HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-06-0342City of Miami
Legislation
Resolution: R-06-0342
City Hall
3500 Pan American
Drive
Miami, FL 33133
www.miamigov.com
File Number: 06-00422ii Final Action Date: 5/25/2006
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S),
DENYING THE APPEAL BY BRENDA KUHNS, WENDY STEPHAN, PAT KELLY AND
THE BUENA VISTA EAST HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION,
AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD, THEREBY GRANTING
WITH CONDITIONS THE CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION NO. 05-0313,
ISSUED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR ON JANUARY 18, 2006, TO ALLOW FOR
NEW CONSTRUCTION OF ELECTRA TWO, LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 100
NORTHEAST 39TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A."
WHEREAS, the Miami Zoning Board at its meeting on March 27, 2006, Item No. Z.4, adopted
Resolution No. ZB 06-1152 by a vote of five to one (5-1), of Special Permit Application No. 05-0313
by the Planning Director on January 18, 2006; and
WHEREAS, on April 11, 2006, Brenda Kuhns, Wendy Stephan, Pat Kelly and the Buena Vista
East Historic Neighborhood Association (Applicant/Appellee) timely filed an appeal of the decision of
the Zoning Board; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission after careful consideration of this matter, finds the application
for Class II Special Permit does in fact meet the applicable requirements of Zoning Ordinance No.
11000, as amended, and deems it advisable and in the best interest of the general welfare of the City
of Miami and its inhabitants to deny the appeal, affirm the decision of the Zoning Board and thereby
approve with conditions the Class II Special Permit as hereinafter set forth;
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. After reviewing the record below and having heard argument of counsel, and being
otherwise duly advised in the premise, it is found that:
a. The Applicant/Appellee did not seek any variances from the requirements
of the City's zoning code;
b. The Applicant/Appellee failed to provide to the Zoning Board any competent
substantial evidence to support a reversal of the Planning Director's approval
of the Class II permit;
c. The evidence submitted by the Appellants consisted exclusively of non -fact
based, opinion testimony of neighbors;
d. The testimony presented by the neighbors went only to their sentiment that
City of Miami
Page 1 of 3 File Id: 06-00422ii (Version: 5) Printed On: 1/30/2017
File Number: 06-0042211 Enactment Number: R-06-0342
the project was aesthetically "out of scale" and offered no expert testimony
on that issue;
e. It was the Appellants' burden on appeal to the Zoning Board to establish
through competent substantial evidence that the criteria of Section 1305 of
the Zoning Ordinance had not been met, a burden which they failed to carry;
f. The Applicant/Appellee provided competent substantial evidence in the form
of expert testimony of a traffic engineer, a planner and an architect, all of
whom testified that the Project was in compliance with the criteria in Section
1305 of the Zoning Ordinance;
g. The Project was reviewed and approved by the Director of the City of Miami
Planning Department, who found in her Final Decision dated January 18, 2006
(which we adopt and affirm and is attached hereto as "Exhibit B"), that with
regard to the criteria set forth in Section 1305 of the Zoning Ordinance, the
Project has been reviewed and found to be sufficient subject to the following
mitigating conditions:
1. The Applicant/Appellee 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; and
2. The Class II Special Permit approval is further conditioned on a full
review by the Office of Zoning and any substantial changes that arise
due to zoning comments will require a new Class II Special Permit
while minor changes due to zoning comments shall be considered
substantially in compliance with this approval.
h. Additionally, the City Commission at its hearing on May 25, 2006, imposed the
following additional conditions which are subject to the review and approval of
the Planning Director:
1. The Applicant/Appellee will re -design the Electra II project to comply
with a height of one hundred and twenty feet (120') to the roof.
Mechanicals defined as air conditioning units, elevator equipment
chillers, boilers and cooling towers, may be at a maximum height of
twenty-five feet (25') and may be located in the center of the roof.
2. The Applicant/Appellee will provide at least 10,000 square feet, not
including sidewalks or promenade area, of nonresidential commercial
space, including but not limited to, retail and office uses in the
redesigned development.
3. The Applicant/Appellee will provide an articulated east facade that is
architecturally treated consistent with the rest of the development;
such articulation to include any one or more of the following: building
openings, greenery, planters, balconies, windows, or any other
architectural element. Such architectural treatment shall be provided
by Applicants sufficient to eliminate the "spite wall" or blank wall effect
of the east facade.
4. The Applicant/Appellee will provide an artistic treatment for the south
facade, including but not limited to a mural, mosaic, or other artistic
element, that is visible from Interstate 195. The specific type of artistic
element shall be of a permanent nature, require little to no maintenance
by future owners, and shall be designed to identify and emphasize the
City of Miami Page 2 of 3 File Id: 06-00422ii (Version: 5) Printed On: 1/30/2017
File Number: 06-0042211 Enactment Number: R-06-0342
design district neighborhood. Nothing herein shall in any way restrict
the use of regular architectural elements such as windows or balconies
on any portion of the south facade. The Neighbors shall have the right
to recommend artists and designs for the south facade. The Neighbors
and Applicants understand and agree that the City shall be ultimately
responsible for approving said treatment.
5. The Applicant/Appellee's redesign of the project will retain the existing
high end architectural elements depicted on the approved Class II
Special Permit plans, including but not limited to glass facades and
rounded corners.
6. The Applicant/Appellee will provide off -site parking to compensate for
reduction in parking, for example, but not limited to, by contract with
the City of Miami for use of public parking and/or in the event no public
parking is available, to pay into a Parking Trust Fund, if such option is
available. If valet service is utilized, the valet will be prohibited from
parking cars in the Buena Vista East Historic Neighborhood.
Section 3. Based on the foregoing findings and determinations, the City Commission hereby
denies the appeal and affirms the decision of the Zoning Board, Resolution No. ZB 2006-1152,
adopted March 27, 2006, thereby granting the Class II Special Permit Application No. 05-0313 issued
by the Planning Director on January 18, 2006, to allow new construction of the Project for the
property located at approximately 100 Northeast 39th Street, Miami, Florida, more particularly
described in attached "Exhibit A."
Section 4. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption and signature of
the Mayor. {1}
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.
City of Miami Page 3 of 3 File Id: 06-00422ii (Version: 5) Printed On: 1/30/2017