Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2007-02-14 MinutesCity of Miami City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33133 www.miamigov.com IF Ali Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 14, 2007 9:00 AM SPECIAL PLANNING AND ZONING City Hall Commission Chambers City Commission Manuel A. Diaz, Mayor Angel Gonzalez, Chairman Joe Sanchez, Vice Chairman Marc David Sarnoff, Commissioner District Two Tomas Regalado, Commissioner District Four Michelle Spence -Jones, Commissioner District Five Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager Jorge L. Fernandez, City Attorney Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Minutes are transcribed verbatim. Periodically, agenda items are revisited during a meeting. "[Later...]" refers to discussions that were interrupted and later continued. 9:00 A.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Present Chairman Gonzalez, Commissioner Sarnoff, Vice -Chairman Sanchez, Commissioner Regalado and Commissioner Spence -Jones On the 14th day of February 2007, the City Commission of the City ofMiami, Florida, met at its regular meeting place in City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida, in special session. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Angel Gonzalez at 9:13 a.m. and adjourned at 11:52 a.m. Note for the Record: Commissioner Regalado entered at 9:20 a.m. ALSO PRESENT: Jorge L. Fernandez, City Attorney Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager Pamela Burns, Assistant City Clerk Chairman Gonzalez: Welcome to the February 13 [sic], 2007 Special Commission meeting in this historic chambers. The members of the City Commission are Joe Sanchez, Vice Chair, Tomas Regalado, Michelle Spence -Jones, Marc Sarnoff and myself Angel Gonzalez, your Chairman. Also on the dais are Pedro Hernandez, City Manager -- and the City Manager. Is someone here for the City Manager's Office? OK. -- Jorge Fernandez, City Attorney, and Pamela Burns, Assistant City Clerk. The meeting will be opened with a prayer by Vice Chairman Sanchez and pledge of allegiance by Commissioner Sarnoff. Invocation and pledge of allegiance delivered. MAYORAL VETOES (Pursuant to Section 4(q)(5) of the charter of Miami, Florida, Item(s) vetoed by the Mayor shall be placed by the city clerk as the first substantive item(s) for the commission consideration.) NO MAYORAL VETOES Chairman Gonzalez: According to a memo from the Clerk's Office, there are no vetoes to be reported, is that correct? Pamela E. Burns (Assistant City Clerk): That's correct. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. ORDER OF THE DAY Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. City Attorney, will you please state the procedure to be followed during this meeting? Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Yes. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, good morning. Members of the public, good morning. Any person who is a lobbyist must register with the City Clerk before appearing in front of the City Commission. A copy of the Code section about lobbyists is available in the City Clerk's office. The material in connection with each item appearing on the agenda is available for inspection during business hours at the City Clerk's office and online. Formal action may be taken on any item discussed or added to this agenda. All decisions of the City Commission are final, except that the Mayor may veto certain items approved by the City Commission within ten calendar days of the Commission action. The City ofMiami Page 2 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Commission may override the veto by a four fifth vote. Anyone wishing to appeal any decision made by the City Commission for any matter considered at this meeting may need a verbatim record of the item on which the appeal is based. Absolutely no cell phones, beepers, or other audible sound or ringing devices are permitted in the Commission chambers. Please silence those now. Any person making impertinent or slanderous remarks or who becomes unruly while addressing the Commission shall be barred from further attending Commission meetings, unless permission to continue or again address the Commission is granted by a vote of the Commission. No clapping, applauding, heckling, or verbal outbursts in support or opposition to a speaker or a Commissioner are allowed. No signs or placards are allowed in the chambers. Persons exiting the Commission chambers shall do so quietly. Persons may address the City Commission on items appearing on the 'public hearing" portions of the agenda and on items where public input is solicited. Persons wishing to speak should inform the City Clerk, as soon as possible, of the desire to speak, giving the City Clerk their names. At the time the item is heard, persons who will speak should approach the microphone and wait to be recognized. Any person with a disability requiring auxiliary aids and services for this meeting may notify the Clerk. The lunch recess will begin at the conclusion of deliberation of the agenda item being considered at noon. The meeting will end either at the conclusion of deliberation of the agenda item being considered at 10 p.m. or at the conclusion of the regularly scheduled agenda, whichever occurs first. PZ (Planning & Zoning) items will begin after 10 a.m. or soon thereafter, as you're able to get to it, and Mr. Chairman, for the record, the -- this special meeting has been advertised, and furthermore, we also advertised that there would be an addition to the already P&Z special meeting that had been set; the notice is in front of me, and the additional item that you have added to be your first item for discussion this morning is the discussion of the City ofMiami's federal, state, and legislative agenda. Chairman Gonzalez: For the workshop, right? Mr. Fernandez: For the workshop, yeah, this morning. Chairman Gonzalez: Very good. Mr. Fernandez: So those are the two items, the item I just announced, as well as your established P&Z agenda. Chairman Gonzalez: Very good. OK. PLANNING AND ZONING ITEMS Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Let's go into the Planning and Zoning agenda, and the first item is PZ.1. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Mr. Fernandez: Read the protocol that we will be following -- Chairman Gonzalez: I'm sorry. Go ahead. Mr. Fernandez: -- for P&Z (Planning & Zoning) items. Chairman Gonzalez: Go ahead. Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, members of the public, P&Z items shall proceed as follows. Before the P&Z agenda is heard, all those wishing to speak will be sworn by the City Clerk, and momentarily, she will stand up and swear all of you that would like to speak. Staff City ofMiami Page 3 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 will briefly describe each request as it comes in front of you, whether an appeal of a variance, special exception, vacation, abandoning, and property, that is, easements or right-of-ways [sic], text amendments, zoning changes, comprehensive plan changes, or a MUSP (Major Use Special Permit), and make its recommendation. Also, staff will briefly give you the history of the item and how the lower boards have acted on it and -- the case stands in front ofyou. If it's an appeal, the appellant, or if it's an application, the petitioner, will then present their case to you. If it's an appeal, the appellee will then present its position. That's the sequencing of events that we will observe. After that has taken place, then members of the public will be permitted to speak. During the presentation of this item, questions may be asked of staff or of any presenter, but such questions must be directed to the Chair. The Chair may impose time limits on all presenters, and the range of time limits that the Chair has in the past considered are for appellant and appellees or applicant time limits ranging from ten to twenty minutes, and then for members of the public, time limits ranging from two to five minutes, according to the item and according to how the agenda is for that day. If a homeowners group or a civic association or other group of residents are represented by counsel or an agent, such person may, at the discretion of the Chair, have more time than just a regular member of the public to speak, considering that many members of the public, many individuals belonging to that group will be forfeiting their opportunity to speak, but that is clearly at the Chair's discretion. Furthermore, appellant and -- or a petitioner shall be permitted to make final comments. They'll have the ability to rebut any testimony that has been adduced. After that happens, then the Chair takes the public hearing, closes the public input portion of the public hearing, and takes the item to yourself. At which point, you would consider, you would deliberate, debate, and decide by making a motion to grant or deny the item in front ofyou. The City Commission may, while it is deliberating on the issue, ask staff or any presenter questions without deeming the public portion part of the public hearing reopened again. In order for you to get answers to your question, you may ask those questions. With those limitations, Mr. Chairman, you should proceed. Chairman Gonzalez: You need to swear the witnesses. Pamela E. Burns (Assistant City Clerk): For those ofyou who plan to provide testimony this morning, would you please stand and raise your right hand? Chairman Gonzalez: (Comments in Spanish.) The Assistant City Clerk administered oath required under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons giving testimony on zoning issues. Ms. Burns: Thank you. Please be seated. PZ.1 06-01845mu RESOLUTION "INCOMPLETE (CHANGES NECESSARY) - PENDING FINAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY CITY ATTORNEY." A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 5, 13, AND 17 OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, FOR THE 2222 BISCAYNE PROJECT, TO BE LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2200 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATE 438-FOOT, 29-STORY HIGH MIXED -USE STRUCTURE TO BE COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 371,863 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE; APPROXIMATELY 6,537 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL AND BANK SPACE; APPROXIMATELY 6,728 SQUARE FEET OF RESTAURANT SPACE; AND APPROXIMATELY 1,784 TOTAL PARKING SPACES; PROVIDING FOR CERTAIN FLOOR AREA City ofMiami Page 4 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 RATIO ("FAR") BONUSES; DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL; MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATING CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; PROVIDING FOR BINDING EFFECT; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 06-01845mu - PAB Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01845mu - Analysis.pdf 06-01845mu - Comp Plan.pdf 06-01845mu - Zoning Map.pdf 06-01845mu - Aerial.pdf 06-01845mu- Projects in the Vicinity.pdf 06-01845mu - IDRC Comments (5.30.06).pdf 06-01845mu - Traffic Sufficiency Letter 10.03.06).pdf 06-01845mu - UDRB Resolution (9.20.06.2).pdf 06-01845mu - MDAD Planning Comments (08.29.06).pdf 06-01845mu - School Board Comments (07.18.06).pdf 06-01845mu - PAB Legislation.pdf 06-01845mu- Public Works Comments (7.24.06).pdf 06-01845mu- Exhibit A.pdf 06-01845mu- Exhibit B.pdf 06-01845mu PAB Reso.PDF 06-01845mu - Outside Front Cover.PDF 06-01845mu - Inside Front Cover.PDF 06-01845mu - Table of Contents.PDF 06-01845mu - I Project Information.PDF 06-01845mu - IA Letter of Intent.PDF 06-01845mu - IB Major Use Special Permit Application.PDF 06-01845mu - IC Zoning Write-Up.PDF 06-01845mu - ID Zoning Atlas and Land Use Map.PDF 06-01845mu - IE Project Data Sheet.PDF 06-01845mu - IF Deed Tax Printout.PDF 06-01845mu - IG Ownership List.PDF 06-01845mu - IH State of Florida Documents.PDF 06-01845mu - II Directory of Project Principals.PDF 06-01845mu - II Project Description.PDF 06-01845mu - III Supporting Documents.PDF 06-01845mu - Tab 1- Minority Construction Employment Plan.PDF 06-01845mu - Tab 2 - Traffic Impact Analysis.PDF 06-01845mu - Tab 3 - Site Utility Study.PDF 06-01845mu - Tab 4 - Economic Impact Study.PDF 06-01845mu - Tab 5 - Survey of Property.PDF 06-01845mu - Tab 6 -Drawings Submitted.PDF 06-01845mu CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 06-01845mu CC Exhibit B.PDF 06-01845mu CC Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 2200 Biscayne Boulevard [Commissioner Marc Sarnoff - District 2] APPLICANT(S): Javier F. Avino, Esquire, and Scott Silver, Esquire, on behalf of Grouper UTD, LLC, Owner and Ines Marrero-Priegues, Esquire, on behalf of Crescent Heights of America, Inc. City ofMiami Page 5 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to City Commission on January 17, 2007 by a vote of 6-0. *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: This will allow the development of the 2222 Biscayne project. Motion by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-07-0091 Chairman Gonzalez: Good morning. Roberto Lavernia (Chief Land Development): Morning. For the record, Roberto Lavernia, with the Planning Department. Item number 1 is a Major Use Special Permit, named at 2222 Biscayne, at the address of 2200 Biscayne Boulevard. It's a 438-foot, 29-story high, mixed -use structure, with 371,863 square foot of office, 6,537 square foot of retail, 6,728 square feet of restaurant spaces; with a total of 1, 784 total parking spaces. The Planning Advisory Board recommend approval with conditions. Also, the Planning Department recommend approval with conditions. Condition 11, which is design review, condit -- we are going to modify on the records condition original is from (a) to (h). We are eliminating condition (a). Condition (b), the project shall comply with FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) improvement on Biscayne Boulevard; condition (c), coordinate with the Street Car Trolley Plan and provide additional detail of the proposed "waiting area"; condition (d) is going to be modified. It reads now, eliminate the curb cut along Northeast 2nd Avenue; condition (t, provide a landscape plan that specifies the species and proposed location of all plant material for review and approval by the Planning director prior to the issuance of a building permit; condition (g), provide a complete free survey of existing condition, including species, diameters, and spread, including all trees in the right-of-way, and condition (h), identify the exact dimensions and location for proposed art walls along the garage elevation and submit for review by the Planning director. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, can I ask a question? Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Regalado: Those conditions would probably change the way the building is designed, not at all? Because one of the condition is "if' we have a streetcar. You said coordinate with the Street Car project. Mr. Lavernia: To coordinate with the plan for the streetcar, yes. Commissioner Regalado: But how do you know we're going to have it? Mr. Lavernia: If it doesn't happen, that doesn't matter. We're in agreement with the solution. Commissioner Regalado: That's what I was trying to understand, that if they have to coordinate with something that may happen or may not happen, it's like, you know, an exercise in futility or City ofMiami Page 6 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 a change for -- of plan for them. Suppose that they want to go out this way and somebody tells them, well, you know, the rail is this way, and -- about if there is no rail. Lucia Dougherty: One of the things that they did (INAUDIBLE) do in connection with this -- excuse me. For the record, Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I'm joined today with the principal, Scott Silver, who is in the audience, as well as his colleague, Aaron Butler, and Happy Valentine's Day to you all. They did, in fact, make us take away a curb cut here on 2ndAvenue, which we agreed to do. The curb cut was something that would only access our retail, and we have sufficient entrances and exits on 22nd. The curb cut was eliminated just in case there was going to be a trolley car coming in the future, but it really doesn't make any difference in terms of the facade of our building, other than taking away a curb cut, so with that, the location is on Biscayne Boulevard. It takes the entire block. It's between Biscayne Boulevard and 2nd Avenue, and 22nd and 23rd, and you may recognize it because it -- right now it has the UTD (United Teachers of Dade) towers in the front, and an office building for Crescent Heights is located on Biscayne Boulevard, and in between our new office tower, there is a parking garage, a two-story parking garage, so these two are existing and the parking garage. You may note the location of it. It is -- right in the middle of your highest density C-1 zoning classification in the City with an SD-20 and 21 overlay. It is a mixed -use, meaning about 3,500 square feet of retail and a bank, and a office building primarily. There are 15 levels of parking. We have 1, 784 parking spaces, at 1 to 300. I know this is an issue that -- for Marc -- Commissioner Sarnoff, so we have 49 additional spaces over the required parking that is on this property. The property or the loading is totally internalized. The first five floors are actually liner uses, liner office uses, and interesting thing about this project is that this art screen that covers the upper levels of the garage, it was designed by a New World School of the Arts student, and is actually an integral part of the building itself and Gail Baldwin, who is our architect, can give you a little bit more detail about how this screening is actually (INAUDIBLE) and part of the actual building itself. It's not just something that's pasted on. It's actually part of the building. With that, I'd like to turn it over to Gail just for a few moments of discussion dealing with the architecture. Gail Baldwin: Good morning. Basically, the building is made up in a rhythm of the structural system, and the apparent -- Chairman Gonzalez: We need your name and address -- Mr. Baldwin: Oh, I'm sorry. Chairman Gonzalez: -- for the record. Mr. Baldwin: Gail Baldwin, architect, at 3215 Mary Street, Coconut Grove. The grid carries through the whole project, so the apparent parking to office building doesn't actually occur because it all looks the same, and there's a building in Coral Gables that has this same kind of a facade, and you take a look and you can't tell where the parking stops, and the office buildings, where the occupied spaces occur. In this particular case, we have five stories of liner. In other words, occupied space on the street, eyes on the street, plus the retail on the street, so it's a very friendly to the sidewalk, and it also sets way back from Biscayne Boulevard as a -- it doesn't overcrowd Biscayne Boulevard. The art, I think, is terrific. I think the building is terrific; has a good architect, and the screening of the cars themselves occurs back behind the grid, and so, so does the glass, it sets back a couple of feet so that there's no apparent change in occupancy. Commissioner Sarnoff Counselor, I was trying to --I didn't get through all the conditions that were being obliterated or changed. Do you recall what they were? Ms. Dougherty: They -- yes. What they had initially asked us to do is eliminate curb cuts on 22nd Street, and instead of doing that, they asked us to change and take -- eliminate the curb cut City ofMiami Page 7 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 on 2ndAvenue because that's the more pedestrian street, and therefore, we'd keep all of our loading and service on 22nd. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Was there anything else, because I remember a series of things? I wasn't getting -- I didn't -- I just didn't have the page open, and I wanted to check off what the conditions that were deleted were, because I heard -- Ms. Dougherty: That was one of them. Commissioner Sarnoff -- something about landscaping, and I -- Ms. Dougherty: We agree with all the other conditions. The landscape conditions, we agree with. I think that initial -- Commissioner Sarnoff What are the landscape conditions? Vice Chairman Sanchez: I think you should put all the conditions on the record. Mr. Baldwin: Basically, we had specified a variety of trees, and the Urban Design Review Board requested that we go to oaks, and we said fine. I mean, simple as that, and we show the trees, the tree locations on our plans, and we agreed. Chairman Gonzalez: Will you please state the conditions so the Commissioner is aware of you know -- Ms. Dougherty: OK The first -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- what the conditions are going to be? Ms. Dougherty: -- one that was eliminated is reconfigure the building so that it is in keeping with the scale of the area and creates a better transition to the adjacent properties. This was a condition that was a holdover over from the UDRB (Urban Development Review Board) when -- which we had -- Mr. Baldwin: IDR (Internal Design Review). Ms. Dougherty: -- an entire -- excuse me, IDR, which was an entirely different building. Since then, we've worked with staff and now I believe that they believe it's in keeping with the scale and massing, so that was eliminated. The other one was the project shall comply with FDOT improvements on Biscayne Boulevard, which we agree; coordinate with the Street Car Trolley Plan and provide additional details for a proposed "waiting area, " and if that occurs, you know, the building permit will show that. The number of curb cuts shall be reduced on 22nd Street, and that we changed to eliminate it on 2nd Avenue. Internalize the loading spaces so that they are assessed from within the garage, and the loading vehicles do not have maneuver in the public right-of-way. That was also a leftover from the IDR that's already been incorporated. Provide for a landscape plan that specifies the species and proposed location of all plant material for review and approval of Planning director prior to the issuance of a building permit. In your Major Use Special Permit, you do already have a landscape plan -- Commissioner Sarnoff And that's been -- Ms. Dougherty: -- but the City always makes us come back with a new one by the time that we get a building permit that gets approved again. Commissioner Sarnoff Would I know, sitting here, how many oak frees we would be accounting City ofMiami Page 8 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 for? Ms. Dougherty: How many oak frees? Do we know --? Commissioner Sarnoff In other words, what I'm understanding is that your palm frees have gone to oak frees, per the City's request. Ms. Dougherty: Correct. Commissioner Sarnoff I don't have -- correct me if I'm wrong, ifI did my diligent effort, I wouldn't have the landscape plan in front of me, correct? Ms. Dougherty: Well, there is a landscape plan in your Major Use Special Permit book. We'll just pull that out and tell you what's on there now. Commissioner Sarnoff But that would be palm trees, correct? Ms. Dougherty: We do have palm frees on there. Commissioner Sarnoff So now they would be oak trees -- Mr. Baldwin: Correct. Commissioner Sarnoff -- same number, same placement, same --? Mr. Baldwin: In actuality, you're getting much more canopy. Commissioner Sarnoff Canopy, I understand, so what I am -- what you're telling me on the record is where I would see a palm free, I would now see an oak free? Ms. Dougherty: If that's what you want. Commissioner Sarnoff No. I'm asking if that's what you've agree to? Ms. Dougherty: Whatever you want. We agree to whatever landscape plan the City wants us to, that's the point. Commissioner Sarnoff My question to you is what is the plan? It's oak free, right? Oh, both. OK I'm -- Ms. Dougherty: It's both right now. It's landscape with oak frees, as well as -- Commissioner Sarnoff Palm frees. Ms. Dougherty: -- palm trees. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Ms. Dougherty: And that's it. The rest of them are the same. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion to approve this. Chairman Gonzalez: We need to open the public hearing first. Commissioner Sarnoff Sorry. City ofMiami Page 9 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wants to speak on this item, please come forward to be recognized. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. Commissioner Sarnoff. Commissioner Sarnoff I'll make a motion to approve it. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second, with conditions. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion, and we have a second. It's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: With conditions. Ms. Dougherty: Thank you very much. Chairman Gonzalez: You're welcome. PZ.2 06-01242ec RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC USE, EASEMENTS LOCATED SOUTH OF NORTHWEST 14TH STREET BETWEEN NORTHWEST 10TH AVENUE AND NORTHWEST 11TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA. 06-01242ec Planning Analysis.PDF 06-01242ec Public Works Analysis.PDF 06-01242ec Zoning Map.pdf 06-01242ec Aerial Map.pdf 06-01242ec Application & Supporting Docs.PDF 06-01242ec ZB Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01242ec ZB Reso.PDF 06-01242ec Legislation (Version 2).pdf 06-01242ec Exhibit A.pdf 06-01242ec CC Fact Sheet 01-25-07.pdf 06-01242ec CC Zoning Map.pdf 06-01242ec CC Fact Sheet 02-14-07.pdf LOCATION: Approximately South of NW 14th Street Between NW 10th Avenue and NW 11th Avenue [Commissioner Angel Gonzalez - District 1] APPLICANT(S): Iris Escarra, Esquire, on behalf of Miami Hotel Investments, Ltd. FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PLAT & STREET COMMITTEE: Recommended approval on September 14, 2006 by a vote of 6-0. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on December City ofMiami Page 10 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 11, 2006 by a vote of 6-1. PURPOSE: This will allow a unified development site for the previously approved Civica Towers Major Use Special Permit. Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Vice -Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-07-0092 Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.2. Gail Baldwin: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: You're welcome, sir. Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's the MUSP (Major Use Special Permit), right? Lucia Dougherty: Yes, it is. Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.2. Go ahead. Roberto Lavernia (Chief Land Development, Planning): Closing, vacating, abandoning and discontinuing for public use a portion of an easement that is a part of the previously approved Major Use Special Permit, Civica Towers, and the Planning Department is recommending approval, the Zoning Board recommend approval, and we're recommending approval, too. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Is there anyone in opposition to this item? OK. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wants to speak on this item, please come forward. You're in -- Iris Escarra: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: -- opposition? Vice Chairman Sanchez: No. She's the applicant. Ms. Escarra: No, no. Chairman Gonzalez: Oh. Ms. Escarra: I'm the applicant. Chairman Gonzalez: You're the applicant, OK. All right. Commissioner Regalado: She's in favor. Chairman Gonzalez: She's in favor, right. All right. The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman -- Chairman Gonzalez: Make a motion. City ofMiami Page 11 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Commissioner Regalado: -- do you want -- Chairman Gonzalez: I need -- yeah, please. Commissioner Regalado: -- me to make a motion in your behalf? Chairman Gonzalez: Please. Commissioner Regalado: In behalf of the Chairman, his district, I'll make a motion to approve. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion, and we have a second. It's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Thank you, Commissioner Regalado. Ms. Escarra: Thank you, and Happy Valentine's. Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.3 -- pardon me? Ms. Escarra: Thank you, and Happy Valentine's. Chairman Gonzalez: You're welcome. PZ.3 06-02238x RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), GRANTING THE APPEAL, REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD AND THEREBY GRANTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, CONDITIONAL PRINCIPAL USES OF "R-1" SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF PLACES OF WORSHIP IN "C-1" RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3501 WEST FLAGLER, MIAMI, FLORIDA," PURSUANT TO PLANS ON FILE AND SUBJECT FURTHER TO A TIME LIMITATION OF TWELVE (12) MONTHS IN WHICH A BUILDING PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED. City ofMiami Page 12 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 06-02238x Analysis.PDF 06-02238x Zoning Map.pdf 06-02238xAerial Map.pdf 06-02238x Letter of Intent.pdf 06-02238x Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 06-02238x Plans.pdf 06-02238x ZB Fact Sheet.pdf 06-02238x Appeal Letter.PDF 06-02238x ZB Reso.PDF 06-02238x CC Fact Sheet.pdf 06-02238x CC Legislation (Version 3).pdf 06-02238x CC Exhibit A.pdf 06-02238x CC Legislation (Version 4).pdf 06-02238x CC Exhibit A.pdf 06-02238x CC Fact Sheet.pdf 06-02238x Submittal Petitions.pdf Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Vice -Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-07-0094 Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.3. Yes, sir. Roberto Lavernia (Chief Land Development, Planning Department): PZ.3 is an appeal of the Zoning Board decision for an expansion to an existing church on 3501 West Flagler Street. The Planning Department recommend approval of the special exception original [sic], and is recommending uphold the appeal now. Zoning Board deny the special exception on January 8. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: The Planning Department recommend approval, right? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yep. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ben Fernandez: Good morning, Mr. Chair, members -- Chairman Gonzalez: Good morning. Mr. Fernandez: -- of the Board. Ben Fernandez, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard. I'm here this morning on behalf of the Universal Church of God. The Universal Church is a church that's headquartered out ofManhattan. It is a worldwide church, a Christian church, and they are currently located at 3501 West Flagler Street, which is between Flagler and Flagler Terrace, just west of 35th, and this is an application really that is trying -- seeking to modernize the existing facility that's there. There are -- there's one principal church that many of you that have lived in the City for a long time may recognize. It is very distinct architecturally. It's sort of a Greek column type of architecture, and what's next to it is over here in this picture, which really doesn't go with it much. They're just sort of kind of an old barrack kind of look, and some of those buildings were damaged over the years, and the application that we have before you today seeks to demolish three of these buildings and replace them with the structure that you see here, which follows the same type of column architecture as the principal building. Altogether we will be adding 14,786 square feet that will comprise pastors' residences, office use, and also a production and film -- not film, but television studio that will only transmit church services to City ofMiami Page 13 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 their congregation. The amount of parking that we're adding, as a result of this remodeling, is -- totals 35 parking spaces, so that the total parking now will be 69 parking spaces. Currently, there are only 34 parking spaces on the site, so by demolishing these buildings, what we're doing is we're reducing the footprint, and we're making the building more vertical up against Flagler Street, away from the residential neighborhood, and creating a better parking area for the entire church here. The existing church is a nonconforming use. It was built years ago, and the parking is grandfathered, but the new addition complies entirely with the Code. In addition, we're going to be providing landscaping along Flagler Terrace, which will be comprised of shade frees. I believe that they are oaks -- yeah, live oaks, all of them, and there really isn't much there now in Flagler Terrace. This was denied by the Zoning Board. You may be wondering why this is denied. I would like to say -- although they're not here to speak, I would like for the members of the church and some of the area residents to please stand up, show your support. Thank you. We also have petitions filed. I'm here with Pastor Wilson Santos from the Universal Church, and we'd like to submit these for the record, petitions from both area residents and from church members, and we have no opposition. There was really no opposition at the Zoning Board either. I think that the Zoning Board -- this church, in the past, was not the Universal Church of God. It was a -- there was another faith that was occupying this structure, and they may have had some issues with the neighborhood. We don't know. We're not aware of them. The Universal Church has been there for over two years. They have had no problems with the neighborhood, no problems with NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team). Chairman Gonzalez: Well, the church used to be a Christian church back then, and it was -- the reverend was Bobby Cruz -- Mr. Fernandez: That's right. Chairman Gonzalez: -- who was there for many, many years, and I -- Mr. Fernandez: Right. Chairman Gonzalez: -- attended that church -- Mr. Fernandez: Right. Chairman Gonzalez: -- for quite some time, so -- Commissioner Regalado: IfI may -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- and the -- Commissioner Regalado: -- Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Even though it's in the Commissioner district, my mother used to live two blocks away -- Commissioner Regalado: Yeah. Chairman Gonzalez: -- and that was the church that she used to go to, and the issue that I remember was parking -- Mr. Fernandez: Parking. Chairman Gonzalez: -- issue with the neighbors. Mr. Fernandez: That's right, and that's exactly what the church recognizes is an issue here, so City ofMiami Page 14 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 by narrowing the footprint, we're able to add 35 spaces. I think it makes it a much better church. Commissioner Regalado: And Mr. Chairman, ifI may. I -- in the last ten years, we had used the church for community meetings, CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) meetings, and of course, we have attended some of their services. When Bobby Cruz was there -- he moved on to Doral and the church. I think that the debate -- the problem in the past was the issue of parking, not so much on Northwest 1st Terrace, but on 35th because on Sundays there were so many people that even they have to hire off -duty police that would close 35th -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: --Avenue-- Chairman Gonzalez: You're right. Commissioner Regalado: -- and that was the complaint that, you know, 35th was closed, and people couldn't get out, but it was a police decision to close down that street. I think that the debate on the Zoning Board -- and I watched it -- was not so much as they were planning to do, but what it was there now. It was -- the debate was about what's there now, and you know, the buildings. I -- it is an area that is very important. Flagler is one of the most important arteries and the most traffic in Miami -Dade County, east and west, and I think that those plans and more parking will be an asset to the area, andl -- well, ifyou finish the debate, I am ready to present a motion. Mr. Fernandez: That will close my presentation. I'll just reserve time in case there's any need for rebuttal. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wants to speak on this item, against or in favor, please come forward to be recognized. All right. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. Commissioner Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I would introduce a motion to grant the appeal on the special -- granting a special exception for the Universal Church in 3501 West Flagler Street. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion, and we have a second. It's an ordinance. Commissioner Regalado: No. It's a resolution. Chairman Gonzalez: Madam City Attorney. Commissioner Regalado: No. It's a resolution. Chairman Gonzalez: It's a resolution? Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Motion carries. City ofMiami Page 15 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Mr. Fernandez: Thank you very much. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. PZ.4 06-01238Iu ORDINANCE Second Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2735 AND 2745 NORTHWEST 14TH STREET AND A PORTION OF 2700 NORTHWEST 15TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL"; MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 06-012381u - PAB Fact Sheet.pdf 06-012381u - PAB Analysis.pdf 06-012381u - PAB Concurrency Report.pdf 06-012381u - Comp Plan Map.pdf 06-012381u - Zoning Map.pdf 06-012381u - Aerial Photo.pdf 06-012381u - PAB Legislation.pdf 06-012381u - PAB Application Documents.pdf 06-012381u PAB Reso.PDF 06-012381u CC Analysis.PDF 06-012381u CC Concurrency.PDF 06-012381u CC Application & Supporting Docs.PDF 06-012381u CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 06-012381u 06-01238zc Exhibit A.pdf 06-012381u CC FR Fact Sheet.pdf 06-012381u CC SR Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 2735 and 2745 NW 14th Street and a Portion of 2700 NW 15th Street [Commissioner Angel Gonzalez - District 1] APPLICANT(S): Matthew V. Rigg, President, on behalf of 1490 Plus, Inc. FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended denial to City Commission on September 20, 2006 by a vote of 6-0. See companion File ID 06-01238zc. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to Restricted Commercial. Motion by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez City ofMiami Page 16 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 12889 Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.4. PZ.4, go ahead. Roberto Lavernia (Chief Land Development, Planning Department): PZ.4 and PZ.5 are companion items. Chairman Gonzalez: Right. Mr. Lavernia: One is the land use change and the other one is the zoning change. This is the second reading. It was presented completely in front of you on January 25. The applicant offer a covenant that was reviewed by all departments and signed by all departments, and that we're in agreement with the covenant. Chairman Gonzalez: OK, and the covenant is that they -- it's going to remain a parking lot and duplex? Mr. Lavernia: Yes, sir. No commercial activity will be -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Lavernia: -- placed in those lots. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Is there anyone that wants to speak on PZ.4? Please come forward to be recognized. Anyone in favor or opposition of PZ.4? Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing -- Commissioner Sarnoff I'll make a motion -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- the public hearing is closed. Commissioner Sarnoff -- for the Chairman. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion, and we have a second. It's an ordinance. Madam City Attorney. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by Assistant City Attorney Maria J. Chiaro. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call, please. Pamela E. Burns (Assistant City Clerk): Roll call. A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above. Ms. Burns: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 4/0. PZ.5 06-01238zc ORDINANCE Second Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 26, OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE City ofMiami Page 17 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM "R-2" TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO "C-1" RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2735 AND 2745 NORTHWEST 14TH STREET AND A PORTION OF 2700 NORTHWEST 15TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 06-01238zc CC Analysis.pdf 06-01238zc Zoning Map.pdf 06-01238zc Aerial Map.pdf 06-01238zc Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 06-01238zc ZB Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01238zc ZB Reso.PDF 06-01238zc CC Analysis.PDF 06-01238zc CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 06-012381u 06-01238zc Exhibit A.pdf 06-01238zc CC FR Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01238zc CC SR Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 2735 and 2745 NW 14th Street and a Portion of 2700 NW 15th Street [Commissioner Angel Gonzalez - District 1] APPLICANT(S): Matthew V. Rigg, President, on behalf of 1490 Plus, Inc. FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. ZONING BOARD: Recommended denial to City Commission on October 30, 2006 by a vote of 5-1. See companion File ID 06-012381u. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to C-1 Restricted Commercial. Motion by Commissioner Spence -Jones, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez 12890 Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.5 is also a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wants to speak on PZ.5, please come forward. Seeing none -- you're going to speak on PZ.5? Unidentified Speaker: I'm the proposer. Chairman Gonzalez: Pardon me? Unidentified Speaker: I'm the proposer. Chairman Gonzalez: You're opposing? Unidentified Speaker: No. I'm the proposer. Chairman Gonzalez: Oh. You are the proposer, OK You want to speak? City ofMiami Page 18 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Unidentified Speaker: I'll withhold unless there's objection. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. OK, seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. Will you move it, Commissioner? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Oh. I'd like to make a motion to move the item. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion on PZ.5. We need a second, and we have a second. It's also an ordinance, right? Yes. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by Assistant City Attorney Maria J. Chiaro. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call, please. Pamela E. Burns (Assistant City Clerk): Roll call. A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above. Ms. Burns: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 4/0. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. PZ.6 06-02178 ORDINANCE Second Reading "INCOMPLETE (CHANGES NECESSARY) - PENDING FINAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY CITY ATTORNEY." AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, CREATING A NEW SUBSECTION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 11000, AS AMENDED, ARTICLE 9 ENTITLED "GENERAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS," SECTION 906, ENTITLED "ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES," PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE SECTION 509.233, RELATED TO PUBLIC FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS, PROVIDING FOR A THREE-YEAR DOG -FRIENDLY DINING PILOT PROGRAM TO ALLOW DOGS IN APPROVED OUTDOOR SEATING AREAS OF SUCH FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS AND PROVIDING FOR NECESSARY ASSOCIATED IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 06-02178 - PAB Fact Sheet.pdf 06-02178 - PAB Legislation.pdf 06-02178 PAB Reso.PDF 06-02178 CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 06-02178 CC FR Fact Sheet.pdf 06-02178 CC SR Fact Sheet.pdf APPLICANT(S): Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager, on behalf of the City of Miami FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission City ofMiami Page 19 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 on December 6, 2006 by a vote of 6-0. PURPOSE: This will allow dogs in approved outdoor seating areas. Motion by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones 12891 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. PZ.6. Maria J. Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): PZ.6 is a proposal that was requested by the City Commission to be drafted to allow for a program for dog dining in restaurants in certain restricted areas of those restaurants. Chairman Gonzalez: Right. This is a second reading ordinance. Anyone from the public that wants to speak on this item, please come forward. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. Commissioner Sarnoff I'll make a motion, and also find out from the acting now City Manager, tomorrow, can people go and fry and sit with their dogs, if need be? Can there be some sort of a permit application? Ms. Chiaro: Let me explain to you how the ordinance will work. It has been advertised with an effective date of 30 days. Starting tomorrow, applications will be taken. The applications require that a plan for each restaurant be submitted, so the applications will be taken. They'll go through a -- what is our Class I Permit process, so that by the effective date of the ordinance in 30 days, we'll be able to issue those permits, but the application process, after discussing it with the departments in the City, can begin immediately. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Can --? Commissioner Sarnoff I'll make a motion. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I second. I just want -- I second it, butt want to just ask a quick question on it. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. We have a motion, and we have a second. Discussion. Commissioner Spence -Jones: It's not a big discussion. I just wanted to -- I'm glad you asked the question because I was wondering, you know, what would be kind of the next step. Now the restaurateur or the business owner actually has to -- so an individual just couldn't go to any restaurant. The restaurateur has to agree to having that. Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. He comes up with a plan, you know, a segregated plan, where the dogs get their sections, and -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Oh, OK. Commissioner Sarnoff -- there may even be a leash -- some sort of leash requirement or something, or -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Is it --? City ofMiami Page 20 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff I don't know the exact plans, but you can't -- I don't think the dogs can sit wherever they want outside. I think there's -- Ms. Chiaro: There's a whole scheme set forth in -- Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Ms. Chiaro: -- the ordinance as to where the dogs can be, what requirements are necessary for the ord -- for the restaurant -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. In about -- Ms. Chiaro: -- to put in place. Commissioner Sarnoff -- 20 years, dogs will get equal rights, and we won't have that segregation. Commissioner Regalado: But the state law allows dogs outside. Commissioner Sarnoff Right, right. I'm sorry. Ms. Chiaro: This -- Commissioner Regalado: That's the state law, so can you restrict what the state law allows? Ms. Chiaro: The state law that was enacted provides for certain restrictions in restaurants -- let me say this a different way. The state law allows for dogs to be permitted in restaurants so long as the local jurisdictions put in place criteria for those -- for the dogs to be there, so that's what this ordinance is. Commissioner Regalado: I understand, but the state law -- Ms. Chiaro: The state law is -- Commissioner Regalado: -- says outside. Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Ms. Chiaro: Outside, that's correct. Commissioner Regalado: So how 'bout ifI want to do it inside? Ms. Chiaro: The -- we don't have any regulations that allow for the dogs to be inside. Commissioner Regalado: How 'bout if it's raining? Ms. Chiaro: The dogs don't really care. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but the owner does, so I'm the owner; it's raining and -- so I leave the dog out, just out there in the rain and go eat inside? Chairman Gonzalez: Buy him -- Ms. Chiaro: I think -- City ofMiami Page 21 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: -- a raincoat and an umbrella. Commissioner Regalado: So, I mean -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: This Commission meeting's gone to the dogs. Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: You know what they say, rain happens, so -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Chiaro: I think that this is an enforcement or administration issue. It's certainly not a legal issue. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. We have a motion, and we have a second. Would you please read the ordinance so we can move along? The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by Assistant City Attorney Maria J. Chiaro. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call, please. Ms. Chiaro: By Class --I need to add the -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Class I. Ms. Chiaro: -- language in that title that allows for this permit by Class I, by Class I Permit. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call. Pamela E. Burns (Assistant City Clerk): Roll call. Vice Chairman Sanchez? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Madam Clerk, I would like to raise my paw in support of this ordinance. Yes. Ms. Burns: Commissioner Regalado? Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Ms. Burns: Commissioner Spence -Jones? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yes. Ms. Burns: Commissioner Sarnoff? Commissioner Sarnoff Doggone it, yes. Ms. Burns: Chairman Gonzalez? Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. City ofMiami Page 22 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Ms. Burns: The ordinance, as modified, has been adopted on second reading, 5/0. Vice Chairman Sanchez: So when do we get the cat lobbyists to come in and try to push one for the cats? Commissioner Spence -Jones: I know, right? Commissioner Sarnoff I'll explain that one to you later. Commissioner Regalado: There's no love for the cats. Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.7. Commissioner Regalado: That's the problem. PZ.7 06-01234Iu ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 402 NORTHEAST 36TH STREET AND 347 NORTHEAST 35TH TERRACE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL"; MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. First Reading 06-012341u - PAB Fact Sheet.pdf 06-012341u - Analysis.pdf 06-012341u - Concurrency Report.pdf 06-012341u - Comp Plan Map.pdf 06-012341u - Zoning Map.pdf 06-012341u - Aerial Photo.pdf 06-012341u - PAB Legislation.pdf 06-012341u - PAB Application Documents.pdf 06-012341u PAB Reso.PDF 06-012341u CC Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 06-012341u CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 06-012341u & 06-01234zc Exhibit A.pdf 06-012341u CC FR 02-14-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-012341u Submittal Diagram.pdf 06-012341u Submittal Photos.pdf 06-012341u & 06-01234zc February 2007 Corporation Certificate of Good Standing.PDF LOCATION: Approximately 402 NE 36th Street and 347 NE 35th Terrace [Commissioner Marc Sarnoff - District 2] APPLICANT(S): Melissa Tapanes Llahues, Esquire and Ben Fernandez, Esquire, on behalf of Grape & Associates, LLC FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. City ofMiami Page 23 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on September 6, 2006 by a vote of 6-0. See companion File ID 06-01234zc. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to Restricted Commercial. CONTINUED A motion was made by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, and was passed unanimously, to continue items PZ.7 and 8 to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for April 26, 2007. Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.7. Ben Fernandez: Mr. Chair, PZ (Planning & Zoning) -- I'm here on behalf of PZ.7. I was willing to let Mr. Gil Pastoriza go ahead of us because our client is in transit over here, and I don't know if that's something that the Board would be receptive to doing. PZ.9, I believe. Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.9. Commissioner Spence -Jones: We're on PZ.7. Commissioner Regalado: No, it's PZ.7. Chairman Gonzalez: I just called PZ.7. You -- Mr. B. Fernandez: Yes. I'm here on PZ.7, but my client is in transit. Chairman Gonzalez: Is going to be late. Mr. B. Fernandez: If you want to call it now, we can call it now, but if -- I'm sure you may have questions about it, and -- Chairman Gonzalez: OK. On PZ.8 -- Mr. B. Fernandez: -- so she's -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- is a companion, right? Mr. B. Fernandez: Is a companion, correct. [Later..] Saul Cimbler: I'm here opposing -- Chairman Gonzalez: Or, at least, try. Mr. Cimbler: -- PZ.7 and PZ.8 -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Mr. Cimbler: -- and I do have a meeting to get to. My remarks will be brief and would not impact at all Mr. Fernandez's presentation. I live within the area, within a 500-foot radius of advertising, so I'm affected by this, so -- Pamela E. Burns (Assistant City Clerk): Excuse me. I need your name for the record, please. Mr. Cimbler: Saul Cimbler, City ofMiami Page 24 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Cimbler: My -- ifI may continue? Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah. Go ahead. Mr. Cimbler: -- issue isn't with anything that they may want to build there. My issue is that I live in Edgewater. I used to live in Edgewater. I moved out, and I moved back, and this project, although it faces 36 Sfreet -- and I'm sure an argument will be made that it has an impact on 36 Sfreet -- is going to have a horrible domino effect. I've been here before on behalf and against developers, and I'm very active in the commercial real estate market in this area. If you pass this ordinance, you are inviting everybody who has a piece of property in the middle of the block, so to speak, between Biscayne Boulevard and the water, to come back to you and say, well, you know, you just granted a permit for a project. Even though they argued it faces 36 Sfreet, the back of it is on 35th Sfreet, which is a complete residential street. I assure you that 35th Court and 35th Street already have a fraffic issue that I can't even let my son go outside and play because of the fraffic, but the real issue is here that, come down the road, if you permit this project -- whether it's a good project or not isn't the issue -- you're inviting everybody who lives - - who owns a property east of Biscayne Boulevard to come here and say, although my property is zoned residential, you just permitted a residential zoning in what is the middle of the block, so on this one, I support what the Zoning Department [sic] is saying, which is a denial because the domino effect is obvious. There's a whole bunch offolks who own properties would all agree that Biscayne Boulevard, for example, which is zoned commercial, that the fine folks who bought properties right behind there and put buildings together to do their MUSPs (Major Use Special Permits), that was the right thing to do because they're going to limit the commercial to that street, but as we sit here today, in Mr. Sarnoffs district, there's a whole bunch offolks looking for something to do with their properties, and they are going to come back here and use this as a precedent, so it's no reflection on Mr. Fernandez or his client's fine project. It's just it's going to impact this particular area of Edgewater, and it's going to accelerate some folks who have been sitting on the sidelines trying to figure out what to do with their properties, and they're going to come back here, and they're going to flood you. I appreciate Mr. Fernandez giving me the opportunity to speak out of turn because there is somebody who actually is waiting for me. Mr. B. Fernandez: And I apologize for requesting that you take this item out of order. I had no idea thatHr. Cimbler was going to be requesting to speak. I would invite him to stay and listen to our application because it's not only what appears in the kit, so he's not aware -- Mr. Cimbler: Mr. -- Mr. B. Fernandez: -- of some of the conditions that -- Mr. Cimbler: Mr. Fernandez -- Mr. B. Fernandez: IfI could just -- Mr. Cimbler: -- you know -- Mr. B. Fernandez: -- really because I think it would -- you would be satisfied to know that, through a list of conditions that we're going to be proffering in association with the application, that this approval would really not have any significant precedential value, but I'll get into that more. I don't want to take up the Commission's time. This is probably out of order to do it at this point. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman. City ofMiami Page 25 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah. Mr. Cimbler: Of course, the Commission has an attorney and staff that can -- if they can feel comfortable that they can assure it, then obviously that's something the Commission can be done Commissioner Sarnoff Well, can I --? Mr. Cimbler: -- but we've all been in front of developers who have promised that, and your client can sell the property down the -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Mr. Cimbler: -- road, and there's where your issues are. Commissioner Sarnoff Can we take this now, and if his client wants to add something when he comes in, let him add? Mr. B. Fernandez: Absolutely. Commissioner Sarnoff Because I'd like him to address what -- if you think there's something that mitigates this that -- you're an attorney, are you not? Mr. Cimbler: No, I'm not. I'm a zoning consultant and -- Commissioner Sarnoff OK: Well, you're -- Mr. Cimbler: -- my wife will tell you some -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- a professional in the area. Mr. Cimbler: -- other things, but yes, I do have some -- Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Sanchez: But you're here as a resident? Mr. Cimbler: -- expertise, and I'm here because I live -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: You don't have the handicap of being a lawyer, right. Mr. Cimbler: -- within the 500-foot advertising radius. In fact, the -- Commissioner Sarnoff Which street do you live on? Mr. Cimbler: Thirty-fifth -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Cimbler: -- so I'm -- Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman, if you're going to open up this item, you need to hear staff present the item to you -- City ofMiami Page 26 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah. Mr. Fernandez: -- give you the history of the item; how it comes -- Chairman Gonzalez: I believe -- Mr. Fernandez: -- to you, and then the applicant may speak. [Later..] Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right, so where do we go from here? Mr. Fernandez: PZ.7 and 8. Vice Chairman Sanchez: PZ.7. Are we ready to proceed with PZ.7 and PZ.8? Mr. B. Fernandez: Yes. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Mr. Fernandez: With regard to -- prior to opening it and prior to staff making their presentation -- well, let staff make their -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Let's -- Mr. Fernandez: -- presentation, and then I will have some -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Counsel -- Mr. Fernandez: -- issues to direct the Board on. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Right. Let's have staff make the recommendation, and then the appellant should be ready, and we could proceed. All right. Harold Ruck (Planner II): All right. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Sir, you're recognized for the record. Mr. Ruck (Planner II): Good morning. My name's Harold Ruck, with the Planning Department. This PZ.7 is a companion item with PZ.8; one is for future land use map change, the other is for a zoning change. I'll present the future land use change, and Roberto Lavernia will present the zoning change. The PZ.7 is the first reading of a proposed ordinance amending the future land use map of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan, from high -density multifamily residential to restricted commercial. The property address is approximately 402 Northeast 36th Street and 347 Northeast 35th Terrace. The subject properties are comprised of two lots, one fronting Northwest 36th Street and one fronting Northwest 35th Terrace. This is between, approximately, Biscayne Boulevard and Northeast 5th Avenue. The PAB (Planning Advisory Board) recommended approval for the future land use map change. The Planning Department recommended denial of the application because the change will present an intrusion of commercial uses into a high -density residential neighborhood, and the change makes it a negative precedent to the future land use change applications. That's it. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Roberto Lavernia (Chief Land Development, Planning Department): The companion item, the City ofMiami Page 27 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 zoning change, the Planning Department is also recommending denial. It was recommended denial for the Zoning Board. The Planning Department has concerns about the intrusion of commercial uses into the residential area, so our recommendation also is for denial of the zoning change. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: You're welcome. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Your recommendation is to denial, for the record? Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman, it has come to our attention in reviewing this item that the applicant, in this case, is a corporation, Grape Associates, LLC (Limited Liability Company), and checking the records, they are not presently in existence. It's a dissolved corporation, and counsel, for the record, needs to establish what's the status of his client because, in my opinion, if his client does not exist, you may not -- he may not have a right to proceed with this application. Commissioner Sarnoff He's right. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Bring it on this afternoon. Bring it this afternoon. Mr. B. Fernandez: Yes. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Let's do something. Mr. B. Fernandez: Bring it in the afternoon? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Mr. B. Fernandez: That's fine. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Why don't we do something? Let's bring it this afternoon, and I believe that we have a little -- some residents that are here on an item. Let's try to get them out of here. They're item 10 -- Mr. B. Fernandez: OK. Vice Chairman Sanchez: --I believe, or 11. Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah, but wait, wait, wait, wait. Unidentified Speaker: 7. Chairman Gonzalez: Wait, wait, wait, wait, because the City Attorney is claiming that this corporation do not exist, and if the corporation do not exist -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Chairman Gonzalez: -- the attorney have no right to present the item, so we need to conclude that. If the corporation exist, then we might take it this afternoon or we might take it now. If it doesn't exist, then it goes out. It goes off -- Mr. B. Fernandez: Maybe I can -- City ofMiami Page 28 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: -- the agenda. Mr. B. Fernandez: -- clarify that, Mr. Chair. Ben Fernandez, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, here on behalf of Grape Associates, LLC, which is the company in question. When we filed this application in 2006, the company was a valid company. We have a Certificate of Good Standing that was required to be filed with the application from the Department of State -- from the Secretary of State, verifying that they were in good standing. It's my understanding -- I have the 100 percent shareholder of the company with me here today, which is Ms. Elanna Eltes, and Elanna tells me that she provided the annual report. What the -- what I think Sunbiz indicates is that there was a failure to supply the annual report that is required in order to -- for the company to remain active, in active standing, so it appears as inactive due to, perhaps, an inadvertent mis -- failure to file an annual report. However, I'm hearing from my client, who's here today, Ms. Eltes, that, indeed, they have filed that report, so I don't have any paper to show you to that effect at this time. It came to our surprise. Obviously, when -- the only requirement is that when we file the application, we provide a Certificate of Good Standing, which we did. Chairman Gonzalez: Let me tell you. It's very easy -- Mr. B. Fernandez: I think this is an inadvertent omission, at best -- Chairman Gonzalez: If you go on the -- Mr. B. Fernandez: -- and -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- Internet, you can find out. Commissioner Sarnoff It's inactive. Mr. B. Fernandez: It's inactive. Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah, and -- Mr. B. Fernandez: Right. Commissioner Sarnoff -- just from my understanding, is a corporation can take no affirmative actions without being active in the state of Florida, and since we are acting in a capacity as a quasi-judicial body, we should not take any -- allow you to take any action. Mr. B. Fernandez: Can -- is it possible for us to -- can we -- we can bring it --? I'm hearing that they can bring information this afternoon or continue it -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Defer it, continue it. Mr. B. Fernandez: -- to another date. Commissioner Sarnoff Defer. I would -- Mr. B. Fernandez: I think we can (UNINTELLIGIBLE) that. I was -- Chairman Gonzalez: Oh, no. Mr. B. Fernandez: -- we were not aware of this issue -- Chairman Gonzalez: We should defer it. City ofMiami Page 29 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Mr. B. Fernandez: -- until this morning. Commissioner Sarnoff It should be deferred. I mean, you should come in here and demonstrate to the City Attorney that you're an active corporation. A judge wouldn't allow you to -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second on the -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- argue. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- deferral. Mr. B. Fernandez: I don't have a problem with that. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second to defer. Mr. Fernandez: Defer to which meeting, the one in March? Chairman Gonzalez: No. Vice Chairman Sanchez: No. Mr. Fernandez: No? Chairman Gonzalez: I will say the one in April be -- Unidentified Speaker: No. Chairman Gonzalez: Who said no? Vice Chairman Sanchez: No, no. That was Stevie. Twenty --April 25? Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Twenty-six, twenty-six, April 26. Mr. B. Fernandez: Twenty six. Chairman Gonzalez: Because we're trying to clean up -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Chairman Gonzalez: -- March agenda, and it's going to be kind of hectic too, so PZ.7 and PZ.8 are being deferred to April 26. Vice Chairman Sanchez: April 26, 26. Chairman Gonzalez: Twenty-six -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Chairman Gonzalez: -- Planning & Zoning meeting. Mr. Fernandez: Right, so that's a motion. City ofMiami Page 30 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Mr. B. Fernandez: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: That's a motion -- Mr. B. Fernandez: Need to vote on it. Chairman Gonzalez: -- and that's -- and it has a second, so all in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. PZ.8 06-01234zc ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 21, OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM "R-4" MULTIFAMILY HIGH -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH AN "SD-20" EDGEWATER OVERLAY DISTRICT TO "C-1" RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL WITH AN "SD-20" EDGEWATER OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 402 NORTHEAST 36TH STREET AND 347 NORTHEAST 35TH TERRACE, MIAMI, FLORIDA; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 06-01234zc Analysis.pdf 06-01234zc Zoning Map.pdf 06-01234zc Aerial Map.pdf 06-01234zc ZB Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 06-01234zc ZB Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01234zc ZB Reso.PDF 06-01234zc CC Application & Supporting Docs.PDF 06-01234zc CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 06-012341u & 06-01234zc Exhibit A.pdf 06-01234zc CC FR 02-14-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-012341u & 06-01234zc February 2007 Corporation Certificate of Good Standing.PDF LOCATION: Approximately 402 NE 36th Street and 347 NE 35th Terrace [Commissioner Marc Sarnoff - District 2] APPLICANT(S): Melissa Tapanes-Llahues, Esquire and Ben Fernandez, Esquire, on behalf of Grape & Associates, LLC FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. ZONING BOARD: Recommended denial to City Commission on October 30, 2006 by a vote of 4-2. See companion File ID 06-012341u. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to C-1 Restricted Commercial with an SD-20 Edgewater Overlay District. CONTINUED City ofMiami Page 31 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 A motion was made by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, and was passed unanimously, to continue items PZ.7 and 8 to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for April 26, 2007. [Minutes related to item PZ.8 are located under companion item PZ.7.] PZ.9 06-01844v RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), GRANTING THE APPEAL, REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD, THEREBY DENYING A VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, TO ALLOW AN INCREASE IN HEIGHT ELEVATION, PROPOSED 33'0", ALLOWED 25'0", WAIVED 8'0", FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1260 SOUTH VENETIAN WAY, MIAMI, FLORIDA. 06-01844v Analysis.pdf 06-01844v Zoning Map.pdf 06-01844vAerial Map.pdf 06-01844v Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 06-01844v Plans.pdf 06-01844v ZB 11-13-06 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01844v ZB 01-08-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01844v ZB Reso.PDF 06-01844v Appeal Letter.PDF 06-01844v CC Legislation (Version 3).pdf 06-01844v & 06-01844v1 Exhibit A.pdf 06-01844v CC Legislation (Version 4).pdf 06-01844v & 06-01844v1 Exhibit A.pdf 06-01844v CC Fact Sheet.pdf Motion by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Vice -Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-07-0095 Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Let's take PZ.9 then. Ben Fernandez: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. We're here to please everyone -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Or try. Chairman Gonzalez: -- or, at least, try. [Later...] Chairman Gonzalez: No, no. We're going to hear PZ.9, right? Maria J. Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): 7 and 8. City ofMiami Page 32 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Unidentified Speaker: 7 and 8. Commissioner Spence -Jones: 7 and 8; that's what he's saying he -- Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. Pastoriza, are you ready for PZ.9? Gilberto Pastoriza: Yeah. Chairman Gonzalez: Are we going to take -- Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): All right, so -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- PZ.7 and 8? Mr. Fernandez: -- PZ. 7 and 8. Chairman Gonzalez: What are we doing? I called PZ. 7, and -- Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. He has -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- Fernandez told me to please -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Wait. Chairman Gonzalez: -- wait because his client isn't here, so -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: PZ.9. Chairman Gonzalez: -- he wanted me to take Mr. Pastoriza's item, which is PZ.9, right? So are you ready for PZ.9? Mr. Pastoriza: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Is the City ready for PZ.9? Mr. Fernandez: PZ.9. Chairman Gonzalez: Go ahead. PZ.9. Roberto Lavernia (Chief Land Development, Planning Department): PZ.9 is an appeal to the Zoning Board decision of a variance on 1260 South Venetian Way. The Planning Department original [sic] recommend denial for no hardship. The Zoning Board grant the variance on January 8, and this is an appeal to that decision. Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. This is an appeal, so therefore -- Mr. Fernandez: Appellant goes first. Unidentified Speaker: First. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- appellant goes first, and there is no rebuttal, correct? Unidentified Speaker: There is. Mr. Fernandez: Well, after appellant, goes appellee, which -- City ofMiami Page 33 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Mr. Fernandez: -- would be the gentleman over there and then members of the public -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes. Mr. Fernandez: -- and then at the conclusion, appellant would have an opportunity to rebut. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right, ma'am. For the record, you have time for -- Louise Caro: Yes. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- rebuttal. Ms. Caro: Louise Caro, 3683 Avocado Ave (Avenue), for the appellant, Roger Simon. He's at 1339 South Venetian Way, and the Venetian Causeway Neighborhood Alliance, at 1000 Venetia [sic] Way, which is comprised of about a hundred families, mostly residential. The appeal today is based on the fact that this variance doesn't meet the requirements for acceptance by the Zoning Board. Your Article 19 specifically states that the -- to grant a variance, you have to show that the prop -- there's something unique about the property that's creating a hardship for the owner of the property, and it cannot be any action that the owner of the property is taking, and then there are six requirements that it must demonstrate in the application that the Zoning Board needs to look at and make findings on in order to get those, so I'm going to go over those fairly quickly. The first one is that a special condition and circumstance particular to the land that are not particular to others in the same zoning district. Here there are none. The applicant's letter of intent answered that the property is a waterfront lot, which faces a single-family district within the City ofMiami Beach, which allows a greater height of 45 feet. That's completely irrelevant. What the City ofMiami Beach does has no bearing on the City of Miami's Code, which is 25 feet. All the other properties -- or most of the other properties in the immediate vicinity all comply with that. Second, the special conditions and circumstances do not result in a action by the petitioner, and as I said here, we're talking about the prop -- a property, according to the applicant's answer, is located on an island, and it requires a higher flood elevation than other properties situated in the City ofMiami. Well, this -- on the island, it's R-1 zoning, and everybody else is -- having their 25 feet, it doesn't seem to be affecting their property, and also, then why is there a building already on this property? It looks like it's been there for some time. All the other homes are happily in compliance, and how is a taller building, a 33-story -- a 33-feet -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Feet. Ms. Caro: -- three-story building, how is that going to help with flooding? It doesn't make any sense. OK. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thirty-three feet. Ms. Caro: Right, thirty-three -- right. They're making it higher, so how -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Caro: -- is that -- what does that got to do with flooding, which is what their answer was. There's a case called Anon versus the City of Coral Gables, where the court specifically say it's an essential prerequisite to the granting of a variance that the hardship is unique to that property, and they have shown nothing that's unique to that property. It's a double -wide lot. It's gigantic. It's not like they can't fit a house on there or any kind of problem like that. Third City ofMiami Page 34 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 requirement that must be demonstrated by the evidence is that a literal interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance deprives the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other property owners in the same zoning district on the same terms of the Zoning Ordinance, and that it creates an unnecessary and undue hardship on the petitioner. For this requirement, the applicant states that a few neighbors have building heights higher than 25 feet above the flood level. However, that argument is -- cannot be used here. Under 1901.2 ofArticle 19 of your Zoning Ordinance says nonconforming land uses of neighborhood lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning district and permitted use of lands shall not be considered grounds for granting a variance, so in the application, it says that there was a house next door that's 54 feet tall. You cannot use that as grounds to grant this variance. I don't know why that house is 54 feet tall. I couldn't find a variance in the record. I don't -- I can't answer that. OK. OK, fourth, the granting of the variance requested conveys the same treatment to the individual owner of the -- on -- for -- just in compliance with all the other houses around it. This is important because that case I talked about, the Anon versus Coral Gables, that particular property, they couldn't build a house on it. The ordinance said you have to have 50 feet of frontage. It was only 46 feet of frontage, so he wasn't going to be able to build a house. That's certainly not the case here. He has a double -wide lot; there's already a house on it. There's nothing to show that there's any reason why -- He's getting the same treatment. He's asking for special treatment here, and then fifth, the variance of -- granted is the minimum variance that makes possible a reasonable use of the land. Like I said, we're looking for special treatment here. We're looking to build a gigantic house on a double -wide lot. There was nothing in the application and nothing before the Zoning Board that spoke to this at all, and lastly, the granting of the variance has to be in harmony with the surrounding neighborhood. Clearly, a grant of this variance is like a -- they're frying to modify the zoning without changing the zoning. If you wanted, as a city, for people to have higher buildings on these islands, you would do that, I'm sure. There's a process for that, but to try and do it roundabout through a variance is trying to circumvent due process of the law. Finally, the Zoning Board, as I mentioned earlier, was required to make findings, and these findings have to follow the four -- six -- the six criteria that I just discussed, and that wasn't there. They basically just said this petitioner wants to have a taller building, and they granted it, so that's all I have. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Applicant, you're recognized for the record, and then we'll open it up to the public. Mr. Pastoriza: Yeah. Morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. Gilberto Pastoriza, 2525 Ponce De Leon, 7th Floor. I'm here on behalf of the appellee, the applicant in connection with this height variance. I think that I want to talk a little bit about some of the procedural aspects. You have two items that were appeals of this particular decision of the Zoning Board, item number 9 and item number 10. Vice Chairman Sanchez: 10. Mr. Pastoriza: Item number 9 was the Association. If you carefully take a look at their appeal, the appeal was filed on behalf of Venetian Causeway Neighborhood Alliance, and that's important. The other appeal was filed by our next -door neighbor to the east, Mr. Dominguez, under 1276 Venetian LC, who is the entity that owns the property. We have gotten together with Mr. Dominguez, who is represented by Mr. Ben Fernandez. We have resolved our issues with our next -door neighbor. I would tell you that it had nothing to do with money, so we did not settle this monetarily. We settled it by agreeing to move our building further away from the prop - - from the water's edge, to a distance of 40 feet from the water's edge, where it used to be 26 feet before. The other reason why Mr. Dominguez felt that this was a very good applicantion is that - - and I'll get into it into more details later on -- we have opened up two view corridors on both sides of this property. Setbacks here are five feet on the sides. We have buildings that are 15 feet from the sides. I just want to also bring to your attention that the address for the Alliance is, pursuant to the records, 1000 North Venetian Way. The Alliance clearly has no standing to bring this lawsuit. There is a case, which is the City ofMi -- it's Peacock versus City ofMiami, City ofMiami Page 35 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 646 So. 2d 29, which basically states that associations can raise procedural issues, but as far as substantive issues, they don't have standing. If you review the appeal that was filed by the Alliance, the appeal deals exclusively with substantive issues and not -- they are not alleging any procedural irregularities, so to that extent, I would say that the Association has no standing. I would ask the counselor of where is the address for the Association. Is it 1000 North Venetian Way? Ms. Caro: Yes, and if you look in the record, on the Web site, I have a "for example, Roger Simon, " who's vice president of the Association, and he is directly across the sfreetfrom -- Mr. Pastoriza: Right. Ms. Caro: -- this property. Mr. Pastoriza: Well, your appeal only says that `for -- Ms. Caro: It says -- Mr. Pastoriza: -- example" -- Ms. Caro: -- both, right. Mr. Pastoriza: -- written by hand at the last moment, but they -- Ms. Caro: Which was acceptable to the City. Mr. Pastoriza: Here's my point on this appeal. These neighbors live at 1000 North Venetian Way, most of them do. Four out of five of their directors, they either live on 1000 North Venetian Way or on 801 Venetian Way. This is a 22-story building, and this, I believe, it's also a high-rise building, so the neighbors that are complaining for an additional eight foot increase in height on this house -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Eight -- wait a minute. Eight foot? Mr. Pastoriza: Eight foot increase in height. Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's not eight foot. Mr. Pastoriza: Eight foot. -- they live in a building that is taller than our building, so in effect, they are all looking down on us. I mean, it's easy to say, well, we don't like the increase in height to eight feet, but the fact remains that most of these people live in buildings that are a lot taller than what we're seeking here. Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman, just so that the record -- and you can move with appropriate speed through these application -- Teresita, from records, would have to put on the record testimony that we deem the appeal to be proper because an individual, not only an association -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: But she will do that after. Mr. Fernandez: Right, OK -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: We'll -- Mr. Fernandez: -- so -- City ofMiami Page 36 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- get her to do that on the record. Mr. Fernandez: All right. Very good. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Let him con -- Mr. Pastoriza: Yeah. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Go ahead, and conclude when you're done -- Mr. Pastoriza: Please. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- and then you have an opportunity -- Mr. Pastoriza: Yeah. Let me -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- to rebuttal; we'll open up -- Mr. Pastoriza: -- go through my points here. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Mr. Pastoriza: The property, as you know, is in San Marco Island. It's a waterfront lot, it's zoned R-1, and it's designated single-family. We're seeking an eight foot variance from your Code. San Marco Island, if you take a look at all the islands within the City ofMiami, as far as height is concerned, is like the hole in the doughnut. It is the only island that has that severe height limitation of 25 feet. You have Grove Isle that has multistory buildings; Brickell Key, Watson Island, and even Biscayne Island, which is the -- where most of these appellants live, members of the Alliance live, they all have either R-3 zoning -- everything indicated in orange -- or they live in very tall buildings, so the only -- in the City ofMiami, the only island that has this height limitation is San Marco Island. If you were to cross to the Miami Beach islands, which are the balance of these islands here, Miami Beach recently amended their code, their height code, but even under their amended code, a -- on a property of our size and our frontage, we could build a 33-stor -- a 33-foot-high house, which is what we're doing here. That's what we're seeking, a 33-foot house. There is already a precedent on this island for granting of height variances. September 22, 2003, the Zoning Board passed resolution 2003-0757, which granted 1429 North Venetian a height variance of 34 feet. Our -- the house next door to us, to the top of the structure immediately to our west, is 56feet. We have shadow studies that we conducted. Let me see where I put it. Give me one second. Here we go, and basically, what you have there are studies that were done on the days that has the biggest shadows, and on one side you have the -- with the 25-foot height requirement under the Code, on the bottom half and on the top half is on the 33-foot height that we're proposing. As you can see, the impact of the shadow is -- the increase in the impact of the shadow is pretty negligible, once you take that into consideration. We were very concerned about our two neighbors next door to -- our next -door neighbors because we felt, at the end of the day, that the ones that were going to be the most impacted ones were going to be the neighbors on our side and the neighbor across the street, so in the design of this house, we took into consideration what would be better. Would a shorter, bulkier house be better than a thinner, slightly taller house, and we decided that, for purposes -- aesthetics, and for purposes of creating view corridors for all of the neighborhood, it would have been better to do a thinner house, a little bit taller, than a shorter, squatter house, and in that respect, what we did is -- this is the site setbacks. The Code requires you to go -- the green is the property line; the orange is the setback line, which is five feet, and our buildings are at 15 feet. You have the same situation on both sides so that you have opened up views on both sides, pretty much akin to your Charter that requires you, on waterfront property -- although single families are exempt from that, but they do encourage and require view corridors. We also, in working with our City ofMiami Page 37 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 neighbor next door, took our setbackfrom -- the City requires 20 feet. We took it all the way back to 40 feet, 6 inches; before, we had 26, so we felt that this was a lot better design. It was a more sensitive design than having the bulkier structure which we could build there. I would tell you that this application meets or exceeds all the rest of the requirements in the Codes. It's got 82 percent more green space than required. It has 50 percent less than -- of building footprint than what is allowed. It has less FAR than what is allowed. In other words, we have been very conscientious of our neighbors, and we think that we have a product here that should please all of the neighborhood. If this Commission chooses to deny the appeal and approve this application, I would ask that you place two conditions on our -- on the approval, andl would read them to you. One is the applicant shall maintain a minimum rear setback for any old principal or accessory structures, including balconies of 40 feet, 6 inches, from the northernmost point of the seawall, previously shown at 26 feet, 3 inches, as reflected in the plans provided by the applicant with an issue date of 9/7/06, and then that the maximum height of any development on applicant's property shall not exceed 33 feet to the top of the roofline, and the side setback shall not be less than 15 feet. On January 8, 2007 the Zoning Board granted this variance. In granting the variance, the Zoning Board made all the findings that were required to be made under your City Code. We ask that you deny the appeal and affirm the Zoning Board's decision with the two additional conditions. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Rebuttal. Ms. Caro: Yeah. With all that said, it doesn't speak to the requirements of a variance. It's a beautiful building. I mean, a lot of green space. It's completely irrelevant to what I'm talking about, including the corridors, and in terms of the standing, I think that the -- Teresita will clear that up that we did write in a member, and like I said, he is the VP (Vice President). He lives directly across the street, and I will have testimony from the president, if you want more clarification on exactly who makes up the Venetian Causeway Alliance, and that's about it. What he said is completely irrelevant. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Teresita. Mr. Pastoriza: Mr. Chairman, ifI could just read into the record the letter from our neighbor across the street. He wasn't -- he couldn't be here today because he was -- unfortunately, had a prior Valentine's Day commitment. Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. City Attorney. Mr. Fernandez: For what purpose, as competent substantial -- Mr. Pastoriza: No. Mr. Fernandez: -- evidence? Mr. Pastoriza: All that want the Board to know, to understand that there's -- you know, that we've met with our most impacted neighbors -- Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Pastoriza. Mr. Pastoriza: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff Do me a favor. Just get right to the six issues, and tell me how you didn't create the hardship yourself -- Mr. Pastoriza: OK. City ofMiami Page 38 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff -- and we -- Mr. Pastoriza: I think -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- could get right to the chase. Mr. Pastoriza: OK. I think that -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: From one attorney to another. Mr. Pastoriza: OK. Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Mr. Pastoriza: I think that the issue of the hardship, OK, is really an issue that deals with an overall hardship on this particular island and that has limitations that no other islands all around it have it, with regards -- Commissioner Sarnoff So the hardship is -- Mr. Pastoriza: -- to the -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- Marco Island itself? Mr. Pastoriza: Yes, and the -- Commissioner Sarnoff So what you're really suggesting is that this City should reconsider its zoning as to Marco Island? Mr. Pastoriza: Well, I think that it should be in line with all the other islands that are -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well, the other island's -- Mr. Pastoriza: -- make up that chain. Commissioner Sarnoff -- in Miami Beach. If this city chose to be Miami Beach, we'd look very different. Mr. Pastoriza: Well, even if you go west into Biscayne Island, you can -- Commissioner Sarnoff But you're going into different -- you're going into then different designations, R-4s and R-3 -- I'm sorry, R-3s, and no, I don't want to -- Mr. Pastoriza: R-3s. Commissioner Sarnoff -- give anybody an R-4, but R-3s and other designations, but tell me how your -- tell me how you, by purchasing this property, have not created your own hardship. Mr. Pastoriza: Well, like I said -- Commissioner Sarnoff Not you personally, but your client. Mr. Pastoriza: Uh-huh. I think that you got to view it more on a more holistic plane than just a - - you know, honing in on just one particular piece of property because I think that the hardship - - it could be a community -type of hardship. Now I think that, dealing with the other -- you City ofMiami Page 39 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 know, the other components of that criteria, number one, there's mitigation that talks about here. Another thing is that the height variance is not on the entire structure. It's only on a piece of the structure. It's only on the rear (INAUDIBLE) -- Pamela E. Burns (Assistant City Clerk): Excuse me. You must -- Mr. Pastoriza: -- of the structure. Ms. Burns: -- be on the microphone. Excuse me, sir. Chairman Gonzalez: You need to speak on the mike. Mr. Pastoriza: Yeah. The height variance that we're seeking is only on this portion of the structure and not on the front portion of the structure. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Pastoriza, some day you're going to be speaking, possibly, to a three judge panel. As if you were speaking to a three judge panel, address the six requirements and why you have satisfied them. Mr. Pastoriza: OK. I try to address the first one. Let me get the rest of them. I have them here somewhere. Excuse me. OK One, A, "I fry to address it. The special conditions and circumstances do not resultfrom actions of the petitioner in that we don't -- we did not create the Zoning Code. The Zoning Code was created by the City ofMiami, and we did not, you know -- it was not our -- Commissioner Sarnoff One question: Did you purchase it knowing what the Zoning Code was? Mr. Pastoriza: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Number two. Mr. Pastoriza: That was number two. Literal interpretation of the prohibition of the Zoning Ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning districts under the terms of the Zoning Ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the petitioner. Well, remember that we already have the property next door, who is already taller than 33 -- than 25 feet. There's also already cases or approvals that have been granted to allow those properties similar to ours to go to the additional height. Commissioner Sarnoff On Marco Island? Mr. Pastoriza: On Marco Island, yes, sir. Commissioner Sarnoff Can you name those properties? Mr. Pastoriza: Well, the zoning resolution in 2003-0757, which I believe was 1490 -- Ms. Burns: Excuse me. You must be on the microphone. Mr. Pastoriza: -- North Venetian Way. It was right here in this corner, Mr. Sarnoff. Commissioner Sarnoff So not on Marco Island; on the west island. Mr. Pastoriza: This is Marco Island, on Marco Island. This is all Marco Island here. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. City ofMiami Page 40 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Mr. Pastoriza: Granting the requested variance will not confer on the petitioner that special privilege that is denied by the zoning to other lands. I mean, there's the precedent already set next door and across the street. The variance, if granted, is the minimum variance. Well, we have, number one, reduced the variance to one of the buildings. Also, I think it's important to point out that we did create the view corridors so that, in our opinion, that really mitigates any impact that the additional eight feet would be causing on the property, and the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent. It's a single-family house. It will be a single-family house, and it's in line with some of the heights that already exist in the San Marco Island, and it's way below even the height of where the appellants live. That's in -- that would be how I would answer those -- Commissioner Sarnoff Is there a sixth cri -- Mr. Pastoriza: -- criterias [sic]. Commissioner Sarnoff -- have you gotten number six in? Mr. Pastoriza: Yeah, that was "F," the grant of a variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance -- Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Mr. Pastoriza: -- and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. I think, on the contrary, that this design really, you know, works a -- it works as a benefit for all of the properties that are really impacted, which are the ones around us. Thank you. Commissioner Sarnoff Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Sarnoff I'm going to -- Chairman Gonzalez: Teresita Fernandez. Unidentified Speaker: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes. Teresita Fernandez (Executive Secretary): Teresita Fernandez, Hearing Boards. For the record, I would like to state that when Ms. Louise Caro came over to my office to appeal this application, I specifically told her that the Association didn't have any standing, so she had to appeal it on behalf of a particular person, and she did. She handwrote, at that moment, the name ofMr. Roger Simon, and then I accepted the application. She wrote it in front of me. Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Public. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Sarnoff I'm going to make -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Wait, the public. City ofMiami Page 41 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We're going to close the arguments. We're going to open it to the public. Anyone from the public that wants to speak on the item, I'm going to allow two minutes for each speaker. Good morning. Barbara Bisno: Good morning. Thank you very much for allowing us to address you -- Chairman Gonzalez: You're welcome. Ms. Bisno: -- on this matter. My name is Barbara Bisno. I do live at 1000 Venetian Way, and I'm president of the Venetian Causeway Neighborhood Alliance. I know I only have two minutes, butt would like to tell you that, because we expected this to be a week from tomorrow at your regular P&Z (Planning & Zoning), some people who really wanted to address you are not here and have specifically asked me to read their names into the record. One of them is Roger Simon, who had eye surgery scheduled for today and could not alter it; Bob Everhard and Dan Morosa (phonetic) all live right across the street from this property, and the Venetian Island Homeowners Association, which is another association which primarily represents Miami Beach residents, but also represents single-family residents in Miami, specifically asked me to represent that I -- represented them in also asking you to deny this variance and to follow the law, which Ms. Caro has carefully laid out for you. Just to answer just a couple of issues that counsel raised, first of all, we're not -- I'm not speaking for myself as a resident only of 1000 Venetian Way. It is true, we have some R-3 zoning, as the -- Commissioner Sarnoff indicated -- on Biscayne Island and some R-1. San Marco is entirely R-1, and just on the southern spine of the Venetian Causeway, there are buildings like mine and a few others that are mid -rise buildings. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Barbara, you mean approve the appeal? Ms. Bisno: Approve the appeal. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh, OK Ms. Bisno: Deny the variance. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Right, and approve the -- Ms. Bisno: I misstated? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff Affirm. You want to affirm the appeal. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Ms. Bisno: Affirm the appeal. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Ms. Bisno: All right. I'm sorry. Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's OK. Ms. Bisno: Thank you very much. The -- some of the statements that the counsel indicated to you, I just have to respond to. This idea of making a more narrower building and opening up these view corridors, I don't know if you're familiar with our neighborhood. I hope you all are, and if you drive down South Venetian Way, it's a very nice road. All the buildings have fences and enormous investment in landscaping and foliage. There is no side corridors. It wouldn't City ofMiami Page 42 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 matter if you put 15 feet or 30 feet;; you can't see anything. It's all got high fences, including this property when it was -- and there is a building on it right now that has been there for quite some time, and further, this deal of the other islands, you know, Grove Isle is zoned -- the zoning for our neighborhood is very clear. There are R-1 sections, and there are R-3 sections. San Marco is completely R-1, and as Ms. Caro indicated to you, there's, in our view and in hers, no legal grounds for granting this variance, and we would ask that you follow the law. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you -- Ms. Bisno: Thank you very much. Chairman Gonzalez: -- very much. Thank you. Yes, sir. Gary Carman: Good morning. My name is Gary Carman, 1111 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1050, on behalf ofMr. Skip Braver, who owns a piece of property at 1235 North Venetian Way. Mr. Braver opposes this variance; asks that the Commission affirm the appeal that is before it for the reasons set forth above. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Good morning. John Ballou: Good morning. I'm John Ballou, at 801 North Venetian Drive. I've lived there for almost 17 years, and know an awful lot of folks on these islands, and I talked with a number of them, and there is a unanimous support of our being here and looking to affirm the appeal. Also, I noticed that the counsel for the app -- or for the builder, several times, has fried to make a case of -- by slightly modifying this -- these view corridors, that that's going to somehow magically solve the problem of additional height, but also, you've got to recognize that this really combines two lots, and what they've done is sliced out a large view corridor that previously existed between the homes on the two lots, and the amount that's been traded off really is -- what they're providing is far less than what existed before, but that said, I think that it's clear that the only beneficiary of this would be the owner, and it doesn't benefit the residents or the City in any way that we're able to recognize, so we look, once again, for your affirmation, I guess, of this. Thank you very much. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: -- sir. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. B. Fernandez: One more. Mr. Chair, members of the Board, Ben Fernandez, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard. I represent 1276 Venetian LC. Mr. Luis Dominguez, who's the principal of that company, is the owner of the most affected neighbor, which is the immediately adjacent neighbor, and I would just like to say that this variance would benefit not just the property owner, but would very much benefit the abutting property owner, which is my client. To say that Mr. Pastoriza's client has a hardship, I think, is an understatement because we've given him a real hard time. We've given him a hard time for about three weeks since the approval, after we filed the appeal because my client wanted to make sure that what was built was something that was done tastefully and done in a way that would not impact his property interest, and one of the most important things for anyone that lives on the water in Dade County is preserving view corridors. You see it time and again. You see it with docks that are built, variances that go to the Environmental Quality Control Board for people that want to build oversized docks because City ofMiami Page 43 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 they're buying larger boats because that's the trend. You know, I don't have to tell you. We've got the boat show this weekend. Just go see how much bigger the boats are getting and where these people have to keep them, and these are problems, of course, of you know, the idle rich, but their issues are view corridors, by and large, and the R-1 zoning regulations that were -- that apply citywide don't take into account, I believe -- and I know this is a legislative argument, and possibly, not one that's applicable to this variance, but it's something that I think should be considered -- that these island lots need to preserve their view corridors, and what Mr. Pastoriza's client is doing is voluntarily maintaining a setback that is greater than what is required from the water, and for that reason, we're supporting the application. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. All right. That concludes the public hearing of -- Yes, go ahead. Nina West: Nina West, 3690 Avocado Avenue, Coconut Grove. I'm here for Miami Neighborhoods United. We are asking this body to support their own ordinances. If they wish to change the ordinances, they should change them. We don't see a hardship here; it's self-imposed. Nobody said you had to buy that particular piece of property. These rules are for everyone, and the only thing that people can rely on when they purchase property is the zoning and the Commission to uphold the zoning. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Yes, sir. Richard Oronsky: Hi there. My name's Richard Oronsky. I'm the -- a member of the owner of the lot. I'm the property owner. I just wanted to bring up a few points here. One, that the gentleman said that we're taking away a view corridor. That's not really the case right now. Right now, the lot's -- there's one house on the lots, and there is no view corridor, other than on the sides of the property, and as far as the hardship issue is concerned, just to be clear, we, of course, knew the property was in Miami. We're not a hundred percent familiar with the difference in the height restrictions from Miami to Miami Beach at that point, and additionally, with the hardship, we worked very hard with our neighbors -- the adjacent neighbors across the street and to the sides, to understand what their concerns are because we felt that they're the ones that are really directly impacted, and if it's hardship to not get along with your neighbors and not do what's right for them and not take into consideration what they want, then we do have a hardship in that respect because, like Mr. Pastoriza said, we can either go wider and shorter or up a little bit and keep the footprint a little smaller, which I think is much better for the neighborhood. Additionally, a lot of the addresses of the owners that came in on the north side of the island, they don't see our property. How they're impacted, I have no idea, but we have worked with what we felt were the most important neighbors to make sure that they were OK with it, and I don't agree that they're in a hundred percent agreement against this. The neighbors that we've spoken with would rather it was done this way, and that's what we've taken into consideration, and honestly, it was taken into consideration before talking to the neighbors. We tweaked a few things after speaking with them, but from the beginning, we tried to be cognizant of the fact that this is going to be a big house. It's going to -- people are going to look at it, and it's going to impact people, and we tried to be as sensitive to those who we thought cared about it. After the first hearing, which was postponed to deal with a neighbor, the Association came, which we weren't aware of to -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Oronsky: -- and I've fried to work with them to see if there was anything better that could be done. It wasn't an option. They were -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Oronsky: -- just simply -- so that's my point. Thank you. City ofMiami Page 44 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. All right. That concludes the public hearing. It comes back to the Commission. Commissioner Sarnoff I'm going to make a motion, Mr. Chairman, to affirm the appeal. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second to affirm the appeal. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Motion carries. Mr. Pastoriza: Thank you. Ms. Caro: Thank you very much. Mr. Fernandez: Chairman, just for the record, it's a resolution, and just let me make sure that the record is amply clear, so that there is finality to this issue. It's a resolution of the Miami City Commission granting the appeal, reversing the decision of the Zoning Board, thereby denying a variance from Ordinance number 11000, as amended, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Article 4, Section 401, schedule of district regulations, to allow an increase in height elevation proposed 33 feet, allowed 25, waive 8, for the property located approximately 1260 South Venetia [sic] Way, Miami, Florida. That is the action that you have taken today with your vote. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes. Mr. Pastoriza: Thank you. Happy Valentine's. PZ.10 06-01844v1 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), DENYING OR GRANTING THE APPEAL, AFFIRMING OR REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD, THEREBY DENYING OR GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, TO ALLOW AN INCREASE IN HEIGHT ELEVATION, PROPOSED 33'0", ALLOWED 25'0", WAIVED 8'0", FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1260 SOUTH VENETIAN WAY, MIAMI, FLORIDA. City ofMiami Page 45 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 06-01844v Analysis.pdf 06-01844v Zoning Map.pdf 06-01844vAerial Map.pdf 06-01844v Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 06-01844v Plans.pdf 06-01844v ZB 11-13-06 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01844v ZB 01-08-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01844v ZB Reso.pdf 06-01844v1 Appeal Letter.PDF 06-01844v1 CC Legislation (Version 3).pdf 06-01844v & 06-01844v1 Exhibit A.pdf 06-01844v1 CC Legislation (Version 4).pdf 06-01844v & 06-01844v1 Exhibit A.pdf 06-01844v1 CC Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 1260 South Venetian Way [Commissioner Marc Sarnoff - District 2] APPELLANT(S): Ben Fernandez, Esquire, on behalf of 1276 Venetian LC, Abutting Property Owner APPLICANT(S): Gilberto Pastoriza, Esquire and Estrellita Sibila, Esquire, on behalf of 1260 South Venetian Way, LLC FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. ZONING BOARD: Granted the Variance on January 8, 2007 by a vote of 4-3. PURPOSE: The approval of this appeal will not allow a new single-family home with more height than allowed. WITHDRAWN Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. Fernandez, are your clients here now? Ben Fernandez: No, but I plan to proceed. Chairman Gonzalez: You're going to go ahead? OK. Mr. B. Fernandez: Do (UNINTELLIGIBLE)? Chairman Gonzalez: Go ahead, go ahead, go ahead. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Well, item 10 -- my understanding is that item 10, you will announce now for the record that it's withdrawn. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Let -- Mr. Fernandez: Would you do that categorically on the -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- let's -- City ofMiami Page 46 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Mr. Fernandez: -- record, please? Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- fry to get things in order here. Let's go ahead -- and somebody needs to make -- put on the record that PZ.10 is being withdrawn. Mr. Fernandez: The applicant would do that -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: The applicant needs to do that. Mr. Fernandez: -- or the appellant -- Mr. B. Fernandez: The appellant. Mr. Fernandez: -- rather. The appellant -- Mr. B. Fernandez: Yes. Mr. Fernandez: -- will advise the City Commission that they're withdrawing their appeal. Therefore, the decision of the Zoning Board stands. Mr. B. Fernandez: That's correct. Ben Fernandez, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, here on behalf of 1276 Venetian LC, and we hereby withdraw the appeal of the approval by the Zoning Board at this time. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Thank you, Counsel. PZ.11 06-01035x RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), DENYING THE APPEAL, AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD AND THEREBY DENYING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS, TO ALLOW A NIGHT CLUB IN "C-1," SUBJECT TO ALL THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 760 NORTHWEST 4TH STREET, UNITS 101, 102 AND 103, MIAMI, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO PLANS ON FILE AND SUBJECT FURTHER TO A TIME LIMITATION OF TWELVE (12) MONTHS IN WHICH A BUILDING PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED. City ofMiami Page 47 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 06-01035x Analysis.pdf 06-01035x Zoning Map.pdf 06-01035xAerial Map.pdf 06-01035x Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 06-01035x Plans.pdf 06-01035x ZB 09-25-06 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01035x ZB 10-30-06 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01035x ZB Reso.pdf 06-01035x Appeal Letter from Mr. Fernandez.PDF 06-01035x Appeal Letter from Mr. Coleman.PDF 06-01035x & 06-01035v Appeal Withdrawal Letter from Ben Fernandez.PDF 06-01035x CC Legislation (Version 3).pdf 06-01035x & 06-01035v Exhibit A.pdf 06-01035x CC Legislation (Version 4).pdf 06-01035x & 06-01035v Exhibit A.pdf 06-01035x CC Fact Sheet.pdf Motion by Vice -Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-07-0096 Chairman Gonzalez: Now we go to -- we already heard PZ.9. Now we go to PZ.10. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): It's already been withdrawn on the record. Vice Chairman Sanchez: PZ.11. Chairman Gonzalez: I'm sorry. PZ.10 was withdrawn. PZ.11. Pamela E. Burns (Assistant City Clerk): Excuse me. My -- Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.11. Ms. Burns: -- understanding is that the individuals who wish to speak on PZ.11 and 12 need to be sworn in, correct? OK. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. It's PZ.11 and PZ.12 -- Ms. Burns: Would you please -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- right? Yes. Ms. Burns: -- raise your right hand? The Assistant City Clerk administered oath required under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons giving testimony on zoning issues, said oath was translated by official Spanish interpreter. Ms. Burns: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Lavernia. Roberto Lavernia (Chief Land Development, Planning Department): Yes, sir. Item number 11 City ofMiami Page 48 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 is the appeal of a Zoning Board decision for a special exception to allow a nightclub in C-1. The Planning Department recommended originally approval with conditions of the request. The Zoning Board deny the special exception on October 30, and this is the appeal for that. Item number 12 is for the same property, is appeal of a variance too, so I don't know if you want to hear the two cases at the same time and -- Chairman Gonzalez: I guess so, yeah. Mr. Lavernia: Yes. Item number 12 is also for the same address, which is 760 Northwest 4th Street, Units 101, 102, and 103. It's the variance for the same purpose. It's to waive 27 of the required 54 parking spaces. The Planning Department original [sic] recommend deny it, and the Zoning Board recommend denial. The applicant, in this case, is appealing that decision. Thank you, sir. Chairman Gonzalez: Who's the applicant? Is the applicant here? Maria Zuniga: What is the question again? Chairman Gonzalez: Are you in opposition? Ms. Zuniga: Yes. We all are. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Who's the applicant? Is the applicant here or not? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, the applicant needs to be here, and if the applicant is not here -- Chairman Gonzalez: Then we don't have due process, right? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, I -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. I guess, go ahead. Ms. Zuniga: May I ask a question? Chairman Gonzalez: Just you could put it into the record, you know. Maria J. Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): You have no record upon which to accept these comments. I mean, you could only make your decision on a presentation by the applicant or by the appellant. Chairman Gonzalez: By the appellant. That's -- Ms. Chiaro: You have no -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- the problem. Ms. Chiaro: -- presentation to -- Chairman Gonzalez: You're here in opposition, too? Unidentified Speaker: Completely. I'm affected. I've got the 500 feet. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Ms. Zuniga: The fact that the applicant is not here, does that make this process void? I mean, City ofMiami Page 49 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 does it have to be rescheduled? Because that's incredibly -- Chairman Gonzalez: It will have -- Pamela E. Burns (Assistant City Clerk): Your name for the -- Ms. Zuniga: -- inconvenient. Ms. Burns: -- record, please. Your name -- we need your name. Ms. Chiaro: You may take action on this application based on the fact that you have nothing upon which to grant -- Chairman Gonzalez: Right. Ms. Chiaro: -- this appeal. Vice Chairman Sanchez: So we could deny it. Ms. Chiaro: You may deny -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, I'm -- Ms. Chiaro: -- this appeal. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- going to make it very simple. I'm going to make a motion to deny the appeal. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion, and we have a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Motion carries. That's on PZ.11. Commissioner Regalado: That was easy. Ms. Zuniga: That's it then? PZ.12 06-01035v RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), DENYING THE APPEAL, AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD, THEREBY DENYING A VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 19, SECTION 1901, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS, TO WAIVE 27 OF THE REQUIRED 54 PARKING SPACES (GRANDFATHERED 4, BALANCE REQUIRED 51, PROPOSED/EXISTING 24), FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 760 NORTHWEST 4TH STREET, UNITS 101, 102 AND 103, MIAMI, FLORIDA. City ofMiami Page 50 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 06-01035v Analysis.pdf 06-01035v Zoning Map.pdf 06-01035vAerial Map.pdf 06-01035v Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 06-01035v Plans.pdf 06-01035v ZB 09-25-06 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01035v ZB 10-30-06 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01035v ZB Reso.pdf 06-01035x Appeal Letter from Mr. Fernandez.PDF 06-01035x Appeal Letter from Mr. Coleman.PDF 06-01035x & 06-01035v Appeal Withdrawal Letter from Ben Fernandez.PDF 06-01035v CC Legislation (Version 3).pdf 06-01035x & 06-01035v Exhibit A.pdf 06-01035v CC Legislation (Version 4).pdf 06-01035x & 06-01035v Exhibit A.pdf 06-01035v CC Fact Sheet.pdf Motion by Vice -Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-07-0097 Chairman Gonzalez: What about PZ.12? Vice Chairman Sanchez: PZ.12, I will also make a motion to denial [sic] the variance that they're requesting. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion, and we have a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Commissioner Regalado: That was easy. Chairman Gonzalez: Both item has been denied. Maria Zuniga: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: You're welcome. Unidentified Speaker: If it does -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Unidentified Speaker: -- come back, can we (INAUDIBLE)? Commissioner Sarnoff Doesn't come back. Chairman Gonzalez: It's over. Commissioner Regalado: Doesn't come back. City ofMiami Page 51 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff Doesn't come back. PZ.13 06-01239x RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), DENYING OR GRANTING THE APPEAL, AFFIRMING OR REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD, THEREBY DENYING OR GRANTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, TO ALLOW A SUPPER CLUB IN C-1, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 28 NORTHEAST 40TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA. 06-01239x Analysis.pdf 06-01239x Zoning Map.pdf 06-01239xAerial Map.pdf 06-01239x Letter of Intent.pdf 06-01239x Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 06-01239x Plans.pdf 06-01239x ZB 09-25-06 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01239x ZB 10-16-06 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01239x ZB 11-13-06 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01239x ZB Reso.PDF 06-01239x Appeal Letter.PDF 06-01239x CC Legislation (Version 3).pdf 06-01239x Exhibit A.pdf 06-01239x CC Legislation (Version 4).pdf 06-01239x Exhibit A.pdf 06-01239x CC 02-14-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01239x Submittal Presentation.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 28 NE 40th Street [Commissioner Michelle Spence -Jones - District 5] APPELLANT(S)/APPLICANT(S): Nancy Terminello, Esquire, on behalf of Legion of Doom, LLC FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval of the appeal and approval with a condition* of the Special Exception. ZONING BOARD: Made a motion to approve with conditions, which failed, constituting a denial, due to the failure to obtain the majority of votes on November 13, 2006 by a vote of 3-3. *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: The approval of this appeal will allow a supper club. CONTINUED A motion was made by Commissioner Spence -Jones, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Regalado absent, to continue item PZ.13 to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for March 22, 2007. Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.13. PZ.13 is in Commissioner Spence Jones district. City ofMiami Page 52 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yes. (INAUDIBLE). Chairman Gonzalez: Is there anyone here -- Mazi Soufi: Grass Miami Corp. (Corporation). Chairman Gonzalez: -- to speak on PZ.13? Mr. Soufi: Grass Miami Corp., that's me. Chairman Gonzalez: You are the applicant? Mr. Soufi: I'm one of the members of Grass Miami Corp. We're representing ourselves today at this hearing. Chairman Gonzalez: But you are the owner of the supper club? Mr. Soufi: Correct. It's not a supper club yet. We're applying -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Soufi: -- for the supper club license. Commissioner Sarnoff Are you a corporation? Mr. Soufi: Yes, we are, Grass Miami Corp. I'm a member of the corporation. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. City -- Madam City Attorney, can a corporation be represented without an attorney. Maria J. Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): The application was filed by Mr. Terminello. If the -- Commissioner Sarnoff OK, as long -- Ms. Chiaro: -- app -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- as it's individually. Ms. Chiaro: Yes. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Can I -- since this definitely is in -- within my district, do I --? I have a comment on it, and I don't know if we need to go through the whole presentation. Ms. Chiaro: You need to hear the staff presentation first, and then -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Ms. Chiaro: -- you could make your comment. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Lavernia, go ahead. I'm sorry. Roberto Lavernia (Chief Land Development, Planning Department): Yes. It's an application to allow a supper club in C-1. The Planning Department recommend originally approval with conditions. The Zoning Board make a motion to approve that failed, constituting a denial, and City ofMiami Page 53 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 this an appeal from the applicant to the decision of the Zoning Board. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Mr. Soufi: I'm a member of Grass Miami Corporation. My name is Mazi Soufi. This is our appeal for the supper club license, and the reason that we're here today is we feel that we were misrepresented in the first hearing, and that there was a lot of miscommunication and falsehoods that were presented and not a clear understanding of exactly what we were in the disfrict and what exactly the disfrict is, especially the street that we have our property on. I'd like to take this opportunity to hand out these pamphlets to the Board. Ms. Chiaro: I'm sorry, sir. Can I interrupt you? The -- Chairman Gonzalez: Go ahead. Ms. Chiaro: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Go ahead. Ms. Chiaro: The applicant [sic] that is before this City Commission was filed by Mr. Terminelli Terminello on behalf of a corporation named Legion of Doom. That's who the applicant is, not Grass Corporation [sic], so you need to, at least, explain to this Commission -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Why it changed. Ms. Chiaro: -- what the change is, and if that is -- if that corporation that is the app -- is shown as the applicant is who you are representing. Mr. Soufi: Right. I'm a member of both corporations. Where the confusion is is there's two properties right next to each other; one company owns the one property and one company owns the property next door. There's one lessor, and that is Grass, and that is what is the confusion as far as that's concerned, but I'm a member of both, and we basically are one entity, which is Grass Restaurant and Lounge. It's a indoor/outdoor restaurant space. It's on 28 Northeast 40th and 10 Northeast 40th Street. That's part of the initial confusion. To continue on, our concept is a high -end restaurant with indoor/outdoor space, like I just mentioned. We have a executive chef that we're promoting through various publicists, and our primary business is the restaurant business. We have no history of problems with the community. Our corporation -- we have no history of being a nuisance in the community. We are brand-new applicants. We're asking for something that was granted before by a vote of 9/0 in 2004, and we're also asking for something that the staff has recommended, and we're here to answer any questions and to eliminate any confusion moving forward with this application. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Mr. Chairman, if you don't mind. I'm definitely aware of the facility. I've actually been to it a couple of times when you guys were open. It's a beautiful facility. I think, probably, the concerns more so than anything else would be, for me, is the feeling of what's happening from the neighbors' perspective. I understand that one of the biggest issues -- and you can clear it up for me -- is the time frame in which the place would be open. I know that, from visiting it a year and a half ago, the outside area is exposed, correct? Is it still going to remain exposed? Mr. Soufi: That's correct. It's going to have that part as exposed, and there's a picture of the front wall. It's kind of blurry, but if you go through the packet, you'll see a red pickup. That's -- the wall in front of there is the wall in front of the outdoor area, and to the right of that is the indoor space, which is 10 Northeast 40th Street. City ofMiami Page 54 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK, and just correct me if I'm wrong -- and I think one of the issues is the time in which this place closes, which is, I believe, at 5 a.m. in the morning, or it's one of the things that you're requesting? Mr. Soufi: Correct. We have a license to operate until 3 a.m. We're requesting a license to operate till 5 a.m. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. This is -- I'd like to just give you my recommendation on this, if possible. I'd like to ask the Chairman ifI can continue this item to March 22, and ask the applicant to submit to the Planning Department an operational plan, and in submitting that plan, that should give consideration to the conditions that are consistent with those associated with the existing entertainment district's criteria. I think it's important for us to do that. I don't know if there's any neighbors here represented, butt would prefer to have that happen, to have that submitted to the Planning Department -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- first and -- OK. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I would rather have that happen. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion, and we have a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Commissioner Sarnoff You might want to also consider -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: We're done. Commissioner Sarnoff -- Commissioner, putting some sort of window treatment or a window on that blank wall -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Commissioner Sarnoff -- because it just looks like a great, big straight facade otherwise, so you might want to ask them -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- to break that up somewhat. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- and can I ask a quick question? You know, because, again, for me, I understand how important the Design District is in my district, and to have restaurants and have life and activity going on in the Design District is very important, so I support that 100 percent. Like I said, I've been to the location. I think it's a beautiful location. I don't think the neighbors have a problem with the location. The problem is, I really do believe, time, so I would -- Have you had the opportunity to sit down with the neighbors at all? Has this happened? Mr. Soufi: Yeah. There's actually a history in the back of this packet that shows -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah. City ofMiami Page 55 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Mr. Soufi: -- all of our correspondence with the neighborhood. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK, and as far as Buena Vista -- Mr. Soufi: East and Heights -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- East and -- Mr. Soufi: -- we've -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- Heights --? Mr. Soufi: -- both gone to their meetings and corresponded with them. Commissioner Spence -Jones: And has it been -- I mean, have you guys made any headway at all? Mr. Soufi: Well, it's pretty much at the point where there's just a misunderstanding with what our product is, and it's exactly what we're going to do because of the previous owners, which we have no relation to, we have no -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. I'm going to suggest that, before this comes back on March 22, since there are new owners, new peo -- Mr. Soufi: No. We've met with them, as the new ownership. You can look in the back and you'll see correspondence from October of last year, maybe June of last year, all the way up until about December. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK, because I understand that there was some commitments that was made, and I would like to just see them incorporated in the overall plan from the neighbors. That's all. Mr. Soufi: That's fine. I mean -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: I mean, I would ask that you guys, at least, before it comes back, meet one more time to make sure that we're all on the same page -- Mr. Soufi: OK. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- and then Commissioner Sarnoffs comment about the facade portion of the project, at least, to put some sort of consideration into that too. Mr. Soufi: That's fine. We want the Board to be completely comfortable with their decision, and we feel that we have a adequate amount of information to provide that -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Mr. Soufi: -- information to you. Commissioner Spence -Jones: All right. Yes, sir. Mr. Lavernia: Excuse me. Yes. Let me ask a question for the Planning Department. The operational plan that we need to review have to take into consideration noise and parking -- City ofMiami Page 56 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Mr. Lavernia: -- and also, the facade mentioned by Commissioner Sarnoff -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. Mr. Lavernia: -- what facade is this? Commissioner Sarnoff Oh, I (INAUDIBLE) -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: No. He's just saying making it look more appealing on the outside. Commissioner Sarnoff You're looking -- right -- directly (INAUDIBLE) just put a window treatment or something (INAUDIBLE) when you see this type of blank wall -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah. I get the -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- and think it's important for her district. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yeah. I think that it's a part -- all a part of their design and motif for what you guys are doing there, the grass concept, but because the Commissioner has proffered that and has mentioned that -- I just want to make sure my neighbors are happy because -- Mr. Soufi: I understand. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- they live there. It's a historic community, you know, and don't want to hear no noise at 5 a.m. in the morning in an exposed terrace, so I know they don't want to hear it either, so -- Mr. Soufi: Everyone's concerns are reasonable and -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK -- Mr. Soufi: -- understandable. We're just here to -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- so if you guys could just sit down and talk and walk through that, I really would appreciate it -- Mr. Soufi: OK. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- before the next meeting. Mr. Soufi: That's fine. Mr. Lavernia: So it's an operational plan and facades of the building; is that OK with you, Commissioner? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Repeat it again. Mr. Lavernia: Operational plan, taking in consideration noise and parking, and elevation, just to see the treatment of the facade. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yes, because Commissioner Sarnoff has -- City ofMiami Page 57 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Mr. Lavernia: OK. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- proffered that. Mr. Soufi: No problem. Commissioner Spence -Jones: All right. Thank you very much. Mr. Soufi: Thank you very much. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We need a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Sarnoff I'll make a motion. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion to adjourn. Is there a second? Commissioner Spence -Jones: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Happy Valentine's to everyone. Commissioner Spence -Jones: I was wondering if you was going to tell us Happy Valentine's Day, since you called us here today. NON -AGENDA ITEMS NA.1 07-00269 RESOLUTION "INCOMPLETE (CHANGES NECESSARY) - PENDING FINAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY CITY ATTORNEY." A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISION (subject matter: Commission's legislative agenda to include recommendations by Commissioner Sarnoff and Florida League of Cities resolution; further directing the City Clerk to forward a copy to necessary individuals.) Motion by Vice -Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Sarnoff, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez and Spence -Jones Noes: 1 - Commissioner Regalado R-07-0093 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We may commence with the workshop or discussion on the legislative -- the City ofMiami legislative agenda. Ignacio Ortiz -Petit: Commissioners, good morning. Ignacio Ortiz, with the City Manager's Office. We're here this morning to discuss Governor Crist's proposals for a property tax reform, and basically, what the Governor has recommended is three things: Doubling the homestead exemption, and that would go from 25,000 to 50, 000 for everyone; making the Save Our Homes cap portable statewide, and also taking the cap to nonresidential properties and to businesses, so for example, the same Save Our Homes cap that exists for homesteaded properties extend that to rental properties and to businesses. I believe Mr. Spring had a financial discussion with all of you during your last Commission meeting regarding the fiscal impact of all the three proposals City ofMiami Page 58 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 to the City. Let me recap that. Doubling the homestead exemption would put us at a $9 million loss, making the Save Our Homes portable -- the amount is unknown, depending on how much portability there actually is, and the -- and extending the Save Our Homes cap to renters and to businesses would result in a loss of over 250 to $300 million to the City. This is what the Governor has on the table. Both the House and Senate now need to discuss the packet. There's a million bills out there on any one of these things, but there's no consensus yet as to what's going to happen, and I'll now entertain your discussion. Commissioner Sarnoff This is -- Chairman Gonzalez: Commissioner Sarnoff. Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Mr. Chairman, with regard to portability, I think it's important that we maintain portability within the County, and the reason being, obviously, Dade County has a certain amount of robust value that possibly other places in Florida wouldn't have, so if portability were to be the call of the day, so to speak, and it were to be the law, you could, theoretically, have people from Putnam County -- and I'm not trying to say anything negative about Putnam County, butt would suggest that their tax basis is significantly less than Dade County -- and you could then have people porting that tax basis that's down here to Dade County, and then we would have to live under that tax basis for a significant number of years. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: That's correct. Commissioner Sarnoff The reason I brought up Proposition 13, and I think it's Public Law 22 in Massachusetts, is because it's got about 30 years of experience, and whether you go from North Dade to South Dade, those values are going to be reasonably consistent, so I think it's important that we send a message to the Governor that portability be restricted within the counties, and I think you'll have a much more neutral basis or a neutral effect to cities, to us, in general. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Agree. Commissioner Sarnoff I think portability is a fantastic idea. I think it allows people to free themselves from their homes, whether they're upscaling, downscaling, sidescaling [sic]. It just -- it's -- there's some components in there that I think the real estate industry would applaud in a very strange and obtuse way; think what it will do for the condo industry in Miami. You have people living in 20- and 30-year-old condos that would consider moving into a brand-new condo that would then allow the older condos to be rehabbed. It would free up -- I think the real estate people would just be pleased with this. It will have a reasonably neutral effect to us, and if we were going to visit inheritability as well, because that's something else I propose, I think for certain members and certain classes of our society that would be a great opportunity for them to maintain some homes that they would ordinarily have to sell, and in terms of what I call fix -ability or renovate -ability, that'll allow people to remain in their home and not face the consequence of higher taxes should we put a cap on it, if you will, and allow them to fix their homes, because people are either illegally fixing their homes or are not pulling permits, obviously, or they are not fixing their homes and living in crammed conditions. Now when I visited with a number of the staffers -- I mean, we're not talking so much about people building tennis courts and swimming pools, but if they were to fix their homes and put another bedroom or a second bedroom on, and we were to limit that maybe to increasing the square footage by 100 percent -- let's say, if you have a 2,000 square foot house; you want to go to 4,000 square foot, maybe that's not the government's business. You know, maybe that's simply not the government's business, and if you were to put a cap on it maybe of you know, the same amount of what the house is worth, maybe we're -- that is something I think that this City should take an interest in. Obviously, when we get -- the rubber meets the road with the doubling of the homestead, and the rubber truly meets the road with it comes to the Save Our Homes initiative City ofMiami Page 59 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 for the businesses, and that's something we should start planning for, and what I had suggested to staff and I bring to the Commissioners, this'll happen quickly, come August. We should think about not only tightening our belts, which I'm sure it's what Tallahassee expects us to do, but maybe coming up with an alternate way of taxing some of our people, and one of the ways I think that's least offensive is a tax that you don't pay every year, a tax that you don't have to sit down every month or every year and write, so what I suggested, having had a little bit experience in buying in Colorado, is that there's a tax you pay when you sell your house. Now, I know when I get my closing statements and I see all sorts of expenses, fees -- you know, I'm paying $250 for somebody to hand -deliver a document to me or -- it just seems like there's a great many expenses that I incur that, ifI were to incur a tax at that time and there's so much money transferring hands, it wouldn't feel so painful, and it would allow the City to make up what I think is going to be facing a shortfall come this August, so I just bring that to bear to the conversation, why we should be, of course, more efficient and a leaner cat, so to speak, as a city we're going to be hit pretty hard, and maybe there is a time and a place to tax ourselves that is not done on a yearly basis, but is only done when we transfer our property and is not so uncomfortable for some of us. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Your resolution, Commissioner Sarnoff had portability, inheritability - - and what was the other one? Commissioner Sarnoff Portability, inheritability, and fix -ability or renovate -ability. It allow -- again, allowed people to renovate their homes up to a certain point, and I've not put the point in there, Commissioner Sanchez. I -- that's something that we should discuss and something that, if you feel is necessary, we can put a limitation in it -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: I'll be the last one. Commissioner Sarnoff -- so I -- you know, I think the thing that we should discuss -- I hope that you'll agree with me that portability needs to be restricted within counties. It's -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Agreed. Commissioner Sarnoff California's a much bigger state than us; they knew that it had to be done on a county basis. Florida's what, the third or fourth biggest state right now? I think we're number three now. Three, right? So I think we should learn that -- and I don't hear anybody in Tallahassee really talking about county to county. You're hearing Crist's plan is, you know, statewide. Just think of -- I don't want to say the word shenanigans, but think about how that can, you know -- how that could bear if people suddenly said let's buy a house in Miami, and we'll port our tax bill from Duval County, or Putnam County, or you know, Lake County, and -- they have a thousand dollar tax bill. Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's ridiculous. Commissioner Sarnoff Right, right. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Commissioner Sarnoff, I definitely agree with you. I just want to get the input from -- again, from the Manager and Larry just on -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Well -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- what is -- I know you're in Tallahassee all the time -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Yeah. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- so what are you sensing is the feeling of what's happening up there? Is it -- does it seems like this is something that could be doable, what Commissioner Sarnoff is --? City ofMiami Page 60 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Well, the Commissioner brings up a good point. The Governor has suggested that portability statewide. However, in meetings yesterday with certain state senators, you know, they're starting to realize that, you know, you could take, you know, Gadsden County, or Putnam County, or you know, one of those small -- Levy County, whatever, and come here and then the inequity is going to be huge, so people are starting to realize that statewide portability may not be a good idea. I mean, you know, some sort of portability, perhaps, but not statewide. I know Commissioner Regalado and I spoke yesterday about this, and he had some insight as to the Governor's portability plans and whether or not that's even constitutional, and -- please. Commissioner Regalado: Well, I think -- good morning -- there is an issue about the portability and the constitutionality because some people will be benefit and other people will be affected, and the Constitution said everyone has to be tax the same way, so that's an issue. I think that we should -- I mean, I fully agree with Marc on this tax, although I really doubt that someone from Putnam County would want to buy a house here in Miami, but -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: You never know -- Commissioner Regalado: -- anyway -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: -- you know. Commissioner Regalado: -- it's interesting, but I think we should focus in what is really going to happen. It's -- you know, the $25, 000 added homestead exemption, that's something that everybody agreed with, and I spoke yesterday to -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: -- two state senators, and they seem to have our -- state representative in our area, Carlos Lopez-Cantera, he's the chairman of that committee. He's going around the state. He's pushing -- he has two bills, and I think it's going to happen, whether or not we have a special election in July and August, or there will be some lobbying to have the election either in November or in the Presidential Election of 208 [sic]; that's something to be debated, but I think, if you look -- and I went by last night there -- at the hearings in South Florida, I mean, there is a hundred percent support for do it and do it now, and -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: It's like that throughout the state. Commissioner Regalado: -- you know, that's a thing that has to be understood, that it will be done. That's what I think, that we should -- in this legislative agenda, we should start focusing on getting money from the State for public safety. Public safety is one of the issues that none of the state legislatures [sic] will deny. I mean -- or the Governor will cut. I mean, Jeb Bush had this -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: -- scissor, you know, and he was cutting and cutting, and he knock down all the special programs and all that from Miami -Dade County every year. I mean, he went after the County big time, and -- but no one, not this Governor, will cut public safety. I think that we should have a revenue stream for public safety, because 80 percent of the people in the state of Florida are going to vote for the $25, 000 added extension. It will pass, you know. There is also a move in the Legislature -- Ignacio, you know -- to cap the budgets of the local governments, and that could be very well something that the Governor would also entertain, so I just think that in this session, which is only days away, we should focus in frying to be sure that we are going to have at least some revenue stream for public safety, because the cities and the City ofMiami Page 61 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 county are going to be hit with this $25, 000. The only problem that I have is that we represent the people, not the government, and we, as a government, cannot lobby against the $25, 000 added homestead exemption with the disguise of fiscal responsibility, of lack of services, and all that, because it's what the people want. It's not only what the people want; what the people need, so I'm -- I am -- I -- we have a very good briefing yesterday. Some of the issues in the Legislature agenda are important, and I hope that you can achieve some of them. I think that the Legislature will be focused on this debate and also the insurance crisis. Many items will be left out. It's like -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: -- one of those PZ (Planning & Zoning) agendas in the City Commission where the Chairman says, well, you know, we're going to do it next month, so I just hope that we can focus in frying to get a revenue stream for public safety either from the sales tax that the State get or the special funding that the State has for public safety. I think it's important. I mean, you know, we cannot go after transportation dollars because what they're going to say is, well, you guys have a revenue stream of millions of dollars each years [sic] from the half a penny tax. I mean, the City has received $42 million since 203 [sic], and last month, in October, we got $900, 000; in September, a million two, so that's a revenue stream that it will be there. Mind you, the projections are that we will get more money from the half a penny sales tax because the more money people have, the more money people would spend, and people are spending, people paying sales tax, so I think that that is a sure revenue that we have, but you know, I would urge you and urge my colleagues to try to lobby for some permanent revenue stream, be small or medium or large, but for public safety, because the reality is that we are going to be short of some million dollars because of the added $25, 000 homestead exemption. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: You bring up an excellent point and one that I agree with completely. This is the time that, as a Commission, all ofyou should entertain formulating some sort of suggestions or formulating some sort of you know, suggestions that you want to tell the Legislature. This is the time they're listening. I mean, the same way that the Governor has a proposal, you can have a proposal, and that's something that we can transmit to our friends in both the House and the Senate so that when the discussions are going on, there is something that you, as a body -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Support. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: -- have a suggestion on. Commissioner Regalado: I would suggest that -- to see if someone can file a bill, in behalf of the City, that part of the sale tax will be used for public safety, according to the population of the cities in the state of Florida. They cannot legislate only for Miami. They have to legislate for the whole state, but I think that if we are able to get that formula through, committees or -- Legislature will be very happy to bring home, north, south, east, and west of the state, some money for public safety, and you know, according to the population, that's fair, that's fair, so I would urge my colleagues to consider this, because you know, if you look at the polls, if you look Mason Dixon, or you know, UF, University of Florida polls, this is going to happen, regardless of the philosophical debate, whether it would affect services or not, it's going to happen, and we really need to be ready to use some additional money, so I, for one, would move a resolution, if that is the case, to ask that we try to get someone to file a bill in order to have some revenue, permanent revenue for public safety in the different cities, according to population, from whatever source the Legislature feel. I mean, the sales tax is one that it's always open. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: And excuse me. This is a technical point, but any sort of suggestion would go on the general property tax bill or the general -- Commissioner Regalado: Right. City ofMiami Page 62 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Mr. Ortiz -Petit: -- so not a specific bill, but -- Commissioner Regalado: No, but I mean, it's an amendment. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Oh, OK. Right, right. OK Commissioner Regalado: It's an amendment -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: OK. Commissioner Regalado: -- but it have to go through a committee. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Correct, correct. Commissioner Regalado: It has to go through a committee, and I will assure you that many legislatures [sic] will be happy to, you know, bring their -- to their governments some money for public safety, which is the most needed funding for all the cities in the state of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: I do have a question, because we're talking about homeowners that have homestead exception [sic], but what are we doing in reference to commercial property, people that rent their apartments? Because the truth -- Commissioner Regalado: No. The Governor has a cap. Chairman Gonzalez: -- of the matter is -- Commissioner Regalado: The Governor has a plan to cap three percent. Chairman Gonzalez: Three percent, because the fruth of the matter is that people out there, they can no longer pay rent. I mean, you know, it's becoming impossible to have a commercial property in the City ofMiami, or as a matter of fact, in the County, and pretty soon you're going to see a lot of people selling their properties and getting out of here because -- I mean, if you have a mortgage, and you have to pay insurance, and you have to pay the expenses to maintain the property, with the money that you can charge on rent, you can't make it. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Right. Chairman Gonzalez: You can't make it, and the time is coming where property owners are trying -- are raising the rents and they're losing the tenants because the tenants can't afford to pay higher rents, so you end up with an empty property, keeping to pay mortgage, insurance, and maintenance, and eventually, you have two choices: either you lose the house and your investment, and sometimes it's a life investment, or sell the property and then leave. Move to another state. Move to another city. Move. Move out of the City. Commissioner Regalado: And Mr. Chairman, ifI may. Yesterday we discuss that. One of the legislative issues that you have to take to Tallahassee is the appraisal by income -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Correct, correct. Commissioner Regalado: -- to amend the state statutes. Well, as we discussed, the state statutes allow the property appraisal [sic] to assess, by income -- Chairman Gonzalez: By income approach -- City ofMiami Page 63 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Commissioner Regalado: -- this -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- of course. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Correct. Commissioner Regalado: -- is exactly what Lori Parish is doing in -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: That is correct. Commissioner Regalado: -- Broward County. Chairman Gonzalez: And that is what we -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: That's correct. Chairman Gonzalez: -- propose here, and we sent it to the County. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but -- Chairman Gonzalez: The County approve it. We sent it to Tallahassee. The legislator approve it, and then -- Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, it's a piggy bank. Chairman Gonzalez: -- they kill it at the Senate. Commissioner Regalado: It's a piggy bank. Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah -- Commissioner Regalado: It's a piggy bank. Chairman Gonzalez: -- I know. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Well -- and after -- Commissioner Regalado: But you know, the only solution -- because the property appraisal [sic] has so much latitude that he or she can choose and pick whatever -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Whatever method, yeah. Commissioner Regalado: -- statute to appraise. The only solution that we have here is an elected property appraisal [sic], because when Lori Parish ran for property appraisal [sic] in Broward County, her campaign was "I will assess the value of the property by income, and people living in apartment buildings will not have to pay so much high rent," and she won, and this is what she's doing. I mean, the guy next door in West Palm is doing some different -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Is doing the opposite. Commissioner Regalado: -- you know, but she is -- she's doing that, and she's capping -- you know, the ren -- you know that rents in Broward doesn't go up more than ten percent, which is the logical thing. I mean, inflation is like 3 -- 4.1 in South Florida, so it's fine. Ten percent, people would do it. Here, the rent is going up 80 percent and people cannot -- that's why, you City ofMiami Page 64 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 know -- if we do not support this thing, someday this same Save Our Homes initiative people will get so many signatures and put in the ballot a more strict amendment to the Constitution, and they will roll back taxes and do whatever they want to do, so I think, you know, it's -- hopefully, the state legislature will recommend some legislative that all property appraisals [sic] in the state of Florida should be elected. I mean, there's 66 elected, and there's only one that is not elected, but -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: We -- after our meeting in the morning, we had the chance to meet with State Senator Mike Haridopolos, and they're well aware of the disparities between property appraisers, and what he said he's going to do is that he is going to convene a forum of all 60 -- what is it? -- 67 property appraisers in Orlando. He's going to sit them all down in a room with people from the Department of Revenue, and he's going to read them the Riot Act, and if people still disagree, then legislation has been filed both by Representative Lopez-Cantera and Senator Atwater; would eliminate highest and best use from the criteria that property appraisers can use. Commissioner Regalado: That's what -- Chairman Gonzalez: Very good. Commissioner Regalado: -- they do here. They use -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: -- the only criteria [sic] he uses is high investment. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: That's correct. Commissioner Regalado: That's all that they use, and this is why people cannot pay their rent, so -- but -- Chairman Gonzalez: Vice Chairman Sanchez. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, good morning. Mr. Chairman, if there's something that we all can agree on is tax relief and I believe that it's something that we all have to work together, whether it's local government, county government, and state government on this crisis. The Governor has made it very clear that something will happen, and the Governor has stated that he is the governor of the people, and so far, he's done that. I mean, he's tackled some tough issues, such as the insurance costs crisis, and now he's focusing on property taxes. What they're looking at -- and the resolution that -- well, the committee's looking at doubling the tax -- the homestead exception [sic] for everyone. You know, that's going to cost us $9 million, which I don't think anyone here is against that, and we will do everything we can to make sure that we're able to come up with that money. Now on the portability. As I -- as Commissioner Sarnoff has stated, it's -- the biggest concern, whether it's countywide or statewide -- because I think that we could carry the burden on countywide, but we certainly may not be able to carry the burden on the state side; being realistic on the issue. I have also talked to some of the senators and representatives up there, and there's some concern about that, so that's an issue that's going to be discussed and probably amended in Tallahassee. The other aspect that's being presented is the business rental, the cap on a tax to provide relief. That, we don't -- we definitely don't know how much it's going to be, but you stated it's somewhere in the neighborhood of 200 to $300 million. Larry Spring: Commissioners, Larry Spring, chief of Strategic Planning, Budgeting & Performance. We would find ourselves, in our current Five -Year Plan, in a $200 million operating deficit if it is implemented as stated. City ofMiami Page 65 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: And that's my point. I -- you know, we have a fiduciary responsibility in the City ofMiami. I mean, I don't think anyone here would want to say, listen, we lower your taxes on a Monday, and Friday we have to have an emergency meeting to tell the residents that we've had to slash their services, and a police officer may take a little longer to get your house to provide you aid. We may not be able to pick up your frash twice a week but once a week, and then rescue may be interrupted, so those are the things that we don't want to get into, because really, it is irresponsible for us. We need to be the voice of practicality on this issue, and you know, it's great when we're able to get together and have a workshop because we can't get together and talk;; we'll be in violation of the Sunshine law, and people don't understand that, but when we come together and we're able to put our ideas together, and some of the ideas that have been put together here today are excellent ideas, to fry to bring relief to our residents -- I think that when it's all done and said, we're going to have a resolution that is going to be sent to Tallahassee, because that's what we're trying to do here. We're trying to send a clear message to the people who represent us in Tallahassee, that the taxpayers cannot continue to have that burden of tax -- property taxes because, yes, people are moving out of the City; people are having to dip into their savings. As a matter of fact, I read in the paper some poor, young lady had to pawn her wedding ring to be able to pay for her taxes, and that is fruly sad, so having said that, I think I've been the last one to talk. I just want to bring one item up. Have you had an opportunity to review the draft resolution for the Florida League of Cities? Mr. Ortiz -Petit: I've read it, but I don't have it in front of me. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Have you read it -- are you comfortable with that resolution, as it's written? Mr. Ortiz -Petit: It's fairly innocuous. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: I mean, it's -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a res -- for discussion, I'll make a -- I would move to put all together the Florida League of Cities resolution, the legislative package, and Commissioner Sarnoffs recommendation. I tell you, I think we need a little bit more clear definition on the fix -ability. That one, I hope you'll agree with me on that. There needs to be more clarity on that before we could put it on our resolution that'll be sent through the Clerk's Office, through Tallahassee, and all the representatives on the House side and the Senate side, and that would be -- if you want to add inheritability, I could agree with that one, butt would request that you withdraw the fix -ability because that one doesn't have a clear definition of exactly what it's going to be, and that might -- you know, there might -- they may be looking for one item not to support this resolution, so having said that, Mr. Chair, I would make a motion putting all these items together in support of this legislative body to Tallahassee, and of course, the Governor, Charlie Crist. Commissioner Sarnoff I'll second that, with the amendment. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion, and we have a second, as amended. Discussion. Commissioner Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: The resolution of the League of Cities is -- calls for neutral, but it does not clearly support the $25, 000 double homestead exemption. I think that we should be in record supporting the $25, 000 double homestead exemption and also the proposal of the Governor to cap commercial properties, because this is the only way that we can save the people City ofMiami Page 66 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 ofMiami in order to save their homes and to allow the people that are renters to continue living in the City ofMiami. It is -- it would be very confusing to send a message to Tallahassee by not clearly supporting the double homestead exemption, which we all agree, and also the commercial cap, which I think we all agree, because the most affected people are the renters and the very small business in the City ofMiami, which is what we have here in Miami, small businesses, so I would really hope that we can include in that resolution the support for the double homestead exemption and the cap that the Governor is proposing on commercial properties. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, if -- Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. City -- Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sarnoff If, in fact, what Larry Spring is telling us is correct, and if, in fact, that cap will be $200 million -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) bankruptcy. Commissioner Sarnoff -- in five years -- and I'm -- I understand the need for this, but could we also then just consider for a moment coming up with a different kind of tax that doesn't necessarily upset somebody on a yearly basis that may, in fact, make up the difference, and that would be a tax when we sell our property, or a fee, or some way of creating a fund -- well, revenue stream that'll make up this $200 million? I mean, I -- we have to take what he's saying as true. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but Marc, this is different. What we -- what we're doing here is supporting the legis -- the package that it's going through committees in the legis -- I think that your idea -- I will support your idea because it's another line in the contract, and people would pay it. I would also insist that Ignacio and the people that are going to Tallahassee in the City's behalf will try to get that bill amendment so we can have a permanent revenue stream from the State for public safety, which, in turn, will -- and remember, Larry, which is brilliant, he -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Call the question. Commissioner Regalado: -- is doing this numbers using the growth of the budget in all these years, so we understand that we have to tighten our belt because of this, so by using the growth of the budget, he can project a lot of money, but if we were to be more discreet in the budget growth, the money will be less. The County budget has grown, in one year, 14 percent; inflation has only been 4.1, so I'm just saying, Larry, you know, with -- I can't fight you on numbers -- Mr. Spring: No. Commissioner Regalado: -- because you will win, but you know what? I think you're very smart, and you are giving us your numbers with the regular growth of this budget, which has grown more in the last years than the inflation rate. Mr. Spring: No. Actually, our budget grew -- it was 1.7 percent from year-to-year -- Commissioner Regalado: OK. Mr. Spring: -- so that's below CPI (Consumer Price Index). City ofMiami Page 67 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Commissioner Regalado: Well, it's below. Then I was referring to the County. The County -- Mr. Spring: Whole nother issue. Commissioner Regalado: No, I understand that, but what I'm saying is that if we reduce -- Mr. Spring: I -- Mr. Chairman, if you will allow me? Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Go ahead. Mr. Spring: I understand what you are saying. I also participated in some conversations with a couple of state senators and representatives yesterday. We talked about, and I think something that you're trying to get to is, you know, yeah, we need -- we may need to be more efficient and tighten our belt, but keep in mind, the State has unfunded mandates that they impose on all the local municipalities, and part of the solution of having a cap is also having them, you know, revisit those unfunded mandates, which is some of the things that we discussed yesterday. How - - you know, how do we balance this whole thing out? It is not just about saying, all right, we're just going to put this revenue cap, and I'll see you guys when the oversight committee is started. It's about working together. Let's balance out the mandate. A good one -- and I'm not picking on our unions or anything like that -- we have a requirement a state statute that says we have to provide a pension, and it tells you what type of pension we're supposed to provide. We have a mandate that states that we have to provide health insurance to our retirees. We have to offer them the same health package that our actives has [sic]. That's a unfunded mandate, and it cost a lot of money, so those are things that we need to also engage our Legislature on as saying, in addition to, all right, yes, we do want to provide tax relief for our citizens. You know, I've talked about something that nobody wants to talk about, state income tax, but you know, if we're going to shift our paradigm, you know, let's throw the whole thing in. Let's look at every possible avenue. Sales tax has also been brought up. How -- you know, assessing things that are now currently exempt. We have to take a new look at it, and I'm encouraged with the conversations that I had yesterday because I know the people that I talk to are going to listen to what I have to say on behalf of this City, not only in the public forum, but also in the private forum; you know, allow me the opportunity to provide our numbers. They wanted to see the back-up of our Five -Year Plan and how the Governor's stuff will impact us, you know. You know, the Senators are going around, not only our senators locally, but people from Central Florida and other area -- other districts are coming to meet with this Commission and the citizens of this area to find out, OK, well, it may play out a little differently here in Miami as opposed to Gadsden County, so I would encourage that -- you know, I support, you know, from an administrative standpoint, or from my budget standpoint, the resolution that's being passed here, but also to include that we also consider, you know -- and I don't have those now today to say these are the mandates that we want to fry to adjust and provide that plan, but as we continue to work, we need to look at those mandates, so -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. Manager, you wanted to speak? Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman, yes. I think it's important to note that it's very apparent that some tax relief actions will happen. As Commissioner Regalado mentioned to me yesterday, we have to look for substitutes, and that's very true. I think the resolution that we have on the table right now is one that we could go forward with because it's general enough that it will provide us the ability to watch what's going on in Tallahassee. There are many things that haven't been defined. There is nothing fixed in the Senate or in the House, and I think that we have to keep an eye on -- follow and support whatever is best for the City ofMiami. Obviously, portability at the County level, we're comfortable with. I'm very concerned with the City ofMiami Page 68 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 cap on the commercial business properties, even though I fully recognize that we need to do something in order to provide relief to buildings that provide rental. We need -- something has to happen, but if we do it by placing a cap on the commercial properties, that's going to be devastating to the City ofMiami if we don't have another alternative source to take its place. Commissioner Sarnoff has, you know, the idea on the -- you know, when you have the sales of real estate, you know, tacking something on, that's one idea of coming up with substitutes. I think that the issue of the Florida League of Cities on neutrality, I see it as a non net loss of revenue. I think that's a good idea, and I think it's general enough, as a thought, that it's compatible with what Commissioner Sarnoff was proposing, so I think what you have on the table right now is good and it doesn't box you in at this early stage, and allows for the City to continue to monitor what goes on in Tallahassee, and then take the desired course of action. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Call the question, as amended. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion, and we have a second, as amended. All in favor, say -- yes? Commissioner Regalado: Are not -- are we not going to include the support for the $25, 000 double homestead exemption? Unidentified Speaker: No. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes. You wanted it. I don't have a problem with it. As a matter of fact, there's -- the League of Cities will support that. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, the -- because it's important that the City, as a government, is seen in the Legislature as supporting the $25, 000 double homestead exemption. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if we're supporting the Governor's recommendations, we are supporting the $25, 000 increase. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but the League of Cities is not supporting the Governor recommendation. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, it is. Yes, they are. Commissioner Regalado: No, they're not. They're calling for a neutral tax program, and the Governor has in the agenda both the $25, 000, plus the cap on property -- commercial properties, and the League of Cities is not supporting that. Is it? Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Well, the -- Mr. Hernandez: I think the neutral statement refers to maintaining a non net loss of revenue, meaning that if you have the additional 25,000 on homestead exemption, there should be something that the State can do to assist municipalities, like unfunded mandates, like maybe a redistribution of how they give out sales tax back to the municipalities. There are ways to, hopefully, make that neutral. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Correct, and remember, the doubling of the homestead exemption only applies to people with homesteaded properties, OK -- Commissioner Regalado: I understand that. City ofMiami Page 69 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Mr. Ortiz -Petit: -- and -- right, and within that universe, there are different bills, you know, for homestead for seniors, homestead for veterans, homestead for teachers, homestead -- and if you make a blanket statement "we support doubling of the homestead property, "I ask you, please fry to keep it as general as possible so that when new proposals come in, you can say, well, we like this one; we don't like that one. If you box yourself into a general proposal, then you have to accept anything that comes along the line. Commissioner Regalado: No, no. I understand what you're saying, but listen to me. The proposal of the Governor is $25, 000 for everyone, rich or poor, in the state of Florida, with homestead exemption. That is the proposal. Now veterans, disabled veterans, elderly, they have another homestead exemptions [sic]. In the last two elections, the Constitution was amended. In Miami -Dade County, we have 29,000 -- close to 30,000 in Miami -Dade County, 30,000 people that own houses, that had homestead exemption, that qualify for the $75, 000; that is, 65 years old, less than $23, 000 of income, and these property owners, they qualify for the three, right, the one that we have, the second that was passed four years ago, and this one that was passed last November, $75,000. Imagine, in the City ofMiami, the City, only the City, we have 8,511 property owners with homestead exemption that qualify for those three exemption, the one that we have, plus the two, so if you look at the population of the County and of the City, I mean, we are, by far, number one in number of people that do qualify for really, really like poor, you know, under 23,000. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Commissioner -- and you're already on the record, and I've heard it loud and clear. There is a general consensus that something needs to be done, and that a doubling of the homestead exemption would be a good idea. However, right now the only proposal on the table is the Governor's proposal. We've not seen anything come out of the House. We've not seen anything come out of the Senate. You may like what the House is saying better. You may like what the Senate is saying better, but we don't know what they're going to say yet, so at this time, it would be my preference and my recommendation that you hold off -- I mean, we hear that, yes, we need relief, I get it -- on making any concrete, you know, battening down on any position where we don't know yet what the House or the Senate is going to say. Commissioner Regalado: And I understand that, and I'm sorry I'm taking so long, because I mean -- you know, suppose that there is a proposal on the House that says, well, yes, we support the Constitution amendment for the $25, 000 double homestead exemption, but suppose that someone said, well, in order to lessen the impact on local governments, we are going to stagger the homestead exemption in the -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Right. Commissioner Regalado: -- next four years of -- or five years, 5,000, 5,000, 5,000, 5,000, that could be a plan that will work for some governments, but it doesn't work for the people. My point is that we should send the message that we support what the people really need now, and that's what I'm saying we are supporting or we should support. I mean -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: And -- Commissioner Regalado: -- we should support the Governor's because we don't know what is going to come out of the House and the Senate. You know what mean? Mr. Ortiz -Petit: But it's something you may like better. It's something you may not like better, but I'm just -- Commissioner Regalado: I understand that. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: -- saying that, you know, when all three are on the table, you can make a City ofMiami Page 70 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 decision -- Commissioner Regalado: Hey -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: -- at that time. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: -- I mean, you know, I understand. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well -- Commissioner Regalado: I'm not voting for this resolution, if it doesn't have the support -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Roll call. Commissioner Regalado: -- for the -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Fair enough. Commissioner Regalado: -- $25, 000 because -- but I understand. I understand that there will be some -- I'm telling you, there are some -- imagine the army of lobbyists of all the county and the cities in Tallahassee. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: We're not that strong. Commissioner Regalado: They will be lobbying for the governments, not for the people, mind you. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Some will argue that to that's a distinction without a -- Commissioner Regalado: Yeah. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: -- difference, but that's OK. Chairman Gonzalez: Madam City Clerk, will you please do the roll call? Commissioner Regalado: What's the resolution, Mr. Chairman? Chairman Gonzalez: Resolution is to -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: The resolution on the record is to support the Florida League of Cities and the legislative package, and the recommendations proffered by Commissioner Sarnoff except with the -- as amended, where it will not include the -- Commissioner Spence -Jones: Fix -ability. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- fix -ability and the renobility [sic], correct? Commissioner Sarnoff Correct. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Roll call. Pamela E. Burns (Assistant City Clerk): Roll call. Commissioner Spence Jones? City ofMiami Page 71 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Commissioner Spence -Jones: Yes. Ms. Burns: Commissioner Regalado? Commissioner Regalado: No. Ms. Burns: Commissioner Sarnoff? Commissioner Sarnoff Yes. Ms. Burns: Vice Chairman Sanchez? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Burns: Chairman Gonzalez? Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Burns: The resolution has been approved on a vote of 4/1. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, ifI may -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Thank you, Commissioners. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- I want to thank the City Manager and the staff and all of you for allowing this. I have -- I've been here nine years, and I think, in the nine years that I've been here, I've seen maybe three or four workshops. I am all in favor of workshops because it really gives us an opportunity to iron out our differences in a very respectful manner where we're able to provide research and get our staffs to do the proper background work for us to be able to determine and put together good legislation such as this one, so thank you, Mr. Sarnoff, thank you Mr. City Manager, and thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Spence -Jones: Mr. Chairman, I just -- Chairman Gonzalez: You're welcome. Commissioner Sarnoff I'll yield to my Commissioner. Commissioner Spence -Jones: -- also want to say to the City Manager and to Iggy, I don't know if you guy -- I'm sure you guys had the opportunity to be briefed on all the legislative items that were going to be, at least, addressed by Iggy and the City Manager in Tallahassee, and I'm glad to see that a lot of the key initiatives will be pushed very hard in Tallahassee, and it was great to be able to, at least, have, at least, a one-on-one meeting with you to have a clearer understanding because there's ways that we can assist you with our constituents to make sure that if there's phone calls, or anything that's necessary to happen in Tallahassee, to at least, push some of these items. I know a lot of my constituents, you know, in my district are -- were concerned about a lot of key issues. The one thing that I did not see on the updated list, though, is I just wanted to make sure that we include the historic preservation piece of this, meaning -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: We'll meet, yeah. Commissioner Spence -Jones: OK. I just -- that was the only question I had, to make sure that we include it in there. City ofMiami Page 72 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Mr. Ortiz -Petit: And we love help, by the way. Commissioner Spence -Jones: All right. Mr. Hernandez: Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chairman, I just want to sfress two things that I don't know that they're -- let me just stress them, whether they're part of the resolution or not. I think something Commissioner Regalado said is extremely important that Ignacio will bring to bear to Tallahassee, and that is the biggest expense for this City is Police and Fire, and what Commissioner Regalado was saying is we need to find, through the sales tax, some sort of a revenue stream from Tallahassee that would help us bear the burden of Police and Fire. You know, when Lopez-Cantera or anyone else goes up to Tallahassee and they pass all these laws, when they come home, their garbage is still picked up; they still call the Fire Department. They're still going to be rescued. When they call for the Police, they're still going to get a cop out there, and everything they do has an affect locally here on this City, but up there, it looks brilliant, and all it does is hurt us, so if in fact -- and I know Larry's not here -- Let's just say Fire and Police accounted for 60 to 80 percent of our budget, whatever it is; I know it's a high percent, Commissioner Regalado is absolutely right, that we need to come up with, from them, relief or help so that they acknowledge every time that they lift a shovel and they take some sand out of our bag, that we get some sand back in the bag from them. The second thing I want to stress is that you can go up there and find out -- because if portability is going to be the call of the day, whether it's portability statewide, or whether it's going to be portability on a countywide basis, that is going to create a great many closings in the state of Florida, one way or another. If in fact, we need to come up with an alternate source of revenue, let's have that alternate source of revenue at a time when the citizens are not so concerned about that exfra hundred, three hundred, five hundred dollars, whatever it may turn out to be, and let's see if we can put some sort of a component or tax in that will make up for the shortfall as a result of the rental, because you're absolutely right; we need to give rentals relief whether that comes in a three percent cap, or whatever cap it comes in, but when somebody goes to sell that property, let us get back some of the -- let us recoup, at a time when it doesn't hurt the taxpayer, some of the money that we're going to lose, because I suspect Larry's going to be dead right in his numbers, and even if he's wrong, and he's 20 percent wrong -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: You're going to lose money anyway, yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff -- that's $160 million loss, so -- Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Lose money anyway. Commissioner Sarnoff -- let's sfress, let's go up there with two things. One, a source revenue for the first responders, and number two, let's come up with a way, a means, a manner, an allowance from the County, and the City -- and the State to allow us to do something at closing. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: And Commissioners, perhaps, you can work with the Law Department to draft some sort of language that then I can take to the Legislature. It's a lot easier if you have language in hand, and you just hand it to them, and they run with it. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. [sic] City Attorney. Maria J. Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. City ofMiami Page 73 Printed on 3/6/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 14, 2007 Motion to Adjourn Mr. Ortiz -Petit: I'm sorry. Commissioner Sarnoff Mrs. City Attorney over there has agreed. Mr. Ortiz -Petit: Thanks. A motion was made by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Spence -Jones, and was passed unanimously, with Vice Chairman Sanchez and Commissioner Regalado absent, to adjourn today's meeting. City ofMiami Page 74 Printed on 3/6/2007