HomeMy WebLinkAboutLegislation (Version 5)City of Miami
Legislation
Resolution: R•05-0155
City Hall
3500 Pan American
Drive
Miami, FL 33133
www.ci.miami.fl.us
Final Action Date: 3/1012005
File Number: 05-00014
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S),
GRANTING THE APPEAL BY ANDREW W.J. DICKMAN, ESQ., ON BEHALF OF
THE MORNINGSIDE CIVIC ASSOCIATION, ROD ALONSO, RON STEBBINS,
SCOTT CRAWFORD AND ELVIS CRUZ, REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE
MIAMI ZONING BOARD, THEREBY DENYING THE CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT
APPLICATION NO. 04-0198, TO ALLOW FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR THE
PROCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 5301-5501 BISCAYNE
BOULEVARD,S
MIAMI FLORIDA MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN
BOULEVARD, ,
"EXHIBIT A."
WHEREAS, the Miami Zoning Board at its meeting on December 13, 2pENY4, Item
he appeal filed
adopted Resolution No. ZB 2004-0960 by a vote of seven to one (7-1),
to by Andrew W.J. Dickman, Esquire, onb Clf of the a Class IilSpecial Permit Applicationgside Civic Association, n No. 04-0198
od Alonso,
Ron Stebbins, Scott Crawford and Elvis
Cruz of
issued by the Planning Director on October 27, 2004, and
WHEREAS, the developer Morningside Development, LLC filed a petition for writ of certiorari
from the City Commission's decision set forth in Resolution R-05-0155 and the Circuit Court
Appellate Division, upon motion for clarification, issued an order on October 18, 2005, quashing
the City Commissions decision set forth in Resolution No. R-05-0155 and remanding the case
back to the City Commission for proceedings consistent with the opinion of the court; and
WHEREAS, the court in the above stated order in summation ruled the City Commission must
make specific written findings and determinations of fact under 1305
fothO rdinarce No. 11000,
lass l Special Permit
the zoning ordinance of the City of Miami, as to why the application
should be granted or denied under the zoning ordinance and further held that the City
Commission is sitting as an appellate body and is limited to traditional appellate review of the
Zoning Board's decision( the review is limited to what was actually presented to the zoning board);
and
WHEREAS, the City Commission after careful consideration of this matter, and
notwithstanding the recommendation of the Miami Zoning Board, finds the Class II Special Permit
does not 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 grant the appeal, reverse the decision of the Zoning Board and Planning Director
and deny the Class II Special Permit as hereinafter set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA:
City of Nliatni
Page 1 of 3
Printed On: 11/3/2005
Enactment ;Yumber: R-05-0I55
File Number: 05-00014
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 Zoning Board departed from the essential requirements of the law by failing to
provide findings of fact to support its decision to deny the appeal and grant the Class 11 Special
Permit;
b. The applicant failed to provide competent substantial evidence that the requirements of
Section 1305 of Ordinance No. 11000 have been met;
c. The offstreet parking and loading facilities are inadequate because the applicant is
requesting to provide fewer stalls than required and wishes to allow the loading spaces to back
into the public right of way;
d. The applicant's plan to preserve the natural features is inadequate;
e. The project is incompatible and inharmonious with other development in the area to a
degree which may cause substantial depreciation of the value of nearby property;
f. The conditions and safeguards are inadequate to protect against the potentially
adverse effects of the project;
g. The denial of the Class II permit does not inordinately burden an existing use of real
property or a vested right to a specific use of real property.
h. The denial of the Class II Special Permit does not directly restrict or limit the use of real
property such that the property owner is permanently unable to attain the reasonable, investment -
backed expectation for the existing use of the real property or a vested right to a specific use of
the real property with respect to the real property as a whole, further the property owner is not left
with existing or vested uses that are unreasonable such that the property owner bears
permanently a disproportionate share of a burden imposed for the good of the public.
Section 3. Based upon the foregoing findings and determinations, the City Commission grants
the appeal and reverses the decision of the Miami Zoning Board, Resolution No. ZB 2005-0960,
adopted December 13, 2004, thereby denying the Class II Special Permit Final Decision
No. 04-0198 issued by the Planning Director on October 27, 2004, to allow for new construction
for the properties located at approximately 5301-5501 Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Florida, more
particularly described in "Exhibit A."
Section 4. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption and signature
of the Mayor. t1}
City of Miami Page 2 of 3
Printed On: 11/2/2005
Enactment Number: R-05-0155
File Number: 05-00014
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:
JORGE L. FERNANDEZ CAa.J
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.
City of Miami Page 3 of 3
Printed On: 11/2/2005