This is an affordable/workforce housing project. This is Pinnacle Housing Group, experienced developers of that kind of housing throughout the City. That's what this project is all about. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK, and just so that I have on the record one -- can I ask -- ? Can't ask anything about it. Mr. Fernandez: Yes, but as you ask, let me again remind you that special exceptions, as well as rezones and all of these issues that you deal with in your P&Z (Planning & Zoning) agenda, these are all decisions that run with the land, and so the special exception that was granted was on the land; was not necessarily to the owners of the land right now, so they can stand here and they can represent to you whatever they want, but knowing market conditions -- and 1 will be the devil's advocate for a minute, Mr. Cruz, much to your surprise, I'm sure -- they could turn around, after they get this one-year extension of time, and sell the property because you cannot prohibit them from freely alienating their property and selling it, and then they sell it with a special exception because that travels with the land It doesn't travel with the individual, so truth be told and very transparent and open, that is what's happening. Now, you as a Commissioner making a policy determination, may look at them straight in their eyes and tell them if they fool you once, they won't fool you twice, and then you take it from there. City of Miami Page 204 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Recio: Commissioner, I can assure you that we will -- submitting the tax credit financing on February 1, just as we discussed tonight, and that is the intention of this project. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I want it in blood. Mr. Fernandez: Well -- but the record is clear. You know, he understood you -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah. Mr. Fernandez: -- and we all understand you, but the record is clear. Commissioner Spence -Jones: No, he just -- Vice Chairman Winton: Elvis -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- I'm just playing. Mr. Cruz: Yeah. Vice Chairman Winton: -- you have more? OK. Mr. Cruz: Mr. -- may I address the City Attorney? Vice Chairman Winton: Please, yes. Mr. Cruz: Mr. City Attorney, I thank you very -- Mr. Fernandez: Leave me alone. Mr. Cruz: You're a smart guy. I like that. You brought up a point that 1 was hoping to get to, which is the fact that they are not legally bound to build this -- Mr. Fernandez: But this is not proper rebuttal. That's not an issue that they raised. That's an issue that I raised, and on my quarter or my nickel, you cannot continue -- Mr. Cruz: OK. Mr. Fernandez.: -- to abuse of the Commissioner's discretion. Mr. Cruz: OK, I won't. Let me -- Mr. Fernandez: Rebuttal is limited to points they raised on their case. Mr. Cruz: All right. Let me -- for the well-being of Commissioner Spence -Jones -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yes, sir. Mr. Cruz: -- and the district and the neighborhood, let me say that there is nothing to prevent them from selling; that you appear to be leaning towards granting the extension based on this being affordable workforce housing. Once they sell, the new buyer is not obligated to provide affordable workforce housing, and perhaps what's more important is that this property has been advertised for sale for quite some time. Mr. Fernandez: Rebuttal concluded. Mr. Chairman, you may proceed. City of Miami Page 205 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Mr. Cruz: Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: So -- Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion. Vice Chairman Winton: -- we have -- oh, we have a motion and a second Mr. Fernandez: Yes, to grant -- Chairman Gonzalez: It's a resolution. Mr. Fernandez: -- the extension of time. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second to grant the extension of time. Any further discussion? Commissioner Spence -Jones: I just -- well -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, ma'am. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- it's passed already, right? Vice Chairman Winton: No, no, we haven't -- we got to vote, so -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: -- if there's any further discussion, then I was going to call the vote. All in favor, "aye. " Chairman Gonzalez: Aye. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign, opposed, and I will vote "no," so -- but the motion carries. Mr. Fernandez: The motion carries, 2/1. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Mr. Recio: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Spence -Jones: 1 just want to put something on the record real fast, if you don't mind. Chairman Gonzalez: Go ahead You're recognized. Commissioner Spence -Jones: If I can -- if we can, 1 definitely want to talk further with staff on this issue regarding the project because funding did come from my allocation towards this project, so I'd like to sit down to make sure that the neighborhood residents, the minority contractors in the area are involved. City of Miami Page 206 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: We have lost quorum, so we have to stop. Ms. Slazyk: PZ.32. Oh, no quorum. Oh, OK. Mr. Fernandez: Just -- Chairman Gonzalez: The next item will be PZ.32 when we have quorum, so start getting prepared for PZ 32. NON AGENDA ITEMS NA.1 06-00148 DISCUSSION ITEM Discussion regarding the role of the City Manager in the controversial settlement of the Fire Rescue fee matter. Commissioner Regalado: I do have a pocket item that I do wish to discuss, Mr. Chairman, about the controversial settlement of the fire -rescue fee and the role of the City Manager in these negotiations, so I don't know if you wish to do it now or wait until the end. Chairman Gonzalez: Those are pocket items. I would like to take that at the end of the day -- Commissioner Regalado: It's fine by me. Chairman Gonzalez: -- if possible. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Mr. -- Joe Arriola (City Manager): I'm not going to be here. Do it now. Chairman Gonzalez: You want to do it now? Mr. Arriola: I'm not going to be here. In the afternoon. Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Fernandez.: Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Sanchez: Let's get clarification from the City Attorney. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. This is a -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Mr. Fernandez: I need to caution you that while you're free to conduct yourselves as you deem appropriate, that this is an item that is in litigation. It is being hotly contested. It is an item that, of course, we all understand is being played also in another court, the court of public opinion, and there is a lot of press, but with regard to the seriousness and the importance of this item to the City, I need to caution you that this is in the courts. There's no finality to this issue. It is still being argued, and it's very contentious, and my advice to you is that this item, at this time, not be aired because it may impact and impinge on the judicial process. Commissioner Regalado: Well, Mr. City Attorney, my issue and my comments are only those in City of Miami Page 207 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 the public domains. I have not attended the trial. 1 was subpoenaed and I was asked to be on the standby. I called the office because I do --1 did want to testify, but they said that I was not needed, so under your advice and our -- the City -- the attorneys that the City hire, 1 did not even show up at the trial. The only thing I know is what I have read in the media, I've seen on TV (television), and it is -- the perception that I, as a resident, I got from reading what has been transpiring in that trial regarding the conduct of the City Manager and not about the outcome of the trial that I wanted to bring a motion of lack of confidence by this Commissioner on the City Manager because of the way that we were informed as elected officials, and that's all that there is to it, no opining about what the outcome should be, but about the way that we elected officials, which, at the end of the day, are the one responsible for voting and approving whatever settlement the Administration and the City Attorney brings to us we're led to believe. I mean, the first time that I saw a story on TV, I saw Commissioner Winton bashing that and said, "Somebody has to pay for it." What I'm trying to do here is just send a message to the Mayor, who have the ultimate responsibility of the City Manager, because like he says, he doesn't work for the Commission -- that you know how we feel, and I -- frankly, I feel very bad, very frustrated for the way that the City Commission was informed on this matter, and that's the whole issue. It's not about who's right or who's wrong, who lied. Apparently, somebody did. Who lied? Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Our City Attorney, I thinly gave us very good advice. Chairman Gonzalez: Right. Vice Chairman Winton: 1 think we've -- Commissioner Sanchez: Very good advice. Vice Chairman Winton: -- all been very patient here, but Commissioner Regalado keeps -- it keeps moving and moving, and the City Attorney said we shouldn't discuss this period. He didn't say we should discuss a little bit of it or a piece of it or something. He said you shouldn't discuss this. We're in active litigation, and the end result of that active litigation could be -- there's substantial risks, and he's suggesting we don't talk about it, and I'm in -- I think that advice is advice we should listen to. Commissioner Regalado: And can I -- Chairman Gonzalez: Right. Commissioner Regalado: -- ask just one other question before I shut up to the City Attorney? Mr. Fernandez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Regalado: Does this mean that the City Commissioners cannot discuss this case in the media? Mr. Fernandez: No. Individual City Commissioners, in their -- as you carry out your duties on a day-to-day basis, you don't divest yourself of title of City Commissioner. You may talk to the press. You may talk to your neighbors. As an individual Commissioner, you remain free to -- notwithstanding the fact that I'm admonishing you that what's in the best interest of the City is for all of you individually and collectively to remain silent and allow the judicial process to take place. It is a good process. It's a process that this country's based on for hundreds of years, and it always achieves fair and equitable results, but individually, you may do as you deem City of Miami Page 208 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 appropriate. Collectively, as a body, you need to heed my advice, which is do not entertain and do not discuss any item that's presently in the courts. Commissioner Regalado: OK. That answers my question, so I guess that I'll defer this item until we have a resolution from the court. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We appreciate that. All right. This concludes the regular -- Mr. Arriola: Commissioner, can I make one little comment, because I need to clear the record? Chairman Gonzalez: I -- Mr. Arriola: I did not advise -- Commissioner Regalado: Whoa, whoa, whoa. If you don't let me -- Mr. City Attorney, Mr. City Attorney, listen to me. Chairman Gonzalez.: Order. Commissioner Regalado: If you told me -- Mr. Arriola: This is something totally derent. Commissioner Regalado: -- an elected official to shut up, you cannot allow the City Manager to say whatever he -- I don't know what he's going to say, but 1 followed your advice. Mr. Arriola: No, I -- Commissioner Regalado: I followed your advice. Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman, I -- the word "shut up" I don't use. My mother would hit me on the side of the head if I used those words -- Commissioner Regalado: Well -- Mr. Fernandez: -- but the -- Commissioner Regalado: -- I mean, it was a benign "shut up." Mr. Fernandez: I give advice to the Commission, and the Chairman is running the meeting. It is up to the Chairman to tell all ofyou and to tell the City Manager how he wants to conduct this meeting. It's not -- Chairman Gonzalez: I want -- Mr. Fernandez: -- up to me. Chairman Gonzalez:: What I want to do is move to the next item. Mr. Arriola: But Commissioner -- Chairman Gonzalez: This is the end of it. Mr. Arriola: -- it's -- City of Miami Page 209 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: The City Attorney has advised us -- Mr. Arriola: But it has nothing to do -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- legally. Mr. Arriola: -- with the item. Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. City Manager, I don't want to continue -- Mr. Arriola: OK. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: -- arguing this item. We will have -- Mr. Arriola: Well, he's just a liar -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- enough time -- Mr. Arriola: -- and I just wanted to prove it to you. Chairman Gonzalez: We will have plenty of time -- after this issue is concluded in the courts, then we will have the next hundred years to debate it and discuss it and say whatever we want. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. NA.2 06-00149 DISCUSSION ITEM A motion was made by Commissioner Spence -Jones, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, and passed unanimously, directing the Administration to develop a maintenance plan and budgeted line item that addresses the maintaining of streetscapes in neighborhoods throughout the City of Miami. Commissioner Spence -Jones: There -- my concern, like in speaking to you earlier, was to make sure that -- I know that we have a lot of roadway, great capital improvement projects happening -- Northeast 2nd Avenue, Biscayne Boulevard, Flagler, which are all great projects. My biggest concern with these projects is the maintenance of them. You know, we put a lot of money into making beautiful, you know, streetscapes and roadways and all of that, but then there's no real way to maintain them, so what I'd like to do is direct the City Manager to come back with a maintenance plan, but not just a maintenance plan, but somewhere in the budget a line item that can address maintaining, you know, the streetscapes in these particular neighborhoods throughout the dis -- not just through my district, but throughout the city because 1 think it's important -- we spend a lot of money and then we don't keep it up. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second Vice Chairman Winton: Third Chairman Gonzalez: And we have a third Commissioner Regalado: Four. Chairman Gonzalez: All in -- and we have a fourth -- favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. City of Miami Page 210 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: Motion carries. Is that it? Commissioner Spence -Jones: That's it, sir. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. NA.3 06-00153 RESOLUTION District 5 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO CREATE A TASK FORCE CO-CHAIRED BY A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCEMENT TEAM AND THE DEPARTMENT OF CODE ENFORCEMENT, CONSISTING OF FIVE TO SEVEN MEMBERS TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENTS AND BUSINESS OWNERS REGARDING CRIME, ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS AND SAFETY IN THE LITTLE HAITI PARK AND WAREHOUSE DISTRICT, TO BE PRINCIPALLY CONCERNED WITH THE AREAS BOUNDED BY NORTHEAST 62ND AND 72ND STREETS FROM NORTHEAST 2ND AVENUE TO NORTHEAST 5TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA; DIRECTING THE TASK FORCE TO CONDUCT ITS STUDY AS STATED HEREIN AND TO PRESENT A REPORT TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITHIN 120 DAYS WITH RECOMMENDATIONS. Motion by Commissioner Spence -Jones, seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton and Spence -Jones Absent: 2 - Commissioner Sanchez and Regalado R-06-0067 Chairman Gonzalez: Pocket items. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I have one. Chairman Gonzalez:: You have one? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Just have one, Chair. Yeah, just one. Chairman Gonzalez: Go ahead. Vice Chairman Winton: Great presentation -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: And he's -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- Ben. Commissioner Spence -Jones: This is just from earlier -- the earlier time during the meeting. 1 just want to make sure I put an official resolution regarding creating a task force co-chaired by the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) to look at the issue regarding the Little Haiti Park warehouse district to deal with the concerns of the business owners regarding the crime, regarding the roadways and safety. I just want to make sure 1 officially put that in the record, and asking for them to come back in 120 days with a recommendation to this Commission so that at least something is happening at the same time. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. That's your motion? City of Miami Page 211 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion. We need a second Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second. All in favor, say "aye. II The Commission (Collectively): Aye. NA.4 06-00152 RESOLUTION District 1 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION REQUESTING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY TO WORK WITH THE CITY OF MIAMI DEPARTMENT OF POLICE WITH NUMEROUS ISSUES AFFECTING THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE PUBLIC HOUSING RESIDENCES, GWENDOLYN CHERRY APARTMENTS, LOCATED AT 2301 NORTHWEST 23 COURT, MIAMI, FLORIDA AND 2015 NORTHWEST 18 TERRACE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS WELL AS ITS ADJOINING NEIGHBORS. Motion by Chairman Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton and Spence -Jones Absent: 2 - Commissioner Sanchez and Regalado R-06-0065 Chairman Gonzalez: Do you have any pocket items, Commissioner Winton? Vice Chairman Winton: Not that 1 know of Chairman Gonzalez: No? All right. You want -- I'm going to pass the gavel. 1 have a couple of pocket items. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK Chairman Gonzalez: One of the pocket items -- and I have to -- I need to excuse myself because we had personnel here from Miami -Dade County Housing. I believe they arrived here around 5 o'clock, and actually, with the Planning & Zoning meeting, it has taken us longer than what I expected, and they left, but one problem that I have is a problem with the Gwen Cherry complex that's in Allapattah. They're low-income housing projects that are handled and managed by Miami -Dade County Public Housing. The -- we're having a lot of problems in those projects. Our police have their hands tied. We need to have some action from the County assisting our Police Department to do their job. We understand, according to some information that I got from the PSD sergeant and the major of Allapattah and the commander, that they have some information that reveals that people that are convicted felons are living in these units. People that are not supposed to live there are living with parent -- with relatives and friends, and we need to take some action, and our Police Department, there is only so much they can do. The rest has to be handled by the County, so 1 have a resolution of the Miami City Commission requesting Miami -Dade County to work with the City of Miami Department of Police with numerous issues affecting the health and welfare of the residents of the public housing residences, Gwen Cherry Apartments, located at 2301 Northwest 23rd Court, Miami, Florida, and 2015 Northwest 18th Terrace, Miami, Florida, as well as its adjoining neighbors, and that is my resolution. I move. City of Miami Page 212 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second it. Chairman Gonzalez: And, Commissioner, we have a motion and a second here. Vice Chairman Winton: Second Chairman Gonzalez: No. We have a motion and a -- Vice Chairman Winton: Third Chairman Gonzalez: -- second. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, I'm Chair. Oh. Chairman Gonzalez: All in favor, say "aye." Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry. I'm sorry, so do we have a motion and a second on -- Chairman Gonzalez: And second Vice Chairman Winton: -- the table? We have any further discussion? Chairman Gonzalez: No. Vice Chairman Winton: If not, al! in favor, "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign, opposed. Motion carries. NA.5 06-00156 DISCUSSION ITEM A motion was made by Chairman Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, with Commissioners Regalado and Sanchez absent, recommending that Commissioner Tomas Regalado evaluate the performance and compensation of City Attorney Jorge L. Fernandez; Commissioner Michelle Spence -Jones to evaluate the performance and compensation of City Clerk Priscilla A. Thompson, and Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton to evaluate the performance and compensation of Auditor General Victor Igwe. Direction to the Administration by Chairman Gonzalez to report back to the Commission within 30 days with a recommendation concerning the performance and compensation evaluations of officers appointed by the City Commission. Direction to the Administration by Vice Chairman Winton to provide appropriate staff in assisting the Commissioners with the evaluation process; further recommending that the Administration provide data in reference to the market for comparable positions. MOTION Direction to the Administration by Chairman Gonzalez to report back to the Commission within 30 days with a recommendation concerning the performance and compensation evaluations of officers appointed by the City Commission. Direction to the Administration by Vice Chairman Winton to provide appropriate staff in assisting the Commissioners with the evaluation process; further recommending that the Administration provide data in reference to the market for comparable positions. City of Miami Page 213 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez.: All right. My other pocket item has to do with the City Attorney, the City Clerk, the -- Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Inspector General. Vice Chairman Winton: Inspector General. Chairman Gonzalez: -- Inspector General, so what I have decided to do, since 1 like to give participation of my colleagues in all the process, so I came up with this idea, and I hope that you two accept it. One Commissioner is missing in here - -well, two Commissioners are missing, but I move to designate certain Commissioners to evaluate the performance, including compensation of those offices directly appointed by the City Commission. I recommend that Commissioner Regalado evaluate the City Attorney; Commissioner Spence -Jones evaluate the City Clerk, and Commissioner Winton evaluate the Inspector General, and that -- Mr. Fernandez: Auditor General. Chairman Gonzalez: -- is my motion. Vice Chairman Winton: And that's your motion? We need a second. Michelle. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Oh, second. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second. Do we have any further discussion? I think it's a great idea, Mr. Chairman, that you've come up with. 1 think -- you know, it's -- that's -- we should prob -- we should institutionalize this idea that you've come up with. It's really very good. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign, opposed. Chairman Gonzalez: What 1 recommend is that — Vice Chairman Winton: The motion carries. Chairman Gonzalez: -- you know, you work on this, and maybe, I don't know, in 30 days or so, come back with a recommendation. Vice Chairman Winton: And Mr. City Manager, we're going to obviously -- each Commissioner will need some assistance from appropriate staff in terms of the evaluation process, and because this is going to deal with compensation, we also need data, so you know, what do comparable people in comparable jobs -- what's the market doing out there? I think that's going to be important, as well. Otto Boudet-Murias (Chief of Planning & Economic Development): Yes, 1 will provide you with all the support you need Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: And if we don't have any other business, 1 will like to move to adjourn. Vice Chairman Winton: We're all in favor. City of Miami Page 214 Printed on 2/21/2006 City Commission Meeting Minutes January 26, 2006 Chairman Gonzalez: All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Meeting is adjourned. City of Miami Page 215 Printed on 2/21/2006