HomeMy WebLinkAboutComm Sarnoff Response to Mayor's letter(City- of i tmi, F1nri r z
MARL D. SARNOFF
COMMISSIONER
DISTRICT 2
May 9, 2007
The Honorable Manny Diaz
Mayor
City of Miami
3500 Pan American Drive
Miami, Florida 33133
Re: Reply to Denial for Veto (Dated May 7th, 2007)
Grove Bay Residences
3663 South Miami Avenue
Dear Mayor Diaz:
P.O. BOX 330708
MIAMI, FLOR IDA 33233-0708
(305) 250-5333
FAX (305) 579-3334
I am in receipt of your response to District 2's request for veto to the
Mercy Project. While I disagree with your analysis, my principal concern is
that three Commissioners (not from the subject District), allowed an R-4
designation on the Coconut Grove waterfront. This will be viewed as a
watershed event by other developers in the Grove.
First and foremost, the City of Miami's system of government mirrors
the federal government's system of checks and balances. One of the most
important checks on power, thereby providing balance, is the mayoral veto.
Your past employment of the veto or lack thereof is not indicative of its use
on the merits herein. In fact, the Commission's vote on this matter was 3-2
in favor, one Commissioner's change of vote would have changed the outcome.
I walked the Grove door to door, from end to end, not six months ago. The
overwhelming majority of the residents oppose the three towers. As a result
of the other Commissioners' lack of regard, the developer of this project has a
sellable R-4 designation for land in the Grove. As you are aware, this is a
land use designation of unrestricted residential height.
The City Attorney refused to allow the developer to place a voluntary
covenant on the land use change, which would have required the scaled down
three towers to be built on this parcel of land, resulting in an unrestricted
x1
rn
rn
rn
The Honorable Manny Diaz
Re: Grove Bay Residences
May 9, 2007
Page 2
i
RECEIVED
designation that will make the sale of the R-4 lar e liik* o®n the
building of the three towers. As I pointed out to you, t is is the proverbial
"camel's nose in the tent," "establishing a dangerous
massive development in the single family neighborhocd1' Y t-gtg . $ Lof the
request to veto].
Let me remind you that two Boards (Zoning and Planning), charged
with the responsibility to make recommendations to the Commission, both
voted to deny the change of zoning, the amendment to the comp plan, and the
three towers. The applicant has gone so far as to compensate the `yellow
shirts,' Village West, Natoma Manors, and Bay Heights for their favorable
testimony for the three towers. In fact as you pointed out their attorney
made the project better, but you failed to cite the millions of dollars in
payments they anticipate receiving (either in dollars or goods and services).
The implication of your reference to the Village Council's vote, I
suspect, is to insinuate that I voted for the project then, and not now. This
suggestion is political gamesmanship, and is misplaced and unappreciated.
At the time of the Mercy vote, the Village Council conducted its order of
business under Robert's Rules, which I am sure you know means the Chair
not only does not vote, but is required to act as an impartial broker of
information. I did not vote because at that time I could not vote. Subsequent
to the Mercy vote, the Council changed its Bylaws to utilize "small board
rules," which provided the Chair with the ability to vote.
Subsequent to the Mercy vote, there was a motion for reconsideration
{brought by a Council member who previously voted in favor of the project} in
which three board members voted to oppose the project — myself, Felice
Dubin and now Chair, Gary Hecht. I have never changed my mind on this
project. To the contrary, I have always voiced my concern and opposition to
this project throughout my campaign.
Mr. Mayor, under. the City of Miami's appellate review you should have
restricted your determination as to whether to veto upon the testimony heard
and evidence presented at the Commission meetings. The testimony
included that of: Thaddeus Cohen, the former Secretary of the Department of
Community Affairs; Henry Isler; Jay Williams; Subrata Basu, the County
planner; Joel Hoffman; Richard Heinsenbottle; Max Blumberg; the United
States Department of Interior; as well as Arva Moore Parks.
The Honorable Manny Diaz
Re: Grove Bay Residences
May 9, 2007
Page 3
RECEIVED
We are at a crossroads in Miami. We must pignplAyhylinpwlitof the
process by clearly evaluating the testimony, the documents received in
evidence, and the environment under which th ' 6ids` Q ireANthe
presentation of an applicant. Filling a chamber witic d)Fytlllt t4. fhirts' is
the politicalization of the process. You will recall the testimony of one of
these paid supporters to wit, "...the lady [who] brought all the money," he
said, "I got her phone number right here. She pulled up in, I think a gray
Honda. She had a little case full of money." I requested that you perform an
investigation under Chapter 14 of the Code, but you have not responded. The
disclosure ordinance I introduced is just one step in unearthing the motive..
and biases of neighbors and neighborhood organizations who, support an
applicant, although receiving compensation from either the applicant or its
lobbyist. Oftentimes residents are shortsighted by accepting money to
support projects - this may result in a project with negative long term
consequences.
I am disappointed that, at a minimum, you did not veto PZ-2, the
change of zoning, and require the developer to place a voluntary covenant to
run with the land requiring the scaled down three towers be built. I am
equally disappointed that you did not veto PZ-3 and require the developer to
build the three towers with all the "suggestions" in your letter, most of which
were reprinted from my request. A suggestion or promise of the developer
cannot be taken to the bank and does not have the force of law to protect our
constituents. Only time will tell, but I suspect the project will never be built
under the market conditions that Miami is experiencing and we will, in turn,
have R-4 designated property for sale on the waterfront in Coconut Grove.
I thank you for the open-door policy you have extended to me
personally. I have truly enjoyed our work together, and I believe that when
we work together we can make any project better than if we work alone.
However, with your attendance in Tallahassee all last week, I was faced with
no alternative but to place District 2's request for a veto in writing. It was
the right thing to do and I stand by the request. We must be good stewards
of the land within the City of Miami to create in your own words — a
sustainable city - as representatives of the people.
M. cD. S.r
Commissioner District 2
City of Miami