Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2007-06-28 MinutesCity of Miami City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33133 www.miamigov.com Meeting Minutes Thursday, June 28, 2007 9:00 AM 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 June 28, 2007 CONTENTS PR - PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS MV - MAYORAL VETOES AM - APPROVING MINUTES EO - EMERGENCY ORDINANCE RE - RESOLUTION M - MAYOR'S ITEMS D1 - DISTRICT 1 ITEMS D2 - DISTRICT 2 ITEMS D3 - DISTRICT 3 ITEMS D4 - DISTRICT 4 ITEMS D5 - DISTRICT 5 ITEMS PART B PZ - PLANNING AND ZONING ITEM(S) Minutes are transcribed verbatim. Periodically, agenda items are revisited during a meeting. "[Later...]" refers to discussions that were interrupted and later continued. City ofMiami Page 2 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 9:00 A.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Present: Chairman Gonzalez, Commissioner Sarnoff, Vice -Chairman Sanchez and Commissioner Regalado Absent: Commissioner Spence -Jones On the 28th day of June 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 regular session. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Angel Gonzalez at 9: 48 a.m., recessed at 1: 05 p.m., reconvened at 3: 05 p.m., and adjourned at 9: 19 p.m. ALSO PRESENT: Jorge L. Fernandez, City Attorney Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk Pamela Burns, Assistant City Clerk Chairman Gonzalez: Welcome to the June 28, 2007 meeting of the City ofMiami City Commission in this historic chambers. The members of the City Commission are Joe Sanchez, Vice Chairman, Tomas Regalado, Michelle Spence -Jones, who's absent today due to a illness, Marc Sarnoff, and me, Angel Gonzalez, Chairman. Also on the dais are Pedro Hernandez, the City Manager, Jorge Fernandez, City Attorney, and Priscilla Thompson, City Clerk. The meeting will be opened with a prayer by Commissioner -- Vice Chairman Sanchez and the pledge of allegiance by Commissioner Regalado. Invocation and pledge of allegiance delivered. Chairman Gonzalez: Are there any presentations from any of the Commissioners, proclamations? None. PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS MAYORAL VETOES NO MAYORAL VETOES Chairman Gonzalez: We have no vetoes from the Mayor's Office to report? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): That is correct. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. APPROVING THE MINUTES OF THE FOLLOWING MEETING: Motion by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Vice -Chairman Sanchez, to APPROVED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez and Regalado Absent: 1 - Commissioner Spence -Jones Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We need to approve the minutes of the meeting of May 24, 2007. Is there a motion? Commissioner Sarnoff So move. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second. City ofMiami Page 3 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 ORDER OF THE DAY Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion, and we have a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Motion carries. Chairman Gonzalez: Now the City Attorney will state the procedure to be followed during this meeting. Mr. City Attorney. Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, members of the public, any person who's a lobbyist must register with the City Clerk before appearing in front of the City Commission. A copy of the Code section 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 Commission action. The Commission may override such veto by a four fifth vote. Any person or entity requesting approval, relief or other action from the City Commission concerning any issue shall disclose, in writing, at the commencement of the hearing on the issue, the following information: Whether any consideration has been provided or committed, directly or on its behalf, to any entity or person for an agreement to support or withhold objection to the requested approval, relief or action; number 2, to whom the consideration has been provided or committed; 3, the nature of the consideration, and 4th, a description of what is being requested in exchange for the consideration. The disclosure form, which is available from the City Clerk, must be read into the record by the requesting person or entity prior to submission to the City Clerk. 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, nor 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 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 chamber shall do so quietly. Persons may address the City Commission on items appearing on the 'Public hearings" portion of the agenda and on items where public input is solicited. Persons wishing to speak should inform the City Clerk, as soon as possible, of their 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 notnj, the City 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. this morning. Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, Mr. City Attorney. [Later...) Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Having said that, Mr. City Attorney, we're ready to go into the Planning and Zoning agenda. Will you please state the procedure to be followed during the Planning and Zoning meeting? City ofMiami Page 4 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Fernandez: Well, Mr. Chairman, the items that you have today in your PZ (Planning & Zoning) agenda are legislative items. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Mr. Fernandez: These are not the applica -- any -- no application is, in essence, in front of you. These are all legislative changes that you're making, and as such, there is no need for me to read the protocol or the procedure that we have in place when there are applications. However, what I believe that the Chair needs to establish for the public is the proceeding and how it is that you will allocate time to everyone wishing to speak on items relative to the P&Z agenda, primarily Miami 21 and all of the other related items on the agenda, which are really related to the changes to our Zoning ordinance, and so, therefore, just setting time limits, if you will, and setting the protocols that you would like to have the audience follow would suffice for purposes of establishing rules for this meeting. Chairman Gonzalez: Very well. We need to swore -- swear everyone that is going to speak on the record, Madam City Clerk. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Yes, sir. If you are here in the audience and you're going to be speaking on any of the P&Z items, I need you to please stand and raise your right hand so you can be sworn in. The City Clerk administered oath required under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons giving testimony on zoning issues. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Wow. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. As in every Planning & Zoning meeting, I will be allowing five minutes to attorneys representing clients on any of the items, andl will allow two minutes for each speaker from the public, so we have some -- Miami 21 is going to be an item that is going to take a lot of time, so I suggest that everyone please try to stay within your two minutes. Of course, if any of the Commissioners have any questions from any of the speakers, you're welcome to ask your questions and get your response or your explanation or whatever you so desire. Having said that, we are going to start with PZ.1 EMERGENCY ORDINANCE EO.1 07-00865 ORDINANCE Emergency Ordinance Department of AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, Public Works AMENDING CHAPTER 11"CABLE TELEVISION", AND CHAPTER 54 "STREETS AND SIDEWALKS" ARTICLE I ENTITLED "IN GENERAL" AND ARTICLE III ENTITILED "USE OF PUBLIC RIGHTS -OF -WAY BY COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS" OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, IN CONNECTION WITH THE FLORIDA CONSUMER CHOICE ACT OF 2007; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE. 07-00865 Legislative SUB.pdf 07-00865 Choice Act.pdf 07-00865 Summary Form.pdf City ofMiami Page 5 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Motion by Vice -Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Sarnoff, that this matter be ADOPTED as an emergency measure, with modifications, waiving the requirement for two seperate readings PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez and Regalado Absent: 1 - Commissioner Spence -Jones 12928 Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. Manager, I believe you have some items under the regular agenda. Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Yes, Mr. Chairman. We have two items. It's E0.1, public rights -of -ways [sic]. I'm going to have the director ofPublic Works present the item. Stephanie Grindell: Stephanie Grindell, director ofPublic Works. EM.1 [sic] is an emergency ordinance amending Chapter 11, Cable Television, and Chapter 54, Streets and Sidewalks, entitled "Use ofRight-of-Way and Communication Systems." There's been some changes since what was submitted originally, and those changes are that joint applicants will also be required to sign on the maintenance agreements and continuing use permits. Those are included in the packages that you received in your briefings. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Is there a motion on the item? I'm sorry; it's an ordinance. Vice Chairman Sanchez: It is an ordinance, andl would make a motion on the ordinance. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Sarnoff Second. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion, and we have a second. It's a public hearing. Anyone from the public that wishes to speak on this item, please come forward to be recognized. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. Mr. City Attorney, would you read the ordinance? Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's a -- Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): It's an ordinance. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- four fifth ordinance. Mr. Fernandez: It's a four fifth vote. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Gonzalez: Roll call, please. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): This is your first roll call on your emergency ordinance. Second roll call. Roll calls were taken, the results of which are stated above. Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed as an emergency measure, 4/0, as modified Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. City ofMiami Page 6 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 RE.1 07-00866 Department of Risk Management RESOLUTION RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), ACCEPTING A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT OF DECEMBER 2006 ("SETTLEMENT") REACHED WITH BROWN & BROWN, INC. BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, THE FLORIDA OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION, AND THE FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL ON BEHALF OF FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY INSURANCE POLICYHOLDER CLIENTS OF BROWN & BROWN, INC., WITH SAID SETTLEMENT RESULTING FROM A JOINT INVESTIGATION UNDERTAKEN BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, THE FLORIDA OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION AND THE FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT SIXTY-FOUR THOUSAND, NINE HUNDRED AND SIXTY-EIGHT DOLLARS AND THIRTY-EIGHT CENTS ($64,968.38) AND ANY PERMITTED INCREASE THERETO AS THE CITY'S SHARE OF THE SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS DISTRIBUTION AND TO EXECUTE THE RELEASE, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, RELATED TO THE SETTLEMENT. 07-00866 Legislation.pdf 07-00866 Exhibit 1.pdf 07-00866 Exhibit 2.pdf 07-00866 Summary Form.pdf Motion by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Vice -Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff and Regalado Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez Absent: 1 - Commissioner Spence -Jones R-07-0371 Chairman Gonzalez: RE.1. Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): RE.1 is the settlement with Brown & Brown. The City has to accept the settlement before June 29, and it's a recommendation from the Administration that we go ahead and accept the $64, 000 settlement. Mr. Spring. Larry Spring: Larry Spring, chief financial officer. The Manager has substantially explained the item. It is a voluntary settlement reached between the State of Florida and Brown & Brown that has promulgated this settlement amount, and we -- again, we are recommending that we accept this settlement. Commissioner Sarnoff I'll make a motion. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion. Is there a second? Vice Chairman Sanchez: I would make a second for the purpose of discussion. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Discussion. Commissioner -- Vice Chairman Sanchez, you're recognized. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Pertaining to this resolution of Brown City ofMiami Page 7 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 versus Brown, let me just state for the record thatl have been briefed andl am very concerned with this resolution for the following reason: This is not an issue that happened ten years ago or five years ago. This is an issue that happened in 206 [sic], and we realize that at that time, the current City Manager was not here, but this is a perfect example of poor accountability and poor management, where we were paid $1.4 million on an investigation that the State was doing; was paid to the City; the City received the money and just put it in an account, giving us no opportunity to find out -- or whoever received that money should have asked was that the proper payment? Were we underpaid? Were we overpaid? And that money was put in an account, and therefore, killing our chance of auditing the situation to find out exactly if that was the amount of money that we were receiving, so we're in a situation today that's -- andl believe this is under the Code [sic] of Silence; is that correct, Mr. City Attorney? Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): That this is what? I'm sorry. Vice Chairman Sanchez: This is under the Code [sic] of Silence. Mr. Fernandez: No, this settlement is not under the Cone of Silent [sic]. I mean -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, is there -- there's an RFP (Request for Proposals) out -- Mr. Spring: Yes, there is -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- so this is under the Code [sic] of Silence. Mr. Spring: -- an RFP out with regards to our insurance program service. Mr. Fernandez: I wasn't aware that there was an RFP out. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right, soI have to be very careful to what say on that, not to violate that, but once again, while being briefed and being advised of this situation, I felt that it is ill responsible for us to have accepted that money; just went ahead and put it in an account and manage -- Risk Management account when we didn't even -- you know, we weren't even supposed to be paid, and then there's an ongoing investigation by the State, and then, today, after that investigation, we're being handed over $68, 000 [sic], so how do I know if that's the right amount that we were supposed to be paid, and therefore, under the Code [sic] of Silence, this same company is a part of a bid and in the process for that bid to continue to represent the City, and that, to me, is alarming. Mr. Spring: Commissioner, all -- at this point, all can put on the record is the fact that, factually, you have -- you are correct. Those items -- those incidents did occur, and our investigation with the Risk Management staff that is in place now, myself now being CFO (Chief Financial Officer), it was also one of the first questions I asked when this particular settlement was proffered: Have we received all of the money? Unfortunately, at this time, the -- that previous settlement was accepted. The checks were deposited into the same accounts from which the premiums were paid, and unfortunately, we are here today with this last, I guess, final piece of the settlement, again, voluntarily being proffered by the insurance company. I do want to put on the record, however, that with regards to the circumstances, nothing illegal has occurred, and this has been a situation of nondisclosure, which they're trying to rectify, so I understand your sentiment. The only thingl can tell you is I'm the person that's in front of you now, andl am recommending that we do accept this settlement, this $64, 000, in closing this chapter, I guess, and being able to move forward. Vice Chairman Sanchez: You know, it's becoming an everyday challenge for this Commission to win the public's trust. With all these incidents that are happening; people are very displeased with their government, not only on a local base [sic]. Look at Congress now with a 14 percent City ofMiami Page 8 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 approval rating and continuing to drop, and these are the things -- because people think that we know everything that goes on in the City. We're policymakers. That's why we are three branches in our government, and the only reason that we find this out is when we get briefed, and it's our staff that has to do the research, and we have to ask those questions, and you are, under your duty, to advise us the truth because all who labor here seek only the truth, so that is why I cannot support this resolution, andl needed to put that on the record, because we cannot continue to make these mistakes. These mistakes, as we try to pass them and it doesn't come out into the sunlight, are the little mistakes that people out there constantly challenge the elected officials and the Administration of their government, and just to say -- andl wanted to say on the record that the City Manager was not here in 206 [sic], but this isn't something that happened ten years ago, how -- like a lot of things that are happening, ten and eight years ago. This happened in 206 [sic], and to me, it's alarming, so I will not be supporting this resolution. Mr. Spring: If you will, Mr. Chair, I would like to just put on the record that we, in light of Commissioner Sanchez's comments, as of today in our finding out of these circumstances, did provide full disclosure to all the Commissioners at this point in time. I understand your frustration, and again, all can do is stand here before you now as your chief financial officer and stand behind my word and tell you that give you full disclosure, and that's why you knew of the previous payment. Commissioner Sarnoff Well -- Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sarnoff The reason I'm going to support this settlement agreement is that it is a better than eight page settlement agreement, which has been executed by Governor Crist and has been executed by Chief Financial Officer Tom Gallagher, and if you read the terms and conditions of the eight -page agreement, you'll see exactly what business practices were complained of and you'll see that this was a settlement agreement entered into, brokered on behalf of the State of Florida, and it was done so based upon significant negotiations, and if you read the footnote to the agreement, you'll see that each city is getting a pro rata share back, so we're getting our pro rata share back. If we can't trust the State government with all its employees and if we can't trust the Governor, then we may as well shut down government -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff -- because we have got to start trusting somebody, and they have decided that this was an agreement that was in the best interest of the State of Florida to enter into, and that we, as a city, are getting our pro rata share back. Now I understand the reticence. I understand everybody's mistrust for government, but government can't shut down because there's a low approval rating. We have to rise above that, and we have to do what's in the best interest of the citizenry, and to take this settlement agreement based on what's on the words in the four corners of the agreement, it is simply imprudent not to accept the settlement agreement and not to accept this resolution, so I hope that my colleagues will join me in accepting the settlement agreement. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Madam City Clerk, why don't you do a roll call on the item? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): All right. Roll call. Commissioner Regalado? Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Sarnoff? Commissioner Sarnoff Yes. City ofMiami Page 9 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Thompson: Vice Chairman Sanchez? Vice Chairman Sanchez: No. Ms. Thompson: And then Chairman Gonzalez? Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Thompson: Then the resolution has passed, 3/1. Mr. Spring: Thank you. Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry. Yes, 3/1. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Before going into the -- we don't have any other regular items, do we? Not according to my luck here. City ofMiami Page 10 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 PART B PZ.1 06-01846mu RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 5, 13 AND 17 OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, FOR THE COLUMBUS CENTRE PROJECT, TO BE LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 21 SOUTHWEST 15TH ROAD, 1450 AND 1490-92 SOUTH MIAMI AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATE 710-FOOT, 56-STORY HIGH MIXED -USE STRUCTURE TO BE COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 219 TOTAL MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH RECREATIONAL AMENITIES; APPROXIMATELY 234 HOTEL ROOMS; 211,449 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE; APPROXIMATELY 6,512 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL AND RESTAURANT SPACE; AND APPROXIMATELY 596 TOTAL PARKING SPACES; PROVIDING FOR CERTAIN FLOOR AREA RATIO ("FAR") BONUSES; MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATING CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; PROVIDING FOR BINDING EFFECT; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City ofMiami Page 11 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 06-01846mu - PAB Columbus Centre.pdf 06-01846mu CC Zoning Map.pdf 06-01846mu CC Aerial Map.pdf 06-01846mu CC Project in the Vicinity.pdf 06-01846mu CC Revised School Impact Review Analysis.pdf 06-01846mu PAB Reso.PDF 06-01846mu CC Legislation (Version 2).PDF 06-01846mu CC Exhibit A.pdf 06-01846mu MUSP Binder Cover.PDF 06-01846mu Table of Contents.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. A. Introduction.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. B. Application for Major Use Special Permit.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. C. Legal Description.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. D. Disclosure of Ownership.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. E. Ownership Affidavit.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. F. Directory of Principals.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. G. City of Miami Zoning Atlas Map, Page 37.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. H. City of Miami Future Land Use Map.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. I. Aerial and Location Map.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. J. Ownership List.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. K. Project Data Sheet and Summary.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. L. Summary of Approvals.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. M. Tax Information.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. N. Warranty Deeds.PDF 06-01846mu Article I. O. Corporate Information.PDF 06-01846mu Article II. Project Description.PDF 06-01846mu Article III. Supporting Documents.PDF 06-01846mu Article III. Tab 1 Survey.PDF 06-01846mu Article III. Tab 2 Site Plan and Drawings.PDF 06-01846mu Article III. Tab 3 Traffic Impact Study.PDF 06-01846mu Article III. Tab 4 Site Utility Study.PDF 06-01846mu Article III. Tab 5 Economic Impact Study.PDF 06-01846mu Article III. Tab 6 Historic and Environmental Preservation Board Approval.PDF 06-01846mu Additional Information Requested by the PAB.PDF 06-01846mu CC 05-24-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01846mu CC 06-28-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-01846mu CC Analysis.pdf 06-01846mu Miami -Dade Aviation Dept Comments.pdf 06-01846mu Exhibit B.PDF 06-01846mu CC 07-26-07 Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 21 SW 15th Road, 1450 and 1490-92 South Miami Avenue [Commissioner Marc Sarnoff - District 2] APPLICANT(S): Tony Recio, Esquire, on behalf of 1450 South Miami, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, Nickel Goeseke, Veronica Cervera Goeseke, Javier Cervera and Alicia Cervera FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with City ofMiami Page 12 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 conditions*. HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* of a Certificate of Appropriateness on July 5, 2006 by a vote of 5-0. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended denial to City Commission on February 21, 2007 by a vote of 7-1. *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: This will allow the development of the Columbus Centre project. CONTINUED A motion was made by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Sarnoff, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Spence -Jones absent, to continue Item PZ.1 to the City Commission meeting currently scheduled for July 26, 2007. Roberto Lavernia (Chief of Land Development): Good morning. For the record, Roberto Lavernia, with the Planning Department. PZ.1 is a Major Use Special Permit for the Columbus Center. The Administration is requesting the continuance of the item at this time. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Is there a motion to continue? Vice Chairman Sanchez: A continuance or --? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): In other words, if it's continued, it will come to the next regular scheduled PZ (Planning & Zoning) meeting. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Ms. Thompson: It's -- Mr. Lavernia: It's up to you to decide -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: I'll -- Mr. Lavernia: -- if you want to hear it in the next City Commission or defer to it to a date -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's fine with me. I make a motion to continue the item. Commissioner Sarnoff Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion and we have a second to continue PZ. 1 until the second meeting in July. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Motion carries. PZ.2 06-02095 ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF MIAMI TO ADOPT A NEW ZONING CODE TO BE KNOWN AS THE "MIAMI 21 CODE" TO APPLY IN THE AREA GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS First Reading City ofMiami Page 13 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 THE EAST QUADRANT AND MORE SPECIFICALLY DEPICTED IN EXHIBIT A, "MIAMI 21 ATLAS," ATTACHED HERETO, INCLUDING DEFINITIONS, GENERAL PROVISIONS TO INCLUDE THE ADOPTION OF THE MIAMI 21 ATLAS FOR THE EAST QUADRANT, REGULATIONS GENERAL TO ZONES, STANDARDS AND TABLES, REGULATIONS SPECIFIC TO ZONES, SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS, PROCEDURES AND NONCONFORMITIES, AND THOROUGHFARE GUIDELINES; REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 11000 AS APPLICABLE TO REPLACE IT WITH THE MIAMI 21 CODE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 06-02095 - PAB Miami 21.pdf Miami21Document 03-16-07.pdf 06-02095 PAB Reso.PDF 06-02095 Miami River Commission Comments.pdf 06-02095 CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 06-02095 Exhibit A - (Miami 21 Atlas - June 2007).pdf 06-02095 Exhibit B - (Miami 21 Code - June 2007).pdf 06-02095 CC FR Fact Sheet 06-28-07.pdf 06-02095 Submittal Brickell West Study.pdf 06-02095 Submittal by Mayor's Off. Letter Dept. of Comm. Affairs.pdf 06-02095 Submittal Letter Miami River Commission.pdf 06-02095 Submittal Letter -Brenda K. Newman.pdf 06-02095 Submittal Letter -Judith Sandoval.pdf 06-02095 Submittal Letter -Robert Mayor.pdf 06-02095 Submittal Letter -Sam Poole.pdf 06-02095 Submittal Miami neighborhood United.pdf 06-02095 Submittal Petition for bldg. height limits.pdf 06-02095 Submittal Upper Eastside Miami Council Reso..pdf 06-02095 Submittal Village Council Reso..pdf 06-02095 Submittal-AIA Miami American Institute of Architects.pdf 06-02095 Submittal -Barbara K. Bisno.pdf 06-02095 Submittal -Bennet Pumo.pdf 06-02095 Submittal -Community Benefits Coalition.pdf 06-02095 Submittal-Daniella Levine Statement.pdf 06-02095 Submittal-McDowell.pdf 06-02095 Submittal -Miami 21 Fact V Reality.pdf 06-02095 Submittal -Support Preservation of Historic Royal Palms.pdf 06-02095 Support Letters for T6-36-60 Brickell West Area.pdf 06-02095 0425-Presentation-City Commission -June 28 07.pdf 06-02095 Submittal BRICKEL VILLAGE WEST Study 06-02095 Submittal Economic Impacts on Historic Preservation.pdf APPLICANT(S): Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager, on behalf of the City of Miami FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. MIAMI RIVER COMMISSION: Unanimously found the draft "Miami 21" Eastern Quadrant to be consistent with the Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan, subject to conditions*. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to City Commission on April 18, 2007 by a vote of 7-2. City ofMiami Page 14 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: This will adopt a new zoning code entitled, "Miami 21 Code," for the East Quadrant of the City of Miami. DEFERRED A motion was made by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Spence -Jones absent, to defer Items PZ.2 - PZ.7 to the City Commission meeting currently scheduled for September 27, 2007. Chairman Gonzalez: PZ.2. Roberto Lavernia (Chief of Land Development, Planning): PZ.2 is the Miami 21 new code for the east quadrant that is going to change the text and the zoning atlas of the -- with a new ordinance for that quadrant. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Let me ask you, PZ.3, 4, 5, and 6 are related to Miami 21, right? Mr. Lavernia: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, they are. Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Very good. All right. Here we are, Miami 21. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Chair? Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. Mayor, you're recognized. Yes. Ms. Thompson: May I just ask a question because you asked one? Are we going to combine the discussion then for PZ.2 straight through all of them in one? Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. City Attorney, what is your recommendation on the legal aspect? Can we take all the items together, PZ.2, 3, 4, 5, and 6? Jorge L. Fernandez (City Attorney): Well, actually, the preferred way to do it would be for you to open all items at the same time because they're all interrelated, and then when you -- comes time to vote, and you vote on them individually -- Chairman Gonzalez: Independently. Mr. Fernandez: -- so that members of the public comments, when they come -- and perhaps, you can do some flexibility with the time that you have established, if they're going to be speaking to more than one item -- you could then, perhaps, by courtesy, extend that time a little bit, but all items are interrelated; they're all hinged on Miami 21, although they could also start -- stand separately on their own, and in fact, all the other ordinances that we have, regardless of what happens with Miami 21, are being recommended for passage and adoption on first reading also, independent ofMiami 21, so you may open them all together or you may choose to open them separately. Chairman Gonzalez: All together? Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah, I think it's a good idea. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. We open all the items together, from PZ.2 to PZ. 6, so Mr. City ofMiami Page 15 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mayor, you're recognized, sir. Mayor Manuel A. Diaz: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and indeed, who -- here we are. I am pleased to come before all of you this morning to present a plan for the City's future, and this plan is Miami 21. At its core, Miami 21 is about people. Miami 21 is an attempt to ensure that individual buildings are designed to blend into a cohesive context that respects people and communities, not produce individual stylized buildings that do little to enhance the public realm. It is an attempt to create predictability and meaningful citizen engagement in the development approval process, not a reward for those with time and money who utilize our current system to thwart the desires of the community at large. It is an attempt to create more affordable housing, not grant developers additional building capacity without compensating the public for this important benefit. It is an attempt to provide residents with greater access to our City's public spaces, our parks, our waterways, plazas in Biscayne Bay, not by only providing access to those select few who can afford it. It is an attempt to grow smart by channeling development to transit hubs, not by allowing development to overrun our residential neighborhoods and corridors. Three years ago, this Commission voted to enlist the assistance of one of the world's premier planning and design firms, Duany Plater-Zyberk, to realize our collective desire for a zoning code that creates a sense of place by validating the importance ofMiami's people and our shared history. After great effort and public deliberation, we have a plan that, while not perfect, brings forth the best ideas, those of both the professionals and the resident experts in the proposal before your consideration today. Today, let us move forward and make a clean break from our failed history. Let our actions today be revolutionary, for they are not visionary. For a speak of vision, one must look to the warning of Commissioner Henry Gould (phonetic) Ralston, one of your predecessors who served our city very early in our history. In 1915, in the midst of a period of rapid growth, he urged his colleagues to adopt a development plan in order to avoid the prospect of continued haphazard growth. His concern was not borne particularly by high-minded ideals, but driven by the practical economic concerns of his time. In his comments to his colleagues on the subject, he noted: There is no question, but -- that you will have to pay for it, unless you do something soon. The City plan is not just a pretty picture on paper; it is a comprehensive plan to which the City will build in the future something which the cities all over the country are doing and cities in Germany and England are also adopting. It is a matter of economics. Unfortunately for all of us, Commissioner Ralston's comments went unheated and much was lost in the balance. Beyond the continued haphazard development that marks our history to this day, the lost opportunity included failing to maximize the talents of some of the most renown professionals of that time. Among the individuals that were identified then were -- by Commissioner Ralston to work on this development plan was the notable landscape architect Warren H. Manning of Boston, a long-time associate of Frederick Law Olmsted, and I'm sure you recognize those names, so I am urging each of you, Commissioners and residents alike, to heed the wise counsel of our predecessors, confirmed by our own experience over the last hundred years, and move this plan forward for our City's future. You have been provided with a copy of the article that appeared in 1915, in whatever the Miami newspaper of the time was, where the Councilman Ralston argues that we cannot continue to grow in a haphazard, hodgepodge way, and that some argued against it because they thought that this type of a plan was premature, and finally, the Commission decided not to spend $1, 500 to adopt what would have been Miami 21 some hundred years ago. You were also provided a letter from the secretary of the Department of Community Affairs of the State of Florida, who we have made a presentation on Miami 21, a private presentation, to him, and let me just quote a couple of lines from that letter. "Cities will play a vital role in accommodating Florida's continuing growth in a manner that achieves a sustainable future for our state. It is essential that we strive to create livable, attractive, and well -designed cities with an adequate degree of mobility. I commend you and the City for undertaking this initiative and urge you to proceed with this important endeavor. The Department looks forward to working closely with the City as it processes the plan amendments needed to make Miami 21 a reality." Commissioners, today is indeed the first day. I don't believe we should make the same mistake that our predecessors made in 1915. This Commission has shown itself, over the course of the last few years, as a Commission with vision, City ofMiami Page 16 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 whether it's in the budgeting field, or in parks, open space, public realm, and in all areas that cover city government. You have all looked towards the future, and that's what we need to do today. We cannot afford to continue on the course that we are today. We all, I believe, recognize that we have a zoning ordinance that is outdated, a zoning ordinance that is not building and designing the kind of city that we want. We can't continue to concern ourselves with the wishes of an individual property owner. That is not what we're here for. We are here and should be here and should be controlled by our desire to design a city that works, to design a city that makes sense. That, I believe, is the obligation that we have to future Commissioners and to future Mayors, not to mention to our children and grandchildren; to leave them a city much, much better than the one we found, andl believe this plan, while not perfect, goes a very long way towards beginning in that process. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. All right. We're going to open the public hearing. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Order lunch. Chairman Gonzalez: Anyone from the public? Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Mr. Hernandez: I believe that, first, we have a presentation by the City's consultant. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Let's have the presentation. Good morning. Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk. Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, representing Duany Plater-Zyberk and Company and the team of consultants that presented Miami 21. This is about a 15- or 20-minute presentation. I don't know if you want to remain standing while I do it, but this is different than the one that you heard during the workshop that was a highly technical presentation, which was intended to inform you about the Code and its specific provisions, and this morning's presentation is intended to give a kind of larger picture of the main issues -- concepts and issues that are addressed by the Code, and how we hope that it will provide a blueprint for change for the City in the manner that the Mayor referred to, so I open with a reminder that we begin with a city that has a wonderful history and a wonderful framework from the residential neighborhoods that are so fiercely and rightly defended; wonderful open spaces where public can gather and commerce civic life or informally -- I'm describing the pictures on the screen, and I might remind you that when I first came to Miami in the 70's, there was absolutely no place to eat outdoors, so we've come a long way. The open spaces that are -- reflect our natural environment, especially along the waterfront, and of course, a history and culture of diversity, which is admired nationally and indeed, worldwide, so these are great things to start with, but we know that we have a future of growth, which puts some of these wonderful things at risk, and -- that a framework for moving into the future is required. If we are to preserve and improve our quality of life, a new approach is needed, and so we turn to, as the Mayor said, an approach which is being used more and more throughout the country and, indeed, the world based on something called "smart growth principles," and the ones that apply to Miami include compact urbanism, a transit -- a future increasing transit orientation, mixed -use centers for neighborhoods so that they can be walkable and their quality of life improved, strengthening the sense of community, increasing green building, open space preservation, and enhancement, and the method to deal with all of this, as the smart growth movement has discovered in recent years, is a form -based code. Taking some slides from the City's very first presentations as it set out and presented to you the hopes for this endeavor, it's really only a form -based code which can deal with a transformation that you'll see in the next three slides. From streets that are largely vehicle -oriented, such as this one, the improvements to make them more pedestrian -oriented and to help the City grow towards this vision involve City ofMiami Page 17 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 both improvements in the public realm adding shade to the streets, as you see here, and improvements to the private realm; in other words, the way the buildings are built. The work that we're done in the past two years builds on the experience of the City. On the left, you have an image of what the current Code, 11000, allows. That's a 12-story garage that's totally exposed. On the right, you have the option, the alternative that this code proposes, that it would institutionalize. That building on Miami Avenue, recently built on the right, was built in consultation and negotiation with the Planning Department and through the complex MUSP (Major Use Special Permit) process, and we're -- we know that there are a myriad of buildings going through as -of -right that don't go through that process that are being still built, like the one of the left, so this code, at this density, proposes that we institutionalize some of the successful negotiations the City has produced in new building. The guiding principles. How do you deal with that high -density area, as well as the individual neighborhoods? The guiding principle is the concept of the transect. A description of transitional environments from areas of preservation to areas of high density, much as you see in this diagram of the barrier island, the successive environments that have to do with location in a city, range from something like Simpson Park, which would be identified as TJ -- that's not in our quadrant, so I'm just using that as an example -- through to T6, which is the highest density, and each one of these zones, we have already, in the City, illustrated in different buildings, although not as coherently organized or in the transitional mode that the transect describes, which is what this new code will do. There are many cities which have been built according to these ideas. This is just a series of references; Washington, San Francisco, and if you look at Miami in the region, you'll see these different transect zones appearing, and we now have the opportunity to rationalize their organization. Form -based codes, by definition, are graphic because they deal with the form of building and open space, and these are just illustrations from the Code that you've seen before. It simples and clarifies the Code, the document as a whole, and makes it easier to use in each T-zone, which replaces the old zones of the City Code. There are proximately two- or three -typed pages that accompany one page of drawing, such as this, so you can see that it's very much simpler than the one we know. I'd like to speak of -- to the process next, to remind you that we started out with a division of the City into four quadrants, essentially four phases. This was given to us by the City. I believe that you all considered that this was a good idea when we started out, and of course, we've been working on the east quadrant while still looking into the other quadrants. Some of you, indeed, have given us comments of some of the concerns you already know you have in your quadrants, which we have included many the east quadrant regulation, but we understand, as we move into the subsequent quadrants, that there will be additions and adjustments to the Code that reflect conditions that are different there, so we do understand that what we are presenting today, what we have completed until today reflect one part of the geography. I think everyone knows there's been intensive community input; over 50,000 pieces of direct mail, signage and information across the City, and various kinds of banners, advertising, press releases, newsletters, and so on; multiple appearances in the media and print, newspaper articles, and so on; over a hundred public meetings and workshops with stakeholders, including multiple focus groups with professionals, the attorneys, the architects, and so on, as well as developers and representatives of residential neighborhoods. The Web site has been extremely active, as you can see; over 500 daily visits, a hundred thousand monthly visits, and over the Web site and through e-mail (electronic), we have been asked and we have answered almost 500 at this point, 500 questions. I would take the moment, at this point, to point out that when -- at this point, when you hear dissatisfaction, it is not that we have not heard or not been responsive to the issues that are being raised, the outstanding concerns, but it is our professional -- what we are bringing to you is our best professional opinion of what the correct thing to do is, of what is the best thing for the City, and as they come up today, I hope that we would have the opportunity to explain where some of the differences lie. Of course, one always begins with an understanding of the existing condition, and so you know there was an extensive analysis of the existing Zoning Code. This was up on the Web for a long time, and in summary, some of the items that seem to require a change include the fact that the gross lot area method of basing capacity calculations are quite unpredictable. I'll speak about that a little bit later; that there seem to be lacking transitions in density and height, particularly in adjacent C-2 City ofMiami Page 18 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 neighborhoods. At higher densities, exposed parking garages give poor pedestrian frontages, often blank walls as well. Green space required in high densities was often inaccessible on top of the podium or roof. The existing floor area ratio of bonuses do not require public benefits. Some of them were being given away without any return from the private sector. The numerous special districts, which comprise the Code, are largely reactive to special conditions, and one of the things that this code does is it really encompasses all of those reactive -- that reactive history into a more proactive and comprehensive approach, and finally, complexity and vagueness in this kind of layers of long accumulating regulations, which we've had the opportunity to clarify. One example of that complexity of existing zoning, this diagram in Coconut Grove, which shows that there're essentially five layers from a plat map through different kinds of original zoning and then special districts above, resulting in 20 in -- just in downtown Coconut Grove, 22 different zoning districts. How can you make a coherent place and a beautiful place out of that? The gross lot area issue in which sometimes essentially twice the lot area can be calculated for capacity, depending on adjacencies is addressed by -- in this code by proposing the use of net lot area to make it more predictable, and a translation from FAR (floor area ratio) to FLR (floor lot ratio), which manages, for the most part, the expected capacities. Probably, what we've heard about the most, however, have been the undesirable juxtapositions and the need for transitions from the commercial corridors, which have sprung sometimes unexpectedly, although built into the zoning have sprung these high-rises, which tower over their neighbors, and so we -- the code has a method of dealing with transitions across the transect in which, next to T3, the residential neighborhoods steps up in the commercial zoning must be provided or, in another condition, one might be able to actually have transitional zoning before you get to the single-family house. Much of that grows out of existing conditions and the neighborhoods' desires, and by the way, the stepping up of the buildings is an outgrowth from the special districts, which have been responding to this condition, so it institutionalizes that history. One of the tools we used with the meetings was the -- this is a frame from an animation that showed the construction of a single-family neighborhood, the potential of a transitional lot or two of townhouses prior to the kind of typical 27th Avenue or Coral Way type of high-rise, which we've seen going up, but much different in that it's -- it requires a liner and a step back to the neighborhood behind, but besides these specific issues, there is embedded in this code a larger vision of the City, which understands that it's essentially made of neighborhoods, and that the neighborhoods have opportunities for improvement, not just conservation, which, of course, is important, but such as this photo and drawing in Wynwood show, the possibility of taking an existing empty lot and making it into a town or neighborhood green at the center of Wynwood; long an idea would be advanced by this document right there with San Juan Bautista overlooking it. The commercial corridors, those which have not yet developed with their commercial zoning, for instance, which lie with some uncertainty at the edges of beautiful neighborhoods, can be enhanced by mixed work -- a mixed -use, live -work, low-rise development, replacing the uncertainty that's there with predictability, and the streets could be enhanced with medians and trees along sidewalks. Neighborhood access to open space. There're a number of items in the Code, including addressing the continuation of a public waterfront north of the existing ordinance area, across Wynwood, allowing neighborhoods better access to a public waterfront, such as you see in these photos and drawings. These opportunities still exist, so there is this idea of the -- of a continuous public waterfront from the Key Biscayne entry all the way up to Julia Tuttle; it needs to be worked out, how it works, how it can work in front of existing buildings, but there's still opportunities to pull that together as a part of the vision of this Code, and another continuous open space, the FEC (Florida East Coast) corridor, which -- for which there's transit studies currently, can also be developed as a greenway in parallel with new transit, and you could, through the City from the north boundary all the way to the south boundary, connect the FEC to the Metrorail corridor and have one continuous greenway for walking and bicycling, as well as transit in a way that few others cities in the U.S. (United States) could boast. Of course, one of the other issues that came up frequently was the desire to improve the his -- the City's efforts for historic preservation, and one of the items that's joined with ours today is the improved Chapter 23 of the City Code, which includes transfer of development rights provision, which relates to our public benefits programs, and you'll hear about new categories of eligibility from designated City ofMiami Page 19 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 to contributing and architecturally significant buildings, which can all take advantage of this , so it really comes down to the quality of public -- of the quality of life and the quality of the public realm. In terms of the public space detailing the streets to make them more pedestrian friendly and more friendly to bicycling, wider sidewalks, trees for shade, and on the private property, asking the buildings to be designed to embellish the public realm, not just worry about their own program, so that ten foot setback, which is in the T5 and T6 zones in the higher densities is asked to become part of the sidewalk, a wider sidewalk would then allow trees to be planted along the streets to shade the streets and make them more pedestrian friendly. The buildings are being asked to have habitable space overlooking the street; liners, doors and windows, concealing the parking garage so that there's life facing the street rather than inactive space. Cross -block passages, where the blocks are too large for pedestrian comfort to improve connectedness. Transitions for height and density, predictable height and floor plates, so all of this is adding up to the goals that I talked about. Another frame from that animation, which shows that ground level, how this might occur, the liner on the left with shops below, apartments above, the ten foot set -- front setback being added to the sidewalk, allowing trees at the edge, parked cars protecting the pedestrians, one or two lanes of traffic and a landscaped median. A few slides to show you how the City's already moving in this direction through projects, again, of the negotiated variety. Here is a photo ofMiami Avenue looking south next to Midtown, in which we have precisely the same street section, a median with landscape on a broad street, parking and trees up against a building which has shops with awnings and residences above. At a slightly higher density, Setai in the Edgewater area, which has residences above shops. Those shops are waiting for further development in this area to give them a clientele, but one of the other successes of Setai was the provision of one block long of waterfront street, which didn't exist there before in the manner that the Code would ask for for future projects. Another part of Biscayne Boulevard, a taller building showing a retail frontage, a concealed parking garage behind a liner and a tower above that, and at the highest density downtown, I found -- recently found this example that I thought was a graphic -- a very graphic explanation of where we've been and where we want to go from Biscayne One, which has some ten or fifteen stories of parking garage exposed to our beautiful Biscayne Boulevard as part of that recent history, and the new building under construction to the north of it, which has a tall lobby and commercial space with a parking garage concealed by the liner that you see with those balconies. It might be worth taking a look at how -- what all this means in terms of both the environment and health to related issues that are receiving a lot of attention in terms of urban development these days, andl would remind us that the parks and public space master plan, which you received only a little while ago, has been very much a part of this effort with -- and the plan refers to it in terms of the public benefits. The green building component has increased during the time that we were working on this as it became more and more to prominence in all of our consciousness. The setbacks and the building heights are intended to promote air and light for streets, as well as view corridors between buildings for the inhabitants of the buildings. I've already talked about the wider sidewalks with trees for shade. The benefits of walking are clearly documented these days, but -- for health, but we also know that that component of walkability [sic] is important if we are to not choke in traffic congestion in the future, and a system for trying to increase all of these needs for both environmental and personal health, parks, housing, green building; brownfields, as you know, are embedded in this document, and finally, maybe less -- with less impact, but still, nonetheless, important, generous ceiling heights now being allowed with a different kind of measurement of height. Those public benefits that I mentioned, I think you've had a thorough explanation of how this program expands the existing bonus program, applying not only to affordable and workforce housing, but parks and open space, the inclusion of civic facilities. You could have something like a fire station find a place as part of private development; therefore, reducing the onus on the City for developing some of these as land prices grow over time. I've already spoken about historic preservation and green building, and of course, brownfields, to encourage the redevelopment of brownfields the City has mapped. In most cases, this bonus takes into account on -site or offsite provisions or a fee payment, and finally, I would note that a recent addition to the benefit program was that in the T5 zones abutting D1, an additional story is intended to encourage affordable and workforce housing. A City ofMiami Page 20 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 quick summary of the transect zones for those who may not have heard these before, but essentially, as a form -based code, T3, which is the suburban residential density that we already have in the City, is a two-story building, a detached building. It's either single-family or duplex. T4 is the townhouse or low-rise apartment building, which is essentially a party wall building, and has continuity. T5, a five -story building, likewise, residential, commercial, or mixed -use; and then the T6 zones run through, encompass the history of -- and the variety of densities in the City as it scales up from some of the lower high-rises along the corridors, T6-8 to T6-48, which has an unlimited height limit in the core of the downtown, and two different kinds of commercial industrial zoning. T3, I would point out, has three sub categories, R, L, and O. The T3 R is the single-family dwelling, much as it is throughout the City; the T3 L is an addition, single-family dwelling with an ancillary unit, with a granny flat, which, of course, is part of our history, but was not possible to replace or to rebuild -- to build again under 11000, so this is a new introduction that you could have granny flats in some neighborhoods, not all neighborhoods again, and T3 0 is the duplex. We've heard back from the Public Works Department that the idea that the front yards of buildings should not be paved over with concrete is actually much better for the City's street drainage and that was an unsolicited comment from City staff as they were watching our work, and so here's an example in this photograph of how that might change. T4 in which -- something that has not been built a lot in the City, the residential townhouse is, once again, possible. It actually -- this is an R -- this is one of the replacements for R-3, which has not been a great component of the City's building. Another replacement is T5, which allows five stories in a more urban setting. In some areas, only residential, T3 R; T5 R, T5 L and 0 allowing mixed -use and then totally commercial, and finally, the T6s, which also have residential only, residential with two stories of mixed -use, and 0, residential mixed -- totally mixed -use or commercial, so in a sense, what this new structuring of the uses does is it reflects what has effectively been happening through public hearings with the existing Code. There are large -- there are areas in the City where, for instance, residential uses are not allowed, but people have been producing residential buildings in those areas through -- by bringing that request to you in public hearings, and understanding that that's one way to clarify and simplift, the process, we have developed these subsets -- these categories, which are, geographically, laid out appropriately. All of this was based on a number of studies, including -- of related issues, including, of course, transportation, and the walkability [sic] that's desire -- that we desire and speak of is related to making a city amenable to transit. There's a lot to be done in inserting additional transit, but there's a very thorough bus system that works, Metrorail, Metromover, and, in this case, I'm showing the future transit -oriented development areas that might exist in relation to the new FEC line. That kind of transit -oriented development is occurring across the country, from California, Oregon, Washington; Texas has made great strides, and closer to home, downtown Kendall is a reaction to transit opportunities. Not to forget the streets in the manner that I've been describing them as an important component, there's a section in the Code that deals with thoroughfares very specifically, related to the kind of generic widths of right-of-ways [sic] that are in the City, and as you see on the left, a prototype for waterfront streets, if we can get a few more blocks of those in along the way or along the FEC corridor, where possible, so these are really illustrations proposing an idea to try to gain as change occurs, and so embedded in all of this is the idea that change occurs over time, that in -- that growth is incremental, and that each project is not all going to happen at once; each project has to contribute to that future vision. There is the very secure intent with the long -intense section of the Code to protect the neighborhoods and to ensure transition and densities. This -- the process limits zoning changes to two occasions during the year in which they can be brought to public hearings with upzoning being allowed only to the next successional transect, so there's a kind of -- a logic and rationale to how the City grows, and the requirement for an extended context analysis so that you no longer will be seeing one lot at a time being brought to you with, no doubt, you wondering what's around it, what has -- is this a logical request for a change, and so on, so there's this idea that you always have the bigger picture of the neighborhood as you make change. There's also the opportunity for a kind of larger, more opportunistic change in special area plans, a nine -acre minimum of an area to be considered requiring a detailed master plan with very specific design guidelines. It allows some flexibility within the transect regulation so City ofMiami Page 21 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 you can establish your own grandations [sic] of the transect, provide a series of public benefits that grow out of that site specifically, and this, of course, does require a public hearing because this is about important and major change for specific areas, so in summary, the issues that this proposed Code covers include the predictability of height and intensity through its form -based descriptions. Clear and user-friendly regulations. I think that was pointed out to you in the workshop; an effort for a significant improvement in the public realm, not only providing an illustration for how the City should work with its streets, but how the private sector can contribute to that; requirements to avoid blank walls and open garages through liners and habitable space; requirements for active use on the ground level; eyes on the street; public benefits, which incentivize the provision of additional housing, parks and open space opportunities; incentives for the creation of civic space, such as -- as the City might need, such as fire stations within private development; requirements and incentives for green building; the new zoning category that I mentioned that allows granny flats, that historic outbuilding; new historic preservation incentives with the transfer of development rights, and a streamlined approvals and permitting process. Two slides, in summary. When we started this process, we knew from the start that there were two opposing desires in the City, and that the conflicts, the frequent conflict of these indeed were our challenge, and one being the conservation and one being development, and the conservation desires include preserving the neighborhoods, andl think I've already spoken to our effort to make appropriate transitions, which do not exist today. The increasing -- increased preservation of historical sites, again with incentives, like transfer of development rights; creating sustainable development through green building, through adding to the tree canopy, and through improving connectedness for walkability [sic]; increased access to the natural environment, bay walk, river walk, and new parks, such as the Goody Clancy Plan has told us. In the end, we hope, creating safe, vibrant, and pedestrian friendly neighborhoods, preserving those that exist and enhancing them, improving the quality of life for all residents, so as we look back over the two years that we have spent on this, I think we can look at this first list that we set out and say that we have tried very hard to achieve the conservation goals ofMiami 21, and the development goals or the development desires related to the corridors, where development was occurring next to neighborhoods, and so what we have been trying to do was to enable those commercial corridors to function as transit -oriented -- future transit -oriented, current walkable centers for the adjacent neighborhoods, to create a predictable environment for growth and appropriate development, the kind of uncertainty of negotiation through the MUSP being set aside; creating sustainable development through green building, both a development and conservation goal; creating a pedestrian friendly environment to improve the public realm that is the chief amenity of private development in this City. There's no golf courses; it's the streets and squares which are the amenity of private building, and maintaining, above all, the future growth capacity of downtown as the focus of the region for economic, civic, and cultural life, so I close with the slide I opened with, with a reminder that we hope that we have addressed the geography and climate, as well as the culture and daily life of today's residents, as well as future residents, and commercial opportunities in the City, trying to bring forward the best of our history, while we forge a new path as a growing center for South Florida. Thank you. Mr. Hernandez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Mr. Hernandez: This -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Mr. Hernandez: -- concludes staffs presentation. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. City ofMiami Page 22 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Regalado: Chairman, are we going to ask questions to the consultant or --? Chairman Gonzalez: If you want to, yes, sir. Yes. Commissioner Regalado: If you -- Chairman Gonzalez: Come to the podium; have some questions from the Commissioners. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you. Thank you very much for the presentation. I enjoy the first presentation in our office many month ago, and the latest that I have from the Manager and Orlando Toledo just a few days ago, and on your first presentation, you mention that whatever the first quadrant will result, it would be replicated throughout the City, and the Manager had said that it would be easier because most of the concepts will be use, the ones on the first quadrant for the rest of the City, so I'm just saying this because it would be of the interest of any one of us to opine and to question and to suggest, not only for the first quadrant, but for the whole City, since we are one city. I would like also to thank the Mayor for his comments. This article back in 19 -- early nineteen century, it shows that the City needs to see with a future vision, although this doesn't apply to us because we decided to ask you to come up with new ideas, and we didn't think it was premature to do a new zoning code, but -- and of course, there are some instruments that we still had in the past to deal with what the Mayor mention, the wish of one developer. He could have use a veto to veto the Mercy Hospital project, which was something out of the ordinary, andl'm sure that Miami 21 would not allowed it, but you mention Coral Way and 27th Avenue corridor as the poster child for what should not happen, you know, what is going on there. There are four neighborhoods associations abutting Coral Way and 27th Avenue: Silver Bluff from 17 to 27th Avenue, from US 1 to Coral Way; Golden Pine, US 1 to Coral Way, 37th Avenue to 27th Avenue; Gables Gate, 9th Street, Southwest, to 16 Street, 37 to 27th Avenue, and finally, the biggest one, Shenandoah Homeowners Association, from 12th to 27, and from 9 Street to Coral Way. None of these homeowners association had the opportunity to be brief on Miami 21, none of them. If they, by themself [sic], don't follow what is going on or go into the Web site, they haven't been paid attention to it, andl'm sure that there are many throughout the City that are in that same situation. I mention those four -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk. Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: -- because you mention the corridors that are the poster child for what shouldn't be done, and most of them -- all of them are in the district that I represent. There are more west of the City, which has not been consulted. Do you think that it's fair to create a model that will be in existence for the next hundred years and have consulted some of the people, most of the people on the first quadrant, but then replicate that same quadrant in the rest of the City without the same or better or less public input from the rest of the City? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: I understand the concern, Commissioner. You know, the -- this endeavor was set out in such a way that we could specifically not deal with the whole City at one time because that would be enormous, andl think what need to do is lay the concern to rest that this is a kind of blueprint that would be overlaid in places that we have not studied yet without input from those places, from -- Commissioner Regalado: So -- but -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- those neighborhoods, so -- Commissioner Regalado: -- so what you told me on the first briefing is not correct? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: I probably said it -- if that's what you heard, that was said incorrectly, because we will be moving into the next quadrants, which this as a foundation document to work City ofMiami Page 23 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 with, but it is and always has been fully intended to take additions and adjustments, as needed, because we understand the geography, the history, the culture in the other parts of the City are different, so we already know there're a number of things that are specific to the east quadrant that will not apply to other parts of the City, and we often talked about certain issues in other parts of the City, which are not geographically present in the east quadrant that we know we will be dealing with. We don't pretend to know all of them, but we did do the Coconut Grove Planning Study some years ago, and we don't pretend that it's -- things are the way they were then, but I think we have -- and in addition to that, the existing Code that we analyzed, we were very careful to take into account what it has been producing across the entire City, so any concerns that there are things in the east quadrant which somehow contradict needs and desires in other parts of the City, I think we should set aside because we have a method for dealing with that. Commissioner Regalado: OK, so I'm -- that was one of my concerns. Now, the concern now becomes time -- timeline. You were very meticulous in doing the first quadrant, so if, as you say, we have to reexamine quadrant by quadrant, we're talking next quadrant, maybe two years, the other quadrant, another two years, and so far, two and two and two will be -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: A lifetime -- Commissioner Regalado: -- eight years. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- and we've been concerned about that, but think that much of the time that we have spent in this first part was actually dealing with the existing Code and making the transition in the document. We now have the document as a framework. We don't have to redo the structure of the document; the content will take adjustments and additions, but a terrific amount of time was spent working with the City staff. You know, that -- the story we tell of the 360 uses that were redundant and needed to be pared down to the smaller number of uses, that doesn't happen overnight. That sort of thing is the foundation that we have established, that we are confident is a good foundation for the whole City, and that that does not have to be -- we don't have to start from scratch, so we would like to do -- we would like to address in the subsequent quadrants, the public process primarily in which we listen very carefully and explain where we've been and then produce results for feedback, you know, iterative feedback. Commissioner Regalado: And change one of the -- one or some of your proposals, if that is the case. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: If that is the case, yes. Commissioner Regalado: Because I'm concerned, andl was called this on attention by one of the residence that happen to go and look and look. The new concept is, if you build in R-1 or R-2, which is most, by the way, in the district that represent, it's that you park on the back and you use the alleys, right? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: If there are any. Commissioner Regalado: If there are any. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: In this area, Silver Bluff and Golden Pine, and Gables Gate, and Shenandoah, there are hundreds of alleys, but the problem is that this City Commission passed an ordinance long time ago saying, if the neighbors agree and maintain, they can take over the alleys, and they have, and they did, so that would be sort of a nightmare to -- City ofMiami Page 24 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Plater-Zyberk: That's obviously -- Commissioner Regalado: -- bulldoze -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah, and in -- Commissioner Regalado: -- all through those alleys to -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- we need to learn about that, but that would be an existing condition that we would certainly not contradict. Commissioner Regalado: -- so -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. If those alleys are going into private property, that's a fait accompli. Commissioner Regalado: -- we will have -- if we have open alleys, but if we don't have open alleys -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: And those decisions, we could take neighborhood by neighborhood. The alley issue is -- especially in the -- it's more important in the T4 -- in the higher densities where there's more cars to park, because when you do head -in parking from the street, you lose the parking on the street, and -- this was one of the drawings we had in workshops that we did, and the alley gives you an additional access that -- it keeps the parking on the street; you can have a driveway off the street, but it actually increases the capacity, as well as for utilities, so it's an ideal, but in an existing condition, if it's not practical, if it doesn't exist, if it's half gone -- Commissioner Regalado: Right. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- that's understood by the Code. Commissioner Regalado: It's like -- in my case, I live on Shenandoah, 20th Street, Southwest. I don't have an alley in the back. The house was built in 1946. God forbidden [sic], there is a hurricane, andl have to rebuild more than 20 percent of the cost of the house, I have to rebuild it to the new Code, parking on the back, right, sort of? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: The -- well, the -- no. What the new T3 is suggesting is that the historic pattern, which exists in places like Shenandoah, of the driveway to a single -car garage or a carport, or the -- through a carport to the outbuilding in the back is an ideal. The current Code actually asks for two spaces head -in. It doesn't allow what we call tandem parking, and what that does is it increases the pavement; it, again, increases the width of street frontage that, where you lose on -street parking, and what we're trying to do -- suggest is the replication of what has worked well in those neighborhoods for a long time addressing that 11000 actually doesn't let you do what is historic -- has been historically there. Commissioner Regalado: No. I'm using myself, because these are the houses of all my neighborhood -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: -- and shouldl have to park in the back, the lot is 55, plus 150, something like that. I will have to -- five feet setback, both side 15 feet, for a driveway to go to the back, and -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: But you can park in the driveway. City ofMiami Page 25 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Regalado: -- I can -- I need to have a very narrow home, and these are the things that people don't know. I'm just saying this. Like if I want to build a legal addition under Miami 21, that would be a very difficult thing to do, and people don't know that, and that was my point - Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: -- on the need to consult the rest of the City. We are one city. I have my issues about two boards deciding two different kind of laws, but you know, that's up to my colleagues to decide in the voting, but my point is that how can we announce to the world that we have a new zoning code, if we only have a new zoning code for one part of the City and not all the City? I think that it's not premature to change the Code and to reform the Code, but it would be unfair to announce that we have a code that now is going to solve most of the problems, if we haven't consulted or talked or, at least, receive the input -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: --from the rest of the City, who are also taxpayers. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Well -- may -- Commissioner Regalado: Sure. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- suggest a response? When we started the process, I think that was embedded in it. There was an understanding that we would be taking this one piece at a time. That was not disturbing to the consultants because we are aware of other cities that have either worked in phases or just rezoned the downtown and kept its zoning code somewhere in the rest of the City, or even that have made the new Code an option for several years while the old Code stays in place. I, frankly, don't think that's a great idea, but the legal -- there're legal precedents for various combinations, let's say, and so -- I think that was understood at the beginning. It was not a concern when we started, and the first public meetings were citywide meetings to introduce the whole effort, in which we did hear from people in your neighborhoods. We didn't continue the discussion with them in the way that we did with the east quadrant, but I think there has been a great awareness in the City of this effort, and a great awareness on our part that we need to be giving as much effort listening, responding, changing for the future phases as for this first one. Commissioner Regalado: Andl really appreciate that you feel that it's important that the public have input. One last issue that I have. You are familiar with the term that the Fire Department use, "backflow," right? Now the backflow, which is a tool where the water, excess water comes, is on the front of the building. As a matter of fact, the County has an ordinance now that mandates that backflows will be landscape because they're ugly. The backflow brings the excess water in case office -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes. Commissioner Regalado: -- to the streets. Your proposal brings the backflow to the second or third tier -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Second layer, yeah. Commissioner Regalado: -- or layer of setbacks, which is fine and probably great. My only concern is that the City ofMiami Fire Department has not been involved in all the planning, and these are the guys and girls who have to go there and fire the fight; setbacks, parkings, driveways, size of buildings, entrance, it is a paramount priority because the only way to fight the fire is to get there, and my understanding is that some of the people in the Fire Department City ofMiami Page 26 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 just went there -- they were curious -- and went there to one of the meetings, but there has been no interaction between Planning, between Fire, and yourself. Is that a correct assessment? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Our interaction has been with the Public Works Department and with our transportation consultant, who we assume enveloped as a well -- we are familiar with fire regulations, but that's something that we can certainly check on in the second quadrant, butl think that the adjustments -- Commissioner Regalado: The bigger buildings are in the first quadrant. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- but the adjustments have been, in terms of the -- well, let me speak to the backflow preventer, because that's a very specific one, and in fact, that came up in downtown Kendall, and we were working with the -- in a -- at another time, we worked with the County to make a modification to that ordinance to allow it to occur beyond the building face. In other words, that there might be -- doesn't need to be out many the middle of a sidewalk, where it often occurs now. It does need to be between the entry of the water -- street water and where it starts being used in the building, so we've been -- in terms of the ordinance that governs that, we've been working and had worked prior to this with the County on that, which is what gave us the confidence to include that. I don't know any other city in the country that puts a backflow preventer out in the sidewalk, which is what we've been doing, and is a kind of major pedestrian impediment, so if -- we can always change the wording slightly if it needs to be adjusted if, somehow, it's not worded correctly, but we understand that issue very clearly, and I'd be happy to hear specifically from the Fire Department about that concern. Commissioner Regalado: I wish you would. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: You're welcome. Vice Chairman Sanchez: I would respectfully request that we hold our questions till the end of the public hearing and allow the public to speak, and I'm sure that we're all going to have questions. I have about seven of them directed to the young lady, so if we could just let the public speak? Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chairman, maybe -- can I make a suggestion, because I think what we need today is a good debate, and part of that debate, I think, is going to involve asking questions -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Lots of questions. Commissioner Sarnoff -- of the -- not only of the DZB [sic], but of the citizens, so we understand and get to the root of their concern, so I'm going to try and interact as best I can with the public and ask a great many questions. I will reserve my questions for DZB [sic] at the end. I agree with Commissioner Sanchez on that. The other recommendation I would make would be to try to get what call the organics of this out. What mean by that is, is this just a good idea or a bad idea? Let's try to get that out of the way, and then what I call the fine-tuning of the idea. The way I suggest we do that is we try to get as many architects up here as we can, at first, so they can say pro, con, this is the way it would look. I still have not seen a building design, prior to Miami 21 and one that would be designed post Miami 21, so that we can get in our own minds what it is we're looking at. I understand form -based code. I understand what that word City ofMiami Page 27 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 means. I just want to see, from an architect standpoint, what it is we'd be looking at, and then ask everybody else from their legal, whether it's notice requirements, whether it's my street should look like this. I'm more than prepared to take those, but I think, at first, conceptually, we should get our mind around what it is we're looking at, so can I recommend to you that we ask -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Since -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- the architects --? Chairman Gonzalez: -- like I've been saying, you know, the first quadrant that is going to be impacted is going to be your district, and believe also part of Commissioner Spence -Jones district. What input -- you would like to hear the architect first? Who would you like to hear second, attorneys and then the public? I want to handle this -- Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. I'd like to see, from the architectural standpoint -- and maybe that'll take us through the morning and maybe that'll take us through even a little bit of the afternoon -- I'd like to hear from them what it is Miami 21 means to them so that we can get a look -- it's just a concept to all of us. I mean, it would be like you -- it would be like me saying to you, do you know what an isosceles triangle is? OK, maybe you do, but I'd like to see it in photographic form. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. How many architects do we have in the chambers this morning? Vice Chairman Sanchez: That will be speaking on the item. Chairman Gonzalez: Any architects? Two. Commissioner Sarnoff Two. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's got to be more. Commissioner Sarnoff I would have hoped so. Chairman Gonzalez: How many attorneys do we have in the audience? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Speaking on the issue. Chairman Gonzalez: Speaking on the issue. Vice Chairman Sanchez: The attorneys have it. Chairman Gonzalez: We have about ten, twelve attorneys. All right. Let's open with the architects; let's follow with the attorneys, and then we'll take the general public. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Chair -- Antolin Carbonell: Good morning. Ms. Thompson: Excuse me. Chair? Chairman Gonzalez: Developers. You want to consider developers or do you want to exclude them? Commissioner Sarnoff Let's put them at the end. City ofMiami Page 28 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Thompson: Excuse me. Chair -- Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Developers, you might come back at 10 o'clock tonight. Yes, ma'am. Ms. Thompson: Excuse me, Chair. Do we have a time limit on the architects? Chairman Gonzalez: Time limit is going to be five minutes for the attorneys, two minutes for the regular public. Of course, the time that the Commissioner is going to be asking questions, that time doesn't count. Ms. Thompson: And then the architects? Chairman Gonzalez: Five minutes -- Ms. Thompson: OK. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: -- because -- Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: -- Commissioner is going to have a lot of questions, and they going to have a presentation to do. OK. Why don't we have the architects lined up on both podiums so we can interchange? OK, sir. While they get organized. Mr. Carbonell: OK. Good morning. My name is Antolin Carbonell. I'm a registered architect. I have been a resident of Northeast Miami for 46 years, as were my parents and grandparents, andl have nephews and nieces and their offspring also living. Five generations of this family has lived there. I built my own house in an historic neighborhood many years ago, and have used Biscayne Boulevard as a pedestrian and as a transit user for many years, and think this is one of the best things that has ever happened. I have not conducted specific studies about how these buildings are to be laid out, but the massing and the increased density can only increase and make the viability of these neighborhoods and more specifically, Biscayne Boulevard and the transit hubs, a viable, walkable city, which is something that, unfortunately, neither my parents nor my grandparents were able to experience, but I hope my grandnephews and grandnieces will be able to experience. Furthermore, my nephew, who is a -- has a management company, is looking to actively establish his business within walking distance of his house in Belle Meade, so I only see this as a very positive. I understand that there are some limitations, some concerns about some neighborhoods that were not as well laid out in the 1920s as they should have, but overall, Biscayne Boulevard has been Miami's main street since 1892, when the first paved road into Dade County was built. We just -- it's only taken a hundred and fifteen years, but we finally have continuous curb, gutters, and sidewalks, the basic infrastructure of walkable city, and we now need the buildings with the density to back it up. As of right now, the only area in Northeast Miami that is starting to have some pedestrian activity is adjacent to the areas where there are high-rise condominiums on the bay that people could walk, where it's more trouble to get into your car and go out than it is to just walk down the street for a cup of coffee, so I hope you'll take these into account, and encourage you to approve this ordinance. Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. You still have two minutes and fifty seconds. Mr. Carbonell: No. I don't -- I'm giving my time to others; I don't need to. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Go ahead. All right. City ofMiami Page 29 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Robert Hink. My name is Rob Hink. I'm with the Spinnaker Group. I'm also the president-elect for the U.S. Green Building Council, South Florida Chapter. I'm not directly an architect, but I do help architects design their green buildings, but I'd like to address it from the U.S. Green Building Council point of view. A portion ofMiami 21 deals directly with green buildings. Green buildings, by our definition -- and by our definition, we're using a T,FED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) rating system -- on average, save 30 percent of energy, and cut down 50 percent of water usage, and also will decrease greenhouse gases by 30 percent over non -green buildings. The U.S. Green Building Council's a non-profit organization, based out of Washington, D.C. (District of Columbia), whose mission it is to encourage green building and to help further the green building programs through education, technical assistance, and through market transformation. We feel that what is being done with Miami 21 is a wonderful step in the right direction for the building community down here in South Florida and for the citizens of Miami, in particular. The T,FED rating system -- and I'll be brief about this, butt do want to talk about it a little bit so people understand what it is -- looks at how a building is constructed, but it's more than how it's constructed. We look at the site issue, such as storm water. We look at open space. We look at irrigation. We look at the potable water usage in buildings. We encourage the minimization of auto usage, citing buildings near public transportation. We also look at the energy usage. Any green building now has to be 14 percent more efficient than Code requires, so that will fall out here with Miami 21. We also encourage green power, such as solar and wind usage. We also look at material usage, such as reusing of building materials, using recycled materials, using regional materials, which have less impact on the environment. We also encourage good indoor air quality. Usually, one of the things that comes up when ordinances are passed to encourage TFED, or to require LEED, is cost. On average, a green building cost 1.8 percent additional to build. Now, of that cost, the studies have shown that that pays for itself in three years, due to the increase in energy savings, water savings, and operational savings inside the building, not to even get into the productivity of the people working inside buildings who are much happier because they're healthy, they're in buildings that are properly day lit, great filtration of air, no odors, things like that. The return on investment for a green building falls up somewhere between 25 and 40 percent. I think most developers would love to see a return on an investment like that for people who are holding onto their buildings. Just to give you an idea that you're not out on a limb, Sarasota has been encouraging the use of green buildings and the LEED program, in particular, for a number of years. They've been -- back in the '90s, they started requiring green buildings. They have a large number of green buildings over there. Gainesville has had an ordinance in place. Pompano Beach has an ordinance in place. Oakland Park has an ordinance very similar to what you're doing with your density bonuses for the very highly -advanced green buildings, the gold and platinum LEED buildings. Hollywood is also working on ordinances. There are a number of other counties that are looking -- excuse me -- counties and cities that are looking to see what Miami is going to do to be an example, and they want to follow what Miami's going to be doing down here in regards to the LEED requirements. In closing, I just want to say that the U.S. GBC South Florida, the U.S. Green Building Council of South Florida, supports and encourages the adoption ofMiami 21, and in particular, the adoption of the green building components ofMiami 21. Thank you. Commissioner Sarnoff Wait. Stay up there. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff, you're recognized for questioning. Commissioner Sarnoff I have a -- I didn't get your name, first off. Mr. Hink: Rob Hink. Commissioner Sarnoff Rob -- Mr. Hink: Hink. City ofMiami Page 30 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff -- Hink, OK. Rob, I have a letter to the Mayor here, dated June 20, and it's from the Building Association of South Florida. It actually encourages LEED certification, but asks for further certifications. Is LEED, in your opinion, sufficient, or should we be going further? Mr. Hink: I believe LEED is very sufficient. There are some other rating systems out there, but I'll tell you that about 90 -- I,FED has the market share by about 90 percent of the market of what's being adopted. It's adopted by GSA with the federal government; all federal buildings. I think there's over 14 states who have adopted it, and quite a few cities, municipalities, and counties who have adopted it. Commissioner Sarnoff I read an article in the New York Times recently that suggested the average German building uses a third less fuel, electric, and water than an American building. Is that about right? Mr. Hink: That's absolutely true. Vice Chairman Sanchez: They're way ahead of us. Commissioner Sarnoff If we go to a LEED certification, will we be nearly equivalent to that of the Germans? Mr. Hink: We will -- well, as of two days ago, at midnight, LEED changed the regulations. The minimum now is you have to be 14 percent more efficient than the new Code, the new Code that was just adopted in November, which is -- as (UNINTELLIGIBLE) 90.1, 2004 for the technocrats here, which is already very aggressive, so we have to be four -- have a 14 percent improvement over that -- Commissioner Sarnoff All right, so -- Mr. Hink: -- but it's not 30 percent, but it's -- if you look at -- over our standard buildings, it will be in the 20s, at least, maybe approaching 30. Commissioner Sarnoff OK, so it is your opinion that the LEED certification is adequate? Mr. Hink: Yes, it is. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Mr. Hink: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado, you have any questions? Commissioner Regalado: No, nothing. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Rob, I have a question. Pertaining to Section 3.11.4, which focuses on the green building, do you believe that -- under your expertise, do you think that these bonuses are enough, and can we compare ourself [sic] to other cities that have similar, and if they do, how successful have they been in promoting green buildings? Mr. Hink: I'll answer that question two ways. Are they enough? I would encourage you to look at your other forms of getting those density bonuses and seeing if you think it's equivalent. I think, if you look at those, my opinion is that it isn't equivalent. If a developer has a choice to go City ofMiami Page 31 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 -- and maybe it's the intention of the City, you know -- for instance, the affordable housing bonus, I think it's probably easier or more economical for them to attain, could be, than to higher level gold or platinum buildings that the density bonus addresses. If you're looking comparison to other cities, I think they're quite adequate. Oakland Park has a density bonus, and think you're fairly close to what den -- what Oakland Park has developed, and that has been on their books for almost a year and a half now. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Would you proffer any recommendations you may have? Mr. Hink: I would increase the density bonus allowances for gold and platinum because -- just because -- first of all, platinum is very difficult. You know, platinum -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well -- Mr. Hink: -- the -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- extremely difficult. Mr. Hink: -- yeah. You know, there's only one platinum house in the state of Florida. There's no platinum buildings in the state of Florida. There's only one that I know is even being planned and it's kind of an experimental one up at Florida State, excuse me, and that's the only one that I'm even aware of that's going for the platinum, so I think that if you want to push platinum -- platinums are wonderful buildings if you've been inside them. U.S. Green Building Council headquarters in Washington has one. I would increase the density bonuses, at least for that because they are very costly to achieve and have tremendous impact on the environment. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. All right. Mr. Hink: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Next speaker. Five minutes. State your name and address for the record. Bernard Zyscovich: My name is Bernard Zyscovich. My address is 100 North Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2700. I -- first, I want to say that I'm here solely to represent the interest of a client who hired us to be the architects on their project on 17th and Biscayne Boulevard, Mid Guard. I also would like to make everyone aware, for full disclosure issues that I have worked in the past for the City doing the FEC Corridor plan, the Omni CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) district; I'm currently working on the Downtown Development Authority Master Plan, and I'm not here representing any of those specific entities. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Madam Clerk, could you reset him back at five minutes? Mr. Zyscovich: I wanted to give you an illustration on behalf of our client as to the comparative analysis between the SD-6 ordinance, as currently existing in the City, because we have actually been retained by him to propose a building for submittal under SD-6, and also what Miami 21, under the guidelines that we've been reviewing as of the June 20 amendment, and also with verbal comments made to us over the past few days, so this is as up-to-date as we can possibly be, including comments that have not yet made it to the Code. On this site, which is a very typical site, actually, in terms of the City, it's a full block site. On Biscayne Boulevard, 2nd Avenue, and also 17th Street, we wanted to show you what the plan looks like when you actually take the Code and put it into a building, in one of these higher density blocks. The first thing is that there are requirements related to the layering in terms of the buildings from the street, in terms of the first layer, second layer, the issues related to liner uses, which cover parking, where the parking occurs and where the towers occur. One of the things that happens is that in order City ofMiami Page 32 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 to maximize the opportunity to use the allowable development, you're limited in the size of the building footprints that you can have, so that's a very important consideration because the footprint of a residential tower cannot be any bigger than that, and this is important under the base analysis ofMiami 21, because every developer I ever met wants to maximize his floor area, especially under the current Code, which has costs related to bonuses, so you're going to want to build as much building as you can without incurring additional costs. What we've done is we compared the plan that we had for the SD-6. We took the same program, we put it into here, and basically, what we have is a rectangular building with four rectangular towers. The size of the building is 21 stories, even though we're a 36 zone, because when you begin to maximize the footprints and you analyze it, what really governs is the amount of parking that you can have. In the Code, it's written that you cannot go more than eight stories high in parking, so basically, the parking will limit the amount of area that you can build. We were told verbally at a meeting yesterday that we were incorrect in that, and that the intention is that we can still continue above eight stories, but within the footprint of what's allowed for the office tower, and the office tower also has a maximize size of 30,000 feet, so we'll show you another example later. Basically, when you do this analysis and you do the ground floor retail, we're at approximately 51 percent of the area that we can build under SD-6 without any current bonuses, so all of this is compared to SD-6 without a PUD (Planned Unit Development) bonus, without any of the other available bonuses because we wanted to do a base building, so let's say our client wants to build more than what he's allowed to do without additional cost. When you go to the next scheme, you end up -- Commissioner Sarnoff Wait. Your last diagram was without -- that's it, without cost? Mr. Zyscovich: That's without cost. You can build 51 percent of what you can build right now under SD-6 without bonuses -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Costs -- Mr. Zyscovich: -- that you're allowed to have. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- towards bonuses. Mr. Zyscovich: Right now, in the City, you're allowed to have, under the current zoning, you can have 20 percent bonuses and affordable housing bonuses. We didn't count any of those bonuses. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Near the 1100 -- Mr. Zyscovich: We just went straight -- Vice Chairman Sanchez:--11000. Mr. Zyscovich: -- SD-6. In the case of trying to get to the 36-story height without paying for the bonuses related to additional height, we need to go two floors of underground parking in order to provide enough parking to support the amount of area that we can build, and what we've done is we've estimated the cost of the underground parking at $37 million, so if you spend $37 million on underground parking, you can actually get to the 36-story limitation on the height without paying additional costs for the bonus provision. Chairman Gonzalez: We don't have a quorum? We (UNINTELLIGIBLE) have a quorum, so continue, please. Mr. Zyscovich: When you begin to look at what you can build when you add in the additional bonus of height which is allowed, you end up not being able to do that unless you actually enter into the bonus pool, so what we did is we took a verbal comment that we received yesterday that City ofMiami Page 33 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 we would be allowed to build parking within the office building footprint. It's a little hard to read. Here's the base, and there's the footprint of the parking tower, and then there's building above the tower, so this becomes a 19-story parking tower unlined, and when you do 19 stories of parking and it's extremely inefficient in a 30, 000-square foot footprint, you can actually get enough parking to avoid the underground parking, but you have to start paying the bonuses for the additional height, and that bonus amount is $10.8 million, and it has a 19-story parking tower, and this one, after all of this, gets you to 88 percent of what you're allowed to do under the current Code. The previous one I showed you with the underground parking can only get you to 77 percent of what you're allowed under the base of the -- of this existing Code. We also have made a mistake here, because when you read the Code, it requires a mid -block connection, and we neglected to read carefully enough to understand. We noticed it last night very late that it requires that mid -block connection to be open to the sky, so therefore, this initial 8-story podium also has to be broken with a pedestrian connection in the middle of the block open to the sky, which will actually make these numbers worse, but we didn't think we wanted to spend all night drawing it, so we're showing it this way, but it actually gets a little bit worse. Commissioner Sarnoff So you would have -- Commissioner Regalado: Can I --? Commissioner Sarnoff -- you -- go ahead -- would have to go up more than 19 stories to make up for the lost parking? Mr. Zyscovich: Yes, but I think the point we're trying to make is that a 19-story parking tower -- Commissioner Sarnoff You're making your point -- Mr. Zyscovich: -- is -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- your point -- Mr. Zyscovich: -- something undesirable. We did figure out a way to get to a hundred percent. That put the parking at 21 stories within the 30, 000 footprint, and then we could get to a square footage equal to what you're allowed to build today without bonuses. Commissioner Sarnoff The -- Commissioner Regalado: One question. Sorry. Mr. Zyscovich: Let me just -- I'll just -- OK, one question. Commissioner Regalado: One question about underground parking, but specifically to that address, because you mention -- is that Biscayne and --? Mr. Zyscovich: Biscayne and 17th. Commissioner Regalado: OK. Remember the storm we had several weeks ago? Mr. Zyscovich: Yes. Commissioner Regalado: That area was completely and absolutely flooded is that correct? Mr. Zyscovich: Um -hum. Commissioner Regalado: I went by there. City ofMiami Page 34 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Zyscovich: Right. Commissioner Regalado: I mean, TV (television) cameras and everything, and cars were stuck up to the door, so my question is, what kind of guarantee we could have that underground parking will not be flooded? Mr. Zyscovich: Well, no one could ever give you a guarantee that it could not be flooded, but the technology does exist now. Commissioner Regalado: Pumps. Like pumps. Mr. Zyscovich: There are pumps, but what happens is, in the construction -- because one of the problems of underground parking up until two or three years ago was that you dewater, so you have to have a pump, as you've seen in construction sites, that's pumping water out while you're trying to pour concrete in. There's now a different technology, which has been in use in Europe for years, which is that you leave the water in the hole; you do all of your excavation under water, and then you pour the concrete in the water, and then the only water you pump out is what's left in the hole, so the technology exists. It's just that it's very expensive still. It's something, as architects, that we propose whenever we can. Most of the time our clients don't do it because of costs. Sometimes -- we just finished a project here in Coconut Grove called Grove Garden, where Taurus used to be, where we have two floors of underground parking; no problem. The excavation was fine and everything went well, but it does cost a lot of money. With a limited amount of scope, it's a reasonable way to go because the gross dollars don't add that much. In this particular scenario, we -- you know, basically, we're just doing a dispassionate analysis, and what we're trying to report to you is that under the current Code, the options to be able to get to the allowable building area that you currently have are very, very, very expensive options. The last boardl wanted to show you, and we have a lot more to show you, but we won't unless you request them, is that this is the project we're about to design for the same site -- that we have designed for the same site for submittal, which allows for diversity and variety in the way that the building forms are put together. This is a diagram, because we didn't do the architectural treatment here because we just had these changes recently and we didn't have time to create buildings, but one of the attributes of this -- and you can see it diagrammatically -- is that when the building shapes are actually prescribed in terms of a maximum footprint, there will be no financial incentive for someone who's a developer to leave some of that area off the table in the interest of creating something possibly more interesting, maybe with more variety, because when the price point changes at 36-story and after that, you pay $21 a square foot for every square foot you build, no one's going to want to build above that line until they've used up all of the available area that they could get for free, which is why I think that this is not an unfair representation, because the dimensions of the buildings in the Code are very specific. They're specific to the residential tower. They're specific to the office tower. Hotels, et cetera, to my knowledge, are not mentioned, but they're also a maximum dimension, so it's not like you can make whatever you want. It really says it can't be more than a hundred fifty feet or more than a hundred eighty feet or whatever the latest iteration is, and because of the fact that we have many, many blocks of the City still to build, I feel confident in saying that the architectural treatment will essentially be the treatment of the skin of the building, and that in order to maximize the block, there is no way, other than whether you have two on the end or rows of two, you're going to always be having these types of relationships where towers are looking in on each other and other things are happening by virtue of the fact that that's how you maximize your square feet, so anyway, that -- we have many, many detailed issues regarding this, but to the best of our ability, this is what we wanted to show you in terms of the impact of the form on the design, the impact of the cost on the design, and the fact that because this is a typical block, we think this will be repeated frequently throughout the City. Commissioner Sarnoff How many cars do you account for in your current zoning SD-6, and City ofMiami Page 35 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 how many cars do you account for -- is that apples to apples? Mr. Zyscovich: It's the same. It's apples -- Commissioner Sarnoff OK -- Mr. Zyscovich: -- to apples. Commissioner Sarnoff -- and is it one -- what is the number, 1.5? Do you know? Mr. Zyscovich: I think it varies according to the -- Commissioner Sarnoff Residential versus -- Mr. Zyscovich: -- uses -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- commercial? Mr. Zyscovich: -- andl don't know if we have that information on this diagram, but we have 1, 645 for the current Code, and we have, I think, the same 1, 700 -- they're always in the same amount, but they're actually less because we can't get to the number in the same -- as we -- we don't get to the same square feet as we have in the existing design for the project, andl want to emphasize that we've really been diligent about not taking any of the other available bonuses under this existing Code, which most developers would try to take, so this is flat line without bonuses. Commissioner Sarnoff You're showing -- in other words, you're saying under 11000, you've taken no bonuses? Mr. Zyscovich: No bonuses. There are bonuses available. This is based upon a comparison of Miami 21 to 11000 without any bonuses. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Under 11000 they could go higher, because otherwise -- Mr. Zyscovich: Eleven thousand allows you to go much bigger, much -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right, but -- Mr. Zyscovich: -- higher. Commissioner Sarnoff -- the picture you just showed us -- go back to your last picture you showed us. It's still up there. Just pull that down. Mr. Zyscovich: OK. Commissioner Sarnoff That photograph, is that -- that's the one you're proposing now without any bonuses? Mr. Zyscovich: Correct. Commissioner Sarnoff You're proposing a building without any bonuses -- Mr. Zyscovich: Yes. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- or is that --? City ofMiami Page 36 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Zyscovich: No. Actually, we are. We're proposing a building without any bonuses. Vice Chairman Sanchez: You're done? Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I have some questions on that. Bernard, as you stated, through these regulations and changes, do you feel, as an architect, that you would be restricted in designing a building as -- I believe that the buildings that we have now, which they're all different in many ways, I guess -- just like our community, so diversified We have difference of different characters. Under this Code, would you be limited, not only yourself, but any other architect, to be creative in designing a more beautiful building or a more attractive building? Mr. Zyscovich: Well, let me have one little preface and I'll answer that. I want to be clear that the opinions I'm going to give you are my personal opinions and my professional opinions. I'm not representing -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: I -- Mr. Zyscovich: -- anyone else. I'm not here to represent anyone else. My opinion -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Listen -- Mr. Zyscovich: -- is -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- I'm not asking you -- Mr. Zyscovich: Right. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- as representing your client. I'm asking you as a -- Mr. Zyscovich: Right. I -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- respectable architect in our community. Mr. Zyscovich: Yeah. The answer simply is yes. I think that this is a city, in my view, which has spent many years developing its image. It's now an internationally -recognized image, andl think a big part of the image that we've fought to -- fought for is the type of design and interest in design that our community of designers has put forward, and in working with this project as an example, I find that in order to meet the needs of my client, I have no way but to organize the project, by and large, the way that I showed you under Miami 21, which I don't believe is nearly as interesting or possible for creativity as the way we have it without those form -driven restrictions. Vice Chairman Sanchez: On parking, you touched on parking, and the buildings will require less parking, and that's the future of downtown. I know that we're heading towards a transit -dependent community, but to be honest with you, the infrastructure isn't there now -- Mr. Zyscovich: Correct. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- for people to leave their cars and utilize what we have now, which, at times, is inadequate to meet the demand of people who want to get from point A to point B when they decide to leave their car. What do you foresee in that -- City ofMiami Page 37 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Zyscovich: There are different -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- as an architect? Mr. Zyscovich: -- codes around the country. Some of them have minimum parking. There are also codes that have maximum parking. Personally, I agree with you, and professionally, I agree with you. I think that a code could be written that institutes whatever parking requirement is desirable under a city that has an effective transit system, and that that aspect of the parking ratio could take effect when the transit system's in place. Until such time as the transit system is in place, we're really doing two things. One is, I think, we're kidding ourselves that people would move into those buildings when they're still so attached to the car. Certainly, many urban people would, but it's not that frequent that somebody lives within walking distance of where they work, and the other is that there aren't too many developers, and you know, investors that know of that would want to take the risk of building a building without adequate parking for this time, and they would choose to do their project somewhere else because it's a very big risk. I can tell you by example because we did Midtown; that in Midtown, we went to a 1.15 ratio because during the course of that work, it was clear that the trolley system was going to be move forward in the City, and we were expecting that it would arrive at Midtown and be -- it did not affect the sell of units because of the boom, but we heard from the developer and the salespeople, repeatedly, that there was a lot of dissatisfaction among the people buying, and that the reason they decided to buy was because they wanted to treat it as an investment, so that's disconcerting because we build these buildings for people to live in them, and if we don't provide the parking in the buildings, then I think this City will have to find ways to provide parking through public parking structures, until the transit is in place. Commissioner Sarnoff Bernard, you're -- you are aware of West Palm Beach going to a form -based code. Mr. Zyscovich: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff Have you been asked by West Palm Beach to come off that form -base code? Mr. Zyscovich: I've been asked by West Palm Beach to change that code, yes. Commissioner Sarnoff How so? Describe it and tell us why. Mr. Zyscovich: Well, this was a heated conversation at the Commission in West Palm. They were saying that the main reason that they wanted to change the code that had been just recently enacted, I think, about eight years ago, was because there was a sameness and repetitiveness to the buildings that were being built in the city, and specifically, some large U-shaped residential buildings where the space between the buildings were very short -- I mean, narrow. There was no FAR. There was no FLR. I think, also, the code was designed initially for the idea that people would do development in lots because we, as architects, like to think that -- we get a lot of fabric and texture in a city because you build one building at a time, but what happened in West Palm is, I think, clearly what happens here in Miami, which is that there's an incentive to buy a whole block, and when that type of form is put on an entire block, it creates pretty much what I've shown you, which is the maximum way you can build it out according to the form code, and therefore, in West Palm, the development community were building -- even though they were different developers with different architects, they were building the same building with different skins, which had a, in the minds of the Commissioner, an impact that they didn't want to continue, so we were asked actually to change the code. Commissioner Sarnoff And are you -- have you done that or are you in the process of doing that? City ofMiami Page 38 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Zyscovich: We have our master plan adopted, and now the City has asked us to write the zoning, so we're in the process of initializing the zoning for the City. Commissioner Sarnoff How many other cities are you aware of in the 500,000 residential -- 500,000 size of residents have a form -based code -- Mr. Zyscovich: I don't know -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- and above, I should say? Mr. Zyscovich: -- I -- I'm not able to answer that question with certainty. I don't really know. I think it's a fairly new concept. Commissioner Sarnoff Would you mind ifI asked Elizabeth to come up and just --? Vice Chairman Sanchez: I was going to -- Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Elizabeth -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- I wanted to get two sides of the story. Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Vice Chairman Sanchez: As a matter of fact, I was going to bring her up to ask her the same questions, but -- Commissioner Sarnoff Elizabeth, could you just come up and just express if what you heard is accurate, inaccurate? If so, how it's inaccurate? Vice Chairman Sanchez: And ifI may interact. Can you also -- are they similar in many ways or --? What are the differences between this concept and the one -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: The West Palm? Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- in the Palm? Yes. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah, OK. I feel compelled to start by telling you that we have asked the architects if they've studied sites and they are experiencing problems or questions, to share them with us before bringing them to public hearing, and so I regret that this is occurring in this manner, rather than being able to have the chance to sit over the drawings with Bernard and his office in advance. I should say -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well, I think -- and for whatever it's worth, Elizabeth, I expected a lot of architects to be standing up behind Bernard -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff -- and I'm disappointed, because I think I've made a couple of pleas from this dais; I want to hear from the architects. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: And we have worked very intensively with individuals on projects like this to under -- precisely to understand these issues in specific areas because the City's full of odd conditions, and we've had many sessions with a group representing the AIA (American Institute of Architects), which, out of 19 points, I think we've addressed and made the adjustments for all City ofMiami Page 39 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 but one and maybe that's why they're not here, but -- so I think need to respond in the following way. One is the form aspect of this code for tall buildings, for high -density buildings, is really minimal. We have taken away the light plain and other issues that are in 11000. What we have done is asked the first part of the building to be only eight stories tall. First thing we did was we took the open space off the podium, and it's now part of the sidewalk. It's part of the public realm. Subsequently, we've asked that the first wall that the public experiences is at the eighth -- stops at the eighth story before it sets back ten feet. However, you don't need to run that the full length of the block, or the full length of your site. You have a 70 percent factor. The fact of the matter is that most architects will use that fully and develop a street wall because there's a parking garage inside there which benefits from the orthogonal, from the right angle of our street grid, so if you look at the buildings, the bottom of all of the tall buildings that have been built up to now, I dare say you will find that most of them hold the street line for that reason. We're only asking that they be lined, and that they not go up to 15 stories right on the street. Commissioner Sarnoff But would -- let me just understand, because this -- pretty much since I've been on the podium, or on the dais, I should say, everybody's come to us with a lined building, and you're suggesting that that's as a result of a MUSP and that all planners -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: That's correct. Commissioner Sarnoff -- have wised up and said four years ago, we noticed some very pretty buildings being -- no -- let me say this right -- very big buildings being built that did not have liners, but it's not actually part of our Code. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: That's correct, and you can see those buildings all over town. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, the Aon building right next to one of the parks that we're trying to get is a non -lined building right by -- on the water by Biscayne. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: There are -- you can -- if you go along the waterfront, you'll see many parking garages -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- wastefully facing the water, so that part of the form is not restrictive because it's already being done. The towers are free after that ten feet, and in some cases, the towers are allowed to come forward if there is some difficulty on the site. We've identified the conditions under which the tower does not need to set back at the eighth story. The tower shape is free, so that's a misconception. With regard to the floor plates, most of the footprints of residential buildings that have gone up during this time of grade building and that have come before the boards have been less than 18,000 -- have been at 18,000. The reason for that floor plate are the long buildings that are coming up along the corridors that tend to cast a long shadow, act like a wall to the neighborhood in front of them, block their air and light, so, yes, the development community wants to maximize the floor plate. We think this is a quality of life issue for the City. The -- there are several buildings on Brickell, like Santa Maria, which are in the low 20s, butl think they're inappropriate for most of the rest of the City. The 30, 000-square foot floor plate of the office building has not been exceeded; that's a standard, so we felt that what we were trying to do by that floor plate was eliminate the most egregious exaggerations, and in fact, that's one thing that we did learn from the Palm Beach code. That was a very simple form -based code for a city that had no building going on at the time, and it actually helped spur a lot of building, so the floor plate limit comes from understanding that issue. Commissioner Sarnoff Can you help me with that, because I don't --? I almost understand what you're telling me, but I don't quite understand what you're telling me. Could you go back -- City ofMiami Page 40 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Plater-Zyberk: All right. Commissioner Sarnoff -- and help me understand floor plate? Vice Chairman Sanchez: No. We'll get there. Look, I got a question on that, too. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: The floor plate is the area of the floor, on each floor. Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: It does not include the -- we don't count the balconies. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: No. We're encouraging outdoor area throughout the Code, so most of the buildings that have gone up in the City have been less than 18,000 square feet. Commissioner Sarnoff Most of the residential buildings. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Most of the residential. There are some that are larger that we think have had a negative impact on their surroundings because of their bulk. Commissioner Sarnoff Then is it your intention to try to govern at 18,000, to try to promote 18,000 square foot? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: As the maximum. Commissioner Sarnoff As the maximum? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff So that's the intent. Your intent is maximize residential at 18,000? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: That's correct. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: And most of what you see going up in the Edgewater sort of north of the downtown area is less than that. There're even some 10, 000-square foot floor plates, so what we're seeing is a lot of slender towers, and we're suggesting that we do not want to see the larger than 18 in the future. The -- Commissioner Sarnoff And just -- I apologize, but -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff -- when I'm calculating my 18, I'm not calculating parking. I'm just doing my residential floor plate. OK. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Just to go back to West Palm Beach, one needs to understand the full history. Our original proposal for the City was of a certain height with a step back to emulate some of the historical buildings that had narrower penthouses. There was a public referendum after our plan was done, which cut the height of buildings as a kind of straight height, which has contributed to what Bernard was describing, so we understand that the results in West Palm Beach have not been perfect, but there was a public component to that, which followed our first work. City ofMiami Page 41 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff What did they cut the heights to; do you remember? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: I think it went from 15 to 10. Commissioner Sarnoff Stories -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff -- or --? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: And at the time that this was taking place, there was an extreme sensitivity to height in the city. There were only three or four tall buildings, so now that there's been a build out, there is a reaction, which is appropriate, I think, and then with regard to parking, I think Bernard's right. You know, it's hard to get people to do now what you think they might be doing when the transit system is fully functioning or is more appealing, or when there's so much congestion that people give up, but the precise reason that we went between --from FAR to FLR and included the parking in the -- that capacity was to encourage that over time, so right now, if you reduce the parking, if you build less parking than you might have under the FAR system, you still get the same amount of habitable building. In the new code, we're suggesting that any reduction in parking that you make in the future is an incentive because you still have the floor area of that for habitable space, so you actually get more floor area, so we're not saying you have to go underground. We're saying you do have to line some part of the podium, and it's -- hopefully, it's a kind of recognition that we're going to be going through a transition and that we want to help people make that transition. Commissioner Sarnoff Let -- can I just see ifI understand what you said? Let's just say we're 20 years from now and we've got rocket powered shoes, and we don't even have to worry about mass transit, and we're getting around just fine; very few people use cars any longer. You're saying that we can actually take eight, or five, six floors of parking and then create residential units out of that? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: In a new building. Commissioner Sarnoff In a new building? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah, and -- or you could build a new building without parking and go to the older building next door and say, you're not using one-third of your 14 stories of parking; couldl rent that for my residents? Commissioner Sarnoff Your code actually talks about that or speaks to that? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: It doesn't say that specifically, but it's opened the door for that. In order to do that, you really have to have a kind of -- a good parking management system. Commissioner Sarnoff Or, alternatively, does your code provide for the possibility that the City ofMiami decides that we would create or a private entrepreneur would create a parking garage that could be used by three or four buildings? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes, shared parking. Commissioner Sarnoff Shared parking. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: And the Code does speak to shared parking. City ofMiami Page 42 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: What is it, one -quarter of a mile sharing -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: I believe so. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- from the project? One -quarter of a mile? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah, and the exact distance, I'd have to look up. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Right. On -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: A thousand feet. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- the issue of livable and saleable square feet after the eight stories, do you foresee people or projects doing away with balconies? Because the saleable -- in other words, not doing balconies to be able to enhance their project or size? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: No. I don't -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Based on livable -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- understand the provenance of that question, because, in fact, the balconies don't count as floor area, so open space, space that's opened to the outdoors -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Neither does the stairway -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- does not count. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- electrical rooms and common areas. They don't count, right? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: All of the indoor space counts, including elevator shafts. This is -- but the factor from FAR to FLR that was taken include -- understands that and incorporates that -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Right. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- so it's in order -- it is to make an easier calculation to facilitate the permitting process for everybody, for the architects, developers, and the City staff. Commissioner Sarnoff Have you addressed everything? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: I think so. Commissioner Sarnoff Let me ask a question then. Do you agree that the building would look like what Bernard has cast on the right-hand side versus the left-hand side? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Well, that's what I can't speak to because I haven't had the opportunity to really examine it, but I think one thing should be clear is that in the existing Code, and ours brings that history along, there's no guarantee that the capacity that is zoned is actually realistically or pragmatically achievable, so I look at those diagrams andl think I'm not sure that anyone would want to build all of that stuff regardless of the numbers of buildings or size and shape of buildings because at some point, it's too much. You know, the floor plate of -- I don't know what the size of the floor plate of the building that he's proposing is. It looks very big to me, and it -- and at some point, you get too deep for light, you know, for practical -- so those are the kind of things that we would be talking about if we were to be sitting down over the drawing board, andl should add that we've done this with myriad examples, so I'm sorry that we couldn't do it with this one in advance. City ofMiami Page 43 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff I expected a lot of architects to be right behind Bernard and how many more architects are there? Unidentified Speaker: Six. Commissioner Sarnoff OK, so there're still some more. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff I expected quite a few, actually. You've met with a lot of architects, and you're saying every issue in your mind has been clamed I heard you say, except one, was it? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: The AIA brought us a kind of -- a letter, a memo with, I believe, 19 points, in which probably about two weeks ago, maybe a month ago, but the intensity of interest rose in the last two weeks, as you can imagine, and a number of those items, we identified as being issues related to specific areas or sites, and we made the adjustments in the code to accommodate them. The one that we thought was -- that we should not was the re -- the suggestion that bonuses apply only -- be applied only in terms of floor area, additional FLR, that the height not be a limit in terms of getting to the bonus point, and the reason we said we want the bonus to be made of both height and FLR is that that gives more to the City, and we're working in behalf of the City and its future, and the whole benefits program is there for, we think, good reason, so yes, you may decide -- in most cases, except for extreme gross lot area sites, which several which have been pointed out to us, you can achieve the FLR at that first height, at 36. For instance, in Bernard's case, SD-6 is T 36. You can -- but if you want to have a slender building and reach higher for views, that's when you would hit the benefits. Commissioner Sarnoff You want it to be that way, correct? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes, we do. Commissioner Sarnoff In other words -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: For the good of the City. Commissioner Sarnoff Right. You don't want people designing two -window buildings to reach as high as they can so they can sell the first eight floors and say, look, you could see Biscayne Bay. You don't want that to happen? I'm being facetious, but -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah Commissioner Sarnoff -- what I'm saying is -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Oh, very nar -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. You don't want the very long, narrow building -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Oh, no. We don't -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- because you want them to pay for that. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- we think -- no. We think the narrow buildings are good, but we think that they're desirable enough that people will, above those heights, pay to do that -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. You want them to pay -- City ofMiami Page 44 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- and the City, thus, will benefit. Commissioner Sarnoff -- right. You want them to pay for the height -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff -- regardless ofFLR, so to speak? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: And -- but built into -- this is our understanding, andl should make this clear because of Commissioner Regalado's concerns that you voiced, is that we understand that, at some point, probably moving further west, where those -- where tallness of the type that it is on the waterfront will not be as much of an issue or it won't be in the zoning because it's close to the neighborhoods that, at that point -- and where the costs -- the prices will probably be more reasonable that most people in those parts of the cities probably will not enter the benefits program, so this is intended to take advantage of the most desirable, most expensive parts of the City for the good of the City. Commissioner Sarnoff Just two more questions. Your present parking requirements are equivalent to what we have right now in the SD (Special District) overlays? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: You know, there's a variety -- Commissioner Sarnoff I know it's a hard question. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- among them, but it's similar, and we've gone back to that. We initially began with a lighter, a lower parking requirement, and we've gone back to something that's close to the existing ones. Commissioner Sarnoff And the last thing I'd ask you is ifI asked you to provide to my office alternate designs based on what Bernard has placed on the record here today as to his footprint of his building, could you provide my office three alternate designs as to what that building could be built under Miami 21 ? I'm not asking for anything -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. No. We could, but would prefer to do it with Bernard, who -- Commissioner Sarnoff Oh, absolutely. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- has the information. Commissioner Sarnoff I just want to be made privy to it. That's all. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff I just want to know that you could do this, you could do this, or you could do this, or maybe you have to do that. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff In which case, we all learn that that's what it has to be. Thanks. City ofMiami Page 45 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Liz, before you step down. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes. Vice Chairman Sanchez: You know, they say that a picture's worth a thousand words, andl think that that picture right there says it all, andl suggested when we had the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) meeting, that it came about that maybe we could have more comparative analysts [sic] (UNINTELLIGIBLE) take three sites where we could have a display like that to clearly show what could be done and what Miami 21 does, so we could have a better understanding as -- you know, this -- I continue to say that this -- it's complex, you know. I'm sure that the average person who could read Miami 21 half a dozen times, and if the light bulb doesn't turn on, we have a problem. It's complicated. People need to be aware of -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: We'd be -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- what's going on, but I think if we took three sites in downtown and you did that, we would have a better understanding how as to fine-tune -- I think -- listen, the concept in itself Miami 21, I stated it before, you know, it's moving along. There are some elements that we have some concerns with, and this is cutting -edge legislation, folks. Whatever we -- decision we take today will have consequences, so we got to make sure that -- you know, this is well -cooked -- this is as close as possible; that, when we go out and the residents continue to participate, they have a better understanding. Just because you don't understand something, you know, doesn't mean that you're going to reject it, but you've got to have an understanding of it, so -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: And -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- if you could just provide -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- we'd be happy to make those comparisons with the participation of the architects that know those sites to begin with, and we can do that by the second reading. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Thank you. Commissioner Sarnoff If you want to respond, you may. Vice Chairman Sanchez: And you know what, Liz? Liz, I'm sorry. Could you also do it for a single-family home? Thanks. Mr. Zyscovich: I wanted to make just one point. We gave the drawings to the planning firm a week ago, and a week is not an awful lot of time, but we were here at the UDRB (Urban Development Review Board) hearing, specifically, to present this project, and we didn't have an opportunity to do that, so we would have had it on the record earlier. The point I wanted -- Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me. Why? Mr. Zyscovich: The Board didn't let us speak. Commissioner Regalado: Why? Mr. Zyscovich: I don't know. We were here. We were prepared. I thought the item was for the purpose of listening to the discussion from the architectural community, and we didn't -- we weren't allowed to speak because it wasn't a specific project. I think the Commissioner was here at the UDRB also. City ofMiami Page 46 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: Why don't you repeat that for the Commissioner? Mr. Zyscovich: I'm saying that we did, in good faith, try to get this out there. I know we gave it to the planning firm a week ago. I know we gave it -- and we were here trying to present it at another time. At which point, I think the City Attorney asked us to leave these documents; we did it, so -- but we were also here at the UDRB hearing for the purpose of being able to discuss this, and for some reason, I don't know, we were not allowed to speak. We sat through the whole meeting and never got a chance to do that, but the point is is it's been difficult to actually have a kind of interchange that I think is the right kind of interchange that I think we're having now, and unfortunately, I agree with Liz. It's unfortunate that this is the process that brought this up, but by the same token, I still want to stay on point, andl want to make it clear what our objection is in regard to this aspect of the proposed code. One of the things in the code is, aside from the distance maximums of the building, you also have to stay 60 feet away from any other building, so when the comment is made that we can make any form we want on this block, which is a typical block, in order to say 60 feet away from the other buildings, we only have 20 feet in which to play with the shape, and the same is true no matter how we organize that, so if you take the mentality of what is likely to happen, which I believe is the developer trying to get as much area in his building free of extra costs as possible, I think that the result will be along those lines, andl also agree with Liz in the form that, yes, we have a city filled with parking podiums, andl think it's common for them to be lined, but the real issue here is not related to the podium. The issue is that when you get above eight stories, which often is not enough to accommodate the parking, you then find that you have another set of restrictions, so you have one set of restrictions at the ground plain. You have another set of restrictions at 80 feet. You have another set of requirements when you hit your base tower height, and no matter what, in order to do what you can do today, it ends up costing the person more money than he would have to spend today, which I don't fully comprehend, because I thought the idea was to make construction more affordable, andl don't -- my concern is from the standpoint of the industry that I'm so involved in. We know we're hitting a point where the cycle is diminishing. As we add in the extra cost to get a building done, I'm concerned about the fact that it will make it even more difficult for the average person to be able to deal with being able to afford the building, because as was stated, the waterfront sites have been built. The people who don't care how much money, that's already taken care of. Now that we start getting into the second, third, fourth blocks back into the City, I'm just concerned that we're going to have a city that is -- Commissioner Sarnoff But Bernard -- Mr. Zyscovich: -- predominantly like that. Commissioner Sarnoff -- ifI were to go to Miami Avenue right now, andl were to go to the south of the river, andl think even north of the river, I -- maybe Wind [sic] and a couple of others are doing this -- see buildings that are 30, 40 feet apart still being built as we speak; that I would have to believe that the people who purchased on the river, who were unlucky enough probably not to be looking at the river but to look -- be looking back at the City are now looking at some other condominium right in front of them that, I doubt, unless that is truly affordable housing, which I still doubt, they're looking right in the window of another condominium. Mr. Zyscovich: I agree. That's exactly my point, because when we designed the -- Commissioner Sarnoff But wait, wait. I'm talking about 11000 right now, so if she's adding -- I would be surprised if they're 30 feet apart. Maybe I'm wrong, and I'm sure you will con -- Mr. Zyscovich: No. They're much more. They're actually more than that. Commissioner Sarnoff Are they? City ofMiami Page 47 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Zyscovich: Yeah, but you raise the right point. There is no code, that I can imagine, that will protect us from certain abuses that happen as a result of people trying to do the least, you know, desirable thing. The point that I'm trying to make is when you analyze a block from the perspective of the developer who wants to build the maximum square footage, you will end up, in this case, with a block with four buildings. The project that we're going to propose is a block with three towers. The reason that we're able to do that is we're free to deal with shape, form, height, area, all the things that can be done to assemble the same square footage in a different way without penalty. The point that I'm trying to get to is when the different components of the building are prescriptive, and it basically establishes what you will build, then what will happen is the market will respond by building what you're telling them to build, andl don't know anyone who would prefer to spend $21 a square foot additional for what he could spend zero for and, therefore, when you do a rational analysis -- because we arrived at this last night, because it's not actually in our DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) to create buildings like this -- but when we began to look at how to do it, and we took that as the mission, what can you really do, according to these particular set of issues? We're just wanting to alert you to the fact that the results that we wish for may not be the results that we get. Commissioner Sarnoff Fair enough. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Next. Yes, ma'am. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chairman, this is a citizen who has a medical problem. I -- if that's all right with you, I've asked her to step up. Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah, sure. Ginger Vela: Thank you very much. My name is Ginger Vela, andl live at 920 Northeast 86th Street. That is in the Upper Eastside in the neighborhood of Shorecrest. I'm also a member of the Upper Eastside Preservation Coalition, and the reason I'm standing here before you -- and I want to thank you very much, Commissioner, for letting us do this -- is because --I'm here because I want to speak to the quality of life issues and what we really do want on the Upper Eastside. I brought some petitions that we had signed by a hundred and thirty-eight people in the neighborhood that support that position, and what we would like is no more than three stories lining the corridors of Northeast 79th Street from the bay to Biscayne Boulevard, and from Northeast 79th Street to 87th Street on Biscayne Boulevard, because now I understand that Miami 21, which I congratulate the City and the architects on working with this. I mean, it's really a wonderful undertaking, but clearly there're a lot of questions. I understand that T6-8 is what is now being designated, which would be up to eight stories tall on those two corridors of Biscayne and 79th, with a right to buy up to 12 stories, and what we've always said, back as far as maybe seven years ago in a charrette in the Upper Eastside, included Shorecrest; it included El Portal, and some Miami Shores people. We had a charrette where we said, yes, we'd like only three stories on those corridors, especially on Biscayne. That's what the charrette was talking about, and when Commissioner Sarnoff went into office, many -- a majority of the people also said they wanted only the three stories, and as Elizabeth mentioned, the buildings now have different ceilings and different heights for the different floors. The first floor could conceivably, you know, being a commercial or a, you know, some sort of enterprise on the first floor be a 24-foot ceiling, and then the other floors would be -- the way people like ceilings higher now -- they would be, not that high, but maybe 12, 10 stories, so you're getting, I mean, the -- and now you're getting up to something close to 50 feet, andl would like to say, on behalf of residents of our neighborhood that we would like that -- andl know that there're other people here today, and it's only a difference of opinion, butl think considering how important this is for many years to come, that this has to be looked at very carefully, andl will also say that we have a homeowners association, which was brought up earlier about the homeowners associations. We do have Shorecrest Homeowners Association, but in the time that we've all learned about Miami 21, that has never been a topic of discussion at any of our meetings, nor has there been a polling City ofMiami Page 48 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 of any of the residents to find out exactly what they really would want to happen on Biscayne or on Northeast 79th Street, and those of us who are represented by the petition, would like to say that we are not -- we don't consider our homeowner association or our president to represent our views just because we've never talked about it. Chairman Gonzalez: All right, ma'am. Thank you very much. Ms. Vela: Thank you very much. Oh, by the way, I have some petitions. I would like to give those out. Chairman Gonzalez: Give it to the City Clerk. Vice Chairman Sanchez: City Clerk. Ms. Vela: OK. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Ms. Vela: Can you each get one or --? Chairman Gonzalez: Next. Vice Chairman Sanchez: City Clerk. Ms. Vela: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: She'll give it to us. Ms. Vela: Thank you. Robert Behar: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, Robert Behar, Behar Font & Partners, 4533 Ponce de Leon. Thank you for the opportunity to come before you. Let me start by saying that I believe something needs to be done. I -- we all seen what has happened in the last four or five years, andl will agree; something needs to be done. I do not agree the way the proposed is done -- as been submitted. I think it needs to be -- go back and work some -- and come back at a later time with those revisions, and I'm not go through all of them. I took a different approach to an analysis I did. I took the approach of we are not, if my opinion, going to see those 30-, 40-, 50-story towers for some time to come. I think those -- we saw the impact it made. We saw what has happened. Now, we will see, in the next couple of years, what's going to be the end results. I think the approach is, look at what is predominantly located throughout all the corridors throughout Miami, whether it is Biscayne, whether it's 27th Avenue, 37th Avenue, Flagler, where you really have -- and the way the City is laid out, you have a grid, which the commercial lots abutting the residential, is typically about a hundred foot in depth, and that's typically throughout the City, andl took the approach of what would happen to those smaller properties? What would be the outcome? How will they benefit or suffer? I did whatl thought would be a very open-minded approach, andl took what was -- is allowed under 11000 today, and what would be under the proposed, andl did a diagram -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: What's the square footage of the property? Mr. Behar: Commissioner, this is a property that is probably a hundred and seven feet by a hundred and forty-five feet, and what I did here is looked at what, under 11000, you allowed to do? And this is one of the design, where you go up on the corridor -- and let me state on the corridors is where, my opinion, the density should occur professionally. I took the approach that says what is allowed today under the present Code and respecting the 907 Code that's abutting City ofMiami Page 49 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 residential? Andl did a quick diagram and showed the existing Code and what is being proposed. One, the massing of the T6-8 -- and this is at -- since we don't have a map throughout the whole City yet laid out, I took the interpretation, I took the -- based on the analysis that was done on the first quadrant and assume that, during the second, third, and fourth quadrant, we will have the same designation for the corridor when abutting a residential, but you could see this in the diagram that the envelope is much smaller than what it is today. This promotes two things: One, because of the depth of the property and the required setback of 25 feet for the vehiculars, the parking, I don't have enough depth to do any type of feasible parking garage. I would have to use mechanical lifts, which is -- I want -- the proposal that is -- or idea as being proposed, or go underground. Well, in my opinion, in my experience, andl think that we all saw Dade -- downtown Dadeland, what has happened. I don't think that Miami is yet ready, or because of the condition, we can go down two, three floors. Cost, yes, it's tremendous, but my biggest problem is that the restriction that they're putting on this corridor, it really doesn't promote to have a lot of movement. You're going to maximize, representing developers -- developer will maximize your envelope. We're going to get the same forms throughout, the same massing. I think that -- do we need to does [sic] something? Yes. Do we need to go back and - -? This is just one of my observation. There're some others, and there's other architects that going to come up and tell you those, as well. I think that we need to do something. I need to go before the first and second reading. We need to go back to Liz and have her analyze these condition and come up with a more suitable solution. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Couldl --? I have a question on that. That's -- you're talk -- you're referring to T6 zones, right? Mr. Behar: That's correct. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Abutting T3 zones? Mr. Behar: That's correct. Vice Chairman Sanchez: You don't get any bonuses, and you know why? Because you got commercial real estate right behind, and that's the whole purpose of this. I think the reason why -- andl -- we need to say it that we're all in front of here is because as Bernard said it, in the 11000 ordinance, there were loopholes, you know. Projects came here and they were super sized, and that's the reason why, today, we're addressing, you know, Miami 21, whether we agree with the entire element or not, but -- Mr. Behar: But, Commissioner, the reason they were super side [sic] because you got provisions in that Code that allow you to super size. Vice Chairman Sanchez: And that's why we felt -- Mr. Behar: OK. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- this Commission, that within the law that existed then, you were able to receive that. Mr. Behar: What the Code -- what the new proposed code is doing is yes, it's limiting your development right, and I'm OK with that, but when you limit me to go into -- force me to go into mechanical system park and go underground, I have a problem that now you're restricting my, as a property owner, as an architect, development right totally, and is that a viable solution? I'm sorry. I don't agree with that. If the infrastructure of the public transportation system was -- 20 years from now was -- yes, but we're not there yet. You know, they mention quality of life. I City ofMiami Page 50 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 don't believe -- because what you're -- you know, what this is going to provide, what it's going to produce is that you're going to have people with cars and cars going to be on the street, and it's going to happen -- same thing happen in Miami Beach. Look at the Beach today with all the parking problem, andl -- I do have an apartment on the Beach andl have a problem, because we don't have sufficient parking in the building and people park on the street. That's not quality of life. Vice Chairman Sanchez: What would you proffer? I mean, what would you suggest? Mr. Behar: Commissioner Sanchez, there's -- andl think this would take a lot more than the five minutes allowed or thirty minutes. I think that, yes, we need to go back. We need to analyze what is -- what would happen on a small sites. Andl think that -- a lot of the architects would agree with me that for the next five, ten years, those sites are the one going to be more impacted. Is there a solution that I could offer now? No. I think that we need to sit back and analyze because I think that part of the problem is yes, the liner units throughout the whole garage or throughout the eighth floor that will set the building back. About two, three years ago, we sat with the Planning Department and we modified two sections of the Code. One was pertaining to C-1 and the liners unit require on small lots. At that time, we proposed -- andl think it got incorporated into the Code, into the present Code, where for the first three floors, you have a liner unit, and this may only pertain to a small site, not throughout the City, and that's something that think that should be looked at when you have not large sites, but smaller sites as well. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Behar, do you have a proposed, I think, about an 11-or 12-story building right there, right? Mr. Behar: Mr. Sarnoff, that's -- is what -- yes, what the -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Mr. Behar: -- Code today will allow. Commissioner Sarnoff No. I understand, and this is what the Code today allowed, and that's the problem that this Commission's trying to seek to rectify. I mean, you have single-family homes that back yards get to look into, balconies of 11- and 12-story buildings, and -- I mean, whatever struggle we have here today, whatever solution we're trying to achieve, if anybody thinks this is OK, this is what the Commission is trying to stop. I don't think anybody thinks this is acceptable, and this was taken, by the way, from the picture of a cap -- former captain in the City ofMiami Fire Department's home. This -- I used to know the name of this guy, andl apologize; I don't remember any longer, but this was a paid for house. What's his house worth today? Mr. Behar: And I'm not going to disagree with you. I think that something needs to be done, but to the point that you're going to bring me the parking garage even closer with the proposed -- because under T6-8, on the three -- abutting 3-3, you can bring up to six feet. It's not any better. Right now, you could go up four -- Commissioner Sarnoff What's the (UNINTET,TIGIBT,F)? Mr. Behar: -- stories. Commissioner Sarnoff It's -- Mr. Behar: -- you're allowing to go three stories. I am not at a point to continue to allow those type of projects. Unfortunately, when they don't go through a review process, those happens, and you get open garages, and you get many difference aspect -- you know, components of City ofMiami Page 51 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 project that we would not be happy with, but I think that by the same token, you got to look at what happens to the existing property right of you know, a resident or a property owner. Commissioner Sarnoff But it seems to me whatever you're suggesting to us, you still want to maintain your height, isn't that what you're telling us? Mr. Behar: Not necessarily. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Mr. Behar: The -- andl brought a -- an example of a hundred foot depth lot because that's going to be, in any opinion, most prominent throughout the City. Commissioner Sarnoff I think you bring up a wonderful issue, and your issue really is 27th Avenue, Coral Way. It's a wonder -- it's a neighborhood issue, but we're talking about, with Bernard, is the core ofMiami, is the downtown. We could live with changes there, but when you get into the core of the neighborhoods, I mean, that's where everybody lives. It's where everybody spent all their hard-earned money. I mean, I applaud you for bringing up this issue -- Mr. Behar: But, Marc -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- because -- Mr. Behar: -- the way this is today proposed, you really don't have a viable solution to incorporate a garage on a small lots. You're forcing to go into a system, either underground or mechanically, and you will achieve the same thing. I think that, from the pedestrian level, three, four stories is perhaps what you in a small -- on a corridor, you will perceive the liner units. After that, may not need to go up eight stories to set the parking back as much. Otherwise, you will not be able to achieve, not even 50 percent, and by the way, in every single case that we analyze, good or bad, the development right, decrease between 23 and 65 percent, so to tell us that, theoretically, we're not losing any development right, no, that is, I think, erroneous comment. I think that you are losing no matter what, whether it's the FLR, whether it's the density, whether -- some -- it is being compromised between a 23 and a 65 percent. Commissioner Sarnoff And you're basically saying that's unfair to a person who owned the building for 20 years or 20 months? Mr. Behar: Yes. Could -- should it be a compromise? Yes, but think shouldn't be that drastic. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Next. Reinaldo Borges: Commissioners, thank you for the opportunity. Reinaldo Borges, with Borges Architects, downtown Miami, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard. I want to offer a contrast perspective from that of Bernard and Roberto, and Bernard was gracious enough to allow me to use his exhibit because I was not prepared for this. I'm here representing another item, which is more of a global planning idea, but first of all, I applaud the Mayor and all of you for having this conversation, which is so vital for our City and how this City will evolve into something really unique and very special. I, too, endeavor in a lot of these complex, high-rise projects, like Bernard is illustrating here, where the current Code allows for there to be what some would call a jungle of form, and height is not restrictive, and there's a lot of unlimited height. My comments are primarily right now, with all the SD districts that we know as SD-6, SD-7, and so on, around the Brickell and Biscayne corridors. I will not make any comments concerning the other City ofMiami Page 52 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 corridors that Roberto mentioned, but I think that there is a lot of goodness in the form -based code philosophy, andl think that we're heading in the right direction. Professionally, that's my opinion. Unfortunately, there is a concern about height in the code right now that is illustrated in this diagram here, which I think is a bit too restrictive indeed. I think that height is one of those things that high-rise developers are willing to pay extra for because of the obvious issues of views and so on, and I think that if the current form -based code liberates the issue of height a bit, that within the parameters of the form -based code that we have to work with as architects and planners, that one could really do world -class architecture with almost as much freedom as Bernard is illustrating in this diagram here. Obviously, things will change, things will evolve. I think also that liner use is a preferred solution to the garage facade, and we have endless amount of examples of garages that were allowed for many reasons, to remain very raw and very exposed to our beautiful city, and it's unfortunate and it's something that we have to deal with now for generations to come. I think that there should be serious consideration to allow artistic treatment to be part of the lining of garages and not always to the degree or the percentage of liner usage. We have been here many times doing Major Use Special Permit projects with more than 70 percent of liner on given projects where the property allows and has the adequate depth and the parking is allowed to be more functional, so I just wanted to make a comment that the form -based code is not the problem. I think that, you know, as high-rise architects, one would enjoy for there to be more flexibility in height, because again, when you're down at the street level as a pedestrian, and being concerned about the pedestrian experience, whether a building has 15 more stories or 30 more stories, you really don't notice a difference. I mean, if you walk up and down Brickell Avenue, and you're adjacent to the Four Seasons Hotel, or you're adjacent to the Espirito Santo Tower, the perception of height is insignificant at that scale at that level, whether you're on the street as a pedestrian or whether you're driving, andl think that there's a little bit too much concern about allowing the buildings to have more of a skyline and more variety of height within, of course, the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) regulations and so on, so that's one of my main concerns, and I'll speak to that, as well, on a study that we're doing on the West Brickell neighborhood, which has a similar concern. Again, developers are willing to pay top dollars for that additional height because it means a lot more in the way that they position and distinguish their projects, andl think, in these high-rise neighborhoods, there should be no concern about allowing that additional flexibility in this form -based code, so that's my comment. Thank you. Commissioner Sarnoff Wait. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Commissioner Sarnoff Just stay there for one second. I'm trying to understand what you told me. You're looking for more height, correct? Mr. Borges: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff And you don't want to pay for that height, right? Mr. Borges: Well, I think that there's a formula right now for what they call 'public benefit," which allows for there to be additional height. I mean, the fact of the matter is that most developers in trying to absorb these new changes -- and we've done about 15 or 20 different studies on different sites to really at the before -and -after effects of the code -- they don't want to go through the additional cost -- to pay for the additional cost. In most cases, developers want a simplified process, which also -- is also the intent of this exercise, is to try to simplift, the process, so I think that what I'm saying is, yes, to allow for more flexibility in some way that is formulated within the form -based code that would give you more freedom, like the kind of skyline that you see here versus this very sort of monolithic approach, and this will be the tendency of most developers because they do want to maximize the volume that they could build. City ofMiami Page 53 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff See, I think we're talking past each other, and that's what I want to make sure. Mr. Borges: OK. Commissioner Sarnoff To me, in one respect, you're saying, Commissioner, I want more height, but I don't want to go through the public benefits program to get that height. Is that what you're saying? Mr. Borges: Yes. I'm saying that there should be, as of right -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Mr. Borges: --flexibility to play with the height of the building; that we should not be restrictive, and -- Commissioner Sarnoff Do you want -- Mr. Borges: -- Elizabeth made it very clear that -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- to tie the height to the -- Mr. Borges: -- the biggest problem that West Palm Beach had was that they were concerned about the additional height, they limited the height, and now they have blocky, monolithic buildings, so -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- FLR? Mr. Borges: I have no problem with the FLR. I think the FLR has a lot of great things in it. It does allow for the developer to make some choices about the amount of parking that they're prepared to provide in the respective project. I do think, as a community, that we need to look at mass transit and other ways of getting around, so -- Commissioner Sarnoff But what you're telling me -- I want to be sure because -- you're asking for a two-dimensional equation, which is, one, I want to be able to get more height without going to bonus, but I mind the FLRs, where they are now, which the only way you're going to get there is by a tall, narrow building. Mr. Borges: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff So you want the ability to build a tall, narrow building without having to pay bonus? Mr. Borges: Well, I -- my point is that -- Commissioner Sarnoff I'm sorry, public benefits. Mr. Borges: Yes. Well, I think that better architecture has great impact on public benefits, so what I'm saying is that when we're faced with these kinds of exercises and we're restricted within this kind of formulation here, that it's difficult to have public benefit where the massing is so prescribed and so limited as -of -right, and developers -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well, let me negotiate with you for a moment. Mr. Borges: Yes. City ofMiami Page 54 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff Do you just think $21 a square foot's too much money? Do you think 10's right? Do you think 15's right? Do you think we have no right to it? Mr. Borges: I think that there's a complexity in that question -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well, are we just haggling over price? Mr. Borges: -- that -- and I'm not here to answer the question of the financial aspect of that. I think developers are willing to pay more for additional height, but I don't think that being restrictive and so defined in height is -- should be a concern of this new code. Commissioner Sarnoff So your -- what you would like this Commission to walk away with and suggest to the Commission and the Mayor, do away with public benefits for height? Mr. Borges: I'm not sure that I'm exactly saying that, but it could be. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, that's what I'm trying to figure out. I mean -- Mr. Borges: It could be. Commissioner Sarnoff -- that's why I asked you if -- Mr. Borges: Because public -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- is it --? Mr. Borges: -- benefit is defined in a certain way in this new code, and) may see it a little bit different as an architect in terms of what public benefit really is. I mean, if public benefit is that developers because they want to go quickly towards the finish line, end up with three towers that are all capped at the same height, I don't think that that's public benefit. I think that we lose. I think the City loses and future generations lose -- Commissioner Sarnoff No. I -- Mr. Borges: -- in terms of -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- like your public benefit -- Mr. Borges: -- you know, sort of -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- argument outside of a public benefit argument. That's a good argument. You're saying it's not a public benefit to have monolithic -looking buildings. I'm OK with you saying that. My question to you is a little different. My question to you is that you want the ability to go high and narrow without having to pay public benefits? Mr. Borges: In the way that it's written in the code, I would say yes, but the public benefit comes by the additional development rights, the -- you know, the tax base, the increased value that the City has, the architectural richness that the City gains. You know, the language of form just gets better when you have a little bit more freedom when you're designing high-rises. Commissioner Sarnoff So, supposing) was a real stickler for public benefits and) just think they're good things -- maybe I'm alone up here; I don't know -- and supposing) were to say to you, well, maybe 21, I was a little bit greedy; $21 a square foot's too much. What do you think the right amount of money is? City ofMiami Page 55 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Borges: I wish I could respond to that, Commissioner. It wouldn't be responsible for me to tell you a number. I know that all the Major Use Special Permits that I have approved in this process here, everybody has maxed out the bonuses, you know. Everybody always maxes those out. Commissioner Sarnoff What were the bonuses under 11000 a square foot? About 11, $10 a square foot? Mr. Borges: Yeah, twelve dollars and something, yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff OK, $12, so we just went a little crazy. We just went too far with the $21, right? Is --? Mr. Borges: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sarnoff No? Mr. Borges: I -- I'm not prepared to answer that question. I'm sorry, I guess. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, let me ask you this. Supposing this Commissioner were to suggest maybe you're partly right, and we only want to do 11 or 12, $13 public benefits a square foot. Would you still make the same objection? Mr. Borges: My basic point is it's more -- Commissioner Sarnoff I guess the nodding heads back there -- so I think there are some people that just don't want public benefits. Mr. Borges: My concern is a little more fundamental. I think that the Code within the parameters of a form -based code, should allow for more flexibility in the height and the variety of shapes to the buildings. I'm not -- I don't have a problem with the prescription of the footprints. I think that those are all very logical, but you know, I think that we need to be careful that we're not so restrictive with a form -based code that we get a city that looks very chunky and very monolithic and very unsculpted Commissioner Sarnoff Yes, but I want to understand that your restrictions are as a result of paying for the height? Mr. Borges: But, by nature, developers may not take that option, so -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right, right. Mr. Borges: -- you know, you get to the lowest common denominator and you end up with a chunky building, you know, so that's my concern. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Mr. Borges: Thank you. Commissioner Sarnoff Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Mr. Borges: Thank you. City ofMiami Page 56 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: Next. We're going to be breaking for lunch at 1 o'clock, and we'll be back at 3. Anthony Garcia: My name's Anthony Garcia. I'm a graduate of architecture school, and I'm -- been working with Harcone LLC, on an area of Park West in the core, downtown, andl just have actually two points to make, and one is that we've been working with the Planning Department and with the City and with DPZ (Duany Plater Zyberk) on hashing out a lot of these issues, andl think that a lot of the architects that are coming up here should have also done their homework prior to this, and gone through the motions. I mean, we've known that Miami 21 has been coming for quite some time, so I think that a lot of these issues should have already been hashed out. A lot of Bernardo's issues also, I think -- you know, his -- the idea that the code is prescriptive and that it's going to define -- it's not flexible enough. You can't really make that argument because the current Code is that as well; lot coverage requirements, FLR -- FAR requirements. These things are already existing. They're creating a certain type of building in the City, andl think we've already discussed that, the podium with the tower on top, so the flexibility argument isn't really there. The analysis that I worked on with Harcone was one that found that development rights weren't taken away. In fact, you had the same development rights. There was not any lack of flexibility in design. You have the same flexibility in design, so -- you know, that you can't get extra height without paying for it. You're closing loopholes that the existing code has that shouldn't be there in the first place. It's a free-for-all. At some other time developers were able to get this extra square footage, so the fact that the current code -- the new code is going to close those is a benefit. It's not something that is -- it's going to take away from the architecture. It's only going to add to the architecture. Commissioner Sarnoff Anthony, you graduated from architect school? Mr. Garcia: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff And your clients are willing to pay for that height? Mr. Garcia: They are, absolutely. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Mr. Garcia: Absolutely. Commissioner Sarnoff What are their names, because we want to make sure we approve them right away? Mr. Garcia: It's the Harcone LLC, and also -- and I just want to also respond to Mr. Borges' comments. We've also done several MUSPs, and we've already been working under the Miami 21 code, you know, assuming certain requirements. We've been using the liner and we get up to the maximum. We've been using the bonuses that are already available, but you get to the FAR, your max FAR. Nothing's being taken away just by having a liner. All you're doing is providing the pedestrian somewhere that they want to walk, so -- Commissioner Sarnoff Thanks, Anthony. Mr. Garcia: -- thank you -- Commissioner Sarnoff That was a -- Mr. Garcia: -- for your time. City ofMiami Page 57 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Sarnoff -- interesting perspective. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Next. Ann Carlton: Excuse me. My name is Ann Carlton. I live at 743 Northeast 80th Street, in Shorecrest. The young lady that previously made a remark that she handed out petitions saying that she didn't want to be represented by the Shorecrest Homeowners Association. I happen to be one of the founders of the Shorecrest Homeowners Association many years ago. We do represent Shorecrest. There are many groups or, should say, a small group of people who are in our area that do not want Shorecrest Homeowners Association to represent them. That's fine. That's their prerogative, but please, do not take into consideration the fact that Shorecrest Homeowners Association is so bad. It's done a lot of wonderful things. They continue to do wonderful things, andl resent anyone that says anything derogatory about it. Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, Ann, and it's a pleasure to see again -- Ms. Carlton: Thank you so much. Chairman Gonzalez: -- right here. Eric Silverman: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes. Mr. Silverman: My name is Eric Silverman. I'm with the Vagabond Motel, and I'm here representing myself and Octavio Hidalgo, at 7301 Biscayne Boulevard, and we thank the Mayor and the Commission very much for this hearing, and the opportunity for us to voice our full support for both Miami 21 's vision of the future of the City and Chapter 23, with the authority that it would grant the Preservation Board and department, and we're proud that the vagabond was the first historic hotel in Miami, and are pleased that we participated in the subsequent establishment of Miami's first historic district in the City ofMiami. The district known as "MiMo" (Miami Modern) architecture features some of the finest examples ofMiami Modern design of the 1950s. Known for its visual acrobatics, neon lights, Buck Rogers, George Jetson whimsy, MiMo will be known worldwide between 55th and 78th Street here in Miami. The National Geographic, in a recent article, had 29 reasons to love Miami and voted the Vagabond, in our neighborhood, as the number -one reason to love Miami today. Recent awareness has been increased recently in the magazine that had the top hundred and fifty buildings in America, and only two buildings in Miami were included; one being the Delano Hotel, which is the same architect, Mr. Swartburg, and the other, the Fontainebleau Hotel. Interesting, both of these were MiMo designs, andl think also had tremendous sensitivities to their neighborhoods and the appreciation that's growing today. Parking is always going to be an issue, and I've heard a lot of things going around, possibly incentives for underground parking, for the sensitivity to the quality of life that we need to have here in the City, andl don't hear developers talking about open sky, and maybe I'm the first developer Bernard will meet that does support not building out to the maximum of a property. For this, we need the sensitivity of Chapter 23 that will allow the historic board and its team to truly support the area's adaptive reuse of many of these wonderful buildings in the MiMo district. We're one of the few neighborhoods that supports low -density, and aspires to create a unique sense of place and also face the challenges that are ahead. With the approval of Chapter 23 and Miami 21, we hope the preservation team will be able to address case -by -case parking ratios, safety issues, and architectural integrity. In Miami 21, with have seen a tremendous support on discussing any building, any issue, getting together with them, City ofMiami Page 58 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 attending meetings, andl really find it hard to believe that anybody hasn't had the same opportunity to meet with them as we have. We have the opportunity to really create a unique, diverse and wonderful Miami that's true to Miami and Miami's future. We will need to delicately mix old-world charm with modern features that restaurants, services and consumers will require and desire if we're to succeed. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. I'm going to -- Mr. Silverman: I just want to get to the -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- need to cut you off. Mr. Silverman: -- height ratio, ifI could, and then I'll be done. Chairman Gonzalez: -- because, you know, I said general public two minutes, and you have already consumed four minutes, so -- Mr. Silverman: All I'd like to do -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- go ahead and conclude. Mr. Silverman: -- is I would ask you to have sensitivity that when there's retail spaces that the height allow there to be at least 15, 20 feet in the height of retail spaces; loft living is desired in downtown Miami, and we quickly hope that you pass Miami 21 and Chapter 23. Thank you for you time. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Thank you. Hi. Robert Flanders: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, the general public. My name is Robert Flanders. I live at 720 Palm Bay Lane, in the Upper Eastside, in Miami, and before I address Miami 21, I'd like to personally thank Commissioner Sarnofffor his and his officers support for the American Legion's Tenth Annual Fourth of July this coming Wednesday, where this year, we're going to honor two of Miami's police officers and a firefighter for their outstanding service to the community. Miami 21. You might agree, gentlemen that a fundamental rule of government and business is "Good planning is key to the enterprise." Miami 21, which has engaged the public in over 60 meetings, is all about our collective vision for planning for what we want our City's future, its appearance, its sustainability, and the economic vitality to create a better quality of life for all citizens. Another excellent rule of business in government is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it, " and as we look around, any neighborhood in Miami we can clearly see that Miami's Zoning Code has been broken for generations by a string of unplanned individual zoning decisions favoring the powerful, the privileged who brought -- who bought the zoning system right out from underneath us. In Miami, in many cases, highest and best use is the ultimate oxymoron. I personally think that Manhattan is the best example of what forward thinking and master planning can do for a major city. One hundred and ninety-six years ago, the Commissioners' plan of 1811 was adopted for the orderly development and sale of land ofManhattan between 14th Street and Washington Heights. The plan is arguably the most famous use of the grid plan as considered by historians to have been far-reaching and visionary, and it's true. If you go south from 14th, it's an absolute mess of streets running on -- off in all directions, and if you go north, everything tracks the grid, especially the mass transit which makes the city work, and by the way, the vast majority of the buildings do not have parking in Manhattan. With Miami 21, we become a city formed by a covenant, by a dedication to a set of principles that will determine what we want our future to look like, and by an exchange of promises to uphold and advance certain commitments among ourselves and throughout the community, these principles and commitments are the core of Miami 21, and the soul of this master planning effort. Miami 21 makes Miami unique and City ofMiami Page 59 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 uniquely valuable among and to other cities around the nation and the globe. It is true that some people like to make headlines, but I'm sure you'd rather write history, and that is your chance today. Please, do the right thing, and support Miami 21's promise for a better future. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Mr. Flanders: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Next. Robert Decker: Thank you. Good afternoon, Commissioners. I appreciate you hearing me now because I have to leave for Gainesville because of a death in the family. Chairman Gonzalez: We need your name and -- Mr. Decker: My name is Robert Decker, and I'm here representing Miller Machinery and Supply Company, a property owner in Edgewater for 70 years. As part of the Concerned Citizens of Edgewater, I have met with each of you at least once and have been impressed with your attention to our concerns. As you know, our major concern has been with the proposed height limitations for our area, which previously had unlimited height as a right. To propose capping height in our area, where so many tall buildings have already been built, and then selling additional floors back, is basically converting property owners' value to the City, which is little more than a form of taking of property without compensation. I plead that you revisit this issue before adopting Miami 21. My involvement with the Edgewater group has led me to meet with some of the other neighborhood groups in the northeast quadrant and other quadrants, and learn that they also have grave concerns about what the adoption ofMiami 21 in its present form would do to them for their neighborhoods in terms of property value and utility. As a layman, most ofMiami 21 is beyond me, andl am amazed at how much time many of my fellows citizens and property owners have spent learning the nuances ofMiami 21 and the effect it will have, if adopted in its present form. Of the many confirm -- concerns I have heard discussed, one that stands out is nonconformity. As I understand it, my company's property and many, if not most other properties, would become nonconforming under Miami 21, and as nonconforming property, it would not only be difficult to sell at a fair price, it would also be very difficult to obtain financing on it. This is hardly fair to property owners, many of whom have suffered through some really bad times for many years in our City, just as things now seem to be improving. Most of us are not opposed to Miami 21 in concept, but maintain there's much to be fixed before it gets adopted. Please defer or at least -- defer adoption or at least implementation until substantial changes can be made. To impose this upon the northeast quadrant before completing the other four quad -- other three quadrants would be most unjust. Thank you for your attention. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Applause. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Now we're going to -- I'm sorry, but we're going to break for lunch. We will be back at 3 o'clock. Thank you. [Later...] Chairman Gonzalez: We have all four Commissioners here. We're ready to resume this Miami 21 meeting. Madam City Clerk, we need to do a swearing in again. Ms. Thompson: Yes. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. We're still handling our P&Z agenda. If you were not sworn in this morning and you will be speaking on any P&Z item, we City ofMiami Page 60 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 need you to please stand and raise your right hand so you can be sworn in. That's if you've not been sworn in and you're testifying on any P&Z item. The City Clerk administered oath required under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons giving testimony on zoning issues. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. I'm going to open the afternoon meeting with Ms. Truly Burton. I believe she has a board meeting at 4 o'clock this afternoon. She just made it to have a statement. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Truly Burton: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. I'm Truly Burton, represent the Builders Association of South Florida, with addresses at 15225 Northwest 77th Avenue, in Miami Lakes. Just to share with you all, we've been monitoring the Miami 21 process now for the past few years, and I've been through many code rewrites and streamlinings and simplifications and updates in my 23 years here at the Builders Association. Regrettably, I'm not sure that this one is really ready for prime time yet. Most code revisions are to simplify and make more understandable the Zoning Code, andl wish I could say that's the case at this point. Comments from our members tell me that they find it more cumbersome and more difficult to understand, and then they have to take that and try to apply it to their clients' needs, as well as to themselves, because they are also equally creative and talented architects, and they're having a very difficult time doing that. In Mr. Zyscovich's presentation, one of the concerns thatl had was -- and a very simple example. At the very last minute, he reread the Code; saw that changes had to be made because they didn't notice that, or they had an interpretation question, and they weren't fully clear on this, and this was at 11: 30 last night. Second, when you take a look at the Code, there's a lot of new language. We don't have zoning codes anymore. We have something called transects. I'm not sure why the zoning designations, the zoning districts that we have now don't seem to, you know, work. I'm concerned that that kind of new language creates a set of new definitions, new things that people have to learn, and I'm concerned about how that's going to get translated into the physical being; how those buildings are going to look after people have, you know, read Code that they're still not clear on. I guess, the bottom line of that message is take the time, make sure it's clear before you approve anything. Also, a second point, recently, as you all know, the State Legislature has gone through a major tax reform event or special session. They've exempted certain cities, including the City ofMiami, in light of its past financial struggles, andl think that was appropriate. However, I'm concerned that if you adopt the Code in its form now, given some of its issues, it could hurt the City's financial stability, because of its unintended consequences and, in some cases, because of its very explicit reductions in density and other things without appropriate support for the City. Finally, as to green buildings, which I sent you all a letter about, the Builders Association of South Florida supports the Green Building's effort, and has been for a while. However, this particular Code endorses only one certification program, and that's the LEED program. The only reason that you've heard about that one is 'cause it's -- really, it's the most popular. There are four or five other certification programs out there that are similar; they're not identical, but they're similar. That includes Green Globe Initiative, the National Association of Home Builders, Veridian, and the U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). The United States Environmental Protection Agency have their own programs. I would ask you to please do not give the exclusive to LEEDs. There are many other ways to get to the same very good goal and language in the plan needs to allow for flexibility to permit several other green building programs and don't give the exclusive to LEEDs. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Ms. Burton: Just in closing, the -- I don't think it's ready for prime time yet. There's a lot of City ofMiami Page 61 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 concerns and questions from builders andpractitioners. Thank you so much. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you very much. Commissioner Sarnoff Wait. I have a question, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes. Excuse me. Commissioner Sarnoff I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. Julie [sic] -- it's Julie [sic] Bruton [sic], Ms. Bruton [sic], right? Ms. Burton: Yes. Truly, yes. Commissioner Sarnoff Trudy [sic], I'm sorry. Ms. Burton: That's fine. Commissioner Sarnoff Let me try to get that right. You do not want us to give the exclusive to LEEDs. What's wrong with just starting out with LEEDs and then improving to another or going to another type of certification? Ms. Burton: Because I think once that happens, then everyone is going to just use T,FEDs exclusively. I don't think there's a problem, per se, with it. However, I think there's other ways to do the same thing, and giving T,FEDs the exclusive certification is an issue. Somebody else might find it more cost-effective to do the same thing in a different way. There's a variety of ways to get to the same good goal, andl think green buildings is a very good one, but again, LEEDs is a nonprofit organization, which is fine, but you give them 50 or 60 or $70, 000 for them to come and look at your building; you pay extra for T,FEDs, where others -- as an example, I know the National Association of Home Builders, which is the entity that I'm most familiar with, they are putting their code requirements into -- they're putting their guidelines into code requirements within the past -- within the next four to six months, so I think there's others out there that are equally cost-effective. Commissioner Sarnoff Thanks. I didn't know that. Ms. Burton: Thank you. Commissioner Sarnoff Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Madam City Clerk, we need to start using the clock, please. Yes. Dean Lewis: Good afternoon. Chairman Gonzalez: Good afternoon. Mr. Lewis: My name is Dean Lewis. I'm an architect with D.B. Lewis Architecture and Design, and I've had five years of pracfice here in Miami with Major Use Special Permit experience, as well as urban development mixed -use projects primarily in the Upper Eastside, and in adjacent zones equivalent to T6-24 and T6-36, as proposed with Miami 21, and I'd like to unveil and stand for the opportunity to take more time to refine the Miami 21 Code as it exists today. I don't think it's ready for adoption, and I think that there're -- or a first reading for the following reasons. One of which is legislative, which would create a complexity to continue to massage and refine the code after this reading. Zoning in progress will most likely be triggered, and that would further complicate things, but I know that that's not my specialty, so I want to move into the issues which are technical and speak precisely about it and help what has been, up until now, City ofMiami Page 62 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 I think, an overly generalized series of commentaries from architects. I'd like to get more specific and try to answer some of Mr. Sarnoffs questions and any other that were presented earlier. One of which is when the public benefits kick in and how they would kick in? And I think that's a critical question, and today, obviously, and Miami 21, it has been proposed to kick in in a much sooner period of development entitlements, sooner than the current 11000 Code has outlined under the Major Use Special Permit program, which is overly complex, and we're happy to see that dissipated, but needless to say, developers, from their point of view, are going to end up paying three times -- on the average, three times as much for an acre or larger of land with the equivalent entitlements than they have to pay today, and that is going to be viewed as a major concession. The other issue is they'll be paying sooner than they typically are paying now in 11000. The third issue in the entitlements is how much, and though I think the number's between what was originally $12.67 a square foot per bonus has now been increased up to a maximum, I think, the highest is $25 a square foot, depending on what area you're found in the City, whether it be CBD (Central Business District) or Upper Eastside and/or the corresponding districts. That being fixed may be a problem, and would suggest an alternative measure for calculating these benefits based on the following methodology, which is really related to where it comes out of the developer's pocket, and what time he is liquid and the banks have appraised the property and is -- are prepared to provide financing. At that point, the land has an appraised value per square foot, and would recommend that you consider at that point attaching, for example, a ten percent surcharge per square foot of whatever that number is. For example, I'm appraised by the market value that point. I'm not appraised at a current tax value that's locked in, but it -- now is going to be able to fluctuate based on real market conditions, and ifI have $500 per square foot appraised value of land and/or project at point of sale, at which point, the bank liquefies, if you will, the developer, that's where you can request, I would think, that ten percent piece, which would be equivalent to so many dollars per square foot. Now, with a limit, you're at 25, depending on the price and the appraised value of the land, that could vary and should vary accordingly. I hope that would be -- able to be refined before we have an opportunity or obliged to vote on Miami 21 today. The second technical issue that I want to move into is the adjacencies. We started with an imperfect beginning. This is a cut -and -fill problem that's similar to as you're regrading a site for a new building. You want to balance your cut and you want to balance your fill so you don't have to bring in or take away soil from that site, and to sum up quickly, the T6-24 adjacency with T6-36 is still as imbalanced as it was before we started, so therefore, I don't think Miami 21 has quite yet resolved the imperfect beginnings that we're confronted with on a regular basis between what is currently C-2 and what is directly adjacent to SD-6, which has an FAR currently of 8.4 -- up to 8.4 following certain design guidelines, and immediately adjacent to C-2, which is a 12-story 1.72 disassociation of volume and intensity, which is still problematic in the current Code, because T6-24, my neighbor now with T6-36, is still only with an FLR of 6, and my T6-36, directly adjacent, starts at 12 and goes up to 24, and this is a current conflict that is still remaining parasitic, if you will, within the current Miami 21 proposition, and -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Lewis: -- how we can revise that and finesse what is one of the primary concerns of Miami 21, which is to alleviate -- Chairman Gonzalez: You have used your -- Mr. Lewis: -- severe adjacencies. Chairman Gonzalez: -- five minutes. Mr. Lewis: OK. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chairman. City ofMiami Page 63 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: You have questions? Mr. Lewis: I would strongly recommend you take the time to address. Commissioner Sarnoff Dean, I could just say now I could tell you why most people should show up here with graphs. Mr. Lewis: OK. Commissioner Sarnoff I think a graph might have helped with some of those numbers. Mr. Lewis: Well, I have some charts here, if -- andl do have proof of the adjacencies I'm referring to. Let me show you. First, on the two-dimensional map scale, you have the T6-24I'm referring to, which is proliferate throughout the Central Business District, adjacent to T6-36 here today. Now, in certain areas, T6-24 is appropriately zoned with its FLR of 6. That is when it's adjacent to R-3 and R-4 zones up in the further Upper Eastside, but when it gets to the adjacency at T6-36, I, as well as -- we've reviewed this with numerous projects and tests. Once I am within an acre of scale of land, I am losing my development entitlements andl am generating a volume that is inconsistent with what we're trying to resolve as problematic today in current's Code, which are these severe adjacencies. Commissioner Sarnoff Dean, why would they ever be against an R-3? There is no longer an R-3. Mr. Lewis: This is currently C-2. This is current SD-6. Commissioner Sarnoff I understand, but you said once you get a TC-24 [sic] -- Mr. Lewis: T6 -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- 6-24, then -- Mr. Lewis: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sarnoff -- and you said it goes to an R-3, why would it ever be next to an R-3? Mr. Lewis: R-4. Up -- on the Upper Eastside. There are examples. Commissioner Sarnoff Why would there be an R-4? Vice Chairman Sanchez: No, no, no, no. He's confused; T4, T5. Mr. Lewis: It will become T4 and T5 if it was previously R-3 or R-4 -- Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Mr. Lewis: Yes, but what I'm saying is we need an alternative -- we need an additional transect zone between these two, that it has not been resolved yet, as another example of some of the issues that we have propellant -- Commissioner Sarnoff Let me ask you to address -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff -- three questions I have. City ofMiami Page 64 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Lewis: Please. Commissioner Sarnoff You said that you're paying three times as much for an acre now. What do you mean by that? Mr. Lewis: Currently, the entitlements is a complicated formula in 11000, but it was much more -- it was still clearer than it is when it kicks in in Miami 21, and it kicks in sooner in Miami 21, which is not necessarily a bad thing, as long as it's balanced with where you were before. For example -- and this is a major problem that I still think persists. Miami 21 says I have an FLR of 6, which we all understand what that is about. You take your net lot and you multiply it by 6, and that's how many square feet or intensity you can pack or compose on that site. In addition, there's a height limitation where your benefits start to kick in. I asked directly DPZ to adjust their zoning code to allow the following: That is, ifI respect my FLR of 6, but I go above my 24 foot limit, shouldn't I still not have to pay my benefits? If I respect my FLR, my intensity of square footage, say I can build 200,000 square feet, andl am the City ofMiami who wants to promote taller, narrower buildings, why shouldl --? Just because I go above my height limit of 24 before I have to start paying into it, if I'm still within my FLR of 6 -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Mr. Lewis: -- pay -- Commissioner Sarnoff In other words, you don't -- let me simplify it for you, because I don't want to spend as, you know -- Mr. Lewis: No. You understand my -- Commissioner Sarnoff You want to be able to go above the height limit within your FLR and not pay the -- Mr. Lewis: Exactly. Commissioner Sarnoff -- bonus? Mr. Lewis: Exactly. The other thing is, ifI am a form -based code andl say these are my setbacks, which the rear setback, I think, is 30 feet across-the-board, has to be reduced to 20 for numerous reasons. I'm not going to get into it now, but if you have a series of setbacks in height and sides, laterally, ifI fill that volume, I should be equatable [sic] to my FLR. My FLR should balance out if I'm form -base code, and there're numerous examples where that doesn't work. My FLR is, very often, insufficient to fill my volume, to fill my box, so which is it? Which controls? Is it a form -base volume or -- Commissioner Sarnoff Dean, have you -- Mr. Lewis: -- is it the FLR? Commissioner Sarnoff -- addressed this with Elizabeth? Mr. Lewis: Yes, and we have come halfway. She asks for 80 percent, approximately, acquiescence on my part, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) vote support for the Code. I'm in support of the Code, but think we're only at 50 percent. I still think it's better than 11000 as it is today, but my major concern, as well as with other architects, is that tomorrow, if we go into -- as opposed to deferring this, if we vote on first reading, this can lock in, legislatively, a very difficult methodology to further refine and amend what is initially a good thing. City ofMiami Page 65 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff And the last thing, you said that you have to pay your public benefits sooner than you would have. Mr. Lewis: It's too soon. Commissioner Sarnoff What do you mean by that? Mr. Lewis: Almost twice as much, and in about 25 percent -- what I mean by that is the following: Today, as you accumulated your bonuses through the MUSP program, affordable housing bonus or the PUD (Planned Unit Development), not to get too specific, you paid in at a certain volume as well as primarily, not volume, but intensity. In other words, square footage, and the problem with the current Code is that it was -- it -- you couldn't foresee what kind of mass you were going to get and therefore -- because of the parking garages, they didn't count in your FAR; you ended up with volumes with podiums and buildings that were out of scale with their neighbors, so the FLR came in as a Band-Aid or a solution, which I think is viable to now -- well, let's include the square footage of the parking as well, so we all know how big this mass is going to get. Now the problem now is there's a huge gray area between how many real square feet now have saleable as a developer as opposed to what had before, so everybody's scurrying around to try to recalculate what is my balance of FAR in 11000 and FAR -- what mean by FAR is saleable residential area, for example, in Miami 21, and it is typically with the lots greater than from our studies -- and we've looked at a numerous series of building types, mixed -use with structured parking, residential and commercial, mixed -use projects, you're typically paying sooner, and 20 to 30 percent loss in your FAR, in your saleable FAR -- in other words, you're paying sooner in that 20/30 percent differential, and besides that, we all know you're paying more per square foot to the point where you're actually going to render certain projects unfeasible to develop, and that's a big concern we have, so how do we continue to refine our wheel before we have to put it on the track? Vice Chairman Sanchez: I have one question. Could you see the --? Could you put that up again? I think one of the questions that you had is how -- you were questioning as to the boundaries of the T6-24 and T6-36. Mr. Lewis: Yes. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Can you elaborate a little bit on that? Mr. Lewis: Yes, exactly. Remember, we've only started this study in the first quadrant, the first quadrant of the City, and the exercise was to equate -- andl say cut -and -fill; it is really a literal translation of that between what is a current C-2 zone, OK -- ifI say tomorrow, C-2, which has certain development entitlements, is now going to become T6-24, in and of itself, it's fine. It makes sense. It's when you put it next to SD-6, which allows for a much larger development entitlements, I still have the same problem I had before in the vertical dimension, which is severe problems of adjacency, the same problems that we have resolved, I believe with the SD-9 corridor in the Biscayne Boulevard, between 50th and 70th Street, Northeast, where we created the SD-9 overlay revisions to that adjusted -- to the 45-degree angle and sculpted that volume down to the residential neighborhoods. Do you understand where I'm coming from? It is -- first, you assign a new zoning code for each partial, each -- whether it be C-2 before or C-1; I apply that, but then also have to address the adjacencies. IfI still have imperfect or severe adjacencies, which we've all complained about before, then I still haven't solved my problem, and in this particular case, I still think it needs to be relooked [sic] at, as well as look at this. I come even further south, and I'm next to SD-6 still, andl have another zone, which is T6-8, this is going to prohibit healthy development. These guy -- this is still going to remain semi -blighted, undeveloped territory. Right -- north of 95, there's Bayview Market here. This is the Upper -- this is just northeast of Overtown. This whole pocket needs to be pro -motivated -- City ofMiami Page 66 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Mr. Lewis: -- with proper, positive development stimulus, as well as -- yeah, OK, we're going to pay for it, but can't have the severe adjacency drops, and think that's a bit of an emotional, but strong point of view that I think needs to be adjusted at this time prior to going further. You had three questions -- Commissioner Sarnoff No. I thinkyou got it. Mr. Lewis: -- Mr. Sarnoff. Commissioner Sarnoff I think you got it. Mr. Lewis: OK. Commissioner Sarnoff Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Next. Yes, sir. Good afternoon. Hadley Williams: Hadley Williams, 2441 Trapp Avenue, Miami. I would like to address three different -- PZ. 2, 3, and 4. I'm also chairman of the Miami 21 Committee ofMiami Neighborhoods United. We have done expensive work over the last two years on Miami 21, and in summary, we agree with the prior speakers, that it is a great project, and we're all for it, but it is not ready yet, and it is not ready in two or three major areas, but first, we have a question that's more of a legal question, and I'm not a lawyer, but in handout number one, which I just sent out or handed out, Miami has designated itself in the Comprehensive Plan as an urban infill area, and if you look at the second page, Florida Statutes require that neighborhood participation process must include a governance structure whereby the local government shares decision -making authority for developing and implementing the urban infill and redevelopment plan with community -wide representatives; for example, a 501(c)3 organization, so the State is saying that a plan of this magnitude really requires joint decision -making with the community in a different forum than the City Commission, so we wish to put that on the record. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Mr. Williams: Moving on to the next issue. What has been raised before about the other quadrants of the City not having reasonable input, I would like to differentiate in your minds very clearly between the new code. The new code is the text, the text of all the rules and all the requirements that go with the atlas, what used to be called the map, so the atlas has been done for the first quadrant, and all the negotiations that have been carried on, but we have pointed out, a year ago -- and handout number two is a letter we wrote June 14, over a year ago, to the Mayor and to DPZ, requesting that the Code, the text that has ended up in the Code, which is generic, the rules, the new rules, be taken to all of the other districts because it is definitely a requirement, in our view, that other citizens in other parts of this City participate at this point. Now we understand the original direction given to DPZ was to do one quadrant, but I think we've all learned along the way, we all see that there are major complexities that have not been resolved yet, and a lot of them should be taken to the rest of the City, so a year ago, we got an answer back, which is handout three, from the City and from DPZ saying, don't worry, the Code will be open for discussion in the other quadrants, but in the presentation to the Planning Advisory Board this year, on April 4, the following quotes were made: Lourdes Slazyk, referring to the Miami 21 Code, said, "The structure is done already. The other quadrants are only the map, " and Ana Gelabert-Sanchez said, at the same meeting, referring to what will happen to the remaining quadrants, "The Code will be the same, " and if you wish to review the records of the presentation of the PAB (Planning Advisory Board) meeting, I thinkyou will find those quotes City ofMiami Page 67 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 are there, so we believe strongly that the project is fantastic in the long -run. It's been a huge amount of work, and we respect DPZ and the City Planning staff and all those involved, for a tremendous effort, but as you've been hearing today, there're a lot of issues that people don't understand. When we met with the City Manager about three weeks ago and gave him a list of things, which is also included in the back ofyour packet, 18 different items of concern ofMiami Neighborhoods United, one of the issues was, Mr. City Manager, do you understand, when you read this code, what is going to happen to your home or your piece of property? And the answer was, "no, " and the same thing is happening, I think, today, so I think, for you all to vote positively to go forward with Miami 21 at this stage, when you do not understand, I think, from all the discussion so far, what you are approving, we don't either, and half of the people who stood up so far don't understand it either, so I think we're 60 or 70 percent of the way down the track, but we need another six months or one year. We're already a year late, so let's go out to the rest of the City, the other three quadrants, collect their input on the Code, improve it, discuss with the architects; not between the first reading and the second reading. Nothing's going to get resolved, gentlemen, in two weeks. We really have to say it's three-quarters of the way done. Let's get the rest of the citizen input, and bring it back again when we're much more prepared all around. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you very much. Mr. Williams: I haven't finished. Chairman Gonzalez: Any questions? Applause. Chairman Gonzalez: Remember -- Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: -- what the City Attorney said when we started the meeting, no clapping, no outbursts, please. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Williams, your prop -- Mr. Williams: We also agree with the latest gentleman, that there where oversimplification problems with some of the basics, and we had been pointing this out for over a year to DPZ, that the current definitions of T4, 5, and 6 are oversimplifying for the needs of this City. This gentleman was just saying between 2, 6, 12, and 24, I think, there are 2 large differences, and there has to be something in between. We had been recommending consideration of a T4 and T5 for mid -density sections of the City when you get away from downtown, so T4, T5 had been designed for central core, and they have the mass, et cetera, that's appropriate for a downtown area. We have no problem with that, but as we look at other parts of the City, and we'll find this out for sure as we go into the other quadrants, there should be a scaled -down version of a T5 that has less mass, more setbacks, that is more in context with the rest of the City -- Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Mr. Williams: -- so -- Chairman Gonzalez: You have exceeded your time. Commissioner -- City ofMiami Page 68 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. -- I -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- you have questions? Commissioner Sarnoff Yes, I do. Mr. Williams, are you proposing that the City go to all the neighborhoods and come up with actually the map before we implement any part ofMiami 21? Mr. Williams: That would be ideal. At least the Code text has to be taken out and discussed, andl think the only way the Code text can be understood is by working with the map. We would also recommend that, in doing so, a team be hired to work to represent the neighborhoods, professionals, an architect and a planner, and maybe a financial person. Commissioner Sarnoff So what you're asking this Commission to do is to keep 11000 around for another year, year and a half -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Or more. Commissioner Sarnoff -- and keep working with the community so that every other month -- every other two weeks -- I guess every two weeks is the way you say it -- we're faced with more zoning decisions based on 11000 so that another eight or nine or -- big buildings can be built based on what 11000 has -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- and that would be completely OKMNU (Miami Neighborhoods United)? Mr. Williams: Well, what has happened in the last year? The original schedule was that the whole thing was supposed to be before you a year ago, so yes, there had been some new buildings, but we're talking about a major planning activity that if two or three more buildings get built and the Commission sees fit to approve two or three between now and then, we'll take our lumps. This is a major planning effort. Commissioner Sarnoff I understand. I just want to make sure that that's what you're asking for. I want to make sure that you understand that's what you're asking for -- Mr. Williams: We understand that. Commissioner Sarnoff -- because if it took -- if we're a year late in doing one -quarter of the City, ifI just extrapolate from that, and we could be two years late from doing three fourths of the City, I want to make sure that's what you're asking us to do, andl want to make sure that each time we get up here and we have a very qualified lawyer explain why the Code allows for something, and we struggle and say, "But Miami 21's coming, " that we -- you understand that we could have had it in place for this quadrant and worked with the City, you know, throughout the other quadrants, alternatively, andl actually suspect this might be a compromise that you might want to think about, is going to the other communities and getting them comfortable with what Miami 21 is about, the expressions, the terms, the conditions of it; maybe not coming up with the exact mapping, but I just want to make sure that what you're asking us to do is do nothing until the entire City is mapped. Mr. Williams: Well, first we believe that the bulk of the work has been done. DPZ said this morning that they did have to step back, that the extra time was taken to lay the foundation, and we agree with that. That's why I say 70 percent or more is done and is good and is the basis for a further discussion, but I think, as I said, if it's to do the text reviews only of the Code with the City ofMiami Page 69 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 rest of the City and leave the detailed map for later, that would be far preferable than going forward with the way things are where nobody understands what we have -- Commissioner Sarnoff Thank you. Mr. Williams: -- and where we do understand, we have problems. There are other issues that are in your handouts. The City Manager responded to about three of the eighteen issues that are in your handouts. Commissioner Regalado: I just wanted to ask you something to clam, because I think that Commissioner Sarnoff offer you -- either you die in the electric chair or by lethal injection, but -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Pick your poison. Commissioner Regalado: -- this morning, the U.S. Senate, the most exclusive club in the world, voted down the immigration bill. The 100 senator said that the most important issue, domestic issue in the United States, is immigration, but they voted down the bill because it was fluff. It had so many problems, and they said we have to redo this. We have to do it right. We have to build a fence. We have to get consensus, even though the President had said, "Senate, pass it, and then, on a conference, we'll try to work out the difference." I think that we are face here with the same dilemma, and two wrong don't make one right. You know, it took time -- it wasn't our fault. We approve the money. I think the consultants have been paid almost $3 million. We approve the money; they did the work, but it is important -- and you represent Miami Neighborhoods United, one of -- several of the homeowners association in the district that I represent belong to that umbrella. People need to be comfortable. At least, if you are going to say to people, you know, you will not be able to build a swimming pool in your back because you have to go into the back or through the alley, people need to know, and people -- because you know, what we are getting into here is a sort of hometown democracy scenario. If we approve this today and say, oh, we'll fix it in a few weeks, then a lot of people will be upset, and they going to go out seek signatures, ten percent of the signatures, and bring back a ballot saying -- like the Village of Key Biscayne just said, "No land -use change at all without going to the electorate, " and yes, there is a solution. We can have a land -use change moratorium until they finish Miami 21. We can still approve projects. People can build by right, but we can have a moratorium while we discuss this, so it is not either we build -- we continue to build more buildings. It is about public process, andl urge you, as Miami Neighborhood [sic] United representative, to probably be the conduit where we can have real public hearings throughout the City ofMiami, at least that the people will know, at least that the office of all the Commissioners here will be able to distribute, in a simple way, with pictures, what Miami 21 is, and you know, you don't need a hundred percent of the people to be reached, but at least, you know, you need some people that really are driving the quality of life issues in our community to understand what is Miami 21. Yes, there was a meeting in downtown, the first meeting, and some people attended. I went back and check when Ms. Plater [sic] mention this. I believe that, from the district that represent, four people went, andl represent 80,000 people, so mathematics don't lie. I think that we need to -- with the help ofMiami Neighborhoods United, and all the civic organizations, and the NETs (Neighborhood Enhancement Teams), and if we get all -- everyone involved, I mean, we can do it. The senators today said, you know, we are not -- we need to do something, but we need to do it right, and this is what is suspected of us today, so I'm just asking you, as one ofMiami Neighborhood [sic] United representative, and we have several here, to give us a hand, maybe to try to reach as many people as possible, through e-mails and personal visits and meetings. I would love to participate, so I just wanted to thank you, andl would say that there are remedies, because if we need to do something, then we can do a land -use moratorium, six month -- by six month, in different areas, and then we'll be protectedfrom building all these buildings that Marc is concerned with. Thankyou. Thankyou, Mr. Chairman. City ofMiami Page 70 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Mr. Williams: May I respond? Chairman Gonzalez: Any further questions? No? Thank you very much. Yes, ma'am. Barbara Bisno: Good afternoon. My name is Barbara Bisno. I have prepared some remarks. I'm just going to summarize them. If you don't mind, I'd like to present them to the Clerk and let her -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Bisno: -- distribute them. Chairman Gonzalez: Go ahead. Ms. Bisno: Thank you. My name is Barbara Bisno. I live at 1000 Venetian Way, Apartment-603. It's the only property I own in Miami. It's my home. I don't sell property. I don't develop property, andl represent -- I'm president of the Venetian Causeway Neighborhood Alliance. I have about six items I want to bring up quickly. You've got something -- the arguments behind them, but I'd like to just put them on the record. Please amend Miami 21 so that single-family homes continue to be measured in height the way they are under 11000 of 25 feet to mid-eave instead of the beginning of the eave. You're beginning to introduce out -of -scale homes into neighborhoods. Some would call them McMansions; please do that. I wasn't in the chambers, unfortunately, when Liz made her presentation, but from some remarks about neighborhood associations, I believe she may have brought to your attention that the Planning Department has agreed to two amendments to Miami 21, subsequent to the workshop, which have not been placed on the Web site, that I'm aware of having to do with notice to neighborhood associations. Am I right about that? Do I not have to go into them? Well, let me go into them quickly. The two issues that the Planning director agreed to during the workshop was that applicants for special area plans rezoning and changing of the 21 code would have to give notice to neighborhood associations in the same way that they now are required to give notice for -- on waivers, warrants, exceptions, and variances, so that should be an amendment that the Planning Department would be making, and very importantly, there's nothing in the current code that requires the Planning director and the Zoning administrator to advise anybody of their decisions, other than putting them on the Web site, and a neighborhood or an individual resident would have no idea when to be checking. They'd have to constantly be checking the Web site to see if the decision had been reached. What the Planning director agreed to was that both the Planning director and the Zoning administrator would forward all of their decisions and interpretations on all matters, including zoning interpretations, changes in applications with substantial modifications, a -- waivers, warrants, exceptions, variances, special area plans, rezoning, changing the Miami Code to their NET offices, and the ordinance would require that the NET office gives notice to the neighborhood association. The only outstanding issue that we were still discussing was what -- on what ground a neighborhood association could seek an enlargement of time for appealing that decision, if the notice given was not timely, and that it's going to have to go through so many steps. I was asked to submit some language, which is in my written document, in which I have sent to the City. That hasn't been agreed to yet. I just -- to make a parenthetical thought about the individual who -- I forgot what -- Shorecrest. I think that she was concerned that neighborhood associations were getting notices and perhaps, didn't represent a particular resident. That's a very valid concern. We would love for the individual residents to be getting notice of these same things that we've asked for for neighborhood associations, but we've been told by the City it's too expensive, so we hope that neighborhood associations will be -- will advise their members of decisions made and will lead -- certainly, in our neighborhood, it has made a big difference if the neighborhood association has gotten it, because an individual resident may not have the resources or really understand what his or her City ofMiami Page 71 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 rights might be. Third point, appeal period. There's 15 days to appeal from the PA -- let me say this right -- PAZB (Planning and Zoning Board) Board -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Right. Ms. Bisno: -- and then from the board -- to the board and then from the board to the Commission. We're asking for 20 days, because sometimes residents and neighborhood associations have to hire legal and other experts, and 15 days may be too short. We're just -- we asked for 30. That was said to be way too long, so we're compromising on 20. Now, appeal to the City Commission. From the board, there's two decisions of -- decisions on two matters that the board makes that does not go to the City Commission. It goes straight to court, and that's on waivers and warrants. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Warrants. Ms. Bisno: At the workshop, there was some discussion about, well, that's all right. It's not too important what -- it's little things. Well, truth is, it's not. Waivers may be sought for several important issues to neighborhoods: Parking requirements and deferrals, extensions above maximum heights for roof structures, vehicle entries, loading docks, surface areas, extension of docks into Biscayne Bay, development of nonconforming lots. These are all -- and alterations of nonconforming structures. These are all -- can be sought by waivers, and we believe should be - - any decision determined by the board should be appealed to the City Commission before anybody has to go to court. Warrants are also very important. Sometimes it has to do with placing a recreational facility in a T3 neighborhood. That's -- some T3 neighborhoods, that's a warrant. The -- bed -and -breakfast in some T4 neighborhoods, that's a warrant, so we would ask that on waivers and warrants be treated the same as all other decisions by the PAZB Board to go to the City Commission before court, andl -- on that note, I would just say that I've heard developers say at these kinds of podiums, we can get things on waivers that we couldn't have gotten on a variance, so that's something new in Miami 21, and should receive the attention of the Commission. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Bisno: About -- Chairman Gonzalez: You have exceeded your time. Ms. Bisno: I'm -- use my time. Can I say one thing in a half a second? Chairman Gonzalez: Go ahead. Ms. Bisno: OK. Thirteen oh five and 11000 sets many standards; most of them are design. We've got a form base, but there's seven of them that protect neighborhoods. Nowhere in M21 (Miami 21), when any decision is being raised -- being made, there's no standard of protection, preservation of neighborhoods listed as one of the factors for the deciding person to consider, and we would submit that it should be. It's number five in my -- Commissioner Sarnoff A through G? Ms. Bisno: A through G, on page 4. Thank you, sir -- Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Ms. Bisno: -- for your attention. City ofMiami Page 72 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Commissioner Sarnoff Stay up there. Stay up there. Ms. Bisno: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chairman. If these -- you took these -- legal requirements were in place -- so I'm excludingA -- you would be comfortable with Miami 21 ? Ms. Bisno: No. Commissioner Sarnoff No. Ms. Bisno: I only had two minutes. The one that I left out, actually, or that I was -- next on my list -- let me just say this. Chairman Gonzalez: You had five minutes. Ms. Bisno: I had five minutes? Chairman Gonzalez: Yes. Ms. Bisno: Oh, my goodness. Chairman Gonzalez: It seemed like it was two, but -- Ms. Bisno: I know. Chairman Gonzalez: -- you had five. Ms. Bisno: I was having so much fun, it just flew by. Let me just say, I have tried -- Chairman Gonzalez: Andl don't blame you. I believe that maybe you needed 15, 20 minutes, but if you go 15, 20 minutes -- Ms. Bisno: No, no, no. This will -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- plus -- Ms. Bisno: -- take one -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- the questions of the Commissioner, then only -- Ms. Bisno: -- I know, I know. Chairman Gonzalez: -- five people will be able to speak. Ms. Bisno: This will take 30 seconds in response to a question. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes. Ms. Bisno: You said that we could respond to questions. Commissioner Sarnoff Just respond, Barbara. Go ahead. City ofMiami Page 73 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Bisno: OK. Commissioner Sarnoff Let's stop talking about it. Let's just respond. Ms. Bisno: I have learned, in my study ofMiami 21, that the nonconformity section is so important -- so many of our homes will become nonconforming structures; that thousands of homes will become nonconforming structures under Miami 21. Hundreds of build -- commercial buildings will. I have a simple solution. My solution is, if anything is conforming before it's passed, it stays conforming; no limit of time, until it is sold or it -- or -- by death or conveyance. It changes hands by death or conveyance, or it is destroyed, and at that time, for six months, the re -- the buyer or the heir had -- can decide: Fix up the house, keep it nonconstructure [sic] -- keep it nonconforming, or change it. Doesn't -- so it gives value. If the buyer wants it, it's still valuable. The homeowner, (UNINTELLIGIBLE), the businessman doesn't have to worry about all these rules. There are some rules you can only do 20 percent of a nonconforming structure of wiring in 12 months. What are you supposed to do, 20 percent in 12 months, and then stop, and then the next 20 percent the next 12 months? Anyway, that's it. Commissioner Sarnoff Is DZB [sic] here? Are they still here? Would somebody address -- can you address the nonconformity issue? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Ms. Bisno: Uh-oh, they're getting the team. Commissioner Sarnoff I'm getting the big lawyers against you now, Barbara. Ms. Bisno: Yep. Vice Chairman Sanchez: You might as well -- Ms. Bisno: Uh-oh. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- address that issue. Commissioner Sarnoff Now you've really opened up Pandora's box. Ms. Bisno: I'm going to sit down, OK? Nancy Stroud: Good afternoon. My name is Nancy Stroud. I'm special counsel to the City on this project, and the nonconforming rules that exist today are basically being carried over into this code. That means that the same thing that happened the last time the Code was revised, I guess, ten years ago, is going to happen again -- Ms. Bisno: But aren't -- Ms. Stroud: -- today. Ms. Bisno: -- wouldn't you say that the changes ofMiami 21 are so much more dramatic than any change we've experienced before? Ms. Stroud: I believe, in some instances, Miami 21 will, for example, in the case of uses, make a lot of existing nonconforming uses now, legal. You'll be able to have uses that perhaps were not conforming to the last code in this new code. For structural issues -- Ms. Bisno: I think you said it -- City ofMiami Page 74 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Stroud: -- because the form is changing, it's -- yes, it's -- there are going to be created nonconformities, and that's why the rules are here, to allow for alterations in the case of nonconforming structures; for rebuilding in the case of destruction, in the -- where there's an act of God or hurricane, or so forth, and they're exactly the same rules that have been in operation probably for 50 years -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well, let me ask you -- Ms. Stroud: -- in the City. Commissioner Sarnoff -- a question. Let me put this -- let me put some context to what you're saying. Let me try to take somebody else's district that's not mine. Let's say I'm in -- I own a house in Commissioner Regalado's district and I'm supposed to have a side driveway to get my two cars in the back, but obviously, I don't because I don't have the room right now. A hurricane comes and destroys my home. Was I a nonconforming home before that so that I can rebuild the exact home, or am I required then to build a home with the side driveway so that I can bring my car to the back? Ms. Stroud: The home can be rebuilt under the nonconforming use provisions that are being adopted and that are in effect today. Commissioner Sarnoff A lot of people nodding their head no behind you. Ms. Bisno: Is a waiver required? Ms. Stroud: There is -- for -- let me get to the rule. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is there a waiver as a, you know -- Ms. Stroud: There is a provi -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- act of God? Ms. Stroud: I'm sorry. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is there a waiver, such as maybe hurricanes -- Ms. Bisno: No. It's a waiver that -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- an act --? Ms. Stroud: In the case of a hurricane -- Ms. Bisno: -- not that kind of waiver. Ms. Stroud: -- where a structure -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Right. Ms. Stroud: -- is totally destroyed the structure can be rebuilt as it was by process of waiver. Ms. Bisno: Yes. You have to seek a waiver. Commissioner Sarnoff So -- but let me ask -- City ofMiami Page 75 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Regalado: But if it's 20 percent or more? Ms. Bisno: No. Ms. Stroud: The 20 percent rule relates to another issue. The 20 percent rule relates to structural alterations for repairs and maintenance, and the current code, which would be carried over into this code allows for repair or maintenance of load -bearing walls and other structural safety issues, to be permitted up to 20 percent of the gross square footage of the portion of the building that's being -- that is nonconforming, so there's always been a relief valve for providing structural improvement that is necessary to the safety of the building, and you can go up to 20 percent in any 12-month period, 1-year period Chairman Gonzalez: Let me ask a question. That 20 percent applies to any work done in the property, inside or outside the property? Ms. Stroud: For work that does not involve structural safety, but is simply renovation, that can be done at any time. Chairman Gonzalez: Without any kind of a -- Ms. Stroud: Just according to your normal building permit requirements. I mean -- Commissioner Sarnoff So you could have -- Ms. Stroud: -- the rule doesn't change. Commissioner Sarnoff -- a nonconforming structure and decide to put more onto the house or change a bathroom, a bedroom -- Chairman Gonzalez: Right. Commissioner Sarnoff -- a kitchen; nothing to do with percentages, right? Ms. Stroud: You can do some structural improvement if it does not increase the nonconformity, so often there are -- Chairman Gonzalez: But -- Commissioner Regalado: Wait, wait, wait, wait. Chairman Gonzalez: -- the Commissioner -- Commissioner Regalado: IfI want to do an addition -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- asked the question that was trying to ask. Ms. Stroud: I may not -- Commissioner Regalado: -- legally -- Chairman Gonzalez: Let's say that I want to change -- Ms. Stroud: Yes, sir. City ofMiami Page 76 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Regalado: -- it's OK? Ms. Stroud: Yes. Vice Chairman Sanchez: We need to clam that. Ms. Stroud: If you want to -- let me see ifI understand your question. Commissioner Regalado: No. My question is, I -- my granddaughter needs a playroom, so I want to build, with permits by the way, not illegal, can I do it, as long as I have the setbacks, the eight feet setback? Ms. Stroud: You can make changes as long as it does not increase the nonconformity, so if you have existing -- if the new code allows you to build to a certain setback and that's where you want to build to, you certainly can do that. Commissioner Regalado: But I thought I was nonconforming all the time. Ms. Stroud: There are different kinds of nonconformities -- Commissioner Regalado: OK. Which one -- Ms. Stroud: -- and it depends -- Commissioner Regalado: -- I am? Ms. Stroud: -- it will depend on what you want to build and what regulation is being applied, so for examples, you may be nonconforming as to set back; you may be nonconforming as to height; you may be nonconforming as to other locational things. It's -- one nonconformity doesn't make your whole building unable to be -- Commissioner Regalado: OK. Ms. Stroud: -- modified. Commissioner Regalado: I know you're pretty busy, and -- but do you have like three month so we can go house -by -house in my district and see who is what kind of nonconforming? Ms. Stroud: I'm at your disposal. Commissioner Regalado: No. I know. Commissioner Sarnoff Let me read this to you and see if you agree with this. Chairman Gonzalez: Before you read it, will you allow -- Commissioner Sarnoff Oh, go ahead. I'm sorry. Chairman Gonzalez: -- me to go back to -- Commissioner Sarnoff I apologize. Chairman Gonzalez: -- your question and my question? A person wants to renovate the house, inside the house; do new bathrooms, new kitchen, new floors, new walls. Is there any impediment to do that under Miami 21, any waivers that they have to request, any proced -- special procedure that they have to go through now in order to do that? City ofMiami Page 77 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Stroud: If he is doing interior renovations, not changing the exterior -- Chairman Gonzalez: Right. Commissioner Sarnoff That's whatl thought. Ms. Stroud: -- it's very unlikely that there's going to be any impediment. Chairman Gonzalez: It's very unlikely, but -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes or no. Chairman Gonzalez: -- you're not giving a definite answer. Ms. Stroud: I think it would depend -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yes or no? Ms. Stroud: -- on your particular structure. I would say 99 percent. Chairman Gonzalez: You're not an attorney, are you? Ms. Bisno: Yes, she is. Chairman Gonzalez: You are? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, she is. Ms. Stroud: Excuse me. I am. Chairman Gonzalez: Can you tell a judge that it's very unlikely or it's very -- you have to give -- Ms. Stroud: Well -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- definite answers. Yes or no. I mean, I'm asking a simple question. Ms. Stroud: Let me give you an example. Chairman Gonzalez: I'm going to ask another question now. Let's say that a person wants to change -- needs to change the -- all the windows in the house because the house is 50 years old and the windows are old and bad and are -- as a matter of fact, could be a hazard in case of a hurricane. Does that implicates any special process that, you know -- can a person do it like they do it now; they pull a building permit, they go get the approved windows and change them, and that's it? Because you know, one thing that we don't want to do here is complicate -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Chairman Gonzalez: -- people's lives, I mean, and make people's lives miserable, you know. Ms. Stroud: Interior work, generally, will not require any permit, and let me give you an example, though, because I -- Commissioner Regalado: Theory. City ofMiami Page 78 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Stroud: -- want to be accurate for you. Commissioner Regalado: In theory. Ms. Stroud: Let me give you an example. If you have a load -bearing wall that is nonconforming, your wall, which is load -bearing, goes into a setback, for example, and it makes it nonconforming. You have a new setback regulation, and at the passage of the ordinance, that wall becomes nonconforming as to that setback. There is a rule that, if you want to change that wall -- Chairman Gonzalez: Let me tell you. Ms. Stroud: -- and your interior renovations might change that wall -- Chairman Gonzalez: I believe that what we have been hearing here today, you know, in reference to all of the people being hesitant to support this is based on the fact that we are not giving the people definite answers to their questions. I mean, we -- maybe, it's possible. If it rains, it may change. If it's a sunny day, it could be different, you know. I mean, that's why we're having what we're having here today. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chairman -- Ms. Stroud: I'm sorry. I think there are two -- Chairman Gonzalez: You know, let me tell you. On my questions -- Ms. Stroud: -- parts to the answer. Chairman Gonzalez: -- I give up. Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman, ifI -- Chairman Gonzalez: I give up. Mr. Fernandez: -- may. If the questions -- there are different ways of answering questions. Without -- the fact pattern that you gave -- Chairman Gonzalez: Jorge, Jorge -- Commissioner Regalado: No, no, no, no, no. Chairman Gonzalez: -- no, no, no, no, no. I -- Commissioner Regalado: It's yes -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- no, no, no. Commissioner Regalado: -- or no. Chairman Gonzalez: With all due respect -- Mr. Fernandez: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: -- my question is a very simple question. City ofMiami Page 79 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Fernandez: Correct, and to the extent that you -- Chairman Gonzalez: IfI want to change everything inside my house, can I do it the same way that I'm doing it now, pulling a building permit and doing everything according to the codes, or do I have to go through a different process? Yes or no? There can be two answers. Maybe yes, maybe no. Mr. Fernandez: We'll have the technical people in the City -- Chairman Gonzalez: You know, come on. Jesus Christ. Mr. Fernandez: -- we'll have that by way of testimony from Lourdes Slazyk, who would be in a position to answer that question. It's a straightforward questions; it deserves a straightforward answer. My answer to you would be, on the basis of what you have asked, is no. Chairman Gonzalez: You see. Mr. Fernandez: Miami 21 -- Chairman Gonzalez: Same thing that Commissioner Sarnoff -- Mr. Fernandez: -- would not impose any additional conditions. Chairman Gonzalez: -- was asking. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, let me read the law to you. This is what the proposal is. It says, "Should a nonconforming structure, or a portion thereof be destroyed to an extent of more than 50 percent of its assessed valuation, at the time of such destruction occurs -- the hurricane -- it shall not thereafter be con -- reconstructed, except in conformity with the provisions of this Code." Chairman Gonzalez: There you go. Commissioner Sarnoff "If reconstruction is essential to the reasonable conforming use of the building or structure, the Planning director, after recommendation" -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Can waive it. Commissioner Sarnoff -- "by the Zoning administrator" -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Can waive it. Commissioner Sarnoff -- "may, by waiver" -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Waiver. Commissioner Sarnoff -- "allow reconstruction to the extent reasonably necessary to allow such reasonable conforming use, " so it seems like their concerns are truly valid, and they don't want discretion to be in play. Now, we, as lawyers, know you can write whatever you want. I mean, we could change this in -- with a stroke of a pen and clean up what they don't want, which is -- I think what they don't want is, if, in the event the building is destroyed, they want to be able to reconstruct it pretty much as -is, andl think they also want to be able to do some reasonable renovation and improvements to a nonconforming building. Chairman Gonzalez: Right. City ofMiami Page 80 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff I -- you know, I don't think the Commission's going to go very far until those issues -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yep. Commissioner Sarnoff -- are at least acknowledged and at least we clean it up differently than what we did with 1100 -- or 11000, whatever it is. I mean, I have a whole different issue with Lourdes up there, and we're going to talk about loss of characteristic of use, which is a real fun part we're going to get into shortly, Lourdes. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Could we take a conceptual stab at this? If -- Commissioner Sarnoff Sure. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- because there's several different conditions that you're talking about. Commissioner Sarnoff I strongly urge you to do it for their neighborhoods. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff I strongly urge you to go to Commissioner Regalado's and to Commissioner Gonzalez's and work through a hurricane scenario, and then work through -- his scenario's a great one; he wants to be a better grandfather, and he wants to have a bigger playroom. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: So if -- let's just do two or three scenarios. One is that you have a house that has been conforming; it's a normal house somewhere in a neighborhood, and you want to do the renovations inside. There's no problem with that, just as there is not now. There's a -- Unidentified Speaker: There will always be -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- process for that. Ms. Bisno: Is it nonconforming now, though, under Miami 21, under your scenario? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: No. Unidentified Speaker: Under Miami 21, no. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Most houses are not. Ms. Bisno: Well, let's take one that is. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Well -- Ms. Bisno: OK. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- let me just finish -- Ms. Bisno: I'm sorry. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- OK? Chairman Gonzalez: They're all nonconforming. City ofMiami Page 81 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Plater-Zyberk: I think one -- Commissioner Sarnoff Start all over. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- of the things -- Commissioner Sarnoff Start all over. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- that you're -- Commissioner Sarnoff Start all over. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- concerned about is that, in your -- in some neighborhoods, which we have not encountered perhaps as much in the east quadrant is that there's a good deal of nonconformity that the City, in a sense, has understood. It's continued. People come in for permits after the fact. Whatever the history is, and that's obviously something that, I think, would come up in your -- in those areas that we would then address. It hasn't come up in the east quadrant in that way because we haven't been presented with it as an issue, but if that needs to be dealt with in some way in the next quadrant, that's clearly one thing that we would deal with. Commissioner Sarnoff Well -- but my -- there's going to be votes outside the east quadrant, and I'm urging you, Elizabeth, to listen to them and try to -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff -- come up with -- because I know they're going to say, please explain to me -- I hate to talk to you guys, but -- Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff -- please explain to me why I should vote for this, because I need to know that if someone in my neighborhood, my next -door neighbor's house goes down, which will be nonconforming based on Miami 21, he can rebuild it just the way he wants to, or he wants to put a new kitchen, and he wants to extend the back out of that kitchen, and it may be an encroachment, is he going to be allowed to do that under -- because ofMiami 21's new rules. I think you have to hit it head-on. I -- this is what I think the purpose of why they want to address this. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: And -- but the -- I think the difficulty we're having is that there are some differences that Miami 21 will be presenting to existing conditions, but there's also a lot of nonconformity, which already exists, which one would worry about returning -- Commissioner Sarnoff I think -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- because of its impossible impingement on a neighbor, so I think that's why it needs a larger discussion in the arena in which it's occurring. Commissioner Sarnoff -- this is what was written to me, andl thinkl know what they're saying now. It -- just let me read it to you. "Nonconformity must be rewritten to accommodate all buildings and property, including single-family homes developed and approved under code 9500 through 11000. Miami 21 is using 11000's own nonconformity language for Miami 21 's enforcements. What took 35 years to rehab, rebuild, and be enforced into compliance under Code 11000 is now being made illegal to be destroyed in 20 years," and they saying all at the City ofMiami Page 82 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 simple cast of your approving vote, and I think what they're saying is if you just absorb 11000's language and you put your processes in place, they have to know what they're voting for. It's -- you're right, it's not particularly impressive to the -- to our quadrant, because I think we probably have the most conforming quadrant in the City, but they don't sit in the same seat that I do. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: No. I understand. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: Well, but the City Attorney assure us that nothing is going to change. Vice Chairman Sanchez: No. Mr. Fernandez: On the facts -- on the fact pattern given by Commissioner Gonzalez. A simplistic question deserves and got a simple answer. Now, if you add complications and if you add nuances, and if you -- Commissioner Regalado: No, no, no, no, I'm not adding complication. The expert just said -- Mr. Fernandez: Well, the expert -- Commissioner Regalado: -- that they have to see case -by -case. Mr. Fernandez: Correct. Commissioner Regalado: You were absolute; she was maybe -- Mr. Fernandez: Well -- Commissioner Regalado: -- so the question is -- well, I guess we believe you. Mr. Fernandez: -- I was absolute on the fact pattern that was given, because at -- a simple answer was demanded, and when I'm told give a simple answer, yes or no, I look for the simplest way of answering it quickly, and so what Commissioner Gonzalez asked is no, no change in Miami 21. Now, what the expert was trying to do is be extremely careful and make sure that you know that according to the nuances and to the -- and the different overlays that you may put on that question, you may have a different answer -- Commissioner Regalado: OK. Mr. Fernandez: -- which is honest. Commissioner Regalado: OK, so it may be another answer, other than no. That's what I'm trying to find out. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Couldl --? Mr. Fernandez: Which is the question that's pending? That wasn't a question. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Could --? Commissioner Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. City ofMiami Page 83 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Regalado: I'm just curious because the Attorney said that ten years ago, there was a change in the Zoning Code, right? You said that ten years ago, there was a change in the Zoning Code. Ms. Stroud: Approximately. Commissioner Regalado: Huh? Ms. Stroud: Approximately, yes. Commissioner Regalado: Was it -- Ms. Stroud: It's my understanding that -- Commissioner Regalado: -- substantial -- Ms. Stroud: -- the 11000 was enacted about ten years ago. Commissioner Regalado: -- the change to the one before? Ms. Stroud: It's my understanding that it was a comprehensive change, yes. Commissioner Regalado: So then this code that we're changing is only ten years old. It's a baby. Vice Chairman Sanchez: No. It's -- Commissioner Regalado: Would you say? Mr. Fernandez: It's more like -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- 20 years. Mr. Fernandez: -- 7 -- Lourdes Slazyk (Zoning Administrator): Seventeen. Mr. Fernandez: -- 17 -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Seventeen? Mr. Fernandez: -- years. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Seventeen years. Ms. Stroud: Seventeen. Commissioner Regalado: Seventeen years, OK. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Listen -- Commissioner Regalado: It's almost an adult. It still cannot drink, so you said it was enacted, and you said it was substantial -- City ofMiami Page 84 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Stroud: Yes. Commissioner Regalado: -- and that was the code that created all this mess, and yet, you're saying that most of the thing in that code, you're rolling over to Miami 21, right? Ms. Stroud: No, sir, I don't think said. I said -- Commissioner Regalado: Yes, you did. Ms. Stroud: -- that the nonconforming use provisions generally are brought over, yes. Commissioner Regalado: Well, we were -- Ms. Stroud: Not the whole code. Commissioner Regalado: -- told that everything was a mess, so I figured if we roll over everything, we still have a mess. Is that --? I mean, I'm not an attorney. You have to bear with me. Ms. Stroud: No, clearly, this code is changing regulations for the City. The whole purpose of doing the code is to improve the regulations of the City. Commissioner Regalado: No. I just want to understand that this code that we're changing is not the one that the Mayor mentioned on 1915, but you said it was substantial, so this is -- that change 17 years ago, none of us were here. We can say we inherit the mess, but this is what we're trying to change. That is correct, right, what we had in the last 17 years? Ms. Stroud: Yes. This code would change Ordinance 11000, which was adopted about 17 years ago. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Sanchez: I think that if there's one thing is that we need clarity on this nonconformity. This is one of many things that is going to affect everyone citywide, especially property owners that own homes. I think it needs to be very well-defined as to the scenarios that we spoke here, and one is the scenario of a national disaster. In other words, what would happen to a resident or a home -- and you could pick any neighborhood you want -- where if we have a national [sic] disaster, whatever it may be, a hurricane, a tornado, whatever, under what guidelines clearly define simplicity where someone could simply read, this is what I need to do? I mean, that -- I think that is very important for us to cross over this bridge, and it's one of many bridges in Miami 21 right now, but I think it's very important that that is clearly defined to simplf it, so you're talking about a national disaster model, and then you're just talking what, about a simple remodeling of a property, where one's not afraid if you're going to change all the windows. You know, I should know, if I'm going to change all my windows, what is it that need to do? I need to know what -- what process I need to go through. Ms. Stroud: Can I answer that? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Sure. Ms. Stroud: It's a building permit process. If you change your windows, you are allowed to City ofMiami Page 85 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 change your windows with no special process. Vice Chairman Sanchez: So, in other words, just -- Ms. Stroud: You are allowed to change -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- if you don't change the walls, if you don't change the foundation of your home, you don't have a problem? Ms. Stroud: Correct. The only exception was if you change a load -bearing wall. Otherwise, everything you do in the interior can be done. Anything you want to do that -- Commissioner Sarnoff But if he is -- Ms. Stroud: -- complies with the Building Code. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Hold on. Let me just -- how 'bout if you wanted to add -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- to the back of your house and you had to tear down a wall to add -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- maybe another room -- Chairman Gonzalez: That was going to be -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- then where does that put you at? Chairman Gonzalez: -- my next question. Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Ms. Stroud: Well, let me just point you to 7.2.4. I can read you -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: What, 7.2.5? Ms. Stroud: 7.2.4 -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: 7.2.4. Ms. Stroud: -- on page 48, in Article VIL In my version, it's page 48, and the last sentence of paragraph one says, 'Alterations for interior work, such as repairs or interior remodeling, shall be allowed pursuant to the Florida Building Code and not require a waiver." Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Let me ask you a question because this is happening all over my district presently, as we speak today. Let's say that a new family, a new couple bought an old house, and they have children, and they need to expand the house, and they want to do an addition to build an additional bedroom and maybe expand the kitchen. How does Miami 21 limit this type of expansions? Ms. Stroud: OK. When you have an addition, those additions have to conform to the Code. There's a provision that -- it's the same paragraph that I just read from. City ofMiami Page 86 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: They have to conform to the Code. What are you trying to tell me? Ms. Stroud: The structure's -- Commissioner Sarnoff You can't have your addition. Ms. Stroud: -- nonconformity must remain the same -- Chairman Gonzalez: Because today, all they have to do if -- Ms. Stroud: -- or decrease in degree. Chairman Gonzalez: -- with -- if they're not encroaching on setbacks or anything like that, all they have to do is have an architect do some drawings; an engineer certify the drawings; present it to Building and Zoning; get a building permit -- Ms. Stroud: Exactly. Chairman Gonzalez: -- build; call for inspections, and have their bedroom and their kitchen? Ms. Stroud: That's exactly right. Chairman Gonzalez: Is that the -- it's going to be the same way under Miami 21 ? Ms. Stroud: Exactly. Chairman Gonzalez: They won't have to make a driveway on the side of the house to bring the car around and make it on the patio? Ms. Stroud: No. Chairman Gonzalez: No. OK. Very good. Ms. Stroud: And can I answer the storm question, because I think that's right here in front of me, too? Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK, please do. Ms. Stroud: If there is a storm, an act of God -- it's on the same page, 48 -- Commissioner Sarnoff See ifyou -- Ms. Stroud: -- and 7.2.3, under paragraph 3. Commissioner Sarnoff Point 2 point 3. Ms. Stroud: Where a structure containing a nonconforming use is destroyed to an extent of 50 percent or more of the gross square footage at the time of the destruction, by explosion, fire, act of God public enemy, all those disasters, the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board, may, by exception, allow its replacement or reconstruction -- Ms. Bisno: By exception. Ms. Stroud: -- in accordance with some criteria -- that's the question about storm damage. City ofMiami Page 87 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Bisno: So you have to go by exception, is that correct? Ms. Stroud: You have to go to the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board by exception. There's a public hearing involved. Now, I understand some cities -- andl know this has happened in hurricanes -- if there is a natural disaster, have extended the time, for example, of coming in for those permits, and can adjust, you know, to the particular problems of the disaster, depending on how serious it is. Commissioner Sarnoff Butl want both Commissioners to understand that you have got to go in front of a board and get permission to do that. Chairman Gonzalez: To do that. To be able to -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Chairman Gonzalez: -- do an expansion on your house. Commissioner Sarnoff No, no, no. This is -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: You've got to go in front of the board. Commissioner Sarnoff Correct. Chairman Gonzalez: To rebuild it. Commissioner Sarnoff If your house gets -- if your house is blown down by Hurricane Andrew, you've got to come in and get -- you've got to ask permission from a board to do that. Chairman Gonzalez: To rebuild your house. Commissioner Sarnoff To rebuild your house, if it's 50 percent or more. Chairman Gonzalez: And that's something that you don't have to do today. Ms. Slazyk: Unless you rebuild it to conform. Commissioner Sarnoff I think you're right. Ms. Stroud: If you rebuild it -- Commissioner Sarnoff I don't know the -- Ms. Stroud: I'm sorry. Commissioners, if you rebuild it to conform, you don't have to. Commissioner Sarnoff If you build it to conform. Ms. Stroud: If you -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right, but if you build it -- Ms. Stroud: -- but if you build it to -- where it doesn't conform, you come back. Commissioner Sarnoff I -- here's, I think, their concern, and don't mean to speak for anybody, City ofMiami Page 88 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 but they have some narrow lots, and if you carry forward their requirement of having to go down the lot with a driveway, I think their concern is that if that was a requirement, and let's say that house was a nonconforming house because it's been there, they don't want to then have to build a narrower house on that lot. Let's say DZB [sic] -- and know you haven't done their quadrants, but let's say you decide every house has to have a side driveway that goes all the way down in the back because you decide -- and maybe not even wrongfully so -- that all cars must be parked in the back. Their concern would be that means you're going to have a very narrow, long house, and that's not a fair use of the land, I think. Ms. Stroud: I think, in that circumstance, a special rule might required, as -- Commissioner Sarnoff No. I -- Ms. Stroud: -- you're suggesting -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- their -- andl -- Ms. Stroud: -- that -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- their point would be that when it comes to their section to be designed Ms. Stroud: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff -- they should never -- they should make sure that there's no requirement of having to have that driveway down the side of their lot. Ms. Stroud: That's correct. In that circumstance, a rule can be created for the nonconforming part of this code to allow for those particular characteristics of neighborhoods. Commissioner Regalado: Do you know how many families the City has help through the home rehab program and FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) in the district that I represent? Ms. Stroud: No. Commissioner Regalado: More than 200, because these people were the poorest of the poor, and yet, they own a house because they bought it in 1970; paid off the house; have a social security check. They qualin, for FEMA, home rehab, the $25, 000 additional homestead exemption, and 70 years old, maybe they have a son -- disable son. Do you think that these people have the resources or the culture, number one, if they have to rebuild, and FEMA or the insurance helps to build according to Code, or they want to spend the last years of their life living as they want, and if they do, do you think that they need to be submitted to boards and hearings and tribunals? Seems to me it's a little unfair, and this is a question of culture, and yes, OK, we were talking to the Manager the other day, and yes, we do want to change the culture, and, yes, Liz wants to change the way -- you can change the zoning of a city, but you cannot change the culture of a city in two years, and it is important here to look about the human factor. There are many people that bet on the City ofMiami. Do you know that a group of people, including Commissioner -- former Commissioner Winton, by the way -- wanted to abolish the City ofMiami in 1997, and the people ofMiami voted 89 percent? This is when no condos were here; just the residents, the old people, the older people -- the poor people that we want to get rid of now, because they bet on Miami, and they endured the fire fee, and they endure the high taxes because they wanted to have a city, and now we come and say to them that we want a 22nd century city where you cannot park on the street, and you can -- you should have your barbecue in the front, not in the back. You have to do (UNINTELLIGIBLE) in the sidewalk, not in your City ofMiami Page 89 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 hole in the back. Why? Why, at least, we do not inform, and that has been my point. I do want to change, but it is unfair on the part of the City, unfair on the part of the consultant, not to inform the people this consequences, because you know, the -- if God willing, we don't have a storm this year or next year, but about the other year, some people will start coming to us and say, Commissioner Gonzalez, they are telling me at NET that I have to go into a public hearing. I don't know anything about that. I just -- you know, my main bedroom collapse. That's all we asking, you know, inform the people, so -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Commissioner, with all due respect, our intention is not to change the culture. I think that we started out -- I tried to start out by saying that it's -- there is a diversity of culture that we admire and intend to respect, andl would like to point out -- because it's been repeatedly said, the driveway that has to go by the side of the house. The drawing shows the driveway to one side, but it's not causing it to go by the side of the house. It's just saying that one-third of the house width can be devoted to the car, whether it's a garage or a carport, and that, in fact, is the historic pattern of the City. By allowing an addition to that, not requiring the double width driveways, which are now required, and by allowing the outbuilding, the granny flat, to be returned to the Code, we will be, in fact, reducing nonconformities in some neighborhoods, which take on that part of the Code, so there's been a lot of talk about balancing today, butl think we've tried to be very careful about that, and we will pay very close attention in the other parts of the City. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Bisno: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Next speaker. Richard Strell: Hello. My name is Richard Strell. I live at 404 Northeast 35th Street, in Miami, andl have some handouts that want to give the Clerk. Chairman Gonzalez: Have -- give it to the City Clerk, please. Madam City Clerk, let's reset the clock for three minutes for the public, because actually, you know, I believe two minutes is too limited to -- for the amount of things that they have to say in reference to this discussion, so you got three minutes. Mr. Strell: Thank you, and thank you for having me. I followed the Miami 21 process fairly closely, and I've been concerned really with the process itself. One thing that want to say is consultants generally don't openly or dissent or quit a job halfway through a consulting job, so if there have been problems, one would normally expect consultants to come out publicly against them. The original Code, which we waited for for six months that came out in late April, was a fairly detailed Code and map, and we used that for most of the charettes in the beginning. Planning took those maps down and all the other documents, and they've refused to repost any of the documents prior to August; yet, most of the charettes and meetings occurred prior to that time, and the maps and codes before that reflect it. The significance is that if we wanted to compare what DPZ originally proposed prior to the influence of whoever was influencing it over the many months, we wouldn't be able to compare, because that's not available. There are inconsistencies, in general, in the plan. For instance, the plan is supposed to discourage the use of cars, and yet, bikes aren't allowed on streets over 30 miles an hour, unless there's bike lanes. DPZ is recommending narrower streets and wider medium [sic] strips, so there'll be smaller streets, less room for bike lanes; bikes can't be on streets, unless there's bike lanes of 30 miles -- over 30 miles and hour, and yet, at the same time, they're saying we should be using our cars less. In terms of the -- getting back to the process last week prior to the review, the day before, there was a 22-page addendum that was issued. The day before the review for you Commissioners, in contrast to what was stated here about that addendum, it had many major changes, andl think it's indicative of what I've seen in the process. For that addendum to come City ofMiami Page 90 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 out the day before review and a week before the vote, really one should question why. Likewise, the historic preservation document was not up last week, and if it's up on the Web site since then, it can't be found. I was always under the impression that the Mayor had considered historic preservation an important part ofMiami 21, so why that document's not available and hasn't been for many weeks to read is beyond me. The Web site itself, things have moved around. At times, when it's important to find things, as I've just said, it's hard to find them. I don't know who's behind the Web site, but it seems like a Houdini. If you look at a Web site like Seattle's Planning Department, it's clear, it's easy to find things. It makes sense. There's layers of depth, and there's a science to Web site design that doesn't exist at Miami21. org. As far as getting straight answers from the Web site, Planning likes to talk about the quantity of answers that have answered -- that have been answered, but ex -Commissioner Haskins, in a series of e-mails with me said, and quote, "The problem is, for some reason, the answers posted to the Web site are very generic, and for most people, not very satisfactory." End of quotes. If that's what the Commissioner's experience was over two months of trying to get answers on some issues, not just for me, but for other people, that doesn't speak well for a process where four hundred and something questions supposedly have been answered satisfactory [sic]. Chairman Gonzalez: You have expired your time. I -- Mr. Strell: I have already? Chairman Gonzalez: -- gave you an additional minute, and you -- Mr. Strell: Oh, OK. Thanks. Chairman Gonzalez: -- used it all. All right. Mr. Strell: I'll speed up. Many -- in fact, many residents gave up trying to get answers, as far as I'm concerned, because of the process. I would say that since especially in light of some of the criticism of the City ofMiami from the standpoint of ethics and accountability, we should look very closely at the details of this plan. Clearly, none of us understand it thoroughly, in spite of the two years. Other cities have taken many more years for a plan half this size. I'd request that we do the same. Thank you -- Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Mr. Strell: -- very much. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Any questions from the Commissioners? No questions. Next speaker. Yes, sir. Henry Patel: My name is Henry Patel. I'm the owner of a couple of motels on Biscayne Boulevard; one is in high -density zone, and one is in the MiMo, and here are my friends, but to make it easier, I have chose to speak on behalf of everybody, so do I get ten minutes? Chairman Gonzalez: Pardon me? Mr. Patel: I'm sorry. I'm going to speak so that it make it easier -- Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Mr. Patel: -- but my comment is pertaining to the historic desig -- Chapter 23, where, you know, with all due respect to my friends, you know, the 35 feet was asked, andl had meeting with some leaders. My position has always been, let's be on a common ground where we can all live with. I'm not going to get what I want, everything, and neither should be the other side, and my comment to that was that we have been on the boulevard 20 years, and to make it unique, most of City ofMiami Page 91 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 us live at the hotel with our family. We came in -- I came in when I was a single man; got married. Now I got two kids, andl live at the hotel, so it's not just that we are business owners. We live and we operate the hotel in the -- from the same area, and you know, I'm proud that I'm on the boulevard 20 years. When I came here, I was -- I have seen a bad area, and I'm ready to see the good, but there are some -- some turbulence is on the way, and I'd like to say that the height restriction should not be limited to 35 feet. Primarily, because I'm pretty sure you know that Miami is under supply of hotel rooms, especially Miami -- when you're talking about City of Miami, and because of under supply of hotel rooms -- and we have lost so many hotel rooms to condo conversions in downtown Miami. We have business, but we are losing the business because we are limited. In 1991, when I was the presi -- when I was on the board of the Chamber of Commerce, I was one of the one who implemented SD-9 because, at that time, crime was a high issue on Biscayne Boulevard. I was shooting my own feet by restricting hotel growth or adding rooms, but that was required, but now we shouldn't be limited to 35 feet because of the fact, if you add the math, our cost of living is very high. I mean, even -- the State is talking about reducing the tax on homeowner, but nobody's talking about the commercial properties, and then if you have to limit 35 feet, which is only two stories -- just add the math. We lose business to Miami Beach. I'm not saying ten stories is what we want, but something -- a middle ground, a live and let live position. Otherwise, we all be run over. We haven't got any benefit from all the construction which is going on. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) that I pay $1, 500 doctor bill for all the dust allergy I got for me and my kids, but there are issues with the -- and to be honest with you, when MiMo was brought in, it was decided one and a half month. Livelihood of about 300 plus businesses on Biscayne Boulevard -- yeah, it's there. I'll live with it. I -- although I was not so happy that one and a half month is too short to decide where people did not even make repairs after the Hurricane Wilma on the Biscayne Boulevard. That was -- MiMo was voted June last year. It was done in only one and a half month, not enough time for us to think. You know, we had to still fix our roofs and windows, and now 35 stories, I don't think that's right. That's gross unfair to the people on the -- on boulevard businesses. I'm not asking ten stories, but that's one thing you really need to consider. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Let the Commissioner -- the district Commissioner ask questions. Commissioner Sarnoff Henry, you're sitting here, you're Marc Sarnoff right now. What would - - how many stories would you put up? Mr. Patel: I say it straight up, no ambiguous question. Five stories, I can live with that. Commissioner Sarnoff Five stories? Mr. Patel: Yes, sir, and I'm pretty sure I can speak on behalf of some of my friends here. Five stories, we can live with, but if somebody's going to say 35 feet -- ifI put four extra room in, that is 35 feet. Commissioner Sarnoff And -- Mr. Patel: Eric is six feet tall; right, Eric? Commissioner Sarnoff How many -- Unidentified Speaker: Yep. Commissioner Sarnoff -- feet would you do your stories? Mr. Patel: I'm sorry, sir? City ofMiami Page 92 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff How many feet to a story? Mr. Patel: Now that is -- you know, with the current way of -- I mean, I'm -- and hate to be very vague on my answer, but five story would be about something between 60 -- Chairman Gonzalez: About 50 -- Mr. Patel: -- 50 to 60 feet -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- feet, I believe. Mr. Patel: -- depends upon, you know -- now we are going with mixed use, andMiMo is bringing in more restaurants, and we feel that we can bring in some restaurants in the neighborhood, so that will be like -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's 95 feet. Mr. Patel: -- 50 to 60 feet? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Ninety-five. Mr. Patel: Ninety-five? Chairman Gonzalez: Huh? Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's about 85. Mr. Patel: I'll be lucky ifI get that. Chairman Gonzalez: Five feet -- five stories is 85 feet? Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Eight five, ninety five. Chairman Gonzalez: I don't think so. Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah, it is. Chairman Gonzalez: Is it? Really? Commissioner Sarnoff The way Miami 21 would -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Chairman Gonzalez: Oh, the -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- interpret it. Chairman Gonzalez: -- way Miami 21 -- OK. Mr. Patel: And please, you know, let me just make more -- one comment. I sit on the board of the largest hotel owners association in the country; 8,000 members, 28,000 properties. Miami is an envy of everybody. It's looked in the microscope as one of the best city to live in. All this what is going on right now in Miami is under the microscope, so as a leader, it's a test of City ofMiami Page 93 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 everybody's leadership in here. We need to decide on one or the other way. We might need more rigorous brainstorming, but it has to happen fast because I think it's making the investors nervous around the country what is going to happen, so please, you know, let's act in a timely frame, but decide something -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Sir. Mr. Patel: -- as a general comment on even Miami 21. Vice Chairman Sanchez: I have a question. What are you currently zone? Mr. Patel: I don't even know. Commissioner Sarnoff He said they have an SD (Special District) overlay. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Huh? Mr. Patel: SD-9 -- Commissioner Sarnoff SD-9 -- Mr. Patel: -- and -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- overlay. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh, SD-9 overlay. Mr. Patel: Yeah. Layer after layer; I have three layers. I don't know which one is going to apply to my property, SD-9, then MiMo, and Miami 21. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, one of your properties is not zoned SD-9, so -- Mr. Patel: No, no. I'm not talking about that. I didn't even bring that -- I'm talking about S -- MiMo District, primary. That was my first comment. I'm talking about MiMo District -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Mr. Patel: -- but I don't know if SD-9 is going to be lifted. I don't know that, and you know, it's painful for people to have a historic district when they didn't even change the windows and fix the roof after hurricane, andl can -- I think we can all live and let live. It's the best thing to go; can't drag on with one wants this, another wants that. It can't be like that. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Mr. Patel: Thank you very much. Commissioner Sarnoff Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Next, sir. Martin Diaz-Yabor: Thank you. I'm basically here to read a statement on behalf of the City ofMiami Page 94 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 American Institute of Architects, Miami Chapter. Chairman Gonzalez: We need your name and address for the record. Mr. Diaz-Yabor: My name is Martin Diaz-Yabor. I'm the president of the American Institute of Architects, Miami Chapter, with offices located at 275 University Drive, Coral Gables. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the City ofMiami Commission, honorable Mayor, and staff. Again, I would like to commend our Mayor and all of those involved in an enor -- in the enormous effort in bringing Miami 21 to fruition. After many meetings and countless hours of work, together with the Mayor and many of our peers, we have managed to review and improve some of the extent of -- some extent the draft ofMiami 21. We've -- we have also presented and met with DPZ, the City Code consultants in several occasions, and have brought forward 18 or so points of concern, of which approximately 13 have been addressed, corrected, or resolved. As architects and experts on the field of zoning, planning, and design, we believe that Miami 21 Code is a step in the right direction, a must for a progressive city. We know that, given the adequate time to finalize, review the entire draft, a good and sound code can be achieve, but the time to do so is what we're asking and seeking for. It is of utmost importance that steps we are about to take, which will shape the future of this City, are taken with great care, integrity, prudence, consideration, and sensibility to all. Hence, we would humbly request from all of you elected members of the Commission not to defer, but to allow Miami 21 draft to move forward in the direction of progress and leadership that all great cities take. Thus, us -- thus, allowing us to continue working hands-on with the Mayor, the City consultants, and staff towards a final version ofMiami 21. This will ensure the final version of the Code to be clear, comprehensive, manageable, practical, and specially fair to all before it comes again for you for the second reading. This will allow for all pending points to be resolved in its entirety, and for the Code to carry the endorsement of all who look after the best interest of this great city and its people. We thank you for giving us the opportunity to address you and voice our opinion, and humbly request your endorsement in the passing ofMiami 21 draft in the first reading with the conditions we have presented to you in this statement. Thank you, and God bless. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Any questions from the Commission? No questions. Yes, sir. Good afternoon. Ramon Nunez: Good afternoon. Chairman Gonzalez: You have three minutes. Mr. Nunez: OK. Good afternoon to all. My name is Ramon Nunez. I live in Little Havana. I am an ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) member, and we have 3, 000 families as members in Miami. I (UNINTET,TIGIBLE) sitting here, but -- this reason. Community members who have taken time off work to come to this meeting have been sitting and waiting for hours to talk to you, while you have let developers and professionals take the whole morning and part of the afternoon, people who are paid to be here. This shows us a great deal about who matters in Miami 21. We are here today to ask that you put the community first; that Miami 21 become something that will force public benefits from all these huge, high condos; that Miami 21 creates real affordable housing. You have an opportunity. Make the public benefit program stronger. Number one, make more projects participate. All of the T5 zone, for example, or anyone who gets an increase of square footage through Miami 21, we need more money to build. Number two, get people to look after the money; make them report annually to you how much money is in it and where it came from. Make sure the money is getting where is it supposed to be. Number three, make sure all income levels are addressed. Right now, over half ofMiami is under 80 percent of area median income, yet, your affordable housing monies go to people making much more than that. Direct money to the people living in the City now, and number four, set the percentage between housing and parks today. Don't fight every year. Don't City ofMiami Page 95 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 make us fight with each other. When we negotiate the split, put it in writing, and put it in the Code today. Thanks. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Mr. Nunez: You're welcome. Chairman Gonzalez: Do you want to speak? Go ahead. Diana Achille: Sure. Good afternoon. My name is Diana Achille. I reside in 11840 Northeast 19 Drive. I have things for the Clerk. We want the Commissioners to hear loud and clear that these are the things that we need to be added and included in being considered when we're talking about Miami 21. We require more affordable housing to be built under the Public Benefits Program by making the public -- the program mandatory for all large developers. This is simple, just put more money in like a pot; make more projects participate. Take anything from T5, for example. Also, we define a set percentage of expenditures for the Public Benefits Trust Fund that will be dedicated each year to the building affordable housing, rather than forcing the City Commission to determine the amount every year. Also, we do not want to fight with people about green space. Set aside a certain percentage from the beginning. Third, address the needs of the residents at variety incomes -- variety of income levels. Currently, the Affordable Housing Trust gives money out to projects for families at 150 percent of the median income. This is not enough. We need housing for all income levels in the City, and fourth, appoint an independent advisory board to oversee the Public Benefit [sic] Trust Fund. We have seen in the papers recently the scandals. It is time that the City own up to its past mistakes and place a real oversight board to make sure that the developers are actually paying into the funds and we are getting the housings we deserve. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Eileen Bottari: Good afternoon. My name is Eileen Bottari, 505 Northeast 76 Street. I'm here on behalf of the Palm Grove Neighborhood Association, and also, Miami Neighbors [sic] United, which we are a member of. I'm going to speak on two issues, zoning inside residential neighborhoods and zoning surrounding residential neighborhoods. I first want to start out by saying that attended the first meeting ofMiami 21, and the City leaders stated that, yes, there was bad zoning inside residential neighborhoods, and it would be corrected, and two, that they were going to make sure that the new Miami 21 Code did not allow for high-rise zoning next to single-family homes. First thing we're going to talk about -- and we're using the Palm Grove neighborhood map -- is our neighborhood. Starting at the bottom, from 64 Street down to 58 Street, we have zoning that is T4 and T5 -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Ms. Bottari: OK? That's three stories and five stories. Now on the bottom, where you see the T5, which is the 58 Street, we took pictures of all of the houses on that block. Bob's going to show you the pictures. These are all single-family homes -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: T5? Ms. Bottari: -- and it's zoned T5. We have been working with DPZ. We have done a letter, petition that was very detailed. We have sent them a letter with maps and details. We have worked with Commissioner Sarnoff on this. They have all the information. We have requested that the zoning be changed to T3 L. There are a few blocks that would get the T4 zoning, and they know what they are, but 90 percent of what they have zoned in my neighborhood, at T4 and T5, should be T3 L, and if it's happening in my neighborhood, it's happening in other neighborhoods that they are making proposes [sic]. Second issue that I want to discuss is the City ofMiami Page 96 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 zoning surrounding our residential neighborhood. Now it was stated that it was going to be a transition. As you can see, along Biscayne Boulevard, where we have our T3 L, all of that should be T3 L. You have T5 and T6, so you are proposing to put five stories and eight stories abutting right next to single-family homes. There is no transition, and if you look to the north of our neighborhood, right north of the Little River Waterway, it's T4. It goes from T4 to T6, which is eight stories, and they can build up to twelve, so there is no transition. We have asked that there is a transition. We have asked for the 35 feet along Biscayne Boulevard; that has been -- since day one, we've asked for that. Unidentified Speaker: Since '90 -- like '96. Ms. Bottari: Well, since the charrettes and the master plan. Vice Chairman Sanchez: And currently, now, it's SD-9, right? Unidentified Speaker: Yes. Ms. Bottari: Currently, now, it's SD-9. Unidentified Speaker: The lots are 150 feet deep, so it's (INAUDIBT,F) -- Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry. We're not -- Chairman Gonzalez: You need to speak -- Ms. Thompson: -- recor -- excuse me. Chairman Gonzalez: -- on the mike -- Ms. Bottari: You're not recording. Chairman Gonzalez: -- because it needs -- Ms. Bottari: Come over here. Chairman Gonzalez: -- to be on the record. Vice Chairman Sanchez: But have another -- I have a question. In getting back to the T5 abutting the residence with the picture -- Ms. Bottari: Right. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- could you go back to that? Ms. Bottari: That whole block is T5. Vice Chairman Sanchez: But what block is that? Ms. Bottari: Fifty-eighth -- Fifty-ninth Street. Show them on the map. They're all histor -- and right now, we're in the process of having our neighborhood -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: 58 and 59 Street. Ms. Bottari: -- become historic. City ofMiami Page 97 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Unidentified Speaker: Yes. Ms. Bottari: All of the homes -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: And that's the Upper Eastside? Ms. Bottari: -- in my neighborhood probably, I'd say, 80 percent of them, were built in the 1930s, the 1940s, so you have the old Miami architecture, and there's nothing that, you know -- if you zone that block and those areas T5, what you're basically doing is saying to a developer to come in and just bulldoze everything, so there's no protection there. Chairman Gonzalez: Commissioner Sarnoff. Commissioner Sarnoff Oh, no. I'm very well aware, andl have my own map, as opposed to the Miami 21 map, that will bring out the appropriate time that certainly -- Ms. Bottari: Well, we're -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- what you asked for, Eileen -- Ms. Bottari: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff -- and Bob. Ms. Bottari: I think that what we're asking for, not only for our neighborhood, but for all neighborhoods, is really simple. It's a simple request, and we've been trying for two years to get the maps changed. They have made some changes, but on the big issues, they have stalled us, and Commissioner Sarnoff has been working with us, so if it's happening with -- in our quadrant, it's going to happen in your quadrant, too. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Thank you very much. Ms. Bottari: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Sir, sir. We need your name and address for the record. Antonio Cruz (as translated by official Spanish interpreter, Rene Ramos): Antonio Cruz, 913 Northwest 80th Street. I'm a member of ACORN. The City ofMiami is in the crisis of housing. According to the State plan, half of the Miamian qualin, based on the annual finances for any -- some type of assistance for housing. We're the city that is -- that pays more for housing. All of us pay more than 30 percent of our income in rent. I want to tell you my story. I had surgery. Chairman Gonzalez: Madam City Clerk, what happened with the clock? Mr. Cruz: They took a tumor out of me of 1.8 centimeters that I had in my brain. As a result of this, I was put on disability. My finances actually today are $749 a month, and my rent, $700. I had to move in with family because I didn't have enough, not even to eat. I'm on the waiting list for housing, rent. I was told, according to my needs, in the waiting list, I have to wait at least, four or five year. Then for -- there's crisis -- or because there are no crisis of housing in Miami. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Yes, sir. City ofMiami Page 98 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Daisy Moller (as translated by official Spanish interpreter, Rene Ramos): Daisy Moller. I live in Miami, 2110 Northwest 35th Street. I've been living here in 16 year [sic]. I've been working and paying my income taxes. I have -- I'm a single mother with -- Chairman Gonzalez: As we all -- Ms. Moller (as translated by official Spanish interpreter, Rene Ramos): -- three kids. Chairman Gonzalez: -- all of us do that, work and pay income tax. That's part of our obligations. Ms. Moller (as translated by official Spanish interpreter, Rene Ramos): I want to tell you this so that you will know that I'm a person that have been working to sustain my family, my kids. I see that this year and every year there are problem with our rents. It's getting worse, and cannot pay it. Right now I'm living with a family -- Chairman Gonzalez: Let me help you out. Explain to the lady that what we're discussing here is not paying people's rent or -- what we're discussing here is a change on the zoning laws of the City ofMiami. Ms. Moller (as translated by official Spanish interpreter, Rene Ramos): What I'm trying to say is that this time I cannot pay that much rent -- Chairman Gonzalez: Well -- Ms. Moller (as translated by official Spanish interpreter, Rene Ramos): -- and it's very expensive, and we're trying to find some housing that is affordable. Chairman Gonzalez: We understand, but also the City ofMiami doesn't have -- doesn't handle public housing. Unfortunately, it's the County government, and the place to go is to County Hall to request their assistance because they are the one that have plenty, plenty of units closed down that they could open and help persons like her. OK? Ms. Moller (as translated by official Spanish interpreter, Rene Ramos): That we need affordable housing. Chairman Gonzalez: I understand. Ms. Moller: OK. Chairman Gonzalez: I understand. Rene Ramos: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Bennet Pumo: Hello. I'm Bennet Pumo. We have a -- we've been in Miami since 1941. We built a lot of the warehouses in the commercial district up in the Little River Industrial Park, and we dealt mostly with small family, mom -and -pop -type shops. Miami 21 may be a great concept. The problem is that right now, as our Mayor said earlier today -- he was talking about haphazard development, and he has con -- I guess he's accused all of you of just doing your haphazard job up until today. We've probably done very good. I helped rewrite the Code back with Bert [sic] Waters back when it was rewritten from 11 -- 9500 to 11000 on the nonconformities, so I'm a little familiar with it. Nonconformity is the biggest issue in Miami 21. I don't -- you talk about the high-rises; you talk about this, you talk about that. Whatever's built City ofMiami Page 99 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 out there today, once you overlay Miami 21 to it, everything's going to be nonconforming. I don't care what degree it is. There is no acceptable degree of any nonconformity within Miami 21. Therefore, every property, structural or use -wise -- not every use, but just about every structure in the City ofMiami will be subject to a nonconformity of some sort. Nonconformity by -- you heard some of the talk -- discussions earlier -- very difficult. It's a very difficult situation if you have -- if it's use -specific. If you lose a tenant, the tenant that's in there -- if it's a nonconforming use, it's (UNINTET,TIGIBT,F) use. If you have a mechanic shop, you can only put a mechanic shop back in there. There are no acceptable nonconforming uses that can go back in there at a lesser degree. You must comply. There's a lot of things that are very specific. I handed a pamphlet out to everybody that talks about D1, D2. At the presentation that took two and a half hour -- filibuster here earlier today, they mentioned everything except commercial, DI and D2. It was totally ignored today. Nobody has said one thing about it. Why? Because they've ignored it from the complete process. Earlier -- about an hour ago, she stated that the nonconformity issue was never brought up to -- in the northeast quadrant. I got to tell you that's a bold-faced lie. I've been out there, and I've been on nonconformity for the last two years. I presented it; I've written code. I've done everything; tried to bring this nonconformity issue to the surface. Now, all of a sudden, everybody says, oh, my gosh. It's going to hurt the houses. Why? 'Cause they got to vote. OK. We don't get a vote. We're commercial guys, but you know what? Nonconformity is the issue. A house they said you can rebuild; yeah, maybe, if you don't go beyond 20 percent on the remodel. There's lots of things in here. I hope you read what I wrote, and have lots of things in here. If they would listen, we can fix Miami 21. As it stands now -- if you passed it as it stands now, with its deficiencies, you have haphazard development. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chairman. Chairman Gonzalez: Commissioner -- Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Pumo, you have something here that catches my eye, which is D1, live -work use. Explain that to me a little bit. Mr. Pumo: There's live -work and work -live. At first, they didn't -- they wouldn't take the concept that there was two separate entities of live -work and work -live. Live -work is more than 50 percent live within your occupancy. Work -live is you -- your commercial use has to be primary. Your work -live is only an incidental component to your primary use, which means it's only a habitable space for them to stay. It shouldn't be subject to any units per acre. It shouldn't be subject to anything except it's nothing more than a habitable space that they will get a permit for, just like they would get a broiler permit, or a permit for a spray booth, or anything of that nature. Now live-work's a different scenario. Live -work, you can have an apartment. Now the problem with the live -work scenario in the D1, which you asked about, on D1, if you look at the D1, it says nine units per acre. The problem is they have live -work and work -live under the residential statutes in Table 3. The problem is, if you go to Table 4, under residential, it only says one unit per lot of record so if you have a property that may be an acre, two acres of commercial development, that you may want to have adaptive reuse to put your work -live and a live -work in, you're subject to only one unit per lot of record so it doesn't matter if you have 20 units already built and developed on your property. You're subject to only one unit of lot of record according to this because it's under residential. Commissioner Sarnoff Put this in a real -world application to me. If -- let's say I'm -- I live in Wynwood and I'm an artist, andl want to be able to live in my studio. Is that the application that we're thinking in terms of? Mr. Pumo: It would depend on the intensity of the live portion and the intensity of the work portion, and of course, what the artist realm of art is in. If that artist has a braising rod or equipment, then he can't go there because he belongs in manufacturing. City ofMiami Page 100 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff So depending upon the medium of art that use -- ifI happen to be a welder andl weld statues, I can't live on my premise? Mr. Pumo: I wouldn't think so because of the way the statute is written. I don't think you could get into that zoning. You'd have to go to a D2 zone. Commissioner Sarnoff And what if my medium of art happens to be canvas? Mr. Pumo: Canvas would probably go into D2. Commissioner Sarnoff And that would allow me to live there? Mr. Pumo: No. D2 does not -- at this time, which I've been trying to get them to accept a work -live scenar -- in a work -live scenario, you can probably use a habitable space, which would be work -live, and you can put that in D2. At present, they don't want to accept a habitable space within a D2, although it's accepted all over the country, which I rewrote the -- I wrote a piece of a code for them and submitted it to them over a year ago, where I pulled excerpts from other zoning areas in California, Ohio, Chicago, and New York, and presented it to DPZ over a year ago as allowing a habitable space within a D2, and it's fully acceptable. Exception. If it's a hazardous waste -- or not hazardous waste -- if it's a hazardous occupancy. If you go and you get your certificate of use and make your application and you happen to be a hazardous use, then, of course, you cannot have any habitable space within a hazardous building or a Group H occupancy. Commissioner Sarnoff So, in your opinion, they've missed the boat when it comes to artists living and working at their own -- Mr. Pumo: Well, if you -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- artist studio? Mr. Pumo: -- go to your Table 3, it allows 150 units of work -live and live -work -- no, I'm sorry. In a T6 zone, you can put 150 units of live -work. You go to a DJ, which allows eight stories by right; ten stories by bonus -- you can have a ten -story building, but they're telling you that you can only have nine units within that ten -story building, and then that nine units is disqualified because they have it under the residential title, which only leaves one unit per lot of record. Commissioner Sarnoff And you say that you've given them sample ordinances on this? Mr. Pumo: I have given them -- yes. I have a six -- I think it was a five page report that I gave. It was an entire code for live -work and work -live. Commissioner Sarnoff Could you forward that to my office? Mr. Pumo: I sure will. Vice Chairman Sanchez: What -- Mr. Pumo, what are you currently zoned now? Mr. Pumo: I have zoning -- I have property zonedfrom -- all the way from D -- oh, not D --from C-1 all the way up to I-1. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Industrial? Mr. Pumo: Yeah. We have -- right now, with Miami 21 in effect in the northeast quadrant, 26 buildings will be changed, 13 of the buildings will be totally nonconforming in use and in City ofMiami Page 101 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 structure. That's close to 197,000 square feet is now going to be nonconforming in structure and use. The other 13 buildings are going to go from C-2 to D --from C-2/I-1 to DJ, which makes them almost totally nonconforming in structure and use, as well. That's 26 buildings. Almost 300,000 square feet is going to now be nonconforming. A hundred and twenty-six warehouse units with businesses in them relating to about a five hundred to a thousand jobs are going to be totally nonconforming in use and never allowed to exist, expand, or go any further than where they are right now because they're going to be frozen in time. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Thank you. Mr. Pumo: I think I'm pretty on the mark on this stuff guys. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK, thanks. Mr. Pumo: Thank you. Ben Fernandez: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Sir, state your name and address -- Mr. B. Fernandez: Mr. Chair -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- for the record. Mr. B. Fernandez: -- Ben Fernandez, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard. First of all, I don't want to reiterate things that architects have said about the way the Code works. I think that they're more qualified than I, and you've heard from them with respect to how they -- many of them believe that the limitations stifle creativity rather than encourage creativity. I don't know that that's absolutely true, but it's certainly something that you need to consider in making your decision. I don't think -- I think that the current Code allows a great amount of flexibility, and I think that's something that we definitely want to retain with Miami 21, if it ever is adopted, but I want to say that, with respect to the application of this Code, I think that it -- many times, it's contrary to the specific intent, its application. It's applied inconsistently in many ways, and there's actually no transition that results in many cases from the application of the transect. The first example I want to raise is this board -- shown on this board here, which is the intersection ofFlagler Street andl-95. It's in the downtown core area, and it is an area that Miami 21 says, under Section 2.1.2, that the intent of the Code is to maintain the future growth capacity of the City core and to ensure its preeminence as a transit -oriented pedestrian friendly focus of the region's economic, civic, and cultural activities. They want to maintain the future growth capacity within the core. In this specific instance, you can see that they're designating this property as T6-36B -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: B. Mr. B. Fernandez: -- whereas everything else around it in purple is T6-48, which is what corresponds to the CBD District. Today, the property that's shown as T6-36B is zoned SD-6, and it benefits from the gross lot area definition, which gives it a large amount ofFAR, an amount ofFAR that is consistent with CBD. Commissioner Sarnoff What does "B" stand for? Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's an amendment -- Mr. B. Fernandez: B -- City ofMiami Page 102 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- right? Mr. B. Fernandez: It's an amendment. It's been broken down, and "A" provides one FAR; "B" provides a different FAR. "B" provides a 22 FLR, and "A" provides a 12 FLR. This is the higher FLR, but it's nowhere near the FLR that's permitted under T6-48, which is a 30 FLR, so today, you have CBD here, and you have SD-6 here, and they work well together because the SD-6 benefits from the gross lot area definition, which allows it to be compatible with the CBD district, but when this is changed to T6-36B, and this remains T6-48, what happens is this can no longer benefit from the gross lot area interpretation. It can no longer take into consideration the fact that the FAR is today based up to the centerline of the interstate, and what you have is a much greatly reduced FLR, by 50 percent of what you can do today under our calculations, and so this is an example of where the Code is actually working contrary to its specifically intent -- specific intent. We suggest that for properties like this, perhaps you should consider a transfer of development right ordinance simple -- similar to what you've done with the MiMo historic district, for example, or come up with some better solution. I think the transects need to be more closely looked at as they actually apply to properties. Another example is Biscayne Plaza. Biscayne Plaza is currently zoned a combination of SD-9 and C-1. It's all C-1, but the property that faces Biscayne Boulevard has an SD-9 overlay, which limits its height considerably. This is as a result of an amendment that was adopted not too many years ago. It was something that was done to satisfy area residents, andl think it achieves a transition from the frontage along Biscayne near the residential neighborhood -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Conclusion. Mr. B. Fernandez: -- to the back. Under Miami 21, what you get is one transect for the entire 18-acre property. There is no transition. There is no recognition of the fact that currently there're different entitlements that apply to the property. C-1 is an unlimited height with a greater FAR; SD-9 is a restricted height, and that's a problem. I mean, you -- it's contrary to the Code specifically stated intent of creating different heights and different intensities throughout the northeast quadrant. Another example, I think -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: In conclusion. Mr. B. Fernandez: In conclusion, the last example, I think, is your T6-24 reference that believe Dean Lewis talked about, next to T6-36. You have no transition there. T6-24 gives you 24 stories in height, but its FLR is reduced to eight -- I'm sorry, six -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Six. Mr. B. Fernandez: And T6-36 has a much, much greater FLR. There is absolutely no transition there, and either a new transect needs to be invented to create that transition, or the FLR needs to be increased in T6-24. Another thing, very briefly, is the fact that Miami 21 provides for no variances of parking requirements or loading spaces. Uses that are going to be nonconforming or existing retail uses, for instance, that may need to apply for a variance as a result of the change in use happens all the time in the City ofMiami. Many of those small business owners come to you and apply for a variance of parking requirement; sometimes it's justified, other times it's not, but Miami 21 doesn't take that into account whatsoever. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Any questions? Commissioner Sarnoff So in conclusion, what you'd like to tell us is you want more height, more liberality; let's keep 11000? Mr. B. Fernandez: No. I think, you know --11000, if you'd simply create more Class II Special Permit requirements, create more special districts along your corridors -- a lot of the same City ofMiami Page 103 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 things would -- you get the same result with less trouble. I think your Planning Department is already invoking a lot of the things that Miami 21 is encouraging. Commissioner Sarnoff So just a couple more SD-9, 6s, and 12 overlays, a few more variances, and we're right there? Mr. B. Fernandez: I think you've gone a long way with your current -- Commissioner Sarnoff And a couple Class IIs. Mr. B. Fernandez: -- Code in creating special districts that are tailored to areas. Absolutely. Commissioner Sarnoff So we really -- we're on the verge of getting it. We just haven't quite gotten it yet. Mr. B. Fernandez: No. I think that there are a lot of corridors that just haven't been looked at. I think where you've looked at it, you've gotten it right, absolutely. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Sarnoff Thanks. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. I'm going to ask you to please cooperate with us. Can we take three minutes each? All right. Three minutes each. Do we agree on three minutes? I think three minutes, you have plenty of time to present your case to this legislative body, so we'll start with you, sir. State your name and address for the record. Three minutes. Three minutes, I will kindly -- Unidentified Speaker: Can I ask a question? For -- related with Miami 21, not for another thing. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah, Miami 21. Unidentified Speaker: They come in here and (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Miami 21. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, sir, just on the issue, which is Miami 21, andl tend to agree with you on that. Unidentified Speaker: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Anything else is irrelevant. Sir, three minutes. You're recognized for the record. Robert Diznoff Thank you. My name is Robert Diznoff, with the Human Services Coalition, located at 216 Northeast 17th Terrace. I'd like to read the following on behalf of HSC (Human Services Coalition) CO [sic] Daniella Levine, who regrets that she cannot be here today. HSC absolutely agrees with the main premise ofMiami 21, that we need better planning, walkable streets, mixed -use communities, and a more uniform zoning and permitting system. These factors all, undoubtedly, lead to a more vibrant civic life in a city like Miami, but if these are the only real changes to Miami's civic and social life brought about by Miami 21, then we're going to miss a huge opportunity to address some of our city's most urgent social problems. As you all know, Miami 21 creates a Public Benefits Program, in which large projects may purchase more buildable space by building parks or affordable housing, or contributing to the Public Benefits Trust Fund. This replaces the current bonus density program, under which all of the money goes into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, and although the Mayor and this Commission have City ofMiami Page 104 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 done a commendable job in bundling affordable housing over the last several years, I'm afraid we're still a long ways away from being able to house our workforce safely and affordably. According to the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing, which the Department of Community Development uses for its planning purposes, in 2005 there were almost 27,000 households in Miami that were paying more than half of their incomes on housing, and so needed some kind of assistance. There's no way we're going to be able to meet the -- that need without implementing a much more aggressive policy to build new affordable housing. We should think more creatively. Why not require that all residential projects over a certain size -- 15 units, for example -- make a certain portion of their units available to low- or middle -income households? Miami 21 already requires that medium- to large -size buildings contribute to the environment by meeting green building standards, so why not make sure they also contribute to the long-term economic viability of the City by contributing units to affordable housing? Cities across this country have used this kind of inclusionary zoning to attract and maintain a viable, vibrant working class in the midst of escalating home prices. There's no reason Miami could not do the same. Indeed, it's actually one of the policies recommended in the City's Comprehensive Plan for Affordable Housing. Miamians need and deserve decent affordable housing in addition to a livable, green city with effective planning. Miami 21 creates the opportunity to make both happen: a beautiful, efficient, green physical space supported by the diverse, inclusive society that will ensure its long-term success. I urge you to please heed the Planning Advisory Board's call to strengthen the affordable housing component ofMiami 21 before passing it. I'm handing out some documents that can provide more details as to how. Appreciate your time. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much, sir. Commissioner Sarnoff So, Robert, in conclusion, we should take the fact that you want the $25 a square foot public benefits to maybe be raised? Mr. Diznoff To be raised? Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. In other words, go to 30, 35. Mr. Diznoff That'd be great. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Sir, good evening. State your name and address for the record. Alyn Pruett: Good afternoon. My name is Alyn Pruett. I live at 2901 South Bayshore Drive. Vice Chairman Sanchez: You have three minutes. Mr. Pruett: Yes, sir. I'm a member of the Cocoanut Grove Village Council, and I'm here to speak on behalf of the Council in regard to Miami 21. I seem to be losing my voice. Apologize. The Council has many questions about Miami 21, but I'm here to speak today about our major concern of the moment, and that is process. Toward that end, I have a resolution of the Council that I'd like to read and have entered into the public record. You should be receiving copies of it. Resolution of the Cocoanut Grove Village Council, whereas, the Miami City Commission will conduct a first hearing on adoption of the proposed Miami 21 Zoning Ordinance on June 28, 2007, and residents of Coconut Grove have expressed concerns and confusion regarding the timetable and process for implementation ofMiami 21 Zoning Ordinance in Coconut Grove, and the zoning committee of the Council has reviewed the public record of the process of public involvement by which the Miami 21 Zoning Ordinance has been prepared, and expressed concerns to Council regarding the limited opportunity for public review of the draft ordinance, and there have been no meetings held specifically for the purpose of receiving public input from residents of Coconut Grove regarding the regulatory framework that has been prepared based upon input primarily from the residents of the east quadrant, and it is the understanding of the City ofMiami Page 105 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Village Council that it is the intention of the City to utilize the Miami 21 Ordinance as applied to the east quadrant as a basis for the remaining quadrants of the City, and that the City Commission is being asked to approve the enactment of that ordinance for application to the east quadrant without having begun to solicit input from residents of the remaining quadrants, and such piecemeal legislation is likely to lead to a confusion of differing zoning codes in the different quadrants, a result that is opposite the City's intention in creating a new, smart code for the City, and whereas, as a result of the above factors, the Village Council has concerns about the prospective adoption by the City Commission of zoning district regulations that are planned to be applied to Coconut Grove without those regulations having been discussed directly with the residents of Coconut Grove. Therefore, be it resolved that the Cocoanut Grove Village Council recommends that the City ofMiami City Commission defer adoption ofMiami 21 for any quadrant until a draft zoning atlas has been prepared for Coconut Grove and the other areas of the City that have not yet been specifically addressed in Miami 21, and the proposed zoning ordinance and atlas for the entire City have received ample review and input from the residents of Coconut Grove and all of the other neighborhoods of the City. Cocoanut Grove Village Council, June 28, 2007. It's signed by Gary Hecht, chairman of the Council, and Michelle Niemeyer, secretary of the Council, and it was adopted at a special meeting of the Council this week. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you -- Mr. Pruett: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- sir, and under three minutes. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Pruett -- Mr. Pruett: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sarnoff -- you want this Commission to wait until we go to every community -- get the atlas done, get community input -- before we implement any part ofMiami 21? Mr. Pruett: My understanding, from the presentation that was given this morning, is that the heavy lifting part ofMiami 21 has been accomplished. I think it would be a good idea for you to ask your consultants how quickly they could prepare an atlas for the remainder of the City so that we could find out whether it is a reasonable time frame. I think the problem you have seen in the comments throughout the morning and the afternoon is that the devil is into details. We don't know all of the consequences of these proposals until you look at them on many properties throughout the City, and clearly, that opportunity has not been provided. Commissioner Sarnoff Well -- and you don't want this passed until the detail is out there for every community? Mr. Pruett: That's correct. To give you a concrete example, in Coconut Grove, we have an overlay zone, as you well know, called NCD-3. I have looked andl could not find any reference to NCD-3 or the protective provisions therein in Miami 21. If it's there, I missed it, but I couldn't find it, and yet, you're being asked to adopt an ordinance for the entire City that does not address a major component of the zoning today that protects Coconut Grove, so -- Commissioner Sarnoff In other words, does the NCD (Neighborhood Conservation District) survive Miami 21? Mr. Pruett: I have been told, verbally, that, yes, it will survive. Frankly, that verbal intent on the part of the City does not give much comfort to the residents of Coconut Grove. As you know, we have an NCD-3 ordinance that has two placeholder ordinance spots; one for R-2 and one for City ofMiami Page 106 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Mr. Pruett: -- commercial that have never been adopted these many years -- two years since the NCD-3 was adopted. Our concern is that if we want to get it right, as others have said today, let's make sure we get it right across-the-board. Otherwise -- you talked about a five-year process to continue and complete this. You're going to be looking at a five- to ten-year process, in my personal opinion, of variances, additional overlay zones. You know, if NCD-3 isn't here today, what are we going to do next year when you come to Coconut Grove? Will we create an overlay zone to provide that protection? Will we amend T3 to provide that protection? Then we have to go back and amend it throughout the City. You're looking at a very -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Mr. Pruett: -- difficult process of amendments if you go forward without the full input of all neighborhoods in this city, in my opinion. Commissioner Sarnoff Thank you, Mr. Pruett. Mr. Pruett: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. No clapping. Sir, you're recognized for the record. Three minutes. Neisen Kasdin: Good afternoon, members of the Commission. Neisen Kasdin, 1 Southeast 3rd Avenue is where my offices are, and last few months, I feel as though I've sort of lived downtown as well. I'd like to share with you the -- my experience in the City ofMiami Beach in the 1990s, when I was a City Commissioner and Mayor, and we went through a comprehensive rewrite of our city's zoning ordinance. First of all, the task that you've undertaken is an enormously difficult task, and it's taking a lot of work. It was for us in Miami Beach, as well, and we followed many of the same principles that you are following today in your Code rewrite, in terms of creating transition zones, respecting and providing for historic preservation, making sure that as buildings meet the street, that they create a better pedestrian environment. It was a very difficult process because, for the most part, many in the development community wanted no change whatsoever and fought that change. At the same time, many citizens' groups wanted more change than the city was legally able to do. You're in exactly that same position. Miami 21 is trying to thread that needle between respecting the property rights that people have and the claims they may have if those rights are diminished, but at the same time, bringing order out of chaos and creating a rational zoning system with tran -- with appropriate transitions and making sure that the entire environment of the City is improved by this zoning ordinance. It's a very difficult task, andl would tell you there is a lot of work to be done. Although there is a lot of great architecture in this City today, I would also tell you that there is some pretty bad architecture with enormous pedestals, people who use the entire volume of the lower portion of their building, which is anti pedestrian, and this Code is not only talking about what happens at the top of buildings, but what happens at the street level, and tries to make that better for everyone who lives in the City, so it's a monumental task, andl will tell you this as well -- and based on my experience in Miami Beach. Your task isn't going to be done when you finish passing this ordinance on second reading, and even pass it into the other quadrants. You will have to come back and revisit elements of this ordinance because, as it is applied and practical real -world situations will reveal that certain things need to be refined, and modified, and changed, so no -- and it goes, I think, to the questions Commissioner Sarnoff has raised as well. There isn't one point in time where every single thing will be perfectly in place. You will have to deal with fine-tuning it as you go forward, andl think that this City Commission is so well balanced that it will, at the say -- will not be saying yes to all developers, and it will not be City ofMiami Page 107 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 saying no in support of all neighborhood groups opposing things. You'll work that balance within the law and recognize those rights, but also create very good zoning. Another thing that you'll find is there may be some claims. Vice Chairman Sanchez: In conclusion. Mr. Kasdin: In con -- I just want to say there may be some claims under the Property Rights Act, but you know what? You will deal with it; you'll work it out, and where you have to recognize those rights, you will. In conclusion, what I would say is, in my experience as a public official and involved in urban development and planning for many, many years, this is the kind of initiative that a city undertakes like once in a hundred years. There's no city of this size that I know of in this country in recent times that has undertaken as comprehensive, as thoughtful a rezoning and replanning of the city as you are undertaking right now. It's a lot of work. You're doing a great job, but what you are doing is creating a blueprint for not one year, for not two years, but as Mayor Diaz says, for decades to come of how the City should be developed, so I encourage you to go forward. Deal between first and second reading with the issues that have come up. I think you've had a very intelligent discussion, particularly of the nonconformity issues. You want to sharpen that language, and then move on with it, and think you'll be proud. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Sarnoff, you got any questions? Commissioner Sarnoff No. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Mayor, I do. If -- you have gone through that path. Let me just ask you one thing: Was it worth it -- Mr. Kasdin: Absolutely. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- in Miami Beach? Mr. Kasdin: Absolutely, and I'll tell you, it was painful, but it was absolutely worth it because you can look back today and realize that conditions in the city have improved. The quality of the city has improved because of the work we did. Some of it came later than we hoped it would come; some of it maybe needed to be fine-tuned afterwards, but I'm very proud of having done that, and we have a better city for it. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Elaborate a little bit on the aftermath, when we -- Mr. Kasdin: And that's important because people shouldn't walk away thinking -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: No. Mr. Kasdin: -- it's all over as soon as you pass it on second reading. We had a number of Harris Act claims, which was the Property Rights Act, which was actually passed just about a year and a half or so before we adopted the most comprehensive of our rezonings in the city. Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's the Bert J. Harris -- Mr. Kasdin: The Bert J. Harris Property Rights Act, and that act says that if a government takes an action which unduly burdens a property, they are entitled to compensation from that, so you may have some property owners, after this passes, if it passes, who make that claim, and you know what? You'll do what we did in the City ofMiami Beach. You'll deal with it. Where there's a legitimate claim, you'll recognize it. Where an adjustment needs to be made, you'll do it, and where you feel no change needs to be made, you'll also handle it that way, and you'll probably have some of those. City ofMiami Page 108 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: How many did you have? Mr. Kasdin: Well, we had a lot. We had -- I will tell you, the Harris Act -- and Lucia can vouch for this -- was passed probably in 1967, and at one time, we had half of all of the Harris Act claims in the state of Florida, and we -- at the end of the day, we settled virtually all of them. We did it by either -- in many cases, negotiating. We wanted to reduce development rights on some parcels, and we wound up in a negotiation, so we did reduce the rights, not as much as maybe we initially passed, but a lot more than had existed before, and so we tried to approach it in a very practical manner within the law, andl think we were successful in successfully resolving those. Vice Chairman Sanchez: What year was that? Mr. Kasdin: We passed a series of changes. It wasn't in one shot. We did -- starting in really 19 -- probably -- 94; 1995 was the first large -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Right. Mr. Kasdin: -- reduction in rezoning, and -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Are there any -- Mr. Kasdin: -- then 1997 and '98 was the second one. Commissioner Sarnoff -- pending cases in Miami Beach right now? Mr. Kasdin: There shouldn't be. You know, I don't know. I don't think there are. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. I don't have any further questions. All right. Thank you. Ma'am, you're recognized. Commissioner Sarnoff City -- did -- City Attorney. Commissioner Regalado: Mayor, one -- Mr. Kasdin: Yes. Commissioner Regalado: -- question. Mr. Kasdin: Yes, Commissioner. Commissioner Regalado: What triggered the public action to take to the ballots changes in zoning? Mr. Kasdin: Well, actually, there were no ballot changes that changed zoning. The ballot changes just, on a perspective basis, said that you could not upzone, which, by the way, the city had not done in 15 or 20 years. The ballot changes were a voice of citizen unrest, but they didn't actually change any zoning in the city whatsoever. The -- Commissioner Regalado: But some projects went to the ballot. The -- Mr. Kasdin: None, no. Commissioner Regalado: -- South Beach -- City ofMiami Page 109 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Kasdin: No. The -- there was the -- what was known as the Portofino development by Kramer. Commissioner Regalado: Right. Mr. Kasdin: That didn't actually go to the ballot. That -- what it -- what had happened was there was a referendum that passed which said that waterfront properties could not be upzoned without going to referendum -- Commissioner Regalado: Right. Mr. Kasdin: -- and so that project -- there was actually an agreement between the city that was privately -owned land (UNINTELLIGIBLE) we swapped with city -owned land. Part of the city -owned land was going to be upzoned, and as a result of the passage of that referendum, that agreement with the Portofino Group was withdrawn and terminated, but the interesting thing, Commissioner, is that, in the early '90s, and frankly, when I was first elected and tried to get people's attention about the need to change the zoning, no one was interested because no buildings were coming up at that time. Then when buildings started coming up, everyone was interested in changing the zoning, but of course, at that time, rights had vested, so what we did is we had a very difficult situation of trying to, you know, not that dissimilar from Miami, in a climate where there's a lot of interest in investing in building, changing the zoning while this was going on -- Commissioner Regalado: Thank you. Mr. Kasdin: -- but it was all done -- I will say this. Every single change in zoning, every single one, was done legislatively. It was not done by referenda. The changes, by referenda, limited the ability to make further changes, none of which were ever proposed or had been proposed for a long period of time. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you. Mr. Kasdin: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Three minutes. Adrienne Pardo: Hello. My name is Adrienne Pardo. We're going to be doing a PowerPoint presentation. I will stay within the -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Three minutes. Ms. Pardo: -- three -minute limitation. I have a few consultants, and they will each stay within their three -minute limitation as well. This is on the Brickell West area. Each of the Commissioners should have been given a -- delivered a book yesterday. We have some extra copies, which we're going to give to each of you in case you don't have it, and I'd also like to hand this in to the Clerk. These are signatures from about 27 property owners in the Brickell West area. My name is Adrienne Pardo, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I'm with Greenberg Traurig. With me here today is my cocounsel, Santiago Echemendia, as well as our clients, Charles Tavares and Gabrielle (UNINTELLIGIBLE). We are here to address the Brickell West area, which is within the City's central urban core area, and why it should be designated T6-36, pursuant to Miami 21. We have put a team together of professionals who have spent a great deal of time looking at this particular area, and it is bounded by -- it's in front of you -- it's bounded by -- you have on the north side is Southwest 7 Street, on the south is Coral Way; to the west is 1-95, and to the east is the Metrorail, so I'm talking about this entire area within here. Right now, it is proposed as T6-24. We are suggesting that T6-36 is the most City ofMiami Page 110 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 appropriate transect for this neighborhood. Immediately to the north here, this is T6-36, this entire area here across the street, and then this entire area is all T6-36, as well. With me here today is Reinaldo Borges and David Bushinsky, and they are with Borges & Associates, and will be addressing the architectural aspects; Richard Garcia, our transportation consultant, with R. Garcia & Associates, Tom Schlosser, our economist, with Sharpton, Brunson & Company, and Guillermo Omedillo, our planner consultant. Guillermo is the former director of Planning & Zoning with Miami -Dade County, and the former Planning & Zoning director with the City of Miami, as well, and at the end, Mr. Echemendia will finalize. It's our position that if this Commission is going to adopt Miami 21, that now is the time to get it right, and for this particular neighborhood, the right thing would be a T6-36 designation. This would comply with the smart growth principles that were discussed earlier in the presentation. At this point, I'm going to turn it over to Reinaldo. Reinaldo Borges: Thank you, Adrienne. Honorable Commissioners -- I'll keep this within the three minutes -- we have prepared a very detailed PowerPoint, which you have copies of and we most certainly will answer any questions you have. Today, as an architect and planner, we're here representing this group primarily focused, as Adrienne was noting, in the west Brickell neighborhood. We are asking for equal treatment of the west Brickell neighborhood to that of the east Brickell neighborhood, as we understand it, as T6-36B, with an FLR of 22 and 12. Our study reveals that the proposed T6-24 transect in the west Brickell neighborhood represents a lost opportunity that -- for this neighborhood. It would not allow it to reach its full potential, in our opinion. The west Brickell area is integral to the greater Brickell neighborhood. It's an area bounded by downtown Miami and the river, as Adrienne was pointing out. The west Brickell area is ideal for development potential due to its location within the City's urban core. It's a high-rise district. There are no single-family homes in this particular neighborhood. We don't feel or see a transition issue in this neighborhood. We also feel the neighborhood has adequate access to sustainable infrastructure, and we have Richard who will address that. In our opinion, consistency with the neighborhood to the east makes all the sense in the world. We are making a decision here that will affect the growth pattern of the City for generations to come, and we see it's a lost opportunity not to allow this particular neighborhood to take advantage of its relationship to the established Brickell neighborhood to the existing infrastructure that surrounds it, and you know, we urge you to reconsider the T6-24 designation that is being considered for this area. I'd like to quote Mayor Diaz, who has been a very strong leader and voice in this process, andl quote, "Miami 21 is more than a way of -- to manage and guide the growth of our city. It is an expression of our shared values and aspirations as a city; our desire for safe, livable spaces for human interaction; our desire for growth that nurtures our native environment and our desire to create a climate of economic inclusion where all have access to the promise of prosperity and opportunity. It is where we lay the foundation for the City's future." Again, I urge you to consider the west Brickell area for the T6-36, with an FLR of 12 or 22 as -of -right zoning. Thank you. Richard. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Just a question. So you're saying "as -of -right zoning, " and should be - Mr. Borges: Yes. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- T -- Mr. Borges: T6 -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- 6 -- Mr. Borges: -- 24 allows for increases -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: No, but you want 36 -- City ofMiami Page 111 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Borges: Yes, as -of -right. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- and you're saying as -of -right? Mr. Borges: Yes, the same as what we have on the east side of Metrorail all the way through to the bay. See it here. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Mr. Borges: OK. Richard Garcia: Good evening. Richard Garcia, 13117 Northwest 107th Avenue. We did a transportation area analysis of the Brickell West area, and here you have an overlay showing you the area that was previously described west of the Metrorail. Here are the major corridors with also the Metrorail and Metro stations. What we found in here are some circular radiuses of influence of walking distances, and what this particularly notes is a ten -mile radius for a Metrorail and five -mile radius -- and that'll come into play a little further in my presentation here. The City is in a TCEA, a Traffic Concurrency Exception Area. It falls within also the urban infill area, and it's exempt from Florida Statutes on concurrency for traffic. The importance of this is this was done to promote infill development and redevelopment, reduce urban sprawl, and to improve mobility on a regional level for transit, pedestrian, and bicycling. The City's currently -- this area is under DRI, Development of Regional Impact, Increment and that DRI is for the downtown areas, which includes the Omni, the Central Business District, and Brickell, and Brickell West lies within this Increment II part of Brickell Transportation in this area supports development through the transportation corridor concept, which basically states to move people and not just cars, and that's why you've adopted a person -trip, which I'll get into a little further. Transit capacity exists and can be increased by reducing headways on your transit systems, and the Increment III of the DRI is currently in process, and that will further evaluate the traffic in this area. City's adopted, like I stated, a person -trip methodology. It considers the movement of people through transportation corridor concept, which is moving people in the various modes. Total corridor capacity includes then vehicular, transit, and pedestrian, and the transit's the most important because that's the infrastructure you currently have, which includes, of course, the Metrorail, Metromover, and the Metrobus. The EAR, or the Evaluation Appraisal Report, further supported the person -trip concept, having transportation control measures to promote multimodal usage and to encourage transit, pedestrian, and bicycling. It did identify some level of service "F" conditions. However, they were outside the DRI or the downtown area because of the infrastructure that exists there, which, subsequently, is outside the Brickell West area. The Metrorail area of influence, which was the reason for the circles, is radial in nature, and the Metrorail station was located, when it was developed, based on this radial area of influence, and the Metrorail would have a ten-minute walking radius area of influence, and the Brickell West has an average walking distance to the Metrorail of 4.8 minutes, so it's obviously was chosen for -- to take advantage of this area, and actually, the ten-minute walking radius is even beyond the Brickell West area, so what's important here is that equal intensity on both sides of that station would promote a more efficient and increasing transit ridership, and of course, 1-95 is a physical barrier to that concept. In conclusion, the purpose of the urban infill area, the DRI, the person -trip methodology, the EAR, and the transportation element is basically to do one thing; to try to promote reduction of auto dependency, increase ridership and transit usage; to reduce urban sprawl, and of course, each project does still have to meet traffic requirements independently, as you've seen in the past with MUSPs and even Class IL The DRI Increment III will further evaluate traffic, and transportation corridors currently can support a T6-36 transect zone for Brickell West, and having that type of transect would reach critical mass, which stimulates the use of mass transit in this area. With that, I turn it over to Tom for economics, unless you have any questions. City ofMiami Page 112 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: Questions? None. Tom. Tom Schlosser: I'm Tom Schlosser, with Sharpton, Brunson & Company. We're at 1 Southeast 3rdAvenue, Miami. We did an economic analysis, and an economic analysis reveals that allowing T6-36 rather than T6-24 for Brickell West is consistent with the national trend for urban centers. The T36 [sic] zoning designation allows for high -quality projects in this significantly underutilized area of the City. Allowing T6-36 for Brickell West produces multiple economic benefits such as economic development opportunities, which leads to significantly enhanced quality of life; provision of a significant investment opportunity in this area, creation of an economic engine to help induce sustainable growth, increased development fees and tax base for the City, and increase in the number of permanent jobs in Brickell West. We wanted to put some numbers on this, and what we did in order to do that is we developed a scenario where the area would be 50 percent built out over the next 20 years, and we compared the amount of jobs and the wage impact during construction, and most importantly, the taxes per year that would occur if T36 [sic] -- or that would be limited if T36-24 [sic] were enacted rather than our suggested T6-36, and you can see that the difference in jobs would be 5, 000 jobs. The wage impact during construction would be 864 million in lost opportunity, and this is the most important one, the taxes per year would be $54 million different if T6-24 were enacted, and that -- the present value of that 54 million comes out -- over the 20 year period, comes out to $673 million. We wanted to do -- to see what one property would look like if T6-24 were enacted, so we took one currently being built property that's up there in the northern area of this and showed it -- it's being built under SD-7. If that were to be built -- would have been built under T6-24, the opportunity cost would have been 109 jobs less; wage would have been 22 million less, and you would be getting $1, 247, 000 of taxes per year less; present value of that's $15 million. Your own development people are showing that number 9 area down there in the bottom of this little map, which is to the west of Brickell Avenue, as being all one market area, so to consider T6 -- to consider Brickell West under -- should be considered as one market area with the rest of the Brickell area. Here are the -- that's area 9, west of Brickell. Do you have any questions of me? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Any questions? Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Mr. Brunson -- Mr. Schlosser: No. My name is -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- you did a -- Mr. Schlosser: -- Tom Schlosser. Commissioner Sarnoff Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Schlosser. Mr. Schlosser: OK. Commissioner Sarnoff Your firm is Sharpton Brunson. Mr. Schlosser: Yes, it is. Commissioner Sarnoff I apologize. You have a great many numbers here. How much would the public benefits have been for all these buildings, to go from a T4 -- what is it, T --? Mr. Schlosser: That's my first slide, the one that shows the $673 million tax difference over 20 years. That's for the whole area at a 50 percent build out. Commissioner Sarnoff At 50 percent build out -- City ofMiami Page 113 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Schlosser: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff -- you're saying it would be more profitable for the City by $673, 000? Mr. Schlosser: Six hundred and seventy-three million dollars is the -- Commissioner Sarnoff Million dollars. Mr. Schlosser: -- present value of the $54 million a year in taxes that the City would collect. Commissioner Sarnoff And what does that consider in terms of -- this is just with taxes, right? Doesn't have anything to do with wages? Mr. Schlosser: There's the tax aspect of it. The wages difference -- during the construction period, over the 20 year period, the difference in wages is $864 million difference. Commissioner Sarnoff But are you considering the wages as part of the -- is that part of your analysis? Mr. Schlosser: Yes. It's on this slide. The wages -- in other words, a billion dollars, six thirteen -- a billion, six -- thirteen million in wages would be earned at a 50 percent build out in this area under T6-36. Commissioner Sarnoff So if 50 percent of the land were built out -- Mr. Schlosser: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff -- then you would have a $673 million dollar aggregate net gain? Mr. Schlosser: In taxes, yes. Commissioner Sarnoff In taxes -- Mr. Schlosser: Right. Commissioner Sarnoff -- and that considers -- does that take into consideration the difference with the public benefits portion? Mr. Schlosser: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff It does? Mr. Schlosser: It's taxes. I don't know what you mean by public benefits. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, how much would they pay --? Let's just say, for instance, they -- they're building to 36. A T6-24 can get to 36, correct? Mr. Schlosser: T6 -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes. Mr. Schlosser: -- I'm sorry. I didn't follow you. You -- I didn't follow your question. Commissioner Sarnoff No. My question is kind of elemental, which is a T6-24 can get to a T6-36; they just need to pay a public benefits portion. City ofMiami Page 114 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff My question to you is -- Mr. Schlosser: Yes, they could. Commissioner Sarnoff -- at a -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff Right -- Mr. Schlosser: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff -- so my question to you is, at a 50 percent build -out rate in the entire Brickell West area, how much would the City take in in public benefits? Mr. Schlosser: I didn't do that calculation to move it from T6-24 to T6-36. Commissioner Sarnoff Wouldn't that be relevant for us to consider? Mr. Schlosser: Yes, it might be. I didn't do that, though. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Got anymore questions? Commissioner Sarnoff No. Unidentified Speaker: Guillermo. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Next. Guillermo. Commissioner Regalado: I have a question, and maybe, Guillermo, you -- we're still on Brickell West. Guillermo Omedillo: Yes, sir. Commissioner Regalado: If that area has all the categories requested in all the Planning plans for growth and for density, is it logical that it would be recommended like that, while in other areas that does not have the infrastructure, Metrorail, Metromover, buses, it's been recommended for more density. You been a planner forever -- Mr. Omedillo: Too many years. Commissioner Regalado: -- why -- how can we understand this recommendation here and the other here, if you have all the criteria that is requested in terms of transportation? Let's say New York. You have a little New York because within -- between five walking miles, you have all the subway entrances, let's say, so why do you think it's been recommended differently than other parts? Mr. Omedillo: Well, ifI -- let me enter the record, and good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, Chairman. Guillermo Omedillo, for the record, 1450 Madruga Avenue, Suite 203, Coral Gables, Florida. The question -- I wish I had a quick yes -or -no answer. Perhaps, ifI make a very short presentation, it will illustrate better in trying to respond to your question. It'll be a better, more complete answer to your question, ifI may, Mr. Chairman. You're taking the City ofMiami Page 115 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 opportunity now to take a comprehensive look at the zoning of the City. Obviously, you're going by quadrant. That's a decision that this Commission made, and that, of course, has its consequences, but you're looking fundamentally at the principles that give the base upon which Miami 21 is built. You have principles such as concentrate, not sprawl. You have principles that have been passed by the County. The urban development boundary is one of them, and let me try to keep pace with the graphics. The urban infill area is another principle that was adopted by the County so as to concentrate rather than sprawl development. The other principle that you have to use is that you have to use your existing infrastructure and your program infrastructure effectively and efficiently. When you look at examples like the transportation infrastructure existing in the Brickell area -- andl will not differentiate between Brickell East and Brickell West because when you see the graphic, you will realize that it should be treated as the same way for the entire area, simply because you have -- first of all, you have the Metrorail station, which is located right smack in the middle of the entire district. When you draw the five-minute or ten-minute circles -- walking circles, you will see that everything falls within those two circles. Then you add to it the fact that you have PeopleMover stations throughout, and then you have the bus routes that traverse the area. The other thing that you have to consider is that this is a somewhat isolated area. You have the bay; you have the Miami River; you have 1-95, and to the south, you have an area which traditionally has been treated by the City for many, many years as a residential district; different densities, but essentially, a residential district, so you have very well-defined boundaries. It's not only well located for those purposes and is well served by the infrastructure of transportation, but also remember that the main sewer lines that go through this area are the ones that are closest to the treatment plant, which is located out in Virginia Key, so you're talking about an area that it's better served than many of the other areas of the City simply because its location in relationship to the infrastructure. The other thing is that you have the buffers that I mentioned, and when you look at the buffers that exist between this area and the residential area that is to the west of 1-95, you will see that it's a very generous buffer. One, because 1-95 is elevated; two, because the right-of-way for 1-95 is really wide. We have sketch that shows the dimensions, but I'm not going to go into that type of detail. The other thing that you need to take note of in this slide is that you have the Metrorail line, and you have the Metrorail station right in the middle of that district. The market also has told you certain things. You see to the top of the slide two blue areas. Those areas were rezoned by this Commission, and those are the areas that have really responded by creating development west of the Metrorail line. Obviously, there was something there that was lacking at the time that development was going to go in there, and the property owners of these two properties or three properties saw it fit to bring it in front of you to have that zoning changed in order to be able to meet the demands of the market, so you have a number of things. You have transportation infrastructure. You have the sewage infrastructure. You have the concepts of infill, and you have the concepts of concentrate around the points of transportation infrastructure rather than sprawl. You have the buffers. You have the market that indicates that it is feasible to do a T6-36 or its equivalent within the same area, so in conclusion, I have to say, Commissioner, this is an area which is ripe for redevelopment, and the way that the market has indicated that it will redevelop, it will be in the form of a T6-36, so there are a number of things, and forgive me for giving you a long answer to a short question, but I believe this area is ripe for a type of higher intensity/higher density development simply because the conditions that prevail throughout the area. There are other areas in the City that are not as well served from the transportation facilities that exist here and may not have the same infrastructure of services. By that, I mean parks and open space, or may have other conditions such as sewage and water that -- water lines that do not serve to the same capacity that these -- that this particular area is served with, so I -- if you give me a specific one, I can look at it, and from the locational standpoint, I can tell you, location wise, butl couldn't tell you as to the infrastructure. I could tell you about the transportation infrastructure, but nothing that is buried underground, such as water, sewer, and treatment capacity. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you. City ofMiami Page 116 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Anymore questions? Thank you so much. Mr.Omedillo: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Next speaker, three minutes. Santiago Echemendia: Mr. Chair, Santiago Echemendia, 1441, on behalf of Brickell West, or on behalf of Brickell Village Land Corp., specifically. We are in favor ofMiami 21. We'd like to commend the Mayor, the Administration, DPZ. They've done a fabulous job, subject to our proposed adjustment, of course, and some of the other adjustments that think you heard earlier today. Commissioner Sarnoff, to address your issue on the -- because I had asked the same question regarding the bonuses, that the disparity is so great between the 50 million in bonuses monies that you guys have secured over the last 20 years relative to the 673 million that are projected to be secured vis-a-vis the increase in the tax base, that we thought it was nominal, especially in light of the fact that the proposed bonuses are about three times the price of the old bonuses because the old bonuses were based on gross. These are based on -- I'm sorry, the other way around, but they end up being three times as expensive as the bonuses were in the past, so the likelihood of somebody buying up from a 36 or a 24 is less so than it used to be, and it wasn't an issue of height. It was an issue of FAR, et cetera. There was an architect that earlier -- I believe it was Dean, who suggested that really the buy up shouldn't be based on height. You're penalizing folks for putting taller, more handsome buildings. Instead, the bonus buy up should be on either density or FAR, so that's kind of my personal opinion, butt share that -- Commissioner Sarnoff Does handsome -- Mr. Echemendia: -- with the architect, as well. Commissioner Sarnoff -- always go with taller? Mr. Echemendia: I'm sorry? Commissioner Sarnoff Does taller and handsome always go hand in hand? Mr. Echemendia: Well, certainly, a taller, thinner building -- I mean, just think of a squat Manhattan versus the Manhattan that you have today. Under a form -based code, as we have today, there's the possibility that, in fact, it will have aflat top in some instances, as opposed to having spires jutting up in a handsome or architecturally aesthetic fashion. The other point that I wanted to note because, you know, I think our presenters and our experts have really given you the substance, is the issue of -- DPZ has done a great job, but DPZ is a recommending consultant. Ultimately, the decision is yours. You guys could further tweak this; you can modify it. You don't have to accept everything that they're proposing. Why do I say that? Because at one point in the process, you may recall -- I believe we had a perspective compromise settlement with respect to the Brickell West area, where you were supportive, where the Manager was supportive, and the response that we got back was that DPZ said no. We submit to you that, with all due respect to them, they're not the ones who are ultimately deciding what goes into this document and into the new zoning code. We would submit to you that, in light of the evidence that you've heard attested to by your former principal planner that has spent a tremendous amount of time, our entire team, in looking at this area, and analyzing it further than DPZ has -- because, frankly, they've had a daunting task; they haven't had the time -- that, in light of the analysis, the area analysis, the contextual that our experts have put into this, or the analysis that they've put into this that, in fact, we believe that a T6-36 with an FLR of 12 is supportive, is compatible, and would be the right decision in terms of the public interest in favor of the City of Miami. Commissioner Sarnoff So taller and more handsome buildings? City ofMiami Page 117 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Echemendia: Taller, thinner versus squatty similar buildings, yes. Commissioner Sarnoff Gotcha. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. OK. No more questions? Does that conclude your --? Thank you. Unidentified Speaker: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Who's next? Robert Mayer: Robert Mayer. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Sir, you're recognized for the record. Three minutes. Mr. Mayer: Thank you. I also have Sylvia Wong with me from Wong Foods. Her address is 400 Northeast 62nd. We're here presenting a petition -- I'd like to read it into the record -- signed by about 65 to 70 businesses, individuals, representing businesses, the hundred of employees, properties worth hundreds of millions of dollars, volunteers active in the community, and developers. We're all active in and support our community, and we've all been very active in this process. Rarely have these groups ever come together in support of the same cause, but independently, and then, collectively, we have all concluded that if Miami 21 is to have the best chance to succeed, you must defer its approval or at least its implementation in the Upper Eastside quadrant at this time. You need to do this until all the questions have been asked -- notice, I didn't say answered because I don't think all the questions have been answered in our quadrant, but all the questions have been asked from all four quadrants. If you do not do this, we fear monumental confusion, severe and adverse economic impact, unlimited litigation and cost to our area and the City when both can afford it least. Rest assured, we are not anti Miami 21. In fact, many of us strongly support its goals and its eventual implementation, but we have identified several areas -- you've heard a lot of them today, so I won't go through them. I've got one at the end I'll go into in particular that hasn't really been raised, but as currently written, we see many negative and substantially adverse economic consequences to all levels of our City's citizens and businesses, particularly on the small businesses, property owners, and most dangerously, affordable housing, both its building, construction, and its financing. Many of these could be fixed, but they haven't been. Other provisions ofMiami 21 are inconsistent, poorly drafted, or just plain confusing or incomplete. We congratulate you on starting this endeavor, and we're talking about the Mayor who did a great job in recognizing this issue, the Commissioners, the consultants that have been involved, the City planners that have worked night and day on this, and all of the citizens that have been involved. This has been a great process, but it's not done. The City's current Code -- Zoning Code can and must be improved or extensively updated. In support of that, we, as a group, have met numerous times, been involved in the drafting and comment on Miami 21, and most recently, met as a very divergent and quite often, contentious group to intensively review the latest drafts we got ofMiami 21, including the changes posted on the Web site the day after the PAB approved it, and the 20-page -- plus pages that was proposed and then submitted, unevaluated and unchallenged, months later to you all literally the day before your last meeting. Simply put, the more changes we see, the more dismayed we are that the other quadrants haven't been involved. These last-minute changes, along with other issues that are unaddressed and unresolved in our quadrant alone make it clear there is still much work to do in this major and much needed effort. These last-minute major changes by DPZ has -- which are a result of meetings in just our quadrant, strongly indicate that all four quadrants should be allowed to weigh in with their unique concerns and test the water and ask their questions. Experimenting in one area, particularly an area as poor and challenged and frustrated as this area has been with the Little Haiti Park and the other issues that we've had, could well destroy businesses and lives. Representing many divergent interests -- City ofMiami Page 118 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: Sir, may I interrupt you for a minute? Mr. Mayer: Yes. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Your time is up. You have time. Would you like to transfer it to him? Sylvia Wong: I would like to transfer my three minutes to Mr. Robert Mayer. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Could we --? OK. Sir, you're recognized for the record. Mr. Mayer: Thank you. Representing these very divergent interests, we ask that the City conduct a study of the impact of implementing Miami 21 only in the Upper Eastside quadrant by itself at this time, and that the stand-alone code of the City, under a separate set of rules and operational procedures mandating that the City's already overburdened departments, which have enough difficulties meeting the requirements and reporting to the State, and creating two separate divisions, two separate boards, two separate sets of rules, conflicting major city codes at the same time is going to create great expense and confusion. Doing this in the face of a massive property tax change that is impending on all of us could be a disaster not just for our quadrant, but for the entire city. We strongly encourage you all to defer this until you get it right. Now the one issue -- because all the others have been addressed quite substantially -- that we really want you to think about is the reverse of the issue that you heard from the Cocoanut Grove Council. The Cocoanut Grove Council is concerned about not having their input. We're concerned about that too, but we are even more concerned that the Miami 21 might be implemented in our quadrant, on our properties, and that over the next two to three to four, or however many years it takes, there would then be subsequent and additional substantial changes. We know they're going to happen. You know they're going to happen. You've heard some of them today. You came up with issues today and resolutions to some of those issues today, but what happens to our quadrant that got stuck with the first set of the Code and acted on it? We're stuck in the past. We had buildings in the past. We strongly encourage you to look at this as a citywide problem; get the City's input across-the-board, and then implement it. Commissioner Sarnoff You want -- Mr. Mayer: Don't do it piecemeal. Commissioner Sarnoff -- the suffering to go around the whole city, right? Mr. Mayer: We want the benefit to go to the whole city and the suffering; you're right, Commissioner. I also presented over there something) was asked to present by two of the Commissioners, which was a proposal on the T5, increasing the public benefit section to T5, with adjustments for the concurrency. That addition -- if you look at the maps, just in our quadrant, you would treble the amount of areas that could contribute to or benefit from the public benefits section. As currently written, it is T6 only, and a "may"provision about T5 housing that is abutting Dl. That's a very, very limited answer to the PAB's request that affordable housing be enhanced. We think it's completely inadequate. Commissioner Sarnoff You're saying T5 that abuts DI should be allowed to get what? Mr. Mayer: Actually, DPZ's proposal -- PAB, when they passed this on to you, a month and a half ago, I think it was, they had three conditions in passing it on. One of those was an extensive or substantial increase in the affordable housing component. The only thing we've seen -- well, there's two things. One is there's a little more -- there's more oversight, and that was good, and that's a good response, but the actual affordable housing impact that we see is very minor because they added a sentence in that's a little bit of wild sentence into Section 311 that says you City ofMiami Page 119 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 can get -- you may get an additional floor on T5 properties that abut Dl. That's a very small section. I mean, you could count them almost on your hands and feet in our -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well, what is your -- Mr. Mayer: -- quadrant. Commissioner Sarnoff -- proposal? What is your proposal? Mr. Mayer: Our proposal is that all of T5 would be subject to the public benefits section. This means that they could build -- use the public benefits additional height and the additional density for affordable housing/workforce housing, or they could contribute to that program and put more money into the City funds, and if you look at that section of property that's T5, not abutting T3, you would find that that is almost trebling the amount of what DPZ has proposed, which is the T5 abuttingDl. Commissioner Sarnoff Does any T5 abut T3? Mr. Mayer: Yes. We have an exception. In the proposal you have, just like the T6 that cannot get public benefits if it abuts T3, our proposal also eliminates public benefits eligibility if it abuts T3. We actually took it a step further. Vice Chairman Sanchez: But don't think you have any property there that abuts T3. Mr. Mayer: I know, but I'm draft -- we drafted it for -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh. Mr. Mayer: -- the whole City. We weren't thinking just about our quadrant. We took one step further. We took it one step further. We thought that T5 abutting T4 R should get a less extensive benefit because the people in T4 R -- you know, it's shorter; it's more residential. If it's T4 L, T4 0, or T5 R, it would get two floors, and if it's T5, then you could get the three floors. What we're trying to do is to enhance the transition to eliminate that jump, and one of the other reasons for this is if you look at T5, it's 65 units an acre. If you look at T6, it's 150 units an acre, and there's no transition, and you have properties directly next to each other that you're going from 65 units to 150 units. You can't build affordable housing in this city at 65 units an acre. Commissioner Sarnoff And what would your change -- how many units per acre would you increase to? Mr. Mayer: Depending on what you're co -- located next to, it would go up to -- if you were adjacent to T4, I believe the proposal is -- I think it would -- went -- took it from 65 to 90. If you're adjacent to T5 R, it took it to 105, I think, and the max would be 120, so it provides a transition. If you're doing something good for the City, the public benefits, you could actually transition that, and we would not have this jump up and down proposal that you currently have. As it's currently written, T6 next to T4 could be -- you've got your three or four stories there, and T6 next to T4 could jump up all the way to 12 floors. You could have an eight floor gap, and we think that's wrong. Commissioner Regalado: That's mainly industrial, right? Mr. Mayer: This quadrant -- and the majority of people who signed this petition are commercial owners and businesspeople. There is a huge section which is all residential. Our actual commercial component is surrounded by residential. We have Morningside. We have the little area just on the other side of the railroad tracks. It's highly residential. West of us is all City ofMiami Page 120 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 residential. In fact, the property that I own and that Sylvia owns, we're directly next to the Little Haiti Park, which the City has just built for -- I don't know whether it's 25, 35, 45 million at today's date, but it's quite a bit of money, and between that and the Lemon City Library Park and the Little Haiti Cultural Campus, so we're in a hugely residential area that we, as business owners, are talking about, but the proposal we made on the T5, as we drafted it -- and we met with ACORN. We met with quite a few of the affordable housing folks, as well, and spoke to them about it. The proposal really is supposed to be a citywide proposal because if you believe in affordable housing, then this should impact the entire city, and it should happen now, and we shouldn't limit it to T6. Commissioner Sarnoff But you're presently zoned T5 and have no benefits, correct? I'm -- yeah, you can get no public benefit. You can -- Mr. Mayer: Yeah. If you want to talk about my property, I have two city blocks, which is -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: T4, not T5. Mr. Mayer: -- T5 -- no. Mine is T5 and T5 0 -- Commissioner Sarnoff And that -- Mr. Mayer: -- andl can't do anything with public benefits. I can't contribute to it. I can't buy extra height. I can't benefit from it and build more units. I'm stuck at 65 units in an area that everybody has said should be affordable housing. Vice Chairman Sanchez: I believe T5 can buy -- Mr. Mayer: I don't abutDl. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh. Commissioner Regalado: So you cannot contribute -- Mr. Mayer: That's correct. Commissioner Regalado: -- to the public benefit? Mr. Mayer: I cannot contribute to it or re -- or -- Commissioner Regalado: And you would? Mr. Mayer: Oh, absolutely. I had four different groups that walked away from our property when we found out that we were T5 L and T5 0 and the public benefits does not apply to it -- Commissioner Regalado: Well -- Mr. Mayer: -- and every one of them was an -- Commissioner Regalado: -- why -- Mr. Mayer: -- affordable housing developer. Commissioner Regalado: -- would they walk away if Miami 21 has not been implemented yet? Mr. Mayer: Because of the timing. I mean, they go through this process -- when these guys City ofMiami Page 121 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 build affordable housing, quite a few of them are doing it through the State program, and so they have to get the property under contract; they have to get the proposals; they go to the State; they go into a lottery program. They all have perfect applications, every one of them. Two years ago, we went through this process. There were 35 or 40 applications. Every one of them got a 100 score, so then they have a lottery about who wins, and you get your lottery number, and if it's good, you get to built your project. The numbers that these guys deal with are very narrow. The profitability threshold is very, very narrow on affordable housing, and when you say to somebody you can buy this property and build 65 units on it versus 150 units on it, you're going to end up with bigger units, which is not -- makes it less affordable, and you're going to end up, because of the five stories, you have more cost for the stairs, for the -- all the areas that a normal building would have in affordable housing. It becomes more expensive per unit, and I'm not the builder. I don't do this. I'm just the guy who owns the land that's met with them and gotten a real education about Miami 21 from their point of view as they are looking at it. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: So what would be the best scenario for the Little Haiti Park to be a very active, crime free park? Mr. Mayer: The Little Haiti Park is currently getting close to being done, and it has a lot of businesses around it right now. The -- at one time, the proposal was it would have T5 L around it, which would have allowed some residences, some eyes on the park, and actually, the park consultants were in favor of that, and we thought that's what was going to happen with it. Everything south of the park is being converted to T5 L or T5 O. There's some further south of us that becomes T4. One of the problems with that is we are currently an industrial area. We have a lot of uses that will become nonconforming, but -- and my use, which is a trailer park, is residential. I'm probably the only guy in there that could make an argument that I might be conforming, butt still can't tell you that am 'cause haven't quite found that provision in there. The way to make that park best would be to have it surrounded by T5 0, to allow the maximum -- the least nonconforming uses, and to allow people, as they rebuild those buildings, to have work below -- live -work, as Mr. Pumo was talking about, and residences above; people to use it, people to look at it, people to protect it with their eyes, and don't own any property on that park, so I'm telling you my view from what I've heard from the consultants and from what I've heard from all of these other property owners. From my point of view, I would like to see public benefits for T5 because we'll treble the amount of areas that can contribute to and benefit from -- Commissioner Regalado: But when you -- Mr. Mayer: -- public benefits. Commissioner Regalado: -- went to the consultants and the City planners and you say I want to contribute to the public benefits. I have people that are willing to do affordable. Why you don't let me? And their response was? Mr. Mayer: Well, the response we get is that they've looked at this area and that's appropriate, according to their concepts, and T5 -- the actual proposal in front of you, slightly different than that, has been presented to them, I know for a fact, by at least one Commissioner's office. It's been presented to them. It's been on the Web site. I've sent it to them directly. I've never gotten a response to it. Commissioner Regalado: So we promise affordable housing. We try to look for people who are willing to take a risk because, as you say, affordable housing is a very minimal profit, but we don't want affordable housing in one area -- Mr. Mayer: We desperate -- City ofMiami Page 122 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Regalado: -- but we don't know why. Mr. Mayer: -- we desperately need it. We talk about it being a major goal. I know it's a goal of -- at -- every Commissioner I've talked to -- and I've talked to every one of them, except for Commissioner Gonzalez personally over the last two or three years, andl know you all are in support of it, andl know the Mayor is in support of it, but it doesn't seem to get into the Code. It's just not there. The PAB -- Commissioner Regalado: So what's -- Mr. Mayer: -- demanded it, and it's not there. Commissioner Regalado: -- the mystery here? Mr. Mayer: I can't answer that question, sir. Commissioner Regalado: OK. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, Elizabeth is -- can you answer it Elizabeth? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: There -- I think there are two issues here. One is the location of the T5, and the other one is the bonus floor, and -- with regard to its adjacency. I think-- andl will admit that we started out at one point with a bonus on T5 of one floor across-the-board, and we heard concerns about its proximity often to lower residential areas, and the suggestions which we picked up on were that anything below six -- T6 should not be bonused, so we rolled back on that. When it became -- as the pressure in the other direction began to rise, we said adjacent to the districts -- to the former commercial and industrial areas. It would not be impacting the residential -- surrounding residential area, so I'm just giving you the sequence of the kind of back and forth about it. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, in your opinion, will it affect a T4 if they -- what is it, two stories they want, or is it --? You want density, don't you? You want 65 units to -- you want 65 units per acre to go to 90 or --? Mr. Mayer: What I'm told is that it's the units because you don't want the size because then it makes it less affordable. Commissioner Sarnoff Right -- Mr. Mayer: You want the units. Commissioner Sarnoff -- so does 90 units or 95 units suffice for you per acre? Mr. Mayer: For certain properties, it would. The problem is that in certain properties, it won't. I mean, you have to look at them on a one -by -one basis. That's why we made that proposal. If they're in a -- surrounded by other T5 and they build affordable housing, they should get the maximum benefit. If they're next to a T4 R, they should get less. We're trying to -- and frankly, I think that should apply to T6, as well. It doesn't right now. In T6, as long as you're not next to T3, you've got 150 units, plus bonuses up to four floors, and you could be next to T4 R, so -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: I need to explain that because -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Please do. City ofMiami Page 123 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- you have to understand that we're not starting from scratch. This isn't an empty piece of paper, so besides the fact that we're translating the prior code into the new one -- andl think you all have heard us say at least once that we're being very careful not to do upzoning in -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: In certain areas. Downzoning in (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- an intense way that would preclude future benefit for the City through the upzoning or special area plan process, but also, the density is related to the Comprehensive Plan, so part of that translation from the old code categories to the new one was an attempt to bring along the existing densities in the Code so that we would not be engaging a massive Comprehensive Plan change in that way. There is a provision for changing zoning and -- in two different ways in the future, which would apply to this issue as well as the prior speaker's. I hope that explains why we are where we are. Vice Chairman Sanchez: I just have one question, Mr. Mayers [sic], and we're talking about the industrial area, Mrs. Wong, that you own. Has there been any changes to that? I know you've been very involved in the process with DPZ. Have they made any changes to the industrial area, allowing you to do things, benefits? Mr. Mayer: The industrial area that remains industrial, the DI and D2, there's been some changes back and forth. There was a change to remove some of the uses, I believe -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Right. Mr. Mayer: --from D1, butl can't comment on that as much as, for instance, Mr. Pumo, because I was working on a different aspect of this. This was a team effort of a lot of people. Vice Chairman Sanchez: I understand. I -- but there were some changes to the -- Mr. Mayer: Well, I was looking at more the way they applied the transects to the pieces of property. For instance, it was -- there were some DI along the railroad tracks that didn't abut the railroad tracks. That got fixed The -- we got through to the (UNINTET,TIGIBT,F) folks and got them to understand. That got fixed, and then the property along the park, which was T5 L, went back to being Dl. In terms of usability -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Let me ask -- my question is going to be simple. Before, when it was industrial, now with the changes, what do you allow extra in the -- in your prop -- in the property that Mrs. -- Mr. Mayer: My property -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- Wong owns? Mr. Mayer: -- was C-2 and light industrial, and -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Right. Mr. Mayer: -- we have almost eight acres. As I've been told by the folks that were going to develop it -- and a couple of them were actually sent to us by the Commissioners who wanted us to deal with these affordable housing folks. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Right. Mr. Mayer: At that time, they were looking at 150 units an acre. They were looking at City ofMiami Page 124 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 eight -story buildings. The zoning we have right now, as it currently exists, means we can build five stories, 65 units an acre. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. OK. All right. Any further questions? If not, next speaker. Mr. Mayer: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Three minutes. Fran Bohnsack: Commissioner, I want to thank my colleague, the other professional who waits in line, for letting me go first. I quite literally have to be on a boat at -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: I'm sorry. Ms. Bohnsack: -- 7, so -- my name is Fran Bohnsack. I'm with the Miami River Marine Group. I think you know that's an organization of the marine industry working on the Miami River. That includes the cargo carriers, the boatyards, the tugboats, the recreational boat repair places, et cetera. I'm here because we have been participants in this process for --from the beginning, for the past two years, and in fact, we laud the Mayor's initiative and the goal ofMiami 21, and we had a certain degree of comfort with how the river was treated in terms of its marine industry right up until June 20 of 2007. That's a little over a week ago, when an amendment was made to Miami 21 having to do with setback and waterfront walkway regulations. Up to this point, and even before Miami 21, back with the Miami River Commission working on the greenway for the river, the marine industrial properties were always exempted from that. In other words, the greenway would go by them, but not intrude across them, and that was for reasons mostly of safety, but also, in some cases, of security with restrictions from Homeland Security if their cargo areas -- so that was good, and we had no setback requirements. The amendment that appeared on June 20 now has imposed a 20 foot setback on DI andD2, which is the light industry and the heavy industry. Commissioner Regalado: How long? Ms. Bohnsack: Pardon me? Commissioner Regalado: How much of a setback? Ms. Bohnsack: Twenty feet. It doesn't sound like much, but -- Commissioner Regalado: Is that -- you said June 20? Ms. Bohnsack: Yes. Commissioner Regalado: That was the week -- Ms. Bohnsack: Yes. Commissioner Regalado: -- after we have the workshop here. Mr. Manager, did we discuss that amendment in the workshop that we did here? Mr. Hernandez: Commissioner, I know that Brett Bibeau gave me a copy of his comments, his remaining comments. He told me that everything else he felt had been resolved. He had a few outstanding comments. He gave them to me. I provided that information to our Planning Department to further look at it. I need to basically ask them if they were able to incorporate or not those additional comments. Commissioner Regalado: No, but what I'm asking is did we were able to discuss -- because City ofMiami Page 125 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 there was some of the issues in the workshop that we had here in this chamber -- the setback, the amendment, what appears all of a sudden? We didn't discuss this, nor we were informed, right? Mr. Hernandez: I don't think that item was discussed because Brett wasn't here. He had to leave. Commissioner Regalado: Who what? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: We haven't made any amendments after the workshop. I think the timing is - Mr. Hernandez: No. There were no amendments made after the workshop, but Brett Bibeau, from the Miami River Commission, he -- I talked to him before the workshop. He had some comments. He had told me that he -- that the other issues had been resolved. There were a few pending items, and the items were referred to Planning to take another look at them. Commissioner Regalado: So there is an amendment proposed now on the Miami River? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: May I speak to this? Because I think can -- Commissioner Regalado: Yes, please. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- resolve it. Commissioner Regalado: Yes, please. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: There are no amendments between the workshop and now. We did receive a letter from the River Commission asking for a dimensional change in the setback for the industrial properties, and there's no problem with doing that, but we didn't want to make those changes between the time that you had the workshop and this reading, so that's one of the things I'm going to come back at the end and talk to you about that we can accomplish before the second reading. The letter -- Commissioner Regalado: So -- wait, wait, wait, wait. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: This refers -- Commissioner Regalado: So there is no 20 feet setback now? There is -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: There is -- Commissioner Regalado: -- nothing proposed on a -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: In the document, currently, it's there. Ms. Bohnsack is correct, but the River Commission sent us a letter, which I think you have on file today because it was handed to me this morning, saying that that needs to change, and we understood that that was a mistake, -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: And it will be changed. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- so we will change that. Commissioner Regalado: It was a mistake -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes. It was a mis -- City ofMiami Page 126 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Regalado: -- so there is no -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: It was a mistake -- Commissioner Regalado: -- requirement -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- so it will -- Commissioner Regalado: -- or setback? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: There will not be. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: There will not be. Are we sure? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes, we are. You know, much of what's going into this one document -- Commissioner Regalado: But it's been three years. You have the brightest minds working with you, and you are just saying that it was a mistake? It was somebody wrote something that -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes. I have acknowledged -- Commissioner Regalado: -- was weird -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- that for the -- and for the following reason. The existing documents which cover these kinds of regulations are spread throughout various City documents and legislation, and part of this enormous effort has been bringing regulations from many documents into one, so I think we have -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Listen -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- caught a tremendous amount of them, and -- Commissioner Regalado: When would -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- we're getting this one now. Commissioner Regalado: -- you think it would had happened if we had passed this today and no one caught the mistake, not even the Miami River -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: You were going to bring it -- Commissioner Regalado: -- Commission, not even us? I mean, we had -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Well -- Commissioner Regalado: -- a situation like that. No one read the first page of a contract, and we were sue, and we're paying millions of dollar. There are several restaurants on the river -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Jesus Christ. Commissioner Regalado: -- if they have to -- a storm comes, and if they have to rebuild, a 20 feet setback will completely eliminate all the tables that look at the water, so the restaurant will be gone. City ofMiami Page 127 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Plater-Zyberk: We understand. Unidentified Speaker: That's right. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: Are there any other mistakes that we should know? I mean, any surprise? Vice Chairman Sanchez: You're bringing it back as an amendment, right? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes. We would -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- we will -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Do you want to address the issue? Come on. We got to get going. Robert Ruano: Yeah. Commissioners, I'd just like to make a comment for the record. Robert Ruano, director of Grants and Sustainable Initiatives. The River Commission did meet in April, and this was brought up as a recommendation to exempt marine industrial. I brought the point up, and we discussed it. We decided to take that section out of it. The letter that you have says that we voted for it, but we didn't. We didn't vote to exempt marine industrial. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Thanks for the clarification. I don't think you need to clarify anything. Are you done? Ms. Bohnsack: Are we -- does this mean that we're good to go to take this out? That's my question. Vice Chairman Sanchez: I believe that's -- Commissioner Regalado: Nobody knows. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- I believe that was put on the record. Ms. Bohnsack: OK. Vice Chairman Sanchez: I mean, I understood it. Ms. Bohnsack: Oh, I'm a little concerned -- Mr. -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Ms. Bohnsack: -- Ruano just made a statement that it's not my understanding of what happened at the Miami River Commission, so I just wanted to express my concern; please ask you all, Commissioners -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Bohnsack: -- to be vigilant. There isn't much left in that area, but as goes eastern quadrant, so may go the others, so please help us protect the marine industry. Thank you. City ofMiami Page 128 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Who's next? Bob, are you next or --? Ma'am -- Bob Powers: She is. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- three minutes. State your name and address -- Judy Pruitt: Thank you very much. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- for the record. Ms. Pruitt: My name is Judy Pruitt. I live at 837 Navarre Avenue, in Coral Gables. Although my name is Pruitt, I do not know the other Pruitt that was here from Coconut Grove. I have a letter to the City of Miami Commissioners. I'm the current president of Dade Heritage Trust. We're a 501(c)3. Dade Heritage Trust, Miami's largest nonprofit historic preservation organization, supports the City ofMiami's efforts to develop Miami 21 as a long-range comprehensive and more just plan for growth. As explained to our board of trustees, Miami's 21 provisions, especially relating to transfer of development rights, or TDRs, will encourage historic preservation efforts and the protection of historic sites and neighborhoods, goals which Dade Heritage Trust heartily embraces. Dade Heritage Trust supports Miami 21 as a concept and urges your enactment of provisions that will encourage property owners to preserve and restore rather than demolish historic buildings. We believe that renovating, rather than destroying older buildings, preserves a sense of historic and place, conserves environmental resources, and enriches the texture of our community, making a Miami a more varied and interesting place to live. Thank you very much for your efforts to enhance Miami's quality of life through controlled growth and historic preservation efforts, andl would like to put this into the matter of record andl -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Pruitt: -- also have economic impacts of historic preservation in Florida I would like to give you. Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, ma'am. Please turn it in to the Clerk, and thank you. Sir, you're recognized for the record. Mr. Powers: Thank you. My name's Bob Powers. I live at 565 Northeast 66 Street, Apartment 2. I own that property. My property falls into a nonconforming use, as does about two-thirds of my neighborhood. The problem with the procedures and nonconformities is is that they are quite vexing to read and go through, andl consider myself pretty astute, andl find myself at a loss, I would say, to try to figure out some of this stuff and to go back to what DPZ has brought up a couple of times when they talk about repairs and maintenance. The part they fail to realize is what they have written is -- it says here -- andl got to read it -- repair or replacement of load -bearing walls, or the bearing walls where it necessary for structural safety, fixtures, wiring, or plumbing, to an exist -- extensive and extend involving up to 20 percent of the gross square footage of the portion of the building or the structure, nonconforming. Vice Chairman Sanchez: What --? Mr. Powers: That's what it says, OK, so I'll tell you where you can find that. That's -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Bob, what's the number? Mr. Powers: -- page 40. Vice Chairman Sanchez: 7? Page 40? City ofMiami Page 129 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Powers: It's item "E." Now half -- the reason this is called the Magic City is it was built -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: No. Mr. Powers: -- within 40 years, completely. Every piece of property was built on. That's why it's called the Magic City. I would venture to say that everybody sitting in this room owns a home of 40 years, if not older, which means you're going to the other part of this nonconformity thing. It's found in 7.2.3, nonconforming uses in land, water, or structures, or lands or waters in combination with structures. That's kind of misleading because when you read through it -- it's on page 42, Section B. Where all effective dates of adoption -- that means the minute that you guys adopt this, the 20 years starts that day. That's when the 20 years starts, and every 20 years, your property has to come before some board by way -- andl think it's by waiver. The waiver. This is the waiver application. It goes through one, two, three, four, five people review that to tell you whether you can keep your house or not keep your house; whether your building is going to be con -- renewed for a nonconforming use or not. In my case, the other part of the nonconforming use is the fact that ifI decide to take my property and turn it condo, I can't do it because that becomes another nonconforming use, so I'm in a quandary because that's not how I bought that property. I bought that property really to go out feet first in, but you know, I also bought it to retire. That's my retirement, so the thing here is that this whole thing is very, very complicating and very, very involved, and not that we -- I disagree, personally, with Miami 21 in concept. I do think that a great deal more work -- and it really goes -- and I'm speaking from a personal thing here, andl don't like the way it's landing on me. I really -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank -- Mr. Powers: -- don't. I find it -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- you. Any questions? Mr. Powers: -- offensive. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. City Attorney, does the present 11000 Code have the 20-year provision? Mr. Fernandez: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff Are you sure? Mr. Fernandez: Yes, it does. Mr. Powers: The difference with that, though, is that get a private company to come out and do the inspection, and then they send you guys the report -- Commissioner Regalado: Right. Mr. Powers: -- saying that the -- Commissioner Regalado: That's whatl did. Mr. Powers: -- inspections have been carried out. I don't have to go through five different people to have that done. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah. You hire a company. City ofMiami Page 130 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Powers: That's the difference. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah. Mr. Fernandez: But when you speak of nonconformities, you know, there are structures and uses, and within those are categories. I believe that what our existing Code 11000 speaks to is of uses -- is that correct? -- not perhaps to structures. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right, but see, that -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well, the structures -- I'm sorry. Vice Chairman Sanchez: No, no. It's OK. Commissioner Sarnoff -- are always grandfathered in, correct? The uses are grandfathered in so long as they're continuous, correct? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Twenty years. Commissioner Sarnoff You have 20 years, and then you apply for something? Just let her explain that to me because I'm -- Ms. Slazyk: This is no -- Commissioner Sarnoff I'm going on my 19th year. Ms. Slazyk: Right. Commissioner Sarnoff I want to make sure I'm conforming. Ms. Slazyk: I know. This is no different than it is today. In 1990, when we adopted -- oh, for the record, Lourdes Slazyk, Zoning administrator. When--1990, when we adopted 11000, there were a series of uses around the City that became nonconforming. In 20 years, which would be coming up in 2010, they would need to get special exceptions to be able to continue their nonconforming status for uses. Structures remain nonconforming as long as they're standing, legal nonconforming. Commissioner Sarnoff Most -- but most of us -- so if we're in the use category, we're really mostly talking about businesses, correct? Ms. Slazyk: Correct. Commissioner Sarnoff Are we ever talking about residential? Ms. Slazyk: There are nonconforming uses that are residential if you have multifamily in a single-family district. Commissioner Sarnoff So he has a legit -- Ms. Slazyk: If it has a CU (Certificate of Use), it's a use. Commissioner Sarnoff OK, and those of us that have residential don't have CUs. We just have COs (Certificates of Occupancy) -- Ms. Slazyk: Right, single family doesn't need a CU. City ofMiami Page 131 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff -- so once you get to a CU, you have to have that renewed every 20 years? Ms. Slazyk: Correct, and that's -- Commissioner Sarnoff So he -- Ms. Slazyk: -- three units or more when you become multifamily. Duplexes don't have CUs either. Vice Chairman Sanchez: And that we do now -- Ms. Slazyk: Yes. That's exactly the way it is today. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- but -- Mr. Powers: The -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- simpler. Now there's (UNINTELLIGIBLE). Mr. Powers: Yes, it's simpler. They're going to make it more complex. That's the issue at hand. Yes. Vice Chairman Sanchez: No, no, no, no, no. Mr. Powers: Yes. It goes to a waiver, then it has to go to a pre -application. Then it goes to file with Planning. Then it goes to Planning director. Then it goes to building permit. Vice Chairman Sanchez: No, no. Mr. Powers: You don't do that now. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Clarify that. Mr. Powers: No, you don't. Ms. Slazyk: What we're -- what this is is a chart saying what the process is, but if you have to get a special exception today, the process is similar. You have to file the application; go through a plan review. You have -- the steps are the same. We just have a chart now, where we don't in 11000. Commissioner Sarnoff So -- Ms. Slazyk: The steps are the same. Commissioner Sarnoff -- but his -- Mr. Powers: But that's not what it said in here. Commissioner Sarnoff -- building -- let's assume you just -- let's just use Bob because what better name than "Bob" to use as an example, so Bob has a nonconforming building under 11000 now. Do you have that? Mr. Powers: Yeah. City ofMiami Page 132 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff OK, so Bob has a nonconfirming -- forming 11000 building right now. He will equally have a nonconforming in 21, as well, right? Ms. Slazyk: Without reviewing his case, I don't know for sure because there are things in Miami 21 that are actually things that are nonconforming today will become nonconfor -- will become conforming. Commissioner Sarnoff Conforming. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Nonconforming (UNINTELLIGIBLE). Ms. Slazyk: There are a lot of uses -- if you're nonconforming today and -- I'll use the motels on Biscayne Boulevard as an example. They became nonconforming uses when we adopted SD-9 because it prohibits motels on the boulevard. Miami 21 is going to permit them again, so all of those nonconformities now go away. They will be conforming. Commissioner Sarnoff So it's a mixed bag. Ms. Slazyk: It's a mix -- there -- it's case -by -case review, which anyone that comes in for a building permit, we review the specifics of their case, and then tell them, OK, here are your options. Commissioner Sarnoff Is there a language we could put in this that would make someone like Bob feel more comfortable, so he doesn't feel like there's discretion -- Ms. Slazyk: I believe so, and we've been discussing it now of really trying to -- this was written a very long time ago. We carried it over to the most -- greatest extent possible from 11000 so that the rules wouldn't be different than they are today, but I think it could be simplified. Commissioner Sarnoff And we've done away with characteristic of use? Ms. Slazyk: Yes, we have. It's not in your draft, but since -- Commissioner Sarnoff We don't have a beauty parlor exception anymore? Ms. Slazyk: After the workshop we had, we had a staff meeting with Miami 21, with the consultants, and we're fine-tuning that and clar -- cleaning it up. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Commissioner Sarnoff Bob, we're going to get you that new language. Mr. Powers: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Sir, you're recognized for the record. Three minutes. Carter McDowell: Thank you very much. For the record, my name is Carter McDowell. I'm an attorney with Bilzin Sumberg. I'm here with my partner, Vicky Garcia -Toledo, and my associate, Carlos Gimenez, although I'm going to be the only one that speaks. This is an historic day in a lot of different ways, but in an attempt for a little bit of humor here, we have the Cocoanut Grove Civic Association, the greater Miami neighborhoods, the northeast neighborhoods, and everyone saying to you, "Don't do this yet; it's not ready." The development community is saying, "Don't City ofMiami Page 133 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 do it; it's not ready." There are a couple of people who have said, "It's OK, as long as you make my change, " but basically, nobody has come up -- well, that's not true. I don't want to exaggerate. Almost nobody has come up to you and said, "Boy, it's ready. Let's go." Commissioner Sarnoff They're all staying at home. They're that comfortable. Mr. McDowell: That may be the case. I would note, at the outset, a couple just minor procedural issues. The Mayor read the letter from DCA, the secretary of DCA this morning, and it points out something that is procedurally, extraordinarily important. The last line, the Department looks forward to working closely with the City as it processes the plan amendments needed to make Miami 21 a reality. State law requires that your land development regulations be consistent with your Comprehensive Plan. There are many aspects ofMiami 21 which are not consistent with your current Comprehensive Plan, and you are required to change the plan first, or at least, in parallel with your land development regulations, if you're going to adopt them, andl think the secretary clearly indicated that in -- as he closed his letter, so that is something that you will need to look at. Commissioner Sarnoff Wait, wait. Stop there. Is that going to be correct, Mr. City Attorney? Mr. Fernandez: Commissioners, that's already being taken care of. We're working on all the necessary comp plan changes so that before Miami 21 for this quadrant becomes effective, you would have your Comprehensive Plan in order. Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Sorry. Mr. McDowell: I would only give a footnote to that. It would not be a small area amendment because it doesn't qualify. It would have to go through a review at the State; that's a nine- to twelve-month process, so if you haven't filed, you got a long time before that's going to be an accurate statement, andl don't believe that you have filed. Mr. Fernandez: Yeah. Again, not to prolong this discussion and not to -- but there has been a change in the Legislature. The Governor has just signed a bill that basically puts us in a different footing, and we will be reporting to this Commission precisely how you need to proceed so that you are complying with the law at all times. Mr. McDowell: Let me give you a little bit of my background because I think it will help you understand some of my comments overall and give you a little bit of context. I'm an attorney, but I also have a master's degree in planning. I worked for the City ofMiami Planning Department in 1977 and did a significant portion of the testing for nine -- the Ordinance 9500, so I actually worked for this city at that time. I then went on to other public employment and ended up as director of Building and Zoning for the City of South Miami for about four or five years. I then went back in -- went into private practice. I've dealt with zoning ordinances pretty much every day of my life since 1977. I consider myself to be pretty expert at it because I do it for a living. I've done projects from Key West to Jacksonville, literally. I've worked with zoning codes in all of the -- everywhere in between. This code that you are proposing is, bar none, the most complicated, difficult -to -understand code that have ever seen in any jurisdiction. I believe Commissioner Sarnoff asked Liz a question earlier this morning -- and by the way, I've had about a three-hour conversation with Liz. They've made themselves available. They've made some of the changes that I suggested that they make. I don't want to suggest they have not, and there's an enormous amount of work that's been put into this process, but it's still not ready. There are too many internal inconsistencies, and there are some other issues. As we've looked at this, there are just any number of problems, andl would suggest to you that part of the reason that there are so much angst about the nonconforming use provisions is that while the prior code changes, the adoption of 9500 from the ordinance that proceeded it, the adoption of 11000 that - - when -- that succeeded 9500, those were evolutionary changes. You went into those zoning City ofMiami Page 134 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 codes, and you changed district regulations. You changed some of the -- you simplified some things in 11000. You took the same basic skeleton of an ordinance and made modifications to it. You didn't throw the whole ordinance out and start over again. Miami 21 throws the entire ordinance out; starts over again with a brand-new nomenclature, new language that I've never seen in a zoning ordinance before anywhere, and so there is this enormous learning curve with this document. I've said publicly that I don't believe it is possible for an attorney or a private property owner to understand what they can do with their property without hiring an architect to sit down and design a project or look at potentially designing a project under 95 -- under Miami 21. Bernard Zyscovich gave you a presentation this morning that compares a property that we represent together right across the street from Omni. You saw the dramatic difference of what can be done under today's Code and what can be done under Miami 21 in that project. That is largely, almost entirely, a result of the limitation of the parking pedestal. If you think just simply, there's a parking requirement today, and there is a parking requirement in the future, and they're very similar, although there are some policy issues that are buried in this document that you should be aware of. Today, you drive through downtown and look at the parking pedestal on any of those projects, and you'll find that they're all 11, 12, 13 stories, and what this is going to do is cut the pedestal by a third. Well, if you can only provide two-thirds of the amount of parking, you can only build two-thirds of the amount of space. It's that simple, so that decision is a very, very important decision in the downtown T6 area. I would note, for the record, that that particular property -- I understand, although I would -- my colleagues would, I believe, give me their time. I would note for the record that that particular property is -- currently has an unlimited height, or limited only by FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) regulations. It is surrounded literally with 60-story buildings that are already approved as part of several MUSPs; one to the south, the Omni to the east, and the other projects to the north. This proposal is SD-6(36), so while we're surrounded by 60-story approvals, you're -- this suggests that we should get 36 stories, and let's talk about what that means. Why -- Commissioner Sarnoff But you would get bonuses, correct? Mr. McDowell: We would be eligible -- Commissioner Sarnoff Eligible for bonuses. Mr. McDowell: -- to buy additional height -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Mr. McDowell: -- and let's talk about that because I talked to Liz about it. I've also lectured extensively on exactions and impact fees, and what the legal requirements are for a proper exaction and the proper impact fee, and Florida has a dual rational nexus test. There has to be a rational relationship between the fee and the impact created by the project, and then there needs to be a rational relationship between the expenditure of those funds and a benefit back to the property in question. I ask you, how is there a difference in the impact of an apartment that is built on the 36thfloor that doesn't have to pay anything and that same apartment built two floors higher that suddenly has to pay an impact fee, that suddenly has to pay a public benefit fee? Andl raised this with the City and with Liz, and Liz said "Well, we understand it's OK because it's voluntary." Well, let's examine that question. Is it voluntary? I respectfully suggest it's not voluntary at all. Our existing zoning is unlimited height. You are downzoning us to 36 floors, and then saying, but you can buy it back from us. That's a voluntary act if ever I've heard one. That's an illegal exaction, ladies and gentlemen. You are going to get challenged on it, and I don't think it will survive the -- whatever challenge comes forward. It's also, I believe, problematic -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Let me interrupt you for a minute. You've gone beyond your three minutes. City ofMiami Page 135 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. McDowell: I -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Why don't we do something? Let's take a -- Vicky Garcia -Toledo: We'll give him our time. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Let's -- but listen, it's not -- Mr. McDowell: I'm going to close up. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- the issue here is us. Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. I need to go to the bathroom, so -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: I need to go to the bathroom, so please allow us two minutes. We've been here -- just a two -minute recess, and we'll be right back. Mr. McDowell: Andl appreciate your stamina because we're all tired too. [Later... Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much for being so patient with us. Sir, I apologize for the interruption, but apparently, I had to do something no one else could do for me. Please. Mr. McDowell: And really and truly, I think everybody in the room appreciates your stamina in putting up with this process, as we all have, but these are very long days. Picking up just briefly on the parking pedestal issue and some of the policy issues, and things that you, as Commissioners, should be aware of that are buried in this document -- and there are many of them, but I'm going to point out two because they seem to contradict our practical experience when we've come before you with MUSP applications, is that in the T5 transect district, there's a provision that says within a half -mile of the TOD and a quarter mile of bus transit, the required parking may be reduced by 30 percent by a process of waiver. Our practical experience before this body is that you usually ask us to provide more parking than what the Code requires, not less. That's really a policy decision. By the way, as a planner, I don't disagree with that policy, but as there's been significant discussion, we don't have the transit system we would all like to have. That policy is also repeated in a different form in the T6 district, where within a half -mile of the TOD or a quarter mile of bus transit -- of which there is no definition, I might point out, whatever bus transit may mean -- the required parking may be decreased by 30 percent by a process of waiver, and then it goes on to say, in the T6-48, which is most of the downtown area, parking for residential uses located within 600 feet of a Metrorail or Metromover station shall not be required. No longer a parking requirement for residential in the downtown corridor, and I mention that because, think about the buildings that have been built. Virtually every one of them is within 600 feet of either a PeopleMover station or a Metrorail station. That means all of the buildings currently under construction or just finishing, or virtually all of them, would have no parking requirement at all. That does not mean they would have -- not have parking because the market would demand that they provide at least some parking, but there would be no parking requirement, and there certainly would be nothing that would require them to provide more parking than what the Code requires. Well, I guess any parking more than zero would be more than what the Code requires. Commissioner Sarnoff Stay there for one moment. Then you -- you're of the opinion, as a planner, that you cannot construct buildings without parking? Mr. McDowell: The market will not allow you to sell condominiums, particularly, or office City ofMiami Page 136 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 space, if you -- or occupy office space if there is not some parking available. I don't think that anybody would suggest to you that you could go into the marketplace, particularly today, with a unit in downtown that had no parking and find anybody who's going to occupy that unit. While we would all like to be in a city where we don't need cars, that's not the reality we find ourselves with. Commissioner Sarnoff So the arrangements that were made with either Lofts 1, 2, or 3, you -- are not satisfactory from a planning standpoint, as far as you're concerned? Mr. McDowell: I think they are a policy decision that bears significant discussion by this body and by the Planning Department to determine whether that's an appropriate policy or not. I don't think -- Commissioner Sarnoff That was a great lawyer's answer, but what about the planner's answer? Mr. McDowell: I think there -- I believe that in the downtown core, there is some reason to reduce parking requirements. I certainly believe that. I think we are going to get to a point where getting -- driving in and out of downtown is going to be very difficult, if not impossible. Certainly, if you went to Boston or New York, or Philadelphia, or Washington, or any other city that has a major transportation system -- public transportation system, most of us wouldn't dream of driving into downtown Manhattan if we didn't have to. Commissioner Sarnoff What comes first, the transportation system or the need? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Transit. Mr. McDowell: Ideally, the transportation system, but I can tell you, I also served as a member of the South Dade Watershed Task Force for Miami -Dade County, and the backlog of unmet transportation need in this community is in the billions of dollars, like in five or six billions of dollars, so while we all strongly support any type of mass transit that can be produced, and we've -- as a community, we've passed additional half cent sales tax to fund it, which is important. That's not enough money to get us where we need to be in the short-term, and so we need to find other funding sources, and in 20 or 30 years, hopefully, we will be in a place where we have a much better transit system. In the interim, I'm not sure that would want to live in this community without a car, as much as I would like to, actually. We were talking about it at lunch, how nice it would be not to need a car, so I commend to you the fact that there are policy -level issues buried in this document that you all need to look at. I think it bears discussion by you, the Planning Board, and others. You may have already discussed it. I may be wrong, but I -- as far as I'm aware, based on our experiences with the MUSP applications that have come before you, that seems to contradict the direction we've gotten from this body. There's another issue that -- and it's a legal issue that believe is important with regard to this code, andl need to set the context a little bit. Zoning codes, in general, set minimum regulations. The current code sets setbacks, height limitations, lot coverage, parking requirements, loading requirements, and all those kinds of things, but the current code does not go on to, except in a few limited spaces -- areas -- say that your building must be in a certain location. It tells you where it can't be, but it doesn't tell you where it must be. There are a few limited exceptions in the Code. It doesn't tell you the shape of the building. It doesn't tell you a maximum footprint, other than lot coverage. It doesn't tell you first tier, second tier, third tier. This Code is intentionally directing a specific form of building, and as a result, it's extremely detailed and extremely complicated. Because of that and because every property is somewhat unique, it has also set up a process of administrative waivers and warrants, and the waivers, I think there're some 29 waivers, ifI remember, 28 waivers that are listed, and there are a whole host of warrants that are listed, and then we get to the variance side after those two levels, but want to raise a concern that have with the Code because as I read the waivers, in particular, and to a lesser extent, the warrants, there's an enormous amount of discretion that is given to your Zoning Administrator or your City ofMiami Page 137 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Planning Department to approve or not approve those waivers. There's really no standard. If you look at the -- if you look at -- and I'll give you the sections -- 7.1.2.5, Administrative Waiver, OK, it said -- well, let me start with the warrant section because it'll make it clearer as to what the issue is. Administrative warrant is 7.1.2.4, and underneath that, one of the subsections, D, is review criteria, and it says the following criteria shall apply to administrative warrant application. The review shall consider the intent of the transect, the intent of the Miami 21 Code, and the manner in which the proposed use will operate given its specific location, proximity to less intenses [sic] uses. Particular consideration shall be given to protecting residential areas from excessive noise, fumes, or commercial vehicle intrusion, traffic conflicts, and the spillover effect of light. That's in the review criteria, subsection D, under Administrative Warrant. When you get to 7.1.2.5, Administrative Waiver, subsection D says review and approval. There are no standards in that section granting or not granting an administrative waiver. Some of those waivers have a range of what can be granted. Vice Chairman Sanchez: What subsection is that, "B"? Mr. McDowell: Sub D, under 71 -- I'm sorry--7.1.2.5, Administrative Waivers. While there is a limited set of discussions of the warrant process, there is no apparent standards for the review or denial of a waiver, andl will tell you that makes me very uncomfortable on behalf of my clients because if we go in with a condition that needs a waiver -- and would suggest to you, given the details of these codes, that almost everybody's going to need a waiver of some kind -- that somebody's going to make -- challenge the City and say that doesn't meet the requirements. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Let me just stop you there. Could we address that issue of the waiver? Mr. Fernandez: Yes. I'll ask Ms. Stroud to address that issue. Clearly, both under -- while she's coming up, both under the waiver and the warrant, we have been very careful to make sure that procedural and substantive due process is afforded to anyone that will be affected by it, but Ms. Stroud will be able to explain it better. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Ms. Stroud, please (UNINTET,TIGIBT,F) both on the waiver and -- on both, please. Ms. Stroud: Good evening. On the warrants, the warrants are for uses, and the waivers are for particular dimensional kind of standards, and I'm entirely comfortable that the criteria for warrants are specific enough. They're consistent with the other kinds of criteria that you would find in codes regarding, for example, conditional uses. I have no -- I really don't think that that is a major issue. On the waivers, the waivers are very specific, and essentially, very small changes that can be permitted administratively, and because of the nature of those waivers, the extensive conditions for waivers haven't been fleshed out. Of course, we can do that, if that's the will of the Commission, but there are two different things, and -- so I guess I'm not as concerned as Mr. McDowell is on those. Mr. McDowell: Let me tell you why I'm concerned. Commissioner Sarnoff I should be looking at what section now, 7.1.2? Mr. McDowell: Seven -- the warrant is -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Seven -one -two -five. Mr. McDowell: -- 7.1.2.4, and the waiver is 7.1.2.5. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Five. City ofMiami Page 138 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff And what subsections, or is that -- that's the correct --? Mr. McDowell: Sub D is the review criteria for -- in each of those subsections. They're somewhat parallel in structure -- Commissioner Sarnoff OK. Mr. McDowell: -- and sub D is -- andl read you the review criteria for the warrant. Let me read you some other language. When considering the necessary or the reasonableness of such applied for exception or use in relation to the present and future development of the area concerned and the compatibility of the applied for exception or use with such area, what I'm reading to you is the provision from the Miami -Dade County Zoning Code addressing special exceptions on usual uses -- in new uses, and it required the Community Zoning Appeals Board to look at the unfavorable affect on the economy, not generate excessive noise, traffic, undue burden on public facilities, water, sewer, solid waste, recreation, transportation, accessible by private roads, et cetera, et cetera, very similar to the language in your Code. Let me read you what the Third District Court of Appeals said about that language. This language is legally deficient because it lacks objective criteria for the County Zoning Boards to use in their decision -making process, and the court went on to say it is unconstitutional. This Omnipoint decision threw out the entire process at the County, andl can tell you, created a de facto moratorium for almost two years at the County while they went back and adopted objective criteria for each of those kinds of hearings, so -- Commissioner Sarnoff What's the name of the case? Mr. McDowell: -- the reason I'm concern is that we -- Commissioner Sarnoff What's the name of the case? Mr. McDowell: It's Omnipoint versus Miami -Dade County. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Omnipoint? Mr. McDowell: Omnipoint Holdings, Inc. versus -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Omni -- Mr. McDowell: -- Miami -Dade County -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- point - Mr. McDowell: -- 811 So. 2d 767. I'll give the Clerk a copy of the case. It is directly on point, and it's binding law in the City ofMiami because it's the Third District opinion, and the reason I'm concerned on behalf of my clients is two fold; one, because I think it -- potentially, it allows fairly un -- not fairly, very unbridled discretion on the part of the administrator to either grant or not those waivers. I also then need to give notice to all of the -- all those surrounding property owners and every neighborhood association, and every one of those decisions is then appealable by any one of those parties, subject to meeting the standing requirements, but they are then subject to appeal here. I see administrative gridlock, to be perfectly honest. We're going to ask for the waiver. Some neighbor somewhere is going to object -- by the way, remember you had a discussion earlier to put an addition on a nonconforming house, you need a waiver, so if the next -door neighbor doesn't want you to put an addition on your house and you need a waiver, too bad. You're going to get appealed and be in a long process, so I'm concerned that, one, I end up in that process, and two, that we do exactly what happened in Omnipoint. We start down this process, somebody, neighbor, otherwise, challenges, claims that their -- that it's too City ofMiami Page 139 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 unbridled discretion to an administrative official, and we go into never-never land for two years. That's a disaster for all of us. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Let's go ahead and wrap it up when you can. Mr. McDowell: Let me close by saying that -- where I started. Miami 21 is a good process. It's created a parks master plan. It's more than just this ordinance. It seems that it's come to be defined by just this ordinance, but it's really a lot more than just this ordinance. It's looking at the City comprehensively. It's addressing the conflicts which do exist throughout the City. It's addressing the parks and the life -- quality of life issues. Those are very positive things. It needs to, in its time, go forward, and those parts of it are going forward This ordinance is not ready to go forward. It will lead to litigation. It's going to lead to litigation either as I have just described or possible Bert J. Harris claims. Mayor Kasdin said to you earlier that the City of Miami Beach undertook a similar process, and that they spent, if you put the times together, about three or four years doing it, but what he didn't tell you is they did not rewrite their zoning code. They did not start out -- throw out the code and start over again. They -- again, they went in, they reduced building heights permitted in districts. I know. I was directly involved. I filed several of the Bert J. Harris claims in that instance. They reduced building heights. They reduced FARs by eliminating bonuses. They did a lot of things, but they did it within the context of their existing ordinance, so they didn't have to reinvent the wheel. The difficulty here is we're reinventing the wheel -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Mr. McDowell: -- as opposed to mod4ing -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Mr. McDowell: -- the wheel, and yes, we all need to look at the City. There are problems. There's no question. Ironically, most of Liz's slides that were the poster children for the problem areas were in areas that are not in the east quadrant. They're on Coral Way and 27th Avenue, and she showed you slides of them, and she's absolutely right. It's not a good condition -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Any questions? Mr. McDowell: -- but this isn't going to address it. Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Mr. McDowell, I mean, if what I'm hearing you say is correct, it pretty much means, no matter what we would do, as long as we reduce in FAR or cut the height of a building, you would essentially represent a client and sue us? Mr. McDowell: Not necessarily. Not at all. There are ways to make changes in zoning codes. There are -- if it's a very significant change, if it's a 51 percent reduction in FAR, I think it's fair to say that we're likely to bring a challenge, yes. If it's an incremental change, if there're trade-offs back and forth, there're benefits, there're bonuses -- you know, when you honestly tell us we're going to downzone you so you can buy back your rights at $21 a foot, and oh, by the way, we're not going to let you build the parking; you need to go underground to do that, which costs you 300 percent as much, challenge is likely. I can't -- I'm not here to threaten that. I'd rather -- Commissioner Sarnoff No. I -- Mr. McDowell: -- see it get worked out because I don't think it's necessary. I think there's a -- there are ways that this ordinance can be changed. I think it needs to be dramatically changed, and ifI would leave you with one thought, please, God, don't adopt this ordinance without City ofMiami Page 140 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 rewriting your nonconforming use provision completely. Commissioner Sarnoff I think agree -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff -- with you on that, but let me ask you this question. Are you aware of any zoning codes in the United States that have public benefits? Mr. McDowell: I'm not aware of any that have it the way it is being proposed here. There are ordinances that have inclusionary housing requirements. There are ordinances that provide bonuses for people to do something; if you do 'X " we'll let you do "Y. " That is there, but not in a direct 'you buy back what we, otherwise, may have taken from you." I'm not aware of it set up exactly that way. It's not that I -- that -- honestly, affordable housing and parks are incredibly laudable goal. Nobody's going to ever say that this city doesn't need more affordable housing, although I would tell you I believe this ordinance is going to drive up the cost of housing substantially in many ways, andl didn't mention it, but there -- the bond for the green certification, I mean, it's a penal bond. It's not a performance bond. It's inappropriate. That just came up July -- June 20, by the way. I think it's a good planning start. I think it does need to be looked at citywide. I agree with the neighborhood groups who have said, you know, if you do this now, and then everybody else needs to make changes -- one of the reasons that you go through a major rewrite on a zoning code is because, over time, you tend to develop internal inconsistencies just because you amend it piecemeal over a period of years, in this case, 17 years, but if you go in and adopt this now and then each other quadrant requires changes to some of the textual language, which is going to apply citywide -- all of these procedures are going to apply citywide -- then you're going to end up in a no man's land not knowing where it is, and it has been -- you know, I think some of us have been criticized that we didn't get to people earlier. We tried This has been a moving target for us too. I mean, this is a big ordinance. It's hard to work through, and there's been a new version that's come out kind of every 90 days or so, and it takes quite a while to get through this process. I would leave you with one other closing thought, ifI might, because there -- you've, I think, opened hearings on several items together. The ZIP (Zoning in Progress) ordinance has a lot of problems with it, OK, andl ask you to think about an approvedMUSP. We've got -- there are dozens of approved MUSPs in the City ofMiami at this point. They are big projects by nature. They are often phased projects, and it -- because of the radical change between 11000 and this ordinance, none of those MUSPs will meet the requirements ofMiami 21. I mean, I can't think of one that will truly fit in this envelope. Somebody will contradict me, I'm sure, but I can't think of many [sic]. We're in a -- we're also in -- you know, Miami 21 started when there was the strongest, most bold real estate market any of us have ever seen in 50 years or a hundred years here. We were going up in value 20, 30 percent a year for five years, and that's when Miami 21 started because all the building was happening. We're not in that place anymore. The real estate market is in trouble. I think it would be foolish to say it's not. There is not any new development that's occurring at this moment, other than people who are trying to vest their rights because they're afraid of what may happen to them here. I don't think you're going to see a lot of new buildings start in the next little bit. Getting them financed when you have a presales requirement is going to be extraordinarily difficult, and layering on top of it expensive new regulations that are very hard to understand is only going to further, if not dampen, maybe kill that marketplace, and with everything that's happening with ad valorem taxation and everything else, that, to me, is something that is a major, you know, 30, 000-square foot view that needs to be taken into consideration. You spent the last ten years building some pretty remarkable projects, actually, and building up the tax base of the City ofMiami to a point where you're in good shape financially. You could spend the next ten years going in the other direction pretty quickly if you're not careful, and -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. City ofMiami Page 141 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. McDowell: -- some of that's beyond your control, but some of it is within your control. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anymore questions? If not, thank you -- Applause. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- so much. Next speaker. Unidentified Speaker: Thank you, sir. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Mr. McDowell: For the record, I don't know that man. Vice Chairman Sanchez: If you want to leave, sir, you can leave, but you're welcome to stay, but all that I ask that you please refrain from clapping, you know, please. Unidentified Speaker: I'll leave. Vice Chairman Sanchez: No, no. Don't leave, don't leave. Sit down, sit down. Nobody's kicking you out of here. Unidentified Speaker: You want, I'll leave. Vice Chairman Sanchez: No, no, no, no. I don't want anybody to leave. Ijust want to get through this meeting so we can make a decision when the time comes. Sir, you're recognized for the record. Sean Paul Melito: Commissioners, Mayor Diaz, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you tonight. I'm Sean Paul Melito, andl live at 600 Northeast 36 Street, in Miami. I wanted the opportunity to speak with you about our other agenda item, PZ.3, and that is modification of Chapter 23, historic preservation. I support the concepts and initiatives coming through amending Chapter 23 with regard to historic preservation and acknowledgement of the MiMo historic district. I also understand that through the Miami 21 process, the intent was to review and include a lot of the SD overlays, which had some importance of historic significance or neighborhood significance for inclusion in Miami 21. I do believe that one paragraph may have been missed, and that is from SD-9, quote Section 609.3.2, paragraph one, and I'd like to read that for you. "Along Biscayne Boulevard, the pedestrian open space and the ground floor frontage shall so be designed, improved, and located to provide an attractively landscaped appearance using royal palms and other types of tropical plants suitable to its gateway role." In 1926, our Mayor and City Manager, along with a combined Arbor Day and Veterans Day ceremony, practically shut down Miami and with all the festivities, dedicated Biscayne Boulevard to the veterans of all wars. A palm tree was planted downtown, I think now where the Freedom Tower is, which connected the royal palms which were downtown to the royal palms being planted up north. I think timing is perfect right now, as Chapter 23 brings the historic significance of MiMo and Biscayne Boulevard into the spotlight. Biscayne Boulevard's historic gateway linear -type landscaping and its place in Miami's history should not be allowed to fall by the wayside, andl think deserves attention and consideration for designation as a scenic transportation corridor, similar to that of Coral Way and Miami Avenue. Along with recognition of this district and Biscayne Boulevard, and designation of the scenic transportation corridor, we can ensure that we can carry on Biscayne Boulevard in its significance and beauty for many generations to come. Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Sir, I believe you're next. Three minutes. Armando Rodriguez: Thank you. City ofMiami Page 142 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Mr. Rodriguez: This is the longest time that have been in the City ofMiami in my 21 years as an activist. I arrived here at 8:15 -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: We won't start timing you yet. How about that? Mr. Rodriguez: No, no, no. Don't count me yet the time. I already cut all my speech because almost everything have been said already. My name is Armando Rodriguez, and my mailing address is 417 Northeast 27 Street. I'm the president of the Concerned Citizen of Edgewater, andl represent that neighborhood, and there is a big group here from Edgewater that have been since 8:15 that I want a round of applause for them because they have been here -- Applause. Mr. Rodriguez: -- I mean, for already 12 hours, so that is a symbol of -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: You know, I -- Mr. Rodriguez: -- citizenship. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- think you do that just to despise me, you know? Mr. Rodriguez: Yes. OK. Vice Chairman Sanchez: I'm trying to run a meeting here. Mr. Rodriguez: Most of you know the job of our neighborhood association. We have been very positive at stopping (UNINTELLIGIBLE) parts that Mr. (UNINTET,TIGIBLE) and the Port of Miami want to put in Edgewater years ago. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) 42 crackhouses in Edgewater, and I'm sure some ofyou know that. We were very involved when the City ofMiami want to move Camillus House to Edgewater, Miami Avenue and 18 Street, the homeless center. I was part of the umbrella group name by Janet Reno, andl have been involved in Miami 21 from the first date, the day that we have the great opening here in the auditorium at Dinner Key. I approach some City official there, who are here present today and told me, Armando, you are not to worry. Miami 21 would not affect Edgewater at all. We have several problem with Miami 21. I want to second the statement of the Mayor this morning. This is about individuals and communities, andl think communities could be interpret by neighborhoods. The problem we have with Edgewater, one of them, is the lots in Edgewater are very small, and the guideline of Miami 21 have been design basically for corner lots, and did not take into consideration the lot size of Edgewater. We have told that to the people in DPZ several times, but since I am not an architect, my opinion is not really taken very serious. We want an increase in height from 24 floor to 36 floor, and we are not asking for a favor. Today we want unlimited height, even though we know we cannot have unlimited height, even though we know we cannot use the unlimited height. We want to have the right to build 36 floor without paying extra money to anybody. We want the 36 floor, which will allow for architectural freedom and will be consistent with our existing property rights. The plan was designed by Guillermo Omedillo -- was very proud to have Guillermo Omedillo here today, a man that respect tremendously because of his leadership, and a man who really have control in every project that he develop with the City of Miami. Edgewater have no problem with transportation. You have Biscayne Boulevard; you have the 2ndAvenue, Northeast; you have 1-395; you have 112 expressway, so it's no problem with communication in Edgewater. Florida Power & Light have put all the equipment and all the development they need in place for the future development that they were expecting in Edgewater. Miami -Dade County Water & Sewer has made all the connections on Biscayne Boulevard for development, so I don't see what the problem is. By including parking and utility City ofMiami Page 143 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 areas in the calculation for commercial building, we ended with a net loss of development right in commercial property. For the last two years, I have been talking to almost everybody sitting in those chairs; me, Mr. Decker (phonetic), (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Felix, and Fernandez, and some of the people who are in the audience. All of you, including the City Manager, a person that respect tremendously because of his professionalism, have told me, you're right. You should have more than 24 floors. Nobody could see how Edgewater, after you have all the high buildings on the ocean, and you have all the high buildings on the boulevard, have to have 24 floor in the middle. We were successful to have two meeting with DPZ, and we never had an answer on this. DPZ, or the Planning Department, have never change the original plan of Edgewater, even though, from the first meeting, I was told by Ana Gelabert, 'Armando, don't worry. This is just a draft," butt still see a draft after two years. DPZ have not been receptive to our issues. The Planning Department has lost ownership ofMiami 21. The Planning Department doesn't make decisions on Miami 21. Whenever you talk to the people in the Planning Department, it's up to DPZ. I have two meeting with the Manager. I present the problems; Mr. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) present the plans. We presented everything, and the Manager told me, 'Armando, this can be resolved. I don't foresee any problem in getting higher building -- you are not asking for higher density -- and the freedom of design. This will be solve." At least, we would get a compromise. The first time I didn't know quite sure. The second time I get out of the meeting positively sure. Today I approach the Manager, and I said what happened with papers, the calculation? What happened? I gave it to Planning. Planning gave it to DPZ, and they say no, so obviously, the one that is deciding the future of the taxpayer and the citizen of the City ofMiami in planning is DPZ. DPZ is just an architect consultant firm. If we get another firm, they come with another design, so I don't have to live from whatever they decide to do. This morningl was in shock when Mr. Sarnoff ask Elizabeth Plater, do you like tall buildings, and she said from this podium, I have no problem with tall buildings. First time I hear that. The problem is that we have to pay for public use. Now I find out the answer. After they went over the design of the City ofMiami, they decide to give Brickell high; they decide to give the downtown with the height they want. They decided to give the Omni with the height they want, but they decided that the people in Edgewater, who put up with the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) park, with the prostitution, with the rehabilitation houses, now we have to pay for the public use of the City ofMiami. I would have -- I really would have loved to know that answer two years ago. Today I really would know where I stand because there is no reason to put in Edgewater 24 floor, and we're opposed to it. We're opposed to it because it's a right, and am not asking for unlimited height. That's not what I'm asking for. I'm asking to have the same right -- not the same right, at least the same right that the neighbor have. Midtown have 36 floor, and it's passing Edgewater, so I don't see why that have to be limited to us. Look at the opposition you have here today. Ninety percent of the people who came to this podium were opposed to this. Imagine if you make this citywide. You have to have this meeting at the Hyatt in downtown Miami. I think this should not be approve today. Many years ago, I was on this podium, and in that podium was Monsignor McCarthy, a person that respect and love deeply, and it was very sad for me to experience -- to have my bishop over there and being over here oppose in different side on Camillus House. I'm a practicing Catholic. I was opposed to Camillus House when they want to build Camillus House on 18 Street and Miami Avenue. We have like 400 people here. The only person that was here at this time was the City Attorney. It was the City Attorney at that particular time. The pressure on the Commission was gigantic. My dear friend Xavier Suarez, a person that I respect tremendously, very honest, a straight forward fellow, was in favor of Camillus House. I was opposed to Camillus House. The Commissioner [sic] unanimously voted against Camillus House. They had the pressure from the church, from the bishop, from the Mayor. Few months ago, you people decided in moving Camillus House. Beautiful decision. Everybody's happy. If that Commissioner [sic] at that particular time would have bended under the pressure they have and Camillus House would have been built where they originally planned to build Camillus House, you would have been paying the consequences with that at this particular moment. Vice Chairman Sanchez: In conclusion. City ofMiami Page 144 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Rodriguez: Please make a decision today for the benefit of the City, andl am not against Miami 21. I'm against about the process. I mean, to get a meeting with Planning Department, the Office of Commissioner Sarnoff, for the last five to six weeks, have been trying everyday (UNINTELLIGIBLE) to call Planning to have a meeting with Edgewater and the Commissioner and have not been able to set up the meeting date. One day the meeting date was set up, two weeks ago, on a Tuesday. I cancel a trip to (UNINTELLIGIBLE). I was in Miami. The same -- the day before, the meeting was canceled because the person we were going to meet was going in vacation for one day. We have to stop this game. These are the property owner and the resident of the City ofMiami. We demand respect and consideration. Let's have Miami 21, but let's give it the time it takes. Why this rush? And I'm talking for the benefit of the City, for the benefit of the residents, for the benefit of the Mayor, for the benefit of you people. You're making history. Somebody said here this morning there are two ways to make history. You can make history like Mother Teresa; you can make history like Fidel Castro. I have no agenda, no agenda. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Armando, with all due respect -- Mr. Rodriguez: I'm going to stop right here. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- I -- Mr. Rodriguez: Please -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- need to conclude -- Mr. Rodriguez: -- I want you to defer this for at least 90 to 120 days, and ask the Planning Department and DPZ to meet with all these neighborhood associations and try to iron the problems before they come back to the Commission again. Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Thank you. Ma'am, you're recognized. Three minutes -- Brenda Kuhns Neuman: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- please. Ms. Kuhns Neuman: I'm Brenda Kuhns Neuman from 119 Northeast 43rd Street. I'm here as an individual resident and also a board member of the Buena Vista East Historic Neighborhood Association. I doubt I will, in any way, match the enthusiasm of the proceeding speaker, but I'll try. I agree with the lawyer from Bilzin Sumberg, and he spoke to something that think is very important, especially considering that one of the City's goals is to ease this whole process. Section 7.1.2.6(b)(4) -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's a waiver, right? Ms. Kuhns Neuman: -- is regarding an exception. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Exception. Ms. Kuhns Neuman: 7.1.2.6(b) (4). When the Planning director reviews an exception, it says that she has to consider the manner in which the proposed use will operate, giving its specific location and proximity to less intense uses. What's miss -- noticeably missing is any duty to approve or deny an exception. The only criteria that it provides is that it -- that she should consider the -- protecting residential areas from a limited number of items; excessive noise, fumes, odors, commercial vehicle intrusion, traffic conflicts, and spillover effect of light. Missing from this are many things that neighbors constantly argue will hurt their quality of life, such as City ofMiami Page 145 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 shadow, increased residential traffic, a reduced privacy, water -- and other municipal concerns, such as water supply, evacuation routes. None of these are criteria that should be considered when going outside of the Code that apparently we're all agreeing should be -- you know, ultimately should be what we decide upon, so I ask the Board to implement greater standards into any exception to the Code. Any exception, any waiver, any variance should have clear criteria, and it should create an obligation to either approve or deny based on those criteria. We would also ask that Section 1305's design criteria be incorporated into an exception, waiver, or variance for anything that is out of scale with the neighborhood. Another problem with the Miami 21 Code is regarding notice of approvals and appeals. Article 7, Section 7.1.2.4(e) and Section 7.1.2.5(a), (b), (c), and (e) states that an appeal of the determination of the Planning director shall be taken within 15 calendar days of posting the decision on the City's Web site. This is grossly inadequate. First of all, Web posting is not sufficient, and in my opinion, is in violation of the Sunshine Law, which states that automation of public records cannot be a substitute for regular notification. Fifteen days is also insufficient. I guess everyone's suppose -- sometimes these permits can take a year. We're supposed to check every week for a year? Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's a recommendation that has been proffered that we're going to be -- Ms. Kuhns Neuman: OK. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- looking into. Ms. Kuhns Neuman: I'll move on then. Vice Chairman Sanchez: In conclusion, please. Ms. Kuhns Neuman: In addition, after -- in Section 7.1.2.6(c)(1), 7.1.2.7(e)(1), 7.1.2.80 and (h), it states failure to give notice under these sections shall not invalidate a decision on an exception, variance, or Code amendment, so what we have is a notification requirement that if it's violated means nothing. We all know that if there's no consequence to violating a notice requirement, it will be violated, and this statement should be completely stricken from the Code. Commissioner Sarnoff What's that -- what's -- what is the exact -- Ms. Kuhns Neuman: These sections are -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- section? Ms. Kuhns Neuman: -- 7.1.2.6(c) (1), 7.1.2.7(e) (1), 7.1.2. 8C1), like Frank, and (h). Vice Chairman Sanchez: You want to strike them -- you want to --? Commissioner Sarnoff You think they need -- Ms. Kuhns Neuman: Yeah. It basically says failure to notify means nothing. It doesn't invalidate the permit. It doesn't rescind the permit, so ultimately, the notification requirement -- what -- however many days we make it, Web posting, it means nothing. If it's violated, it has no effect. That should be completely stricken. I also opposed the 14-foot height for a floor. That's way too high. It should be ten, twelve feet max, and specific to the -- our neighborhood, Buena Vista East, along 39th and 38th Street, it is presently zoned T6-12. This allows 20 stories three blocks from single-family homes. Commissioner Sarnoff Where is this at? City ofMiami Page 146 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Kuhns Neuman: This is in the Design District, 39th and 38th Street between Miami Avenue and Northeast 2ndAvenue. Twenty stories three blocks away from single-family homes is not a proper transition. Now we have had -- we've been to every meeting, and DPZ has modified the maps in response to us, andl will thank them for that, but we -- this is still too high in this one area. The other change specific to our neighborhood is on Northeast 2ndAvenue between Northeast 41 st Street and 50th Street, it's zoned T4 R, L, 0, five lots in, and so historic homes in the neighborhood are being zoned T4 instead of T3, which the rest of our neighborhood is. We have a thin strip of commercial on 2ndAvenue. We're not arguing that that should go away, but we don't understand and we fear the designation of upzoning our homes, which I think encourages people to destroy historic properties. It's infringing upon the homes. It encourages people to buy large parcels into our neighborhood -- Commissioner Sarnoff T -- Ms. Kuhns Neuman: -- which is only two blocks wide and eight blocks long. Commissioner Sarnoff -- T4 -- Ms. Kuhns Neuman: I'm going to hand you a piece of paper after this that has it on it, Commissioner. I have a handout for each of you. OK, my last point. In the historic preservation chapter, 23, which I believe is PZ item 3, it states the Board may authorize certain waivers to the requirements of the underlining transect. Under that it provides a provision for waiving the very restrictive noncompliance issues regarding repairs, reconstruction, and structural alterations. "May" needs to be changed to "shall, " as it relates to repairing, restoring, or rebuilding a historic property. The goal, I've always heard in this City, is to move forward into the future, but always preserve our past, as well. We are a historic district. We were designated so in the '80s, and the provisions in the historic preservation ordinance should require that the noncompliance ordinance be waived for historic properties, not allow it to be at the discretion -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Kuhns Neuman: -- of the Board. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Are you done? Thank you. Are we staying within the time limits of three minutes and five minutes? All right. Let's keep it up so we can progress and advance. Joann La Marca: Yes. Good evening. My name is Joann La Marca, with ACORN, and I'd just like to say I will stay within my allotted time because I am not a lawyer. Commissioners, we are here today to tell you we see Miami 21 as an opportunity to get affordable housing. Earlier my friend came here to tell you why we need that housing. We are not here to beg you for housing, but we are here to tell you that Miami 21 can be the way to get us more. We support Robert Mayer's proposal to make T5 able to use public benefit programs. Please treat your voters with the same amount of respect as you do those developers, and we support the idea ofMiami 21 and a future for Miami, but we want to be included in this, and thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you very much. Yes, sir. Elvis Cruz: Commissioners, I need the man in the control room to put my PowerPoint up on the screen. Maybe you can go to the other side while he's doing that. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Good evening. Sam Poole: OK. City ofMiami Page 147 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: We need your name and address for the record. Mr. Poole: My name is Sam Poole. I'm an attorney with the firm of Berger Singerman. My offices are at 200 South Biscayne and 350 East Las Olas. I'm here this evening on behalf of Harcone T,T C, the owner of property in the Park West area. I want to pull back out from the drill down that's been going on at the detail level and take a look at what the current zoning code has done to Miami. Eleven hundred and its predecessor have made Miami a collection of tall buildings; some of them are very distinguished, and many of them are quite forgettable. I think we all understand and know watching television of game events that Miami photographs very well, but in fact, it doesn't live well. Walking downtown in Miami at night is terming. I did it three weeks ago, and I don't think I will do it again after a performance at Gusman. A collection of individual buildings competing for attention does not make a city. Great cities are known by their great streets. You know about Magnificent Mile in Chicago, about Fifth Avenue in New York, Champs-Elysees in Paris, Walnut Street, Philadelphia. Locally, we know about Miracle Mile in Coral Gables, Ocean Drive and Lincoln Road Mall in Miami Beach, but when I say Brickell Avenue, I think you see in your mind individual buildings, not a great street with crowds of people on the sidewalk. Buildings that create great streets do accept a degree of discipline that is required to form a sense of place that does bring those crowds to Miracle Mile in Coral gables. We've heard from architects tonight about concerns impacting their design abilities, and we know that Magnificent Mile in Chicago is proof that you can have distinguished buildings that do accommodate the discipline required to create a memorable sense of place, and that level of discipline required to create great city and neighborhood streets is the essence ofMiami 21. The core principles that make crowds gather on Fifth Avenue, and on Ocean Drive, and Les Champs-Elysees, and create value for neighborhoods in Savannah are the core principles of Miami 21, and they are not experimental. They are not radical, but they are proven, and they are proven over thousands of years of civilization, so why do we have to act tonight? Well, the many new buildings that have been approved under the current Code will stand for generations, and you think of the missed opportunities for turning Biscayne Boulevard into a great city street. We might look at the new towers as we drive by, but we'll never walk on Biscayne Boulevard the way we walk on Ocean Drive. Miami 21 will build a city. Current zoning will continue building a collection of stand-alone projects, and is Miami 21 perfect? Of course not, and it never will be. We have already met four or five times with staff to go over issues that, frankly, we do have concerns. We think that the parking requirements are excessive, but this is not the night for you to decide on each of those issues. This is about Miami 21 as a direction and as a code, and so my client wants to build a great city, wants to participate with you in building a great city -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Poole: -- so our request is that you approve Miami 21 tonight -- Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you very much. Mr. Poole: -- on first reading, and I have -- Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you very much. Mr. Poole: -- in response to the request, our architect could not make it tonight, but I have a letter from our architect -- Chairman Gonzalez: OK. Mr. Poole: -- that -- Chairman Gonzalez: Please give it to -- City ofMiami Page 148 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Poole: -- reflects his view. Chairman Gonzalez: -- the City Clerk. Thank you. Yes, sir. Mr. Cruz: Elvis Cruz, 631 Northeast 57th Street. I'm here as the vice president of the Morningside Civic Association and a member association ofMiami Neighborhoods United. Commissioners, Mr. Mayor, last November's election was a de facto referendum on height limits. Commissioner Marc Sarnoff, who had campaigned on a widely publicized promise of a 35-foot height limit for the Upper Eastside, won a landslide 65 percent majority. We expect the Miami 21 process to deliver that 35-foot height limit, as expressed by the will of the people with T4 0 or T4 L as the maximum. This will help protect the integrity of the three historic districts in the Upper Eastside, including the new MiMo district by providing an appropriate transition, which Miami 21 speaks of. The overwhelming support from the voters for a 35-foot height limit was completely expected. In 1996, the citizens of the Upper Eastside participated in the Upper Eastside master plan, which speaks of a 30-foot height limit. In 2003, as part of the Biscayne Boulevard Charrette, the neighborhood associations of Bay Pointe, Morningside, Palm Grove, Bayside, Belle Meade, and Shorecrest officially requested a 30-foot height limit. Biscayne Boulevard is color coded red on this map because it is beyond capacity, rated "F" by the Florida Department of Transportation. We experience this congestion everyday, and the City and County's declaration of a person -trip methodology and a traffic concurrency exception area are attempts to deny that reality. They do not improve the congestion; they only make it worse. Here is the Miami -Dade County Urban Design Manual. It shows the preferred scale for a commercial corridor to be three-story buildings, and here are two pictures from the Miami 21 Web site itself that show examples of good urban design. They show three-story buildings. The courts have ruled 35 feet to be a reasonable height limit. High-rises belong downtown, where we spent billions of dollars, tax dollars, to build the infrastructure for them. We ask that you institute a 35-foot height limit for the Upper Eastside from 36Street to the City limits east of the FEC (Florida East Coast) railway, and that you consider strongly doing the same for the rest of the City ofMiami outside of downtown and the Civic Center areas. The commercial properties will still be successful as the vast majority of all commercial property in these United States are under 35 feet. Miami Neighborhoods United has passed a resolution in favor of this height limit, andl now ask all of those here in support of a 35-foot height limit for the Upper Eastside to please stand and be recognized. We had quite a few more 11 hours ago, but as you can see, the room has just about emptied. Also, on a very, very important topic, at our meeting with City Manager Pete Hernandez and City staffers on May 29, Ms. Lourdes Slazyk told Miami Neighborhoods United that the Miami 21 Code and transects were maximums, not entitlements, and that Section 2301 has been included in Miami 21 to enforce that. That was great news because a city must retain its police powers over development, and that is also very important news regarding the Bert Harris claims that have been mentioned today as saber rattling. They cannot claim that they are losing rights when they were not rights to begin with. They were maximum, not entitlements, but -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Cruz: -- Miami 21 uses phrases like "as of right" and "allowed by right" in the text in direction contradiction to Section 2301. I strongly urge you to change those phrases to maximum allowed so as to avoid conflict within the Code and help prevent expensive litigation. Lastly, Commissioner Sanchez, to follow up on an astute comment you made earlier when you mentioned that we're now getting super -sized buildings, you're absolutely right. As Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk's graphic showed, the change from net lot area to gross lot area was a huge mistake. This picture is worth a thousand words. The huge building in the middle uses gross lot area. Rather than institutionalize gross lot area by incorporating it into the Miami 21 calculations, you should correct the big mistake of 1985 and go back to using net lot area. Gross lot area caused our city to be hugely over -zoned. Thank you. City ofMiami Page 149 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Elvis. Mr. Cruz: Sir. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Under 11000, Miami 21 addresses that concern. Mr. Cruz: Well, that's the big debate. They say it does, but we've -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: You don't agree with it. Mr. Cruz: No, sir, andl have an expert who's done -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Mr. Cruz: -- quite a bit of research on that, Mr. Richard Strell here. He's crunched all the numbers, and the -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Mr. Cruz: -- problem is that the gross lot -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's fine. Mr. Cruz: OK. Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's OK. It's all right. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Good evening. Nina West: Good evening, Commissioner. Nina West, 3690 Avocado Avenue, Coconut Grove. I'm a member ofMiami Neighborhoods United. I belong to the Buena Vista East Historic Neighborhood Association. I'm a big property owner. I have a fifty by a hundred foot lot up there, andl have a little house in Coconut Grove, andl'm here because of all of this. This is your Code. I'm sure you've all read it line by line, andl just have a couple of questions of this line -by-line code, andl'm wondering if you can tell me -- Now Commissioner Spence -Jones is not here, but District 2 and District 5 are the ones we're talking about. Now on this page, it talks about uses and uses that are now excluded, andl'm just wondering if you -- any of you Commissioners can tell me how many people are going to be out of work the day this is adopted in her district, and if allows to your district, and to Commissioner Sanchez districts [sic], and to Commissioner Regalado's district, and to Commissioner Sarnoffs district? I would like an answer to that question because we have a big problem when it comes to jobs. We have too many people chasing too few jobs. These are low paying jobs for nonskilled [sic] people, and we need to keep these jobs, so do you have an answer for me? How many? Chairman Gonzalez: A lot of people. Ms. West: A lot of people? Five people? Chairman Gonzalez: A lot. Ms. West: A hundred? Chairman Gonzalez: A lot. City ofMiami Page 150 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. West: A thousand? Chairman Gonzalez: The way I see it, with what is happening now with development that is almost stopped, a lot of people -- you're going to see a lot of people unemployed, not necessarily due to Miami 21, but because the market has already stop. I met with a group of developers yesterday -- construct -- I mean, not developers, but builders, and they were complaining of how bad -- Ms. West: Well, the builders are going to keep building because we're going to have affordable housing. We're going to have two museums. We're going to have roadwork. We're going to have construction work. I'm not worried about the builders. I'm worried about the little guys who are unskilled. I really -- Chairman Gonzalez: No. I'm talking -- precisely. They were saying that the industry is very bad right now, and some of them are having problems getting new jobs, new construction, so that means that a lot of people are going to be unemployed. Ms. West: Well -- andl also have a suggestion for you. Miami has some of the lowest impact fees in Florida, if not in the nation, for a city our size. If you're worried about affordable housing and you don't want to deal with this bonus problem, just let's have an impact fee. Everybody pays equally, and then we get our affordable housing. Have an impact fee for affordable housing. There's no reason not to do that. It has nothing to do with Miami 21, but we certainly have a new ordinance, and it can be adjusted to do that, and l just want to ask about -- now for the single-family homeowners, 14 feet, T5, 95 feet backed up on your house, that's not right. A house that's 25 feet tall, which is a two-story house, in almost all of the City, where we had many one-story houses that are only 15 feet tall; T4 next to them, 14, 14, 14, 14, then the roof a ten foot roof structure. Is that fair? We have viable neighborhoods. The low-income housing right now is sitting in those little cottages behind these houses. That's where our low-income housing is. Let's keep our low-income housing, what we have left of it, until we have an opportunity to redo this. Thank you, and please wait for the rest of the community. We want a deferral. Please wait. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you, Nina. Grace Solares: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Good evening. Ms. Solares: Thank you, Commissioner. Miami Neighborhoods United -- I -- my name is Grace Solares. I'm the president ofMiami Neighborhoods United and the vice president of the Roads Association. Miami Neighborhoods United has requested that you defer voting on Miami 21 at this time. We're requesting this refer [sic] for various important issues, most of them have been actually already been argued, discussed, and told today. I'm only going to address, at this point in time, the participation issue of the other quadrants. Miami 21 's proposed Code has received public input from the east quadrant only, even though DPZ and the City Planning Department have stated publicly that PAB -- at the PAB meeting that the Code is finished, and that the only Miami 21 has to do is the atlas and has to be prepared for the other quadrants. There are two major problems with this, Commissioners. At the PAB meeting where Miami 21 was presented, there was a member of the PAB who asked how long it would take for the rest of the quadrants to become part ofMiami 21. DPZ answered that not long since all work would have been done on the first quadrant. This means, Commissioners, that what you pass today would be the blueprint for the rest of the City, and this is where the problem begins. Citizens of the other three quadrants have not participated actively, nor have they been invited. As a matter of fact, they've been declined. As the Roads Association Board of Directors requested to participate in a group City ofMiami Page 151 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 meeting with DPZ, and we were declined because we were told that our quadrant was not being dealt with at that time. We are concerned about what will be happening with development in our quadrants while the atlas for the other areas are being prepared. Therefore, we ask that Miami 21 not be approved today until there has been extensive public input from citizens from the other three quadrants, and that all quadrants be implemented simultaneously, so your deferral today, Commissioners, should be with the instructions that all quadrants and all kinds of input be from the different --from your district, district of Commissioner Sanchez and Regalado, and the district of Commissioner Spence -Jones, so therefore, we ask for a deferral at this time with those instructions. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Ms. Solares: Thank you, Commissioners. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Good evening. Brett Bibeau: Good evening, honorable Chairman, honorable City Commission, honorable Mayor. Brett Bibeau, managing director of the Miami River Commission, with offices located at 1407 Northwest 7th Street. On April 2, 2007, the Miami River Commission unanimously found the draft to Miami 21 eastern quadrant to be consistent with the Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan, subject to the following only two remaining conditions, and I'll quote directly from the River Commission's approved April 2, 2007 minutes. "Requiring publicly accessible river walks consistent with the minimum adopted Miami River GreenwayAction Plan standards of a 20-foot wide greenway, featuring a 16 foot wide unobstructed pedestrian path and a 4-foot wide passive zone with landscaping, decorative lighting, benches, et cetera." This may be accomplished by revising the recent amendment to Article 6, Section 6.10(a) by replacing the word "encouraged" with "required, " replacing "12 feet" with "16 feet," and finally, by inserting the word "unobstructed" in front of 'pedestrian pathway" -- "walkway, "pardon me. The second condition, quoting from the April 2 MRC (Miami River Commission) minutes, "requiring a 50-foot building setback from the riverfront, with the exception of marine industrial and low -density residential uses, allowing the City Charter formula where properties less than 200 feet wide, the setback would become 25 percent of the property width, and of course, providing the City Commission authority to grant exceptions." This may be accomplished by revising the recent amendment to Article 6, Section 6.10(a) by exempting D1 andD2 from the waterfront setback requirements, consistent with the original draftMiami 21. Thank you for your time, and have a pleasant evening. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Good evening. Horacio Stuart Aguirre: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Mayor. Horacio Stuart Aguirre, 1910 Northwest 13th Street, Miami, Florida, Durham Park, on the Miami River. I'd like to preface by saying that I have the highest regard for Dean Plater-Zyberk. As a matter of fact, I consider her a friend and an outstanding professional. Nonetheless, the enormity of this great task that is so really necessary has led to, perhaps, a little bit of haste, if not too much haste, and certainly a few opportunities for omissions, and I'd like to briefly point three out. Particularly concerned with the transportation plan, including the proposed parking facilities that are essential for the reduced parking in the mixed -use developments, I don't see any details in the plan for the implementation of financing, and the financing for this is a requirement of Florida Statutes 339.1756. That's one reason why I think we should defer this until we give it additional thought. A second cause for concern is that Miami 21 continues to rely on the prior declarations of the entire City ofMiami as a transportation concurrency area, andl believe that in my interpretation of Florida Statutes 163.25171 and 3 and (i), Florida -- and this is a violation. I also believe that Florida Statutes 163.3180 includes requirements relating to transportation concurrency in management areas and the designation of exception areas. I believe that the City must include detailed designations with supporting data as a part of the EAR (Evaluation City ofMiami Page 152 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Appraisal Report) amendments. I don't find any evidence in Miami 21 that looks forward to those requirements effectively at this time, and finally, there are no impact fees included in nonresidential development, and the recently improved impact fees for residential development will not begin to provide for the cost of the incremental fee structures for the infrastructure. These impact fees are associated with Florida Statutes 163.3182 and (b). I'd like to conclude by saying that I stood here about three years ago and asked you for a moratorium on building and land use changes, and you all decided in greater wisdom to support the developers. I told you there was going to be a crash of the real estate market and in the condominium market. I'm sad to say that I was right. I wish I hadn't been because this is all affecting all of us. I think that now is the time for you to consider not only delaying the implementation ofMiami 21 until you get a final plan, and l must commend the Mayor for admitting that this is not a 'perfect plan." As a matter of fact, I think his words were "not perfect," and we do recognize that the policies of the past have been failed Again, I'm using the Mayor's quote -- are a 'failed history." This is a good time to recognize the wisdom of that admission and to consider a moratorium on all buildings until you correct Miami 21, with all due respect. Thank you. Luis Revuelta: Good evening. Luis Revuelta, 2950 Southwest 27th Avenue. I'd like to commend the Mayor, this Board, DPZ, and the staff for all the work that has been done. It's really commendable. I'm looking forward to the day that this baby is born and we all finally know what we can do. Sitting here today, I was trying to figure out -- everything has pretty much been said, andl was reading yesterday a book that my wife gave me, which is the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Devotional, andl was reading a section of Socrates about sound, logical theory. I said, well, ifI apply sound, logical theory to this process -- we're here mainly because of two reasons; too much traffic, too many tall buildings. On traffic, I'm willing to pay the price for traffic until the public transportation system gets fixed so I think that's a price that you have to pay when you become a city, and we're becoming a young city right in front of our eyes. I happen to be excited about it. I think a lot of people are, but obviously, not everybody shares those views. I think it's worth paying that price for the city that we're becoming. Too tall -- I absolutely agree that a 15-, 20-story building should not be next to a single-family home or a two-story home, butt have seen that argument being used to traffic, which it doesn't make any sense to me. Mathematically, you really cannot make that argument, and it's been used by people that, "Well, I was here first. This is in front of my views. I don't want you." I sat at the Planning Board for years. I have presented to this Board and to other boards, and I continue to see that argument being used and abused and misused. I have as many concerns as everybody has in this on the Miami 21. I think it's a great effort. It's not perfect like everybody has said, but I think it needs refinements. I think those are refinements that come in maybe between first reading and second reading. I'm concerned about the parking setbacks, tower setbacks, how they apply to pedestal; about the additional setback above the pedestal, which we refer to as the wedding cake in architecture. We might have some difference of opinions with the consultants about what a young city should look like as opposed to a more classical approach, but nevertheless, I think that they've been very receptive. They have been willing to work with us, andl am sure that in the next period between first and second reading, I have no doubt that we will be able and should be able to continue to work together to refine these issues. Parking floors behind liners, I don't think they should be limited to eight. IfI can convince a client to allow me to do liners and add the ability to be able to have more levels of parking behind those liners, I think that should be reflected in the Code. I -- we've had already preliminary conversations andl think that can be implemented. I think right now the way that the setbacks and the height requirements are panning out is going to be -- lead to a lot of wide, squatty buildings and to a lot of double towers. We've talked about that. I think we are working through that process right now, andl do believe that, in one of the requirements, I will have a very difficult time convincing a developer, if we have met the FLR, to allow me to go tall and thin if they have to pay. They're going to tell me, figure it out. Just keep the building low; spread it out on the site, andl think, architecturally, I know that me and a lot of colleagues have a problem with that, but in the end, I have always let my business and my life -- and try not to allow paralysis by analysis. I think this is -- we're at one point now that think we need to move on. It City ofMiami Page 153 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 will spark psychologically all of us to put priority on something that we've all been working through two years, but now everybody's realizing that this is not going to go away; that we need to do something about it, and it will help everybody, including myself and my office, to put priority on it. I do not agree with passing zoning in progress because I think that's going to create fear and insecurity with clients and the development sector, so -- and it will lead to a lot of confusion both for staff and architects, and I think -- Chairman Gonzalez: Mr. Revuelta, you have exceeded your time. Mr. Revuelta: -- andMUSP revisions, I think, should be according to the regulations -- Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Mr. Revuelta: -- that they were approved, not under the new regulations. Chairman Gonzalez: Commissioner, you have any questions from the architect? No? No questions. Mr. Revuelta: Thank you very much. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Yes, sir. Jeff Skubick: All right. My name is Jeff Skubick, andl live at 5931 Southwest 9th Terrace, andl -- the reason I'm here is because I have a vacant lot in the City that I'm hoping to get my house built on at some point in the next year or two, and I'll get to the point because I know it's late. Basically, I just wanted to ask you guys to please consider remove -- forcing the Zoning Department to strike the restrictions against garage placement and layout because pretty much the only people who think that's actually a good idea are the people at DPZ. Normal people don't lay awake at night worrying that somewhere, somehow somebody has two cars parked in a double garage that's in front of their house. Basically, it's the norm; it's ordinary, andl think pretty much -- I think you guys most likely agree, and with that, I'll conclude. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Mr. Strell: Hi. My name's Richard Strell. I spoke before. I have a completely different issue -- Chairman Gonzalez: No, no, no. Mr. Strell: -- that wanted to -- OK, no. Chairman Gonzalez: You already had an opportunity. As a matter of fact, I remember that when you spoke, I was allowing everyone two minutes, andl started allowing three minutes -- Mr. Strell: OK. Chairman Gonzalez: -- so I thank you for that. We have some other people that haven't been able to speak, and they should have the right to speak. Yes, sir. Abed Hammoud: Good evening. My name is Abed Hammoud I live at 889 Northeast 78 Street. Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry, Chair. I didn't get the name, please. Mr. Hammoud: Abed Hammoud. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Get closer to the mike. City ofMiami Page 154 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Mr. Hammoud: OK. I'm sorry. My name is Abed Hammoud. I live at 889 Northeast 78 Street. I own a property on Biscayne Boulevard. It's a vacant lot. I need to say something. I'm in favor ofMiami 21. It is a good start, andl encourage you, Commissioner, to approve it and to vote Miami 21 forward so it can continue to be improve. Second, I strongly oppose 35 feet height on -- andl ask you, Commissioner, not to allow 35 height restriction on commercial property on Biscayne Boulevard, and please take in consideration the economic impact. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Judy, good evening. Judith Sandoval: Hi, fellas. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Hey. Ms. Sandoval: I have two -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Hey, fellas? Ms. Sandoval: -- letters here -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Hey, she knows us so well she goes, "Hey, fellas." Chairman Gonzalez: Hey, fellas. Ms. Sandoval: Well, I thought you were tired of all those salutations, you know. I have two letters from two different homeowners' associations; one is Spring Garden, which is actually written to Michelle Spence -Jones, but brought it for her; the other is from Gilda Rodriguez, who is president of the Golden Pines Neighborhood Association, which is your district and your district. Both letters ask for a deferral until -- andl will read the last paragraph, since I'm limited in time, ofHilda's. "Please request a deferral for adoption ofMiami 21 zoning until a proposed zoning map for the entire city has been prepared and all residents of the City have been given an opportunity to review the specific zoning proposed for their neighborhoods." The second letter is from Judith Gray in Spring Garden, and the second part of it also asked for a deferral "until all residents are educated as to how it will affect their own properties and, after that step, have been able to comment on it. Zoning changes that could alter the charming ambiance of Spring Garden are bad for Overtown and the rest of your district." That's Michelle's. "We're constantly battling developers and need your help to stem the tide of inappropriate development. You need only to visit me at 1036 Northwest River Drive to see what a developer can do to ruin a close-knit, quiet community. Thank you for your attention. Judy Gray." Do I have any more time? Chairman Gonzalez: You still have one and a half minutes. Ms. Sandoval: Oh, wonderful. I read fast. OK. I would like say that I don't see what the hurry is. I recently was taken all around the City of Baltimore by my nephew who is a developer and specialist in affordable housing working all over the Midwest, and he lives there, and he showed me the whole city. They have a lot of similar problems. They have a huge part of the city that is all row houses falling apart, and they've lost their manufacturing base, so it's a poor city, but they have taken 20 years to do a plan for the city, the modern city, and it's wonderful. A lot of it has been implemented. The old historic districts are being reused, renovated, and developed as art galleries and so on. The ones that are even older, from the 18th century are all spoofed up and look wonderful. They have a -- they're on a bay like we are. They have a roof project like we are. They also have a lot of new condos, some of them are even out of -- out on the water in stilts. They have an entertainment district, and all of the theaters and performance art centers and museums, they're all within walking distance, and it's quite wonderful, but it has taken 20 City ofMiami Page 155 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 years to get this plan implemented, andl would caution you to take the same amount of care here and not rush things, and as far as DPZ is concerned, they've done a lot of hard work, but they aren't the only people who plan cities. There are other city planners, equally well-known, around the country, and I've talked to many of them, and they -- Chairman Gonzalez: OK, Judy. Ms. Sandoval: -- go at these problems differently, so -- Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Ms. Sandoval: -- do what you think you should do. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Sandoval: Nothing's written in stone. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you very much. Ms. Sandoval: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Luis Herrera: Good evening. Chairman Gonzalez: Good evening. Mr. Herrera: My name is Luis Herrera. I'm the president of Vizcaya Homeowners Association. I'm not coming to talk so long over here, just only simple question. Today we talking about all the projects that it have, TJ, T4, T6, T-40, all the T, but never talking about the neighborhood, what kind of protection we have in Miami 21 for the neighborhood. What kind of protection? Anybody can answer? Vice Chairman Sanchez: A lot much better than eleven hun -- 11000, that's for sure. Mr. Herrera: We don't have nothing in there. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Mr. Herrera: We don't have nothing in it. Chairman Gonzalez: Have you been to the pre --? Mr. Herrera: They taking away Chapter 23. They taking away everything. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right, whatever. Mr. Herrera: We need the protection -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Mr. Herrera: -- andl suggested it to not vote today to the whole city be involved in Miami 21 because the majority of the people in the City ofMiami, they don't know nothing about Miami 21 City ofMiami Page 156 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Herrera: -- just only the people the -- make the buildings, and lawyers, and the engineers. That's the only one they know Miami 21. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Herrera: The neighborhood, they don't know nothing about it, so defer this particular time now to all the people be inform. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Lucia Dougherty: Good -- Chairman Gonzalez: Good evening. Ms. Dougherty: -- evening, Mr. Mayor -- I mean, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I'm here today on behalf of Goldman Properties, and you may know Tony Goldman as somebody who was a urban pioneer in Manhattan and Lower Soho, and then again in Miami Beach on several properties and was a historic preservation developer. He saw Wynwood as some place that was a tremendous place and -- to invest, and he bought probably 11 acres in Wynwood, 60 odd properties in a place that has 60 galleries, and he's been working very closely with DPZ and the City ofMiami staff and very much appreciates their concurrence. They have some additional requests and conditions -- or not conditions, but things that they would like to suggest, andl know that Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk said that she would meet with us in connection with that, so we'd like to continue that dialogue. I have two specific recommendations in connection with Miami 21; one of them deals with adaptive reuse. Right now you have an existing -- if you have an existing building, such as a warehouse in Wynwood, for example, you cannot change it from your industrial warehouse to a restaurant or to retail without providing parking, and so we would suggest that you would -- and it -- they may not have any parking. In other words, the building itself was built at a time when you don't have parking, and so what you're doing is encouraging people to demolish that building to build a new building instead of adaptive reusing the existing building, so we would suggest that, throughout the City, there'd be no parking requirements or no incremental additional parking requirements over that which it had when the building was built for an adaptive reuse of a building. Now what that means is -- or, alternatively, create a situation where you have a parking impact trust fund, such as you have in Miami -- in Coconut Grove. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Grove. Ms. Dougherty: In other words, how the traffic parking impact funds got created, Commissioner Sarnoff, is because you had a lot of retail stores that wanted to put restaurants in. You couldn't put the restaurants in without coming up with parking, and of course, they didn't have parking, so the idea was to actually take money, put it in a fund and the City would create the parking, and we would like to encourage you to do the same thing throughout the entire City, and particularly, any place where you have an adaptive reuse area, so for Wynwood, for example, it's an ideal location for adaptive reuse of existing buildings -- Commissioner Sarnoff Have you thought about this all across the City, or you just thinking about Wynwood? Ms. Dougherty: Well, I think it should be all across the City. Commissioner Sarnoff No, and have you thought through every adaptive reuse? Because that - City ofMiami Page 157 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 - I mean, that's a very comment to make, what you just made. No parking for any adaptive reuse. Ms. Dougherty: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff And you've thought through this whole thing? Ms. Dougherty: I think it's -- the solution -- if you think it's a problem, then the solution is to cre - - have the City municipality create the parking through a trust fund or some sort of a bond issue methodology, but for example, throughout cities, whether it's Coral Gables, for example, all their downtown areas, they don't have parking, and they -- the city creates the parking through the parking trust fund so you wouldn't have all these restaurants if they all -- each one of them had restaurant, parking lot; restaurant, parking lot. That would be bad, so I'm suggesting that you, for -- Commissioner Sarnoff And yet, I don't go to Coral Gables 'cause I can't park. Ms. Dougherty: There's plenty of places to park. You just don't want to pay for it. Commissioner Sarnoff That's the last time she's going to call me cheap. Ms. Dougherty: Mr. Commissioner. The second issue that I have, and this is the one that's really, I think, a very important issue for us all to consider. We have a Major Use Special Permit, many of them are out there right now, and it's a process that takes nine months and at least five hearings, perhaps six, if you go to the Zoning Board; seven, if you go to the River Commission; eight, if you go to the Shoreline Review Committee in Dade County. It's an amazing process with lots of scrutiny, and right now, you have inconsistent recommendations or inconsistent provisions in your Code and in your ZIP. If you look at your Zoning Code, Miami 21, 7.1.3.5(d), it says that any existing project, you can make a minor modification so long as it complies with Miami 21. By the way, there isn't a project that we've ever had that hasn't had some minor modification, but what I'm suggesting is since we've gone through all the scrutiny for Major Use Special Permits, you should allow any major modification, without having to -- so long as it comes to you, so long as there neighborhood participation, so long as notice is given to everybody. It may be a better project than what you could build automatically if you just built the one that was approved, and so what we're suggesting is that -- and by the way, the inconsistency is in the ZIP ordinance that says a applicant for a development permit shall be allowed to make nonsubstantial [sic] changes to an approved Class II special exception or Major Use Special Permit. Well, the way -- well, first of all, there's no definition of what's substantial and nonsubstantial [sic] in this Code, which I think is a problem, but let's assume you went to the old 11000 definition. Sometimes, if you have been -- you've been told if you change the way the windows look, that's a substantial modification. If you take out a fountain from the front of the building, it's a substantial -- Commissioner Sarnoff Stop right there. Ms. Dougherty: Sure. Commissioner Sarnoff Now 11000 does define "substantial"? Ms. Dougherty: It does. Commissioner Sarnoff And ours -- and Miami 21 chose not to define it? Ms. Dougherty: There's not a definition that I've seen. Commissioner Sarnoff Does it need one under this Code? City ofMiami Page 158 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Dougherty: I think it does, and that may be the solution to my problem. Maybe you could define it in a way that would allow for changes such as what we're talking about. For example, I've had many, many affordable housing developers that, once they go to the State and get the financing, the building has to be reduced. That means your wall has to be reduced by ten feet, which makes it automatically a substantial amendment. Commissioner Sarnoff Wait a minute. You represent affordable housing? Ms. Dougherty: Yes, many of them. Commissioner Sarnoff Oh, I didn't know. Ms. Dougherty: I have -- Commissioner Sarnoff I didn't know. Ms. Dougherty: Yes, absolutely. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Dougherty: So I'm asking you to look at this issue and have -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Dougherty: -- your staff look at the issue. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Ms. Dougherty: Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Good evening. Jenny Lawson: My name is Jenny Lawson. I'm a resident of the City ofMiami, andl'm also representing ACORN. My address is 120 Northwest 39th Street, Miami, Florida. I'm disappointed because developers after developers come and talk for half an hour and the public gets three minutes. I'm disappointed because developers come and tell you how they're going to be disadvantaged when they're given -- taken away their right to the sky rights. I'm disappointed because when my members come up and tell you how they're disadvantaged by all the development going on in the community and they can't find housing, they're told that it is not pertinent. I'm disappointed in this Commission, andl'm disappointed that this is where -- thatl have to get up and speak. I'm disappointed that when they threaten lawsuits because we're going to take away their right to the sky right to develop, that the Commission seems afraid, and that when you are asking them to do public benefits because they are building in our city, that they're threatening lawsuits and nobody's demanding more. I live in Wynwood/Buena Vista/Midtown Miami just built -- was built two blocks away from my house. Ten thousand more people are going to go in there, and the exit off the highway is going to be completely a mess, and there's no effort to fix that. Development is out of control. As ACORN, we support Miami 21 and the idea of reigning it in, absolutely, and all we are asking is that when you look at the public benefit fund, you truly get public benefits from what's being built in the City ofMiami; that the people who live here truly benefit from what's being built, and that one solution is RobertMayer's idea, to add in T5. Make T5 participate in the public benefit fund Other cities do it. Commissioner Sarnoff, you asked if there were other cities that do public benefits in other places. There are countless examples of places who do it with more teeth than we're talking about here. They request that any building that builds more than 15 units does ten percent affordable housing. It City ofMiami Page 159 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 forces developers to be a part of the solution and not a part of the problem, and that is what we are asking for. Thankyou. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Applause. Janice Tarbert: Good evening. Janice Tarbert, 2520 Southwest 24th Terrace, the Silver -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Tarbert: -- Bluff -- Chairman Gonzalez: Excuse me a minute. Ms. Tarbert: Sure. Chairman Gonzalez: After you, I'm closing the public hearing. I think -- no? We still more? Well, get on line because -- Allyson Warren: I just did. I was just giving the Clerk something. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Go ahead. I'm sorry. Ms. Tarbert: Silver Bluff Homeowners Association. Approval ofMiami 21 should be deferred until all the quadrants have been completed. Remember, one size doesn't fit all. I also urge your support on placing a timeline on the consultant, DPZ, to complete Miami 21 for the other quadrants. At a PAB meeting, DPZ was asked how long the other quadrants should take, and they said it should be approximately 18 months for the remaining three. I urge you to put them on a timeline. Thankyou. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Let's go. Let's move on. Ms. Warren: Sorry it was that close. I handed the Clerk -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Go ahead. Ms. Warren: Allyson Warren, 650 Northeast 82nd Terrace. Sorry. I've been -- Chairman Gonzalez: I hope so. Ms. Warren: -- here too long. I didn't get out of here until 1 o'clock last night, so I apologize. Vice Chairman Sanchez: It looks like we'll be heading -- Ms. Warren: Tell me about it. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- out of here around that time. Ms. Warren: Tell me about it. On behalf of the Upper Eastside Miami Council, the Clerk's Office is passing out our official position paper, which I will not read and bore you with, but please note the names of all of the business owners from the Biscayne Boulevard corridor, many of whom are affected by Chapter 23, all of whom are in complete opposition to 35 feet, and thank God, the City Administration, the historic planning office, pulled the 35 feet and also took undeveloped land out of the mix because to tell somebody like Mr. Hammoud over here, who has City ofMiami Page 160 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 vacant land that had he built a year ago could have had one of the higher properties on the boulevard that, well, maybe you can build to 35 feet and that's it. We have worked extensively. We have, many of us, gone to every single solitary meeting over these years since the very first one. We've worked with DPZ, andl can say that almost every request or recommendation that we have made, they've implemented, so we would like to see this move forward so that you can get the car out of the garage and be sure the tires are still round and the gas is still good, and what doesn't work, you fix. This plan has morphed significantly since the very beginning. We expect it's going to continue to morph, but until you take it out for a test run, none of us know what's going to work or what's not going to work, so I would seriously request that you let this go out for that test run and let them continue to fix it as they go along. Thank you very much. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. Good evening. Bernardo Fort -Brescia: My name is Bernardo Fort -Brescia, 801 Brickell Avenue, Miami, Florida. I wanted to pick up on the subject of the parking from a different point of view. If we all arrive to our city today and we see the skyline and what is going on, if you notice, the City is being developed by a series of very large-scale projects, and a lot of it has to do with the nature of what a parking garage needs to be in order to work and to fit a garage and a ramp and the number of cars, and what this city is missing in this development period that we've gone through is the construction of smaller buildings, and -- but smaller buildings are practically impossible to build in this town because of the parking requirement, because if you have a small lot and you want to develop a small project, there's no way you can fit, functionally, the parking requirement, and this is creating this city of land assemblies where we drive from large project to large project, to entire city blocks, but nothing of a smaller scale, and the real texture of the city is all about building different scales, and included in that are smaller scaled projects, and therefore, what I wanted to point out is that there may -- there should be some kind of provision for lots of smaller size where, like other cities, including Coral Gables and others, there is no parking requirement. In fact -- well, I don't believe in the parking requirement in general, but know that's a bit radical to propose a city with no parking requirements, but it is -- but when it comes to a small lot where you want to create a Coconut Grove, there would be no Commodore Plaza if there would have been a parking requirement individually for each one of those buildings. There would be no Miracle Mile. There would be no small Alcazar -- Aragon Street in Coral Gables. There would be -- the districts that we all like to go would not exist if each building, individually, had to provide that parking requirement or if it was imposed with some amazing impact fees in order to get those buildings built, which makes them unfeasible, and so if there are municipal garages in a neighborhood, I think that requirement should be removed, and if there's a building -- if there's a site of a certain size, say, you know, whatever may be the determined size, 15,000 square feet, 12,000, 10,000, whatever it may be, in that case, I think that the City should encourage small buildings to occur to activate the sidewalk, not to be -- have 30 percent of the facade populated by ramps going into cramped garages, and that those buildings have a certain role in the City, and they have a -- and the contribution more than counterbalances the -- mitigates the fact that they're depending on parking on the street or municipal garages, or in other garages in the neighborhood. Particularly with buildings which are countercyclical, retail buildings in neighborhoods where there are office buildings that can provide the parking or vice versa, in retail neighborhoods where an office building can be countercyclical to the use of the retail, and therefore, in that case, that some of that parking can be taken advantage of in a more efficient way instead of building so much garage. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Thank you. Yes, sir. Good evening. Felix Rodriguez: Good evening. My name is Felix Rodriguez. I live in 417 Northeast 27 Street, in Edgewater area. I am living in that area for 42 years. I saw in Edgewater many years going up and down, up and down, and from 1985 to nine -- 2002 year, that area was devastated, was totally down because we have a lot of cocaine house -- crack/cocaine house, drug abuse, robbery, prostitution, everything in that area. To live in that area, you are supposed to be in good condition because nobody can live in that area (UNINTET,TIGIBT,F). After the City ofMiami Page 161 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 construction start in the year 2001, Edgewater going up, and you can see a crane in each block, and after that, the area increase. The area was up. The drug stop. The prostitution stop. Everything stop. After Miami 21 start talking, everything going down. Nobody want to do anything there. Don't kill the chicken with the golden -- with the gold egg because that is a chicken with a gold egg, and you know that in less than 15 year, the downtown ofMiami is going to be to 36 Street. Maintain the same density from downtown to 36 Street, that include Edgewater, and you are going to gain a lot of money in taxes that can make a lot of money to the City ofMiami, and don't kill that area because it's not -- that area right now is dead. Last three week, three lady on 26 Terrace. People stolen with a gun $500 and money from them, and one of them right now is in the hospital because that area is down now like 1990. Thank you. Chairman Gonzalez: Thank you. All right. We're closing the public hearing, and we're bringing it back to the Commission. Ms. Plater-Zyberk. Thank you, Commissioner. Chairman Gonzalez: Yeah. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: I have just a few closing remarks, andl would like to start by saying how impressive it is to see, once again, how many people have taken the time to get to know this process and this document, and who are expressing the long-term good of the City and their efforts to be here and in all the meetings they've had with us since the beginning of all this, and I'm personally very grateful for that. I think you can see, as the concerns and suggestions that have been made, truly engaged the City, as a whole, as well as people's individual properties. I think you can also see that there're two sides to many of the concerns voiced. I'd like to speak to several inaccuracies and then suggest a path forward about those that have been expressing two sides. Just a few notes. We have been responsive. When you hear people say that we did not respond -- we have been repeatedly responsive, but very often, we have come back and said we can do certain things. We believe it's correct to do certain things, but on the final one, we really have to present our professional opinion to the Commission. In the districts -- in the industrial -- former industrial areas, we have looked very closely at the codes that Mr. Pumo brought us, as well as others, and there was an intensive economic study regarding how much housing should be -- might be included as live -works in order to keep the workplace -- you heard an expression of concern about jobs -- and future workplace without inspiring immediate gentrification. The NCD-3, it's true, is not in this document. We did discuss the NCDs and decided that it was incorrect to write them into this document as it is about the northeast quadrant, and in essence, we don't know enough about that not having spoken to the people from those areas. That would be one of those additions in the future quadrants that we would anticipate. There is a variance for parking. Someone said there was not, and the T48 [sic] parking release is not a requirement to not provide parking, although I -- we might be sympathetic to Mr. Fort-Brescia's suggestion about parking, but it is an option. The discussion in several areas about T24 [sic] going to T36 [sic], in the case of our presentation, is not necessarily the -- in the long -run, that's an inappropriate way for the City to grow, but we have said from the beginning that we would not be adding upzoning or adding great capacity to the existing zoning capac -- categories of the City without some mechanism to provide public benefit that those increases would require the City to have, and so zoning change and special area plans exist in order to deal with that, andl think you've had a beautiful presentation about how those special area plans might be made by one of those suggesters. Now a suggestion about going forward, I would respectfully suggest that additional meetings are not exactly what's needed. We have, as I explained, met with many different groups. In many cases, we have made adjustments, and then we have ended up with a series of about six or eight things which, in effect, might be policy directives from you to us that we could take care of before the second reading, and I'd like to go through those very quickly, and we need your feedback on some of them. First, with regard to the upper part of Biscayne Boulevard, clearly, there are different ideas about this, and we have, for a long time, presented the combination of T5 and T6-8. We have heard the discussion about the lower heights, 30 foot City ofMiami Page 162 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 to the east on one study, 50 foot to the west on another, SD-9. The stakeholders, who've seen their zoning coming down, and we have presented our combination of zoning as what we think is correct for the boulevard given that history and given its role in the City. I won't go into a longer presentation of that because I think we've made that before. Secondly, with regard to the parking pedestals, actually, I think we don't need your direction on this. We have a way out, I believe, and as the architects expressed, we can get together with them to allow a larger floor plate for parking to grow above the eighth story without liners. Third, nonconformity -- by the way, we do have a clause about adaptive reuse and those sites that do not have parking being able to be reused commercially, but the larger issues of nonconformity, I think, we understand what we have to look at given today's discussion. The public benefits -- this is one that we do need your direction on. The -- part of the room is saying you need more or it needs to be specifically allocated for housing. Another part of the room was saying we don't want to pay for height, for instance, and the benefits are too onerous. More notices -- this is the fifth item. I believe we have largely fulled that. If not, there may be one or two items that we heard today that can be accommodated. Brickell West, the T6-24 to 36, that is one of those areas, again, like Edgewater, in which we have said that is the translation of the prior zoning -- of the existing zoning that's there. To go to T36 [sic] is an increase in zoning which would occur without incurring any benefits for the City, and we felt that it was incorrect for us to be suggesting large-scale upzoning like that at this time, so that's the list, andl could go back through it with you, if you wish, but would suggest that this is a manageable agenda for us to be able to bring back to you in second reading, and would, of course, remind, as well, as did at the beginning, that that applies to what we've done in the east quadrant, and that we would be bringing that as a base, but not as a final document for the rest of the City. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, can I --? Chairman Gonzalez: Yes, Commissioner. Commissioner Regalado: Elizabeth, two questions. Maybe I'm -- it's too late, but ifI hear you correct, you said several things that like to understand. Number one, you seem not to want to do any more round of public meetings. Is that for the first quadrant, or you're talking --? Ms. Plater-Zyberk. I'm speaking to the first -- the east quadrant. Commissioner Regalado: OK Ms. Plater-Zyberk: In other words, sending us back to meet with the community group that we've already met with many times and have listened to and made some changes, but not everything that they want, may not be productive because we're actually bringing that discrepancy to you here this evening -- Commissioner Regalado: OK. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- so that's just for this quadrant. Commissioner Regalado: That's just for this (UNINTET,TIGIBT,F). You seem also to say that there is nothing you would recommend to change in Brickell West or Edgewater? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: At this time, that's our recommendation. Commissioner Regalado: I'm sorry? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes, that's our recommendation. Commissioner Regalado: No compromise, no change? City ofMiami Page 163 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Well, with regard to Edgewater, many of the issues -- there were about five or six issues that were brought to us by the group that's -- that was -- that spoke this evening. Commissioner Regalado: No, no. The one you explain now. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: That's right. Commissioner Regalado: The -- for -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: From 24 to 36 Commissioner Regalado: -- so over there, no change, no more meetings? But you even admitted that there were some mistakes, mistakes about some of the setbacks and all that, so if there should not be any more meetings, if there are not any changes, we only have one -- I mean, two alternative; either reject or approve because you said my work is done. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: OK. No, I didn't mean to make it that -- Commissioner Regalado: That harsh. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- harsh; that's right. What I meant to say was that in the case of these areas where a different category is desired by some of the speakers tonight, we're presenting -- when we say T6-24, we think that's what the City should do. We've -- I think we've tried to explain in the workshop and in various presentations why we think that's the best thing. If the City Commission believes that there should be an upzoning without any benefit derived to the City through the benefits program or through the upzoning process, then we will follow that directive, but we didn't want to make that decision ourselves. Commissioner Regalado: But you have made all the decisions. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Not -- I think they've been done in great collaboration. I, personally, have not made decisions by myself -- Commissioner Regalado: Now -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- and the group -- the team, I think, believes that that should be a policy decision presented to you. Commissioner Regalado: OK. Now everyone -- I mean, you should not be proud, but I mean, you should -- you made history today because I been sitting here in this chair for 11 and a half year, and this is the first time ever on this 11 and a half year that I have seen residents and developers agree 100 percent, but other than that let's see the other areas of the City. You heard what the people said. I -- you know, I believe that, the least that the people could expect before even we approve this in first reading, before the first quadrant, is that the rest of the people of the City at least should have some kind of notion because, otherwise, it's going to be too late. I mean, we are going to have the same story, you know. The people from Flagami wanted upzoning or downzoning, but the people do not know. The people do not know, andl will challenge you when you said and -- or anybody, that the first meeting you met with residents and representative of the area. I can get you 50 persons in four days that are important in different areas that do not know about Miami 21 because they haven't had the time, nor they have been invited because they thought it was the first quadrant, and mind you, you did say -- it was our understanding that it was the first quadrant, but it never was the understanding that the first quadrant was going to be approved and it would be blueprint for the rest of the City, so I would like to ask my colleagues to direct the Administration to then in turn direct the planners to start City ofMiami Page 164 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 meeting with different residents in all areas of the City that would be impacted, but not the kind of meeting -- you know, I offer myself free several month ago -- and I think that there are people here -- to help in the public relations area, and no one took my offer. No one, because I ask, if you all want me to do it and try to bring Miami 21 to the rest of the City. Well, the City Commission should ask me like in the past, but no one ask, and it's not that I'm good. It's just that I'm all doing this, andl have an idea, andl will tell you. If we are going to do -- because maybe the rest of the Commission doesn't feel that there is a need to do any more meetings in other areas of the City -- we need to have the area Commissioners, the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) office, the support of the staff so we can get to all the residents through their homeowners association, and have a comprehensive meeting where people can explain, and you know -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Much -- Commissioner Regalado: -- I -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- in the way that we did for the east quadrant. Commissioner Regalado: Well -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: -- I don't know. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Because that's the way we did it, through the -- Commissioner Regalado: Well -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- NET offices and through a series of public meetings and -- Commissioner Regalado: I don't know. I -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- with the various groups. Commissioner Regalado: -- asked for the list, and there are several persons that work in public relations that were -- that are being paid as we speak now. I don't know what they do because if you use the NET office, then you still using the public relations agency that you hire. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah, it was a combination. The outreach was very rich. Commissioner Regalado: OK, the outreach, so -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: -- I would ask my colleagues that before -- I would tell you, I would suggest to vote this item down because that way it would come back through the whole process, through the Zoning Board, through the Planning Board, and the people will have more time to bring their issues throughout the City. I would move to reject this now, but would like to defer to the Commissioner of the area, which is the area most impacted. Unfortunately, Commissioner Spence -Jones is not here, which will be also the area most impacted, but as I defer to you, I ask you to vote for the City, not for one only -- you, yourself said several month ago that there are citywide issues. This impacts your district, but this is a citywide issue. We need to keep the people from the City informed. We need to keep the people from the City involved, and it would be unfair not to get them involved and just approve something that is going to fall on them like a piano falling from a high-rise, so hopefully, you know, I -- hopefully, we will have that City ofMiami Page 165 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 opportunity, and I'm looking forward to meeting with -- and the residents in our district to see if they are smarter than I am and understand quicker Miami 21 than I did. Chairman Gonzalez: Commissioner Sarnoff. Commissioner Sarnoff You want to go? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes. You know, I want to -- I definitely want to hear from you, being the district Commissioner, but I -- if you would yield to me, I thank -- Commissioner Sarnoff I'll speak -- I'll be more than willing to speak after you. Go ahead. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Mr. Chairman, and my colleagues, last time I checked the City Constitution [sic], it was this Commission who dictated the policy. We have three options we could do here today. One, we could approve, we could deny, or we could amend it, but let me tell you what I think that we should do, and then I would like the district Commissioner to elaborate on this. The issue that's in front of us today, as I stated before, is an issue that we're going to have an opportunity to make a vote that's going to have an impact on a lot of people and the residents in our community. Let me just say that the nine hours that I've been here have been very, very rewarding because I have seen great testimony put forth by not only residents but architects and attorneys, and each and every one of them that came up here cared about this City, and they're concerned about the City, and you know what? A lot of people who put testimony into the record supported Miami 21. They know that the other code that we had, the 11000, was a helter-skelter project code that really was used and abused, and the evidence is out there when you drive through our entire city. As I stated before, this legislation that's being put forth is not an easy legislation. It's cutting -edge legislation. It requires leadership. It requires an opportunity for us to do it, but to do it right, andl think it's important today, based on the -- on a lot of the discussions that we've heard by the residents, which gave great testimony on great recommendations, that we need to look forward and explore them. Let me just say that what we do today will have, I believe for the next maybe ten to fifteen years, will affect this City, so it is very important that we walk slowly and we look at how we do this. Lot of the testimony that was put here -- I think that one of the things that we need to do as policymakers is the following: The first thing that we need to do is we need to find out what we're going to do, whether we're going to look at this as a quadrant or as a -- or as citywide. I think that's the first decision that we're going to make here, andl think we need some time to look at that because Commissioner Sarnoff made a great argument as to, you know what? Hey, we want to stop all this development that's out there that's, you know, infringing in residential areas, but you know what? If we delay the process and we continue to delay this process -- we could go a year to year and a half -- and guess what? Under the old code, these permits are going to be coming in front of us, and they're going to be built, so therefore, I think that we should be very prudent on how we do this, andl don't know yet what I'm going to do. That's one of the issues that I wrote down that I'm going to study, and today, I think that for us to make this decision without a Commissioner that affects her district -- and you heard about -- we spent close to an hour on an issue that was pertaining to her district, andl know she's not here, andl probably -- she's at home recovering watching, or maybe it's being recorded for her to later review, but I think that we need to do what the people wanted us to do, and that is defer the item, and based on the recommendation that was presented to us -- andl wrote them down, andl want to put them on the record because they were very well comments that were put out and suggestions, and just based on the public benefit program, which is Section 3.11.1, I would like time to analyze and compare the methodology used for the public benefits program from TC-8 [sic] through TC-46 [sic] 'cause that's been one issue that we need to make sure that we have down right. The other issue that needs to be clarified, which is not going to affect -- it's going to affect everybody in this district, is the nonconforming, and under 7.1.2.5, I think that that needs to be very well defined as to the nonconforming because that's going to be an issue that's going to bring us a lot of headaches in the future, addressing natural disasters and remodeling. Now there was another issue that was brought out that I think City ofMiami Page 166 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 that we need to look at, and that is, based on the T3, the nonconforming, we need to look at these smaller lots that, God forbid that we get a hurricane or something happens, or along the way, they make modifications, these smaller lots are going to be in trouble, and it's going to be a great inconvenience for the people we represent in R -- well, not R-1 anymore, but T3 or T4, and there needs to be some language there where there have some hardship to make sure that, hey, my house didn't go from 2,000 feet or 1,500 feet to 900 feet because all the requirements that are met, so there's a lot of technical issues that we need to be very careful of. I want to study Brickell West, T6-24 to T6-36. I want to give it some thought. After hearing the arguments, you know, maybe I'll come back and make my decision based on the best advisor that I have, and that's my pillow. Then I want to also take into consideration great recommendations that were put forth by Barbara Bisno, what she presented. I think it was 12 -- I read -- it was 12 of your recommendations. I -- there's a few of them that I'm willing to explore and possibly amend and make this policy a better policy for all of us. Then there was the issue of the T5 abutting the T3 in the Upper Eastside, which needs to be addressed, and the pictures clearly show that we need to look at that and see how we could see -- that's on 58th and 59th, I believe, Street. I think the one that presented it was a Bob Powers on the issue, but also, the T5, the possibility of benefiting from public benefit fund towards the affordable housing that Mayer put -- I think he made a good presentation on that. I think we need to explore that and see if we get focus on that since we're the champions of affordable housing. I also want to take this on a legal aspect, andl want to read that court ruling -- the study that was put out by the court case, Miami -Dade County versus Omnipoint Holding [sic]. I think it's important for us to look at that and also review the legal aspect of this to see how we're challenged. You heard a lot of people saying they're going to challenge. You heard the Mayor ofMiami Beach say they were challenged, and we need to make sure that what beachfronts they attack, we have a defendable case on that. I think there needs to be more clarification on the standards for administration waivers, especially on the subsection (d), 7.1.2.5, and there's also needs -- we need to look at the study, the 35 height in the Upper Eastside that's going to be an issue that probably be debated here, so we have a great opportunity here, listening to everyone that came forth and gave their presentation and their suggestions, for us to review these things and come back at the next Commission meeting, when we have the Commissioner of the district here with us, and we're able to not go through a public hearing again because we went through it, but at least, it gives us an opportunity to study, work out some amendments that might have been already proffered by the lady, Ms. Liz, and possibly some recommendations that'll be put out by the Commissioners, so I think it's very important that we move very carefully on this because we're going to have an opportunity to, as somebody stated, make history, and you know, somebody said, you can make histories two way: the good way or the bad way, so let's do that, but I also want -- and it was very important to have Ms. Plater present to me, which has to be simple. Simplify things. People need to see what they're going to get. People need to have a feeling that they understand the concept. I would like -- and I think we talked about this -- to see three comparative analysis [sic] before the next meeting on properties. I want one in the downtown area. I want one in the Edgewater area, andl would like to see one in the Brickell area. I also want to see that for a residence, andl would like to see that in the three other -- make it the four -- the four other quadrants as to simple, typical home, let's say it's 50 square feet lot, but now it would have the comparison as to all the requirements that they need now under Miami 21, which is the setback, the driveway, detached garage, the alleyway, the entrance, and the other requirements, and then once I have all that information, I could honestly say, as a policymaker, that I can make an intelligent decision because, today, I cannot make that decision, although I think Miami 21 is heading in the right direction to address a lot of the concerns that we have in the City, but once again, I want to make sure that when we do it, we could do it right, so I would yield to you, Commissioner. Chairman Gonzalez: Commissioner -- Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Chairman Gonzalez: -- Sarnoff. City ofMiami Page 167 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Commissioner Sarnoff I'd like to make a motion to defer for discussion purposes. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second. Chairman Gonzalez: There's a second. Commissioner Sarnoff First, let me commend the Administration, and let me commend the Mayor for bringing about Miami 21, and hopefully, when I commend the Mayor in public, everybody understands it's heartfelt because we certainly have more than our differences, but he has seen what's wrong with 11000, and there are a lot of things wrong with 11000, and as Commissioners, we sit up here everyday, and we experience the problems with our present zoning code. Now the thing that I still need to understand on Miami 21 is what call organic. Is it organically the right move for the City ofMiami? When there was a contest between Zyscovich and Duater [sic] Zyberk, I couldn't figure out from that aspect as to what was the better, more aesthetically pleasing building, so to speak. I want to see the outcome that Elizabeth has with regard to the differences between her and Zyscovich, andl want to see Zyscovich -- I'd like to see something come back from him as to how things can be designed differently because that's organically -- we have got to decide for ourselves do we want to go to form -based codes. Everything else is what I call Burger King; everybody wants to order their own, andl understand that. Everybody here has a desire to get what they want because they have it, and it's their lot, or it's their ownership, and you have to appreciate that, and that comes -- that can be dealt with by refining the Code, but think something is important to the -- really three other Commissioners here, whose districts are not necessarily affected, but very much affected. I think you need to have not less than three meetings in your neighborhood, andl think those meetings -- I don't know that they need to rise to the absolute level where you have your final zoning code, where you have your atlas, but I think you have got to start to getting a better understanding as to what exactly it is and what the meanings of this code are going to be to your neighborhood. We saw the rear flank -- no disrespect -- exposed, I think, of nonconformity. I think we have to do some work on nonconformity. I think we need to incorporate 1305 in our criteria in the City ofMiami because I think we need to have set criteria. I am not comfortable with the Zoning administrator or Planning and Zoning person making a decision without -- well, as I call it, out of whole cloth because they have no set criteria under which to implement their decisions. I believe equally that most citizens are going to want to be able to appeal to this board, whether it's financial, whether it's comfort. We are the people that they have elected. We are the people that they can unelect [sic] -- Chairman Gonzalez: Exactly. Commissioner Sarnoff -- so that when we make a mistake, they have the right to campaign against us and say this guy or woman does not belong on this dais, so I think most things, if not all things, need to come to us. Now I read Omnipoint versus Miami -Dade County and was actually quite shocked. It's 845 So. 2d 767. It's a ThirdDCA (District Court of Appeals) 2002 case. It says exactly what Carter McDowell says it says, and here we are adopting a code based on the identical criteria that the Third DCA says is unconstitutional. I think our Law Department or our consultants had better do a better job of looking at the criteria that we set in our Code when we are putting in wording in there that is already declared unconstitutional by the Florida courts. That's a dangerous start -- place to start with. Now, obviously, there's not much point to talking about passing it on first reading, but I'd like to make a statement about first reading. I think you, as citizens, deserve due process not only at the second reading, but also at the first reading because God forbid one of us is not here for the second reading. I would City ofMiami Page 168 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 hope that you could hold our feet to the fire and say that Commissioner made a decision, not based on what he thought it would be, not what it could have been, but what it was, so that when you step off this dais, and God forbid, you get hit by a truck and you're not sitting on the dais three weeks later and this Commission selects somebody wholly different to sit here, that that person at least sits on your shoulders understanding that full due process was afforded the first reading, and) think it's a tremendous mistake that we make here oftentimes saying let's just pass this; we'll fix it on second reading. There's nothing that guarantees you'll be here for a second reading. We just don't know in the uncertainties of the world, so I was going to speak heavily and primarily against a first reading because when I speak to this ordinance or this entire change, it will be primarily the first time that it's right and the second time that it's right. There won't be many changes for a second time. Now I have absolute feelings about the Upper Eastside, and) will implement those feelings at the right time. I have strong feelings about Edgewater, and at the appropriate time, I'll implement those feelings. You have to take DZB [sic] as a recommender, and then you've got to, as a Commissioner, tailor it to your neighborhood, to the wants and the desires of your people. Now I say there's three kinds of people out there; those that want to live in the City ofMiami for a very long time -- and) applaud you; those that are holding their land to sell it for the most money -- it's your Constitutional right; and those that want to develop and develop as much property as you want, equally your Constitutional right, but there's a balance in there somewhere. Somewhere, this has got to be a livable and sustainable city, and that's why this Administration is making a change from 11000 because 11000 does not provide us with a livable, sustainable city. Is this the city you choose to continue to live in. If we continue at the pace -- let's say there was not a market slow -down. The market had not slowed down, and let's just surmise that we were still approving eight MUSPs, six MUSPs, five MUSPs a month. It's only through the grace of capitalism and the slow -down in the economy that that's not happening. I don't want to wait an inordinate amount of time to approve this, yeti don't want to force this down anyone's throat. I really believe you're going to need three meetings, at a minimum, in your neighborhoods just to understand what you are exposing your neighborhoods to. I don't know, like I said before, that you need to get to an atlas stage, but) think you need to get to an understanding stage. For instance, if someone's home went down in a hurricane, that you know that you can take -- say to your citizenry or your constituents, "We can rebuild this. It's not a problem. Miami 21 will not affect this, " or "Miami 21 will affect you this much, but it's a good way to affect you because we think that cars should be taken off the street and not parked directly in front," if you make that choice. You know, Miami 21 has opened my eyes up to a great many things. I was an absolute car enthusiast. My wife will tell you that) used to love to wax my car and drive my car, and) have a different outlook to cars since Miami 21. I fought with Elizabeth when I first met her and I heard that there was going to be -- how many cars they were anticipating a city ofMiamian should have, and) asked the City Manager -- and) won't embarrass him -- about how many cars he has. We all have too many cars. We've all -- all of us drive a little too much. As long as it works on carbon, as long as we emit what we're emitting into the air -- I'm sorry. I'm an Al Gore conformist. I really believe what he has to say is true, and we've got to figure out a way to make this city and the rest of the world a more sustainable world, and that's why I applaud what this Administration is doing. They're winning me over in terms of changing my views of cars. Now it's not going to happen overnight, and it's not going to happen tomorrow, and it's not going to happen in two years, but just provide for this possibility. Someday we're going to have to be able to get around a whole lot better in the City ofMiami by hopping on something, by not necessarily driving your own car. Just provide for that possibility in your thinking. It wasn't in my thinking when I first sat on this dais. It is now ingrained in my thinking and will be ingrained in everything) do from this day forward because we cannot drive ourselves into happiness. We're going to drive ourselves mad. We're going to drive ourselves into madness, but we're not there yet, so with that, I'm going to move that we defer this, and I'm going to actually say that we give ourselves 90 days so you can have three complete meetings. I hope you don't have to go to full atlases because if you have to go to full atlases, I think it can take longer than we need to. I think we need to change 11000. I think Miami 21 is the right direction. I don't think it's right presently, but that's why I'm a Commissioner because, for my constituents, I don't think it's quite City ofMiami Page 169 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 there yet, but I think, with some tailoring and with some ironing, and with some sewing, it'll look a lot better in a very short time. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner, I think the -- Commissioner Regalado: I second the -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- it's a -- Commissioner Regalado: -- motion. Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion and a second already. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. There is a motion, and there is -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: I think the -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- a second. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- proper motion, as the second of the motion -- maker of the motion is to defer all PZ item related to Miami 21, andl believe that you're saying three months, so we're looking at October? September? All right. Second. Ms. Plater-Zyberk. May I ask a question? Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: I just didn't understand something. Commissioner Regalado: IfI can amend -- a friendly amendment. If those three meetings, which I think is fine because of the geographical area -- Commissioner Gonzalez has the area of the airport, Flagami, plus Allapattah -- Chairman Gonzalez: Allapattah. Commissioner Regalado: -- andl -- our district, it's very large. It -- like Commissioner Sanchez has the Roads, East Little Havana, part of Shenandoah. If we are not able to have those three meetings, then we will not be able to vote on first reading, not until and unless those meetings are done, with the help of the Administration. The item will not be back before the City Commission. I'm just saying so just in case, you know -- I'm willing to go any time, any day, but it's important to have the support of the Administration, our office, I'm sure, that will do the work, and I think it's important to have one of your representative, City staff to give us a briefing and to have a public debate. The other thing -- I mean, you said that you will be addressing the issues in your district because it seems that there is a deadlock between, you know, what the planners are recommending and what the people -- and it would be also unfair to vote when there is such a large dissent in the first quadrant, so I -- Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: -- I'm hoping that we can start the process for the next three meetings and come back here more informed. Chairman Gonzalez: As -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Call the question. City ofMiami Page 170 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Chairman Gonzalez: -- it -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh, I'm sorry. Chairman Gonzalez: -- stand now, we're deferring Miami 21 and all the related items for 90 days, until the second meeting of September, which is the Planning and Zoning meeting, considering that everyone has been able to have their public -- three public hearings in every district. Is that the motion -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes. Chairman Gonzalez: -- and the second? All right. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: Those opposed have the same right. Motion carries -- Applause. Chairman Gonzalez: -- and we're ready to adjourn. PZ.3 07-00826zt ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO DELETE, IN ITS ENTIRETY, ARTICLE 7, ENTITLED, "HP HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICTS," AND PROVIDING FOR CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF SAID ARTICLE TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED; AMENDING CHAPTER 23 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "HISTORIC PRESERVATION," BY PROVIDING DEFINITIONS AND ESTABLISHING PROVISIONS FOR (1) "TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR HISTORIC RESOURCES;" A PROCESS WHEREBY OWNERS OF HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT PROPERTIES OR NON-CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES WITHIN THE MIAMI MODERN ("MIMO")/BISCAYNE BOULEVARD HISTORIC DISTRICT MAY SELL BASE UNUSED DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS; (2) REQUIRING BENEFIT FROM SUCH TRANSFER TO BE USED FOR FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE OF ORIGINATING HISTORIC PROPERTIES; (3) AN ELIGIBILITY PROCESS FOR HISTORIC RESOURCES WHEREBY THOSE PROPERTIES NOT YET LOCALLY DESIGNATED MAY QUALIFY FOR THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, (4) A MONITORING PROCESS TO INSURE COMPLIANCE WITHIN THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROCESS; (5) CREATING A TRACKING SYSTEM WITHIN THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS THAT LIMITS CAPACITIES FOLLOWING THE SALE OF THE DEVELOPABLE TRANSFER RIGHTS SUBJECT TO THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE MIAMI 21 CODE; (6) WAIVERS AND EXCEPTIONS FOR LOCALLY DESIGNATED HISTORIC RESOURCES; AND (7) NOMINATIONS TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES; MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTIONS 23-1 THROUGH 23-9 OF SAID CODE; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City ofMiami Page 171 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 07-00826zt Legislation (Version 1).pdf 07-00826zt FR Fact Sheet 06-28-07.pdf APPLICANT(S): Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager, on behalf of the City of Miami FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PURPOSE: This will delete Article 7 from Zoning Ordinance No. 11000, as amended, to provide for certain provisions of the Article to be incorporated in the Code of the City of Miami, and amend Chapter 23 of the Code of the City of Miami by providing definitions and establishing provisions for transfer of development rights. DEFERRED A motion was made by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Spence -Jones absent, to defer Items PZ.2 - PZ.7 to the City Commission meeting currently scheduled for September 27, 2007. [For minutes related to item PZ.3, please see the minutes of item PZ.2.] PZ.4 06-00366zt ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ARTICLE 21, SECTION 2105.4, IN ORDER TO ENSURE THIS SECTION APPLIES TO OCCUPANCY AND USE OF LAND; AND BY AMENDING SECTION 2105.5, SPECIFICALLY, BY ENACTING A NEW SUBSECTION 2105.5, ENTITLED, "INTERIM PROTECTION MEASURES PROVIDING FOR ZONING IN PROGRESS AS TO APPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMITS, AS DEFINED HEREIN, UNDER ORDINANCE NO. 11000 WHEN ORDINANCE NO. 11000 IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING REPLACED BY A NEW ZONING CODE;" PROVIDING FOR INTENT; NOTIFICATION; INTERIM PROTECTION MEASURES; APPLICATIONS FILED PRIOR TO NOTIFICATION; EXEMPTIONS; AND SCOPE; AND FURTHER AMENDING SECTION 2107 TO PROVIDE THAT CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY GRANTED IN ERROR DO NOT AUTHORIZE VIOLATIONS; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 06-00366zt-ZIP (4-18-07).pdf 06-00366zt-ZIP April 4 (Workshop).pdf 06-00366zt - PAB Backup - April 5, 2006.PDF 06-00366zt and 05-00658zt-ZIP March 1 2006 Draft Version 1 (Workshop).pdf 06-00366zt - PAB Supporting Documentation - March 21, 2007.pdf 05-00658zt-ZIP May 31 2006 Draft -Version 2 (Workshop).pdf Sample -City of Miami Ordinanance Chapter 13 by DPZ.pdf Sample -Village of Key Biscayne ZIP and Moratoria.pdf Sample -City of Fort Myers Land Regulation Chapter 25.pdf 06-00366zt PAB Reso.PDF 06-00366zt CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 06-00366zt CC FR Fact Sheet 06-28-07.pdf APPLICANT(S): Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager, on behalf of the City of City ofMiami Page 172 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Miami FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on April 18, 2007 by a vote of 6-3. PURPOSE: This will enact a new section 2105.5, which provides for interim protection measures implementing zoning in progress for a defined and finite interval of time during the pendency of the adoption of a new zoning code. DEFERRED A motion was made by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Spence -Jones absent, to defer Items PZ.2 - PZ.7 to the City Commission meeting currently scheduled for September 27, 2007. [For minutes related to item PZ.4, please see the minutes of item PZ.2.] PZ.5 07-00828zt ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 62, ENTITLED, "ZONING AND PLANNING," TO CREATE NEW ARTICLE XII, ENTITLED, "ZONING APPROVAL FOR TEMPORARY USES AND OCCUPANCIES; SPECIAL PERMIT REQUIRED," TO ALLOW FOR THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR TO AUTHORIZE CERTAIN TEMPORARY USES AND OCCUPANCIES AND SET FORTH PROVISIONS FOR CLASS I SPECIAL PERMITS; MORE PARTICULARLY, BY CREATING NEW DIVISION 1, ENTITLED, "CLASS I SPECIAL PERMITS," CONSISTING OF SECTIONS 62-501 THROUGH 62-512; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 07-00828zt Legislation (Version 1).pdf 07-00828zt Table Attachment to Legislation.pdf 07-00828zt FR Fact Sheet 06-28-07.pdf APPLICANT(S): Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager, on behalf of the City of Miami FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PURPOSE: This will create a new Article XII in the Code of the City of Miami to allow for the Zoning Administrator to authorize certain temporary uses and occupancies and set forth provisions for Class I Special Permits. DEFERRED A motion was made by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Spence -Jones absent, to defer Items PZ.2 - PZ.7 to the City Commission meeting currently scheduled for September 27, 2007. [For minutes related to item PZ.5, please see the minutes of item PZ.2.] PZ.6 07-00830zt ORDINANCE First Reading City ofMiami Page 173 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, BY (1) DELETING ARTICLE 14, ENTITLED, "CLASS I SPECIAL PERMITS; DETAILED REQUIREMENTS," IN ITS ENTIRETY AND PROVIDING FOR SAID PROVISIONS TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED; AND (2) AMENDING ARTICLE 13, ENTITLED, "SPECIAL PERMITS; GENERALLY," TO DELETE REFERENCES TO CLASS I SPECIAL PERMITS; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 07-00830zt Legislation (Version 1).pdf 07-00830zt Table Attachment to Legislation.pdf 07-00830zt FR Fact Sheet 06-28-07.pdf APPLICANT(S): Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager, on behalf of the City of Miami FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PURPOSE: This will delete Article 14 in Zoning Ordinance No. 11000, as amended, to provide for certain provisions to be incorporated in the Code of the City of Miami, and amend Article 13 to delete references to Class I Special Permits. DEFERRED A motion was made by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Spence -Jones absent, to defer Items PZ.2 - PZ.7 to the City Commission meeting currently scheduled for September 27, 2007. [For minutes related to item PZ.6, please see the minutes of item PZ 2.J PZ.7 07-00834zt ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY DELETING ARTICLE 8.1, ENTITLED, "TREE PROTECTION," IN ITS ENTIRETY; FURTHER, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, BY ADDING NEW ARTICLE IV TO CHAPTER 17, ENTITLED, "ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION/TREE PROTECTION," BY PROVIDING FOR INTENT AND PURPOSE; DEFINITIONS, APPLICABILITY, PERMIT APPLICATIONS, REQUIREMENTS, REVIEW AND FEES, CRITERIA AND CONDITIONS FOR TREE REMOVAL, RELOCATION, REPLACEMENT, AND PROTECTION, AND APPEALS AND APPELLATE FEES; ENFORCEMENT, PENALTIES AND REMEDIES; MORE PARTICULARLY BY ADDING NEW SECTIONS 17-100 TO 17-110 TO CHAPTER 17; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 07-00834zt Legislation (Version 1).pdf 07-00834zt Table Attachments to Legislation.pdf 07-00834zt FR Fact Sheet 06-28-07.pdf APPLICANT(S): Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager, on behalf of the City of Miami City ofMiami Page 174 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PURPOSE: This will delete Article 8.1 in Zoning Ordinance No. 11000, as amended, and amend the Code of the City of Miami by adding a new Article IV to Chapter 17, entitled, "Environmental Preservation/Tree Protection." DEFERRED A motion was made by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Spence -Jones absent, to defer Items PZ.2 - PZ.7 to the City Commission meeting currently scheduled for September 27, 2007. [For minutes related to item PZ.7, please see the minutes of item PZ 2. J City ofMiami Page 175 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 D2.1 07-00877 D2.2 07-00878 MAYOR AND COMMISSIONER'S ITEMS CITYWIDE HONORABLE MAYOR MANUEL A. DIAZ DISTRICT 1 CHAIRMAN ANGEL GONZALEZ DISTRICT 2 COMMISSIONER MARC DAVID SARNOFF DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION CONCERNING OPEN BUILDING PERMITS. 07-00877 Cover E-mail.pdf NO ACTION TAKEN DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION CONCERNING NEWSPAPER RACKS. 07-00878 Cover Email.pdf NO ACTION TAKEN DISTRICT 3 VICE CHAIRMAN JOE SANCHEZ D3.1 07-00860 DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION OF FOCUSED APPROACH TOWARD CRUCIAL CITY SERVICES. 07-00860 Cover Email .pdf NO ACTION TAKEN DISTRICT 4 COMMISSIONER TOMAS REGALADO D4.1 07-00848 DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION ABOUT ALLOCATING $10,000 FROM THE DISTRICT 4 OFFICE BUDGET FOR PROSTITUTION DETAILS IN THE FLAGAMI AREA (SPECIFICALLY ON FLAGLER STREET AND SOUTHWEST 8TH STREET). 07-00848 Cover Memo.pdf NO ACTION TAKEN D4.2 07-00849 DISCUSSION ITEM City ofMiami Page 176 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 AN UPDATE FROM THE ADMINISTRATION REGARDING THE LEGISLATION TO ADDRESS SHOPPING CARTS. 07-00849 Cover Memo.pdf NO ACTION TAKEN D4.3 07-00850 DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION ABOUT REAPPOINTING THE AUDITOR GENERAL. 07-00850 Cover Memo.pdf NO ACTION TAKEN D4.4 07-00852 DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION ABOUT NEW REVENUE STREAMS FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI RELATED TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE'S MANDATED REDUCTION OF PROPERTY TAXES. 07-00852 Cover Memo.pdf NO ACTION TAKEN D4.5 07-00879 DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION ABOUT MODIFYING THE NOTIFICATION COMPONENT OF THE MIAMI POLICE DEPARTMENTS CURRENT POLICY THAT ALLOWS OFF -DUTY OFFICERS TO VOLUNTEER FOR PRIVATE GUARD DUTY. 07-00879 Cover Memo.pdf NO ACTION TAKEN DISTRICT 5 COMMISSIONER MICHELLE SPENCE-JONES D5.1 07-00880 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION URGING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY TO IMMEDIATELY PLACE LED PEDESTRIAN COUNTDOWN MODULES/SIGNALS AT ALL SCHOOL CROSSINGS AND PEDESTRIAN PATHS NEAR SCHOOLS, WITHIN THE CITY OF MIAMI; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO TRANSMIT A COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE HEREIN DESIGNATED OFFICES. 07-00880 Legislation .pdf 07-00880 Cover Specifications.pdf NO ACTION TAKEN City ofMiami Page 177 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 NON -AGENDA ITEMS NA.1 07-00897 DISCUSSION ITEM CHAIRMAN GONZALEZ READ A STATEMENT INTO THE RECORD FROM COMMISSIONER SPENCE-JONES REGARDING HER ABSENCE FROM THE MEETING AND HER DISTRICT 5 BLUE PAGE ITEM. 07-00897 Comm. Spence -Jones Statement.pdf DISCUSSED Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Before going into the -- we don't have any other regular items, do we? Not according to my log here. Before going into the Planning and Zoning agenda, I need to read a statement from Commissioner Michelle Spence -Jones. Commissioner Spence -Jones asked me to express her deep regret in not being able to attend this Commission meeting, but abiding by her doctor's advice, she's remaining home until she sufficiently heals. She does have one item on her blue page that pertains to recommending to the County that they install a LED (Light -Emitting Diode) pedestrian countdown signal for the school zones, and she ask for the support of the Commission in sending this message to the County. The [J D pedestrian countdown system is a trend that is fast being implemented in other cities. Last, she would like to extend her deepest gratitude to her fellow Commissioners and her constituents for their kindness and support, and that is the statement. I'm -- I know that Commissioner Jones [sic] is watching us on Channel 77, and we continue to pray for you, and you're going to be back soon, we hope, so God bless you and take care of yourself. NA.2 07-00892 RESOLUTION District4- A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH Commissioner ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE Tomas Regalado SECOND AMENDMENT AND CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, OF THE CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY") OWNED REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 779 NORTHWEST 57TH STREET, MIAMI FLORIDA, BETWEEN THE CITY AND PROGRESSIVE VISION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, INC., A FLORIDA NOT -FOR -PROFIT CORPORATION ("PROGRESSIVE"), TO: (1) AUTHORIZE THE ASSIGNMENT OF PROGRESSIVE'S RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE AGREEMENT TO A NEW ENTITY, WHOSE MEMBERS SHALL BE SOLELY PROGRESSIVE, AND PALMETTO HOMES OF MIAMI, INC., IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE FINANCING REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN THE LOAN COMMITMENT DATED JUNE 14, 2007, FROM GIBRALTAR PRIVATE BANK & TRUST COMPANY, AND (2) EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR SATISFACTION OF CONDITIONS PRECEDENT BY A PERIOD OF SEVENTY (70) DAYS, EXPIRING ON SEPTEMBER 7, 2007, WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH IN SAID SECOND AMENDMENT. 07-00892 Legislation.pdf 07-00892 Exhibit.pdf Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Vice -Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez and Regalado Absent: 1 - Commissioner Spence -Jones City ofMiami Page 178 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 R-07-0372 Commissioner Regalado: I have a pocket item from Michelle. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Pocket items. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Well, not -- Chairman Gonzalez: Commissioner -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- pocket items, no, blue pages. Are you guys going to defer the --? Commissioner Regalado: No, no. No blue pages. The office of -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Commissioner Regalado: -- Commissioner Michelle Spence -Jones is asking for this pocket item. Chairman Gonzalez: Go ahead, go ahead. Commissioner Regalado: I don't know, but I checked with the Administration -- Chairman Gonzalez: You're recognized for it. Commissioner Regalado: -- and it's -- OK. It's -- well, the Manager's Office is -- this is an amendment, the property located at 7079 Northwest 57 Street. Chairman Gonzalez: Please keep it quiet. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Manager -- Chairman Gonzalez: We're trying to conduct the -- Commissioner Regalado: -- do you know -- Chairman Gonzalez: -- meeting here. Commissioner Regalado: -- Lynn, she knows about this. We check with her because they requested -- it's a resolution of the Miami City Commission, with attachment, authorizing the City Manager to execute the second amendment and consent to assignment of purchase and sale agreement of the City ofMiami owned real property located at 7079 Northwest 57 Street between the City and Progressive Vision Community Development Corporation. You know about this. Chairman Gonzalez: We have -- Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Yes, sir. I was made aware of the item. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, what's the item all about? Commissioner Regalado: The item is a second amendment to a -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: Does it -- Commissioner Regalado: -- City property. City ofMiami Page 179 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- have any financial impact? Commissioner Regalado: Huh? Vice Chairman Sanchez: Does it have any financial impact? Commissioner Regalado: I don't know. I don't think so. Laura Billberry (Director): No. Lori Billberry, Public Facilities. Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Ms. Billberry: No. This is a sale of a property to Progressive. Vice Chairman Sanchez: I don't have -- Ms. Billberry: They have -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- a problem with it. Ms. Billberry: OK. Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: Look -- Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion. Commissioner Regalado: -- I'm just doing a favor to a Commissioner. Seems to me that there's some time constraint on this. I'm deferring all my items on the blue page. Vice Chairman Sanchez: So am I, but -- Commissioner Sarnoff So -- Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- can I have something out of order -- Chairman Gonzalez: OK, but wait a minute. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- please? Chairman Gonzalez: Wait a minute, people. Commissioner Regalado: But we need to vote. We need to vote. Chairman Gonzalez: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Be patient. We have a motion. Is there a second to the motion? Vice Chairman Sanchez: I second it. Chairman Gonzalez: There is a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Gonzalez: The pocket item has passed. City ofMiami Page 180 Printed on 7/19/2007 City Commission Meeting Minutes June 28, 2007 NA.3 07-00898 DISCUSSION ITEM Motion to Adioum BRIEF CLARIFICATION REGARDING DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DISCUSSION THAT TOOK PLACE AT THE JUNE 14, 2007 CITY COMMISSION MEETING. DISCUSSED Chairman Gonzalez: Now you're recognized. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. IfI could just take an item out of order. First of all, I would like to say that what transpired previously on this dais regarding the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) was more than a misunderstanding based on misinformation that was provided to me, and what want to do is set the record straight, andl want to say and clearly state that in no way has Commissioner Sarnoff or his staff acted inappropriately, andl just felt that needed to state that for the record because of the respect that have for him, andl think that we're passionate about what we do, andl think at times, you know, we have heated debates out here, but you know what? It's our professionalism that gets us the respect that we deserve, and for the sake of harmony and for working together, and as always, I just want to state that for the record to clam that point, so -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well, your apology is more than accepted, and I'll tell you what. Why don't we finish it off at another softball game? Chairman Gonzalez: All right. Any further business? Seeing -- hearing none, we need a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Sarnoff Motion to adjourn. Chairman Gonzalez: We have a motion. We have a second. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Did --? Second. Chairman Gonzalez: All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Sanchez: Did we defer -- Chairman Gonzalez: Meeting's adjourned. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- all the items -- Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- to the next Commission meeting? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): It's automatic. Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. A motion was made by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Spence -Jones absent, to adjourn today's meeting. City ofMiami Page 181 Printed on 7/19/2007