Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal Presentation39th Street Investors Group, LLC Official Vacation and Closure of a Private Alley Presentation to the City Commission January 26, 2006 o,, Diaal On behalf of the Applicant: VOA Architects: Richard Fawell, Dean Huspen 224 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 1400 Chicago, Illinois 60604 Telephone: 312.554.1400 Facsimile : 312.554.1412 Tew Cardenas LLP: Santiago Echemendia, Suzanne Besu Four Seasons Tower, 15th Floor 1441 Brickell Avenue Miami, Florida 33131-3407 Telephone: 305.536.1112 Facsimile: 305.536.1116 SUBMITTED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR ITEM, City of Miami Legislation Resolution City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33133 www.cLmiami.fl.us File Number: 05-01227 Final Action Date: A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAM1 CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT, CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLI fitted Into the public THAT PORTION OF AN ALLEY LOCATED NORTH OF NORTHEAST 39TH record in Connection with STREET AND EAST OF BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A." item ??- 33 on Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk WHEREAS, the Miami Zoning Board at its meeting on October 17, 2005, Item No. 8, duly adopted Resolution No. ZB 2005-1072 by a vote of six to two (6-2), RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of closing, vacating, abandoning, and discontinuing a portion of a public right-of-way as set forth; and WHEREAS, the Department of Public Works and the Plat and Street Committee have studied the subject vacation and closure and determined that it will not affect pedestrian or vehicular traffic circulation or access for public service; and WHEREAS, the Plat and Street Committee has further considered the criteria contained in the Subdivision Regulations of the Cide Code concerning the vacation and closure of the alley North of Northeast 39th Street and East of Biscayne Boulevard, and has voted 6-1 in favor of this vacation and closure request; and WHEREAS, the City Commission, finds that it is in the best interest of the general welfare of the City of Miami and its inhabitants to grant the vacation and closure of a portion of the public right-of-way as hereinafter described, and deems it advisable to do so; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: Section 1. The recitals and findings contained in the Preamble to this Resolution are adopted by reference and incorporated as if fully set forth in this Section. Section 2. A portion of an alley located North of Northeast 39th Street and East of Biscayne Boulevard, more particularly described in Exhibit "A," is closed, vacated, abandoned and discontinued for public use. Section 3. It is found that: (a) The vacation and closure is in the public interest; and (b) Neither the general public nor public service vehicles, such as trash, garbage, police, fire and other emergency vehicles use the alley; and (c) There is ample access into the area for police, fire, emergency vehicles, and trash collection. Section 4. The applicant must comply with all conditions set forth in the approved final decision of Class II 05-0235 by the Planning Department . City of Miami Page 1 of 2 Printed On: 10/28/2003 File Number: 05-01227 Section 5. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption and signature of the Mayor. (1) APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: JORGE L. FERNANDEZ CITY ATTORNEY Footnotes: {1} If the Mayor does not sign this Resolution, it shall become effective at the end of ten calendar days from the date it was passed and adopted. If the Mayor vetoes this Resolution, it shall become effective immediately upon override of the veto by the City Commission. Submitted Into the public' record in connection with item Pz ss on -w-c4. Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk City of Miami Page 2 of 2 Printed On: 10/28/2005 Page 1 of 1 Santiago ECHEMENDIA - Hearing - January 26th From: Elizabeth Bernardo To: michael@penrods.com Date: 1/23/2006 10:54 AM Subject: Hearing - January 26th CC: Echemendia, Santiago D. Mr. Register, At Santiago Echemendia's request, I am attaching the Notice of Appearance for the hearing on Thursday, January 26th, for your information. As per your e-mail requesting that Patricia M. Baloyra continue to represent you, this will confirm that we are not representing you, and therefore not be in attendance at the hearing. Sincerely, Elizabeth Bernardo Legal Assistant to Santiago D. Echemendia, Esq. Submitted Into the public record in connection with item Pz.33 on 1- x-c` Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk file://C:\Documents and Settings\sde\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00001.HTM 1/23/2006 tsekib)4- A • INT SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ALLEY CLOSURE S 89'49'36" E 70. g 1- at-. 1LOT "A" 0 ?''✓/P.O.B. l DUE 11f3T 70.0 414.4' N.E. 39th STREET a1 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ?Z. 33 on t • 1t.- 04. Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A PORTION OF AN UNNAMED 14 FOOT ALLEY LYING BETWEEN LOT 19 AND LOT A AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ENTITLED "SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK", ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 5 AT PAGE 25 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI—DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 19 FOR A POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN NORTH 0' 16'27" EAST (ASSUMED BEARING) ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 19 FOR A DISTANCE OF 197.54 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89'49'36" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT A; THENCE RUN SOUTH 016'27" WEST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT "A" FOR A DISTANCE OF 197.50 FEET; THENCE RUN DUE WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.00 FEET TO THE POINT BEGINNING. CONTAINING 2765.28 SQUARE FEET OF LAND, MORE OR LESS. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION: (THIS IS NOT A SURVEY) WE HEREBY CERTIFY: THAT THIS "SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ALLEY CLOSURE", IS TRUE AND CORRECT AS PREPARED UNDER OUR DIRECTION AND THIS "SKETCH OF EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION" COMPLIES WITH THE MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS FOR LAND SURVEYS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, UNDER CHAPTER 472 OF THE STATE STATUTES, 61 G17-6.006. BY: ORDER NO. 13661 A.R. TOUSSAINT & ASSOCIATES, INC. LAND SURVEYORS FLORIDA CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. LB-273 620 N.E. 126 SOMII, FLORIDA 33161 PRES. ALBERT R. TOUSSAINT PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER No. 907 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER No. 8939 STATE OF FLORIDA SHEET 1 OF 1 DATE: SEPTEMBER 06, 2005 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS Case No. 2004-1017 VACATION AND CLOSURE OF A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, BEING THE PORTION OF AN ALLEY APPROXIMATELY NORTH OF NE 39th STREET, EAST OF BISCAYNE BOULEVARD. Pursuant to Section 55-15 (c) of the Miami City Code, the Planning and Zoning Department has reviewed the proposed public right-of-way vacation and closure to determine whether it is in the public interest, or whether the general public would benefit from the vacation of the right-of-way. The following findings have been made: • It is found that this application was presented to the Plat and Street Committee and the tentative Plat was approved 6 to 1 (See attached analysis). • It is found that the vacation of the right of way is required to complete a mixed use redevelopment project. • It is found that upon compliance with conditions set forth below, the proposed right of way vacation will comply with Section 55-15 (c) of the Miami City Code for public benefit . Based on these findings, the Planning Department recommends approval of the request subject to the following condition: 1. The applicant shall comply with all conditions set forth in the approved Final Decision of Class II 05-0235 (See attached). Submitted Into the public' record in connection with item Pt. 33 on , - Pric6;� A. Thompson p City Clerk PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS Case No. 2004-1017 VACATION AND CLOSURE OF A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, BEING THE PORTION OF AN ALLEY APPROXIMATELY NORTH OF NE 39'h STREET, EAST OF BISCAYNE BOULEVARD. Pursuant to Section 55-15 (c) of the Miami City Code, the Planning and Zoning Department has reviewed the proposed public right-of-way vacation and closure to determine whether it is in the public interest, or whether the general public would benefit from the vacation of the right-of-way. The following findings have been made: • It is found that this application was presented to the Plat and Street Committee and the tentative Plat was approved 6 to 1 (See attached analysis). • It is found that the vacation of the right of way is required to complete a mixed use redevelopment project. • It is found that upon compliance with conditions set forth below, the proposed right of way vacation will comply with Section 55-15 (c) of the Miami City Code for public benefit . Based on these findings, the Planning Department recommends approval of the request subject to the following condition: 1. The applicant shall comply with all conditions set forth in the approved Final Decision of Class II 05-0235 (See attached). Submitted Into the p bIfa record in connection with item Z• 33 on I-24.-067 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 0 150 300 600 Feet Address: Tivoli Vacate Alley Submitted Into the public' record in connection with item f2.33 on i•N,-ot; Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 150 Feet Address: Tivoit Vacate Alley Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ?2.33 on t--xr Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk CITY OF MIAMI CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT FINAL DECISION File No. 05-0235 To: From: Patricia Baloyra Tew-Cardenas LLP 1441 Brickell Avenue, 15th Floor Miami, FL. 33131 Ana Gelabert, Director Planning Department PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT A FINAL DECISION HAS BEEN REACHED ON THE FOLLOWING MATTER: Title: New Construction (Tivoli) Address: 3915 Biscayne Blvd., Wynwood/Edgewater Final Decision: ❑ Approval El Approval with conditions ❑ Denial Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P2.33 on %-xi-ab Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS The subject proposal has been reviewed for Class II Special Permit pursuant to Section 620.3, 903.1, 908.13, 1106.1 and 1511 of Ordinance 11000, as amended, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida. Section 620.3 states explicitly that a Class 11 Special Permit shall be required prior to approval of any permit affecting the location, relocation or alteration of any structure, sign, awning, landscaping, parking, area or vehicular way visible from a public street. Section 903.1 states explicitly that a Class II Special Permit shall be required where a project is designed as a single site and it occupies lots divided by a street or alley. Section 1511 requires explicitly that a Class 11 Special Permit shall be required prior to approval for development between Biscayne Bay and first dedicated right of way. Section 1106 states that existing structures which have legal non -conforming status may be enlarged, extended or altered as follows: alterations to principal or accessory structures which do not involve an enlargement or expansion may be permitted pursuant to a Class it Special Permit as long as the degree of the structure's nonconformity remains the same or is decreased and at least 50% of the square footage of the original building is proposed to remain. Pursuant to Section 1301.2. of the above cited Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Department has made referrals to the following Departments and Boards. • Zoning Division, Zoning Department. • Wynwood/Edgewater NET Office, Neighborhood Enhancement Team. • UDRB, Urban Development Review Board. Their comments and recommendations have been duly considered and are reflected in this intended decision. In reviewing this application, pursuant to Section 1305 of the Zoning Ordinance, the following findings have been made: FINDINGS Submitted Into the public record in connection with item z�s3 _on l- x-oh Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk it is found that the proposal consists of a new multifamily residential project (72 units) with parking garage and the conversion of an existing commercial building (Hamilton) to residential (16 units). • It is found that the proposed project was initially reviewed by the Internal Design Review Committee (IDRC) on November 2, 2004. The committee recommended sending it back to the architect in order to give the opportunity to respond to the committee comments. • It is found that modified proposals were reviewed by the Design Review Committee on November 16 and 30, 2004, April 12 and 26, 2005 and July 12 , 2005, but some of the original comments were still pending and had not been resolved at that time. On July 26, 2005, a final modified project was reviewed and recommended for approval with a condition by the Internal Design Review Committee. On December 15, 2004, the Urban Development Review Board reviewed and recommended approval with conditions the subject proposal. • It is found that that the proposed alteration to the existing legal non -conforming structure (Hamilton Building) will not increase its degree of non -conformity as per City of Miami Zoning Ordinance. • It is found that the proposed project was designed as a single project and it occupies Tots divided by an alley. • It is found that the landscape plan submitted with this application complies with the Miami -Dade Landscape Ordinance; however, pursuant to staff review, additional landscape details need to be provided regarding the final planting plan prior to its installation and additional shade trees should be incorporated into the site perimeter. It is found that with regard to the criteria set forth in Sec. 1305 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance, the application has been reviewed and found sufficient except for the issues listed above and contained in the conditions. Based on the above findings and the considered advice of the officers and agencies consulted on this matter and pursuant to Section 1306 of the Zoning Ordinance, the subject proposal is hereby approved with conditions subject to the plans submitted by the applicant and on file with the Planning Department and further subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall provide the Planning Department with a temporary construction plan that includes the following: a temporary construction parking plan, with an enforcement policy and a construction noise management plan with an enforcement policy. 2. The Class II approval is conditioned on a full review by the Office of Zoning, any substantial changes that arise due to zoning comments will require a new Class 11 Special Permit; minor changes due to zoning comments shall be considered substantially in compliance with this approval. 3, The applicant shall comply with the condition addressed by the IDRC, specifically on reducing the variety of window shapes and sizes for the building on Biscayne Blvd. 4. The applicant shall provide the Planning Department with a final planting plan. 5. The applicant shall modify the landscape plan in order to provide additional shade trees along the public right-of-way and site perimeter. 2 All truck maneuvering shall be limited to on -site movements; backing up of trucks into the public right-of-way shall be prohibited. 7. The applicant shall be required to apply separately for the required vacation of the existing alley in order to implement the project as submitted. A substantial modification of this project shall be required if the alley is not vacated. NOTICE The final decision of the Director may be appealed to the Zoning Board by any aggrieved party, within fifteen (15) days of the date of issuance by filing a written appeal and appropriate fee with the Office of Hearing Boards, located at 444 S.W. 2nd Avenue, 7th Floor, Miami, Fl. 33139. Telephone number (305) 416-2030. Signature Ana Gelabert, Di &.U42I4 7` . Date Q / IOS Planning Department Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ?• 35 on t-?G^o( Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk;' PUBLIC WORKS ANALYSIS FOR VACATION AND CLOSURE OF AN ALLEY NORTH OF N.E. 39 STREET EAST OF BISCAYNE BOULEVARD The Plat and Street Committee has reviewed the tentative plat of "Tivoli Subdivision" and determined that all technical requirements contained in the Miami City Code Subdivision Regulations have been met and has approved the tentative plat. The members of the Plat and Street Committee have further considered the criteria contained in the Subdivision Regulations of the City Code concerning the vacation and closure of the alley north of N.E. 39 Street east of Biscyane Boulevard and has voted 6 in favor and 1 in denial of this vacation and closure request. Submitted Into the public record in connection with item Pz. 33 on l - aG -Dt• Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk April 11, 2005 Thirty Ninth Street Investors Group, LLC 11111 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 715 Miami, FL 33181 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: TIVOLI SUBDIVISION (FIRST RESUBMITTAL) TENTATIVE PLAT #1666-A Located along the North side of NE 39 Street, East of Biscayne Boulevard JOE ARRIOLA City Manager Submitted Into the public record in connection with item 172.33 on t-240-al. Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk The City of Miami Plat and Street Committee, at its meeting of April 7, 2005, approved the above tentative plat subject to the following revisions being made to the tentative plat, additional information being provided and/or variances being granted. Please be advised that the processing of your tentative plat cannot proceed until these conditions have been satisfied. 1) In the location sketch: (a) Correct the zoning district designation lines. 2) In the title block include the name of the county: MIAMI-DADE COUNTY. 3) Provide a distance and a bearing for each proposed lot tine; it also applies to the monument line and the centerline of each adjacent street. 4) Provide the square footage for the area to be dedicated as right-of-way by this plat. 5) An opinion of title for the remnant portions of Lots 13, 14 and A will be required at the final plat submittal. 6) A plat approval letter form the F.D.O.T. is required at the time of final plat submittal. A copy of the final plat must be submitted to the F.D.O.T., not a copy of the tentative plat. 7) Provide a statement as to the proposed development intent. 8) Show the proposed 25-foot corner radius, with curve date, at the Southwest corner of the proposed plat. If the existing building is to remain, a request for the waiver of the 25-foot corner radius design standard must be submitted to the Supervisor of Plats. 9) Existing utilities in the alley to be closed and vacated must be relocated or easements must be created. 10) An opinion of title in the City of Miami opinion of title form must be provided at the time of final plat submittal. C:\Documents and Settings\rfindling\Resktal3W IMEEtRl1AKESCC KS\TIVOLI SUBDIVISION.doc 444 S.W. 2nd Avenue / Miami, Florida 33130 / (305) 416-1200 / Fax:(305) 416-2152 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 330708 Miami, Florida 33233.0708 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P on t_ Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Thirty Ninth Street Investors Group. LLC TIVOLI SUBDIVISION (FIRST RESUBMITTAL) TENTATIVE PLAT #1 666-A April 11, 2005 Page Two 11) All encroachments across proposed tract lines, if any, must be removed prior to final plat submittal. 12) An opinion of title as to the reversionary rights for the alley to be closed and vacated will be required by the Zoning Board. The opinion of title must also address whether or not there are individuals, in addition to the abutting property owners, having an interest in the alley to be closed and vacated. A copy of the opinion of title must be provided to the Public Works Department. 13) Clarify the tract boundary lines. 14) Correct the dimensions and radius for the easement on the North and East sides of the tentative plat to conform to Fire Department requirements. 15) The Zoning Board will require a sketch and legal description, with a square footage on an 8 '/z "X 11 paper, for the proposed closure. Contact Teresita Fernandez, Chief of the Hearing Boards, at 305-416-2030. Provide a copy to the Department of Public Works. 16) Current backup documentation will be required for all who execute the final plat. A resolution for authority to execute documents and a Certificate of Good Standing from the Secretary of State are required, if applicable. 17) Tentative plat application must be made with Miami -Dade County after receiving approval from the City of Miami Plat and Street Committee. 18) Before final plat submittal to the City, a copy of each the final plat and the opinion of title must be submitted to Miami -Dade County for review and then retrieved and submitted to the City. 19) Provide a letter from the Zoning Administrator that the remnant parcel of Lots 13 and 14 (Northwest corner of the block) is a legal, non -conforming building site. 20) The Plat and Street Committee has reviewed the tentative plat of Tivoli Subdivision" and determined that all technical requirements contained in the Miami City Code Subdivision Regulations have been met and has approved the tentative plat. The members of the Plat and Street Committee have further considered the request for vacation and closure of the easements with respect to Miami City Code requirements and have voted 6 in favor and 1 in denial of this vacation and closure request. C:\Documents and Settings\rfindling\Desktop\MyDirectory\RESOLUTS\TiVOU SUBDIVISION.doc Thirty Ninth Street Investors Group. LLC TIVOLI SUBDIVISION (FIRST RESUBMITTAL) TENTATIVE PLAT #1 666-A April 11, 2005 Page Three In addition to the above requirements, you should be aware of the following: 1. State and local laws require the installation of various physical improvements in the public rights -of -way when property is platted. These subdivision improvements include paving, drainage, landscaping, sidewalks, etc. In some cases this could represent a substantial investment on your part. 2. The alteration, relocation or installation of utilities such as storm and sanitary sewers, electric, telephone, water, etc. caused by this plat will be at the property owner's expense. Also, utility easements may be required on the property being platted. 3. A building permit will not be issued on the property being platted until the final plat Is recorded. Also, the Certificate of Occupancy for any building construction will be issued only after all the required subdivision improvements have been completed. 4. Approval for fire flow requirements must be obtained from the Fire -Rescue Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 5. Additional items must be provided to the City of Miami Department of Public Works before the final plat is submitted to the City Commission for approval. You will be notified in writing as to what these items are after the amount of the bond has been determined for the necessary subdivision improvements. 6. Tentative plat approval is only valid for one (1) year form the date of the Plat and Street Committee meeting at which time it was approved. If you have any questions concerning these requirements, please refer to the attached sheet for the appropriate person to contact. Sincerely, • Francis Mitchall, PE Signing for S hanie N. Grindeli, P. E. StePhanie Grind* PE Chairman, Plat and Street Committee SNG/UH/mp Enclosure: Contact Sheet, MDWSD letter C: bc: A. R. Toussant & Associates, Inc. 620 NE 126 Street North Miami, FL 33161 Plat and Street Committee Members Surveys Civil Engineering Central Submitted into the public record in connection with item `'?. 33 on i , _ 0 (0, Pi :"ho P City Clerk C:\Documents and Settings\rfindling\Oesktop\MyDirectory\RESOLUTS\TiVOLU SUBOIVISION.doc Miami Zoning Board Resolution No.: 2005-1072 Monday, October 17, 2005 Mr. Carlos Martell offered the following resolution and moved its adoption Resolution: AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTORS SET FORTH IN ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDED APPROVAL TO THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE OFFICIAL VACATION AND CLOSURE OF AN ALLEY NORTH OF NORTHEAST 39TH STREET, EAST OF BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT "A" (HEREBY ATTACHED), PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; ZONED R-3 MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. THIS OFFICIAL VACATION AND CLOSURE WAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT: THE APPLICANT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE APPROVED FINAL DECISION OF CLASS II 05-0235. Upon being seconded by Ms. Chloe Keidaish, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: Mr. Charles J. Flowers Yes Mr. Miguel Gabela Yes Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza Away Mr. Charles A. Garavaglia Yes Ms. Ileana Hernandez -Acosta No Ms. Chloe Keidaish Yes Mr. Carlos Martell Yes Mr. Juvenal A. Pina No Mr, Angel Urquiola Yes AYE: 6 NAY: 2 ABSTENTIONS: 0 NO VOTES: 0 ABSENT: 1 Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 6-2 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item r2--33 on -24-D( Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk eresita L. Ferna`ndez, Executive Seer tary Hearing Boards Case No. 2005-1017 Item Nbr: 8 SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ALLEY CLOSURE j 8 h ri S 89'49'36' E 70.0' 19 J74.0' g ', J j „.„ JW JJ/ N � / "CI)Q N.E. 39th STREET LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A PORTION OF AN UNNAMED 14 FOOT ALLEY LYING BETWEEN LOT 19 AND LOT A AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ENTITLED "SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK", ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED iN PLAT BOOK 5 AT PAGE 25 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAM1—DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: O N w { I LOT 'A" b 1 4,`B. P.0.8. EAST UNE LOT 19 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item PZ. 33 on aI Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 19 FOR A POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN NORTH 016.27" EAST (ASSUMED BEARING) ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 19 FOR A DISTANCE OF 197.54 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89'49'36" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.00 ELEI TO A POINT ON THE WEST UNE OF SAID LOT A; THENCE RUN SOUTH 0'16'27" WEST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT "A" FOR A DISTANCE OF 197.50 I - LEI; THENCE RUN DUE WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.00 FEET TO THE POINT BEGINNING. CONTAINING 2765.28 SQUARE FEET OF LAND, MORE OR LESS. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION: (THIS IS NOT A SURVEY) WE HEREBY CERTIFY: THAT THIS "SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ALLEY CLOSURE", IS TRUE AND CORRECT AS PREPARED UNDER OUR DIRECTION AND THIS "SKETCH OF EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION" COMPUES WITH THE MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS FOR LAND SURVEYS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, UNDER CHAPTER 472 OF THE STATE STATUTES, 61 G17-6.006. ORDER NO. 13661 A.R. TOUSSAINT & ASSOCIATES, INC. LAND SURVEYORS FLORIDA CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. LB-273 620 N.E. ] 6 S3.Ai40F} ;I Mt I, FLORIDA 33161 BY: ALBERT R. TOUSSAINT PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER No. 907 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER No. 8939 STATE OF FLORIDA SHEET 1 OF 1 PRES. DATE: SEPTEMBER 06, 2005 Section 2210. Nature and Requirements of Zoning Board Report to City Commission Circle appropriate condition(s): Submitted Into the public record in connection with item Z. 33 on t- -t Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk When pertaining to the rezoning of land under application made under Article 22, the report and recommendation of the Zoning Board shall show that the Zoning Board has studied and considered, where applicable, whether or not: a) The proposed change conforms with the adopted Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan and does not require a plan amendment. b) The proposed change is in harmony with the established land use pattern. c) The proposed change is related to adjacent and nearby district. d) The change suggested is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the city. e) The proposed change maintains the same or similar population density pattern and thereby does not increase or overtax the Toad on public facilities such as schools, utilizes, streets, etc. f) Existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. g) Changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed change necessary. h) The proposed change positively influences living conditions in the neighborhood. i) The proposed change has the same or similar impact on traffic and does not affect public safety to a greater extent than the existing classification. j) The proposed change has the same or similar impact on drainage as the existing classification. k) The proposed change has the same or similar impact on light and air to adjacent areas as the existing classification. 1) The proposed change has the same or similar impact on property values in the adjacent area as the existing classification. m) The proposed change will contribute to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accord with existing regulations. n) The proposed change conveys the same treatment to the individual owner as to owners within the same classification and the immediate area and furthers the protection of the public welfare. o) There are substantial reasons why the use of the property is unfairly limited under existing zoning. p) It is difficult to find other adequate sites in the surrounding are for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. Motion: After considering the factors set forth in Section 2210 of Ordinance No. 11000, I move that the reque n agend tem #be recommended to the Cit ommission for (approval) Of -Pal . / Signathre ` / Print Name TEW • CARDEN MIAMI • TALLAHASSEE • WASHINGTON DC PATRICIA M. BAI.O1 RA WRmt I:R's . DIII};ci LINE: 305.536.8481 pmb .tewlaw.com September 6, 2005 Via Hand Delivery Mrs. Teresita Fernandez Office of Hearing Boards City of Miami 444 SW 2nd Avenue, 7th Floor Miami, FL 33130 Re: Tivoli - Alley Vacation and Closure Application Dear Mrs. Fernandez: FOUR SEASONS TOWER 15rf1 FLOOR 144.1 BRICKELL AVENUE MIAlMI, FLORIDA 33131--3407 T 305.536.1112 F 305.536,1116 WWW.TEW AW.CC)M Submitted Into the public' record in connection with item ?Z. 33 on 1- Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk On behalf of 39' Street Investors Group, LLC, this firm submits the enclosed public hearing application for vacation and closure of a private alley on the property located at approximately 3915 Biscayne Boulevard (the "Alley"). The Alley is approximately 197.52 feet long and 14 feet wide. The vacation and closure of the Alley will facilitate unification of the property for intended residential development. Thank you. Sincerely, atricia M. I3aloyra Enclosure cc: Santiago D. Echemendia, Esq. ''FDesktopk:ODMA/MHODMA/MIAMI;444494; HEARING BOARDS 444 SW 2"d Avenue, 7th Floor • Miami, Florida 33130 Telephone 305-416-2030 • Fax 305-416-2035 www.miamigov.com PUBLIC HEARING APPLICATION FOR AN OFFICIAL VACATION AND CLOSURE OF A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY Welcome to Hearing Boards! This application is intended to serve as a guide in acquainting you with our public hearing process. By any means, please feel free to contact us at the number above, should you have any questions. CITY OF MIAMI ORDINANCE NO. 11469, CODIFIED IN CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE VI OF THE CITY CODE STATES THAT ANY PERSON WHO RECEIVES COMPENSATION, REMUNERATION OR EXPENSES FOR CONDUCTING LOBBYING ACTIVITIES TO REGISTER AS A LOBBYIST WITH THE CITY CLERK, PRIOR TO ENGAGING IN LOBBYING ACTIVITIES BEFORE CITY STAFF, BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND THE CITY COMMISSION. A COPY OF SAID ORDINANCE IS AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK (MIAMI CITY HALL), LOCATED AT 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33133. Copies of lobbyist documentation with proof of payment must be submitted with the complete application. The responses to this application must be typed and must be signed in black ink. The deadline to file the complete application, along with pertinent documents, is the first five working days (1-5) of each month —unless extended because of a holiday —from 8:00 am until 3:00 pm. If you like, you could bring the materials to our office for staff review before the deadline to ensure the application is complete. Please note that the cashier on the 4th floor will close at 4:00 pm; therefore, a paid receipt must be submitted before the deadline. You will be responsible, if needed, to bring an interpreter for the English language to any presentation before city boards, committees and the city commission. A valid power of attorney will be required if neither applicant or legal counsel representing the applicant execute the application or desire to make a presentation before city boards, committees and the city commission. Copies of City Commission resolutions can be obtained at our website through the 'Legislative Hub", or for certified copies, contact the City Clerk's Office at 305-250-5360. Rev. OB-08-05 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P2 53 on l e Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 1, Patricia M. Baloyra, on behalf of _39th Street investorr04p, LLC hereby apply to the Miami City Commission for approval in accordance with ttap#r 55 of the Miami City Code, and in support of that request, furnish the following: Win' 1. Two (2) copies of the Tentative Plat prepared by a State of Florida registered land surveyor. 2. Two (2) original surveys of the property prepared by a State of Florida registered land surveyor within six (6) months from the date of the application. 3. Two (2) original sketch of surveys, prepared by a State of Florida Registered Land Surveyor showing only the area to be vacated or closed and the pertinent legal description of the area, within one year from the date of application. 4. The property/location listed does not have any open code enforcement/lien violations. 5. At least two photographs that show the entire property (land and improvements). 6. A clear and legible copy of the recorded warranty deed and tax forms of the most current year that shows the present owner(s) and legal description of the property. 7. A clear and legible copy of the subject property address and legal description on a separate sheet of paper, labeled as "Exhibit A". 8. Affidavit and disclosure of ownership of the subject property (see pages 4 and 5). 9. Certified list of owners of real estate within 500 feet of the subject property (see pages 6 and 7). 10. What is the acreage of the project/property site? Approximately 3.19 acres 11. What is the purpose of this application/nature of proposed use? Please see accompanying letter of intent 12. Is the property within the boundaries of a historic site, historic district or archeological zone? Please contact the Planning Department on the 3`d Floor for information. No 13. Is the property within the boundaries of an Environmental Preservation District? Please contact the Planning Department on the 3`d Floor for information. No Rev. 08-08-05 2 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item PZ. jon Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 14. For corporations and partnerships, the following documents are to be submitted: a) Articles of Incorporation b) Certificate from Tallahassee less than one (1) year old showing good standing c) Corporate Resolution or a Power of Attorney signed by the secretary of the Corporation authorizing the person who signed the application to do so d) For non-profit organizations only: A list of Board of Directors Tess than one (1) year am 15. All documents, reports, studies, exhibits (8 % x11") or other materials to be submitted at the hearing shall be submitted with this application and will be kept as part of the record. 16. Cost of processing according to Section 62-156 of the Miami City Code: Signet Name Vacation of public right-of-way: (a) Original submittal: Per square foot of right-of-way $ .90 Minimum $ 1,200.00 (b) Re -submittal: Per square foot of right-of-way Minimum Maximum $ .90 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,700.00 Public hearing and public meeting mail notice fees, including cost of handling and mailing per notice $ 3.50 PPtr rip Y, RPloyr2 Telephone (3n5) Slh-,1112 Tew Cardenas LLP Address 1441 Brickell Avenue, 15th Floor Miami, Florida 33131 Date 6 wr Z'c05 E-mail Address pmhidtewl aw. com STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE The foregoing was acknowledged before me this (` 2-) day of 20 05 ,by Patricia M, Balovra who is a(n) individual/partner/agent/corporation of a(n) individual/partnership/corporation. He/She is personally known to me or who has produced as identification and who did (did not) take an oath. (Stamp) Signa(re 4„n. Elizabeth Berrerdo Ait: M, Conrnisaian o0201009 al' Bemires April 7 2007 Rev. 08-08-05 3 Submitted Into the public' record in connection with item 1Z`33 on ( ce Priscilla A. Tho pson City Clerk AFFIDAVIT Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ? z . 33 on 1- Prisccli. Thompson City Clerk Before me, the undersigned, this day personally appeared Patricia M. Baloyra , who being by me first deposes aid says: 1. That he/she is the owner, or the legal representative of the owner, submitting the accompanying application for a public hearing as required by the Code of the City of Miami, Florida, affecting the real property located in the City of Miami, as described and listed on the foregoing pages of this affidavit and made a part thereof. 2. That all owners which he/she represents, if any, have given his/her full and complete permission for him/her to act in his/her behalf for the change or modification of a classification or regulation of zoning as set out in the foregoing petition, In including or 0 not including responses to day to day staff inquires. 3. That the foregoing pages are made a part of this affidavit contain the current names, mailing addresses, telephone numbers and legal descriptions for the real property of which he/she is the owner or legal representative. 4. The facts as represented in the application and documents submitted in conjunction with this affidavit are true and correct. Further Affiant sayeth not. Patricia M. Baloyra Applicant Name �'' Grp ant Signature STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE The foregoing was acknowledged before me this day of�rr.e- 20 05 , by Patricia M. Baloyra who is a(n) individual/partner/agent/corporation of a(n) individual/partnership/corporation. He/She is_personally known to me or who has produced as identification and who did (did not) take an oath. jj (Stamp) e`r'�'k. fib`"' do Signarture •y • Mr cor ,lion oo2mode Rev. 08-08-05 .►r1 Ypres April 7 2007 4 Address: DISCLOSURE OF OWNERSHIP Legal description and street address of subject real property: 3915 Biscayne Boulevard 405 N.E. 39 Street 443 N.E. 39 Street 447 N.E. 39 Street 455 N.E. 39 Street 521 N.E, 39 Street Legal Description: PARCEL A: Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ?Z. 33 on ► -a.- 61- Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk The South 149.88 feet of that part of Lot 13 that lies East of Biscayne Boulevard, the South 149.88 feet of Lot 14, and all of Lots 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 and the West 20 feet of Lot A, LESS the South 8.00 feet for road purposes, SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 5, at Page 25, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida, together with all right, title and interest, if any, in that portion of the 14 foot wide alley lying between said Lot 19 and Lot A and lying North of and contiguous to the Northerly boundary of said Lots 18 and 19, bounded as follows: On the West by the Northerly projection of the West boundary of said Lot 18 and bounded on the South by the Easterly projection of the South boundary of said Lot 19 to its point of intersection with West boundary of Lot A. PARCEL B: The East 75 feet of the West 230 feet of Lot A, of SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK, according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 25, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida. PARCEL C: The East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot "A," MAGNOLIA PARK, Second Amended, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Rook 5, at Page 25, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida, less easement of the North or rear 10 feet of the East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot "A" MAGNOLIA PARK, a Subdivision according to the second amended Plat thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Miami -Dade County, Florida, recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 25, thereof. 2. Owner(s) of subject real property and percentage of ownership. Note: The Code of the City of Miami requires disclosure of all parties having a financial interest, either direct or indirect, in the subject matter of a presentation, request or petition to the City Commission Accordingly, question #2 requires disclosure of shareholders of corporations, beneficiaries of trusts, and/or any other interested parties, together with their addresses and proportionate interest_ Biseaya 39th Group, LLC (50%) 1111 1 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 715 Miami, Florida 331.81 Thomas W. Fawcll (70%) Stephanie Herman (30%) 1 1 1 11 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 715 Miami, Florida 33181 Thirty Ninth Street Investors Group, LLC 11111 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 715 Miami, Florida 33 18l Deerfield 39'h Street Investors, LLC (50%) 5524 Eton Court Boca Raton, Florida 33486 David Hirshfeld (100%) 5524 Eton Court Boca Raton, Florida 33486 3. Legal description and s u eet address of any real property (a) owned by any party listed in answer to_i iestion #2, co ad and (b) located within 500 feet of the subject real property. None Owner or Attorney for Owner Narne f tb,ZnA t.A • etax- r+� tow Caivtu^,wS t-t--P STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE Owner or Attorney for Owner Signature The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this �` ^ day of , 2004, by Patricia Baloyra, Esq., on behalf of Thirty Ninth Street Investors Group, LLC. She is personally known to and did not take an oath. (Stamp) Y? Wit&i iv, 1,;:...,.: '' Commission iri)021 ii O4 ' :- . .� Expires: Nov 13, 2007 ,14. 0 Bottled Tluu wu �'i" Atlantic gondiegCo.,Inc. @PFDesktop\::ODMAIMtIODMA/MTAML;428375;1 Submitted Into the publiali record in connection with item � ` 3:on Thompson City Clerk PROPERTY ADDRESSES AND DESCRIPTIONS Addresses: 3915 Biscayne Boulevard 405 N.E. 39 Street 443 N.E. 39 Street 447 N.E. 39 Street 455 N.E. 39 Street 521 N.E. 39 Street Property Descriptions: PARCEL A: Submitted Into the public. record in connection with item F z. 33 on t - T{o -0 b Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk The South 149.88 feet of that part of Lot 13 that lies East of Biscayne Boulevard, the South 149.88 feet of Lot 14, and all of Lots 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 and the West 20 feet of Lot A, LESS the South 8.00 feet for road purposes, SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 5, at Page 25, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida, together with all right, title and interest, if any, in that portion of the 14 foot wide alley lying between said Lot 19 and Lot A and lying North of and contiguous to the Northerly boundary of said Lots 18 and 19, bounded as follows: On the West by the Northerly projection of the West boundary of said Lot 18 and bounded on the South by the Easterly projection of the South boundary of said Lot 19 to its point of intersection with West boundary of Lot A. PARCEL B: The East 75 feet of the West 230 feet of Lot A, of SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK, according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 25, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida. PARCEL C: The East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot "A," MAGNOLIA PARK, Second Amended, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 5, at Page 25, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida, less easement of the North or rear 10 feet of the East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot "A" MAGNOLIA PARK, a Subdivision according to the second amended Plat thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Miami -Dade County, Florida, recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 25, thereof. ®PFDeskbp\_ODMNMHODM VMIAM(;428061;1 SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ALLEY CLOSURE S SIT49'36- E 70.0' W 1,%7 LOT "A" 19 9a ,0 8�,•j P.0.8. �l►� DUE WEST 70.0" 14.0',I '14- O at N.E. 39th STREET rn J Submitted Into the public record in connection with item _?? • 33 on I - -04 P1 r; 1 Thompson City Clerk LEGAL DESCRIPTION:--------.------------._-___._..----...--------_-.____-. A PORTION OF AN UNNAMED 14 FOOT ALLEY LYING BETWEEN LOT 19 AND LOT A AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ENTITLED "SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK", ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 5 AT PAGE 25 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI—DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 19 FOR A POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN NORTH 0'16'27" EAST (ASSUMED BEARING) ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 19 FOR A DISTANCE OF 197.54 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89'49'36" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT A; THENCE RUN SOUTH 0'16'27" WEST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT "A" FOR A DISTANCE OF 197.50 FEET; THENCE RUN DUE WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.00 FEET TO THE POINT BEGINNING. CONTAINING 2765.28 SQUARE FEET OF LAND, MORE OR LESS. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION: (THIS IS NOT A SURVEY) WE HEREBY CERTIFY: THAT THIS "SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ALLEY CLOSURE", IS TRUE AND CORRECT AS PREPARED UNDER OUR DIRECTION AND THIS "SKETCH OF EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION" COMPLIES WITH THE MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS FOR LAND SURVEYS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, UNDER CHAPTER 472 OF THE STATE STATUTES, 61 G 17-6.006. ORDER NO. 13661 A.R. TOUSSAINT & ASSOCIATES, INC. LAND SURVEYORS FLORIDA CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. LB-273 620 N.E. 116 SZ.,yN011 MI I, FLORIDA 33161 BY: ALBERT R. TOUSSAINT PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER No. 907 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER No. 8939 STATE OF FLORIDA SHEET 1 OF 1 PRES. DATE: SEPTEMBER 06, 2005 Return to Rhia Wrnant Chicaljo Title Insurance Co. 5447 Nude Davis Lane Tampa. FL 33634 7.cx) O0293 This instrument prepared by, Record and Return to: Beth E. Linzner, Esq. Beth E. Linzner, P.A. 2295 NW Corporate Blvd. #235 Boca Raton, FL 33431 Property Appraiser's Parcel Identification (Folio) Number(s): 01 32 79 011 0010 Submitted Into the public record in connection with • item ?2-33 on t-).to-bto Priscilla A. Thompson City€�c 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 CFN 2O'3 5ROO'='2,692 OR i?k. 22962 F'as 1564 - 1565; (2v9s) RECORDED 01/03!2005 12:53:42 DEED DOC TAX 0,60 SURTAX 0.45 HARVEY RUVINt CLERK_ OF COURT t1IAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA QUIT -CLAIM DEED (Wherever used herein the terms "first party" and "second party" shall include singular an& plural; heirs,-legal-representatives;and-assigns-of-individuals;-and-the successors and assigns of corporations, and all pronouns and any variations thereof shall be deemed to refer to the 'masculine, ferninine, neuter, singular or plural wherever the context so admits or requires.) THIS INDENTURE is made this j"'2iay of December, 2004 between Gerald S. Berke!! (party of the first part), as Trustee and member of the last Board of Directors of 39th Street Apartments, Inc., whose post office address is 1463 SW 156t" Way, Pembroke Pines, Florida 33027 to Thirty Ninth Street investors Group, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company whose address. is 1111 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 715, Miami, Florida 33181 (party of the second part). _ WITNESSEFH, that the said party of the first part, in consideration of the sum of Ten and 00/100 Dollars ($10.00), in hand paid by the said party of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does hereby remise, release and quitclaim unto the said party of the second part, their heirs, successors, and assigns forever, all of the right, title, interest, claim and demand which the said party of the first part has in and to the following, described land, situate, and being in the County of Miami -Dade, State of Florida, to -wit: The East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot "A, MAGNOLIA PARK, Second Amended, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 5 at Page 25 of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida less easement on the North or rear ten feet of the East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot "A", MAGNOLIA PARK, a subdivision according to the second amended plat thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Dade County, Florida recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 25 thereof. To have and to hold the same together with all and singular the appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, all the estate, right,title interest, lien, equity and claim whatsoever of the said party of the first part,either in law or in equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behalf of the second party forever. OR BK 22962 PG 1565 LAST PAGE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said party of the first part has hereunto set its hand and seal the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered i the presence of: STATE OF FLORIDA ) )—SS- COUNTY OF BROWARD) Gerald S. Berke U, as Trustee 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized in the State aforesaid and in the County aforesaid to take acknowledgments, personally appeared Gerald S. Berkell who is personally known to me to be the person described in pip who executed the foregoing instrument or who SJA- has produced e.Q"91/ ( J�fli G U/.4 as identification and who swore and acknowledged bef a me that he executed the same, and who took an oath. WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County a nd State last aforesaid this ad day of hetoilifiA2o04. OTARY PUBLIC 0te—v-47, My. Commission Expires:. S. Edward Gillette. y 37I` �o� . ?D05 �i��� Pn�.r� Ati�dic Bot co.-, TIC. Submitted Into the public record c nnection with item 17Z33 on l-24-oco ',-hompson City Clerk This Instrument Prepared by and Return to: Paul A. Lester, Esq. FIELDSTONE LESTER SHEAR & DENBERG, LLP 201 Alhambra Circle, Suite 601 Coral Gables, Florida 33134 1111111111111111110111111111111131111111111 CFN 2O O4RO9913647 OR Bk 22812 P9S 332E - 3331; (4v9s) RECORDED 11/10/2004 11:37:05 DEED DOC TAX 0.60 SURTAX 0.45 HARVE7 RUVIH, CLERK OF COURT t1IAt1I-DADS COUNTY, FLDRIDA Submitted Into the public record in connection with item F'a 33 on '-24-D6 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Parcel Tax I.D. No. 01-3219-011-0010; 01-3219-011-0160; 01-3219-011-0170; 01-3219-011- 0180; 01-3219-011-0190; 01-3219-011-0020; 01-3219-011-0050 SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED (Wherever used herein, the terms "Grantor" or "Grantee" shall include the heirs, personal representatives, successors and/or assigns of the respective parties hereto; the use of the singular number shall include the plural, and the plural the singular; and the use of any gender shall include all genders) THIS SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED, made this 18th day of October, 2004 between NELTNOR HL INVESTORS, LLC, an Illinois limited liability company, ("Grantor"), whose mailing address is 11111 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 715, Miami, Florida 33181, and THIRTY NINTH STREET REVOCABLE STATUTORY TRUST, a Delaware Revocable Statutory Trust ("Grantee"), whose mailing address is 1111 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 715, Miami, Florida 33181. WITNESSETH That Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey to Grantee, Grantee's heirs, successors, and assigns forever, the following described real property ("Property"), situate, lying and being in Miami -Dade County, Florida_ SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO. Book22812/Page3328 CFN#20040998647 Page 1 of 4 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P a. on 1- u, -Ola Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk TOGETHER, with all the tenements, herediments, and appurtenances belonging thereto or in anywise appertaining. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the Property unto Grantee and Grantee's heirs, successors and assigns in fee simple forever. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTARY STAMPS OR SURTAX IN CONNECTION WITH THIS CONVEYANCE SINCE IT IS A CONVEYANCE FROM A GRANTOR TO A TRUST OF WHICH THE GRANTOR 1S THE SOLE BENEFICIARY. SUBJECT TO taxes for 2004 and theraljer appl'tcablc zoning ordinances and land use designations, and any conditions, restrictions, reservations, limitations and easements of record; if any, but this provision shall not operate to reimpose same. AND, Grantor does hereby covenant with Grantee that, except as noted above, title to the property is free from all encumbrances made by Grantor, and Grantor warrants and will defend the Property against the Iawful claims of all persons claiming by, under or through Grantor, but against none other. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal the day and year first above written. Witnessed by: 0,4{0 A.RFV W/A10 ` 1:1"-*- lAitier Hite NELTNOR HL INVESTORS, LLC, an Illinois limited liability co By: Name: Thomas A. Fawell Title: Manager (CORPORATE SEAL) Book22812/Page3329 CFN#20040998647 Page 2 of 4 STATE OF FthOR LIA l._. ) COUNTY ) D�� �- u ss: Submitted Into the public record in connection with item Q2.33 on 1- 4-b( Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk The foregoing instrinncnt was acknowledged before me this /d day of October, 2004 by Thomas A. Fawell, as Manager of NELTNOR III. INVESTORS, LLC, an Illinois limited liability company. He is personally known to me orplvdne op ` cif. 1V4otary Public - Stafe off Commission No.: "OFFICIAL SEAL" DAWN HAUPT Notary Public. State of Illinois My Commission Expires 11 FIiuBRARY eliaW\Fewcf -39tth Sttido s'Spcciat Wn m*y Dccd-dos Book22812/Page3330 CFN#20040998647 Page 3 of 4 EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL A OR 8K 22812 PG 3331 LAST PAGE Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ??, 33 on i-No' D(� Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk The South 149.88 feet of that part of Lot 13 that ties East of Biscayne Boulevard, the South 149.88 feet of lot 14, and all of Lots 15,18, 17, 18, and 19 and the West 20 feet of Lot A, LESS the South 8.00 feet for road purposes. SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 5, at Page 25. of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County. Florida, together with a8 fight, tftIe and interest, If any, in that portion of the 14 foot wide alley lying between said Lot 19 and Lot A and tying North of and contiguous to the Northerly boundary of said Lots 18 and 19, bounded as follows: On the West by the Northerly projection of the West boundary of said Lot 18 and bounded on the South by the Easterly projection of the South boundary of said Lot 19 to its point of intersection with West boundary of Lot A. PARCEL B: The East 75 feet of the West 230 feet of Lot A, of SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK, according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 5. Page 25, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County. Florida. PARCEL C: The East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot W. MAGNOUA PARK, Second Amended, according to the Plat thereof, recorded In Plat Bodo 5. at Page 25, of the Pubes Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida, less easement of the North or mar 10 feet of the East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot 'A' MAGNOUA PARK. a Subdivision wording the second amended Plat thereof on fled in the office of the Cierk of the Circuit Court in and for Miami -Dade County, Florida. recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 25. thereof. Book22812/Page3331 CFN#20040998647 Page 4 of 4 SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ALLEY CLOSURE S 89'49'36" E 70.0' LOT "A" i9 ix 70 0 P.�. .0$ DUE NEST 70.0' d14.0: j 0 i N.E. 391h STREET Submitted Into the public record in connection witi item PZ.33 on 1-9co-o�o Priscilla A. Thompson City Cleek LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A PORTION OF AN UNNAMED 14 FOOT ALLEY LYING BETWEEN LOT 19 AND LOT A AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ENTITLED "SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOUA PARK", ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 5 AT PAGE 25 OF THE PUBUC RECORDS OF MIAMI—DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 19 FOR A POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN NORTH 0'16'27" EAST (ASSUMED BEARING) ALONG THE EAST UNE OF SAID LOT 19 FOR A DISTANCE OF 197.54 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89'49'36" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT A; THENCE RUN SOUTH 0'16'27" WEST ALONG THE WEST UNE OF SAID LOT "A" FOR A DISTANCE OF 197.50 FEET; THENCE RUN DUE WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.00 FEET TO THE POINT BEGINNING. CONTAINING 2765.28 SQUARE FEET OF LAND, MORE OR LESS. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION: (THIS IS NOT A SURVEY) WE HEREBY CERTIFY: THAT THIS "SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ALLEY CLOSURE", IS TRUE AND CORRECT AS PREPARED UNDER OUR DIRECTION AND THIS "SKETCH OF EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION" COMPLIES WITH THE MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS FOR LAND SURVEYS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. UNDER CHAPTER 472 OF THE STATE STATUTES, 61G17-6.006. ORDER NO. 13661 A.R. TOUSSAINT & ASSOCIATES, INC. LAND SURVEYORS FLORIDA CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. LB-273 62E.,,1,2¢ STNOR 31i MIAMI, FLOP,IDA 33161 BY: ALBERT R. TOUSSAINT PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER No. 907 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER No. 8939 STATE OF FLORIDA SHEET 1 OF 1 PRES. DATE: SEPTEMBER 06, 2005 TEW 3 CARDENA MIAMI • TALLAHASSEE • WASHINGTON DC PATRICIA M. RALO1 RA WRITER'S 1)IR1:cT LINE: 305.536.8481 L-1t:a I I .: pmbcci)tewlaw.com September 6, 2005 Via Hand Delivery Mrs. Teresita Fernandez Office of Hearing Boards City of Miami 444 SW 2nd Avenue, 7th Floor Miami, FL 33130 Re: Tivoli - Alley Vacation and Closure Application Dear Mrs. Fernandez: FOUR SEASONS COWER 15TH FLOOR 1441 BRICKELL AVENUE M! AMI, FLORIDA 331 31 --3407 T 305.336.1112 I= 305.536.1116 WWW.TE:wlAW.CO M Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ? Z. 33 on t - -Dip Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk On behalf of 39th Street Investors Group, LLC, this firm submits the enclosed public hearing application for vacation and closure of a private alley on the property located at approximately 3915 Biscayne Boulevard (the `Alley"). The Alley is approximately 197.52 feet long and 14 feet wide. The vacation and closure of the Alley will facilitate unification of the property for intended residential development. Thank you. Sincerely, atricia M. Baloyra Enclosure cc: Santiago D. Echemendia, Esq. @PFDesktop\::ODMA/MHODMA/MIAMI;444494;1 HEARING BOARDS 444 SW 2nd Avenue, 7th Floor • Miami, Florida 33130 Telephone 305-416-2030 • Fax 305-416-2035 www.miamigov.com PUBLIC HEARING APPLICATION FOR AN 0 rvw Submitted Into the public record in connection with item t'2.33 on 1-310-06 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk OFFICIAL VACATION AND CLOSURE OF A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY Welcome to Hearing Boards! This application is intended to serve as a guide in acquainting you with our public hearing process. By any means, please feel free to contact us at the number above, should you have any questions. CITY OF MIAMI ORDINANCE NO. 11469, CODIFIED IN CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE VI OF THE CITY CODE STATES THAT ANY PERSON WHO RECEIVES COMPENSATION, REMUNERATION OR EXPENSES FOR CONDUCTING LOBBYING ACTIVITIES TO REGISTER AS A LOBBYIST WITH THE CITY CLERK, PRIOR TO ENGAGING IN LOBBYING ACTIVITIES BEFORE CITY STAFF, BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND THE CITY COMMISSION. A COPY OF SAID ORDINANCE IS AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK (MIAMI CITY HALL), LOCATED AT 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33133. Copies of lobbyist documentation with proof of payment must be submitted with the complete application. The responses to this application must be typed and must be signed in black ink. The deadline to file the complete application, along with pertinent documents, is the first five working days (1-5) of each month —unless extended because of a holiday —from 8:00 am until 3:00 pm. If you like, you could bring the materials to our office for staff review before the deadline to ensure the application is complete. Please note that the cashier on the 4th floor will close at 4:00 pm; therefore, a paid receipt must be submitted before the deadline. You will be responsible, if needed, to bring an interpreter for the English language to any presentation before city boards, committees and the city commission. A valid power of attorney will be required if neither applicant or legal counsel representing the applicant execute the application or desire to make a presentation before city boards, committees and the city commission. Copies of City Commission resolutions can be obtained at our website through the "Legislative Hub", or for certified copies, contact the City Clerk's Office at 305-250-5360. Rev. 08-08-05 Patricia M. Baloyra, on behalf of .39th Street lnvestor4rglp, LLC E In II) hereby apply to the Miami City Commission for approval in accordance with (,iar 55 of the Miami City Code, and in support of that request, furnish the following: 165 1. Two (2) copies of the Tentative Plat prepared by a State of Florida registered land surveyor. 2. Two (2) original surveys of the property prepared by a State of Florida registered land surveyor within six (6) months from the date of the application. 3. Two (2) original sketch of surveys, prepared by a State of Florida Registered Land Surveyor showing only the area to be vacated or closed and the pertinent legal description of the area, within one year from the date of application. 4. The property/location listed does not have any open code enforcement/lien violations. 5. At least two photographs that show the entire property (land and improvements). 6. A clear and legible copy of the recorded warranty deed and tax forms of the most current year that shows the present owner(s) and legal description of the property. 7. A clear and legible copy of the subject property address and legal description on a separate sheet of paper, labeled as "Exhibit A". 8. Affidavit and disclosure of ownership of the subject property (see pages 4 and 5). 9, Certified list of owners of real estate within 500 feet of the subject property (see pages 6 and 7). 10. What is the acreage of the project/property site? Approximately 3.19 acres 11. What is the purpose of this application/nature of proposed use? Please see accompanying letter of intent 12. Is the property within the boundaries of a historic site, historic district or archeological zone? Please contact the Planning Department on the 3rd Floor for information. No 13. Is the property within the boundaries of an Environmental Preservation District? Please contact the Planning Department on the 3rd Floor for information. No Rev. 08-08-05 2 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item `e2.33 on� Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk .:_V 14. For corporations and partnerships, the following documents are to be submitted: a) Articles of Incorporation cx, In b) Certificate from Tallahassee less than one (1) year old showing good standing c) Corporate Resolution or a Power of Attorney signed by the secretary of the Corporation authorizing the person who signed the application to do so tl. d) For non-profit organizations only: A list of Board of Directors Tess than one (1) year r$d 15. All documents, reports, studies, exhibits (8 1/2 x11 ") or other materials to be submitted at the hearing shall be submitted with this application and will be kept as part of the record. 16. Cost of processing according to Section 62-156 of the Miami City Code: Signat Name Vacation of public right-of-way: (a) Original submittal: Per square foot of right-of-way $ .90 Minimum $ 1,200.00 (b) Re -submittal: Per square foot of right-of-way Minimum Maximum $ .90 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,700.00 Public hearing and public meeting mail notice fees, including cost of handling and mailing per notice $ 3.50 Patricia Y. RLoyra Telephone ( ins) S16-1 I 1 9 Tew Cardenas LLP Address 1441 Brickell Avenue, 15th Floor Miami, Florida 33131 Date 6 `4"T ZtJD5 E-mail Address pmb(dtewJ aw. com STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE The foregoing was acknowledged before me this `re day of ...41)0,-y-z„6.4 ,. 20 05 ,by Patricia M, Baloyra who is a(n) individual/partner/agent/corporation of a(n) individual/partnership/corporation. He/She is -ersonally known to me or who has produced as identification and who did (did not) take an oath. (Stamp) Etzaben Betnerciz 9 • My Commission CO201009 r,di E'+Pros Apil 7 2007 Rev. 08-08-05 3 Signor re 7 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item 72.3.3 on fi->fp -o` Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk AFFIDAVIT Submitted Into the public record in connection with item SILAL.on I •)4 - bL Priscilla .,Thompson City Clerk Before me, the undersigned, this day personally appeared Patricia M Ba.iovra , who being by me first deposes a says: 1, That he/she is the owner, or the legal representative of the owner, submitting the accompanying application for a public hearing as required by the Code of the City of Miami, Florida, affecting the real property located in the City of Miami, as described and listed on the foregoing pages of this affidavit and made a part thereof. 2. That all owners which he/she represents, if any, have given his/her full and complete permission for him/her to act in his/her behalf for the change or modification of a classification or regulation of zoning as set out in the foregoing petition, lJ including or 0 not including responses to day to day staff inquires. 3. That the foregoing pages are made a part of this affidavit contain the current names, mailing addresses, telephone numbers and legal descriptions for the real property of which he/she is the owner or legal representative. 4. The facts as represented in the application and documents submitted in conjunction with this affidavit are true and correct. Further Affiant sayeth not. Patricia M. Baloyra Applicant Name STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE ant Signature The foregoing was acknowledged before me this day ofs/-rr� 20 05 , by Patricia M. Baloyra who is a(n) individual/partner/agent/corporation of a(n) individual/partnership/corporation. He/She is personally known to me or who has produced as identification and who did (did not) take an oath. Bernardo (Stamp) j"""''�. , Commisoon CO201009 Rev. 08-08-05 �n ►� April 7 2007 4 Sign t(ire 1. Address: DISCLOSURE OF OWNERSHIP Legal description and street address of subject real property: 3915 Biscayne Boulevard 405 N.E. 39 Street 443 N.E. 39 Street 447 N.E. 39 Street 455 N.E. 39 Street 521 N.E. 39 Street Legal Description: PARCEL A: Submitted Into the public record in connection with item 12. 33 on ( - 319 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk The South 149.88 feet of that part of Lot 13 that lies East of Biscayne Boulevard, the South 149.88 feet of Lot 14, and all of Lots 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 and the West 20 feet of Lot A, LESS the South 8.00 feet for road purposes, SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK., according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 5, at Page 25, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida, together with all right, title and interest, if any, in that portion of the 14 foot wide alley lying between said Lot 19 and Lot A and lying North of and contiguous to the Northerly boundary of said Lots 18 and 19, bounded as follows: On the West by the Northerly projection of the West boundary of said Lot 18 and bounded on the South by the Easterly projection of the South boundary of said Lot 19 to its point of intersection with West boundary of Lot A. PARCEL B: The East 75 feet of the West 230 feet of Lot A, of SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK, according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 25, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida_ PARCEL C: The East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot "A," MAGNOLIA PARK, Second Amended, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 5, at Page 25, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida, less easement of the North or rear 10 feet of the East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot "A" MAGNOLIA PARK, a Subdivision according to the second amended Plat thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Miami -Dade County, Florida, recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 25, thereof. 2. Owner(s) of subject real property and percentage of ownership_ Note: The Code of the City of Miami requires disclosure of all parties having a financial interest, either direct or indirect, in the subject matter of a presentation, request or petition to the City Commission. Accordingly, question in requires disclosure of shareholders of corporations, beneficiaries of trusts, and/or any other interested parties, together with their addresses and proportionate interest Biscaya 39th Group, LLC (50%) 11111 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 715 Miami, Florida 33181 Thomas W. Fawell (70%) Stephanie Merman (30%) 11 111 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 715 Miami, Florida 3 318 l Thirty Ninth Street Investors Group, LLC 11 111 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 715 Miami, Florida 33181 Deerfield 39' Street Investors, LLC (50%) 5524 Eton Court Boca Raton, Florida 33486 David Hirshfeld (100%) 5524 Eton Court Boca Raton, Florida 33486 3. Legal description and street address of any real property (a) owned by any party listed in answer to restion #2, and (b) located within 500 feet of the subject real property None Owner or Attorney for Owner Name - ' - •A• fow CU c..-sas STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE Owner or Attorney for Owner Signature The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of Baloyra, Esq., on behalf of Thirty Ninth Street Investors Group, LLC. She is personally known to #ne and did not take an oath. (Stamp) •.sois = Commission Nl. » vU4 n- •e7 Expires: Nov 13, 2007 '.�'t' Bonded ihru ���p ���', Atlantic wing Co , Inc. @PFDesktop\:ODMA/MHODMA/MIAMI;428375; i , 2004, by Patricia Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P2. 33 on l X -o ( Prise ;ia A. Thompson City Clerk PROPERTY ADDRESSES AND DESCRIPTIONS Addresses: 3915 Biscayne Boulevard 405 N.E. 39 Street 443 N.E. 39 Street 447 N.E. 39 Street 455 N.E. 39 Street 521 N.E. 39 Street Property Descriptions: PARCEL A: The South 149.88 feet of that part of Lot 13 that lies East of Biscayne Boulevard, the South 149.88 feet of Lot 14, and all of Lots 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 and the West 20 feet of Lot A, LESS the South 8.00 feet for road purposes, SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 5, at Page 25, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida, together with all right, title and interest, if any, in that portion of the 14 foot wide alley lying between said Lot 19 and Lot A and lying North of and contiguous to the Northerly boundary of said Lots 18 and 19, bounded as follows: On the West by the Northerly projection of the West boundary of said Lot 18 and bounded on the South by the Easterly projection of the South boundary of said Lot 19 to its point of intersection with West boundary of Lot A. PARCEL B: The East 75 feet of the West 230 feet of Lot A, of SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK, according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 25, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida. PARCEL C: The East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot "A," MAGNOLIA PARK, Second Amended, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 5, at Page 25, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida, less easement of the North or rear 10 feet of the East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot "A" MAGNOLIA PARK, a Subdivision according to the second amended Plat thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Miami -Dade County, Florida, recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 25, thereof. @PFT)csksap\7:0DMA/MHODMA/MIAMI;428061;1 Submitted Into the public' q 22:,:o n action with itc. . [ 2.J7 on '�O"�� r ri eillu A. 1I. ,rfl1ason City Clerk SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ALLEY CLOSURE S 81149'36" E 70. 19 P.0.0. DUE NEST 70.0" /14.0' f 8 LOT "A Submitted Into the public record in connection with item Mrs s on 1-' ro'' Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 6 N.E. 39th STREET LEGAL DESCRIPTION: — — — A PORTION OF AN UNNAMED 14 FOOT ALLEY LYING BETWEEN LOT 19 AND LOT A AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ENTITLED "SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK", ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 5 AT PAGE 25 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI—DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 19 FOR A POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN NORTH 0'16'27" EAST (ASSUMED BEARING) ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 19 FOR A DISTANCE OF 197.54 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89'49'36" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT A; THENCE RUN SOUTH 0'16'27" WEST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT "A" FOR A DISTANCE OF 197.50 FEET; THENCE RUN DUE WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.00 FEET TO THE POINT BEGINNING. CONTAINING 2765.28 SQUARE FEET OF LAND, MORE OR LESS. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION: (THIS 1S NOT A SURVEY) WE HEREBY CERTIFY: THAT THIS "SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ALLEY CLOSURE", IS TRUE AND CORRECT AS PREPARED UNDER OUR DIRECTION AND THIS "SKETCH OF EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION" COMPUES WITH THE MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS FOR LAND SURVEYS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, UNDER CHAPTER 472 OF THE STATE STATUTES, 61 G 17-6.006. BY: ORDER NO. 13661 A.R. TOUSSAINT & ASSOCIATES, INC. LAND SURVEYORS FLORIDA CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. LB-273 620 N.E. 126 ST.,N0MIAAAI. FLORIDA 33161 ALBERT R. TOUSSAINT PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER No. 907 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER No. 8939 STATE OF FLORIDA SHEET 1 OF 1 PRES. DATE: SEPTEMBER 06, 2005 Return to Rhia Wrnant Chica0o True Insurance Co. 54-47 Nellie Davis Lane Tampa, FL 33634 7.0d-40(oZ93 This instrument prepared by, Record and Return to: Beth E. Linzner, Esq. Beth E. Linzner, P.A. 2295 NW Corporate Blvd. #235 Boca Raton, FL 33431 Property Appraiser's Parcel Identification (Folio) Number(s): 01 32 79 011 0010 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item r2.33 on 1- to-ol, Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 1 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1111 GFht 2c' ciSR.0002692 OR Bk. 22962 P s 1564 - 1565; (2P9s) RECORDED 01/03/2005 12:53:42 DEED DOC TAX O.60 SURTAX 0.45 HARVEY RUVIFIr CLERK OF COURT IMIAIII-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA QUIT -CLAIM DEED (Wherever used herein the terns 'first party" and "second party" shall include singular and- plural; heirs; legal- representatives, and -assigns -of -individuals -and -the -successors and assigns of corporations, and all pronouns and any variations thereof shall be deemed to refer to the *masculine, feminine, neuter, singular or plural wherever the context so admits or requires.) THIS INDENTURE is made this ay of December, 2004 between Gerald S. Berke!! (party of the first part), as Trustee and member of the last Board of Directors of 39th Street Apartments, Inc., whose post office address is 1463 SW 156t" Way, Pembroke Pines, Florida 33027 to Thirty Ninth Street Investors Group, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company whose address is 1111 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 715, Miami, Florida 33181 (party of the second part). _ WITNESSETH,. that the said party of the first part, in consideration of the sum of Ten and 00/100 Dollars ($10.00), in hand paid by the said party of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does hereby remise, release and quitclaim unto the said party of the second part, their heirs, successors, and assigns forever, all of the right, title, interest, claim and demand which the saki party of the first part has in and to the following, described land, situate, and being in the County of Miami -Dade, State of Florida, to -wit: The East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot "A", MAGNOLIA PARK, Second Amended, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 5 at Page 25 of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida Tess easement on the North or rear ten feet of the East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot "A", MAGNOLIA PARK, a subdivision according to the second amended plat thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Dade County, Florida recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 25 thereof. To have and to hold the same together with all and singular the appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, all the estate, right, title interest, lien, equity and claim whatsoever of the said party of the first part, either in law or in equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behalf of the second party forever. OFF BK 22962 PG 156 LAST PAGE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said party of the first part has hereunto set its hand and sear the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered irfthe presence of: eggititi )16/ Print e: %//!.42)0 _ . . Print ame: STATE OF FLORIDA ) —SS: COUNTY OF BROWARD) I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized in the State aforesaid and in the County aforesaid to take acknowledgments, personally appeared Gerald S. Berkell who is personally known to me to be the person described in a d who executed the foregoing instrument or who has produced „knc� t2J41 as identification and who swore and acknowledged bef&_23,.4i/e me that he ex>cuted the same, and who took an oath. WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this a d I y o f OTARY PUBLIC tue17'45 My Commission Expires: wacon.aissumf S. Edwarjlette5ep>� nFZ Asiatic Bones Co, InG Submitted Into the public record in connection with itern PZ - 3_ 3on 1-21,-454 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk This Instrument Prepared by and Return to: Paul A. Lester, Esq. FIELDSTONE LESTER SHEAR & DENBERG, LLP 201 Alhambra Circle, Suite 601 Coral Gables, Florida 33134 11111111111111111 Iiila J11111Nii 1111111111111 CFN 2004R0998.647 OR 8k 22812 P9s 332E - 3331i (49ss) RECORDED 11 /1O/20b)4 11:37:08 DEED DDC TAX 0.60 SURTAX 0.45 HARVEY RUVIU, CLERK OF COURT t1IAt1I-DADE COUNTY? FLDRIDA Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ?Z.33 on Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Parcel Tax I.D. No. 01-3219-011-0010; 01-3219-011-0160; 01-3219-011-0170; 01-3219-011- 0180; 01-3219-011-0190; 01-3219-011-0020; 01-3219-011-0050 SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED (Wherever used herein, the terms "Grantor" or "Grantee" shall include the heirs, personal representatives, successors and/or assigns of the respective parties hereto; the use of the singular number shall include the plural, and the plural the singular; and the use of any gender shall include all genders) THIS SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED, made this 18th day of October, 2004 between NELTNOR HL INVESTORS, LLC, an Illinois limited liability company, ("Grantor"), whose mailing address is 11111 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 715, Miami, Florida 33181, and THIRTY NINTH STREET REVOCABLE STATUTORY TRUST, a Delaware Revocable Statutory Trust ("Grantee"), whose mailing address is 1111 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 715, Miami, Florida 33181. WITNESSETH That Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey to Grantee, Grantee's heirs, successors, and assigns forever, the following described real property ("Property"), situate, lying and being in Miami -Dade County, Florida_ SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO. Book22812/Page3328 CFN#20040998647 Page 1 of 4 Si bmittC .d q;-‘]to the public record in connection with item P'Z • 33 on t -2fo -b(. Priscilla A. Thompson `".... City Clerk TOGETHER, with all the tenements, herediments, and appurtenances belonging thereto or in anywise appertaining. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the Property unto Grantee and Grantee's heirs, successors and assigns in fee simple forever. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTARY STAMPS OR SURTAX IN CONNECTION WITH THIS CONVEYANCE SINCE IT IS A CONVEYANCE FROM A GRANTOR TO A TRUST OF WHICH THE GRANTOR IS THE SOLE BENEFICIARY. SUBJECT TO taxes for 2004 and them afleLapplicable zoning ordinances and land use designations, and any conditions, restrictions, reservations, limitations and easements of record; if any, but this provision shall not operate to reimpose same. AND, Grantor does hereby covenant with Grantee that, except as noted above, title to the property is free from all encumbrances made by Grantor, and Grantor warrants and will defend the Property against the lawful claims of all persons claiming by, under or through Grantor, but against none other. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal the day and year fast above written. Witnessed by: v0N / Lwhev- T4fEr Hite- NELTNOR HL INVESTORS, LLC, an Illinois limited liability co ,s .. ,y By: Name: Thomas A. Fawell Title: Manager (CORPORATE SEAL) Book22812/Page3329 CFN#20040998647 Page 2 of 4 , STATE OF rA) COUNTY ) D ss: Submitted Jr t- the public record in connection with item ?2. 33 on t - . - o. Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this /d day of October, 2004 by Thomas A. Fawcll, as Manager of NELTNOR HL INVESTORS, LLC, an Illinois limited liability company. He is personally known to me orprodut d bit AL— otary Public - Stateoffl di a Commission No.: H3UaRARYK7irntsWIwd -39di Stclocs'Spocial Wananty Deed. AK • "OFFICIAL SEAL' DAWN HAUPT ▪ Notary Pubfic, Slate of Illinois • My Commission Expires 111Q7106 1 Book228121Page3330 CFN#20040998647 Page 3 of 4 EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL A: OR BK 22812 PG 3331 LAST PAGE SubMiri, Into the public record in connection with item Pz-33 on 1-710-be, Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk The South 149.88 feet of that part of Lot 13 that lies East of Biscayne Boulevard, the South 149.88 feet of Lot 14. and ail of Lots 15, 18, 17,18, and 19 and the West 20 feet of Lot A, LESS the South 8.00 feet for road purposes, SECOND AMENDED PEAT OF MAGNOUA PARK, according to the Plat thereof. as recorded in Plat Book 5, at Page 25, of the Pubfc Records of Miami -Dada County. Florida, together with all right, tile and interest, if any. in that portion of the 14 foot wide altay tying between said Lot 19 and Lot A and lying North of and contiguous to the Northerly boundary of said Lots 18 and 19, bounded as folows: On the West by the Northerly projection of the West boundary of said Lot 18 and bounded on the South by the Easterly projection of the South boundary of said Lot 19 to Is point of intersection with West boundary of Lot A. PARCEL B: The East 75 feet of the West 230 feet of Lot A, of SECOND AMENDED PEAT OF MAGNOUA PARK, according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 5. Page 25, of the Public Records of Miatnt-Dade County, Florida. PARCEL C: The East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot 'A', MAGNOUA PARK. Second Amended. according to the Plat thereof, recorded In Plat Book 5. at Page 25. of the Pubes Records of Miami -Dade County. Florida, less easement of the North or rear 10 feet of the East 135 feet of the West 155 feet of Lot "A' MAGNOUA PARK, a Subdivision according the second amended Plat thereof on tined In the otfioa of the Cleric of the Circuit Court in and for Mlarnl-Dade County. Florida, recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 25. thereof. Book22812/Page3331 CFN#20040998647 Page 4 of 4 SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ALLEY CLOSURE $ 89.49'76' £ 72 !LOT 19 n / / 0 DUE M35T 70.0. ,d14A40' 1 N.E. 39th STREET LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A PORTION OF AN UNNAMED 14 FOOT ALLEY LYING BETWEEN LOT 19 AND LOT A AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ENTITLED "SECOND AMENDED PLAT OF MAGNOLIA PARK", ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 5 AT PAGE 25 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: •A" Sutvr gd Into the public rc.. x; d i; . connection with itcin PZ -33 On I- 2 ,-ot, Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Z W COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 19 FOR A POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN NORTH 0'16'27" EAST (ASSUMED BEARING) ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 19 FOR A DISTANCE OF 197.54 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89'49'36" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST UNE OF SAID LOT A; THENCE RUN SOUTH 0'16'27" WEST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT "A" FOR A DISTANCE OF 197.50 FEET; THENCE RUN DUE WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.00 FLLI TO THE POINT BEGINNING, CONTAINING 2765.28 SQUARE FEET OF LAND, MORE OR LESS. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION; (THIS IS NOT A SURVEY) WE HEREBY CERTIFY: THAT THIS "SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ALLEY CLOSURE", IS TRUE AND CORRECT AS PREPARED UNDER OUR DIRECTION AND THIS "SKETCH OF EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION" COMPLIES WITH THE MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS FOR LAND SURVEYS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. UNDER CHAPTER 472 OF THE STATE STATUTES, 61 G 17-6.006. ORDER NO. 13661 A.R. TOUSSAINT & ASSOCIATES, INC. LAND SURVEYORS FLORIDA CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. LB-273 62,E._1_+ STnNOR31 MIAMI. FLORIDA 33161 BY: ALBERT R. TOUSSAINT PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER No. 907 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER No. 8939 STATE OF FLORIDA SHEET 1 OF 1 PRES. DATE: SEPTEMBER 06, 2005 Case Number: 2005-1017 ZONING FACT SHEET Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P7-33 on l -2(0 -01 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 17-Oct-05 Item 8 Location: See Request Below. Legal: (Complete legal description on file with the Department of Hearing Boards) Applicant: Patricia M. Baloyra, Esquire, on behalf of 39th Street Investors Group, LLC 1441 Brickell Avenue 15th Floor Miami, FL 33131 (305) 536-1112 Zoning: R-3 Multifamily Medium -Density Residential Request: Official vacation and closure of an alley North of NE 39`h Street, East of Biscayne Boulevard. Purpose: This will allow a unified residential property. Recommendations: Planning Department: Public Works: Plat and Street Committee: Approval with conditions. Approval with conditions. Approval on April 7, 2005 by a vote of 6-1. Analysis: See supporting documentation. Zoning Board Resolution: ZB 2005-1072 Zoning Board: Recommended approval with a condition to City Commission. City Commission: November 17, 2005 Legistar File Number: 05-01227 Vote: 6-2 Case Number: 2005-1017 ZONING FACT SHEET Submitted Into the public recoi ;. i connection with item J22.33on t Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 17-Oct-05 Item 8 Location: See Request Below. Legal: (Complete legal description on file with the Department of Hearing Boards) Applicant: Patricia M. Baloyra, Esquire, on behalf of 39th Street Investors Group, LLC 1441 Brickell Avenue 15th Floor Miami, FL 33131 (305) 536-1112 Zoning: R-3 Multifamily Medium -Density Residential Request: Official vacation and closure of an alley North of NE 39th Street, East of Biscayne Boulevard. Purpose: This will allow a unified residential property. Recommendations: Planning Department: Public Works: Plat and Street Committee: Approval with conditions. Approval with conditions. Approval on April 7, 2005 by a vote of 6-1. Analysis: See supporting documentation. Zoning Board Resolution: ZB 2005-1072 Zoning Board: Recommended approval with a condition to City Commission. City Commission: Continued on November 17, 2005. Legistar File Number: 05-01227 Vote: 6-2 Case Number: 2005-1017 ZONING FACT SHEET Submitted Into the public record i; connection with item ?Z. 35on!^-x=°6 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 17-Oct-05 Item 8 Location: See Request Below. Legal: (Complete legal description on file with the Department of Hearing Boards) Applicant: Patricia M. Baloyra, Esquire, on behalf of 39th Street Investors Group, LLC 1441 Brickell Avenue 15th Floor Miami, FL 33131 (305) 536-1112 Zoning: R-3 Multifamily Medium -Density Residential Request: Official vacation and closure of an alley North of NE 39th Street, East of Biscayne Boulevard. Purpose: This will allow a unified residential property. Recommendations: Planning Department: Public Works: Plat and Street Committee: Approval with conditions. Approval with conditions. Approval on April 7, 2005 by a vote of 6-1. Analysis: See supporting documentation. Zoning Board Resolution: ZB 2005-1072 Zoning Board: Recommended approval with a condition to City Commission. City Commission: Continued on November 17, 2005 and December 1, 2005. Legistar File Number: 05-01227 Vote: 6-2 City Commission Meeting Minutes December 1, 2005 Ms. Thompson: Chairman Sanchez? Chairman Sanchez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Thompson: Vice Chairman Gonzalez? Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Thompson: The resolution is adopted, 4/1. Ms. Dougherty: Thank you very much. Applause. Submitted Into the public record in connection with item fZ•s on t-14-d6 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Chairman Sanchez: We can't have that. Save it for the Heat game. All right. Recess five minutes, give us -- Commissioner Winton: Yeah. Chairman Sanchez: -- a chance to -- and then we'll come back. PZ.17 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." 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 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 City of Miami Page 95 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes December 1, 2005 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. Submitted Into the *See supporting documentation.public record in connection with PURPOSE: This will allow a unified residential property. item Pz. 33 on 1 - 24,-0(, Priscilla A. Thompson CONTINUED City Clerk A motion was made by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed unanimously, with Chairman Sanchez and Commissioner Allen absent, to continue Item PZ.17 to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for January 26, 2006. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Do we have the City Attorney present? Maria J. Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): Yes. Chairman Sanchez: Yes. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, we do. We have the City Clerk, we have three Commissioners on the dais. OK, we're going to call PZ.17. Whoever is going to be speaking on PZ. 17, please make sure that you speak on the phone so we can all hear. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Commissioner, we may need to do another swearing in because some people may have come in late. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Whomever is going to speak on this item that haven't been sworn in, please stand up to be sworn in. Madam City Clerk. Ms. Thompson: I need you to raise your right hand, please. The City Clerk administered oath required under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons giving testimony on zoning issues. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ 17 is a request for an official vacation and closure of an alley. It's located north of 39th Street and east of Biscayne Boulevard. The request has been recommended for approval, with conditions, by the Planning Department, approval by the Public Works Department, and approval by the Plat and Street Committee. It was also recommended for approval with a condition by the Zoning Board. The requirements, all the technical requirements have been met on the proposed vacation and closure. The Planning and Zoning Department's conditions were -- this was part of a Class II Special Permit for the Tivoli project. The Class II Special Permit included conditions which were the conditions that the Zoning Board and Planning Department recommended be incorporated into this approval. Other than that, it's been recommended for approval. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Yes, ma'am. Patricia Baloyra: Good afternoon. Patty Baloyra from Tew Cardenas, offices at 1441 Brickell, on behalf of 39th Street Investors Limited, LLC, who is the entity. I have Tom Fawer and City of Miami Page 96 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes Submitted Into the public record in connectiqn with item iZ•33 on Priscilla A. Th•m•son City Clerk December 1, 2005 Stephanie Herman, who are principals in the entity, and the project developers for Tivoli. We're seeking today, specifically, the issue before you is the vacation and closure of the alley that run - - the north/south alley that runs right in the middle of the property. As Lourdes said, the Class 11 was approved with conditions on August 8, 2005, and again, this property is on Biscayne Boulevard, and the developers went for a Class 11. They could have gone for a MUSP (Major Use Special Permit). They could have gone for height on Biscayne Boulevard; they did none of those things. They stayed within the confines of what the Code allows; didn't seek extra, and went for a Class 11 and was approved for that. The alley closure has been recommended for approval by the Plat Committee, by the Planning Department. The T-plat has been approved by the County. The Fire Department doesn't need the alley that runs in the middle of the property, and in fact, we're providing access through a different route in the property, and Fire likes that access better. The alley is private and there's no public access to the alley. We are the owners of the property on either side of the alley. The general public isn't using the alley and never has used the alley. Public benefit to the closure of the alley is the facilitation of this project, the Tivoli development, and the developers had provided green area improvements, including shade trees, sidewalks and benches. The Bay Point homeowners properties -- sorry, Bay Point Property Owners Association filed an appeal of a Class 11, and 1 bring this up because there are some individual members of the, you know, homeowners within Bay Point who are here, and also people from Magnolia Park, which is across the street, who are also here, and we heard them at Zoning Board and we can anticipate what their arguments will be, and they are directed toward the Class 11, not to this alley closure, which is the issue before you. Bay Point Property Owners Association filed an appeal of that Class 11, a timely appeal, then they hired Tucker Gibbs, and then they dismissed the appeal. They also have filed a letter supporting -- the homeowners association has filed a letter supporting this specific application. There are some individual members who are still opposed to the development, and they're seeking this public hearing to inject their objections to the Class 11, but that issue is closed. They don't have any standing on that issue, and nor do they have any standing on this issue. When we were here before the Zoning Board, they presented a plat from 1916, the second amended plat of Magnolia Park. Now, that plat includes only Magnolia Park, so it doesn't benefit anyone at Bay Point; that doesn't provide them any entry into this issue, and also, the plat was issued in 1916, and as properties continue to be developed and subdivided, some of these plats gave general rights to people within the entire plat, and this is one of those types of plats. There were problems with that type ofplatting, as you can see now. They're trying to inject themselves in an alley that doesn't really affect them, and therefore, the Florida Legislature, in 1972, passed what is now Section 177.085, relating to platted streets and reversionary clauses, and basically, what the legislature did in 1972 is they said, we have this weird issue with these plats. We're going to give anyone who has a right, stemming from one of these types of plats, one year to file a claim. Otherwise, those claims are extinguished, so even if they had rights under that prior plat, it's gone because the legislature abolished those types of rights under the plat, so the vacation and closure of this private alley serves a public purpose. The people who are here to speak against it tonight don't really have standing to speak to this issue. Again, they're going to talk to you about the Class 11, which is a settled issue, and we urge your approval of the alley. This issue will come back before the City when the final plat is coming for approval, and Adjust like to reserve time for rebuttal. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: All right. All right. Anyone from the public that wishes to address the Commission in reference to this item, please come forward. Yes, ma'am. Kay Hancock-Apfel: Members of the Commission, my name is Kay Hancock-Apfel. I reside at 550 Saba! Palm Road, Bay Point. I've been requested by 20 property owners, many of whom are present today, to make this collective presentation. Unfortunately, our counsel and fellow property owner, Mark Raymond was to make it. He is the managing partner of Broad and Cassel, and he was unable to because he's in trial. I want to bring to your attention that Section 5515 of the City of Miami Zoning Code, there are four distinct elements, all of which must be satisfied in order to grant the vacating of a public right-of-way. The developer cannot satisfy City of Miami Page 97 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes Submitted Into the public record in connection with item PZ_'3 on i-24-e , Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk December 1, 2005 any of these elements. The first element is whether or not the closure of this public right-of-way is in public interest. or would the general public benefit from the vacating of the right-of-way? The answer is an unequivocal no. The project is not a benefit to the neighborhood. It degrades the neighborhood, as it removes mature trees. The developer seeks to build a structure inappropriate for an R-3 designated property. This project can only be built if the public right-of-way is given to the developer, and result in a large building deep into a neighborhood, which, of course, is designated R-3, adjacent to one of Miami's most beautiful R-1 properties, Bay Point, and one of Miami's most historic neighborhoods, Magnolia Park. Just visualize taking the Blue condominium on 36th Street and 1-95, turn it sideways, and add 200 feet; that is the massiveness of this structure the developer intends to build. There are no set of facts that the developer can present to suggest that there would be any public benefit from closing the public right-of-way. Ask yourself, how does a neighborhood, rich with history and mature trees, benefit from the loss of those trees and a large structure, which does not have sufficient access, if this public right-of-way is vacated? There is none. There is a network of alleys and streets throughout Miami, and in this neighborhood, on 39th Street, east of Biscayne Boulevard, the secondary access is utilized by City garbage trucks, Police, Fire, emergency vehicles will be infringing upon the vacating this public right-of-way. Moreover, there is no secondary access that will be available with this closure. Further, and what is essential to the Commission appreciating and understanding is that it will result in the clogging of a narrow street, and Arlys is going to pass out some pictures of that. The issue is best to be addressed by Mr. Pittman, who lives on 39th Street, but what we do know is that with any new structure on the property in question, there will be a needfor public right-of-way. That need is greater with a new structure with more tenants, and instead of providing the necessary general public use, the developer is seeking to eliminate that access. Therefore, there's an adverse affect on Florida Power and Light, garbage trucks, emergency vehicles, as well as delivery vehicles, the neighborhood and its residents. As 1 said a moment ago, Northeast 39th Street is a narrow street, as you can see from the pictures. Vehicles traveling in opposite directions require one vehicle to pullover and stop to allow the vehicle in the other direction to pass. Garbage trucks, delivery trucks, trash pickup, or any other service vehicle, moving vans, bring traffic to a complete stop. In addition, these 90 units are going to be added, proposed by the developer, to 39th Street will increase the needfor public right-of-way. Additionally, because of the enormous amount of traffic that's now coming from Miami Beach, there is a large back up on 38th Street, and more and more drivers are learning to cut over to 39th Street, so we're getting heavier traffic on 39, not less traffic. Now, we have a developer that is proposing that instead of finding ways to reduce traffic burdens, his request will increase the traffic burden. We believe that this vacation should be granted -- should not be granted, I'm sorry. A traffic study is required, we believe, for the Commission before considering it. Would the vacation or closure of the right-of-way have a beneficial effort -- effect on pedestrians and vehicular traffic in the area? The answer, once again, is no, so we have four elements, none of which can be satisfied by this developer. What more do we know? The staff approved this structure, we believe was a mistake, because it s the City's Code on the turning radius of trucks; does not fit within the site plan, which is a condition obtaining Class 11 Special Permit. The loading zone must be 35 feet from the base building line, the property line, and here it's approximately 15 feet. Additionally, a vehicle must be able to turn around in the delivery area, and the Urban Development Review Board knows that if an overlay was put on the structure, it could not and would not be able to permit such turning around. This proposed closure of the public right-of-way is directly counter to what Commissioner Winton said on June 10, 2004, where he stated, and 1 quote, "I want to send a loud and clear message to the development community that we do not want you to assemblage along these corridors that allow you to build bigger buildings. I don't care if half the neighborhood is in favor." This group of neighbors is not in favor of taking this public property for private use. The vacation of this property -- of this subject's right-of-way is not appropriate, does not satisfy any of the requirements of Section 5515, and for all these reasons, we ask that you, who have the power in the City Commission, to not grant this vacation of this public right-of-way. Thank you. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Next. Yes, ma'am. City of Miami Page 98 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Submitted Into the public record in connection item ?Z= 3� Priscilla A. 7Cii�/mpson Clerk Meeting Minutes December 1, 2005 Arlys Raymond: Good afternoon. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Good afternoon. Ms. Raymond: My name is Arlys Raymond. l live 545 Sabal Palm Road. My husband was here earlier this morning, but was unable to stay. 1 am speaking on behalf of both of us. 1 would like to stress the point that this project is comprised of two C-1 parcels and not merely an assemblage of single zoned parcels. Permitting the closure of this public right-of-way would allow mass assemblage of six lots with different zoning to be constructed in my front yard 150 feet away. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: OK. l think that we need to -- you're addressing the building, you're not addressing the closure of the alley, right? You're talking about the building now, You're not talking about the closure of the alley. What we're discussing here is the closure of the alley, and 1 think that whatever statement you want to make should be in reference of the opposition of the alley closure. Ms. Raymond: Yes, sir, 1 understand, and the closure is of absolutely no benefit to us in any way, shape, or form. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: OK, very good. Ms. Raymond: Thank you. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Next. Geoffrey Bash: Good afternoon. My name is Geoffrey Bash. llive at 448 Northeast 39th Street, and directly across the street from the proposed project. 1 would like to mostly talk to you about unintended consequences that 1 believe are important to you when you're considering the closure of this public right-of-way, and I'm going to talk to you first about the loading zone design; trucks need to maneuver within the property, according to Class 11 Permit requirement. The present configuration does not allow this, and forces our service vehicles to either back onto 39th Street, which is not allow -- Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Once again, we're talking -- you're talking about the Class 11 Permit. Mr. Bash: It directly relates to closing the alley because the alley is centrally located on this property. It's ideally located for service vehicles, so if 1 may continue. The -- so this allows the service vehicles to back onto 391h Street, which is not allowed in the Class 11, or to use the fire lane as an exit way to 39th Street, which the developer has promised in the settlement to Bay Point so that he would remove -- so that they would remove their appeal to the Class 11; that they will not use this fire lane as a service road. When confronted by Magnolia Park residents with this dilemma, the developer said that he would deal with the City. We don't know what that means. The developer has been advised of this as early as December 15, 2004, as set forth in the UDRB (Urban Development Review Board) conditions: "Think about how the services get into the building and how they come out of the building. Some of the services will not work as it is." Condition number six of the Class 11 Special Permit, "All truck maneuvering shall be limited to on -site movements, backing up with trucks into the public right-of-way shall be prohibited." This project is proposing a loading zone at the west end of the complex. It's illogical to assume that any delivery person would walk more than 500 feet with a refrigerator, TV (television), groceries, et cetera, to get from the loading zone to a condo unit. From a functional standpoint, the present public right-of-way location is ideal, coupled with a loading zone as it is centrally located in the project. Service alleys comprise an independent network of streets and traditional City planning. Removing one will have unintended consequences, including but not limited to City of Miami Page 99 Primed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes Submitted Into the public record in connection with item 122.33 on 1- -°4' Priscilla A. Thompson City Gietifiber 1, 2005 the delivery of -- the delivery truck, which will be forced to share streets with automobile traffic. The narrow width of 39th Street would clog up traffic to our home when service vehicles need to stop there. The property has been vacant since the beginning of this year. However, when 3915 Biscayne Boulevard was occupied, this public right-of-way was frequently used by tenants and service vehicles. The Magnolia Park subdivision's presently zoned R-3, allowing 75 dwellings per acre. That kind of density demands alleys as service areas, and eliminating any of them will have an unintended consequence of deteriorating the quality of life for those who choose to live in this area. Eliminating the alley will rearrange the traffic pattern in Magnolia Park; therefore, we would like a traffic study performed by a neutral party. Also, this assemblage of six lots straddles two zoning districts. The Building Department has consistently overlooked the City's own Zoning Code in Section 903.1, a section of the code that limits development of adjoining properties with different zoning districts to the requirements of the less intense district. If blending district regulations was allowed then the entire project could have a maximum height of 95 feet instead of 50 -- Vice Chairman Gonzalez: If you forgive me, you're going into density, you're going into assemble of lots, you're going into tra lc -- Mr. Bash: Yes, and when you allow this public right -- Vice Chairman Gonzalez: -- you're staying away from the alley closure issue, which is what is being considered here and what is being discussed here, the alley issue. What are the reasons why you oppose to the alley closure? Mr. Bash: Because when you -- Vice Chairman Gonzalez: It doesn't have to -- Pardon me? Mr. Bash: May I continue? Vice Chairman Gonzalez: I would appreciate it -- Mr. Bash: Because the alley -- Vice Chairman Gonzalez: -- ifyou concentrate -- Mr. Bash: When you vacate the alley -- Vice Chairman Gonzalez: -- yourself on the alley issues, not on the structure that is supposed to be built there, not on the assemble of the lots, not on the density; on the alley issue. Mr. Bash: You're going to see it. It becomes very clear, OK. Please have patience with me. If the buildings regulation -- if the build district regulations was allowed, then the whole project could have a maximum height of 95 feet instead of 50 feet in the R-3 portion, and the setbacks would be zero instead of 20 feet. What the developer has done is cherry -picked the harmless portions of the ordinance, FAR (floor/area ratio), to blend while observing the more objectional requirements, height and setbacks in your respective districts. Following the letter, the intent of 903.1, the entire project would be designated as R-3. This would make for an FAR of .75 for the entire side rather than the proposed blend, and disallows the additional 38,500 square feet of space the developer's proposing for Tivoli. Nowhere does the City of Miami Zoning Code allow for combining zoning districts. Blended zoning certainly does not exist. Even though no one could find a blended C-1/R-3 district, there is no doubt the transferring FAR across a public right-of-way is even more aggressive idea, this one without precedent. The closing of the public right-of-way allows the developer to blend his FAR even closer to Biscayne Bay. The FAR, as calculated, does not even include the elevator lobbies and some corridors for this number to be City of Miami Page 100 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Submitted Into t ;r; put►R; record in connection�c, with item-- Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Meeting Minutes December 1, 2005 computed properly. Propose the building would exceed the maximum allowable area, even if a blended zoning district, by approximately 8,000 square feet. This is the equivalent of approximately eight units the developer is attempting to build without seeking a variance. The Building Department is concerned about enforcing 903.1, because having overlooked it in the past, it may be easier for them to use a previous (UNINTELLIGIBLE) precedent, rather than admitting fault. New projects along major corridors, Coral Way, LeJeune, Douglas, are evidence that 903.1 was written to ensure compatibility between new and existing construction, and to prevent land assemblage to the detriment of lower scaled neighborhoods. Another unintended consequence, the gifting of this public right-of-way, and we have perhaps, the economy tanks, and we've gifted the public right-of-way to developer, who then is able to turn around and sale it for a profit. We're outraged by this. The petitioner has another set of plans on file with the Hearing Office for a lot coverage variance with an indefinite deferral. What unintended consequence may arise by the vacation of the alley with regards to this other set of plans? 1 ask you to vote no on Item 17 today to preserve the existing separate network of service alleys and vehicular streets. The closure of this service alley will have the unintended consequence of turning 39th Street, where 1 live, into a replacement service alley. Thank you. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Next. Steven Ruggieri: Good afternoon. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Good afternoon. Mr. Ruggieri: My name is Steven Ruggieri. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: I'm going to ask you to please focus yourself on the alley closure because, you know, ifyou start talking about other things that doesn't have anything to do with the alley, strictly the alley closure, you know, that's what we need to concentrate on. That's what we need to hear, what you have to say in reference to that, so we can make the appropriate decision on that matter. Mr. Ruggieri: 1 understand. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. 1 appreciate it. Mr. Ruggieri: My name is Steven Ruggieri. My address is 507 Northeast 38th Street in Magnolia Park. The reason 1 want to speak about the alley closure and the problems that it will bring is that the developer's goal, the reason for the alley closure is to allow a unified parcel, a unified parcel of six assembled lots, six lots that are not contiguous. The developer bought the lots knowing that the alley existed, and is now seeking to close it. The -- by closing the alley, we will have created a mega parcel in our neighborhood where all of the other parcels are considerably smaller. The alley closure -- the developer has given as a reason for the alley closure and a benefit of the alley closure, the development of the Tivoli project. That reason, on its face, is a degradation to our neighborhood, not a benefit. The reason 1 believe that it is not -- no benefit and a degradation to our neighborhood is that in allowing these six parcels to now be completely contiguous by closing the alley, the allowable building that could have been done -- and let me put up another board here. This is the lot as it -- this is the current configuration of the six lots. This -- the first two are C-1, the remaining four are R-3. The -- you will see that the new building -- and this is from the Class 11 Permit. This is from the Class 11 Permit paperwork. The C-1 is here, the first two lots, the R-3 are here. By allowing this alley closure, you allow the developer to take the FAR that could be built on this C-1 and build it here. If you do not allow the alley closure, then you will at least stop the transfer of FAR at the alley rather than allow it to be built further into the C-1 district. This is from the developer's boards on how the FAR is calculated for the district; the C-1 and the R-3. By the calculations -- by the developer's calculations, they will be building on the R-3 lots 1.8 -- 1.08 will be the FAR built on the R-3 City of Miami Page 101 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Submitted 1n' thpublic record in connection with item Pi • 33 on 1- 34.9 -bto Priscilla A. Thompson Meeting Minutes City Clerk ecember 1, 2005 lots. The allowed FAR is .75. That's a 45 percent increase, so by denying this alley closure, you will save our neighborhood this overbuilding, and you will keep the developer from enjoying a benefit that we in the neighborhood do not allow -- do not have. 1 cannot build more than .75 on my property, and it just doesn't seem right that someone should be able to. This happens all over the City, but in this case, it is our neighborhood in jeopardy. I thank you for your time. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Yes, sir. Have you been sworn in? Ken Pittman: Yes. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: You have. Mr. Pittman: My name is Ken Pittman. 1 reside at 452 Northeast 39th Street. I'm the cross -hatched property immediately across from the Tivoli. I've never been in this alley. I've never walked across the street into this alley, but 1 own the alley, and so do each ofyou, and so does everybody who lives in the City of Miami. The other role that you have is that you're stewards of our public land. You have to make a decision what to do with the public land, and you have a fiduciary interest to do with what belongs to all of us the right thing, and make sure there's a benefit to what you do with our land. There is a nuance, apparently, in your own Zoning Code that I've heard all of you talk about that allows the developer to spread FAR down the street from C-1 into R-3 zones. It apparently is lawful. That's what your own Planning and Zoning Board says to you. I moved into my old house across the street, from what I knew was an R-3 zoned piece of property, and there was an apartment building there, and 1 had every reasonable expectation that if that apartment didn't remain, a new and slicker one would replace it. What I didn't have the reasonable expectation of was that a new slicker apartment that exceeded the R-3 limitations would be built, your Planning and Zoning Department tell you guys that's perfectly OK, but now it's different because the only way you can make it perfectly OK is to give something that belongs to me away to somebody else. You need to think very carefully about giving away public land to private developers that enable him to do something, which you have expressed you're opposed to, and that is exceeding your own Zoning Code, the limitations of your own Zoning Code, so it isn't your Zoning Code that's allowing this; it's a public alley giveaway that, in fact, is allowing this increased FAR that you've heard about. Give it away, what the gentleman's going to do is perfectly right and lawful within your Zoning Code, but I say don't give it away because it belongs to me, it belongs to you. It's not going to benefit me to have a bigger building across the street than otherwise would be allowed. 1 don't have a problem with him putting an R-3 proper building on an R-3 lot. 1 have a problem with a bigger building than would otherwise be allowed on an R-3 lot, and 1 have a real problem with you giving something that belongs to me away that enables him to do that, so I've tried to confine my comments to alley closure. It's got nothing to do with Class II Special Permit. It's got to do with reminding you that this alley belongs to all of us, and you guys are the stewards and have the right to do with it the proper thing. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Anybody else? OK. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. Rebuttal. Ms. Baloyra: If I may, thank you. Let me try to clarify something. You keep hearing public trust, public alley, giving away my alley. This is a private alley, owned by these developers. They have the reversionary rights in this alley. You are closing a private alley. It's not a public alley. You have to show some public benefit, even if you're closing a private alley, but it's a private alley. It's not a public alley. It's not a street and it's not a public alley. It's a private alley, so the elements that were addressed as far as these, you know, Section 55 -- or Chapter 55, they're not at stake here. The issue is do we meet the level that we need to show you for this private alley to be closed? Number two, they keep saying that the alley is what lets us bind the properties together to form one site. The alley could stay where it is and we could still bind the properties together and do what we're doing with FAR and with units and whatnot. Whether the City of Miami Page 102 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Submitted Into the public record in connection with item fl- 33 on 1-24,BOG Priscilla A. Thompson Meeting Meeting Minutes City Clerk De}ember 1, 2005 alley is closed or not, the properties are bound by a covenant in lieu ofa unity of title. That can go across an alley and bind properties together. FAR can shift with that covenant in lieu ofa unity of title, and you can ask Lourdes or Orlando to clay* that for you. Let me address -- I know that we're on an alley issue, but I want to address some of the Class 1I issues because they were before you. Number one, this is not Blue turned sideways. I mean, look at the model. This is not Blue. As for the truck backing up and whatnot, the -- your Planning Department and your Zoning Department have reviewed this, and it's been approved in a Class II. This is not a MUSP. We didn't go overboard. With the amount of acreage we have on these properties, we could have put in 255 units. We're building 90 units, so that property could have taken a lot more development, and we've not been greedy about it. We've kept it down. You know, there was a statement about elevator lobbies not counting toward FAR. You know, again, your Planning Department and your Zoning Department have reviewed this; it's been approved, and the elevator lobbies are open-air, and the configuration, if I -- the configuration of this -- the reason why it's short on Biscayne Boulevard and moves back sort of-- it undulates a little, but it's only four stories on Biscayne Boulevard, where we could have gone eight, is through negotiations with staff and with the neighbors. You know, we could have either put a tower on the boulevard and these would have been shorter, but staff didn't want that and neither did the neighbors, so we came up with this and now the other half of the neighbors don't want it because they don't like the configuration this way. This is what staff approved. This is a gorgeous project. It's going to bring a much benefit to the neighborhood, and we, you know -- those are issues that deal with the Class II, but I wanted to address them because they were brought up. We meet the elements ofa vacation ofa private alley. We've gotten recommendations for approval from anybody that we need to get Them from. We've already got the T-plat approved by the County. We're here to ask for you to allow us to close the alley so that we can move to final plat on the property, and the gentleman earlier said he's never been in the alley. It's because it's been closed for 80 years. It's never been used by the public. There's a fence there. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Did that conclude your rebuttal? Ms. Baloyra: If you have any questions, I'll answer them, but I think that's it. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: No. Commissioner Winton. Commissioner Winton: 1 need to understand the legal part of this alley, because I've been sitting here all along focused intensely on the public benefit to closing the alley, and legal counsel said directly that the public benefit is building the development and that's not a public benefit, and so explain the difference in this private alley versus public alley, and Madam City Attorney, you may have to chime in here as well. Let me -- just so you understand where I'm going. If we're closing a public alley and there absolutely has to be a public benefit, we measure the public benefit -- and a development is not a public benefit. I mean, it hasn't been a public benefit since I got here, and I suspect that it's not going to be today or tomorrow or the next day, and closing alleys -- we have actually denied a host of alley closures because it did, in fact, create an opportunity to do -- create a bigger footprint, create a bigger project that couldn't be done practically if you had a smaller site, and I didn't even -- so that's the visual I had. I didn't understand what the building is. Kay Apfel, who's a close friend, I might add, was talking about Blue, but 1 didn't know she was talking about Blue sideways, and so I'm picturing Blue there and I'm saying, we're not having Blue there. That's not going to work, but -- so that's where I'm coming from. That's where I was coming from, but I need to understand this legal differential between public and private alleyway. Maria J. Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): I don't know that I can explain it to you because I'm not quite sure what it is -- what the difference is, so I don't want to do that without knowing -- Commissioner Winton: Is there a difference then, or is there no difference? City of Miami Page 103 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes Submitted Into the public record in connection with itemP 33 on -! Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk December 1, 2005 Ms. Slazyk: The only difference that I've been able to ascertain -- and this is just over years of hearing it -- is that in a public alley, it is a public right -of --way, and we have all the rights on it, just like any other public right-of-way; a private alley, we do not. They are allowed to fence it, and it is not in the public domain. They need it -- you know, in their plat, it's shown on their plat, and they need to remove it from their plat in order to develop, but it isn't a public right-of-way that we are the custodians of, like other public right-of-ways. That's the difference, as far as 1 know. I still think that the criteria does apply to it, and in the review at the Plat and Street Committee, it was determined that it complied with the criteria, including the public benefit, and I think it's -- you know, where the developer may say, yeah, the benefit is we get to develop. At the Plat and Street Committee, that's not what they looked at. The Fire Department couldn't use this private alley as it exist today, and moving the easement for 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. You know, especially in fact that -- you know, given the fact that this was a private alley, not a public right-of-way. Commissioner Winton: Also, in our book in the aerial, I'm looking at the private alleyway as being a straight line coming off of 39th and dead -ending at the boundary line of Bay Point, someone's house at Bay Point. This shows, to me it looks like it's an alleyway that goes from 39th north, and then goes back west to Biscayne Boulevard or -- it's going to have to be Biscayne Boulevard. Which is it? Ms. Baloyra: You want to answer -- Ms. Slazyk: The applicant should be able to answer that. Ms. Baloyra: OK. Commissioner Winton: Could -- Ms. Baloyra: The alley that we are seeking to close is this. It's the one that runs in the middle of the property. Vice Chairman Gonzalez.: Right. Ms. Baloyra: North/south through the middle of the property. You have the property description in your packet. Commissioner Winton: OK. Ms. Baloyra: It is this piece -- Commissioner Winton: OK. Well -- Ms. Baloyra: -- right here. It is not this. It is not the one that runs east/west next to the Bay Point wall. Commissioner Winton: Who drew the east -- ? Ms. Baloyra: It is just this one here. Commissioner Winton: OK, so who drew the east/west segment? Ms. Baloyra: They -- that's their (UNINTELLIGIBLE). City of Miami Page 104 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes December 1, 2005 Commissioner Winton: Oh. but is -- does it exist? Thomas Fawer: Yes. Ms. Baloyra: That alley exists. Commissioner Winton: OK, and that doesn't go away. Ms. Baloyra: That alley does not go away. Submitted Int..) he public record in conncction with item 'P?• 3? on t' Priscilla A. Thompson Clerk ierk Commissioner Winton: OK, so it's only the one that goes north/south that's proposed to be closed? Ms. Baloyra: Correct. Commissioner Winton. OK, and Mr. Chairman, forgive me. I know that this is about alley closure, not development. However, they always seem to get intertwined here, and -- Is the model that I'm looking at right there, is that the development? Ms. Baloyra: Yes. Commissioner Winton: That's the proposed development? Ms. Baloyra: That is. Commissioner Winton: OK. Let me ask directly -- let me ask the applicant directly. Is this the proposed development? Is this the total of the proposed development? Mr. Fawer: This is the total of the proposed development along 39th Street. Ms. Thompson: And I -- Mr. Fawer: There is a mirror -- Unidentified Speaker: No. Mr. Fawer: -- section of this -- Commissioner Winton: Oh, I'm sorry. You have to put your name and address on the record. Mr. Fawer: I'm sorry. My name is Thomas Fawer, 11111 Biscayne Boulevard, Miami. Commissioner Winton: OK, and I'm sorry, so you're -- and this is what now? You were saying - Mr. Fawer: This is the portion of the development that is along 39th Street. This whole section is mirrored along the north side of the property on that wall along Bis -- along Bay Point. It's development with a huge green space of two acres in the middle. Commissioner Winton: So -- and so, what you're saying, so I'm clear, is that that's half there's mirror to that -- Mr. Fawer: Correct. City of Miami Page /05 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P Z won --- ( b (o Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk December 1, 2005 Commissioner Winton: -- that goes on the backside that backs up against Bay Point -- Mr. Fawer: Correct, and -- Commissioner Winton: -- is that correct? Mr. Fawer: -- in addition, we're taking the existing building at 3915 Biscayne Boulevard, and we're retaining that in its current 48-foot height. When we first acquired the property, we were allowed to put -- Commissioner Winton: Well, let him come close to the mike. Yeah, come closer. Mr. Fawer: -- a building up there, and our first position was to have a 28-story building there. The staff turned that down. We voluntarily said we'll go to a lower level, When the City reduced the zoning height to 95 feet, we had a plan for that, too, but in deference to the City staff and as well as a number of the neighbors -- nobody is in unison on this -- we were asked to leave the Hamilton building at its 48-foot height, and not raise it to the 95-foot height along Biscayne Boulevard, so we changed our plans exceeded to that and redistributed that FAR without asking for a MUSP, at all from anybody, and the alley, which was right here, is not built on. That's a common walkway for us. It's -- as I think our counsel alluded, it's been walled, fenced with impenetrable bushes on it, and it's never been used in checking with the prior owners for 80 years. Commissioner Winton: Now, this question I'm going to ask of staff; one of the big challenges we've had in the City of Miami as a result of our hundred year old code is what can be built by right? That's where we've had all of our battlegrounds, is the by right ability to build. This site has essentially, in my mind, three component parts. Ms. Slazyk: Correct. Commissioner Winton: It has the C-1 zoning that fronts on Biscayne Boulevard -- Ms. Slazyk: Correct. Commissioner Winton: -- and if you didn't allow for the vacation of the alleyway, you would have an R-3 site here. I don't know, these look to be about roughly equal size. I don't -- so, you've got about a third C-1, a third R-3, don't close the alleyway, a third R-3. My question -- Ms. Slazyk: Correct. Commissioner Winton: What, by right -- Class II Permit, no MUSP, no variances, don't have to come see us -- what can they put on each of those three sites in terms of height and density? And I know you don't have -- because I've been asking you this -- an (UNINTELLIGIBLE) because nobody's done any calculations, but I just want to understand, as best we can, what they can do by right, as best as you can put it on the record, on each of those three, if they were done independent of each other. Ms. Slazyk: OK. On the Boulevard property that's C-1, because of the SD-9 overlay, the only thing they could really do by right is conversion interior stuff to the building. If they wanted to do any exterior remodeling, they'd need a Class II for the exterior work, but to -- Commissioner Winton: No, but what if they -- Ms. Slazyk: -- change the use -- City of Miami Page 106 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes December 1, 2005 Commissioner Winton: -- bulldo -- Ms. Slazyk: -- they could do by right. Commissioner Winton: -- bulldoze the building? Ms. Slazyk: Then they need a Class II because -- Commissioner Winton: Oh, but -- Submitted Into the public record in connection with item f Z • 33 on t -X -o6, Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Ms. Slazyk: -- of the SD-9, but it would be allowed to be 150 units per acre, which would be approximately 114 units would fit there, and if they went again with the SD-9, you know, the limits, it would be a 95-foot building with approximately 114 units -- Commissioner Winton: OK. Ms. Slazyk: -- and the FAR, 1.72. Commissioner Winton: And -- well, how about the R-3? Ms. Slazyk: OK, the R-3 -- the next two R-3s, by right, because there's an alley between that and the water, they could just go get a building permit for a five -story apartment building up to a maximum of 71 units. However, with the lower FAR, they probably couldn't get a full 71 units there, but you know, they could max it out at five stories with a building permit, blank walls on the street; you know, we wouldn't have any say in the design. Commissioner Winton. And the next (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- Ms. Slazyk: The next one, they could do -- those are two more R-3 lots, another approximately 71, 72 units, but that one would require a Class II because it's between the alley and the first and the water, which anything between the first right-of-way and the water requires a Class II Special Permit. Even though it's a private alley, it would still require a Class II, so they would be able to do approximately 70 units, five -story building, but they'd have to come get the Class 11, which is the process they're in now, so total would be approximately two hundred and fifty -some units. Commissioner Winton: OK, and if they were going through a Class 11 process, and they went the route that I just described -- Ms. Slazyk: Right. Commissioner Winton: -- they go after the Class 1I, everybody objects, we turn them down, what's their next step? Ms. Slazyk: Probably court. I mean, I don't -- Commissioner Winton: OK, and then it goes before a judge -- Ms. Slazyk: Yeah, yeah. Commissioner Winton: -- and then a judge is going to decide whether -- Ms. Slazyk: Because -- Commissioner Winton: -- we've -- whether -- OK, so -- City of Miami Page 107 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes Submitted Into the Public record in connection 0i h item ` Z . 33 1- n blp Priscill ► A. Thompson City Clerk December 1, 2005 Mc. Slazyk: Right, because through the Cla�cc II, what you're supposed to do is try to .coy, OK, this property is zoned either commercial or residential. You know, you can't deny them any use of their property, so through the Class II process, even if the appeals go all the way on to Commission and court, they're going to get the use of it for something -- Commissioner Winton: OK. Ms. Slazyk: -- and what it's going to come down to is the size, and the bulk, and the scale -- Commissioner Winton: Right. Ms. Slazyk: -- and all of that. Commissioner Winton: And on some of this we'll have say, and some of it we won't have say -- Ms. Slazyk: Correct. Commissioner Winton: -- and here's to -- and by the way, the neighbors, I know -- in fact, Kay and I have been friends for probably 20 years. I'm not friends with the developer. I don't know the developer. I've met the developer, but I don't know the developer, so the easy thing for me to do is jump on the side of the neighbors, but I'm going to tell the neighbors, I'm not sure I understand what you guys really don't want here. I haven't seen the model before. I didn't know what the plan was, but I'm looking at the plan right now. I also just asked a series of questions about what they could do, if that plan went out the window, and I didn't like the options that he could, in fact, do by right without coming back here. I don't like those options. I didn't like the option of building a tall building right on Biscayne Boulevard, and I didn't like the option of being able to build 70 units, or 60 units, or 77 units on that middle piece, and doesn't have to see anybody. By right, he could do it, and he could build the ugliest thing in the world, granted five stories, only five stories, but it could still be ugly, so -- and we do this all the time, and my memory is -- I know that because -- has this been before us -- ? Why -- ? Ms. Slazyk: No. This was a Class II Special Permit. It was appealed onto the Zoning Board. There was a settlement on that appeal. The appeal was withdrawn, so you're not going to see the Class 11. Commissioner Winton: OK, so -- Ms. Slazyk: That's why they're using this as the method to get into the Class 11. Commissioner Winton: -- but here's what I want to say and do. I'm going to ask for a 30-day continuance, and 1 know it's a pain in the rear end for everyone, but 1 want to tell the neighbors - - and 1 know that your association, because it was put on record, the -- at least the Bay Point Association is in favor; some of my friends aren't in favor, but I'm not driving -- I never come to the table driving the bus for my friends, whether they're the neighbors or the developers. I'm driving the bus that I think is right, and long-term, what can end up in the best interest of our city and our neighborhoods, and I'm looking at this and don't get the objections, particularly considering the alternatives, and I'm willing to move for a continuance of 30 days to get you all back together one more time and figure out if we can't get something resolved here, because what I don't want to have -- what I won't support -- because there's going to be a bunch of other people that are also my friends that I know that are going to come and lynch me, if we allow for a 20-story building to pop up on Biscayne Boulevard, and that isn't right, either. I mean, I like that, I'm sorry. I mean, I think the architecture of that project is among the coolest that I've seen brought before us since I've been here. I wish I didn't like it; it'd be easier. I'd say blah, blah, blah, but I do, Pm sorry, guys, so I'm going to move for a 30-day continuance, and get you all City of Miami Page 108 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes December 1, 2005 back together -- Commissioner Regalado: Second. Commissioner Winton: -- and I want you all to think about the real options that could come our way that we don't necessarily want. Ms. Slazyk: January 26. Commissioner Winton: January 26, right. Is that the next -- ? Ms. Thompson: Yes. Ms. Slazyk: That's the next PZ (planning and zoning) meeting. Commissioner Winton: Oh, I'm sorry -- Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. Commissioner Winton: -- so it's more than 30 -- Ms. Slazyk: Little more than 30 -- Commissioner Winton: -- but it's -- that's our next -- Ms. Slazyk.: -- but it's the January PZ. Ms. Baloyra: If I may, for a moment? Is that all right? Commissioner Winton: I'!! let -- I guess -- Ms. Baloyra: Anyone wants to recognize me? Submitted Into the public record in connection with item 171. 3 on x Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Commissioner Winton: -- each of you one comment. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Go ahead. Ms. Baloyra: OK. We've been working at this for a long time. We have had endless meetings with -- even the, you know, specific people here, and they're not budging. Commissioner Winton: Well -- but you haven't been before us before, and you haven't had somebody sitting here that has the ultimate say, one way or another, make a decision -- Commissioner Regalado: Yeah. Commissioner Winton: -- and so, I know it's been -- I'm sure they feel as frustrated as you all feel, and I'm saying, I know how frustrated everybody is, but y'all are going to meet one more time, and if we're still at an impasse after that one more meet, we're going to make a decision here. I'm going to make a recommendation of some sort for or against, and my colleagues are either going to vote with me or against me, but on the 26th ofJanuary, we're making a decision, and -- yes, sir, Jeff. Mr. Bash: With all due respect, sir, while Mr. Pittman was here at the podium, Ms. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) was there speaking with you, and the point that -- main point that he came here today to make was our objection is very clear and it always has been. We bought our City of- Miami Page 109 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes Submitted Into the public record in connection with item PZ- 33 on I - 24- Prisclla A. Thompson City Clerk December 1, 2005 homes across the street from R-3 property, and you -- and this Commission, if they vacate this public right -of --way. are allowing this developer to build R-3 times two across the street from our home. Commissioner Winton: But that's not accurate. I just asked the question. It was put on the -- Jeff you -- this isn't going to be an argument. You can meet with staff. They'll do the calculations. You sit with them and do the calculations, but your statement is wrong. Mr. Bash: 1 beg your pardon. Commissioner Winton: It's wrong. Mr. Bash: It's not -- the FAR is more than doubled on the R-3 lots for what is allowed by R-3 limitations as to -- relative to FAR. Commissioner Winton: Lourdes, would you come back and put that back on the record again for me, please? Ms. Slazyk: The -- what this developer did was, through a covenant in lieu of unity of title, they joined their C-1 property and their R-3. Commissioner Winton: Right, and 1 understand the part about that opposition, and what you guys are missing coming from me, 1 understand that point, and generally speaking -- in fact, in the City before, 1 don't think we allow this kind of blending to go on, OK, and let's say we didn't allow the blending to go on. Take the blending away. Ms. Slazyk: They could still do -- Commissioner Winton: Bifurcate them -- Ms. Slazyk: -- yeah, the 70 units, yeah. Commissioner Winton: -- into three components parts, which is what I was saying, three component parts; C-1 at the front, R-3 behind it before the alley, R-3 behind that after the alley. By right, what could they build? And what they could build -- Ms. Slazyk: Yeah, and the center piece was -- Commissioner Winton: (UNINTELLIGIBLE), would you put that back on the record -- Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. Commissioner Winton: -- please? Ms. Slazyk: OK. The -- first, the C-1 piece, 114 units. The first R-3 piece -- Commissioner Winton: Yeah, but how tall could they -- bulldoze the building. Ms. Slazyk: That would have been 95 feet. The two -- all the R-3s at 50 feet, and the R-3s would have been another 140 units or so, so a total of -- Vice Chairman Gonzalez: 280. Ms. Slazyk: -- 250, yeah. City of Miami Page 110 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes Submitted Into the public record in connection with item p?_on t'2 Priscilla A. Thompson�ty lerk December 1, 2005 Commissioner Winton: And the first one on Biscayne Boulevard, they would have to have a Class 11 -- Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. Commissioner Winton: -- but -- our Code's in place already. Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. Commissioner Winton.: We've had all the battles over it; 95 feet, that's -- Ms. Slazyk: 95 feet. Commissioner Winton: -- what it is; that's what we allow. Ms. Slazyk: With 114 units. Commissioner Winton: On the second -- on the first R-3 coming off of Biscayne Boulevard -- Ms. Slazyk: By right -- Commissioner Winton: -- they could build -- Ms. Slazyk: -- no special permits. Commissioner Winton: -- five stories by right; don't have to come to us, no architecture review, no nothing. Ms. Slazyk: Correct. Commissioner Winton: Five stories. Ms. Slazyk: Correct. Commissioner Winton: The second piece sold behind, they'd have to get a Class II -- Ms. Slazyk: Right. There would -- Commissioner Winton: -- which is the reason 1 was asking -- Ms. Slazyk: -- also be another five stories. Commissioner Winton: -- the part about the legal process here; what happens; we all end up in court, and maybe that one gets developed last, but it's going to get developed because the court isn't going to say you guys can't have any development back there -- Ms. Slazyk: Right, and -- Commissioner Winton: -- and so that's the only point I'm trying to get at -- Ms. Slazyk: The -- Commissioner Winton: -- is if we blow this up, what could we potentially end up with? And so, I'm saying I'm going to make the developer take 45 more days, meet with you guys, understanding what the real rules are and what we're going to have to deal with, and then come City of Miami Page 111 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes December 1, 2005 back here again, and I hope we have something, but in -- on the 26th, there's going to be a motion in some fashion or another, on the 26th, and a decision's going to be made. period. Ms. Hancock-Apfel: May I ask a question? Submitted Into the Public Commissioner Winton: Yes, ma'am. record In connection with item P? 33_on 1_ X_ Ms. Hancock- Apfel: The developer is to meet with the City? Submitted A. ThompsonCity Clerk Commissioner Winton: No, the developer's to meet with you guys. Ms. Hancock- Apfel: Oh, to us, OK. Commissioner Winton: You all -- Ms. Hancock- Apfel: And in the meanwhile -- Commissioner Winton: -- and -- Ms. Hancock- Apfel: -- we will deal with -- Commissioner Winton: -- what I would -- Ms. Hancock- Apfel: -- my issue is alley. Commissioner Winton: Yeah. Ms. Hancock- Apfel: OK. My issue is not the others, OK, so they'll -- Commissioner Winton: And the public purpose on the alley, and the thing that's been missed in all of this -- I heard Lourdes kind of say it, but I'd like her to put it back on the record again much more clearly, and that is to define the public purpose, and if the definition ofpublic purpose doesn't meet our -- ifwe don't happen to agree with it, then we could potentially strengthen that -- Ms. Slazyk: Yes, more landscape, whatever. Commissioner Winton: -- and that's where we have our greatest amount of leverage, but I'm trying to make you all say, ifwe blow this up, then the alternative could be much worse, and that's what I'm saying to you all. Mr. Fawer: Mr. Commissioner -- Vice Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Fawer: -- may I say one thing? Commissioner Winton: Well, I -- Commissioner Regalado: I second the motion. Commissioner Winton: Yeah, he second the motion. I guess one more time and one more -- and then that's it; each of you can say one thing. Yes, sir. Mr. Fawer: We've met with them faithfully for two years. We have a written agreement that said City of Miami Page 112 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ?2. 33 on j - 2 e -04 Priscilla A. Thompson(Q- C!`OeL'�}ii�LT 1, 2005 all we had to do was enhance landscaping and they would accept this plan. 1 had a revocation of that agreement in the e-mail (electronic mail) and in writing two days ago. They are on public record of having their design of -- to delay me until "I go broke, " and that's recorded in the paper -- Commissioner Winton: OK. Mr. Fawer: -- so, I will do this, but 1 want everybody here to understand what their public position's been, and 1 was willing to meet their agreement to put in whatever landscaping they want, and that was revoked two days ago, so I will do it again because you asked -- Commissioner Winton: Thank you. Mr. Fawer: -- but I want this to be understood, the framework under which I'm operating, and this month and a half will cost me. Thank you. Commissioner Winton: 45 days, sorry. OK. One -- Mr. Ruggieri: We have been -- Commissioner Winton: -- more comment and then we're done. Mr. Ruggieri: -- dealing with the developer. He did offer to provide a landscape plan. We're showing you the landscape plan now. It is three trees in front of one property. Commissioner Winton: Well -- but -- excuse me. Hey, hey, hey. Mr. Fawer: No, that's not true. Ms. Hancock-Apfel: That's not true. Commissioner Winton: Wait, wait, wait, wait. Mr. Ruggieri: I want -- there is the plan. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: We -- Mr. Fawer: That's not true. Commissioner Winton: Listen, listen, listen. Hold on, hold on, hold on. Both sides, no more comments; we're done. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Right. Mr. Ruggieri: One thing -- Commissioner Winton: No, no. Mr. Ruggieri: -- to put -- Commissioner Winton: No. Mr. Ruggieri: -- on the record. Commissioner Winton: No, no. City of Miami Page 113 Printed on 12/22/2005 City Commission Meeting Minutes December 1, 2005 Vice Chairman Gonzalez: No, because we -- Commissioner Winton: No, no, no. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: We're going to -- Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ?2. 33 on /-'{,"bb Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Commissioner Winton: I'm telling you guys, get together, figure out what's right. You can come back to the next meeting, complain about what you want to complain about, and a decision's going to get made, one way or another -- Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Right. Commissioner Winton: -- and I'm hoping that you all are listening to each other, listening to each other. A decision is going to get made. It's either going to be "no" or it's going to be "yes." I don't -- and -- Mr. Ruggieri: We've gotten no give from the developer, no give. Commissioner Winton: Well -- Mr. Fawer: That's ridiculous. Commissioner Winton: -- and the -- but the public purpose piece, Lourdes, at the next meeting, I want it clear on the record, and we have leverage, public purpose, so -- Ms. Slazyk: Absolutely. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Motion carries. Commissioner Winton: Thank you. Commissioner Regalado: Motion -- Vice Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: -- to defer -- Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Meeting adjourned. Commissioner Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, and happy holidays. PZ.18 05-01229 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), GRANTING OR DENYING THE APPEAL FILED BY MICHAEL B. CHAVIES, ESQUIRE AND GABRIEL E. NIETO, ESQUIRE, ON BEHALF OF THE COCONUT GROVE, LLC ("APPELLANT"), AND REVERSING OR AFFIRMING A DECISION OF THE HISTORIC AND City of Miami Page 114 Printed on 12/22/2005 MEMORANDUM TO: SANTIAGO ECHEMENDIA FROM: THOMAS W. FAWELL SUBJECT: TIVOLI / 39TH STREET RESIDENTIAL COMPLAINTS & HISTORY DATE: JANUARY 18, 2006 CC: STEPHANIE HERMAN, DAVID HIRSCHFELD Submitted Into the public record in connection with item 1'2.33 on I•x-v6 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Your question regarding the history of our negotiation deserves written confirmation. Here it is. 1. After two years of discussion, accommodation and changes in response to various demands, we were finally able to enter into an agreement with the residences of 39th Street that met everyone's objectives. At that meeting, Tivoli was represented by me and by Stephanie Herman. The residents were represented by Geoffrey Bash, Ken Pittman and Steve Ruggieri. The substance of the agreement was they were prepared to accept the development as long as we provided additional landscaping subject to their review. A copy of their email confirming our agreement and setting forth the substance of the terms is set forth below. Also attached is a copy of my email response. Submitted Into the public' record in connection with item Ft- 33 on 1-)10 Priscilla A. Thompson City lerKC 2. Our response was delayed by several weeks due to my hospitalization in intensive care with 3 blood clots on my lungs. Upon recovery, we (same people as referenced above) met again at the site on or about November 15 2005 to get their direction on landscaping. As articulated to them, we did not want to spend $15,000 on plans that they might reject out of hand, and preferred to have their prior direction. At the meeting we suggested that a landscape plan focused on height on the narrow right of way on 39th Street might more effectively address what we thought their concerns were. To that end, we gave them two concept drawings to comment upon. See below. 2 Concept Drawing No. 1 Concept Drawing No. 2 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item 'P2.33 on I -DL Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk At that meeting, the neighbor — in particular Steve Ruggieri, who is a landscape architect — agreed with our premise. We all agreed that Steve would study our basic concept and get back to us with more direction. The mood was cordial and constructive to the point that we agreed that Ruggieri could participate in the plant selection with our provider. 3 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ?Z. 33 on I-21e -Deo Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 3. Unilateral Termination of Agreement by Bash et al As agreed on November 15, we waited for their response. After a couple weeks of silence, I placed a call to Ruggeiri. While he did not respond, I did receive the November 28 email below. This email unilaterally declared that our agreement would not be honored by Bash et al, citing as their reason, the impact of hurricanes on landscaping in south Florida. (I am reminded of Claude Reins discovery of gambling in Casa Blanca.) In one sense I was surprised and their sudden change of heart. On the other hand, this behavior was consistent with their stated public position to "...delay, delay, delay until the developer goes broke." I responded with a request for clarification as set forth below. 4 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item `!2- 33 on 1-3.<,-0c° Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk They clarified their position wherein (a) they forgot that they were first going to respond to our concept drawings, and (b) confirmed that they were going to simply terminate the agreement. 5 We have continued to work on our landscaping notwithstanding their unilateral withdrawal from our September 23rd 2005 agreement. Submitted Into the public record in connection with item '1_ on 1 - °6 Priscilla A. pson Cif Clerk 6 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P2. 33 on I - x - o le Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 7 Page 2 of 4 863 So.2d 375 863 So.2d 375, 28 Fla. L. Weekly D2839 (Cite as: 863 So.2d 375) H Briefs and Other Related Documents District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, Petitioner, v. OMNIPOINT HOLDINGS, INC., Respondent. No. 3D01-2347. Dec. 10, 2003. Background: County sought petition for writ of certiorari to quash decision of the Circuit Court, Dade County, Amy Steele Donner, Gisela Cardonne , Manuel A. Crespo, JJ., directing county's community zoning appeals board to grant applicant permission to erect telecommunications monopole. The District Court of Appeal, 811 So.2d 767, denied petition and sua sponte declared portions of county code governing unusual uses, modifications of prior approvals, and nonuse variances facially unconstitutional. County petitioned for further review. The Supreme Court, Bell, J., quashed and remanded, 863 So.2d 195, 2003 WL 22208012. Holdings: On remand, the District Court of Appeal, Fletcher, J., held that: (1) trial court could not consider Federal Telecommunications Act when considering petition for certiorari, and (2) District Court of Appeal could not review the sufficiency of the evidence to support the zoning board's decision but rather could only review whether trial court applied correct law to information offered to zoning board as evidence. Petition denied. Submitted Into the public record in connection with item `PZ. 33 on 1-210-6 6. Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk West Headnotes [1] Zoning and Planning C=191 © 2006 Thomson/West. No Claim 414k191 Most Cited Cases Page 1 [1] Zoning and Planning €=='604 414k604 Most Cited Cases Neither a quasi-judicial body nor a reviewing circuit court is permitted to add to or detract from the local regulations when making its assigned determination of a zoning change application. [2] Administrative Law and Procedure €='305 15Ak305 Most Cited Cases [2] Administrative Law and Procedure C=330 15Ak330 Most Cited Cases Quasi-judicial boards do not have the power to ignore, invalidate or declare unenforceable the legislated criteria they utilize in making their quasi-judicial determinations. [3] Administrative Law and Procedure €='303.1 15Ak303.1 Most Cited Cases Quasi-judicial boards cannot make decisions based on anything but the local criteria enacted to govern their actions. [4] Zoning and Planning 'C'624 414k624 Most Cited Cases Trial court could not consider Federal Telecommunications Act when considering corporation's petition for certiorari contending that county zoning board erred in denying application to construct communications tower, as Act was not part of local zoning criteria. Communications Act of 1934, § 332, as amended, 47 U.S.C.A. § 332. [5] Zoning and Planning €='747 414k747 Most Cited Cases District Court of Appeal considering corporation's petition for writ of certiorari to quash trial court's decision upholding zoning board's denial of corporation's application for permission to construct telecommunications monopole could not review the sufficiency of the evidence to support the zoning to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. http://print.westlaw.com/delivery.html?dest=atp&format=HTMLE&dataid=A0055 800000... 1/24/2006 Page 3 of 4 863 So.2d 375 863 So.2d 375, 28 Fla. L. Weekly D2839 (Cite as: 863 So.2d 375) board's decision but rather could only review whether trial court applied correct law to information offered to zoning board as evidence. *376 Robert A. Ginsburg, County Attorney, Jay W. Williams, Assistant County Attorney, for petitioner. Hayes & Martohue and Deborah L. Martohue (St.Petersburg), for respondent. Before GERSTEN, GODERICH, and FLETCHER, JJ. ON REMAND FLETCHER, Judge. In Miami -Dade County v. Omnipoint Holdings, Inc., 863 So.2d 195, 2003 WL 22208012 (Fla. Sept. 25, 2003), the Florida Supreme Court quashed this court's decision in Miami -Dade County v. Omnipoint Holdings, Inc., 811 So.2d 767 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) and remanded the cause with instructions for this court to review again the circuit court's certiorari decision, this time limiting our review to the standards established in City of Deerfield Beach v. Vaillant, 419 So.2d 624 (F1a.1982), Broward County v. G.B. V.. Int'l, Ltd., 787 So.2d 838 (F1a.2001), and Florida Power & Light Co. v. City of Dania, 761 So.2d 1089 (F1a.2000). As a result this court is limited in its review on remand to the only remaining issue: whether the circuit court applied the correct law. Vaillant at 626; G. B. V. at 843; and Florida Power at 1092. (The issue as to whether the circuit court afforded procedural due process was not raised by the parties, thus need not be addressed.) [1] Our determination here begins with the language of Vaillant, G.B.Y., and Florida Power as stated in G.B.V. at 842: "A decision granting or denying a [quasi-judicial] application is governed by local regulations, which must be uniformly administered. The allocation of burdens expressed in Irvine v. Duval County Planning Commission, 495 So.2d 167 (F1a.1986), is applicable to such proceedings: [O]nce the petitioner met the initial burden of showing that his application met the statutory Submitted Into the public record in connection with item T2.33 on !- -0G Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Page 2 criteria for granting such [applications], 'the burden was upon the Planning Commission to demonstrate, by competent substantial evidence presented at the hearing and made part of the record, that the [application] requested by petitioner did not meet such standards and was, in fact, adverse to the public interest.' " [e.s.] The G.B. V. court went on to say: "To deny a [quasi-judicial] application, a local government agency must show by competent substantial evidence that the application does not meet the published criteria." [e.s.] Neither a quasi-judicial body nor a reviewing circuit court is permitted to add to or detract from these criteria (the local regulations) when making its assigned determination. [FN1] Thus in *377 Miami -Dade County v. Omnipoint Holdings, Inc., 863 So.2d 195, 2003 WL 22208012 (Fla. Sept. 25, 2003) the Florida Supreme Court held that certiorari review is not the proper vehicle to challenge the constitutionality of a statute or an ordinance. FN1. See City of Miami v. Save Brickell Ave., Inc., 426 So.2d 1100 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), at 1104. [2][3] Put another way, quasi-judicial boards do not have the power to ignore, invalidate or declare unenforceable the legislated criteria they utilize in making their quasi-judicial determinations. See Baker v. Metropolitan Dade County, 774 So.2d 14, 19-20 nn. 12-14 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), rev. denied, 791 So.2d 1099 (2001). Thus quasi-judicial boards cannot make decisions based on anything but the local criteria enacted to govern their actions. [4] In the instant case the circuit court appellate division was petitioned by Omnipoint Holdings, Inc. to quash the Miami -Dade County zoning board's denial of Omnipoint's application (to construct a communications tower) on two grounds. First, Omnipoint argued that the board's denial is violative of the Federal Telecommunications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 332 (1996). This Act allows local governments to regulate the placement of personal wireless facilities, so long as such regulation does not unreasonably discriminate among like service providers, or prohibit the provision of wireless © 2006 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. http://print.westlaw.com/delivery.html?dest=atp&format=HTMLE&dataid=A005 5 800000... 1 /24/2006 Page 4 of 4 863 So.2d 375 863 So.2d 375, 28 Fla. L. Weekly D2839 (Cite as: 863 So.2d 375) services. Based on Omnipoint's argument the circuit court concluded that the zoning board's denial violates the Act and thus must be quashed. By considering the Act, however, the circuit court did not apply the correct law. This is so as the Federal Telecommunications Act is not a part of the local zoning criteria, thus the circuit court's decision on certiorari review cannot validly be bottomed on the Federal Act. [FN2] FN2. The Act may, of course, be the basis for an original action challenging a local zoning decision. [5] The circuit court gave a second reason for its quashal of the zoning board's denial: that the zoning board's decision is not supported by substantial competent evidence (which is defined as "such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind would accept as adequate to support a conclusion." [FN3] ) Whether there was substantial competent evidence is an issue outside our review authority. We are not, however, precluded from reviewing the circuit court's decision to assure that the court applied the correct law to the information offered to the zoning board as evidence. For example, in Machado v. Musgrove, 519 So.2d 629 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), rev. denied, 529 So.2d 693 and rev. denied, 529 So.2d 694 (F1a.1988), this court observed that a zoning staff report that was irrelevant to the issue involved was entitled to no consideration in arriving at a conclusion as to whether the substantial competent evidence test had been met. In Jesus Fellowship, Inc. v. Miami -Dade County, 752 So.2d 708 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), this court concluded, inter alia, that the circuit court, by approving the use of lay opinion testimony where technical expertise was required, failed to apply the correct law. [FN4] FN3. DeGroot v. Sheffield, 95 So.2d 912 (F1a.1957). FN4. Additional examples include Metropolitan Dade County v. Blumenthal, 675 So.2d 598 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), rev. dismissed, 680 So.2d 421 (F1a.1996)(fact based lay testimony is perfectly proper); Submitted onnection with o the public record in item �?• �33 on 1'3(.l° Priscilla A. son Cfty Cje k Page 3 Pollard v. Palm Beach County, 560 So.2d 1358 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)(lay persons' opinions unsubstantiated by any competent facts are not evidence). Our review of the circuit court's decision here leads us to the conclusion that the circuit court applied correct law in the process of reaching its conclusion as to the sufficiency of the evidence. As it not our *378 function to pass on the sufficiency of the evidence itself, we stop at this point. Accordingly, the petition for writ of certiorari is denied. 863 So.2d 375, 28 Fla. L. Weekly D2839 Briefs and Other Related Documents (Back to top) • 3D01-2347 (Docket) (Aug. 23, 2001) END OF DOCUMENT © 2006 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. http: //print. westlaw. c om/delivery . html?dest=atp&format=HTMLE&dataid=A00 5 5 800000... 1 /24/2006 Chapter 55 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS* Page 18 of 23 encroachment is not a safety hazard, subject to receipt by the city of written consent of the holder(s) of the private easement(s), written releases from all benefited specified individuals or public or private entities, or a certification that no such benefited individuals or public or private entities exist within the easement, recommendations of approval from the departments of police, public works, fire - rescue, general services administration, planning, building and zoning, and an executed hold harmless and indemnification agreement for the benefit of the city in a form acceptable to the city attorney, with the herein exceptions being subject to compliance with all other requirements of law. (Ord. No. 9584, § 1, 3-24-83; Ord. No. 10367, § 1, 1-14-88; Ord. No. 10730, § 1, 5-24-90; Ord. No. 11008, § 2, 10-8-92; Code 1980, § 54.5-15) Sec. 55-15. Vacation and closure of rights -of -way and platted easements by plat. (a) Procedure. The vacation and closure of any rights -of -way and/or platted easements, and the reversion thereof to abutting property owners shall be accomplished only through the platting procedure as set forth in section 55-7, subsections (a) "Preliminary conference" through (c) "Filing copies of tentative plat and plat application;" however, the closure or vacation of any alley abutting only parcels of land zoned R-1 (single-family residential) and/or R-2 (two-family residential) may be accomplished by an alternative method as set forth herein below. (b) Plat and street committee review of tentative plat. All tentative plats involving vacation and closure shall be reviewed for compliance with all technical requirements of this chapter by the plat and street committee, and including the following criteria: Cv .c 0 § q ca. o.cE :s 0 c�U 0 c0 0 • c r_ Q -o $ r e ,c N ?-o .0 v (1) No tentative plat will be considered by the plat and street committee which includes only rights -of -way or easements to be vacated and closed. The properties on each side of the rights -of -way or easements to be vacated and closed shall be included in the plat, and all abutting property owners shall join in the plat and the disposition of the rights -of -way or easements shown. (2) Vacation and closure of half the width of the right-of-way or easement shall not be permitted. (3) Where the subdivider requests the vacation and closure of a portion of the right-of- way connecting two streets, he shall provide a cul-de-sac specified in section 55-11 "Design standards." This cul-de-sac shall be fully within the property being platted. All property owners abutting the right-of-way between the two streets shall join in the plat abandoning and disclaiming all right, title and interest in the portion of the right-of-way being closed except as provided in subsection (b) below. (4) Where the subdivider requests the vacation and closure of a portion of an alley, he shall provide on his property suitable access from the closed end of the alley to the nearest public street, or streets, as required by the plat and street committee. All property owners abutting the alley shall join in the plat as required in subsection (b)(3), above, except as otherwise specifically provided in section 54-4 of this code. (c) Further consideration for vacations and closure. In addition to review for technical compliance, the plat and street committee shall also consider the request for vacation and closure with respect to the following: (1) Is it in the public interest, or would the general public benefit from the vacation of the rights -of -way or easements? (2) Is the general public no longer using the rights -of -way or easement, including public service vehicles such as trash and garbage trucks, police, fire and/or other emergency vehicles? (3) Would there be no adverse effect on the ability to provide police, fire or emergency http://library3.municode.com/mcc/DocView/10933/1/269 1/24/2006 Chapter 55 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS* Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ?2. 33 on l - N.- C` services? Priscilla A. Thompson C'#x Clerk (4) Would the vacation and closure of the rights -or rNay or easements have a beneficial effect on pedestrian and vehicular circulation in the area? (d) Findings of fact and recommendations. After review of the tentative plat, and if the tentative plat complies with the technical requirements of this chapter, the plat and street committee shall forward to the zoning board and the subdivider, in writing, its findings of fact that the tentative plat is in conformance with the technical requirements of this chapter, and shall also include its recommendations based on consideration of those items in subsection (c), above. If the tentative plat does not comply with the technical requirements, the s ubdivider shall be notified, and further action shall be withheld until the tentative plat is corrected. (e) Alternate method for vacation and closure of platted easements. The vacation and closure of platted private easements, platted public easements and platted emergency access easements, shall be accomplished by replatting the property as set forth in this section. Public hearings by the zoning board and city commission are required, except in cases where waived by the city manager or his designee. Before the requirement for such public hearings may be waived, the applicant shall have obtained (i) written consent to vacate and close the platted private easement(s), platte d public easement(s) and/or platted emergency access easement(s) of the holder(s) of the easement(s), (ii) written releases from all benefited specified individuals or public or private entities, or a certification that no such benefited individuals or public or private entities exist within the easement(s), and (iii) recommendations of approval from the departments of police, public works, fire -rescue, general services administration and planning, building and zoning. The written consent that must be obtai ned from the holder(s) of the easement(s) must specify that the holder(s) of the easement(s) consent(s) to the vacation and closure of the easement(s) and must specify whether the holder(s) of the easement(s) has (have) granted any type of interest in the easement(s) to a third party, and shall specify the third party's identity. In the event that a third party does have an interest in the easement(s), the applicant must also obtain the third party's written approval to vacate and close the easement (s). In addition, the applicant must submit an ownership and encumbrance search report prepared by a title company of the area encompassed by the easement(s) that is (are) to be vacated and closed. Page 19 of 23 (f) Zoning board's public hearing for vacation and closure of rights -of -way and platted easements. After issuance of the findings of fact and recommendations by the plat and street committee, the subdivider shall make application to the department of planning, building and zoning and zoning boards administration for a public hearing by the city zoning board for the vacation and closure. The procedure for public notice and public hearing shall be as set forth in section 62-128 et seq., of the city Code including the payment of the necessary fees as required by the Code. (g) City commission's public hearing for vacation and closure of rights -of -way and/or easements. After public hearing before the zoning board and a recommendation by the board for or against the vacation and closure, a public hearing shall be held before the commission of the city. The procedure for public notice and public hearing shall be as set forth in section 62- 128 et seq., of the city Code, including the payment of any necessary fees as required by the Code. (h) Determination by city commission. If the city commission determines that it is not in the public interest, the rights -of -way or easements shall not be closed, and the plat shall be denied. If the city commission approves the requested vacation and closure, the subdivider may proceed with the plat as set forth in city Code sections 55-8 through 55-14. Approval of the requested vacation and closure shall be valid for a period of four years and shall remain independent of the referenced tentative plat during this period. Any revised tentative plat submitted for review subsequent to the approved vacation and closure must be compatible with the approved vacation and closure, as determined by the plat and street committee. The tentative plat most recently http://library3.municode.com/mcc/DocView/10933/1/269 1/24/2006 Chapter 55 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS* Page 20 of 23 approved by the plat and street committee shall be the official tentative plat of reference when submitti ng documents for final plat approval by the city commission. (i) Public alleys; alternative method for closure and vacation of public alleys abutting parcels of land zoned R-1 (single-family residential) and/or R-2 (two-family residential). (1) Applicability : For public alleys which he exclusively, abutting parcels of land zoned R-1 (single-family residential) and/or R-2 (two-family residential), any public alley which has a parcel of land abutting any side which is zoned with greater intensity than R-2 must follow the procedure established in subsection 55-15(a) herein. An alley Tying between two streets shall not be vacated unless the entire portion of the alley between such streets is vacated or closed. (2) Initiating a request for alley closure. a. The city manager independently or at the direction of the city commission, may initiate the closure of a public alley abutting parcels of land zoned R-1 (single-family residential) and/or R-2 (two-family residential). b. A property owner whose property is abutting parcels of land zoned R-1 single-family residential) and/or R-2 (two-family residential) may file an application. (3) Procedures. a. Pre -application meeting. Any property owner making application to vacate or close a publicly dedicated alley must meet with the supervisor of plats, or designee, and the director of planning and zoning, or designee, prior to applying for the vacation or closure. The purpose of the pre -application meeting is to acquaint the applicant with the procedures for vacating or closing an alley and to acquaint the supervisor of plats or designee with the proposed vacation. b. Application procedures. After the pre -application meeting, the applicant shall submit to the supervisor of plats, or designee, a completed publicly dedicated alley application package. The application package shall consist of the following: Submitted Into the public record in connection with item 1,2.33 on t -x' b(v Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 1. Completed application form; 2. Non-refundable application fee pursuant to section 2-269 of this Code; 3. Legal description of all parcels of land abutting alley proposed to be vacated or closed; 4. List of all owners, including addresses, that abut the alley to be vacated or closed pursuant to the most current Miami -Dade County Tax Roll and dated no later than ten days prior to submission of application; 5. Proof of ownership by the applicant of the property which abuts the alley to be vacated or closed; and 6. Statement from applicant as to whether the general public currently uses the alley, including public service vehicles such as trash and garbage trucks, police, fire and/or other emergency vehicles during the past 12 months. c. Publication requirement. Notice of the plat and street committee meeting shall be published with the clerk of the city prior to the plat and street committee meeting. Notice of the public hearing before the zoning board shall be published, one time, in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality at least ten days prior to the date of the zoning board hearing. http://library3.municode.com/mcc/DocView/10933/1/269 1/24/2006 Chapter 55 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS* Page 21 of 23 d. Notice to other property owners by U.S. Mail and posting at each entrance/exit way of alley. Notice shall be sent via U.S. Mail, certified return receipt requested to all property owners that abut the proposed alley to be yacated or closed. Additional notice may be required as specified on the Submifed Into the publjGstrument of dedication of the public alley. The city shall also post notice of the recoro in connection WihLblic hearing at each entrance/exit of the alley. _item F2.33 on I- -Doc. Plat and street committee review. The application shall be submitted to the Priscilla A. Thomps9r t and street committee 15 days prior to the next meeting. The plat and street City Cler&fmmittee shall make a recommendation to the zoning board, in writing, of its findings of fact and whether the plat and street committee recommends to unconditionally approve, approve with conditions, or deny the requested vacation and closure. After issuance of the findings of fact and recommendations by the plat and street committee, the applicant shall make application for a public hearing with the zoning board. Zoning board authority. The zoning board or its successor is designated as the authority to render decisions pertaining to the closure and/or vacation of alleys pursuant to the provisions of this section. Zoning board determination. Upon receipt of the plat and street committee's recommendation, the zoning board shall determine whether the requested vacation or closure may be granted because it is in the best interest of the public. Determination of the closure shall be based on whether the alley provides the public services. The zoning board shall then by resolution approve, deny or approve with conditions, the requested vacation or closure if such action is determined to be in the best interest of the public. The zoning board shall deny the request if the evidence does not support the vacation or closure would be in the best interest of the public and the primary reason for the closure is to provide a benefit for the applicant or adjacent property owners. The zoning board may attach conditions to an approval including, but not limited to, access and utility easements reservation, landscaping, and public access easement. Appeal to the city commission. Decisions of the zoning board are to be deemed final unless, within 15 calendar days of the date of the board decision, a request for review by the city commission is made in the manner set forth in the zoning ordinance. Receipt of fees for approved alley closures and vacations. Upon receipt of notification of alley closure or vacation approval, the applicant will submit such fees that are required for the publication of closure and vacation and recording fees pursuant to section 2-269 of this Code. Automatic reservation of easement and procedure for release thereof. The city shall automatically reserve an easement over, across and under said lands for the installation, maintenance and operation of any utility located or to be located in the alleys or portions thereof vacated or closed pursuant to this section. If the applicant desires that no easement be reserved, then as part of the application package referred to in subsection 55-15(i)(d)(II), applicant is to submit release letters from all utility companies stating that said utility company will release any interes t in an easement for the alley being vacated or closed. Zoning of vacated alley. The district use and area regulations governing the property abutting upon each side of such alley shall be automatically extended to the reversionary line of the alley included within the vacation or closure, unless otherwise specified. Recording of instrument in the public record. The proof of publication of notice of public hearing and the resolution as adopted, shall be recorded in the deed records of Miami -Dade County, Florida. Authorization for city manager to correct any typographical and/or non -substantial errors. In the instance when a certified opinion of title is received and reviewed by the city attorney demonstrating that a typographical and/or non -substantial error has occurred in the legal description of an alley or abutting parcels of land that was closed pursuant to this section, the city manager is authorized to execute documents, in a form acceptable to the city attorney, to correct any defects in the instrument. http://library3.municode.com/mcc/DocView/10933/1/269 1/24/2006 Chapter 55 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS* Page 22 of 23 (j) Private alleys; alternative method for closure and vacation of private alleys abutting parcels of land zoned R-1 (single-family residential) and/or R-2 (two-family residential). (1) Applicability : This section applies to the closure or vacation of any private alley, which lies exclusively, abutting parcels of land zoned R-1 (single-family residential) and R-2 (two-family residential. Any private alley which has a parcel of land abutting any side which is zoned with greater intensity than R-2, must follow the procedure established in section 55-15 of this Code. An alley Tying between two streets shall not be closed or vacated unless the entire portion of the alley between such streets is closed or v acated. (2) Initiation of a request for alley closure. A property owner whose property is abutting a particular private alley as described in subsection 55-15(j)(1) of this Code and by following the procedure as stated in this subsection 55-15(j)(3) may file an application. (3) Procedures. a. Pre -application meeting. Any person proposing to vacate a privately dedicated alley must meet with the supervisor of plats, or designee, and the director of planning and zoning, or designee, prior to applying for the closure or vacation. The purpose of the pre -application meeting is to acquaint the applicant with the procedures for closing or vacating an alley and to acquaint the supervisor of plats, or designee, with the proposed vacation. b. Application procedures. After the pre -application meeting, the applicant shall submit to the supervisor of plats, or designee, a completed privately dedicated alley application package. The application package shall consist of the following information: Submitted into the public record in connection with item P2.33 on I-Ni-di, Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk c. 1. Completed application form; application must be executed by all property owners which abut the private alley; 2. Receipt of non-refundable application fee pursuant to section 2-269 of this Code; 3. Survey of private alley to be closed or vacated including all abutting parcels of land with zoning designations, certified by a professional surveyor and mapper. Also, the survey must include the legal description and acreage of alley proposed to be closed or vacated; 4. Proof of ownership from all the property owners that about the private alley to be closed or vacated; 5. Releases from all utility companies and statement from applicant as to whether the general public currently uses the alley, including public service vehicles such as trash and garbage trucks, police, fire and/or other emergency vehicles during the past 12 months. Review process. 1. Publication requirement. Notice of the plat and street committee meeting shall be published with the clerk of the city prior to the plat and street committee meeting. 2. Plat and street committee review. The application shall be submitted to the plat and street committee 15 days prior to the next meeting. The plat and street committee shall make a recommendation to the zoning board, in writing, of its findings of fact and whether the plat and street committee recommend to the zoning board that the city does or does not have any interest in the private alley. After issuance of the findings of fact http://library3.municode.com/mcc/DocView/10933/1/269 1/24/2006 Chapter 55 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS* Page 23 of 23 and recommendations by the plat and street committee, the applicant shall make application to the zoning boards administration, or its successor, for a public hearing by the city zoning board for the vacation and closure. 3. Zoning board authority The zoning board or its successor is designated as the authority to render decisions pertaining to the closure and/or vacation of alleys pursuant to the provisions of this section. 4. Zoning board determination. Upon receipt of the plat and street committee's recommendation, the zoning board shall determine whether the city has any interest in the closure of the platted private alley and that it is in the interest of the public good to consent to the closure or vacation of the private alley. The zoning board shall by resolution consent, consent with conditions or object to the requested closure or vacation. The condition of the approval of the closure or vacation may be in the form of a reservation of easement. 5. Appeals to the city commission. Decisions of the zoning board are to be deemed final unless, within 15 calendar days of the date of the board decision, a request for review by the city commission is made in the manner set forth in Article 20, Section 2002 of the zoning ordinance. 6. Final resolution. The final resolution shall be provided to the applicants for proper recordation in the public records of Miami -Dade County, Florida. 7. Zoning of vacated alley. The district use and area regulations governing the property abutting upon each side of such alley shall be automatically extended to the reversionary line of the area included within the closure or vacation, unless otherwise specified. (k) Waiver of fees. The city manager may waive the vacation and alley closure fee required pursuant to subsection 62-156(6) in instances where the subdivider, by plat, is dedicating for public use, right of way that is equal to or greater in size than that which is being vacated. (Ord. No. 9584, § 1, 3-24-83; Ord. No. 10742, § 1, 6-28-90; Code 1980, § 54.5-16; Ord. No. 11299, § 1, 9-14-95; Ord. No. 12140, § 1, 10-25-01; Ord. No. 12293, § 1, 11-19-02; Ord. No. 12453, § 2, 12-18-03; Ord. No. 12483, § 2, 1-22-04; Ord. No. 12615, § 2, 11-18-04) Submitted Into the public record in connection with item Pti 3 on - y4, - o b Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk http://library3.municode.com/mcc/DocView/10933/1/269 1/24/2006 x.. �f 1 TIC RAMI.O.M.,OU.1 L1.01 w LAVAL WIN II M ISISAs WAG MTH NAIMY MOM MOWS MTI OLMIA IWTMIAS LEGEND 0 CANOPY TAM Oman.. MIPONMIr P PM P PM Lana Mud SMALL MEL a▪ wait mom= NA! MEYERS, MM ROYAL. PALM COMMUL4fE8 1M MST PALUETIO PARK LIMO SOCA MTOM FLOMO. SUSS T.4 N,.N11W Ta 1141r14144 MAKI f. MI Paramount at Edgewater Square MONTH MYLIDEL OMIE be. ME 20111 TERRACE • ME 1T K STIELT 10A0M. FLORIDA PLANTING PLAN AT GRADE AROUITECTONIC4 Mb. Mello ZOO Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ?Z 33 on 1. -01,. Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT ANALYSI S Case No. 2005-0948 VACATION AND CLOSURE OF A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, BEING AN ALLEYS LOCATED EAST OF BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, WEST OF NORTH BAYSHORE DRIVE AND BETWEEN NE 20th TERRACE AND NE 21st STREET. Pursuant to Section 55-15 (c) of the Miami City Code, the Planning and Zoning Department has reviewed the proposed public right-of-way vacation and closure to determine whether it is in the public interest, or whether the general public would benefit from the vacation of the right-of-way. The following findings have been made: • It is found that this application was presented to the Plat and Street Committee and the tentative Plat was approved unanimously with condition. (See attached analysis). • It is found that the vacation of the right of ways are required to complete a mixed use redevelopment project as part of a Major Use Special Permit (MUSP) . • It is found that upon compliance with conditions set forth below, the proposed right of way vacation will comply with Section 55-15 (c) of the Miami City Code for public benefit . Based on these findings, the Planning and Zoning Department recommends approval of the request subject to the following condition: 1. The applicant must construct all the public amenity improvements shown on sheet No. LI.01 of the December 3, 2004 Major Use Special Permit (MUSP) application for die "Paramount at Edgewater Square" development. Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P2. 33 on 1 3 i -°` Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Case Number: 2005-0948 ZONING FACT SHEET 28-Mar-05 Item 1 Location: See Request Below. Legal: (Complete legal description on file with the Department of Hearing Boards) Applicant: Adrienne F. Pardo, Esquire, on behalf of Royal Palm Holdings, LLC and Bacardi USA, Inc., Owners 1221 Brickell Avenue Miami, FL 33131 (305) 579-0683 Zoning: C-1 Restricted Commerciall R-4 Multifamily High -Density Residential SD-20 Edgewater Overlay Distract Request: Official vacation and closure of alleys located East of Biscayne Boulevard, West of North Bayshore Drive and between NE 20 Terrace and NE 21 Street. Purpose: This will allow a unified development site. Recommendations: Planning Department: Public Works: Plat and Street Committee: Approval with a condition. Recommended approval with conditions. Unanimously recommended approval with a condition. History: This item was continued from hearing of Mlarch 14, 2005. Analysis: See supporting documentation. Zoning Board Resolution: ZB 2005-1010 Zoning Board: Recommended approval to City Commission. City Commission: May 26, 2005 Legistar File Number: 04-01268c Vote: 6-0 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item Eon i -)4, -04 Priscilla . Thompson City Clerk Tl V CA —A Page 1 of 2 motion was made by Johnny L. Winton, seconded by Jeffery L. Allen, that this matter be ADOPTED. Chairman WW1 e .FECCIr trite cyAffsemej.ksi -we -� Ms. Slazyk: This is an official vacation and closure of the east end of Bis -- located east end of Biscayne Boulevard, west \\ --f North Bayshore Drive, and between Northeast 20th Terrace and 21st Street. This was part of a project that was reviously approved as a Major Use Special Permit. It's been recommended for approval with a condition. The condition has to do with the applicant having shown in their Major Use Special Permit a series of public amenity improvements that' -re going to be right along the bay in front of the Paramount at Edgewater Square development. This includes / Lndscaping, benches, and lighting. Based on that, we recommend approval. `--Tice Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Yes, ma'am. Adrienne Pardo: Oh, I'm sorry. My boards -- do I need my boards? This is for an alley closure. We had a Major Use special Permit before you last month, which was approved for the Paramount Bay project. It's in Edgewater off of .6.701 ,iscayne Boulevard, and -- give me one second. ommissioner Allen: Sure. Sanchez: Next item is -- ourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.6. Thairman Sanchez: -- PZ.6. • cp i,r4 ;_e) ' (V — ..s o r d) . tom Ms. Pardo: OK. Anyways, we had a Major Use Special Permit, which was approved last month. This item was also pposed to be on that agenda. There was a mix-up, so it didn't get on that agenda, and here we are today. Anyways, that lajor Use Special Permit was approved. In order to do the project, we need to have the alley closure approved, and what we're doing is, along North Bayshore Drive, we have a plan to do -- and there was a big discussion of it last month, you Liay remember, that staff had wanted a driveway off of North Bayshore Drive, and then we discussed in detail all of the nprovements we were doing to North Bayshore Drive; that we were improving the seawall across the street; that we're making major improvements, and I have a copy of the plan. Planning Department's approval was subject to these improvements. I put a copy in the record, and I'll give a copy to Planning staff, as well, so that they have a copy -- Chairman Sanchez: All right. /Is. Pardo: -- and we agree to these conditions. We would request your approval. Chairman Sanchez: OK. Madam Clerk, I believe, it's -- the public hearing has been closed, right? Vice Chairman Gonzalez: No. We haven't opened the public hearing yet. 'hairman Sanchez: All right. Is there any opposition to this item? Is there any opposition to this item? It's a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed, coming back to the Commission. Is there a motion? Commissioner Winton: Move -- Commissioner Allen: I move the item -- ,Commissioner Winton: -- with conditions. Commissioner Allen: -- Mr. Chairman. :'hairman Sanchez: There is a motion -- . 16A"'"\e'l eag kns Istude Submitted Into the public record in connection with item PZ•33 on 1-x `oL Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk http://egov.ci.miami.fl.us/LegistarWeb/utilityFunctions/getActionDetails.asp?hsKey=64719& 12/2/2005 Page 2 of 2 _missioner Allen: Second. 1 "rman Sanchez: -- to approve, with conditions. The motion has been made by Commissioner Winton, second by missioner Allen. It is under discussion now. Any discussion on the item? If not, all in favor, say "aye." t "'Commission (Collectively): Aye. 'airman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries. The motion carried by the I'" wing vote: 5 - Angel Gonzalez, Johnny L. Winton, Joe Sanchez, Tomas Regalado and Jeffery L. Allen Submitted Into the public ith record in connection x with 2 0 item l �A• Thompson City Cleric ):i/egov.ci.miami.fl.us/LegistarWeb/utilityFunctions/getActionDetails..asp?hsKey=64719& 12/2/2005 0 150 300 i -r- i 300 Feet Submitted Into the public record in connection with item? • 33 cn I Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Address: STREET CLOSURE 2004-893 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ?2.33_on I- 30-01- Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 0 200 400 toil NE 24TH ST SD-20I SD-20 11111 SD-20 SD-20 800 Feet I Address: ROW CLOSURE 2005-0948 Case Number: 2004-0893 ZONING FACT SHEET 22-Nov-04 Item 8 Location: See Request Below. Legal: (Complete legal description on file with the Department of Hearing Boards) Applicant: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esq. on behalf of Filling Station Lofts LLC, Owner and Contract Purchaser and Jersy Ltd 1221 Brickell Avenue Miami, FL 33131 (305) 579-0500 Zoning: C-2 Liberal Commercial Request: Official vacation and closure of an alley, being the portion of a 10-foot alley located south of NE 17 Street between North Miami Avenue and NE Miami Court. Purpose: This will allow a unified commercial development site. Recommendations: Planning Department: Denial. Public Works: See attached analysis. Plat and Street Committee: See attached analysis. History: N/A. Analysis: See supporting documentation. Zoning Board Resolution: ZB 2004-0958 Zoning Board: Recommended denial to City Commission. Legistar File Number: 04-01389 Vote: 4-4 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item PZ_35 on ol�oz. Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Page 1 of 5 motion was made by Johnny L. Winton, seconded by Jeffery L. Allen, that this matter be ADOPTED. Chairman 4nchez: We move on now to Dl [sic], which was deferred, correct? D1 [sic]. >tge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): And D2 [sic]. Arriola (City Manager): Both. Ir. Fernandez: Dl [sic] and -- :.airman Sanchez: So we go to D1.2 [sic], which is a discussion on the possible resolution regarding a possible ttlement. Are we red -- 1.. Fernandez: That's also been continued. ,cilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): That was -- ommissioner Winton: No, he -- __e Chairman Gonzalez: That was deferred. —airman Sanchez: So that's also been -- OK, that was also deferred, so at this time, before -- I think, Madam Clerk, are _ done with the regular? i°" ' Thompson: Yes, sir. hairman Sanchez: OK. Before we go into the single zoning item, let me just state that, as Chair, I'm very strict -- and —ve made it very clear that PZ (Planning & Zoning) items will be heard on the second meeting of every month. Never, based on the presentation that was made to me by the City Manager, there was a mistake, that he pulled the gym, and out of due respect, after speaking with all the parties, there is a time frame to this, and it was not in their fault, so `"-efore, out of respect, I will allow this item, PZ.1, to be heard today. However, in the past, I want to make it very clear. items will only be heard on the second meeting of every Commission. ,- nmissioner Allen: I admire that, Mr. Chairman. hairman Sanchez: OK, so at this time, I want to take the opportunity to thank the Department Director of Agenda -- the nda's office for working with us. Vicky Guerrero has been superb. The Manager's office, the City's Manager, and in eral, keeping all the agenda simple, straight forth, and streamlining it, and as you could see, it has been more efficient, id today we're getting out of here by 12:30, something that has never happened in this City because we have been able —treamline the agenda, where it compliments us as a professional legislative body, and it compliments the people we 'e that don't have to be here until 2:30 in the morning to talk on an item. -�nmissioner Allen: Right. hairman Sanchez: OK, so having said that -- nmissioner Allen: Mr. Chairman, if I may. airman Sanchez: Yes, sir. You're recognized. Submitted Into the public record in connection with item � • 33__on i • - 0 4 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk ommissioner Allen: I have to interrupt you, but we're going to be moving to a PZ item. I have a pocket item that I can -sense with -- hairman Sanchez: We'll get the pocket items -- tn://egov.ci.miami.fl.us/Le2istarWeb/utilitvFunctions/2etActionDetails.asp?hsKev=60972& 1/10/2006 Page 2 of 5 'ommissioner Allen: -- quickly. hairman Sanchez: -- after the PZ items. ommissioner Allen: Right, OK. Sure. 'hairman Sanchez: Yeah. OK, so let's go to the PZ item. Do we -- Madam Clerk or Mr. City Attorney, if we could just go ito the PZ item. We don't need -- Ir. Fernandez: Yes, you can. hairman Sanchez: OK. Ir. Fernandez: You can roll right into it. hairman Sanchez: OK, so we'll go into the PZ item, which is a resolution. Is. Thompson: Excuse me. hairman Sanchez: Madam Applicant, I apologize for the inconvenience. ommissioner Winton: Wow. Subrnitted Into the public record in connection with item 7'Z.33 on 1->t,'54 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Es. Thompson: I'm sorry. I just want to make sure with the City Attorney, the swearing process. -[r. Fernandez: Oh, yes -- hairman Sanchez: Yes. fr. Fernandez: -- most definitely. "hairman Sanchez: All right. All those wishing to testify either for or against this item need to stand up, raise their right ind and be sworn in by the City Clerk. Also, all those testifying in front of this City Commission, if you're representing client or lobbyists, must register with the City. We will not allow boisterous or loud noises or anything that's obscene at is Commission meeting, so having said that, is there anybody we need to -- ommissioner Winton: Sometimes the public may consider us to be obscene. hairman Sanchez: Well, sometimes we are. Sometimes you are, but we just "beep" you out, that's all. All right. Do we ;ed to swear anybody in? s. Thompson: Yes. hairman Sanchez: All right. All those testifying on this PZ item, please raise your right hand to be sworn in. ie City Clerk administered oath required under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons giving testimony on zoning Sues. s. Thompson: Thank you. aairman Sanchez: OK. Madam Applicant, you're recognized. tn-//eunv ci miami.fl iis/T.euictarWeh/iitilitvFnnctinnc/uPtActinnT)etails asn?hcKev=6fl972Rr. 1/10/2006 Page 3 of 5 ,ucia Dougherty: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell ._winue, here today on behalf of the Filling Station Lofts, which -- just going to show you do a map of this general i rict, which is, as you can see, is getting very lofty. We have -- the location of the subject property is right here. We ave Parc Lofts that is catty -corner, Bay View Marketplace, which is going to be coming before you very soon, is directly cross the street, again, catty -corner, south of the Miami cemetery, and in order to do this project, which you've seen oral times, we need to do an alley closure. The alley closure is in the middle of the block here, and what we're doing is dually taking the alley and moving it perpendicular instead of parallel to the block, so we're going to actually have an as.ement coming across here, so the public purpose is basically to transform a neighborhood, which Henry Harper is, in , a pioneer of the neighborhood, just to show you a couple of pictures of what it currently looks like, and what we ope to see it transformed into is a very vibrant community. This is a rendering of the ground floor, which is almost 100 er;ent retail. It's going to have a full basketball court in the project -- I can go on, if you -- continue, if you would like? 'ommissioner Winton: No, no, no, no, I -- tirman Sanchez: No. Is, Dougherty: OK. '„Lnmissioner Winton: We need staff recommendation so we can get going. airman Sanchez: Yeah. ourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): For the record, Lourdes Slazyk, Planning Department. The staff 3mmendation had been for denial because of the public purpose or the public benefit component. ommissioner Allen: Yeah. Slazyk: I understand, and I think Ms. Dougherty can probably expand on it, that there has been some landscaping out tere in front of the cement -- Dougherty: Yes, there is a (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- actually, a concrete batch plant that is directly across the street om us. __nmissioner Allen: Right. Dougherty: It is located, again -- sorry I'm doing this. ommissioner Allen: Lucia, just one quick second -- . Dougherty: Yes, sir. -nmissioner Allen: -- so that I could be on the same page. Es. Dougherty: Sure. nmissioner Allen: I guess the concern with the Planning Department is the public purpose aspect of it? Slazyk: Right, the public -- ommissioner Allen: OK. . Slazyk: -- benefit. At the time that this was filed and went -- Submitted lrito the public record in connection with item FZ. 35 on 1- - o b Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk tri•//arinv r i miami fi nc/T tar\XT />>tilitI,FnnOtinnc/apt4r tinnfetailc acn7hc1Cev=611977.' 1 /1017nn6 Page 4 of 5 ommissioner Allen: Right. Slazyk: -- to the Plat and Street Committee and the Zoning Board, there was no public benefit presented, and like I ud, I believe that something was going to be proffered now, but at that time, there was none, so our recommendation had ?en for denial. ommissioner Winton: So -- ;. Dougherty: But we think that the public benefit is a revitalization of the whole neighborhood, but in fact, if you go ,d drive in front of this concrete batch plant currently, my client, from across the street, has landscaped the whole front f the concrete batch plant, so they've already landscaped public property to screen the batch plant from the public in this N neighborhood. ommissioner Allen: OK, so right now, you're proffering your public benefit? Ls. Dougherty: It's already done. We proffered it and actually, it's already planted. mmissioner Winton: Proffered and did it. ommissioner Allen: Did it. .,mmissioner Winton: Past tense, not a future promise. ce Chairman Gonzalez: All right. ommissioner Allen: Well, how does -- vubrniited Into the public record in connection with item P2-33 on 1-26,-0(, Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk _ommissioner Winton: And I would like to add to the public purpose. In plenty of areas, particularly in my district, tere's been a lot of alleyways, and there's alleyways that allow people to build bigger projects where you don't cessarily want a bigger project, and so the trade-off for public purpose has -- you really want to get something back Jm those developers because it isn't in a zone many times that needs stimulated economic development. It's in a zone here that's already happening, so we want a clear-cut public purpose; it's harder to find it. This one is easy. This is in an of slum and blight. There is no jobs. There is no development. There is no nothing back there. It's just a mess, and ;'ve been able to get -- fortunate that we've had a couple of developers that are coming back in there that can change tis area that is just awful into a part of a vibrant community, and that all by -- never mind the fact that they're recreating - alleyway, so that there's almost a trade, but they're also doing landscaping. The most important thing that I think .y're doing is providing real economic development, and the retail sector of that economic development is going to ring jobs, so I think the public purpose in this alley closure is crystal, crystal clear, and so I move it. )mmissioner Allen: Mr. Chairman, if I may weigh in just a minute here or two. I understand your concerns, ommissioner Winton. Of course, I'm in favor of development that can eliminate any slum and blight. I just want to -ow both procedurally with the City Attorney's office -- because we've had discussions previously about last minute Dffers, but it appears to me that they've already done - -s. Slazyk: They did it, yes. ommissioner Allen: They've already did it, so frankly, technically, I don't know how the City Attorney weighs in on it, -t -- Is. Slazyk: And it isn't a covenant. This isn't a land use and zoning change, so it's not a covenant that's being proffered. )mmissioner Allen: That's necessary, right. tn•//eunv ri miami fl ,ic/T.euictarWe.h/ntilitvFnnctinns/petActionDetails.asn?hsKev=60972& 1/10/2006 Page 5 of 5 Is. Slazyk: What they're doing is showing their public benefit in a landscaping beautification -- mmissioner Allen: Landscaping, right. Slazyk: Right. ommissioner Allen: But does that -- how does that -- ;. Slazyk: Yeah. We have no objections because that is actually -- it's very good for this area. If you look at the aerial notographs in your package, you' 11 see that trees are very necessary in this neighborhood, and -- mmissioner Allen: Correct. ts. Slazyk: -- what they did begins to bring back some sort of canopy to the neighborhood and greenery. ommissioner Allen: OK. ce Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Does that conclude your presentation? Is. Dougherty: It does, thank you. ice Chairman Gonzalez: OK. This is a public hearing. Anybody in favor or oppose that want to address the 'ommission? OK. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. Commissioner Winton. .ommissioner Winton: I moved it. ye ce Chairman Gonzalez: OK. We have a motion. 'ommissioner Allen: Second. .ce Chairman Gonzalez: And we have a second. All in favor, say "aye." ie Commission (Collectively): Aye. rice Chairman Gonzalez: Motion carries. _s. Dougherty: Thank you very much. Submitted Into the public record in connection with item 172,55 on I. 36 -bt, Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk T r missioner Allen: Yeah. And Ms. Dougherty, could you step over here, once you're done, for a second? The motion _rried by the following vote: Lye: 3 - Angel Gonzalez, Johnny L. Winton and Jeffery L. Allen Thsent: 2 - Joe Sanchez and Tomas Regalado ttn•//P(Tnw ri rni ami fl lic/T e0ictarWeh/ntilitvFnnetion.c/QetAction Details.asn?hsKeV=607%2UL 1/10/2006 PZ.6 Case Number: 2003-0686 ZONING FACT SHEET 08-Sep-03 item 4 Location: See Request Below. Legal: (Complete legal description on fife with the Department of Hearing Boards) Applicant: Gloria M. Velazquez, Esquire on behalf of Urban One Development, LLC 1221 Brickell Avenue Miami, FL 33131 (305) 579-0736 Zoning: C-2 Liberal Commercial Request: Official vacation and closure of a public right-of-way, being the portion of two alleys located in the area bounded by NE 17 Street, NE 17 Terrace, NE Miami Place and NE Miami Court. Purpose: This will allow a unified commercial development site. Recommendations: Planning 8 Zoning Dept.: Denial, Public Works: See supporting documentation. Plat and Street Committee: See supporting documentation. Miami -Dade County NIA. Code Enforcement History: NIA. History: N/A. Analysis: See supporting documentation. Zoning Board Resolution: ZB 2003-0744 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P2.33 on 1-Zc,-o,, Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Zoning Board: Recommended approval to City Commission. Vote: 8-0 City. Commission: N/A. Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P2.35 on [ . 2Q _ o(, Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk N.W. • 4". 4 7 3 IVA 11 • N.W. -417 77: 14 s• 4 .14 • 2 • /I to 3 Jo/ 22 ; .. TI=oir 111 t 4 • 5 • 81.100IVicION 7. YR -A- MC 7. Tea' 44 '7 i • SI Q ST. 4 2 is 13 4 40 to 4 4 ft a • . ST 1- z • ifiw 0 4 .2 41 N. W. '71 I 1 /4. TRACT 0 • NATION At. LIN N RROPE /ries Submitted Into the public record in connection with '4ern eg .53 o 1 1 14 311 17 14 SO _o 76 I 4 2 0I 4. 4 C; 2 • ev A 42 1 TR "e" os 33 772 Age 1 .1 111 444 Is is 14 q? 1 2 11 10 .!" 44 GAO: 1 10 a • s s• 7 • 3 4 / 4 3 c 2 / . sr. so 15 04 1.1 MILL(4$ T TRACTA /Tom! EMI MEI mc." 40 smilial 00 31. st .4 tu WWI 1 s 44 . J1,4111.. jii 1.11310rallES yr., 1241/:4,r.ic 415 -co ou 1, Olaf 1 II lad All fig *.nso OM an cr. ts . • ' • e. „ 17 1=11sLomi 0111111.7-11 IMAM 11M7 SDI 000-1.111111 144.1.1111 Muss 15 N.W. 1.4161 kr" limn N-77 11311E1111 • %,•‘' 9 t>.. • .172 <?3''s C 1 T Y PA R P .4 1 .1 IV 1 ST 17 (4 S T. 71 2 9 T. T. .4 2 e a a 4.7t0' ItT : n PARK CITY CE-ME 41*7 11 •, • a • 1 N. E. 1,0070' sows vitt • RY IAA OMNI ANN T "A" TEMPLE' ISRAEL SUS. 17 3 MS VC IsiS 111 Er ST. Plat STA; 0o4.• 44; E. ST. EMI g "town 159 spa] 4 13 40 15 • 14371 r#1071 1113 4c. u 3 16 4 10 si. S T • .3 s agY '4 ER +c) T. a VI" • 4. TERRANOVA BISCAYNE <sc.% Ar .4, N.E. 11u iv(114 F I a) • .7) TNAcT 10 11111IF N.E ts1•17P, N E ,0 N.E. N.F, • io N. E 19 • 0.4 4 '4 18 t0000ss000soso sou • A. S. t 8 TRAC 40 .22...Q4.01:::247100 0 0 7 61.44 G 1,4 000000 0000000000 se • 4. 04. X▪ 1 -0 z Tti 0 Alia N. E. St • 11 •32 TVA •,T7,41. Prin I QUI • • PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS Case No. 2003-0686 VACATION AND CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, BEING THE PORTION OF AN ALLEY BOUNDED BY NE 17th STREET, NE 17th TERRACE, NE MIAMI PLACE AND NE MIAMI COURT. Pursuant to Section 55-15 (c) of the Miami City Code, the Planning and Zoning Department has reviewed the proposed street vacation and closure to determine whether it is in the public interest, or whether the general public would benefit from the vacation of the right- of-way. The following findings have been made: • It is found that the closure and vacation of the alley could have unanticipated long-term consequences and could ultimately facilitate the development of a building that is inconsistent with the height, bulk and scale of existing buildings in the neighborhood. • It is found that the property owner has failed to demonstrate any public benefits that would be provided as a result of the proposed alley closure and vacation. Based on these findings, the Planning and Zoning Department recommends denial of the request. Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P7. 35 on I.- 24. of Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Page 1 of 2 motion was made by Arthur E. Teele, Jr., seconded by Angel Gonzalez, that this matter be ADOPTED. Chairman Vinton: PZ-6. ,ourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ-6 is another official vacation and closure of public right -of - /ay, being a portion of two alleys located in the area bounded by Northeast 17th Street, Northeast 17th Terrace, Northeast ami Place, and Northeast Miami Court. The Planning and Zoning Department has recommended denial, and the Zoning .oard has recommended approval. The Planning and Zoning Department denial is based on the findings that the property wner has failed to demonstrate any public benefits, and that this closure could have unanticipated long-term nsequences that could ultimately facilitate the development of a building that is inconsistent with height, bulk and scale ,'thin the neighborhood. Submitted Into the public record in connection with airman Winton: Anyone from the public in opposition of PZ-6, by the way? item ?Z. 33 on 1- 24- oL Priscilla A. Thompson 'ice Chairman Teele: You've got a board in opposition. City Clerk ['airman Winton: Right. Other than -- but from the public. OK. Lucia, you want to -- .cia Dougherty: Yes, very quickly. Lucia Dougherty, offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I am here today on behalf of the ..frier of the property, which is -- 'airman Winton: I'm sorry. Is. Dougherty: Yes. .iairman Winton: I opened the public hearing but I didn't close the public hearing. So I'd like to close the public hearing. _rid now, back to you. _s. Dougherty: -- which is Henry Harper and the park loft. Now, when I got the recommendation of denial by the staff, I 'as really -- I thought this has got to be a mistake, because you have already approved a MUSP (Major Use Special 'rmit) for this site. hairman Winton: That's what I thought. s. Dougherty: And these alleys, which you can see in green right here, these little alleys don't go anywhere. iairman Winton: And by the way -- could I interrupt you here for a second? [s. Dougherty: Sure. iairman Winton: And I'd like to make this point to the Commission. This is one of those times where we didn't approve [e alleyway closure before we knew what the product type would be. And you know, that's been the battleground. And have been in opposition to closing many of these alleyways and other public right-of-ways because we didn't know -tat was going to end up there. And so, as a consequence, we were concerned that we would end up with something that as out of character for the neighborhood in doing so. This is just in reverse. We've already approved the MUSP for this aject. We know precisely what's going to be there. Now, a hundred years from now, they may bulldoze it. But a ndred years from now, they'll be thinking about this City in a radically different way than we're thinking about it today. 3 I just wanted to make that point and tell you why, at least from my perspective, I'm going to be very supportive of this `)sure. Es. Dougherty: In terms of a public benefit, this is probably in the worst neighborhood that you have. And I just want to --ow you the photographs. hairman Winton: Yeah. tn•//eanv ri miami fl nc/i.eaictarWeh/ntilitvFnnrtinnc/aetArtinniletailc acn7hsKev=416R3S7 1/10/2006 Page 2 of 2 Is. Dougherty: Henry Harper is really a pioneer developing a loft apartment in this neighborhood in this condition, and a is the public benefit. That, in addition to the fact that the Zoning Board asked us to do some street landscaping as a ublic benefit, and we'd urge your support. ce Chairman Teele: So moved. bairman Winton: We have a motion. ummissioner Gonzalez: Second. airman Winton: Second. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." he Commission (Collectively): Aye. ..airman Winton: Like sign opposed. The motion carries. What was that, PZ-6? Was that PZ-6? Slazyk: That was 6, right. The motion carried by the following vote: .ye: 5 - Angel Gonzalez, Tomas Regalado, Joe Sanchez, Arthur E. Teele, Jr. and Johnny L. Winton Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ?Z. 33 on 1- 2&-0. Prw ! `, _� A. Thompson C `y Clerk tv://eaov.ci.miami.fl.us/LegistarWeh/utilitvFnnctiens/getActionnetails.asn?hsKev=436R3& 1/1 fl/2006 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P 2. 33 on l -x- De, Prisci!!a A. Thompson City Clerk This Settlement Agreement is made this 29th day of September, 2005, between the Bay Point Property Owners Association, Inc. ("Neighbor") and Thirty Ninth Street Investors Group, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company authorized to transact business in the state of Florida, the owner ("Owner") of the Property ("Property") described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. Whereas, Owner has secured the issuance and approval of a Class II Permit, identified as File No. 05-0235, and issued by Ana Gelabert, ("Gelabert") Director of the planning department of the city of Miami on or about August 8, 2005 ("Class II Permit") for a development approximately located at 39th Street and Biscayne Boulevard in Miami FL and commonly know as Tivoli; and Whereas Neighbor has filed an appeal ("Appeal") of the Class II Permit, dated August 17, 2005; a copy of said Appeal is attached hereto and marked Exhibit B; and Whereas Owner has also filed an application for the replatting of the Tivoli property inclusive of a vacation of a private alley ("Re -plat") set forth as Exhibit C. As settlement of differences and disputes between the parties, and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree and respectively promise as follows: 1. The Owner has provided to the Neighbor a title opinion from Chicago Title and Insurance Company dated January 3, 2005 confirming that title is in the Owner. This title opinion is a partial inducement for the entering into of this Settlement Agreement by Neighbor. If said opinion reveals that the Owner is not the sole party necessary to join in this Settlement Agreement, and if any other necessary parties fail to join in the Settlement Agreement, then this Settlement Agreement shall become null and void and have no further force and effect. The Neighbor has provided to the Owner the attached incumbency certificate ("Incumbency Certificate") confirming that the signatory for the Page 1 of 14 Neighbor has the authority to execute this Settlement Agreement. The Incumbency Certificate and the representations contained therein are a partial inducement for entering into this Settlement Agreement by Owner and that Owner in reliance on said Incumbency Certificate and the representations contained therein will expend significant capital and take initiatives on reliance of said Incumbency Certificate and the representations contained therein. Upon the execution of this Settlement Agreement, Owner and Neighbor agree not to pursue any action which would not be in substantial compliance with the provisions of this Settlement Agreement, except through modification of the Settlement Agreement as provided for herein. 2. The Owner agrees to the following: A. B. C. The Property shall be developed in substantial accordance with the plans referenced in the Class II Permit, the implementation of which shall be referred to as the "Project". All existing above ground utilities on the north portion of the Property (adjacent to any Property in the Bay Point neighborhood) shall be buried underground prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy (temporary or final) on the Property. Landscaping in accordance with the landscaping plan in the Class II Permit as modified on the exhibit attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "D" shall be in place on the Property prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy (temporary or final) on the Property. In the alternative Developer may agree to provide 12 Areca Palms, 12-feet in height in 25 gallon containers for each of the six Bay Point parcels abutting the Property and plant three oak trees on each of the six Bay Point parcels abutting the Property. Each oak tree shall be at least 18 feet in height and have a 4-inch caliper and be Florida fancy quality. However, in either case, the time of implementation of the plant material shall be subject to matters of force inajuere and material availability. 3. The Neighbor hereby agrees to immediately withdraw its Appeal set forth on Exhibit B upon the mutual execution of this Settlement Agreement and to deliver to Gelabert at Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P z n 1- Pi �:cita A. TCty °n Clerk Page 2 of 14 the city of Miami the letter attached hereto as Exhibit B-1. Submitted Into the public record in connection with item PPz. 53 on I---='l Priscidda A. Thompson ate k 4. Neighbor hereby agrees that it shall immediately execute the letter attached hereto as Exhibit C-1 irrevocably supporting the vacation of the alley as shown on Exhibit C and to deliver said executed Exhibit C-1 to Mr. Frank McMahon at the city of Miami, and to Anthony Toledo at Miami -Dade County offices. 5. The Neighbor or its designee agrees to be present at any public hearing regarding the Class II Permit to express its support for the issuance of said permit. Furthermore the Neighbor agrees not to file formal administrative or judicial actions adverse to the Project unless it reasonably believes the development fails to conform to the provisions of this Settlement Agreement. 6. Subject to the approval of the city of Miami, the Owner shall include within its condominium documents a provision that shall restrict and limit the north alley to a use by emergency vehicles only. 7. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Owner and Neighbor, as well as their respective successors and assigns. 8. Any violation or breach of any of the terms of this Settlement Agreement may be remedied by any relief available at law or in equity, including injunctive relief and/or damages and sanctions for contempt of court, by any party to this Settlement Agreement. The prevailing party in any proceeding seeking to enforce this Settlement Agreement or any portion hereof shall be entitled to receive from the other party court costs and reasonable attorney's fees, including paraprofessional fees and attorney's fees incurred in connection with any appeal. In any injunctive action relating to this Settlement Agreement, the Owner, its successors and assigns shall stipulate to a maximum $1,000.00 bond to be provided by any parties. Page 3 of 14 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item 172.35 on I - 9. The Owner shall reimburse to the Association its legal fees, costs and Priscilla expensesA. Thompson City Clerk regarding this matter not to exceed $5,000.00. 10. This instrument may be modified, amended or released as to any portion of the Property by a written instrument executed by Neighbor (acting only through Neighbor's board of directors) and the then Owners(s) of the fee -simple title to the land to be affected by such modification, amendment or release. 11. Invalidation of any one of these provisions by judgment of Court shall not affect any of the other provisions of this Settlement Agreement, which shall remain in full force and effect. 12. This Settlement Agreement shall be governed by, construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. Venue for any action under this Agreement shall be in Miami -Dade County Florida. 13. All notices, and other communications which are required or may be given under this Settlement Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given if delivered or mailed, first class mail, postage prepaid or overnight delivery (Federal Express, DHL, Airborne or UPS): To Neighbor: To Owner: George A. Auflick, President Bay Point Property Owner's Association, Inc. 405 Gate Lane Miami, FL 33137 Tel: (305) 438-9958 Fax: (305) 573-4551 Email: ga@acworldwide.net Thomas W. Fawell Thirty Ninth Street Investors Group, LLC 11111 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 715 Miami, FL 33181 Tel: (305) 582-5104 Fax: (305) 895-5887 Email: twfawell a,agincourtco.com Page 4 of 14 14. This Agreement may be executed by the parties in counterpart originals (facsimile copies shall be considered as originals) with the same force and effect as if fully and simultaneously executed in a single original document. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly entered into and signed as of the day and year first written above. Witnesses: Print Name Print Name STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE The foregoing instrument 2005 by or who produced Thirty Ninth Street Investors Group, LLC By: Thomas W. Fawell, Manager Submitted Into the public record in connection with item PZ, 33 on t btv Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk was acknowledged before me this day of , as Owner of the Property, who is personally known to me as identification. My commission expires: NOTARY PUBLIC, State of Florida at Large Print name: Page 5 of 14 Bay Point Property Owners Association, Inc. Witnesses: By: George Auflick, President Print Name Print Name STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2005 by , who is personally known to me or who produced as identification, on behalf of the corporation. My commission expires: NOTARY PUBLIC, State of Florida at Large Print name: Submitted Into the public record in connection with item p2.33 on 1- %' - o(° Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Page 6 of 14 Exhibit "A" Legal description as used in Class II Permit HAMILTON PROPERTY (5 Folio Numbers) Folio Number 01-3219-011-0010: Street Address: 3915 Biscayne Boulevard Legal Description: Submitted Into the public record in connection with item 172.33 on t_749roto Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 19 53 42 PB 5-25 MAGNOLIA PARK 2n' AMD PL W20 FT LOT A LOT SIZE 20.000 X 231 OR 20108-2659 1201 5 (5) MARY DRAKE HOEFFEL & CORNELIA DRAKE VAN RYN KASIN INVESTMENTS NV OR 10052-351 352 0578 2 HAMILTON CORPORATION OR 10765-345 0580 2 PROPERTIES OF HAMILTON INC OR 11770-246 0183 5 US SECURITY INSURANCE CO OR 15234-766 1091 4 Folio Number 01-3219-011-0160: Street Address: 3915 Biscayne Boulevard Legal Description: 19 53 42 PB 5-25 MAGNOLIA PARK 2ND AMD PL S150FT OF LOT 13 LESS ST & S150FT LOT 14 LOT SIZE 150.000 X 85 OR 20108-2659 1201 5 (5) NORMAN S ROSEN TR KASIM INVESTMENTS NV OR 10052-349 0578 2 HAMILTON CORPORATION OR 10765-345 0580 2 PROPERTIES OF HAMILTON INC OR 11770-246 0183 5 LAWRENCE D WINSON TR OR 11770-246 0183 5 US SECURITY INSURANCE CO OR 15234-766 1091 4 Folio Number: 01-3219-011-0170 Street Address: 405 NE 39`h Street Legal Description: 19 53 42 MAGNOLIA PARK 2ND AMD PL PB 5-25 LOT 15 & W1/2 LOT 16 LOT SIZE IRREGULAR OR 20108-2659 1201 5 (5) NORMAN S. ROSEN TR KASIM INVESTMENTS NV OR 10052-349 0578 2 HAMILTON CORPORATION OR 10765-345 0580 2 PROPERTIES OF HAMILTON INC OR 11770-246 0183 5 PROPERTIES OF HAMILTON INC OR 13693-2119 0588 5 US SECURITY INSURANCE CO OR 15234-766 1091 4 Page 7 of 14 Folio Number 01-3219-011-0180 Street Address: 443 NE 39th Street Legal Description: . � ublic Submitted lr.;.,;1) 'fir ;e record connection with record in rc� o b item P.? 3 on � / on Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk MAGNOLIA PARK 2ND AMD PB 5-25 LOT 17 & E1/2 LOT 16 SIZE 99.000 X 204 OR 20108-2659 1201 5 (5) NORMAN ROSEN TR KASIM INVESTMENTS NV OR 10052-349 0578 2 HAMILTON CORPORATION OR 10765-345 0580 2 PROPERTIES OF HAMILTON INC OR 11770-246 0183 5 PROPERTIES OF HAMILTON INC OR 13693-2119 0588 5 US SECURITY INSURANCE CO OR 15234-766 1091 4 Folio Number 01-3219-011-0190 Street Address: 447 NE 39`h Street Legal Description: 19 53 42 MAGNOLIA PARK 2"D AMD PB 5-25 LOTS 18 & 19 LOT SIZE 136.000 X 203 OR 20108-2659 1201 5 (5) MD HOEFFEL AND CORNELIA DRAKE VAN RYN KASIM INVESTMENTS NV OR 10052-351-352 0578 2 HAMILTON CORPORATION OR 10765-345 0580 2 PROPERTIES OF HAMILTON INC OR 11770-246 0183 5 PROPERTIES OF HAMILTON INC OR 13693-2119 0588 5 US SECURITY INSURANCE CO OR 15234-766 1091 4 Apartment Building at 455 NE 39`h Street Folio Number : 01-3219-011-0020 Legal Description: MAGNOLIA PARK 2ND AMD PL PB 5-25 W155FT OF LOT A LESS W 20 FT LOT SIZE 135.000 X 231 OR 12844-2150 0286 1 MANOR COURT CORP YOUKAL CORP OR 10709-838 0480 6 Apartment Building at 521 NE 39th Street: Folio Number : 01-3219-011-0050 Legal Description: MAGNOLIA PARK 2ND AMD PL PB 5-25 E75 FT LOT A LOT SIZE 75.000 X 231 OR 16428-0609 0594 3 FRED HART & W MARJORIE CHARLESTON BAY ASSOCIATES LTD OR 13684- 1153 0288 5 Page 8 of 14 August 17, 2005 EXHIBIT "B" Submitted Into the public record in connection with item P2.33on I - _, 06, Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Objection of Bay Point Home Owners Association, Inc. to the Class II Permit Issued Under File No. 05-0235 C�3 B/PBA Y Pour PROPERTY p WAAERS A3SOC1AT10N, iNcdh 409' Gat' Lane /Maw, R orkla 3313 Via Hand Dellive Terasita :Fernandez Director, City: Aiiarri Hearing Boar Cafe 444 Southwest 2nd Avenue, 7°1 Floor Miami, FL 33130 Mrs. Fernandez In accordance; with Article 18 of Zoning Ordiance 11000, we submit to you an official Appeal and appit,priate fee of $500.00 with reference to the Class 11 Spatial Permit granted to the Tivoli Project at 3915 Biscaync Boulevard. The final decision was rendered August 8, 2005 therfore this appeal is presented to you within the required 15 day limitation. Respectfully, Au flick, ° '` sident f of the Bay oint Property Owner's Association NOTE: the mailing address is different than the physic address: mailing address is Hearing' Boards Office P.O. Box 330708, Miami, Florida 33233-0708 http:flwwwci.miamifl us/hearing boards/default.asp Page 9 of 14 EXHIBIT "B-1" Formal Withdrawal of Objection of Bay Point Home Owners Association, Inc. to the Class II Permit Issued Under File No. 05-0235 (Bay Point Letter Head) Ana Gelabert Director of Planning Department Miami Administration Building 444 S.W. 2nd Avenue 7th Floor Miami, FL 33139 Re: Objection of the Bay Point Property Owners Association, Inc. to Class II Permit File No. 05-0235 for that project commonly known as "Tivoli" Dear Ms. Gelabert; The Bay Point Property Owners Association, Inc. has heretofore filed an objection to the Class II Permit File No. 05-0235 for that project commonly known as "Tivoli". This letter formally and permanently withdraws that objection and terminates and right or interest of the Bay Point Property Owners Association, Inc. to refile its objection. Sincerely, Bay Point Property Owners Association, Inc. By: George A. Auflick, President cc: Thomas W. Fawell Manager, Thirty Ninth Street Investors Group, LLC Submitted Into the public record in connection with item F2- 33 on Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Page 10 of 14 LOT 1 I to O,Erdf ACRE UMW.ae. u. aattr; Imt)aq 1U11.0t teaar w lr gsarraada r name. Naar el la radar Kw lli: RFIS* ROr ,at Fa** Mr AP POMPOM *OAP PPIPP. Kaa. MS to a lam tall a* MO KC SWIMMan Mt lrlratk aabl 010e wa 10010M* ale a *4094f * WW1* S NO I4pr awls Rawls. liH*4** aaatwac rp�aR1IKtRarMamoonlit,aOUt ula. taw RUAtaw Palau atasaa awr�!Is I IRlala.i+l!UIY alwr.'+l�a_ I K®a Hawed Ia6RC. .fa.ur MOM aaYelBrt W Pole IKOtr wt s M*4 aK Watt lac ttt *Kea aaa. RSIO ma. KOa f4. Oat war Oa* 19444. Oawr.. watt TIVOLI SUBDIVISION SECTION I0. TOWNSHIP 69 SQUTN, FIANGE 42 EAST CITY OF ASAMI, MiAkS,ISACIE CQUNTY, F'LQAIDA Ila WOOS /afar w req PW R A CLOSE NO WOVE nt t 1004 /tar .aRalrt Po LOU Iq 11. it f1. 1s. II10/40 AKFl9t4`11Ar Cr Walax *AC rIAr KOK 4 MK Z. MICR MIWO* al iA•IM,R01114,Clog amok Ia�awA oR trr Awl YO E pp /0OS Ial99B5 K01 9RWrrlc tlRf w Ili.. P.MP. P.. rf LOT 2 .,a IRA 1.87B3 ACRE 4 1aT a rr WOO. Yr... .l.es_ 15. N.E. 39th 47 it I as I r WOW 10/000* iIOW 0OIY0 Ulf of TF m IwiLLr w.w Kam K p. a/a91 au MOCK A Grata wain Ra Vat OW a. anal Maatlar7* f A VS A ■ aK IICaa I7. 4c r0 r1t Oaaaa 0Ila A r et 1ptlNpf PY A>r Rp a® wR norm titan ®1a0;.. IO w9 as ap en t O111L aloaala N alFalw>b -- ar a - IR N ahIK:O ItaRM SOW at l9aas aY Oa* ado Nit OAr Kota. la NOM 19It R.ar Kota orwt IR..: °who- tom aagw ItGF4.1 Hwy aaM IMaa 1 OC *at KKK.a% arate aitrIC:t I* OPPOPVC VaKaat 4Caa 190010} MPO I9'POMP I1ai PLATBQQK____PAG SHEET 1 OF 1, LAso ryrAr14M OIC maul 1000 P. RI n 1Rr r or taold mNas tt *4 co. PA<.Ib1:.a H-:faltllO.. 14a0-B1� !. y� _ K.._KUM PSI VOW ea am Oat�1f_ All law tY S9& It NW. LOT 3 tuo>o rt 1.2112 ACM 11 IVO _ *4 for :tA9AP mar - STREET' • yllr a AM* aw a as to Or MN OM 4 'psafP�9far+MK1 aK. . .Ae O"""""Na'"'" JOOaaF,�aaiam R Rp 1�[ p RIQ pW 1�[, q(A►/KWlf��t/ r r+aoa Guar mot 197. RYa.. a N tIRW aalIaMUR. tr. to a4'O 00**4 CPI 44 RiO EafaKaalCVlla101ah :.. R`�. IYCa I,dlOR IDA a,ROW. aI toOa MC /. NraIR. IOW Nat RIa1 ta4001 t6 Gramm ,Ayr a rat war..% am a A tarter ma tp lAurpARON VS Matta m Kk lit. aeareaW p�gaart Oal9arra, a+eaaa 1olt6.a arc rw we 113.6lRAaa10 a�µgqr�� o�f tal� y .9lla� lr Rr o D n Rttisww 1�i/tkMl pq' Y[ {[l arifam Iaa9a a Ut *It sorttom d aM�trF qP:l. istom al wan e M +1a as Kal4atR lIq ar K IOWIak a1aMI �oarlra1ra°a1�am01m�i ri.am eIuarl ^1co�a oa.na+,rt a1 rt �'wMR wKRal as •R• api wY mlK.r.p lm L Y. R IC >tl@ PPY lw.ala aY ant �i l Iyla tun loll pta.= Wtt 44 s4 Cw r wa: MIA*[ CUM nat.:. 4i Mx N AV W. 0.0.i Oe Gala mar I w• ar Mllr Nit MI It* aMIN �aFl t IrK 1W`ata 1pKa FPt a?NMa F OW= UV Or WM NIK KO* Mama T, weal.. 1mR «J» IIgIHXE EXHIBIT "C-1" Letter of Support of Bay Point Home Owners Association, Inc. to the Amended Plat of the Tivoli Project Prepared by A.R. Toussaint & Associates, Inc., Partially Vacating a Private Alley Extending in a North/South Direction at the Project c/k/a "Tivoli" and Identified by the Proposed Amended Plat "Tivoli Subdivision" (Bay Point Letter Head) Frank McMahon Miami Administration Building 444 S.W. 2'd Avenue 7th Floor Miami, FL 33139 Anthony Toldeo Miami -Dade County Building 111 N.W. 1' Street Miami, FL 33128 Submitted Into the public record in connection with item 'P 2.33 on 1-' =eC. Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Re: Amended Plat of the Tivoli Project Prepared by A.R. Toussaint & Associates, Inc., Partially Vacating a Private Alley Extending in a North/South Direction at the Project c/k/a "Tivoli" and Identified by the Proposed Amended Plat "Tivoli Subdivision" Dear Mr. McMahon and Mr. Toldeo: This letter will confirm the support and affirmation of the Bay Point Property Owners Association, Inc., for the above referenced plat. Sincerely, Bay Point Property Owners Association, Inc. By: George A. Auflick, President cc: Thomas W. Fawell Manager, Thirty Ninth Street Investors Group, LLC Page 12 of 14 EXHIBIT "D" LANDSCAPE PLAN REGARDING THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF THE TIVOLI PROJECT PREPARED BY VOA ASSOCIATES OF CHICAGO, IL Sheet #1 VOA Landscape plan Submitted Into the public record in connection with item ??. • 53 on 1-e2G-ob Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk Page 13 of 14 Sheet #2 VOA Cross Section Plan /7 t • • ea Submitted Into the public record in connection with item Pz.35 on k- - b4 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk za • 20 " .\ir 20 Qct6ack. Page 14 of 14