Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2008-02-28 MinutesCity of Miami City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33133 www.miamigov.com Oi IRATE 11e [ ,, IV Meeting Minutes Thursday, February 28, 2008 9:00 AM PLANNING AND ZONING City Hall Commission Chambers City Commission Manuel A. Diaz, Mayor Joe Sanchez, Chair Michelle Spence -Jones, Vice -Chair Angel Gonzalez, Commissioner District One Marc David Sarnoff, Commissioner District Two Tomas Regalado, Commissioner District Four Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager Maria J. Chiaro, Interim City Attorney Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 CONTENTS PR - PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS MV - MAYORAL VETOES AM - APPROVING MINUTES CA - CONSENT AGENDA PH - PUBLIC HEARINGS SR - SECOND READING ORDINANCES RE - RESOLUTIONS PART B PZ - PLANNING AND ZONING ITEM(S) M - MAYOR'S ITEMS D1 - DISTRICT 1 ITEMS D2 - DISTRICT 2 ITEMS D3 - DISTRICT 3 ITEMS D4 - DISTRICT 4 ITEMS D5 - DISTRICT 5 ITEMS 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 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 9:00 A.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Present: Commissioner Gonzalez, Commissioner Sarnoff, Chair Sanchez, Commissioner Regalado and Vice Chair Spence -Jones On the 28th day of February 2008, 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 Chair Joe Sanchez at 9:17 a.m., recessed at 12: 01 p.m., reconvened at 2:15 p.m., recessed at 3: 27 p.m., reconvened at 3:34 p.m., and adjourned at 4: 41 p.m. Note for the Record: Commissioner Sarnoff entered the Commission chambers at 9:18 a.m. and Commissioner Gonzalez entered at 9: 41 a.m. Note for the Record: Commissioner Gonzalez was absent during the afternoon session. Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager Maria J Chiaro, Interim City Attorney Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk Chair Sanchez: (INAUDIBLE) we take this opportunity to welcome each and every one of you. The order of the day is the agenda. We'll go ahead and start with the invocation and pledge of allegiance, and then we have presentations and proclamation. It's an honor today to recognize the following individuals: Dr. Rudy Crew. We also have two of our great prides in our community, two football teams that represented us with pride and dignity, and certainly we are ecstatic that they won the championship here in our community; and that's the Northwestern Senior High School Football Team and Booker T. Washington Senior High School Football Team. So at this time, I'll go ahead and do the invocation, followed by a pledge of allegiance by Commissioner Spence -Jones. Invocation and pledge of allegiance delivered. PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS 08-00242 CEREMONIAL ITEM Honoree Presenter Protocol Item Dr. Rudy Crew Mayor Diaz Proclamation Miami Northwestern Commissioner Certificates Senior High School Spence -Jones Football Team Booker T. Washington Commissioner Certificates Senior High School Spence -Jones Football Team Note for the Record: Proclamation to Dr. Rudy Crew was not presented. 1. Vice Chair Spence -Jones presented Certificates ofAppreciation to the players ofMiami Northwestern Senior High School Bulls Football Team for their countless hours of training and commitment to physical excellence and team spirit, resulting in the achievement the 2007 State Championship in Class 6A Football and its first place ranking in ESPN's Top 25 Elite High School Teams in America. 2. Vice Chair Spence -Jones presented Certificates ofAppreciation to the players of Booker T. Washington Senior High School Tornadoes Football Team for their countless hours of training and commitment to physical excellence and team spirit, resulting in the achievement of the 2007 City ofMiami Page 3 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 State Championship in Class 4A Football and its fourth place ranking in ESPN's Top 25 Elite High School Teams in America. Chair Sanchez: All right. We'll go ahead and start with the presentations and the proclamations. Presentations made. MAYORAL VETOES NO MAYORAL VETOES Chair Sanchez: All right. Just for the record, there are no mayoral vetoes. APPROVING THE MINUTES OF THE FOLLOWING MEETING: Motion by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, to APPROVED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Gonzalez Chair Sanchez: We have one minute [sic] to approve, and that's the Planning & Zoning meeting of January 24, 208 [sic]. We need a motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner Sarnoff So move. Chair Sanchez: Is there a motion? Commissioner Sarnoff So move. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Chair Sanchez: There's a motion by Commissioner Sarnoff, second by Commissioner Regalado. Discussion on the item. Hearing no discussion, all in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries. City ofMiami Page 4 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 ORDER OF THE DAY Chair Sanchez: Let's go ahead and -- Are there any items that the Adminisfration or any of the Commissioners want to pull from the agenda or for discussion pertaining to the consent agenda? I believe there was one item the Adminisfration wanted to pull from the `public hearings." Mr. City Manager -- Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman, Commissioners -- Chair Sanchez: -- you're recognized for the record. Mr. Hernandez: -- good morning. The items that I'm recommending for continuance is PH 3, to be continued, and RE.5 to be withdrawn. Those are the only two. Chair Sanchez: I'm sorry. Which --? PH.3 has been continued. Mr. Hernandez: It's to be continued. And RE.5 to be withdrawn. Chair Sanchez: Okay. RE.5 has been withdrawn and PH3 has been continued, for the record. ']Later...]" Chair Sanchez: All right. Madam Attorney, could you read the process into the record? Maria J. Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): Yes. Before the PZ (Planning & Zoning) agenda is heard, all those wishing to speak should be sworn by the City Clerk. Staff will briefly present the request, whether it's an appeal, a special exception, vacation, text amendment, zoning change, land -use change, or MUSP (Major Use Special Permit) and make its recommendation. Appellant or petitioner will then present the request. The appellee, if applicable, will present its position. Members of the public will be permitted to speak on certain petitions. The petitioner may ask questions of staff and the appellant or petitioner will be permitted to make final comments. At this time, the City Clerk should swear in all those wishing to speak. Chair Sanchez: Okay. All those who will be testifying or giving any statements to this legislative body pertaining to any of the items that have been property advertised based on the Planning and Zoning, you need to stand up and be sworn in; and you also need to register with the City Clerk. All those that are lobbyists and are representing a client and addressing this Commission, please make sure your fees are paid, okay? Madam Clerk, you're recognized. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): If you are planning to testify on any P&Z items that are on the agenda, please, I need you to 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. Chair Sanchez: All right. Okay. Madam Clerk, have we sworn --? Ms. Thompson: Yes, sir, I did. Chair Sanchez: All right. So what we'll do is we'll continue with the PZ items, and later on, after lunch, when we come back, those that'll be testifying on other items that arrived and were not sworn in, we'll have a second swearing in. All right. City ofMiami Page 5 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 CONSENT AGENDA CA.1 08-00143 RESOLUTION BayfrontPark A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID Management Trust RECEIVED DECEMBER 10, 2007, PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 70032, FROM REXEL, INC., FOR THE BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST LIGHTING PROJECT, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $118,014.88; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE 2007-2008 BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET. 08-00143 Legislation.pdf 08-00143 Summary Form.pdf 08-00143 Memo.pdf 08-00143 Quotes.pdf 08-00143 Approval Agenda.pdf 08-00143 Invitation for Bid.pdf This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-08-0090 CA.2 08-00144 RESOLUTION Department of A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BIDS Parks and RECEIVED NOVEMBER 7, 2007, PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. Recreation 53028,1, FROM RECREONICS, INC., AND WATER SAFETY PRODUCTS, INC., FOR THE PURCHASE OF POOL EQUIPMENT AND ACCESSORIES, ON AN AS -NEEDED CONTRACTUAL BASIS, FOR POOLS CITYWIDE, FOR AN INITIAL CONTRACT PERIOD OF TWO (2) YEARS, WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR UP TO THREE (3) ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE VARIOUS FUNDING SOURCES OF THE USER DEPARTMENTS, SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS AND BUDGETARY APPROVAL AT THE TIME OF NEED. 08-00144 Legislation.pdf 08-00144 Summary Form.pdf 08-00144 Award Recommendation.pdf 08-00144 Tabulation of Bids.pdf 08-00144 Certification of Statement.pdf 08-00144 Quote.pdf 08-00144 Quote2.pdf 08-00144 Quote3.pdf 08-00144 Invitation for Bid.pdf This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-08-0091 CA.3 08-00145 RESOLUTION City ofMiami Page 6 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Department of A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BIDS Purchasing RECEIVED JANUARY 2, 2008, PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 66044, FROM TRI-STATE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES, INC., A1A EMPLOYMENT SERVICE, INC., AND WESTSTAFF (USA), INC., FOR THE PROVISION OF TEMPORARY PERSONNEL SERVICES, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS, TO BE UTILIZED CITYWIDE, ON AN AS -NEEDED CONTRACT BASIS, FOR A ONE (1) YEAR PERIOD, WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR FOUR (4) ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE VARIOUS FUNDING SOURCES OF THE USER DEPARTMENTS, SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS AND BUDGETARY APPROVAL AT THE TIME OF NEED. 08-00145 Legislation.pdf 08-00145 Summary Form.pdf 08-00145 Award Recommendation.pdf 08-00145 Tabulation of Bids.pdf 08-00145 Invitation for Bid.pdf 08-00145 Attachment A.pdf This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-08-0092 Adopted the Consent Agenda Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, including all the preceding items marked as having been adopted on the Consent Agenda. The motion carried by the following vote: Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones END OF CONSENT AGENDA Chair Sanchez: Okay. Moving on with the consent agenda, is there a motion to approve consent agenda? Commissioner Gonzalez: So move. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Second. Chair Sanchez: There's a motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, second by the Vice Chair, to approve the consent agenda. The item is open for discussion. Hearing no discussion on the consent agenda, all in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." All three items pertaining to the consent agenda have been approved. City ofMiami Page 7 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 PUBLIC HEARINGS PH.1 08-00147 RESOLUTION Department of A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, BY A FOUR -FIFTHS Police (4/5 THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, PURSUANT TO SECTION 18-92 OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, AFTER AN ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF A SOLE SOURCE; WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND APPROVING THE PROCUREMENT OF THE CRYSTAL REPORTS XI R2 WINDOWS CPU LICENSE AND MAINTENANCE SUPPORT, FROM BUSINESS OBJECTS AMERICAS, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $33,600; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 00001.191551.554000.0000. 08-00147 Legislation.pdf 08-00147 Summary Form.pdf 08-00147 Memo.pdf 08-00147 Memo2.pdf 08-00147 Memo3.pdf 08-00147 Notice to Public.pdf 08-00147 Quotation.pdf 08-00147 Letter.pdf 08-00147 E-mail.pdf 08-00147 E-mail2.pdf 08-00147-Summary Fact Sheet.pdf Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Samoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-08-0093 Chair Sanchez: We do have two PH (Public Hearing) items that both require a four fifth. I believe those are time certain, if I'm not mistaken? But before we do that -- Madam Clerk, just on your guidance here, the public hearings, do we have -- ? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): The only time certain public hearing that you had would have been PH3 for 10:30, okay. Chair Sanchez: All right. Ms. Thompson: So you -- Chair Sanchez: All right, so -- Ms. Thompson: -- and that's been continued. Chair Sanchez: -- PH.1 and PH 2 are not time certain? Ms. Thompson: That is correct. City ofMiami Page 8 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: All right. Let's take up PH.1, sole source; and that requires a four fifth vote. Procurement. Yes, sir. You're recognized for the record. Glenn Marcos: Thank you, Commissioner. Glenn Marcos, Purchasing director. PH 1 is a sole source procurement of Crystal Reports. This -- the Crystal Reports is for the Police Department and will allow the Police Departments to run the necessary reports from their vehicles. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Mr. Marcos: This is a public hearing. It does require a four fifth vote. Chair Sanchez: Okay. We need a motion and -- Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll move PH 1. Chair Sanchez: -- a second. There's a motion by Commissioner Gonzalez; needs a -- Commissioner Regalado: Second. Chair Sanchez: -- second. Second by Commissioner Regalado. Before we open it up for discussion, it is a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed, coming back to the Commission for a discussion. Any discussion on the item? If not, it is a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries. PH.2 08-00156A RESOLUTION Department of A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH Planning ATTACHMENT(S), BY A FOUR -FIFTHS (4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, AFTER A DULY NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF AN EMERGENCY THAT IT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY") TO WAIVE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE BID PROCEDURES PROVIDED IN THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED (THE "CODE") IN SECTIONS 18-85, 18-87, 18-90 AND UNDER FLORIDA STATUTES SECTION 287.055; AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE IN THE AUTHORIZED AMOUNT BY AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($145,000) TO THE PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED AMOUNT OF SEVEN HUNDRED AND SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($775,000) FOR THE NEGOTIATED PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (" AGREEMENT") WITH EDWARD D. STONE, JR. AND ASSOCIATES, INC. D/B/A EDSA FOR WORK REQUIRED FOR MASTER PLANNING SERVICES FOR THE VIRGINIA KEY PROJECT AND FOR PLANNING ALTERNATIVES FOR THE HISTORIC VIRGINIA KEY BEACH PARK LAND AREA AND PROPOSED MUSEUM, INCREASING THE NEW TOTAL AUTHORIZED AGREEMENT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED NINE HUNDRED AND TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($920,000), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, FOR SAID PURPOSE AND TO REINSTATE, EXTEND, CONTINUE AND AMEND THE City ofMiami Page 9 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 AGREEMENT THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2008, WITH FUNDING TO BE APPROPRIATED FROM PLANNING ACCOUNT NO. 00001.351000.531000.0000. 08-00156a Addenduml .pdf 08-00156a Agreement.pdf 08-00156a Bylaws.pdf 08-00156a Competitive Bidding.pdf 08-00156a Exhibit B.pdf 08-00156a Exhibit.pdf 08-00156a Florida Statues.pdf 08-00156a Legislation.pdf 08-00156a Memo.pdf 08-00156a Memo2.pdf 08-00156a Minutes.pdf 08-00156a Notice to Public.pdf 08-00156a Request for Qualifications.pdf 08-00156a Scope of Services.pdf 08-00156a Stock Agreement.pdf 08-00156a Summary Form.pdf 08-00156a Text File Report.pdf 08-00156a Text File Report2.pdf 08-00156a Text File Report3.pdf Motion by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, seconded by Commissioner Sarnoff, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Samoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-08-0094 Chair Sanchez: We go to PH.2. PH.2 is also a resolution requiring a four fifth vote. And that comes to us from the Department of Planning. Department of Planning? Enrique Nunez (Chief of Urban Design): Good morning. Enrique Nunez, City ofMiami, Planning Department. This item is for additional services to the Virginia Key Master Plan, comprised of preparations for additional meetings and in support for additional services for the Virginia Key Beach Park Trust. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: It's a public hearing. Chair Sanchez: Well, we need a motion and a second first. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So moved. Chair Sanchez: There's a motion by Vice Chair Spence -Jones. Is there a second? Commissioner Sarnoff Second. Chair Sanchez: Second by Commissioner Sarnoff. Before we open it up for discussion, anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed. We come back to PH.2 at this time. We're discussing PH.2, which is the Virginia Key Master Plan. Discussion on the item. City ofMiami Page 10 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. I just want to make just a point on this whole item. This is something that I know that the Planning Department has been kind of working on for a while regarding the issue of Virginia Key Beach. I do see a member of the Virginia Key Beach Trust here, Mr. Patrick Range. My support of this amendment to the Virginia Key Beach plan is based on the fact that not only I, but many of the board members felt that it was really important to look at the -- not only the museum, but the possibilities of creating real revenue streams to at least make sure that this particular building or the museum, or whatever is going to be built there will be able to sustain itself. So I think that now that we're being able to at least expand the existing scope, I'm in full support of it. I don't know where Glenn is. I know Glenn had an issue with this in the very beginning from Procurement, but I'm glad that they were able to work things out; because I do think that it's really, really important for us to support the success of the beach and the museum; and I think that this will give us the opportunity to do that. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized. Commissioner Regalado: Two questions. Has any of this money been paid already, or this is new money? Mr. Nunez: No. This is for additional services, which include the viability study for the Virginia Key Beach Park Trust lands and the proposed museum. Commissioner Regalado: Okay. Mr. Nunez: In addition to additional services for the overall Virginia Key Master Plan, as requested by the district Commissioner and City Administration. Commissioner Regalado: So it's about more meetings. So how long would the master plan be under discussion, like how many month or --? Mr. Nunez: Well -- no. At this point, the overall master plan is within the public process. We're preparing for an additional public meeting within a couple of months, which is in response to the last public workshop. And the consultants, the EDSA (Edward D. Stone Associates) team, has been working on design alternatives, which will be presented at the next public meeting. Commissioner Regalado: So what I'm saying is it's not done yet? Mr. Nunez: No, absolutely not. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No. Mr. Nunez: This -- we're still in the middle -- Commissioner Regalado: And how long --? Mr. Nunez: -- of the master plan. Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Commissioner, ifI may. I believe that the planning process for Virginia Key is about half -way done, and it may take another six months. Commissioner Regalado: That's all I wanted to know. Mr. Nunez: Thank you. Commissioner Regalado: And it includes the marinas and all that? City ofMiami Page 11 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Nunez: Absolutely. It looks at the Virginia Key in its entirety, the island in its entirety. And we do have the County as partners in this process. Commissioner Regalado: Okay. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: On the issue, ifI could just elaborate a little bit. I think we all want this project to be a successful project. It is a great project for the City ofMiami. It'll fruly showcase the history of our great city. Whether good or bad, history should always be told because we learn from history. And I think that this study, what it allows us an opportunity is to explore revenues because, as it is, that we will possibly -- God on our side -- build a museum and possibly a cultural center. We need to take every step to make sure that they, at one time, are able to be self -sustained, sustainability. Mr. Nunez: That's right. Chair Sanchez: I was at the grand opening, the ribbon -cutting. It was a great event. I was touched by the many people who traveled thousands of miles to come and share their stories of how that was the only beach that they would be able to go to in those days. I was also very impressed by Reverend Joseph Lowerly [sic], who spoke civil rights movement. And let me tell you, it's one of the best speakers that I have heard till this day. I was so impressed with him that I've done my homework to get to know more about the gentleman. And those of you that were there, and the Trust that was there, was very impressed with the people that really showed out for their support. So this is something that we all need to work together. Mr. Nunez: Right. Chair Sanchez: And I encourage the Administration to even look at the Trust -- looking towards the public sector to partner up to make sure that whatever is built out there is something that, at the end of the day, we could all be very proud of. So I just had a wonderful experience that day. I tried going back the next day; it was impossible to get in. There were so many people. There was so much traffic to get in that I was not able to get in with my wife and children. Thank you. Mr. Nunez: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: All right. It is a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay" The resolution is approved. That takes care of -- Mr. Nunez: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: -- both public hearings. City ofMiami Page 12 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 10:30 A.M. PH.3 08-00149 Department of Community Development SR.1 07-01279 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), ALLOCATING FUNDS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $167,000, FROM THE CITY OF MIAMI DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 2 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RESERVE TO URBAN EMPOWERMENT CORPORATION, TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO FOR -PROFIT BUSINESSES TO CREATE JOBS FOR LOW TO MODERATE INCOME INDIVIDUALS, AS SPECIFIED IN EXHIBIT "A", ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH SAID AGENCY FOR SAID PURPOSE. 08-00149 Legislation.pdf 08-00149 Exhibit.pdf 08-00149 Exhibit2.pdf 08-00149 Exhibit3.pdf 08-00149 Exhibit4.pdf 08-00149 Summary Form.pdf 08-00149 Public Notice.pdf 08-00149 Pre-Legislation.pdf 08-00149 Attachment A.pdf 08-00149 District 2 Funding.pdf 08-00149 Code of Regulations.pdf 08-00149 Pre-Legislation2.pdf 08-00149 Exhibit A.pdf CONTINUED Item PH.3 was continued to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for March 27, 2008. ORDINANCE - SECOND READING ORDINANCE Second Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ENTITLED, "MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC," BY CREATING ARTICLE X, ENTITLED, "DANGEROUS INTERSECTION SAFETY," PROVIDING FOR RECORDED IMAGE MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT OF RED LIGHT INFRACTIONS, AND FOR RELATED PROCEDURES AND PROVISIONS; FURTHER AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE X, SECTION 2-829, ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATION/CODE ENFORCEMENT/SCHEDULE OF CIVIL PENALTIES," TO FACILITATE USE OF CODE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM FOR DANGEROUS INTERSECTION SAFETY; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 07-01279-Legislation-SUB.pdf 07-01279 Exhibit FR/SR.pdf Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Sarnoff, that this matter be ADOPTED WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote. City ofMiami Page 13 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Samoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones 12974 A motion was made by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez , and was passed unanimously, directing the City Manager to proceed with the issuance of Request For Proposals (RFP) soliciting companies to provide Image Capture Technologies. Chair Sanchez: And we'll go to SR.1. SR.1. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Mr. Chairman, to -- I know that -- I just wanted to get clarity on -- if you don't mind, I just have one quick question for you, if you don't mind? Chair Sanchez: All right, but -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I -- it's only -- Chair Sanchez: -- for the record -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- going to be two seconds. Chair Sanchez: It's okay. But for the record, Madam Clerk, we are on SR.1. SR.1 is an ordinance on second reading. "[Later...]" Chair Sanchez: All right. SR.1. SR.1 is the motor vehicle traffic. Those are the installation of cameras. The Administration -- is anyone going to speak on this item, Madam Attorney? Maria J Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): I first will tell you that you've just received an amendment to this item. Pursuant to discussions with all of you, I've removed the language that allows for these fines to accrue such that the City will place a lien. So these will be fines pursuant to our Code enforcement process for running a red light, but there will be no liens imposed as the statute or the Code section allows for. I've excluded that language from the ordinance. Chair Sanchez: All right. The item has been amended. Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll move it as amended. Chair Sanchez: Okay. There's a motion -- Commissioner Sarnoff Second. Chair Sanchez: -- and a second, as amended. It is a ordinance on second reading. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please stand up and be recognized. Seeing no one, hearing no one, the public hearing is closed. This item comes back to the Commission. Discussion on the item. Commissioner Regalado: Chairman. Chair Sanchez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized for the record. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you. Madam City Attorney, the letters will go out to the owners of the vehicles; right? City ofMiami Page 14 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Ms. Chiaro: That's correct. Commissioner Regalado: But there's not going to be any court involvement? Ms. Chiaro: If an owner receives the letter and wishes to challenge the infraction, then there will be a process, and it's set forth in this ordinance, so that the owner can challenge the camera or challenge -- perhaps the owner was not driving the car. There is a process for challenge. Commissioner Regalado: But what I mean is would the court system be involved? Ms. Chiaro: Not the court system. It's a special master in our Code enforcement system. Commissioner Regalado: Okay. Because recently, Harvey Ruvin, the clerk of the court system, asked the Miami -Dade Expressway Authority to do something, amnesty or something, because of the violations of the tolls are clogging the court system; and he cannot handle it. And he was asking for help in terms of getting rid of the thousands and thousands and thousands of court cases. So since this is not going to be on the court, then there is no -- this is only voluntary. There is no enforcement if you do not show up at the Code enforcement? Ms. Chiaro: There will not be a proceeding to show up at Code enforcement. One will receive a notice of violation and either pay the notice of violation or challenge the notice in the special master proceeding. If the payment is not made, if neither route is taken, then the City will proceed -- and the Administration may want to talk about that -- to attempt to collect the amount of the fine -- Commissioner Regalado: And you do that -- Ms. Chiaro: -- through collection proceedings. Commissioner Regalado: -- by sending to a collection agency? Ms. Chiaro: Yes, that's one of the options; and that's usually how it's handled. Commissioner Regalado: But that's the only option. Ms. Chiaro: Well, the City can proceed to try to collect it itself but usually there is a collection agency retained to proceed on the collections. Commissioner Regalado: Because the collection agency is the only entity that can really mess up your credit; the City cannot. Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Commissioner, maybe to expound on that. We, the City, will not be involved directly in pursuing that collection. The idea -- the way this is working at other cities is by going through an RFP (Request for Proposals) process and selecting a company that will provide the equipment, that will provide the cameras, that will, in essence, work with Police to certify the infractions of somebody running a red light. And once there is a notice or a citation is sent, a civil violation, they will pursue the collection. Their revenue is based on their collections. So we have an entity that will have an interest in having a good collection rate. My understanding is that in other municipalities, the collection rate is as good as 70 percent or more; so we're going to be relying on the private sector who will handle the installation of the camera systems, the operation, et cetera, and the collections. We will not be involved in that. Our only involvement is providing a City of Miami police officer that will review the images and certify that there was an infraction. City ofMiami Page 15 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Commissioner Regalado: Okay. Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Chair Sanchez: Discussion. You know, I have more questions than answers on this item. And I'm glad that the amendment at least takes out the lien, which I would have never supported, okay? So that's a step in the right direction. I support this item. I think we need cameras in certain intersections in our community. I know the law does not allow us to have on county or state road, but there are some city roads that really can benefit from this, especially some of the drivers that we have in our community. But still -- at the last Commission meeting, I made a point very clear, and I know all my colleagues heard me very well. We need to have on every ordinance that comes in front of us a fiscal impact study. As a matter of fact, if we don't, we are violating our own Code, which is a violation of our financial integrity ordinance, and that is Section 2-497, same budget management section, which clearly states that written analysis of all budgetary impact of all proposed legislation prior to consideration by the City ofMiami providing through the City Manager to the City Commission a written budget impact analysis for all pocket agenda items and performing such duties and functions as the department director may specify. Now, this, my understanding is that we're hiring a firm that's going to handle that, so they're the ones that are going to go out there and follow through, make sure people pay. Now, my other question is is there a due process for someone who, for whatever reason, gets a ticket and wants to challenge it? And they have every right. They would -- my understanding through your briefing is that that individual will have to go in front of a magistrate -- special master. Is that -- Mr. Hernandez: Yes. Chair Sanchez: -- a cost to the City? Mr. Hernandez: It's not a cost to the City. It's a cost to the person who is appealing the civil citation. And in essence, Commissioner, going back to the other concern that you brought up. I know that the most dangerous intersections in the County and the City are either county roads or state roads. Chair Sanchez: Correct. Mr. Hernandez: And my initial concern is how is this going to help us? I've seen a couple of presentations from firms that do this kind of work, and -- Chair Sanchez: Well, I haven't. Mr. Hernandez: -- and they place the equipment outside of either the state or county right-of-way so they can handle a U.S. 1 and 27th Avenue intersection. For example, they can provide the cameras and they can control the red light running at that location without placing the equipment on state or county right-of-way and without connecting to the traffic control box at the corner, the one that controls the signal. So that's very critical. And we can then address the main purpose of this ordinance, which is, more than anything else, safety. Now, beyond that, there is a potential positive benefit to the City. There will be some revenue coming back to the City. Chair Sanchez: All right. I understand there's other cities that have already implemented this. Mr. Hernandez: Yes. ' Chair Sanchez: Has anyone look at their expenditures, reference revenues? Are they -- what's the percentage of people paying these fines? What's the percentage -- City ofMiami Page 16 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Hernandez: I'll ask -- Chair Sanchez: -- of people getting these fines? Mr. Hernandez: -- either Bill Anido or George Wysong to address those concerns. Chair Sanchez: Because if you tell me that this is going to cost us 30,000 a year and it's going to generate 1.2 or 1.6 a year, it's a good deal for the City, butt haven't heard that yet. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chair, I was at that presentation and what -- and correct me, Mr. Manager, but they told us that they get about an approximate 80 percent collection rate. The cameras don't cost the City anything. The only thing that the City provides is a police officer to certify that the camera and the photograph are correct. The magistrate -- I don't remember who paid for the magistrate, if it was them or us. It was us? Bill Anido: Well, the -- Bill Anido, assistant City Manager. Chair Sanchez: But let me ask you another question. Was he the only Commissioner that got that presentation? Better yet, let me ask, did any other Commissioners get a presentation like this? Commissioner Regalado: No. Chair Sanchez: So you were the only one that got a presentation? Commissioner Sarnoff It was seven in the morning; I didn't mind going. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: We weren't invited. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Sarnoff I don't know if we could have all done it at the same time. Mr. Hernandez: Commissioners, but I think that -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: But we would have liked to be a part of it. Chair Sanchez: All right. Mr. Hernandez: -- the Administration itself provide the briefings that I think summarized the subject pretty well. Chair Sanchez: All right. Any further discussion on the item? No. It is a -- Commissioner Gonzalez: There was a question on the air that the gentleman was going to answer, and we cut him off. What was your answer? Mr. Anido: Well, the -- Bill Anido, assistant City Manager. The question was as far as revenues or costs to the City. What we envision is issuing -- Commissioner Gonzalez: No. The -- Mr. Anido: -- an RFP -- City ofMiami Page 17 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Commissioner Gonzalez: No, no, no. The question was who was going to pay for the special master, either the company, the City, or the violator? Mr. Anido: Okay. The answer is that will be paid by the company that provides the cameras, et cetera. The -- we envision issuing an RFP that will require this company to design, build, operate, maintain the system and also to pay any City costs associated with running the system. Chair Sanchez: So it comes back to the City Commission? Mr. Anido: Yes. Chair Sanchez: Oh, okay. I don't have a problem with it, then. Mr. Anido: So it -- we -- it should -- as a minimum, the City -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Mr. Anido: -- should have no costs -- Chair Sanchez: As long as you -- Mr. Anido: -- associated with this. Chair Sanchez: -- put everything together and it comes back and it has a fiscal impact study because, after all, it's the taxpayers' dollars. Mr. Anido: It should. Oh, yes. Chair Sanchez: All right. Madam Attorney, you want to speak on the issue? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. I just want -- I mean, again, I did have a issue or concern with it at one particular point, and then I was comfortable with it because I was told that the City was actually not going to be putting any dollars out there; we're going to actually be putting the bid process in place to do it. But do want to have clarity on whether or not there would be a conflict; andl was just asking my staffer to at least confer with the City Attorney on the issue of it being a conflict if the person that's actually putting this out to bid -- could you --? I just want to be clear on the issue. Is there an apparent conflict? Ms. Chiaro: When we put the RFP out -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Right. Ms. Chiaro: -- we can include administrative costs and any costs to the City, which would then be -- we would pay for the additional staff necessary. The determination on hiring the police officer -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yeah. Ms. Chiaro: -- the determination on choosing the special master -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Ms. Chiaro: -- would be solely within the purview of the City Manager under our Code. So there is no conflict -- City ofMiami Page 18 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Ms. Chiaro: -- in that regard. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Chair Sanchez: Read the ordinance into the record. This is an ordinance on second reading, so once it's passed here, it is adopted; followed by a vote -- a roll call by the City Clerk. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by Interim City Attorney Maria J. Chiaro. Chair Sanchez: Roll call. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Okay. You're voting now on your substituted -- Chair Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Thompson: -- legislation? Chair Sanchez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above. Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, as modified, 5/0. Mr. Hernandez: Mr. Chairman, ifI may ask your consideration of the following. I would like to, based on this ordinance, proceed with the preparation of an RFP; and I would like your maybe support through a motion to authorize us -- I may not need the authorization, but at least I want to put it on the record that I would like to proceed with the preparation of an RFP process to provide for what this ordinance allows now. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Sarnoff So moved. Chair Sanchez: Is there a motion? Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Commissioner Sarnoff So moved. Chair Sanchez: The motion is made by Commissioner Sarnoff, second by Commissioner Gonzalez? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. Chair Sanchez: Discussion on the item. Hearing no discussion on the item, it's just directing the City Manager to prepare an RFP. No discussion. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. City ofMiami Page 19 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries, and it is adopted. RESOLUTIONS RE.1 08-00150 RESOLUTION Department of Solid A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE Waste APPROVAL OF THE REIMBURSEMENT OF FUNDS, WHICH WERE PAID TO THE CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY") IN ERROR, FOR MISCODED ACCOUNTS PER THE CITY'S NON-EXCLUSIVE COMMERCIAL SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $92,762.73, TO ALLIED WASTE INDUSTRIES, INC.;STIPULATING THAT SAID AMOUNT CANNOT BE INCREASED WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE CITY'S OFFICE OF STRATEGIC PLANNING, BUDGETING AND PERFORMANCE; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM ACCOUNT CODE NO. 04001.213000.549000. 08-00150 Legislation.pdf 08-00150 Summary Form.pdf 08-00150 Letter.pdf 08-00150 Letter2.pdf 08-00150 Audit.pdf Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Samoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-08-0095 Chair Sanchez: We move on to RE.1. Commissioner Gonzalez: Move RE.1. Chair Sanchez: RE.1 is -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Second. Chair Sanchez: -- a reimbursement ofAllied Waste Industry [sic]. There is -- Commissioner Gonzalez: It's a no-brainer. Chair Sanchez: -- a motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, second by Vice Chair Michelle Spence -Jones. It is a resolution. The item is under discussion. Hearing no discussion on the item, anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Mr. Director, could you just put something on the record for those that are not present and watching it on TV (Television); they know what we're voting? Mario Soldevilla: Absolutely. Mario Soldevilla, Director of Solid Waste. This is a resolution seeking reimbursement in the amount of $92, 762.73 to Allied Waste, who is a waste hauler for the City. They -- for miscoded accounts that were paid to the City in error that actually belong to the County. The County did an audit. They found 121,000 -- approximately $121, 000 in miscoded accounts. Our internal auditor reviewed the -- their request. He determined that 119,000 was actually owed. And in addition, the -- that Allied Waste owes the City $26,000; therefore, netting the $92, 762 reimbursement to Allied Waste. Chair Sanchez: All right. There's a motion and a second. The public hearing was open and City ofMiami Page 20 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 closed. It's for a vote. It's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries. And that was SR.1 [sic]. RE.2 08-00167 RESOLUTION Office of the City Attorney A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING A PAYMENT TO THE CITY OF MIAMI, IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000, IN SETTLEMENT OF THE CITY OF MIAMI'S CLAIMS AND DEMANDS FOR THE CASE OF CITY OF MIAMI VS. CONE CONSTRUCTORS, INC. AND AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, CASE NO. 03-18622 CA (08), PURSUANT TO THE TERMS OF A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT; AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, TO EFFECTUATE THE SETTLEMENT. 08-00167 Legislation.pdf 08-00167 Cover Memo.pdf Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Samoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-08-0096 Chair Sanchez: We move on to SR (Second Reading) -- Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll move RE.2. Chair Sanchez: -- 2. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): RE.1. Maria J. Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): RE.1. Chair Sanchez: RE.1, I'm sorry. We move to RE.2. RE.2 is also a resolution. Commissioner Gonzalez: So move. Chair Sanchez: All right. There's a motion by Commissioner Gonzalez. Is there a second? Commissioner Regalado: Second. Chair Sanchez: Second by Commissioner Regalado. Before we open it up for discussion, anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Seeing no one, the public hearing is closed; coming back to the Commission. Discussion on the item. Hearing no discussion on the item, it's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay" Madam Clerk, RE.2 City ofMiami Page 21 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 has been approved. RE.3 08-00175 RESOLUTION Office of the City A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE Attorney DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY XIOMARA QUINONES, WITHOUT ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE TOTAL SUM OF $75,000 IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS AND SERVANTS, IN THE CASE OF XIOMARA QUINONES VS. CITY OF MIAMI, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, CASE NO. 07-23005 CA (10), UPON EXECUTING A GENERAL RELEASE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ITS PRESENT AND FORMER OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE SELF-INSURANCE AND INSURANCE TRUST FUND, INDEX CODE NO. 05002.301001.545000.0000.00000. 08-00175 Legislation.pdf 08-00175 Memo.pdf 08-00175 Memo2.pdf Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Sarnoff, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Samoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-08-0097 Chair Sanchez: RE. 3. RE. 3 is from the Office of City Attorney. It is a settlement. Madam Attorney, you want to put something on the record as to this settlement? Maria J. Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): Yes. This item results from an intersection collision. It is a tort case. The damages for the plaintiff are submitted in excess of $65, 000. The settlement is for $75,000. It is the policy of this -- of our office to vigorously defend and try cases. We had two attorneys in trial this week. Unfortunately, both trials were stopped because of the power outage. This case, however, has a maximum liability for the City of $100, 000. It's recommended to be settled at $75, 000 because this involved a vehicle of the Police Department rear -ended another vehicle. The accident was deemed preventable, by our Board; the officer was disciplined. The plaintiff is a 60-year-old woman who suffered some injuries, broken bones; and so this recommendation comes to you at this amount. Commissioner Gonzalez: Are you saying that this was a car accident? Ms. Chiaro: Yes. No. It -- the cover memo in the agenda says it is a trip and fall, but as explained at your staff meeting, it was a rear -end collision. Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. So moved. Chair Sanchez: All right. There's a motion by Commissioner Gonzalez. Is there a second? Commissioner Sarnoff Second. Chair Sanchez: Second by Commissioner Sarnoff. The item is under discussion. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item Commission pertaining to this either in favor or in opposition? Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed, coming back to the Commission. Discussion on the item? Hearing none, it's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." City ofMiami Page 22 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Madam Clerk, RE.3 has been approved. RE.4 08-00184 RESOLUTION Office of the City A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE Attorney EXPENDITURE OF ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS, IN AN AMOUNT APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR THE ENGAGEMENT OF THE LAW FIRM OF COLE, SCOTT AND KISSANE, P.A., TO PROVIDE SPECIAL COUNSEL SERVICES TO FORMER CITY MANAGERS HOWARD V. GARY, CESAR H. ODIO, AND DONALD WARSHAW, IN THE CASE OF JERRY FRANK TOWNSEND, ET AL V. CITY OF MIAMI, ET AL., CASE NO. 03-21072-CIV-JORDAN, AND REQUIRING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO REPORT TO THE CITY COMMISSION ON A MONTHLY BASIS THE AMOUNT OF FEES AND COSTS INCURRED TO DATE. 08-00184 Legislation.pdf 08-00184 Cover Memo.pdf Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Sarnoff, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Samoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-08-0098 Chair Sanchez: RE.4. RE.4 is a resolution. Madam Attorney, you're recognized for the record. Maria J. Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): RE.4 is the resolution that is presented to you as a result of your executive session at the last City Commission meeting. It seeks to authorize the retention of outside counsel for three former City managers, who are sued among several other defendants, including the City ofMiami, related to a case for a violation of civil rights of an individual who was in jail for some 21 years and then released by the State based on faulty -- an allegation offaulty evidence initially. This comes to you for authorization for outside counsel because the three former City managers, who are entitled to be represented, pursuant to the state law, have several issues that have come up during the case that relate to areas of expertise that the attorneys in my office do not have. So this is to retain an outside expert because of that reason. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll move RE.4. Chair Sanchez: There is a motion by Commissioner Gonzalez. Is there a second? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Second -- Commissioner Sarnoff Second. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- with discussion. Chair Sanchez: Second by Commissioner Sarnoff. Discussion. Vice Chair Spence -Jones, you're recognized for the record on RE.4. City ofMiami Page 23 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Sure. I just had a question for our City Attorney. Maria, is there like a cap at all on what we would spend on legal fees? Are we putting a cap on that amount? Ms. Chiaro: There is no cap on this amount. If the case goes to trial, the fees can be significant, up to a half a million dollars, I am told. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So everyone's comfortable with not having a cap on the amount of -- that we would spend on legal fees? Commissioner Sarnoff I don't think we could put -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I'm just -- I just -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- I don't think we can put a cap. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I mean, we're already voting and we're supporting it, but we know we don't have a choice to take action. But my question was, are we --? I know on other cases we have put caps on it to have it come back in front of us, so if everyone's comfortable with that? Commissioner Sarnoff If you want to make it so they come back in front of us so we can audit their bills, that's appropriate. But I don't think we can put a cap on the amount of money that we would allow them to spend in defending them because I think it would be a violation of -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: You're talking about as far as --? Commissioner Sarnoff Just so it can come back to us -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. That's what I'm talking -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- and we can look at it and see whether -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Well, that's -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I'm sorry. Chair Sanchez: All right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Normally, that's what we do. That's why I -- Chair Sanchez: Who had the floor? You had the floor? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Chair Sanchez: Vice Chair Spence -Jones, you have the floor. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Chair Sanchez: You're recognized. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I just wanted to ask the City Attorney -- I know, in the past -- and my fellow Commissioners -- we have put a cap on it -- City ofMiami Page 24 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: Right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- to have it come back in front of us so that the bill does not get outrageous, so -- I mean, that -- Ms. Chiaro: I have no -- Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. I'll amend my motion to include a cap of $250, 000. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Commissioner Sarnoff, you're recognized for the record, and then -- Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Chair Sanchez: -- City Attorney. Commissioner Sarnoff And I just want to clarify something with you, Commissioner Gonzalez, and that is that it'd just come back to us to review. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Commissioner Gonzalez: Come back to us for a -- to review. Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff But the thing we can't do is put a cap on what an attorney's fees would be because that would quell their ability to represent -- Commissioner Gonzalez: To represent -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- whoever it is we're designating they represent. Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yeah. I wasn't really -- I was just speaking -- Commissioner Sarnoff That's fine. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- I know in the past we've done it. Commissioner Sarnoff I have no problem with looking at attorney's fees bills. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Second then. Commissioner Gonzalez: Okay. Chair Sanchez: All right. It's been amended. Apparently, it's been amended to a cap or -- no, no, no cap; coming back to review for the City Commission. Okay. The motion was made by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chair Spence -Jones. Any further discussion on the item? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Chair, before you take your vote, we have Commissioner Sarnoff as your second. City ofMiami Page 25 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 RE.5 08-00194 District 2- Commissioner Marc David Sarnoff RE.6 08-00118A District 2- Commissioner Marc David Sarnoff Chair Sanchez: I apologize, for -- Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: -- the record. Commissioner Sarnoff made the second. Do we have that corrected? All right. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed, coming back to the Commission. No further discussion on the item. It is a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries. RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING A DONATION OF A FENCE, AT AN ESTIMATED FAIR MARKET VALUE OF $14,500, FROM BERIMBAU INVESTMENTS, PLACED AT THE GROVE HERITAGE GARDEN PARK, IN THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA. 08-00194 Legislation.pdf 08-00194 Cover Memo.pdf WITHDRAWN RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION URGING THE MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS TO SUPPORT THE RE-ENACTMENT OF THE FEDERAL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN AS PROPOSED IN HOUSE RESOLUTION 1022 SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE CAROLYN MCCARTHY OF NEWYORK (ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN AND LAW ENFORCEMENT PROTECTION ACT OF 2007); DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO TRANSMIT A COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE OFFICIALS DESIGNATED HEREIN. 08-00118a Legislation.pdf 08-00118A-Submittal-Correspondence-Mel Martinez.pdf 08-00118A-Submittal-City of North Miami Beach Resolution.pdf Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Samoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones R-08-0099 Chair Sanchez: And we move on to RE.5. No. Yes. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): RE.6. Commissioner Gonzalez: No. RE.5 was -- Chair Sanchez: No. I'm sorry. RE.5 was withdrawn. Commissioner Gonzalez: Withdrawn. Chair Sanchez: RE.6. City ofMiami Page 26 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll move RE.6. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Second for discussion. Chair Sanchez: Well, that's -- there's a motion and a second. Motion has been made by Commissioner Gonzalez, second by Vice Chair. It is the support of the reenactment of the Federal Assault Weapon ban. Commissioner Sarnoff, you're recognized for the record. That is your item. Commissioner Sarnoff Thank you. For the Commission and for everyone, we had a press conference where Chief Timoney was with me, as well as Assistant Chief Fernandez, and we had Detective Walker equally there -- I'm sorry -- Detective Walker's parents there; and, of course, as you all know, Detective Walker was gunned down with an AK 47. I believe Metro -Dade Officer Somohano -- I think that's his last name -- was equally gunned down by an assault weapon, and I think it was a Mack 9, but I'm not sure of that one, but obviously, it was an assault weapon. Every police department, nationally as well as regionally, supports an assault weapons ban. I know I'm probably preaching to go the choir. Just so you know that I've received a response from Mel Martinez, the United States Senator, for our -- for Florida, I should say; and there are many bills now making their way through Congress. The city of North Miami Beach, after the City did its press conference and we put it on our particular blue -- our pages here, has equally passed a resolution in substantial format, the same as ours, asking Congress to immediately act and renew the ban on the manufacture and sale of assault weapons. For those of you that don't know, in 1994 there was, by president -- then -President Clinton, an assault weapons ban, which went into effect for ten years. That stopped by operation of the ten-year increment in 2004. What the City ofMiami Police Department was able to establish is that it appears, since 2004, the number of crimes committed with assault weapons has increased in the City ofMiami almost 20 percent per year. So what we're seeing is an escalation of the use of assault weapons. This is for our police, this is for our citizens, this is for the general safety and welfare and safe being of everyone. It's one thing to pull a trigger and let one bullet release, and it's another thing to pull a trigger and allow 40 or 50 rounds to release. So I hope that you'll all join me in adopting this resolution, as many cities across South Florida are equally doing. The School Board has recently done a resolution of substantially the same kind, and hopefully, our federal government will wake up and realize that the assault weapons ban was a good, valid ban on weapons that didn't necessarily need to be in civilian hands. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones, you're recognized for the record on RE.6. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Want to definitely commend Commissioner Sarnofffor definitely pushing this item. I know that Mayor Diaz and the U.S. Conference ofMayors has been working on this similar item for at least three years, and I'm glad to see that one of the district Commissioners is actually pushing to see that it also happens. I'm in full support of this message that we're sending to Congress. I think that my concern in the beginning about it was not that we don't have a ban placed on it, but it just kind of almost felt to me in the beginning that it was all focused on the end user, the person that was actually shooting the gun. Not to say that it should not be placed on that, but thought that it was important for it to be focused on the retailers and the wholesalers. So I'm glad to see that this particular message that we're sending up by way of the City Commission, by way of the Mayor himself and the U.S. Conference ofMayors will now focus its attention or will focus attention on the retailers and the wholesalers. So I think that it needs to be at least a two prong approach, and I think with this message that we're sending to Congress, that's the most important thing. So that's -- that was the only concern I had in the beginning, because most of -- many of those people that are going to be affected are, like I said, the end users, and not a lot of focus on the folks that are actually selling the guns, and I think that that's extremely important, so I'm glad to see that it's included. City ofMiami Page 27 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: All right. Any discussion on the item? Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chair -- Commissioner Spence -Jones, both of those guns that were used to kill both South Florida police officers were purchased legally. They actually came from a legitimate gun -- for -sale gun place in South Florida. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Right. Commissioner Sarnoff And what's interesting is obviously that you cannot have a fully automatic weapon. However, these gun shops equally sell a conversion kit -- I think Commissioner Sanchez knows this is well -- for $18 that will convert a semiautomatic weapon into a fully automatic weapon, a machine gun, essentially. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Right. Commissioner Sarnoff And I think turning a blind eye to the assault weapon and knowing it can be converted for $18 -- and knowing, more importantly, that both of these guns didn't come from illegal activity; they came from a legitimate purchase. Something we all should equally acknowledge. You have to be 21 years old to purchase a handgun, but you can be 18 years old to purchase an assault weapon. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Right. Commissioner Sarnoff Because a handgun is concealable; an assault weapon is not. So I think -- you know, many things happen in Washington, but what do they say? You catch a cold in Washington and sometimes a sneeze is felt in Florida, and this is one of the cases that we're seeing. A cold was caught in Washington, but the effects of that cold are being felt here in Miami. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And just -- and I don't want to talk much more on it. Chair Sanchez: Vice Chair Spence -Jones -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yeah. Chair Sanchez: -- you're recognized for the record. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And, again, I commend you for bringing the item. It wasn't really about that. I just wanted to make sure that the focus was on both ends because there are still a lot of illegal guns that 14-, 15 year -old people in Little Haiti and in Liberty City have, you know, bought illegally. So my whole thing was just making sure that it was addressing both sides of it, and it -- it's not a -- again, I support it 100 percent, so it's not like a real long discussion. I just really wanted to make sure that this particular message we were sending was going on both ends, and that was really it. Commissioner Regalado: Chairman. Chair Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized for the record -- Commissioner Regalado: Brief. Chair Sanchez: -- on RE.6. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I do support this, butt have a City ofMiami Page 28 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 question. We all know that the process in Washington takes time, and of course, our senator -- our junior senator, is supporting this. Hopefully, the senior senator from Florida will also be supporting. But my question was, meanwhile, several months ago Chief Timoney said that he would allow the force, the members, to have assault weapons; and I just wanted to know how many of the police in the force now carry weapons that can match this situation that we have? Because while the process is on, cops still are out there with the Glock, only the handgun; and just wanted to know how many officers already have been given a weapon that they can use to defend themself [sic], and if they need to pay or if these weapons are being paid by the Police Department? Assistant ChiefAdam Burton: Assistant ChiefAdam Burton, Police Department. Right now we have 30 of those weapons on the street and in the process of getting 30 more, and it's being paid for by the Police Department. Commissioner Regalado: So we have 30 now? Assistant Chief Burton: Yes. Commissioner Regalado: And 30 in the process? Assistant Chief Burton: Yes. Commissioner Regalado: And the force -- are these people that already qualify as sharpshooters, or do they have to go through the process? Assistant Chief Burton: They have to go through a special three-day fraining mandated by FDLE (Federal Department of Law Enforcement), and once they complete the fraining, they are assigned a weapons [sic]. Commissioner Regalado: And is it a goal? Do you have a number? Assistant Chief Burton: Yeah. We're -- right now we don't have a final number of how many we're going to put on the street, but we are adding, and as we get more weapons and we train more people, we're going to get them up. I don't know if we're going to equip the entire patrol force, but a large majority of them will have the weapons. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you. Assistant Chief Burton: You're welcome. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Chair Sanchez: All right. No further discussion on the item. We are about to take a vote on -- Commissioner Sarnoff 6. Chair Sanchez: -- RE.6. It is a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries. Madam Clerk, we approved RE.6. City ofMiami Page 29 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 PART B Chair Sanchez: Okay. Before we go on with the presentation, let's just say that we're going to take up PZ.2 and PZ.3; we're going to break for lunch. We're going to come back at 2, and then we'll take up PZ.6;; 7 is a companion item. And we'll take up PZ.11 with the blue pages of the Commissioners at that time. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Mr. Chairman, you do know we have a CDE (Community Development Entity) meeting today. At least know, as a board member, so I will have to -- at 12:30 -- so I just wanted to let you know I have to go upstairs. Remember, it was mentioned in the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) meeting that we have to convene that meeting? So I just want you to know that I'll be there at two thin -- well, at 12:30 upstairs. Chair Sanchez: Yeah, 12 -- but we'll come back at 2 o'clock, or we could come back at 3:30 [sic]. It's a very light agenda. We shouldn't be here more than at least three hours when we come back. So we could come back at 2. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Chair Sanchez: Okay. So we'll come back at 2, and we'll pick up PZ.6, 7, and 11; and the remaining of the blue pages, which shouldn't have -- be a problem. So let's go on with PZ.2. The applicant is ready? Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Yes. Chair Sanchez: You're recognized. But before you do that, my condolences to you and your husband. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: I was informed that your husband's mother passed away, and -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Yes. Chair Sanchez: -- my -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Luisa Garcia -Toledo passed away yesterday morning. Chair Sanchez: -- so my condolences to the family and -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: -- to your husband. "[Later...]" Chair Sanchez: The City ofMiami Commission meeting is called to order after a recess. I've been advised that Commissioner Gonzalez will not be joining us in the afternoon. Apparently, he's a little under the weather; hope he is well and recovers quickly. Let's go ahead and continue the order of the day. Before we do that, Madam Clerk, all those who'll be testifying in front of this Commission pertaining to the Planning and Zoning items, please stand up and be sworn in. And also, before speaking you need to register with the City Clerk, and before you come up and address the Commission, please state your name and address for the record. At this time all those that will be testifying in front of this Commission, please stand up and be sworn in. City ofMiami Page 30 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Please raise your right hand. The City Clerk administered oath required under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons giving testimony on zoning issues. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: All right. We'll be taking up PZ.6 and 7. They're companion item. PZ.1 07-00513mu RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 13 AND 17 OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, FOR THE EMPIRE WORLD TOWERS PROJECT, TO BE LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 300 AND 330 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, 227, 237, 243, 249 NORTHEAST 3RD STREET AND 230, 249 NORTHEAST 4TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO CONSTRUCT A MIXED -USE PROJECT WITH TWO 93-STORY HIGH STRUCTURES OF APPROXIMATELY 1,022 FEET TO BE COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 1,557 TOTAL MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH RECREATIONAL AMENITIES; APPROXIMATELY 3,317 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE; APPROXIMATELY 24,741 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE; AND APPROXIMATELY 1,321 TOTAL PARKING SPACES; 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 31 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 PAB - ITEM #3 - 07-00513mu-EWT.pdf 07-00513mu - PAB - EWT- PFS.pdf 07-00513mu - ITEM #2 - PAB-01.16.08.pdf 07-00513mu PAB Reso.PDF 07-00513mu Outside Cover.PDF 07-00513mu Inside Cover.PDF 07-00513mu Table of Contents.PDF 07-00513mu Article I. Project Information.PDF 07-00513mu I.A. Letter of Intent.PDF 07-00513mu I.B. Major Use Special Permit.PDF 07-00513mu I.C. Zoning Write-Up.PDF 07-00513mu I.D. Zoning Atlas -Land Use.PDF 07-00513mu I.E. Project Data Sheet.PDF 07-00513mu I.F. Deed-Computer.PDF 07-00513mu I.G. Ownership List.PDF 07-00513mu I.H. State of Florida Documents.PDF 07-00513mu I.I. Directory of Project Principals.PDF 07-00513mu Article II. Project Description.PDF 07-00513mu Article III. Supporting Documents.PDF 07-00513mu III. Tab 1.Minority Construction Employment Plan.PDF 07-00513mu III. Tab 2.Traffic Impact Analysis.PDF 07-00513mu III. Tab 3.Site Utility Study.PDF 07-00513mu III. Tab 4.Economic Impact Study.PDF 07-00513mu III. Tab 5.Survey of Property.PDF 07-00513mu III. Tab 6.Drawings Submitted.PDF 07-00513mu CC Revised School Board Impact Analysis.pdf 07-00513mu CC Legislation (Version 2).PDF 07-00513mu CC Exhibit A.pdf 07-00513mu CC Exhibit B.pdf 07-00513mu CC 02-28-08 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-00513mu-Submittal-Article.pdf 07-00513mu-Submittal-LERA. pdf 07-00513mu-Submittal-Langan-Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Study.pdf 07-00513mu MIA Height Analysis REVISED.pdf 07-00513mu CC 03-27-08 Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 300 and 330 Biscayne Boulevard, 227, 237, 243, 249 NE 3rd Street and 230, 249 NE 4th Street [Commissioner Marc David Sarnoff - District 2] APPLICANT(S): N. Patrick Range, III, Esquire, on behalf of Empire World Towers, LLC FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to City Commission on January 16, 2008 by a vote of 7-0. *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: This will allow the development of the Empire City ofMiami Page 32 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Votes: World Towers project. Motion by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be CONTINUED PASSED by the following vote. Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Samoff and Regalado Absent: 2 - Commissioner Sanchez and Spence -Jones A motion was made by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed unanimously, with Chair Sanchez and Vice Chair Spence Jones absent, to continue item PZ.1 to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for March 27, 2008. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Chair, we're beginning with PZ.1? Is that what you're calling? Chair Sanchez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: We're going to start off with PZ.1. PZ.1 is a resolution. The item should not be considered before 10 a.m. It is not 10 a.m., so we are not violating any code or any rules and regulations. The item has been properly advertised, and we do have the applicant present. We'll recognize the City to put on the record their recommendations, and then we'll give the applicant -- is there anyone here to speak on this item? Is there anyone in opposition to the item? Is there anyone in support of the item? Okay. We still have to open it up to a public hearing, but just wanted to know. All right. You're recognized for the record. Roberto Lavernia (Chief of Land Development): Good morning, Commissioners. Roberto Lavernia, with the Planning Department. This is a Major Use Special Permit for the Empire World Towers, located at 300 and 330 Biscayne Boulevard, 2227, 237, 243, 249 Northeast 3rd Sfreet, and 230, 249 Northeast 4th Sfreet. It's going to be a mixed -use project with 93-story height, with approximately 1, 022 feet to be comprised of 1,557 residential units with recreational amenities; approximately 3,317 square feet of office space and 24, 741 square feet of retail space; and 1,321 total parking spaces. Commissioner Sarnoff How much was the office space? Mr. Lavernia: The office space is 3,317. The Planning Department recommends approval with conditions. It went to the Planning Advisory Board, with -- recommend approval with the same conditions as the Planning Department that I'm going to read on the records condition 11 related to design. Pursuant to the design -related comments received by the Planning director, the applicant shall meet the following conditions: (a) the project must comply with height regulation of the Miami -Dade Aviation Department prior to the issuance of the building permit;; (b) provide a clearance letter for the project from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, regulation with a specific reference of compliance of height and other regulation; and (c) adjust the project to internalize the maneuvering within the garage and avoid loading vehicles to reverse to or from the public right-of-way; (d) the applicant shall engage Burle Marx Group and continue their pattern along Northeast 3rd Street. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right. Does that conclude? Mr. Lavernia: Yes. Chair Sanchez: All right. Madam Applicant, how much time are you going to need? Lucia Dougherty: Probably five minutes. City ofMiami Page 33 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: Five minutes. It's that easy of a sell, five minutes? Ms. Dougherty: Well, we have recommendations from not only the staff but the Planning Advisory Boards [sic], and we meet all the Codes; so let me just present, if you don't mind? Chair Sanchez: All right. You're recognized for the record. Ms. Dougherty: Patrick Range and Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue, here today with Leon Cohen, who is the principal, along with his father, ofMaclee Development Company. It is an L-shaped property located at Biscayne Boulevard and 3rd Street. And this project was first reviewed about a year ago by the internal design review, and it's taken this long to get to this point because the client actually wanted to make sure that, from a geotechnical standpoint and a structural standpoint, this project can be built; and I'm going to submit for the record reports from two engineering firms, one from a structural standpoint and also one from a geotechnical standpoint, to assure the City -- and also from his standpoint -- that this building can be built. It is located in the Central Business District. It's unlimited height and unlimited FAR (floor/area ratio) and a thousand units per acre, and again, it's two stories, 93 stories -- two towers, 93 stories tall; and it's 1,557 residential units, whereas, 2,033 residential units could be built; so it's about 750 units per acre as opposed to the thousand which would be permitted. There are 1,393 parking spaces and 27,000 square feet of retail, and it has more open space than is required. We have about 3,000 square feet more open space than is required by the City. The unique aspect of this building is that it is adjacent to People Mover station, and actually, the People Mover station will be inside the building; so when you exit the People Mover, you can actually use a key card and go into the residential lobby of the building, or you could go down to the retail, by escalator, down to the retail area, or you can go down to the sfreet; so that's pretty unique in even downtown. It does have parking spaces. As you know, in downtown, if you're next to a People Mover, you don't have to provide any parking. In fact, we've provided 1,395 spaces. Kobi Karp and Jennifer McConnelly (phonetic) are the project architects and can describe it a little bit more in detail. Jack Perry is our landscape architect, and he's here. Chris Hagan, who is our traffic consultant with UR -- I mean, with Kimley-Horn, is here today; and Jason Biondi, our environmental consultant and our economic consultant, is also here. We have recommendations of approval from the Planning Advisory Board and from the City staff and we'd be happy to let Jennifer and/or Kobi just give you a little bit more detail, while I show you the skyline. What I've -- what we've done in this view is we've shown you the skyline of the City ofMiami, and in it we've included two buildings that are -- have been permitted, meaning have gotten approvals, including the one that you read about in the paper, but have not been built yet. So I'm going to pass this around. Kobi Karp: Hi. My name is Kobi Karp, the architect for the project. And as Lucia has stated, we have been in the process of working with the City and various municipalities for the past two years on this project. And as an important note, we are located immediately adjacent to a Metrorail stop. So what we did do is we took the Mefro stop opportunity to bridge into the public spaces of our building, so there is a direct -- a pedestrian link to the public spaces of our building. The concept of the curves came about from the Burle Marx master plan of Biscayne Boulevard, so what we did when we met with your staff is that we wanted to create homage and pay respect to that; so what we did is we picked up the curves not only in the building, but also in the public spaces of the project and carried it through. Another thing that we did is then we created what we think a very slender and elegant and sleek kind of a building, not complicated, yet iconic to the community and to us here. The links even specifically have a function. The function is a life safety function, which if God forbid, somebody gets stuck here and they cannot go down, they can always go up and come across. So the form follows the function, and also the streamlined look ala curvilinear relating to the bay, relating to the Fountainbleu and the history ofMiami, with a la Morris Lapidus, we felt is a strong asset. But again, if you have any questions, suggestions, we'd love to hear. And we've had a very good time working with your staff over the past 18 months. Thank you. City ofMiami Page 34 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: All right. Who else in your presentation, Madam Applicant? Ms. Dougherty: That concludes our presentation. All of the expert material's in your book. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Is there anyone from the public to address this item? The public hearing is opened. Okay. Go ahead and speak, and then you sign up. It's the same thing. All right. You're recognized for the record. Anyone else? Nathan Kurland: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Nathan Kurland, 3132 Day Avenue. I just have a few questions for the developers of this project, ifI might ask? Chair Sanchez: Yes, sir, through the Chair. Mr. Kurland: Is it true that there are over 1,550 units in this particular structure, Lucia? Ms. Dougherty: Yes. Mr. Kurland: And most -- some of these units, is it fair to say, are between 1,200 and 3,200 square feet per unit? Ms. Dougherty: Only the top penthouse units are so. Mr. Kurland: And how many of those floors would that include? Ms. Dougherty: Approximately ten percent. Mr. Kurland: Ten percent. So is it fair to say that some of those larger units would be at least two to three bedrooms? Ms. Dougherty: Yes. Mr. Kurland: And you're proposing over 24,000 square feet of retail? Ms. Dougherty: Twenty-seven thousand. Mr. Kurland: Twenty-seven thousand. So ifI understand this correctly, you are proposing how many parking spaces? Ms. Dougherty: Thirteen hundred and ninety-three parking spaces, which is 1,393 more than is required. Mr. Kurland: And if we take into account the second building that comes before us directly after this one, we're talking about over 3,000 bedrooms, per se? Ms. Dougherty: I'm not familiar with the one coming after this. Mr. Kurland: Okay. Well, in this particular unit, we're talking about 3,000 bedrooms, approximate? Ms. Dougherty: No, not necessarily, because most of the units are one bedroom and a den. Mr. Kurland: One bedroom and a den, okay. And can you tell me, please, how these vehicles enter and exit this structure between the rush hour of 7:30 to 8:30 in the morning? City ofMiami Page 35 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Ms. Dougherty: Yes. I'm going to have our fraffic engineer answer you. Chair Sanchez: All right. Christopher Heggen: For the record, Chris Heggen, with Kimley-Horn and Associates. Andl just needed to understand the question a little bit better. What do you mean by how they --? Mr. Kurland: Well, as I understand it, there's 1,557 units. Many of those units will be more than one bedroom, safe to say many. I don't know the exact number. So if we're talking about families, perhaps, with multi -cars, one, two cars possibility, we're talking about a rush hour -- because I would assume that many of these units will have two families working and, perhaps or perhaps not, they will use public transportation, but more than likely, they will drive. During the rush hour morning, 7:30 to 8:30, 9 o'clock, when we can expect somewhere in the vicinity of 1,500 to 2,500 vehicles exiting this particular building, how do these vehicles enter and exit this building during rush hour, and what's the procedure here to increase the egress and ingress into this building? Mr. Heggen: Well, there are two components, I think, that are important to consider about the project. First of all is, as has been mentioned, this project's very unique in the fact that the Metromover station is actually integrated in the building itself and there will be -- we anticipate a significant amount of usage of that, primarily during these -- the rush hour periods; you have a lot of commute -based trips, and so there'd be a lot of commuter fraffic that would be using public transit. And in addition to just the Mefromover component, there are at least 15 bus routes that are in the corridors adjacent to the site; so public transit component is going to be a significant aspect of the project. The other thing that's important to consider, too, is that the traffic is going to be heavily -- is heavily residential. That's the major component of this site. And when you look at downtown patterns today, you have heavily directional fraffic volumes of people coming from I-95 into the downtown, and you have a network of streets where there's -- it tends to be heavily directional from I-95 into downtown; and so if you're talking about the people that aren't using fransit -- and again, that's going to take off a significant percentage -- they're anticipated to be going the opposite direction of traffic if they are heading to further -away destinations because they would be using the direction of travel lanes that aren't heavily in use today because most of the traffic is coming into downtown in the morning. Mr. Kurland: I'm a little confused. I'm sorry ifI didn't understand the response to the question. My question is that the approximate 1,500 to 2,500 vehicles, who may or may not be taking advantage of our mass fransit, you're telling me that everyone is coming in a particular direction, but those who are living here, these 1,500 to 2,000 vehicles who exit this building every day, are going to be using a road that we don't otherwise use? We don't otherwise -- these people will not be using I-95 north, I-95 south, or Dixie Highway? Mr. Heggen: Well -- and first of all, I think the 1,500 number is extremely exaggerated because you're looking at a peak -hour period of traffic. Again, first of all, there's going to be a -- it's anticipated there'll be a significant public transit component of it, and then, secondarily, the -- when you're looking at one peak hour, you don't have all of the units arriving or departing at exactly one time. And in fact, looking at the actual rates for this type of use, if it's considered to be a -- it's a condominium use also with the retail component, the peak hour total fraffic that's anticipated is approximately 645 trips, and that's before you take reductions for transit; and that's because not everybody arrives or departs in the exact same hour. You have people with a wide variety of work schedules. Mr. Kurland: Even if it were 6:30 to 8:30, I'm just wondering how 500 cars enter and exit this building at the same time. It just sounds a bit chaotic onto Biscayne Boulevard all at once, so I'm -- that's why I'm asking the question. City ofMiami Page 36 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Heggen: Yeah. And we -- our firm performed a traffic study. We worked with the City's consultant, URS (United Research Services), and reviewed the operations of intersections and roadways in the vicinity of the site; and also, again, took into account the transit capacity that's available for the users of this site. Mr. Kurland: My final question is, are you willing to go on the record --? I mean, you keep saying that there's a significant number of these people who are going to be using mass fransit. Would you be willing to go on the record and guarantee not only the Commissioners, but members of the public, that that, in fact, will be the case? Mr. Heggen; Well, I can say I can't control people's behavior. We're providing them with every opportunity available to use it and making it as convenient as possible. I can -- nobody can force them to use it. But there -- if you look at the -- at fransit usage, the more convenient you make it for people to use, the more frequently people use it. Again, there's no way to force them to do it, and we can't say that we could. Mr. Kurland: And there's a history in the City ofMiami that that's true? As far as I know, the Metrorail's losing money every year because people aren't using it. Mr. Heggen; Well, ridership and transit -- if you look, Mefrorail came on-line probably around 1980, the early 1980s, and ridership, although there have been fits and starts, has increased over time as there have been increases in density, which is one thing that it takes to make transit work, and also to -- with the other linkages that make it work. And again, I think this project is planning for the future. And you know, in 2020, 2030, years down the road, when this project is going to be there, there's going to be more and more transit all throughout the City ofMiami and Miami -Dade County. Mr. Kurland: Commissioners, I'd like to thank you for your patience for my questions. My final response is that we seem -- when I drive down Biscayne Boulevard right now, it is one massive structure after another massive structure, and we haven't yet really absorbed what we have already built. We don't have any clue how this is actually going to work with all of these units coming to fruition by the end of this year, the end of next year. I just wonder whether or not we should be building another tall building before we understand whether or not we have the capacity to deal with all of the units we've already built and which, I understand, right now we can't fill. But my question is, are we overtaxing our infrastructure to even to be able to handle this kind of structure? Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you, Nathan. All right. Ms. Dougherty: I'd like to respond to that in just a second, if you don't mind? One of the things that we have to recognize is that when you have residential in downtown, it's countercyclical to what is typically in downtown and made your downtown be, you know, basically dark in the evening. In other words, in the evening you had all the folks going from their offices directly out of town. Now you're bringing people downtown so you'll have a 24-hour city. The interesting thing is is if this was half the size, but an office building, you'd have twice as much traffic. There -- typically, traffic is much heavier in an office building scenario than it is in a residential scenario. The other thing I want you to know is that this in the downtown DRI (Development of Regional Impact), so all of those issues were looked at by the Department of Community Affairs when they approved your downtown DRI. They looked at how much residential, they've looked at how much capacity you have for residential, for office, and for mixed use; and that's -- those are the issues they took into consideration when they approved your downtown DRI, which this is totally conforming. And I'd just like you to comment about if this was an office building. Mr. Heggen: That's correct. If you look at the amount of square footage per person -- City ofMiami Page 37 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: Name, name. Mr. Heggen: Again, Chris Heggen, with Kimley-Horn and Associates for the record. Ifyou look at the amount of people per square foot in an office building, it's a lot more dense than you would find in a residential unit. Typically, an office building is anticipated to generate approximately one trip per thousand square feet during a peak -hour period; whereas, a condominium unit is anticipated to generate somewhere in the range -- and these are approximate numbers -- of about a half trip per unit, which may or may not be over a thousand square feet during a peak period. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Thank you. Anything else? Are you done with your presentation? Ms. Dougherty: Yes, sir. Chair Sanchez: All right. The public hearing is closed at this time; coming back to the Commission. Commissioner Sarnoff you're recognized for the record. Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. We can get to the parking in a moment, but ifI understand this correctly, using your pretty model here, right here is the Holiday Inn, correct? Ms. Dougherty: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff So right here you have a structure that is, what, 12 stories? Ms. Dougherty: Approximately -- and I'm going to ask -- Kobi, where are you? It comes to about there. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. So if the Holiday Inn were to sell and they were to sell to somebody who was interested in building a high-rise, you potentially have a high-rise that goes directly in front of the people who purchase these buildings -- or I should say, these units and these units? Ms. Dougherty: That's a potential for everybody, that's true. When you're in a downtown area, that's a possibility. Commissioner Sarnoff Well -- Ms. Dougherty: On the other hand, I do know the people who own the Holiday Inn, and they're renovating; so that's not something that's on the books any time in the near future. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, let me ask you this. Ifyou were to spend, I don't know, $400, 000, maybe even $600, 000 for a unit right here and five years later somebody were to build a unit directly in front of you, are you really getting your money's worth? Ms. Dougherty: Well, you know something, if I'm the person who's building the Holiday Inn, I am going to design this building in a way to maximize the views for my folks as well as the folks in this building. So I would probably orient it not in this direction; perhaps in this direction, a linear building in this direction to maximize everybody's views. This is what happens in downtowns everywhere. Commissioner Sarnoff But you are talking about a building -- you are actually hugging -- I looked at your footprint. You are hugging the Holiday Inn as closely as you can, so if, potentially, they are to build something there in the not -too -distant future or maybe in the distant future --I mean, your building probably won't get built for -- City ofMiami Page 38 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Ms. Dougherty: Probably four -- no. Probably, we would begin construction four or five years from now. Commissioner Sarnoff Right. So your building would be completed seven years from now? Ms. Dougherty: Seven, eight years. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. And who knows, maybe the economy's turned and things are good; now the Holiday Inn wants to sell. Ms. Dougherty: We all hope so. Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Your clients, I understand. And now all of a sudden you have a building -- I mean, I think it happened, and I think -- Mr. Heggen: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff -- it was by Commissioner Sanchez. It's the one right by the river, Neo Vertika, around that section; somebody built directly on top of someone else. Ms. Dougherty: Latitude, yes. Commissioner Sarnoff Latitude, okay. And I just question whether this is good planning. Mr. Karp: Yeah. We -- let me chime in, ifI may, because we studied it in detail for quite a long time because our client was talking to the folks at the Holiday Inn. And what we did is, Commissioner, first of all, we curved the buildings also to maximize the views to deflect it, number one, because we did do a master plan that is a phase II, if you will, if we were put a building in what we were proposing and thinking about is, like Lucia said and you said, to maximize the views not only for the, let's say these buildings are built, but also for the future phase. So we did look at both a round building and like an ellipse building that goes on an angle that maximize the views to the water and sets itself farther apart from the two buildings. Furthermore, because the site has also, let's say, it's height restrictions and so forth, we felt that a certain size diameter would fit in there. And that's how we came up also with the curved facades of those two buildings, which would then deflect the vistas and the views between the two buildings. Commissioner Sarnoff You know, I'm looking at your footprint and I'm looking at the existing Holiday Inn, and I know you don't have a dimensional orientation here, but bet the Holiday Inn doesn't exist 10, 15, 20 feet away; fair enough? And then you have a little bit of a gap on I guess what you would call your -- anybody want to give me my east, north, south, and west tower? So the north tower has a little bit of room, but you would have a structure potentially abutting that structure right there. Ms. Thompson: Chair, I'm sorry. We're not recording the answers, so I -- need to be on the mike. Chair Sanchez: Sir, once again, anything said has to be said on a mike so we could keep the proper records as to the minutes. Mr. Karp: Thank you. I have one right here. Yeah. Just to be specific, on page 101, which is what we were looking at, on Biscayne Boulevard, specifically on 4th and Biscayne, because our site is the majority of the block, we looked at the existing Holiday Inn, which we would put a structure all the way to the north, whether it's ellipse or round or curved, if you will, which would maximize the views to the -- and the vistas for that building to the water; and yet, when you look at the typical plate as the building rises, it has vistas, which we already are affecting City ofMiami Page 39 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 via the relationship of the two buildings that we are proposing for each other. Ms. Dougherty: I'd like to just -- Kobi just comment on this if -- you don't mind. Just to tell you what the setbacks are in the CDB (Commercial Business Disfrict), the -- adjacent to off -streets, they're five feet; interior setbacks are zero. In other words, when you're in the Central Business Disfrict, it's intended that the buildings would actually abut each other, but, in fact, we've -- actually have much greater setbacks than are required. Commissioner Sarnoff But Lucia, wouldn't you agree with me that if the Holiday Inn potentially does sell, as I've noticed a lot of Holiday Inns do sell, they're -- Ms. Dougherty: It recently did sell. That's what I'm frying to tell you. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, I just have trouble believing that 150-story unit on Biscayne Boulevard will remain in a decade. I just don't think, with the cost of land, the value of that land, that 150-foot structure will remain. So in my mind's eye, what I'm frying to do is imagine that somebody will say, well, we don't have to be as big as you guys, but we're going to be big. We're going to be 70, we're going to be 60 stories. And what is the impact to the tower to my very right? And what am seeing is what think will happen is the Holiday Inn will build a structure that has no windows facing you, and your people will be looking -- of course, you'll have sold by then, hopefully -- your purchasers will be looking at blank walls. Ms. Dougherty: Well, let me say this to you. The City is not going to let that happen because you have requirements of not having blank walls, number one. Number two, anybody's going to have to go through a process. In that process, you're going to have all of these residential units coming out saying, hey, listen, there's a blank wall next to us, and therefore, you're not going to let it happen. That's the practical answer. Commissioner Sarnoff But let me -- Ms. Dougherty: On the other hand -- Commissioner Sarnoff -- take the other hand on that because the other hand would be you don't put a blank wall and you put windows, which are ten feet apart. Mr. Karp: No. I mean -- Ms. Dougherty: There's not any different [sic] between Quantum, 1800, Opera Tower, all that happened. It's exactly the same scenario over in -- Commissioner Sarnoff You think the distance -- Ms. Dougherty: -- and this -- by the way, they're not in a CBD. Commissioner Sarnoff And do you think the distance -- I mean, I know Opera. I know Quantum. I know the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) green building. You think they're that close? You think they're within -- Ms. Dougherty: No. I'm talking about Quantum over there on Margaret Pace Park, that area. They're very close. They're as close to -- as this one is, but they're not in the CBD. This is a CBD. You have zero setback required between buildings in the CBD. Mr. Karp: But -- Ms. Dougherty: So somebody who buys in the CB -- I'm sorry. Go ahead. City ofMiami Page 40 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Karp: I'm sorry. Yes, there are zero setback requires [sic] by the City ofMiami, but there is a fire and safety setbacks that, in order to have glass on your facade, you must have a greater setback than zero. If you want to have substantial amount of glass on your facade, you need to set it back greater. You do not need to have that setback. I'm going into details, which we -- Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Mr. Karp: -- discussed for days and months, but I'll give you also more precise. We took that into consideration, Commissioner Sarnoff because if you look at the oval shape of the building, there are specifically two units in the middle which, potentially, can have, you know, the face-to-face. That's why we turned the building like this to mitigate the impact. Will there be impact? Certainly. Can the Holiday Inn in the future build a spite wall? Certainly, they can. But that might not be the best solution for them, and I think that when somebody really studies that, they will come up with a -- that site is so valuable that the views facing northwest and southeast are so great that they wouldn't do that. But what they will probably want to do is again turn their skinny side to our L-shape, which is the farthest point. And that's where the logic kind of comes, like a 90-degree angle and has the 45 come out in the middle. That's kind of how we have thought -- Commissioner Sarnoff And you'll make sure that you provide your services to the purchaser of the Holiday Inn. Mr. Karp: God willing, they should call me. Commissioner Sarnoff All right. Let's get to your ingress and -- egress and ingress. You have two points of entry, is that correct, for cars? Ms. Dougherty: On 3rd and 4th, right? Mr. Karp: The point at 4th is solely as access out, one way out. The point -- we have nothing on Biscayne, obviously, vehicular. We have all the vehicular on 3rd. Commissioner Sarnoff No. I'm looking -- stick with me on A-101 so we're on the same page. Mr. Karp: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff Where are my points of ingress -- how many points of ingress and egress do I have? Mr. Karp: You have on 3rd for the main entrance, and then you also have the service on 3rd towards the left; and then you have egress on 3rd and on 4th. It's 4th, right, Jennifer? Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff So you want to give her the mike? Mr. Karp: That's our loading area, all inside, all hidden; and then there is the inside drop-off the big loop, which brings you in and/or ramps you up to the parking; and also an opportunity right here to egress out onto 4th. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. So, essentially, you have one point of entry, one point of egress for the residents? Mr. Karp: I have two. They can egress here or they can egress here. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay, so one point of entry and two points of egress? City ofMiami Page 41 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Karp: Yes, for the residents. Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff And you have 1,557 units, ifI heard correctly? Mr. Karp: Yes, approximately. Commissioner Sarnoff And you have 700, what we would call, parking spaces? And you achieve 1,395? Mr. Karp: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff You achieve 1,395 through an elevator system? Mr. Karp: No. Through a lift system. Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff Lift system. Mr. Karp: Yes. What we have done is we have met with your staff and staff felt strongly that -- because, originally, we had more place of parking that we want to minimize the volume of the parking. So while going through the process, we reduced the volume by reducing the height of the parking garage by implementing valet, tandem, and lifts. We have the ramps, and so it's not an elevator system, but it creates an opportunity to just lift the car one; and that gives us a higher parking garage space. Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff But to get your 1,395 spaces, essentially, you have 700 plus spaces which utilize a lift. You're parking -- Mr. Karp: Plus or minus. Commissioner Sarnoff -- one car below -- Mr. Karp: Yeah, plus or minus. Commissioner Sarnoff -- and one car above through a mechanical device, through a valet that pushes a button that lifts the car up? Mr. Karp: Yes. Approximately correct, yes. Commissioner Sarnoff Have you ever just thought or computed what it would take, on any given night or any given morning, for the people -- how long they'll have to wait, queue in line to get their cars? Mr. Karp: Yeah, we have calculated that. And actually, what we've implemented is what, you know, some smart people would say it's a smart system in the buildings. And we use it in other buildings; I don't know how smart it is, but it is very efficient in a sense that if you are proposing to use the Metrorail, then you obviously don't go to the garage. But obviously, if you're Kobi Karp and you want to go and take your car to go back to Hollywood, which is going north, then you call them and they bring your car, and then your car is ready for you to pick up. And that's the kind of routine that you do. It's the same as -- you know it takes you `X" amount of time to go down an elevator when you live in a condominium or to get your delivery food from, you know, P.F. Chang down the street. So you systemize it into your system, and you know how much time it's going to take them to bring your car. Commissioner Sarnoff But if you're Marc Sarnoff and you always forget to call ahead? City ofMiami Page 42 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Karp: Yes. Then we can -- Commissioner Sarnoff Just curious. Mr. Karp: -- we have a timer for you, Marc, and -- Commissioner Sarnoff How long would that take? Mr. Karp: We can do it automatically for you, yes. And it presets automatically. Commissioner Sarnoff But if you forget, have you estimated how long -- Mr. Karp: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff -- it would take? Mr. Karp: Yes. We estimate it to be 10 to 15 minutes. Commissioner Sarnoff And that would during -- Mr. Karp: Off the top of my head. Commissioner Sarnoff And is that -- what time of day are you estimating 10 or 15 minutes? Mr. Karp: Again, everybody -- Commissioner Sarnoff High -use time? Mr. Karp: -- looks at the high -use time. High -use time means when do people get up and go to work and go to the gym and go to school; and that time starts at the quiet time at 6 o'clock and peaks off at about 7 to 7:45 and slows down at about 9 a.m. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. And -- Mr. Karp: So it's a three-hour period, about. Commissioner Sarnoff -- how many people do you think will own a car in these particular units? Mr. Karp: Based on our current statics -- you know, we have buildings, whether it's in Miami Beach or Sunny Isles Beach, which arguably do not have the public transportation that we have in downtown Miami or the sophistication, about 50 percent to 70 percent have where they occupy the building, they occupy the unit; so usually 50 to 70 percent of the parking garage is empty at the peak time, of which is the winter season, let's say. Commissioner Sarnoff But your experience is -- let's just use your 1,500 -- let's just round it to 1,550 units, and let's imagine some day all these units are sold. Mr. Karp: God willing. Commissioner Sarnoff What do you think the number of units will have a car in there? How many you think? Mr. Karp: I would say, I think that you can certainly perceive 75 percent of it. I think you're City ofMiami Page 43 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 looking at 1,000 to 1,200 to 1,300. Commissioner Sarnoff So when people sit here or come and question the Commission, you don't anticipate each unit owner having a car? Mr. Karp: Based on our experience and our marketing research, which, you know, we believe it to be true, no, we do not believe that most folks would live here to own a car. Most folks would live here because they don't want to own a car because they want to use -- because they want to work downtown. They want to go down to the triple AAA (American Airlines Arena). They want to go down to Bayside. They want to go to the school. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, you -- Mr. Karp: I'm sorry. Commissioner Sarnoff -- said, Mr. Karp, a moment ago your experience, and I'd like to know what your experience is. Mr. Karp: I'm sorry. As an architect, only as an architect. Our experience has been building multifamily residential in South Florida for the past 20 years, which has been limited. Commissioner Sarnoff It's your experience, in the past 20 years, that there's not a one-to-one ratio of units to cars? Mr. Karp: Yeah. It has not been. I'll give you an example. In the city ofMiami Beach, which arguably, does have parking strain in certain areas -- like Lucia and I worked even back in the 1990s on Cicos Towers. The ratio on that was .75 to .9, maybe 1.0 maximum on the parking ratio. So it was substantially less than the Code requirement, if you will, in the city ofMiami Beach of 1.5 parking spaces per unit. Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff And you don't think it's wise to have 1.5 parking spaces per unit? Mr. Karp: Don't get me wrong. When we started this project, Jennifer, I think we had -- yeah, we had up to 18 floors of parking in this design project. Commissioner Sarnoff And the City reduced them for you? Mr. Karp: It -- not -- I mean, it -- no. We worked together with the City. We worked through with staff, and we felt that -- Commissioner Sarnoff The City reduced them? Ms. Dougherty: If -- Commissioner Sarnoff Planning reduced them; right? Ms. Dougherty: You know, one of the things that we have talked in the last few days about is how we can address getting more parking, if that's what the Commission thought we should do. Imean -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well, here's my concern. And height does not concern me because I happen to think height -- I mean, I certainly was the one that approved -- was it called Bayside or Bayview? One Bay -- what's it called, One --? I don't think that's the name of it, but it certainly -- Ms. Dougherty: One Bayfront Plaza? City ofMiami Page 44 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Commissioner Sarnoff One Bayfront Plaza. So, obviously, height wasn't an issue. But if you remember, on One Bayfront Plaza, it had six points of entry. It had six ways of getting in and out of that building, and it equally had a Metromover. So you could at least, arguably, say to yourself the new Miami -- we know four percent ofMiamians use mass transit, but your folks, who are going to buy in your buildings, are going to be more educated, more savvy. We're going to increase that number to 12 percent, 15 percent, 20, hopefully. It still leaves an extraordinary number of units that are going to require, I think, a car. And I can't imagine a person spending - - do you have any idea what you're going to be spending on here, half a million, a million? Ms. Dougherty: That's probably low, given five years from now; but we can't really tell. Commissioner Sarnoff So a million dollars -- Ms. Dougherty: Um -hum. Commissioner Sarnoff -- let's say. Just -- we'll low -ball it; a million dollars. And they're not going to have a car, let alone a BMW (Bavarian Motor Works), a Mercedes, some high -end car; and you don't think each unit owner will have a car? Ms. Dougherty: Well, let's put it this way. Many people who go to Miami Beach seasonally rent a car, and there's no place to put it. Here, you do have a place to put it. You have plenty of garages in downtown Miami currently. But having said that, if you think or if Kobi thinks that we should increase the parking, we can do it in two ways: One is that we can have two additional levels of parking on the -- put in this property, and that would be about 240 additional parking spaces; or we could do the following. We could do one level of additional parking, which would give you 120 parking spaces, and take one level of liner uses off the ninth floor, and that would give you an additional 30 floors -- 30 parking spaces. So in other words, we have liner uses going all the way up our garage -- that's not open garage -- all the way up through to the ninth floor. If we took just the -- Commissioner Sarnoff Can you have somebody point that out to us? Ms. Dougherty: It's not clear on this, but these are actual live -work units that go all the way to the ninth floor. If we took one liner use off the ninth floor, which is hardly perceptible, we could get 30 additional parking spaces on that floor, so that would be 120, plus 30; that would give you a one-to-one ratio, at least. So if everybody had a car and they were all in there at the same time, you'd have one parking space per -- Commissioner Sarnoff Let me ask you this question. What if we're wrong? And I'm trying to be good to you. But what if we're wrong, and it turns out you have excess parking? Could you reconvert -- Ms. Dougherty: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff -- your liner use into live -work -- living condition? Mr. Karp: Yes, we could. Commissioner Sarnoff It still leaves me with the two -- you have one ingress and two egresses. Is there any way of improving that situation? Mr. Karp: We have, you know, worked it out with staff and discuss it. What I mean by that is, specifically, when we looked at other project [sic] which are existing, a la the Four Seasons, they have -- again, they have a drive -through, so what we tried to do is not only have a big City ofMiami Page 45 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 piazza inside, but also have the opportunity to exit because it's a one-way on 3rd and it's a one-way on 4th, so we -- everybody who has looked at it felt very, very comfortable with the stacking and with the circulation. So I mean, everybody -- it's -- yeah, we feel very comfortable with this. Ms. Dougherty: You know, and the other thing, too, is that I have experience living on Brickell Key, and I -- there's one way in and one way out, and there's three or four thousand residential units; I never had a problem getting on and off the island. I had a problem when I got to Brickell Key Bridge. I mean, the Brickell Bridge, but never had a time going on and off the island because people nowadays have a different -- they don't all leave at the same time. Some people work at home. Many people work at home now. Just -- you know, my daughter works at home, for example, so she's not going in and out at the same time as everybody else is doing anymore. So lifestyles are different. Traffic patterns are different than we knew it, you know, many years ago. So we hope that with the Metrorail -- I mean, that is what people want. They want people to not come from Pembroke -- Commissioner Sarnoff No. I understand -- Ms. Dougherty: Right. Okay. Commissioner Sarnoff -- that it is the City's policy of forcing people onto Metrorail, and I'm suggesting if you accomplish that, the average Miamian's four percent. If you triple, quadruple, quintuple that and you get 20 percent, you're still looking at, I don't know, 1,200 units that -- Ms. Dougherty: Well, we can provide more parking spaces, and I think your idea is good -- Commissioner Sarnoff But -- and maybe -- Ms. Dougherty: -- in that you can convert it back. Commissioner Sarnoff -- you have satisfied me with parking, but then my last issue with you is what I call queuing, people having difficulty getting out of a building, or creating a situation where they get into a building -- and the one thing I liked about One Bayside was it had six entrances, and you really have one entrance and two exits. Mr. Karp: Yeah. But again, just to reiterate, that's why we have, you know, this whole length right here. Commissioner Sarnoff For a queue? Mr. Karp: Coming out. Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff How many cars can you stack there? Mr. Karp: Well, this right here alone is 150 lineal feet, divide into 20 foot for car; so you got 5, 6, 7, 8 cars right here. Plus -- I'm sorry to interrupt. Well -- Unidentified Speaker: Go ahead. Ms. Dougherty: One of the things that the City Planning staff that we worked very hard with, they want less ingress and egress. They actually asked us to provide the least amount of interruptions to the pedestrian on the sidewalk, so that's why we have only -- that's why we only have one, two, three on 3rd Street. Commissioner Sarnoff It's -- City ofMiami Page 46 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Ms. Dougherty: If you had more and more people coming in, you'd have interruptions by cars to the pedestrian, and that's why they fry to discourage that. Commissioner Sarnoff Are you --? Orlando, you're there. Is that the policy of the City, is to create as few interruptions as possible? Orlando Toledo (Senior Director, City Manager's Office): Commissioner, yes, that is the intent. Ideally, we wantpedesfian traffic, and the least cuts that you have on the sidewalk, the better. Commissioner Sarnoff So you don't see a queuing problem here? Mr. Toledo: We believe not. We believe that the way the building was designed adds enough queuing that the building should be okay. Mr. Karp: And just to -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well -- I mean, the reason I'm having difficulty understanding this -- and I don't mean to be thick -- we've never built a building this size in Miami, so anybody that says, you know, Commissioner, based on, you know, Four Seasons, or something like that -- remember, the Four Seasons is only 60 percent or 70 percent of the size of this building, so you have no justification to say we believe this can happen. You're looking at two twin towers here, the size of which the City has never seen; the technology of which -- they actually put into the record that the geological soil samples will accept a building this size and a geo -- excuse me -- and then an engineering sample saying it can be built, so it's not like anybody is sitting here with any great experience and dearth of knowledge that this is going to work in Miami. Mr. Karp: But can I also just interject one thing? Because the idea about six entries and out, you know, it all depends also on how you count them because we do have the penefration on 4th. We do have the double penefration -- the double in and out on 3rd, which also can be converted in the same traffic study that they have done on that, where they can be reverted during certain times where there'll be more coming out than coming in. And also we have a similar to the other project, one, where we also have the speed ramp that brings you up to the fourth level where the majority -- Commissioner Sarnoff Speed ramp? Mr. Karp: Yeah. The ramp that takes you up to the parking level -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Mr. Karp: -- and allows you to stack up at that level. So you can actually pick up the cars at that level. And so to initiate your concern, what I'm -- you know, I can do is I can sit down and - - you can make it a condition. We can sit down and study the traffic analysis that they did there, but a lot of the similarities that they have there. Whether it's during rush hour to pick up the cars on the fourth level instead of only on the ground level; that during rush hour, where you have the exit to 4th and exit to 3rd, we can double it. We can turn it so you can have two exits onto -- Commissioner Sarnoff But let me do this -- Mr. Karp: -- coming out of the building. Commissioner Sarnoff -- then -- you know, because you're not building, as you said, for a couple of years. Let me move to continue this. I'd like to work with you a little closer on parking. I'd like to work with you a little closer on ingress and egress. Those are the issues that City ofMiami Page 47 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 I have concerns with. I'll be more than glad to meet with you or Orlando. Because I just don't think anybody that sits here and says, Commissioner, we have experience with this; we don't. We've never built anything this size, and that's why you proudly come before us; and just like Tibor Hollo proudly came before us and said this is the biggest Miami you will ever have. So while we don't take our egos and don't let our egos govern everything we want to do -- and I understand you want to be the biggest. I would be too. But, on the other hand, you know, the folks that are going to live right next to that building -- and if your building is successful, I just cannot believe the Holiday Inn is going to stay there. I have absolute problems believing frontage on Biscayne Boulevard is going to remain 150 feet. It just does not make sense. And I don't want to say I hope I'm wrong because I hope I'm right, because the more valuable Biscayne Boulevard becomes, the better for everyone else. So I'm going to move to continue this. I'd like to work with you a little closer on it, focus on only those issues, parking, ingress, egress. I'd like to talk to you about the potential for the next building built there. I promised myself one thing when I got on this Commission, and that was if we're going to put high-rises in the City, I didn't want to get into a Latitude situation. I've always passed by that on my way back from the MRC (Miami Riverside Center) building and thought to myself what ifI was one of the persons that bought that unit and I had to stare directly into a garage? I just don't -- I'd feel like I was cheated. So I'm going to move to continue. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Continue will be on the next -- Commissioner Sarnoff We can get together by then. Commissioner Regalado: -- PZ (Planning & Zoning) agenda. Commissioner Gonzalez: Madam City Attorney, you're recognized. Maria J. Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): Yes. I just wanted to clarify the record, that the Commissioner may meet with staff and discuss the issues -- Commissioner Sarnoff Fine. Ms. Chiaro: -- many of which are on the record here. There is not any direct meeting with the petitioner or anyone else appearing in front of the Commission. Commissioner Sarnoff I would be more than glad to meet with Orlando. Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. We have a motion to continue, and we have a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Commissioner Gonzalez: Motion carries. PZ.2 07-01023mu RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 5, 9, 13 AND 17 OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, FOR THE WAGNER SQUARE PHASES II AND III, A MIXED -USE PROJECT, TO BE LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1700 NORTHWEST 14TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA; TO CONSTRUCT TWO STRUCTURES WITH AN APPROXIMATE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 191 FEET AND 8 INCHES (13 STORIES) COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 48 RESIDENTIAL UNITS; APPROXIMATELY 286,933 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE; APPROXIMATELY 15,843 SQUARE FEET OF City ofMiami Page 48 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 COMMERCIAL SPACE; AND APPROXIMATELY 1,407 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. ITEM #4 - PAB - 01.16.08.pdf 07-01023mu PAB Reso.PDF 07-01023mu Outside Cover.PDF 07-01023mu Inside Cover & Table of Contents.PDF 07-01023mu I -A. Application for Major Use Special Permit.PDF 07-01023mu I-B. Disclosure of Ownership.PDF 07-01023mu I-C. Ownership Affidavit.PDF 07-01023mu I-D. Miscellaneous Documents.PDF 07-01023mu I-E. Directory of Project Principals.PDF 07-01023mu I-F. Project Data Sheet.PDF 07-01023mu I-G. City of Miami Zoning Atlas Map.PDF 07-01023mu II. Project Description.PDF 07-01023mu III. Supporting Documents.PDF 07-01023mu III.Tab 1.Minority Construction Employment Plan.PDF 07-01023mu III.Tab 2.Traffic Impact Analysis.PDF 07-01023mu III.Tab 3.Site Utility Study.PDF 07-01023mu III.Tab 4.Economic Impact Study.PDF 07-01023mu III.Tab 5.Survey of Property.PDF 07-01023mu III.Tab 6.Drawings Submitted.PDF 07-01023mu CC Projects in the Vicinity.pdf 07-01023mu CC Revised School Board Impact Analysis.pdf 07-01023mu CC Disclosure to Support or Withhold Objection.pdf 07-01023mu CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 07-01023mu CC Exhibit A.pdf 07-01023mu CC Exhibit B.pdf 07-01023mu CC Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 1700 NW 14th Avenue [Commissioner Angel Gonzalez - District 1] APPLICANT(S): A. Vicky Garcia -Toledo, Esquire, on behalf of Wagner Square, LLC & Wagner Square I, LLC FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with conditions*. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to City Commission on January 16, 2008 by a vote of 9-0. *See supporting documentation. PURPOSE: This will allow the development of the Wagner Square project. Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. City ofMiami Page 49 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado R-08-01 00 Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Let's take -- Lucia Dougherty: Thank you very much. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- PZ.1. It's a noncontroversial item. Is there anyone here --? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Chair, I'm -- that was PZ.1. I think we're moving to -- Commissioner Sarnoff 2. Ms. Thompson: -- P -- Commissioner Gonzalez: I'm sorry. PZ.2. Anyone here on PZ.2? All right, we see none. Yes. Go ahead. Roberto Lavernia (Chief of Land Development, Planning): PZ.2 is a Major Use Special Permit for the Wagner Square Phase II, to be located at approximately 700 [sic] Northwest 14th Sfreet; to construct an approximate 191 feet and 8 inches of height, 13-story mixed -use structure; to be comprised of 48 total multifamily residential units, 286,933 square feet of office space; and 15,843 square feet of commercial space; and approximately 1, 407 parking spaces. The recommendation of the Planning Department was approval with conditions, and the PAB (Planning Advisory Board) recommended approval with the same conditions that the Planning Department had that I'm going to put on the record condition 11 of the development order. Pursuant to design -related comments received by the Planning Director, the applicant shall meet the following conditions: a) include the northern facade architectural difference, rough or smooth stucco, corresponding with the color gray and white proposed along the parking garage wall to provide further visual distinction and break the massing of this surface; b) articulate the white contrasting panel by adding a two (UNINTELLIGIBLE) step to the surface of the garage wall. These fissures should shadow and additional depth along this wall; c) detail the depth of the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) fissure on this facade; and d) enhance the landscape buffer along the northwest corner of phase I and the southwest corner of phase III;; both corners along Northwest 15th Avenue with approximately 50 feet length of a multi -tiered landscape planting or frees, palms, bamboo, or similar materials. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Oh, I'm sorry. "[Later...]" Chair Sanchez: Okay. PZ.2. Vicky Garcia -Toledo: For the record, Vicky Garcia -Toledo, with the law firm ofBilzin Sumberg. And I'm appearing before you on Wagner Square. This is a project that is very dear to the City of Miami because this property was originally a brownsfield. And roughly, in 2000 -- 2001, the City decided that it would not only clean up this property, but have it developed for housing. And the City went out for an RFP (Request for Proposals); chose an applicant to develop the site, my client; and my client started to work immediately with the City. And through their join efforts, the City was able to obtain a BEDI (Brownsfield Economic Development Initiative) grant, which gave the City, I believe, over -- slightly over a million dollars to clean up the site. We are delighted to report that the City completed the entire cleanup. The property has been City ofMiami Page 50 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 certified by DERM (Department of Environmental Resources Management) and other agencies as being cleaned, and we have proceeded with the project. Phase I of the project is of right, is being built of right;; and we proceeded with it immediately because there were time constraints with that BEDI grant requiring the construction of the first phase, which is what you see on the furthest exhibit, and which has 56 residential units running percentage of -- from low-income to moderate -income to workforce units, consistent with the percentages that the City required of the developer. What is in front of you today is the two phases of the MUSP (Major Use Special Permit). Phase II, which is the commercial building -- and again, the commercial building is part of the requirement to satisfy the BEDI grant, which required that 189 new jobs be created as a result of that grant. This will be in the form of a medical office building, and we believe it will be a great source of generator for new jobs in the area. The third and final phase, of course, is an additional 48 units of residential, which percentages are consistent ftom low income to workforce housing with the agreement between the City and the developer. I know you're in a hurry; I'm going to fry to be very brief. The project was designed by Fullerton Diaz, and Frank Paredes is here to share with you the design of the building and the locations of the different elements of the building. Frank. Francisco Paredes: Good morning. For the record, Frank Paredes, with Fullerton Diaz Architects, 366 Altara Avenue. We're very excited to be working on this project. It's been a great project with the developer and with the City to actually be able to convert a project that was a brownsfield. Like Vicky mentioned, this was phase I I think some of the Commissioners may have gone to the groundbreaking already that we had last November. This is a four-story project that's not part of the MUSP, but we brought it in front of you so you can see, contextually, how it actually plays into the rest of the project. There's things that we did in this design that actually weren't required of us, but we thought that they were good ideas, like having these seven townhomes that actually line the surface parking lot beyond so that the parking wouldn't be seen. The one you see in the middle here is the 13-story medical office building, which practically conceals the 9-story parking garage that's behind it. If you can actually see here on this typical floor plan, the building is in the shape of an ` L, " the parking garage completes the square in the back. So you have nine levels of parking garage, 13 levels of medical office building. Phase I is the one that's shortly pulling permit and broke ground, and phase III were pocketed in here the last 48 units that were required. The project is -- has a surgical ambulatory center on the ground floor. That's one of the reasons why we have a large drop-off area, so that people coming into this could actually not have a problem with queuing and worried about ambulances and things like that that could actually get people -- a lot of the elderly people that will be coming to this facility, being an outpatient facility, gets picked up in these buses. These buses require bigger turning radiuses. And all of our entrance and egress is off of Northwest 17th Street. You can see in the elevations how phase II and phase III sort of line the entire project. In the far background, about a hundred feet off of the City is what's left of the parking garage, the nine -story parking garage that I mentioned before, so it's a backdrop. And here it is from the east. Again, the building is -- in the back is about a hundred feet from the -- We also have our materials sample board. Be willing to answer any questions you may have. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: And this -- Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: -- project comes to you with approvals from your staff and the PAB. Chair Sanchez: All right. Is there a motion? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. And I hope this is the last version and the final version of this building because I'm -- I've been working with this land ever since I got elected in 2001. First, we had to find the money; we had to fight to get the grant; then we had one project; then another project; a third project. This, I believe, is about the four [sic] or fifth project; so I hope this is City ofMiami Page 51 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 the final version. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Gonzalez: Having that in mind -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Sec -- Commissioner Gonzalez: -- I'm moving the project. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Second. Chair Sanchez: All right. There's a motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, second by Vice Chair Spence -Jones. The item -- before opening it up for discussion, it's a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. The public hearing is opened. Seeing no one, hearing no one, the public hearing is closed; coming back to the Commission. This is a resolution. The item is under discussion. Anyone wishing to discuss this item? Hearing no discussion, it's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay" Madam Clerk, PZ.2 has been approved -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: -- 4/0. PZ.3 07-00795zc ORDINANCE Second Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION WITH ATTACHMENT(S) AMENDING PAGE NO. 36, OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM "SD-16.2" SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN-PARK WEST COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO "SD-16.2" SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN-PARK WEST COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT WITH AN "SD-19" DESIGNATED F.A.R. OVERLAY DISTRICT, F.A.R. OF 4.6, FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 525 AND 533 NORTHWEST 2ND AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA; MAKING FINDINGS; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City ofMiami Page 52 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 07-00795zc Analysis.pdf 07-00795zc Zoning Map.pdf 07-00795zc Aerial Map.pdf 07-00795zc Application & Supporting Docs.pdf 07-00795zc ZB 07-30-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-00795zc ZB Reso.PDF 07-00795zc CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 07-00795zc Exhibit A.pdf 07-00795zc CC FR 10-25-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-00795zc CC FR 11-09-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-00795zc CC FR 12-13-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-00795zc CC FR 01-24-08 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-00795zc Disclosure to Support or Withhold Objection.pdf 07-00795zc CC SR Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 525 and 533 NW 2nd Avenue [Commissioner Michelle Spence -Jones - District 5] APPLICANT(S): Iris V. Escarra, Esquire, on behalf of Urbana Holdings, LLLP FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on July 30, 2007 by a vote of 5-2. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to SD-16.2 Southeast Overtown-Park West Commercial -Residential District with an SD-19 Designated F.A.R. Overlay District, F.A.R. of 4.6. Motion by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado 12975 Chair Sanchez: All right. Let's take up PZ.3. This will be the last item we'll take up before breaking for lunch. We will recess the minute -- the meeting, and we will be back at 2 o'clock for the remaining items on the agenda. All right. While you set up, we'll have the Administration give their recommendation. Roberto Lavernia (Chief of Land Development): Thank you. For the record, Roberto Lavernia, with the Planning Department again. This is second reading of a request for a zoning atlas address change in order to add SD-19 designated FAR (floor/area ratio) overlay district of 4.6. Planning Department recommend original denial, and the Zoning Board recommend approval. This passed on first reading on January 24, and this is second reading. Thank you. Lucia Dougherty: Good afternoon. Iris Escarra and Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. Here today with the principal, Jorge Arrevalo, as well as the architect, Diego Garcia. This is a request for an SD-19 to appoint -- to allow for a .6 increase in FAR for a condo office building in the Southeast Overtown/Park West redevelopment area. It's located -- but it's located immediately south of the Crosswinds project, which you see here depicted; and along the side of it, there is the City Police Department, a office building for the -- City ofMiami Page 53 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Transit. Ms. Dougherty: Excuse me? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Transit office? Ms. Dougherty: -- transit office building to state office buildings, the parking garages for the Metrorail. And again, the Wilkie Ferguson new -- Wilkie Ferguson courthouse (INAUDIBLE) -- have two new Dade County office buildings, and then you have the Dade County office building at the end. So this -- in this rendering, you'll see the County Hall, and on this rendering, you also see -- or this actual photo, context photo, you see County Hall. So, again, it is a condo office building. This is the first condo office building -- actually, the first condo office building -- you granted this SD-19 overlay in 2006 for this first condo office building, and it is a hundred percent sold; and it is a hundred percent sold because you have all these new office -- state office buildings surrounding this property, which is a good thing. Because what's happened is that you have now created a market for people to actually have offices, do business with the state and city and federal government office buildings which are around here. Commissioner Gonzalez: That is great. Ms. Dougherty: Then the other -- what we're requesting is the SD-19 overlay for the second building, which will give us the same FAR as the first one; and the reason for this is so that we can do a Class A office building. In other words, if you were to have a residential project, many of the amenity things are not included in FAR; but that's not so for an office building. For example, your conference rooms, your -- Iris Escarra: Gyms. Ms. Dougherty: -- gyms, all of those things that make it a much better office building or a much better condominium actually are included in an office building and excluded if you're a residential project. You know, the differences between Miami Beach condominiums, by the way, and the ones in Miami, the ones in Miami actually have a more commodious -- typically, a much more commodious lobbies and common areas because you don't include them, unlike in Miami Beach. If you go to Miami Beach, they're -- if you go to their condominium, usually they're very small because everything is included. And what we're asking for in this case is to allow for a Class A office building in your Overtown/Park West redevelopment area. We have 62 percent of the second building under contract, so -- and again, this is your first building built from scratch in the City ofMiami. So we would urge your approval. Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Ms. Dougherty: And the Zoning Board did recommend approval. Chair Sanchez: All right. This is PZ 3. Commissioner Gonzalez: Let's get it built. Chair Sanchez: At this time -- that concludes your presentation? Ms. Dougherty: Yes, sir. Chair Sanchez: All right. Is there anyone here to speak on this item? Is there any opposition to this item or anyone in favor to the -- to this item? Okay. Is there a motion? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So moved. City ofMiami Page 54 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: There's a motion. Is there a second? Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll second the motion. Chair Sanchez: There's a motion and a second for the purpose of discussion. Before we open it up for discussion, once again, I want to open up the public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Seeing no one, the public hearing is closed; coming back to the Commission for a discussion. Commission -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones, you're recognized for the record on PZ.3. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Sure. The only thing that I really want to say, again, Lucia, you've really put a lot of the great points on the record already. I can say, though, that these -- this -- the developers are shining examples of what community citizens or corporate partners should be. I believe in the first original item that came in front of us, we've add -- we asked for them to assist with some sort of relocation program, not for this particular site, but for the site adjoining it; and they did an outstanding job with making sure that the residents next to the building were relocated properly in the area, which I want to at least be able to acknowledge them for really going above and beyond the call of duty to do that. Also, I just want to -- one of the things that was added originally, Lucia, was to continue to get them -- or at least to encourage them to make sure that local residents in the areas were provided jobs, the labor or base jobs, in the building, not only after the building is completed, but during the construction. And I think that that was one -- the one area that I need for you guys to continue to work on. That has not really been happening in a strong kind of way. I'd like to make sure that that happens as we move forward. And the other question, well, for me, as the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) Chair, what this really does to have a building or buildings like this coming to the area only does great things for the TIF (Tax Increment Fund) in the area, which is awesome, so that we can continue to support additional projects happening in the Overtown area, additional projects happening in Park West; so having them is definitely an asset. The main reason why I would support -- or I at least support it, a project of this height going into the overall area was because it was office condos. And I know that there was a big feeling or a fear constantly in Overtown with people coming from the outside, from a residential standpoint, or large condos coming into the area. This will allow us at least to have a lot of admini -- small -- smaller based type jobs that the local residents can actually participate in. So I just want to commend the builder, the developer, and your team, Lucia, for sticking to what you said you would do. I just want to make sure that the local laborer part of it has not been happening the way that it should. Ms. Dougherty: We will look into that. And we are very proud of the way that the relocation effort took place. We actually -- they purchased this property a year ago. They hired Urgent Care, Inc., which did a fantastic job. They gave three months deposits -- they gave their deposits back, three months rent for -- they found -- they did moving expenses. They found homes. They actually moved people, so -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yeah. They were great. And I just wanted to commend you. Just make sure that you work on the laborer part of it. That's the only thing that we need to -- Ms. Dougherty: Yes. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- make sure the local people from Overtown can work in the construction jobs. Ms. Dougherty: Yes, ma'am. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you. So I think we have -- City ofMiami Page 55 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Is this an ordinance or --? Read the ordinance, please. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by Interim City Attorney Maria J. Chiaro. Commissioner Gonzalez: Roll call. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call. A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above. Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 4/0. Chair Sanchez: All right. Ms. Escarra: Thank you very much. Chair Sanchez: Ladies and gentlemen, the City of Miami Commission meeting stands in recess. We will be back at 2 o'clock. The first item on the agenda at 2 o'clock is PZ.6 and PZ.7. PZ.4 07-01024Iu ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, PURSUANT TO SMALL SCALE AMENDMENT PROCEDURES SUBJECT TO §163.3187, FLORIDA STATUTES, BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF 1.7± ACRES OF REAL PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 70 NORTHWEST 36TH COURT, 64-66 NORTHWEST 36TH COURT, 3665-69-71-73 NORTHWEST FLAGLER TERRACE, 3670-72 NORTHWEST 1ST STREET, AND 58 NORTHWEST 36TH COURT, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL"; MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Item #4 PAB - 07-010241u - .pdf 07-010241u PAB Reso.pdf 07-010241u CC Analysis.pdf 07-010241u CC Application & Supporting Documents.pdf 07-010241u School Board Analysis.pdf 07-010241u CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 07-010241u & 07-01024zc CC Exhibit A.pdf 07-010241u CC FR 01-24-08 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-010241u & 07-01024zc Disclosure to Support or Withhold Objection.PDF 07-010241u CC FR 02-28-08 Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 70 NW 36th Court, 64-66 NW 36th Court, 3665-69-71-73 NW Flagler Terrace, 3670-72 NW 1st Street, and 58 NW 36th Court [Commissioner Tomas Regalado - District 4] APPLICANT(S): Ben Fernandez, Esquire, on behalf of Jorge Cruz Gomez and Maria D. Cabrera, The Eldy Maza Pick Revocable Living Trust, The Amended and Restated Elizabeth Anton-LaRossa Revocable Trust, Lago Capital Investments, Inc. City ofMiami Page 56 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended denial to City Commission on October 3, 2007 by a vote of 8-1. See companion File ID 07-01024zc. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to Restricted Commercial. WITHDRAWN A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez , and was passed unanimously, with Vice Chair Spence -Jones absent, to withdraw item PZ.4. Chair Sanchez: Ben Fernandez, you want to be recognized for the record? Ben Fernandez: Mr. Chair, thank you. Members of the Board, Ben Fernandez, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, with Bercow Radell & Fernandez. I would like to withdraw items PZ.4 and PZ.5. These are in Commissioner Regalado's district. At this time the contractual negotiations between the contract purchaser and the sellers have sort of fallen apart, and we're not prepared to proceed. We'd like to withdraw this without any prejudice so that we can refile in the future, if we can bring it back. Chair Sanchez: Counsel, so you are requesting a withdrawal? Mr. Fernandez: That's correct. Chair Sanchez: All right. Is there a motion? Commissioner Regalado: I move to withdraw 4 and 5 of the PZ (Planning & Zoning) item. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chair Sanchez: All right. There's a motion by Commissioner Regalado, second by Commissioner Gonzalez to have the item withdrawn. All right. No further discussion on the item. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay" Motion carries. All right. Mr. Fernandez: Thank you. PZ.5 07-01024zc ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION WITH ATTACHMENT(S) AMENDING PAGE NO. 33, OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM "R-2" TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO "C-1" RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 58, 64, 66, 70 NORTHWEST 36TH COURT, 3665, 3669, 3671, 3673 NORTHWEST FLAGLER TERRACE AND 3670, 3672 NORTHWEST 1ST STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA; MAKING FINDINGS; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City ofMiami Page 57 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 07-01024zc ZB Analysis (OLD).PDF 07-01024zc ZB Analysis (NEW).PDF 07-01024zc Zoning Map.pdf 07-01024zc Aerial Map.pdf 07-01024zc Letter of Intent.PDF 07-01024zc Application & Supporting Docs.PDF 07-01024zc ZB 11-19-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-01024zc ZB Reso.PDF 07-01024zc CC Analysis.pdf 07-01024zc CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 07-010241u & 07-01024zc CC Exhibit A.pdf 07-01024zc CC FR 01-24-08 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-010241u & 07-01024zc Disclosure to Support or Withhold Objection.PDF 07-01024zc CC FR 02-28-08 Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 58, 64, 66, 70 NW 36th Court, 3665, 3669, 3671, 3673 NW Flagler Terrace and 3670, 3672 NW 1st Street [Commissioner Tomas Regalado - District 4] APPLICANT(S): Ben Fernandez, Esquire, on behalf of Jorge Cruz Gomez and Maria D. Cabrera, The Eldy Maza Pick Revocable Living Trust, The Amended and Restated Elizabeth Anton-LaRossa Revocable Trust, Lago Capital Investments, Inc. FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. ZONING BOARD: Recommended denial to City Commission on November 19, 2007 by a vote of 5-0. See companion File ID 07-010241u. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to C-1 Restricted Commercial. The applicant has proffered a covenant for these properties. WITHDRAWN A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez , and was passed unanimously, with Vice Chair Spence -Jones absent, to withdraw item PZ.5. Note for the Record: Please refer to item PZ.4 for minutes referencing item PZ.5. PZ.6 07-003911u ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, PURSUANT TO SMALL SCALE AMENDMENT PROCEDURES, SUBJECT TO §163.3187, FLORIDA STATUTES, BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF 0.40± ACRES OF REAL PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1252, 1262 AND 1272 SOUTHWEST 21ST TERRACE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL"; MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City ofMiami Page 58 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 07-003911u - PAB Supporting Documentation.pdf 07-003911u CC Land Use Map.pdf 07-003911u Aerial Map.pdf 07-003911u PAB Reso.PDF 07-003911u CC Application Supporting Documents - OLD.pdf 07-003911u CC Legislation (Version 2) - OLD.pdf 07-003911u & 07-00391zc Exhibit A.pdf 07-003911u CC FR 10-25-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-003911u Legislation (Version 2) - NEW.PDF 07-003911u CC FR 12-13-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-003911u & 07-00391zc Disclosure to Support or Withhold Objection.pdf 07-003911u CC FR 01-24-08 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-003911u-Submittal-Photog raph. pdf 07-003911u-Submittal-Petition Signatures.pdf 07-003911u-Submittal-Declaration of Restrictive Covenants.pdf 07-003911u CC Application & Supporting Docs - UPDATED.pdf 07-003911u CC FR 02-28-08 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-003911u CC FR 03-27-08 Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 1252, 1262 and 1272 SW 21st Terrace [Commissioner Joe Sanchez - District 3] APPLICANT(S): Ben Fernandez, Esquire, on behalf of Ive Group One, LC FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended denial to City Commission on April 4, 2007 by a vote of 9-0. See companion File ID 07-00391zc. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to Restricted Commercial. CONTINUED A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Gonzalez absent, to continue item PZ.6 to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for March 27, 2008. Chair Sanchez: All right. Okay. PZ.6 and PZ. 7, land use change and zoning change. Ben Fernandez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to be recognized for a moment. Chair Sanchez: Yes, sir. You're -- Mr. Fernandez: Ben Fernandez, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, here on behalf of PZ.6 and 7. We have had one meeting with the neighborhood on this matter. I have recently received phone calls from other residents that were not able to attend our meeting on February 7 that would like to discuss this application with us, and we believe that we can obtain some support from the application -- additional support for the application, and we would ask that you continue this item to your next meeting to give us some additional time to complete our outreach with the neighborhood. Chair Sanchez: All right. Before we do that, Madam Clerk, what was the first -- the first continuance was asked by who? Was it by the applicant or was it by this Commission or me, as a district Commissioner? City ofMiami Page 59 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry. Actually, I don't have it here with me. I'd have to check the file. Maybe if Teresita is here she could probably tell us. But -- Chair Sanchez: I can't recall. I believe -- it was me who requested --? Zulema Rivero: Look at the plans in that resolution. Chair Sanchez: Okay. So you're -- Ms. Rivero: We wanted to look at the plans (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- Ms. Thompson: Can we come on the mike, please? Ms Rivero: Oh, I'm sorry. Chair Sanchez: It's okay. All right. So it was I who called for the continuance? Ms. Rivero: Correct. Chair Sanchez: All right. Ms. Rivero: For you to look at the plans further and then give us an opportunity for us to have at least one meeting with the -- Chair Sanchez: So this -- Ms. Rivero: -- neighbors. Chair Sanchez: -- would be your -- Ms. Thompson: And -- Chair Sanchez: -- first continuance. Mr. Fernandez: That's correct. Chair Sanchez: All right. Is there a motion to continue the item? Ms. Thompson: I need a name. Ms. Rivero: My name is Zulema Rivero, and I'm at 2121 Southwest 13th Avenue. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Is there a motion to --? Commissioner Regalado: I would move for the Chairman to continue this item for the next -- Chair Sanchez: Yes, both item, PZ. 6 and PZ.7. All right. There's a motion by Commissioner Regalado. Is there -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Second. Chair Sanchez: -- a second? Second by Commissioner -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones. No City ofMiami Page 60 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 discussion on the item. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Thank you. The item has been -- Mr. Fernandez: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: -- continued. Maybe it'll give you more opportunity to sit down with the residents and review the comp. plan. Mr. Fernandez: Yes. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Maria J. Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): And this will be at the next PZ (Planning & Zoning) meeting? Chair Sanchez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Chiaro: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Automatically rolling over to the next PZ agenda. PZ.7 07-00391zc ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION WITH ATTACHMENT(S) AMENDING PAGE NO. 38, OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM "R-1" SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH AN "SD-12" BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICT TO "C-1" RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1252, 1262 AND 1272 SOUTHWEST 21ST TERRACE, MIAMI, FLORIDA; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 07-00391zc ZB Analysis.PDF 07-00391zc ZB Zoning Map.pdf 07-00391zc Aerial Map.pdf 07-00391zc ZB Application & Supporting Docs.PDF 07-00391zc ZB 05-14-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-00391zc CC Analysis.PDF 07-00391zc ZB Reso.PDF 07-00391zc CC Zoning Map.pdf 07-00391zc CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 07-003911u & 07-00391zc Exhibit A.pdf 07-00391zc CC FR 10-25-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-00391zc CC FR 12-13-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-003911u & 07-00391zc Disclosure to Support or Withhold Objection.pdf 07-00391zc CC FR 01-24-08 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-00391zc CC Application & Supporting Docs - UPDATED.pdf 07-00391zc CC FR 02-28-08 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-00391zc CC FR 03-27-08 Fact Sheet.pdf City ofMiami Page 61 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 LOCATION: Approximately 1252, 1262 and 1272 SW 21st Terrace [Commissioner Joe Sanchez - District 3] APPLICANT(S): Ben Fernandez, Esquire, on behalf of Ive Group One, LC FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. ZONING BOARD: Recommended denial to City Commission on May 14, 2007 by a vote of 9-0. See companion File ID 07-003911u. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to C-1 Restricted Commercial. The applicant has proffered a covenant for these properties. CONTINUED A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Gonzalez absent, to continue item PZ.7 to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for March 27, 2008. Note for the Record: Please refer to item PZ.6 for minutes referencing item PZ.7. PZ.8 07-01172x RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), DENYING OR GRANTING THE APPEAL, AFFIRMING OR REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD AND THEREBY DENYING OR GRANTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, UNDER CONDITIONAL PRINCIPAL USES OF C-2 LIBERAL COMMERCIAL (13), TO ALLOW HIRING HALLS, EMPLOYMENT OFFICES AND LABOR POOLS, SUBJECT TO ALL APPLICABLE CRITERIA, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1757 NORTHWEST 23RD STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA. 07-01172x Analysis.PDF 07-01172x Zoning Map.pdf 07-01172x Aerial Map.pdf 07-01172xApplication & Supporting Docs.PDF 07-01172x Plans.PDF 07-01172x ZB 10-29-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-01172x ZB Reso.PDF 07-01172xAppeal Letter.PDF 07-01172x CC Clarification of Parties Letter.pdf 07-01172x CC School Board Letter.pdf 07-01172x CC Legislation (Version 3).pdf 07-01172x CC Legislation (Version 4).pdf 07-01172x Exhibit A.pdf 07-01172x CC 02-28-08 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-01172x CC 03-27-08 Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 1757 NW 23rd Street [Commissioner Angel Gonzalez - District 1] City ofMiami Page 62 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 APPELLANT(S)/APPLICANT(S): Michael A. Gil, Esquire and Melissa Tapanes Llahues, Esquire, on behalf of KEA Investment, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial of the appeal and denial of the Special Exception. ZONING BOARD: Denied the Special Exception on October 29, 2007 by a vote of 5-4. PURPOSE: The approval of this appeal will allow an employment office in the C-2 Liberal Commercial zoning district. CONTINUED A motion was made by Commissioner Gonzalez , seconded by Commissioner Sarnoff and was passed unanimously, with Vice Chair Spence -Jones absent, to continue item PZ.8 to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for March 27, 2008. Chair Sanchez: All right. Before -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I would like to defer one of -- item in my district. Chair Sanchez: Okay. What item would that be, Commissioner? Commissioner Gonzalez: That's PZ.8. Chair Sanchez: PZ.8. Commissioner Gonzalez: I'd like to defer that. Chair Sanchez: All right. There's a motion to defer or continue? Commissioner Gonzalez: Continue. Chair Sanchez: Continue. There is a motion by Commissioner Gonzalez to continue -- Commissioner Gonzalez: To the next PZ (Planning & Zoning) meeting in March. Chair Sanchez: -- PZ.8 to the next regular scheduled PZ agenda. There's a -- do I need a second? Commissioner Sarnoff Second. Chair Sanchez: There's a second. No discussion on the item. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay" Motion carries. That item has been continued. PZ.9 07-013811u ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE City ofMiami Page 63 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, PURSUANT TO SMALL SCALE AMENDMENT PROCEDURES SUBJECT TO §163.3187, FLORIDA STATUTES, BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF 0.60± ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 329, 333, 335, 337 AND 346 NORTHEAST 58TH TERRACE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL; MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PAB - ITEM #2 - 07-013811u.pdf 07-013811u PAB Reso.PDF 07-01381 Iu School Impact Analysis.pdf 07-01381Iu CC Application Supporting Documents.pdf 07-013811u Legislation (Version 2).pdf 07-013811u & 07-01381zc Exhibit A.pdf 07-01381Iu CC FR 02-28-08 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-01381Iu CC FR 03-27-08 Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 329, 333, 335, 337, and 346 NE 58th Terrace [Commissioner Michelle Spence -Jones - District 5] APPLICANT(S): Marcelo Fernandes, Vice -President, on behalf of 64 Development Corp. FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended denial to City Commission on December 5, 2007 by a vote of 8-0. See companion File ID 07-01381zc. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to General Commercial. CONTINUED A motion was made by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez , and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Sarnoff absent, to continue item PZ.9 to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for March 27, 2008. Chair Sanchez: Before we go into the PZ (Planning & Zoning), Madam Attorney, could you read the process and procedures for PZ items into the record, followed by those that --? Yes, ma'am? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): I'm sorry, Chair. Because this young man came to me, there was an individual who came in and said they wanted to continue two PZ items as well. Chair Sanchez: Who's the individual? Ms. Thompson: He's right here. Chair Sanchez: Please stand up and be recognized, sir. Eduardo Fernandez: Hi. Chair Sanchez: Good morning. City ofMiami Page 64 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Fernandez: Eduardo Fernandez, the owner of the property. Chair Sanchez: Okay. What is the property? Which item? Mr. Fernandez: It's PZ.9 and 10, sir. Chair Sanchez: PZ.9 and 10? Mr. Fernandez: Yes, sir. Chair Sanchez: And you want it withdrawn or continued? Mr. Fernandez: Continued, sir. Chair Sanchez: You want it to continue. So, in other words, you don't want to hear it today? Mr. Fernandez: Correct. Chair Sanchez: You want to hear it at the next -- Mr. Fernandez: Yes, sir. Chair Sanchez: -- PZ agenda? All right. That's a valid request. Can I get a motion and a second? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So move. Chair Sanchez: He's the property owner. There's a motion by Vice -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Second. Move -- Chair Sanchez: -- Chair. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So move. Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Ms. Thompson: We need your -- Chair Sanchez: Need a second. Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll -- Chair Sanchez: Second by Commissioner Regalado. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- second. Ms. Thompson: Her mike. Chair Sanchez: Which mike? Ms. Thompson: Spence -Jones. Chair Sanchez: Oh. City ofMiami Page 65 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: She made the -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So move. Chair Sanchez: There's a motion to continue -- Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll second. Chair Sanchez: -- and it's second by Commissioner Gonzalez or Regalado. Everybody second it, okay. Commissioner Gonzalez: Either one. Chair Sanchez: We're not going to argue who second it. No discussion on the item. Sir, at your request, PZ.9 and PZ.10 have been continued -- Mr. Fernandez: Yes, sir. Chair Sanchez: -- to the next PZ agenda. Mr. Fernandez: Thank you very much. Chair Sanchez: All right. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Both items have been continued, sir. Thank you. Mr. Fernandez: Thank you very much. Chair Sanchez: Have a good one. See you at the next PZ Commission meeting. PZ.10 07-01381zc ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION WITH ATTACHMENT(S) AMENDING PAGE NO. 14, OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM "R-2" TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO "C-2" LIBERAL COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 329, 333, 335, 337, AND 346 NORTHEAST 58TH TERRACE, MIAMI, FLORIDA; MAKING FINDINGS; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. First Reading City ofMiami Page 66 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 07-01381 zc Analysis.PDF 07-01381 zc Zoning Map.pdf 07-01381 zc Aerial Map.pdf 07-01381zcApplication & Supporting Docs.PDF 07-01381zc ZB 01-14-08 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-01381zcZB Reso.pdf 07-01381zc CC Legislation (Version 2).pdf 07-013811u & 07-01381zc Exhibit A.pdf 07-01381zc CC FR 02-28-08 Fact Sheet.pdf 07-01381zc CC FR 03-27-08 Fact Sheet.pdf LOCATION: Approximately 329, 333, 335, 337, and 346 NE 58th Terrace [Commissioner Michelle Spence -Jones - District 5] APPLICANT(S): Marcelo Fernandes, Vice -President, on behalf of 64 Development Corp. FINDINGS: PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial. ZONING BOARD: Recommended denial to the City Commission on January 14, 2008 by a vote of 6-1. See companion File ID 07-013811u. PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to C-2 Liberal Commercial. CONTINUED A motion was made by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez , and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Sarnoff absent, to continue item PZ.10 to the Commission meeting currently scheduled for March 27, 2008. Note for the Record: Please refer to item PZ.9 for minutes referencing item PZ.10. PZ.11 04-01208 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), DENYING THE APPEAL BY MORNINGSIDE CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC. AND ROD ALONSO, RON STEBBINS, SCOTT CRAWFORD AND ELVIS CRUZ, AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD, THEREBY APPROVING THE CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION NO. 03-0309, ISSUED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR ON JULY 21, 2004, TO ALLOW NEW CONSTRUCTION, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AND SAFEGUARDS AS ARE PROVIDED HEREIN, LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 5101 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA. City ofMiami Page 67 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 04-01208 Legislation (Version 2).PDF 04-01208 Exhibit A.PDF 04-01208 Legislation (Version 3).PDF 04-01208 Exhibit A.PDF 04-01208 Zoning Map.pdf 04-01208 Aerial Map.pdf 04-01208 ZB Appeal Letter.PDF 04-01208 ZB 10-04-04 Reso.PDF 04-01208 Class II Appeal Letter.PDF 04-01208 Class II Final Decision.PDF 04-01208 Plans.PDF 04-01208 UDRB Reso.PDF 04-01208 Class II Referral.PDF 04-01208 CC 11-18-04 Fact Sheet.pdf 04-01208 CC 05-26-05 Fact Sheet.pdf 04-01208 CC 07-28-05 Fact Sheet.pdf 04-01208 CC 07-28-05 Fact Sheet.pdf 04-01208 ZB 02-26-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 04-01208 ZB 04-09-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 04-01208 ZB 05-21-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 04-01208 ZB 07-09-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 04-01208 ZB 07-09-07 Reso.PDF 04-01208 City Attorney Documents.pdf 04-01208 October 4, 2005 ZB Transcript.pdf 04-01208 CC 10-25-07 Legislation (Version 6).pdf 04-01208 CC 10-25-07 Legislation (Version 7).pdf 04-01208 CC 10-25-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 04-01208 CC 02-28-07 Fact Sheet.pdf 04-01208-Submittal-Correspondence-Arthur J. Marcus.pdf 04-01208-Submittal-Memo-Rafael Suarez-Rivas.pdf 04-01208-Submittal-Chronology. pdf 04-01208-Submittal-Correspondence-Susan E. Trench.pdf 04-01208-Submittal-PowerPoint Presentation -Elvis Cruz. pdf Motion by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be ADOPTED WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Gonzalez R-08-0101 Chair Sanchez: Okay. Are we ready for PZ.11 ? Maria J. Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): Yes. Chair Sanchez: Okay. We are ready for PZ.11. Ms. Chiaro: Mr. Chair, I would like to read a statement to the record since this is an appeal. And -- so I would like to advise the City Commission as to at least its background. The circuit court appellate division in this case reversed and remanded the prior City Commission decision of September 3, 1905 because the City Commission, in granting the neighbor's appeal -- and that is what you are considering today -- and denying the Class II Special Permit, did not make specific findings under Section 1305 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City ofMiami. This section, as amended, has been interpreted by the courts to require the City Commission and other City City ofMiami Page 68 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 boards to make decisions regarding special permits issued under the section to make specific findings of fact supported by competent substantial evidence. Based on the court's interpretation of Section 1305, the City Commission in making these decisions regarding special permits must determine whether the developer's project complies with the nine design review criteria set forth in Section 1305, and you have that in your backup material for this item. The City Commission needs to make these findings on the record after hearing arguments of counsel, considering the evidence and the testimony before you. You need to apply these design criteria findings in the Code and in your backup material in granting the permit for new consfruction or denying the permit or approving with conditions, modifications and safeguards. The amended Section 1305 applies because this special permit was filed in 2003 and it was modified in 2004. What you need to do in making your decision today, whichever way it goes, is to point out why you think the project for new consfruction at 5101 Biscayne Boulevard, the Class II Special Permit, meets the nine design review criteria set forth in the resolution. Conversely, if you, by majority vote, find it does not meet the design review criteria by specific reference to the criteria, you need to make that finding that it does not comply by reference. You would also make similar findings based on the criteria if you approved the project with conditions, stipulations, and safeguards. The issue you are hearing today is an appeal based only on the Zoning Board record. There is an issue on whether it is de novo or based on the record. The appellant and the appellee dispute whether this is a de novo hearing. The best position -- and this is what I advise you -- is to have a de novo hearing, that is that you have a full presentation, each side making such presentation to clarify so that we clarify the past practice. A line of cases holds that this is the best way to go and that this is a procedural amendment and it's effective immediately. We also think that this is -- this will assist the Commission if there is yet another appeal in sustaining your decision. As I discussed with the Chair, the amount given to each side will be equal time and then -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Ms. Chiaro: -- after the presentation by each case, including -- by each side, including the presentation with experts or with any other evidence that's to be presented, then you may take input from the public at the usual -- with the usual time constraints. Chair Sanchez: All right. Based on the advice from the City Attorney, this is a de novo -- this is a fresh, new, no history item that comes in front of this Commission. So we're going to establish the process right now. How much time are you going to need to make your presentation, and how much time are you going to need to make your appeal? Susan Trench: Your -- Shall I start? Susan Trench. I'm an attorney, 7335 Southwest 105 Terrace. Lucia Dougherty is here -- oh, just made it here. We are not going to put on a testimony de novo hearing because we absolutely object. We will make legal argument only and given that, we will make our argument in 15 minutes. Chair Sanchez: All right. So,15 minutes? Ms. Trench: Yes. Chair Sanchez: How much time are you going to need, sir? Michael Sasfre: Aside from the residents who may call -- the public who may come to speak -- Chair Sanchez: No, no, no. This is just presentation. Mr. Sasfre: -- my presentation -- Chair Sanchez: Sir, this is just your presentation. City ofMiami Page 69 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Sasfre: Understood. Chair Sanchez: I'm establishing the process here. Mr. Sasfre: Exactly, and I -- Chair Sanchez: Okay. Mr. Sastre: -- appreciate that. I anticipate that 15 minutes will be sufficient, with the caveat that since we are presenting an expert, that we'll be back and forth, that may run longer. We've got a five-minute PowerPoint that expect to also be within that parameter. Chair Sanchez: All right. Mr. Sasfre: It may go to 20 minutes. Chair Sanchez: All right. For the sake of harmony, all right, we're going to give each side 30 minutes, okay. The appellant goes first, then the original applicant in this case, which is the developer. Then the City staff will give the input as to what their recommendation is, then we'll have the public. How many will be speaking on this item? How many residents will be speaking on this item? Okay. Have you all registered with the City Clerk? So we're looking at about maybe five or six people. Two minutes to each speaker. Okay. Then it'll come back to the Commission; we'll allow the district Commissioner, and then this legislative body will deliberate. That's the process. I just want to be fair. I don't want to deny anybody due process on this. So at this time, the applicant is recognized. Mr. Sasfre: Thank you, Commissioner. My name is Michael Sasfre. I live in Morningside, and I'm also a pro bono attorney representing Morningside and some residents. I think it's helpful to recap some of the background so we understand how we got here today. Twice previously this exact same project came before the Commission; twice previously it was rejected. It went up on appeal. It did return for findings of fact since 1305.2 had not been strictly applied. That does not mean that the basis for the initial decision was overturned. It does not mean that there isn't a basis for the developer that may be valid. But it is significant that Commissioner Winton -- on two unanimous votes, this project was rejected for the primary, simple reason that it directly abuts Morningside, a residential -- an R-1 district. This is an approximate nine -story building. It's got only a ten foot setback. It does not have any surface parking buffer between the proposed building and the R-1 district. There is no -- let me repeat because that's one of our primary legal arguments -- there is no surface parking buffer, which is required pursuant to 1305.2(5). There's only that ten foot setback with the building. Additionally, we believe that the project violates 1305.2(1) and (2); that it does not respond to the neighborhood context, it does not create a transition in bulk and scale, and does not respond to the physical context of the surrounding environment. I think it's also worth calling to the Commission's attention the fact that three other projects just very similar to this one in the same area, one on 52nd Street at 5225, were rejected by the Commission; the 5301 and 5501 projects were also rejected by the Commission previously. Two of those were upheld on appeal. Initially, 53 and 55 were reversed for the exact same reason that happened in this case the first time around, there were not written findings. When 53 and 55 came back before the Commission, again, very similar posture to this case, they were again rejected, but this time the proper language was included in the order; ultimately, the appellate courts upheld it at that point because the order was properly tailored that second time. In this case, the same opportunity was presented right after the September 2005 hearing, and there's an e-mail (electronic) that did provide in an attachment, which reflects -- and mind you, that e-mail was not produced to us previously in litigation; it was not reviewed by the appellate courts. I just happened to luck upon it back in July of 2007 when we started to prepare for a Zoning Board hearing in this case and I looked at the file, and I saw that back in September of 2005, George Wysong sent an e-mail to Anel Rodriguez -- and I can't City ofMiami Page 70 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 remember the other individual, but it's in the record and -- that basically said we need to amend the order, we need to fix the order. That wasn't done. Frankly, I think that's why we're here today again, because the order was deficient in the first place. But let me -- before I get to the PowerPoint presentation and presentation by an expert, let me pinpoint exactly why this does not comply with 1305(2) nor does it apply -- comply with Section 907.3.2. Okay. We discussed already neighborhood context, the transition in bulk and scale. I know you all are familiar with those concepts generally. You probably heard it time and time again, but this is a prime example of why that is part of the Code because you've got a nine -story building, or approximately 90-foot building, that is, again, directly abutting the R-1 disfrict. It also fails to have the required surface buffer parking. That's not an option. That is an absolute requirement under 1305.2(5). There's no variance that's been applied for. There's no variance that's been requested, and I don't know how we can possibly get beyond that strict mandate requirement of 1305.2(5). Finally, 907.3.2 of the Code requires -- and it applies to this project -- it requires -- when you've got a commercial building that is directly abutting an R-1 district, once you get above 40 feet in height -- and mind you, this one's 90 feet in height -- you need an additional setback from the abutting R-1 property line of one foot for every two feet in height. So if you get up to -- this is going to be approximately 50 feet. Let's say it's only 40 feet, 40 feet higher above that initial 40 feet line, that's an additional 20 feet setback that needs to be between the building and the R-1 property. It's not here, period. There's a ten ---- all that's there is a ten foot buffer. It's not a surface parking buffer, as required, and this is just patently violative of 907.3.2, as well as the other provisions I previously cited. At this point, I would like to turn over the presentation to Elvis Cruz. He's going to do a PowerPoint presentation, most of which you may have seen before but some of which, I understand, is new and deals with the 53/55 as well. Thank you. Elvis Cruz: Commissioners, Elvis Cruz, 631 Northeast 57th Street. I'm going to walk you through, with pictures, a lot of whatAttorney Sasfre has just described. As per Section 2301, FAR and heights are a maximum, not an entitlement. Proposed buildings must also comply with Section 1305 of the Zoning Code. And here is the design review criteria of Section 1305. Respond to the physical contextual environment, taking into consideration urban form and respond to the neighborhood context and create a transition in bulk and scale. The proposed building fails to meet these criteria from three aspects. First, the width of the street. Biscayne is only a hundred feet wide at this point, which is relatively narrow for a commercial street. This is because Biscayne was never designed to be a commercial street, but was pieced together in the late 1920s by connecting a series of streets through residential single-family neighborhoods. This is why Biscayne curves and doglegs. Accordingly, the lots along Biscayne were originally platted for single-family homes and are therefore very shallow. This is why there are still 15 of the original single-family homes still standing on Biscayne Boulevard and why the lot in question is only 127 to 135 feet deep. So what is the proper scale for a hundred -foot -wide commercial street like Biscayne Boulevard? Here is the Miami -Dade County Planning and Zoning Department's Urban Design Manual. On page 14, it shows the preferred scale as having three-story buildings. I quote, "In this preferred example, the ratio is slightly less than 1 to 3. Human scale is achieved by a tight section including landscape and three-story buildings." Here are some illustrations from the same manual. They show two- and three-story buildings as examples of proper scale along a commercial corridor. The second aspect, the physical contextual environment taking into consideration the urban form of Biscayne Boulevard, and here is Biscayne Boulevard's context. From 48th Street where the wide median ends northward to the City limits at 87th Street is a distance of 2.48 miles. And in that distance there are only 14 buildings higher than two stories. Over 95 percent of the properties are two stories or less, including the MiMo (Miami Modern) district, Miami's first commercial historic district. And while this application came in before the disfrict was created, this location is still within the disfrict and the proposed building would be inappropriate and harmful to the MiMo district. There are only three buildings in that 2.48 mile -long stretch that will be as tall as the proposed building, the closest one, seven blocks away, was built illegally in 1973 in that it did not have enough land area, which was discovered after it was built; and so the developer had to buy the house behind it to receive a certificate of occupancy. Therefore, this building is not a valid City ofMiami Page 71 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 example of existing scale, but it does show what will result if this building is allowed. The white wall you see on the right is 95 feet high, similar to the heights proposed. Look at how out of scale the building is to the house behind it. Here is the City ofMiami Planning Department's publication for the Biscayne Boulevard charrette. Commissioner Winton outlined the City's goals. The plan will establish standards that emphasize a human -scaled, pedestrian friendly boulevard that promotes compatible development to respond to the context of the boulevard and its immediate surrounding neighborhoods. This same publication has seven photographs and drawings of examples ofgood urban design and proper human scale for Biscayne Boulevard. All seven photographs depict two- and three-story buildings as examples ofgood design and proper scale. Here is the City ofMiami Planning Department's Upper Eastside master plan, a three-year effort which began on March 28, 1996, and which recommends a height limit of only 30 feet on parts of Biscayne. The third aspect deals with responding to the neighborhood context. The neighborhood abutting the proposed sites, Morningside, is zoned R-1; has been there for over 60 years and is a thriving integral part ofMiami history and economy. Because the submitted plans did not show the neighborhood context, here is an elevation of the building with a single story, single-family home drawn in. You can see the design is not only out of scale; there is no transition in bulk and scale whatsoever, in direct violation of the design review criteria. Attorney Sastre mentioned 907.3.2. This would require a setback -- vertically, you see the red line drawn there. That line cuts through the building so this would not comply with 907.3.2. Unidentified Speaker: You said 907? Mr. Cruz: 907.3.2, yes. The SD-9 setback, which was enacted after this application, would require a 45-degree setback. The building would not comply with that also. Also, as proven by Florida case law, 35 feet is an accepted proper scale for buildings adjacent to single-family homes. From the Fifth DCA (District Court ofAppeals), Battaglia Properties versus Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission, the 35-foot height requirement appears to be reasonably related to the stated policies of both Orange County and Maitland to preserve the residential nature of the area. Lastly, this continuing pattern of high-rise development along Biscayne will have an adverse effect on the area. Biscayne is already beyond capacity. Here is Florida DOT's (Department of Transportation's) map showing the Biscayne corridor. The red color -coding you see means it has a grade of "F, " just like on a school report card. In summary, please note that none of these arguments are our opinions. They are objective, impartial standards set by neutral third parties. This substantial competent evidence shows 35 feet to be the proper scale for buildings at this location. In closing, we ask you to apply the same ruling as the Commission did at 5301 and 5501 Biscayne and deny our appeal and approve the buildings - - the building on the condition that it be no taller than 35 feet. Commissioner Sarnoff Say again what you want. Chair Sanchez: Say it again. Mr. Sastre: What happened -- ifI may interrupt -- on 53 and 55, the appeal was actually denied with conditions. The conditions were that the project not be greater than 35 feet in height, and the specific findings of fact, which were upheld on appeal again, that -- were that the Commission found that the project did not adequately respond to the physical environment, did not adequately respond to the neighborhood context, and did not adequately create a transition in bulk and scale. So I know it sounds awkward -- Chair Sanchez: Wait, whoa, whoa. Mr. Sastre: -- but -- Chair Sanchez: Let me just clarify 'cause I -- now I'm a little confused. Okay. City ofMiami Page 72 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Cruz: Well -- Chair Sanchez: First of all, you made arguments that it didn't meet the 40-degree setback and then, all of a sudden, now you want us to approve the project, but limit it to 35 feet. Mr. Sasfre: Well -- Mr. Cruz: Correct. Commissioner, ifI may. That is exactly what happened when it came -- when the other two projects came before you. I think the City Attorney is familiar with the case, and she can guide you through the process, if need be. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Mr. Sastre: I think there was a concern that if it was rejected outright, without some conditions in there, that that could be problematic on appeal, so what happened was it was approved but the limitations -- it was found to be out of context, out of scale, and there were limitations inserted that it should be no higher than 35 feet. I think that's an alternative. I also think there's an alternative just to deny it outright because I do not believe it complies at all with 907.3.2 -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Let -- Mr. Sasfre: -- or the other provisions. Chair Sanchez: -- me just get some clarification on this 'cause you made an argument that based on the County zoning laws, it's not appropriate. Mr. Cruz: Correct. Mr. Sasfre: Yeah. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Mr. Sasfre: I'm actually -- Elvis, I'm going to ask that the ruling be -- that it's denied outright, but that we have specific factual findings. Chair Sanchez: But I -- see, I'm a little confused, counsel, because basically you're making arguments to a project on substantial -- I don't know if it's evidence, but you're making arguments as to some of the elements and then you're saying but it's okay, but just limit -- Mr. Sasfre: No, no, no. Chair Sanchez: -- to 35 feet. Mr. Sasfre: I'm sorry. Let me back up and refract that because it's going to be easier to do it this way. Even though that's what was upheld in 53, 55, I think we just proceed -- I would ask that the appeal be granted on the basis that it does not -- our appeal be granted on the basis that it does not -- Chair Sanchez: So the only issue you have here is the 35 feet? You want the project approved, but the limit is 35 feet? That's -- the whole issue here for you is the 35 feet? Mr. Cruz: Yes. Mr. Sastre: Well, that's -- no. That's -- I think that -- City ofMiami Page 73 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: That it does not exceed 35 feet. Mr. Sasfre: No. I mean, I agree that's what is desirable, but I'm here to make legal -- direct legal and factual arguments. And I think we can work on the order with the City because that's what happened last time is that the order got messed up. The language of the order got messed up. Chair Sanchez: I'm confused. All right. I don't know. I'm a bit confused right now. I'll get it. Just keep on going 'cause I -- Mr. Sasfre: Okay. Well, I mean, ultimately, I think I'm just going to ask that the appeal be granted and that we enter -- that specific findings of fact are entered as to why it does not comply with -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Mr. Sasfre: -- either 1305 provisions or the 907.3.2. Before I call -- Mr. Cruz: May lfinish? Mr. Sasfre: Oh, I'm sorry. I apologize. Mr. Cruz: Okay. Commissioners, today is the 54th time that the Morningside neighborhood has come to City Hall to fight high-rises. At this time I'm asking those who are here in support of our efforts to please stand and be recognized. You have a number of neighbors here. I'd like you to recognize them. Please protect our neighborhoods. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Commissioner Sarnoff Elvis, do you want to restate what you want us to do? Mr. Cruz: Well, as the client, I would ask my attorney to -- Commissioner Sarnoff Speak through your lawyer. Mr. Cruz: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Got you. Mr. Cruz: Shall have a sidebar with him first? Commissioner Sarnoff However you want to handle it. I'd like to hear one emoted -- Mr. Cruz: Gotcha. I understand. Commissioner Sarnoff -- one emotion. Mr. Cruz: Let me have a sidebar with him while our expert witness comes up. Chair Sanchez: All right. Expert witness. Okay. Sir, good afternoon. Welcome to City Hall. State your name and address for the record, and then present your -- Arthur Marcus: Yes, Commissioners. City ofMiami Page 74 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: -- expert testimony. Mr. Marcus: My name is Arthur Marcus. I'm an architect, 1450 Lincoln Road, Miami Beach, Florida. Commissioners, as a professional architect for over 30 years with a far-ranging practice encompassing all types of building and urban design, I'm supporting the appeal by the Morningside Civic Association of the City ofMiami's decision to permit the residential tower project proposed to be constructed at 5101 Biscayne Boulevard. I've worked diligently for many years in Miami Beach not only as an architect but as a citizen activist and a member and chairman of the Miami Beach Design Review Board and Historic Preservation Boards, dealing repeatedly with this issue of ensuring that new buildings in historic neighborhoods fit into the existing architectural context. I was also part of the team behind the Save Miami Beach movement, educating the public about rational development in South Beach. In that campaign we argued that overdevelopment is fruly detrimental to a community's health and well-being. Through my involvement with numerous City committees, we have learned in Miami Beach that critical issues such as building height, building massing, open space between buildings, contextual scale and the ability to see the sky matter deeply to our residents and can have long -ranging effect upon the quality of life in our neighborhoods. The existing predominantly one- and two-story scale of this charming residential neighborhood zoned as R-1 will be irrevocably altered by the abrupt intrusion of this approximately 100-foot-tall building upon its immediate periphery. New construction, especially in such low -scale neighborhood, should always respect and take cues from the existing surrounding urban context. Through the use of a series of stepped building blocks, the transition from one- and two-story residential neighborhoods to high-rise structures lining a commercial corridor should indeed form a gradual transition and not a virtual wall of building. The proposed project fails to respond adequately to the architectural context of the Morningside neighborhood by failing to create an urban design transition of building mass and scale which respects the existing surrounding streetscape rather than smothering it. This urban design principle of transitioning building mass and scale is supported not only by commonly -accepted contemporary urban design practices, it is also supported by your own government advocacy. The Miami -Dade County Planning Department's urban design manual has already illustrated three stories as the example of the proper scale for the juncture of such residential and commercial corridors. The MiMo historic district, which was designated after this application was filed, nevertheless confirms that this stretch of Biscayne Boulevard has historic buildings and a scale well worth preserving. The Miami 21 plan is also recommending three stories for this location, and Florida case law, as has been presented just previously, has supported a 35-foot height limitation in order to preserve and protect the integrity of residential neighborhoods adjacent to similar large-scale development. It is unfortunate that the City ofMiami has often overlooked its own -- very own criteria with respect to relative building scale. Thus, I recommend that you not only listen to the arguments of your residents and constituents, listen to your own government zoning experts in limiting the maximum building height to 35 feet as the appropriate height for buildings proposed to be sited adjacent to these historic single-family residential neighborhoods. And please remember that the precedent was set for this back on May 25, 2006, when you, the Miami City Commission, unanimously decided to allow very -- two very similar projects at 5301 and 5501 Biscayne Boulevard on the condition that they be no higher than 35 feet tall. In closing, I strongly recommend that you follow the previous example. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you, sir. Counsel, you may proceed with your appeal. Mr. Sasfre: Yes. Thank you very much. I'm going to answer your direct question in the following. We would ask that the appeal be granted -- that our appeal be granted; that there be specific findings similar to 53 and 55; that the project violates 1305.2, as amended, in that it does not adequately respond to the physical environment. It does not adequately respond to the neighborhood context; that it does not adequately create a transition in bulk and scale, and that it does not provide the setbacks as required under 907.3.2, as well as 1305, which was the parking buffer setback. In making these findings, hopefully, as we would request, we would also City ofMiami Page 75 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 say that, just as in 5305 -- 53 and 55, that there be an invitation for the developer to submit modified plans reducing the height of the project to 35 feet. But, yes, we absolutely want the appeal granted with those specific findings, similar to 53 and 55. A couple final things to touch on just 'cause I -- I'm anticipating we might hear them in opposition, in response now. This project is governed by 1305.2 as amended. I think it's undisputed, and I don't think we'll hear an argument to the contrary, and the reason why I say it's definitely governed by that is because there were substantial modifications to the plans as late as June 30 of'04 was when the final plans were submitted, and ultimately, those were the plans that were approved with conditions by the Zoning Department in July of 2004. Under the Kubikl decision, which spoke to what happens when you substantially modify your plans, as occurred in this case on a couple of occasions, frankly, your -- the date that the applicable zoning laws apply are governed by when that substantial modification -- when that last substantial modification occurred, and again, that's why I come to the June 30, 2004 date. That would also bring them under the first amendment to SD-9, not the second amendment to SD-9, but the first amendment to SD-9. That doesn't change any of the arguments I've made to date, but I just -- anticipating that there may be some response argument that they're grandfathered in to November of 2003 or something like that. I just wanted to make it clear, and in fact, the appellate court, when they sent us back down, they said that you are coming back for 1305.2 findings as amended. I also have -- and I know they're part of the record, but what was presented on the PowerPoint, the setback that's required under 907.3.2 is found on page A201 of the submitted plans, the final submitted plans dated June 30, 2004, and I'm going to pass them around in a second. And then the absence of a proper setback is illustrated on A101 of the plans. Again, this is where there's only a ten foot setback, there's no parking buffer setback, and it does not have the required setback when you get above 40 feet, pursuant to 907.3.2. And if you'd like, I can hand them -- Chair Sanchez: Okay. All right. Does that conclude your presentation? Mr. Sasfre: Yes. I would like to reserve some time for rebuttal 'cause I don't know what -- Chair Sanchez: Is there rebuttal on appeal? Ms. Chiaro: Yes. The appellant has the opportunity to rebut. You may ask for a particular amount of time. Mr. Sasfre: I don't know how much time is remaining, but -- Chair Sanchez: Well, listen -- well, I'll give you -- Mr. Sasfre: -- I don't anticipate much. Chair Sanchez: -- plenty of time for rebuttal. Mr. Sasfre: Thank you. Ms. Chiaro: I wanted to make sure that the record reflected that the appellant had enough time, as requested, to make the presentation. So Mr. Sastre, if you would just make sure that the record is clear that you were given the necessary amount of time to present your witnesses and your evidence. Mr. Sasfre: Yes. No, I agree. Let me also make sure that, just as part of the record, the expert opinion in writing is made part, and I can hand you a copy of that right now; and also, I think the submittals that the respective parties provided yesterday to the Commission also have been made part of the underlying file, so -- Chair Sanchez: All right. So, sir, for the record, is -- you still have six minutes left. City ofMiami Page 76 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Sasfre: Okay. Chair Sanchez: I gave you half an hour. So you have plenty -- Mr. Sasfre: Okay. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: -- of time. All right. So I just want to establish that on the record. We will -- when we open it up to the public, the public will have an opportunity to address this Commission. All right. Mr. Sasfre: I agree. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: So at this time, you do have time for rebuttal. And we'll go then to the original applicant. You're recognized with the same amount of time, which is -- they had was 25 minutes. Ms. Trench: I think I get 30 minutes, don't I? I don't have a rebuttal, but you gave each side -- Chair Sanchez: All right, 30 minutes. Ms. Trench: I don't think I'm going to need 30 minutes anyway. Susan Trench. I'm -- Chair Sanchez: But he only used 25 out of the 30, but, you know, if you're going to -- doesn't really matter. Ms. Trench: Susan Trench. I'm an attorney. 7335 Southwest 105 Terrace. I represent the applicant here. First of all, we have to lodge our objection to this Commission holding a de novo hearing, and we think any evidence that was presented today, including the expert evidence that was presented, was totally improper. And here is why. The appellate court decision, which, by the way, did not tell this court to apply 1305.2 as amended. I don't know where that came from. But what the appellate court reversed you all on two bases. One was that they said you had to make specific findings of fact as to why you were reversing the Zoning Board's decision, but second, they also said that this Commission improperly held a de novo hearing because the ordinance that was in effect at that time did not permit de novo review, and that is in the decision. The decision is attached to the letter that provided to all of the Commissioners yesterday. After that, while this case was on appeal, the Commission amended the ordinance so that now as to matters that are coming before it in this respect, they can have de novo review. But have provided much case law in my letter that says you cannot now go back to us when a mandate has come down from the appellate court saying you used the wrong procedure with us. There are numerous cases that say you have to go back and use the procedure that was correct at that time. The fact that you have subsequently changed should not apply to us because we have come back to you on a mandate from the appellate court that said it was improper to hold a de novo hearing. So on that basis, we think every -- all the testimony that should be given today should be stricken and not considered by you. What should be considered and what my opponent should have done is present all that information at the Zoning Board. That -- the Zoning Board was always permitted to take new evidence on its appeal under the City's ordinance. That was where it was to be done; that's where it should have been done, and they did appear there, and they did present a certain amount of evidence. And it is that record, the record that was created before the Zoning Board, that this Commission is empowered to review and decide from that either that the Zoning Board had substantial competent evidence to rule as it did, which was that it approved the permit, or that it did not have competent substantial evidence, and if not, why not, and that should be the findings that this Commission presents. So that's our first point. Commissioner Sarnoff So it's your contention that we only go back to the original Zoning City ofMiami Page 77 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Board hearing? Ms. Trench: Absolutely. Commissioner Sarnoff And you say there's a mandate from the appellate court specifically prescribing that action? Ms. Trench: What we have from the appellate court -- the mandate attaches the appellate decision. The appellate decision says that this Commission had no authority to hear the matter de novo; that they had to rely on what was before the Zoning Board. So, yes, I'm saying that that decision and mandate do directly say that. And the only reason -- Commissioner Sarnoff It doesn't really say that. That's your interpretation of it. Ms. Trench: Oh, I think it says that, and I -- Commissioner Sarnoff You think it does? Ms. Trench: -- would invite you -- Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Can I just ask the City Attorney -- does it exactly say that? Ms. Chiaro: It doesn't exactly say that. I think it is debatable whether the procedural rule that we enacted, that is, that this is -- there will be de novo hearings on these appeals, the procedural rule that the City enacted after this case was filed applies because it is not a substantive rule but a procedural one, and therefore, in an abundance of caution, I have opined that we have a de novo hearing. It's debatable at this point, but that's what I've advised -- Ms. Trench: Right. Ms. Chiaro: -- you. Ms. Trench: And I would submit it's not debatable. There are cases -- and I've cited them. I hope you all received the letter that I provided yesterday, specifically on point where a -- one was the County's personnel board changed its procedure while an appeal was pending. And in that case, the Third District said you can't apply the new procedure to that now. In fact, they had to reinstate that guy 'cause they couldn't give him the old procedure anymore. Commissioner Sarnoff Do you have an exfra copy of your letter? Ms. Dougherty: I do. Ms. Trench: She does. Commissioner Sarnoff She being Lucia? Ms. Trench: Yeah. I'm sorry. Lucia -- Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Ms. Trench: -- Ms. Dougherty has it. Commissioner Sarnoff Thanks. Chair Sanchez: Can I get a copy? Is that the whole letter? City ofMiami Page 78 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Ms. Trench: The second major issue where we disagree strongly with both our opponents and the City Attorney is that the amended 1305 would apply to us. It does not. Our complete application for this permit, as that is defined by your own ordinance at 2502, specific definitions, was filed November 24, 2003. The requirements for having a completed application are set forth here, and we complied with all of those. The only changes that occurred in our application after that -- oh, and let me just call your attention to 1305. The amendment specifically said in it all development in existence or any complete application for development filed prior to January 1, 2004 that does not comply with the criteria specified in 1305.2 shall not be considered a nonconformity. We fall within that. Any of the revisions -- and we can provide you with a chronology of what went on. This -- our plans went through numerous reviews with the City, with the internal Design Review Board, with the Urban Development Review Board, and through that, there were certain requested revisions that we agreed to make. We were never denied, as in the other cases, and filed a new application. It was always the same complete application as that is defined. And in fact, your own City Attorney agreed with us in a memorandum that -- from Rafael Suarez -Rivas to Jorge Fernandez, dated January 23, 2007, of which we have copies. Mr. Sasfre: Wouldn't this be de novo incidentally? Ms. Trench: Excuse me. Mr. Sasfre: Wouldn't this be de novo? Ms. Trench: No. This is legal argument. Chair Sanchez: Sir, you'll have time for rebuttal. Just write down the notes, and then you'll have time for rebuttal. Come on. Ma'am. Ms. Trench: He gave you -- gave this Commission the legal opinion that the subsequent revision of the application -- our application on August 23, 2004 was as a result of the conditions required by the Planning and Zoning Department when they issued a recommendation for approval of the Class II Special Permit on July 21, 2004. Therefore, as provided in 2105.4.1, this amendment was proper and did not trigger the application of the amended version of Section 1305. So you all were given the same opinion that we're putting forward here by your own City Attorney, or at least your City Attorney opined that. Commissioner Sarnoff Can we see that? Ms. Trench: We have copies. Commissioner Sarnoff It's in there? Ms. Trench: Yeah. In that memo, your City Attorney came to two conclusions; one, that our Class II Permit had to be reviewed under the pre-2004 version ofArticle 13, Section 1305, and two, that the City Commission must review the Class II Special Permit for 5101 Biscayne Boulevard under traditional appellate review and may only consider the materials presented to the Zoning Department. I mean, that's your internal document and it is correct. Commissioner Sarnoff The Zoning Board hearing you're referencing is the October 4, 2005 hearing? Ms. Trench: That is -- Mr. Sasfre: 2004. Sorry. Commissioner Sarnoff 2005 is what I have. City ofMiami Page 79 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Sasfre: It -- that's a scrivener's error. I think -- Ms. Trench: Oh, yeah. It should -- Mr. Sasfre: -- everyone will agree. Ms. Trench: -- be 2004. The Zoning Board heard this on October 4, 2004. Commissioner Sarnoff You know, I was trying -- Ms. Trench: If that was mine, I apologize. Commissioner Sarnoff -- to figure out how that worked 'cause I couldn't figure out the chronology if it was a 2005 hearing. Ms. Trench: No. It was 2004, and I apologize if that's in mine. Commissioner Sarnoff But it does say 2005 in the transcript. Ms. Trench: Okay. It's wrong. Commissioner Sarnoff So the record should reflect that the 2005 should be a 2004. Ms. Trench: Right. At that time, the Zoning Board unanimously denied Morningside's permit and voted to grant the permit -- I mean, denied their appeal and voted to grant the permit. And if you -- we provided that transcript and also with you the documents that the Zoning Board made findings. They determined that we complied with 1305 as 1305 existed at that time. They determined that we complied with all the requirements that were in existence and that impacted us at that time. They found that we complied with zoning. In fact, we had gotten early zoning approval on this. So what this Commission has to do is look at all those findings of the Zoning Board, determine that they had substantial competent evidence before it to determine that it was appropriate to approve us, which they clearly, clearly did; and ifyou review that, you will see that they did, and -- or ifyou decide that they didn't, you have to render a finding that says why they didn't, why the evidence that was presented before them was not competent and substantial, which I really don't think you can do, and that is the sole function of the Commission at this time. And I believe if you do that and you review what you're supposed to review, which is what evidence was presented before the Zoning Board, you would have to find that there was substantial competent evidence to support that board's decision to deny Morningside's appeal and to grant our permit. Lucia, I don't know if you want to add anything. Thank you very much. Mr. Sasfre: I'm -- Ms. Trench: I bet -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Ms. Trench: -- didn't use my 25 minutes. Chair Sanchez: No, you didn't. As a matter of fact, you got plenty of time. All right. Rebuttal at this time. Mr. Sasfre: Yes, please. Chair Sanchez: You're recognized for rebuttal. How much time are you going to need for City ofMiami Page 80 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 rebuttal? Mr. Sasfre: Well, the problem is I'm going to be addressing some new legal arguments that did not expect based on some e-mails yesterday would be raised. I would ask, please, for ten minutes. I hope not to use -- Chair Sanchez: New evidence? Where did the -- the new evidence coming from where? Mr. Sasfre: New legal -- Chair Sanchez: From today? Mr. Sasfre: -- arguments. Chair Sanchez: From here? Mr. Sasfre: Yes. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Mr. Sasfre: Okay. Chair Sanchez: Ten minutes. Mr. Sasfre: As a preliminary matter, I never thought that 13 -- the new amended 1305 was an issue. When this was before the Zoning Board in October of 2005, they were looking at, and we even referenced the new 1305 standards. They did substantially modify their application on a number of occasions, including reducing it approximately 25 percent in height; that's in the record. And as Kubik showed that when you've got a substantial modification, which you have here, you don't have a completed application until you're done with that. But what's -- also does not make any sense is that we were initially remanded back in July of 2007 to the Zoning Board to -- for findings. And at that time, we stipulated -- and it's part of this record. It's even in the agenda that the parties stipulated that we could come here and have the 1305 findings made here. And, again, I'm going to reiterate that the amended 1305 is the one that applies, and that the parties involved always been traveling under, but even if that were not the case, that doesn't change the argument under 907.3.2 about the setback, and it does not change the argument generally about protecting the neighborhood and the transition in bulk and scale. Transition in bulk and scale was present -- if I'm not completely mistaken -- was also present in 1305 even pre -amendment, pre -January of 2005, so number one, I believe we're bound by the amended 1305. That's what everyone has been traveling under, and that's what, up until, literally, ten minutes ago, I thought we had agreed to. In fact, I'm 99 percent certain that I've got an e-mail from Lucia from yesterday --from Ms. Dougherty from yesterday acknowledging that the new 1305 would apply. There was a dispute over whether the amended SD-9s would apply, but -- and I will provide that e-mail chain and provide that to the record, as well, because what I'm hearing now is literally -- Commissioner Sarnoff Do you have that that we could look at it? Mr. Sasfre: I've only got it on my Blackberry. I still do not have my computer system at work. It's still down for three days. That's also why I had to prepare -- finalize this draft at another computer. Commissioner Sarnoff Want to show us your Blackberry? Ms. Dougherty: I have it. City ofMiami Page 81 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Commissioner Sarnoff Oh. Ms. Dougherty: And there's nothing in here from me. Commissioner Sarnoff Can I see it? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Madam Clerk, does this need to be submitted to you and --? 'Cause I see your expression. I mean, this is the third time -- Ms. Thompson: If they want it part of the record, yes, it has to be submitted to me. If it's not submitted, it is not part of my official record. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Please, can we please make sure we submit things to the Clerk that we want to be officially on the record? Ms. Trench: In fact, I had an e-mail exchange yesterday with the City Attorney copying Mr. Sasfre that specifically objected to the use of the new amended 1305, so I'm not sure I know what he's talking about. Mr. Sasfre: Thatl objected to the use of the amended 1305? Ms. Trench: That we objected to -- Chair Sanchez: Listen, that's a policy issue, and based on the law -- of the 1305, whether it's amended or not, I mean -- Mr. Sasfre: Well, even the old 13 -- Chair Sanchez: -- that'll be decided by the argument that you made. You still are on rebuttal. Mr. Sasfre: Okay. Even under the old 1305, you have protection of neighborhoods and neighborhood context and compatibility with the neighborhood, bulk and scale -- transitions in bulk and scale. The date stamp on the completed application -- and I'm looking right now at the e-mail from Lucia. I will provide it to the record. Can we all stipulate as to the date of the application as being before the Class II was issued, which was July of 2004? This application was never amended after that. And I can provide that to the court [sic]. I think that the City Attorney -- yes, she was copied on that e-mail. The -- also, I think you were referenced to the letter from Rafael Suarez -Rivas from 2007, and that actually, if you look at it, refers to the second amendment of the SD-9 overlay as not applying. It doesn't talk about 1301 -- 1305 as amended or the first SD-9. But again, regardless, there are provisions in our Zoning Code that allow limitations on buildings, that allow transitions in bulk and scale. Our argument under 907.3.2, which, again, is a legal argument based on their plans does not change. That's not de novo evidence. The law is not de novo. The plans as they existed on July 30, 2004, that's not de novo evidence. That's still properly before this Commission. And also, you know, they stipulated before Zoning Board in July 2007 to come here and have this hearing pursuant to the appeal, and I have attached a copy of the July 14, 2006 appeal, which gives a directive to come back here for a hearing for proper findings under 1305. Even if-- looking at nothing else and considering no other evidence from experts or PowerPoints [sic] or anything like that, if you look at these plans as they are prepared, as they were submitted on June 30, 2004, it will show that it's grossly out of scale with something directly adjacent to an R-1 district with only a ten foot setback without the -- a significant buffer. Our position on de novo, very briefly, is as follows. No one is going to dispute that there were never any written findings of fact pursuant to any 1305. Whether you think it's the old one or the new one, no one ever did them, so you're being referred to what the Zoning Board did in October of 2004. Ask them to show you where City ofMiami Page 82 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 those written findings offact are, under whatever version of 1305 they think applies. It's not there; they never did it. That's why when we went back to Zoning Board in July 2007 and we stipulated to come here so that y'all could make the findings offact under 1305. So the statement that there was a full hearing at Zoning Board and that they did the right thing, that's just wrong. Ask them. Ask them, give me the document. Show me where those written findings offact are from Zoning Board. They don't exist, and they will not provide them to you 'cause they can't. So that's number one why I think if there's never been a proper 1305 hearing -- and this was argued incidentally on Kubik II as well, and the court -- the appellate court ultimately ruled in favor on that appeal as well. They said if there's never been -- our position is if there's never been a proper 1305 hearing and there were never find -- written findings offact, that it's entirely appropriate for it to be de novo. It's as if you had a frial under the wrong legal standard and there wasn't a proper order issued, and then on retrial, you're not going to allow it to be a proper new hearing, and we think that's wrong. Number two is what the City was saying, but I wanted to add to it. They were saying -- and I agree with them -- that this was a procedural change to the law that allowed you all to consider new evidence. I agree with that, but I also think it's important that it's also a remedial change to the law because for years -- and this may be to your dismay -- but for years it was the practice of the Commission to allow de novo hearings on these -- on the MUSP (Major Use Special Permit) permits and on the Class II Permits, and it was finally discovered that that was improper in the course of some of these appeals, and that's why the procedural change was made to reflect the long-standing practice. And the last thing on that that I want to read into the record -- hopefully, I can find it -- is the legislative history from when it was amended, and here it is. January 26, 2006, this is when this Commission adopted the change in going from no de novo or to de novo, and it says -- I'm reading -- I'm quoting it. Something has happened recently. In the last few months, a decision of this Commission was appealed to the appellate division of the circuit court. That's 5355, by the way. Now you are literally under court order. You cannot listen to the case de novo. You cannot hear the neighbors. You cannot hear the experts. You cannot hear the developer's experts. Now what we're presenting to you in this item, item number 26, is an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance because the court, in essence, told us that unless we clarify the ambiguity that we have in our ordinance, the courts are going to hold us -- going to hold you acting like appellate judges. By passing this ordinance, you eliminate that ambiguity, and as soon as it passes, you can go back to continuing to hear the appeals from the Zoning Board on a de novo basis, affording everybody an opportunity to come in front of you and present the full case. So that illustrates what was going on historically for many years here and why I believe that not only was this not a substantive change in the law, but that it was a procedural and remedial change in the law that allowed you to hear these -- this particular appeal de novo. And again, not to beat a dead horse, but just to reiterate there's never been 1305 findings offact, written findings offact, as required under whatever version, the old or the new. We believe there was a substantial modification. We believe that everyone, up until today, has been traveling under the belief that the new 1305 applied. Ms. Trench: Since I have so much -- Mr. Sasfre: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Trench: -- time, may I do a brief --? Chair Sanchez: No. There is no -- Ms. Trench: Okay. Chair Sanchez: No, ma'am. There is no rebuttal to a rebuttal. You know that better than I do. City ofMiami Page 83 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Ms. Trench: Well, he raised things on rebuttal that were new. Chair Sanchez: Well -- but it's okay. Ms. Trench: Okay. Chair Sanchez: You can't. All right. That concludes -- at this time, what we'll do is we'll open it up to the public. Anyone from the public wishing to address this Commission, please step forward, state your name and address for the record. Luis Herrera: My name is Luis Herrera. I'm the president of the Vizcaya Homeowner Association. I have come to support what Elvis Cruz said about it because I got the same problem in my neighborhood, and I think we have to respect Chapter 163 that is comply with the neighborhood, to protect the neighborhood, and I think that's what it have to be apply for. And I try to apply in my district too, so I think this -- I'm supporting whatever Elvis Cruz said about it. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Next speaker. Carol Ann Hallam: Commissioners, my name is Carol Ann Hallam. I live at 430 Northeast 51 st Sfreet, Morningside, and I'm also the Morningside district representative for 50th Terrace and 51 st Sfreet. I live a few doors down from this proposed building. I ask you to rule the same way you did on the two buildings at 5301 and 5501 Biscayne Boulevard, to limit these buildings to 35 feet. This will protect Morningside and protect the MiMo historic district from an inappropriate, out of scale building. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you, ma'am. Next speaker. Good afternoon, sir. Please state your name and address for the record. Alfred Sasiadek: Yes. Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Alfred Sasiadek. I live at 463 Northeast 55th Terrace, in Morningside. And I -- I'm not a lawyer. I don't -- I'm not going to present any legal arguments. I just want to talk about some of the mundane concerns of people that live next to high-rises. If you Commissioners were to stand up and turn around and face this wall and imagine it three times as high, that's what the neighbors that would be living next to this project would be facing. Now not only would it cut out their sunlight, change the entire plantings of their yard because -- if you have satellite TV (Television), you'll know that you have to aim your satellite at 45 degrees to the southwest. They would be cut off from satellite service for the first two houses up from that building. And that's all I have to say. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you, sir. Anyone else? All right. I see no one else, so at this time, the public hearing is closed, and it comes back to the Commission. Based on the appeal that's in front of us, Commissioner Sarnoff, you're recognized for the record. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, there's no doubt that this particular project does not fit the scale with the neighborhood. However, I'm not convinced the best procedural way is to grant the appeal. I actually am convinced the better way to deal with this is to deny the appeal but impose a 35 foot height limit, and I would like to state for the record why I believe there should be a 35 foot height limit based on Section 1305, as well as Section 907.3.2. First, the project fails to satisfy the following portions of the design review criteria set forth in 1305. The site and urban planning response to the physical contextual environment taking into consideration urban form and natural features (UNINTELLIGIBLE) equally exposed to site and should minimize the impact of automobile parking in driveways on the pedestrian environment and adjacent properties. Equally, buildings on corner lots should be oriented to the corner and public streets. Architect and landscape architecture. We should respond to the neighborhood context -- and I stress context -- and create a transition in bulk and scale, which the record clearly demonstrates City ofMiami Page 84 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 has not been done. We should create pedesfrian-oriented development, promote pedesfrian interaction, and design facades that respond primarily to the human scale. There certainly is no human scale with a 90-foot wall. The streetscape and open space should provide open, useable space that allows for convenient and visible pedesfrian access from the public sidewalk, as well as vehicular access and parking should use surface parking areas as the district buffer. It appears clear to me the contextual renderings along with the context photographs shown that the project fails to utterly respond to the physical, contextual environment, taking into consideration urban form and natural features. Equally, respond to the neighborhood -- it fails to respond to the neighborhood context in creating a transition in bulk and scale as required by the law. As is shown in the photographs and contextual renderings, the presently -existing urban form in the neighborhood are single-family, one- or two-story homes, or small commercial structures as ably demonstrated. The specific purpose, the survey, the location map, and the UDRB (Urban Development Review Board) submittal show the proximity to this tall building will have to existing single-family homes ofMorningside. They will be adjacent with a rear setback of only ten feet, which would violate Section 907.3.2 with regard to the required triangulation. The elevations in other documents submitted to the Zoning Board show a proposed building on a prominent corner. The building is not oriented to the corner, and the public streets are in violation of DRC Section 1 subsection 3. There are no use of surface parking lots as a buffer or a transition between the large developments and the single-family historic homes they seek to abut. Indeed, with only a ten foot setback, the projects will rise 90 feet into the air against single-family homes, the lots as shown by the elevation and section drawings and contextual perspectives. This was both shown at this Commission as well as in the October -- let me get the exact date. We said we'd changed that date -- October 4, 2004 Zoning Board hearing. The proposed project is adjacent to a far less -intense use, a single-family R-1 home. Any reasonable interpretation of this ordinance, coupled with proposals extreme proximity to this single-family neighborhood dictates -- and I state, dictates -- a less -intense use. It is appropriate, most importantly, to restrict the height of a project based on the existing neighborhood and scale and compatibility. It is for these reasons that I believe that we need to deny this appeal but impose a 35-foot height limitation on this proposal. Chair Sanchez: All right. Is there a second? Commissioner Regalado: Second. Chair Sanchez: Discussion on the item. I just have one issue. I could support what the Commissioner proffered. Could I --? Mr. Marcus, was it you who came up? Could you please come up? I have a couple of questions for you. Sir, you stated that you did a lot of work for Miami Beach. Mr. Marcus: I work as an architect in Miami Beach. Chair Sanchez: Okay. What year were you there in Miami Beach? What year did you -- Mr. Marcus: I've been there from -- Chair Sanchez: -- do some --? Mr. Marcus: -- '92 'til now. Chair Sanchez: Were you there when they did a lot of the downzoning? Mr. Marcus: Yes, I was. Chair Sanchez: Just out of curiosity, how many legal challenges were presented to Miami Beach based on the Bert Harris Act? City ofMiami Page 85 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Marcus: Well, I -- not having worked with the City ofMiami Beach, I don't know. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Mr. Marcus: I know there were numerous -- Chair Sanchez: Okay. And that's the only -- Mr. Marcus: -- contests. Chair Sanchez: -- issue that I have here. I could -- you know, the only issue here that I have is that we're going to be making a motion, and it's going to have a burden on this city. It's going to put this city in harm's way when it comes to liability. That area there is zoned SD-9, okay, which is ten stories? Under the Zoning Code right now, somebody could build ten stories? Eight, nine, ten, eleven, whatever. Orlando Toledo (Senior Director, Building, Planning & Zoning): Eighty-five feet. Chair Sanchez: Excuse me? Mr. Toledo: Eighty-five feet. Chair Sanchez: Eighty-five feet. If we impose this 35 feet, we are violating that property owner's right, and that's a concern that I have. And that individual can sue us. They could sue us under the Bert Harris Act, so I am -- you know, I want to be able to sit here on one project, but then you start a process that's going to cost this City in court -- and last time that I did my homework on Miami Beach, Miami Beach is still paying big money on all the challenges -- legal challenges that were presented to them under Bert Harris Act, and that's a concern that I have. Right now the zone that's in that area is SD-9, which is the height that they have. You're imposing a 35 feet restriction on that individual. That property owner, just like ifI went to a single-family home and told you you can't have a single-family home, or you have a duplex and I tell you, well, you know what? We're changing. You can't have a duplex anymore. Now you got to have a single-family home. That's a problem that I have here, so I just want to put that this -- you're opening up the City to big liability when we do that. If there's an agreement -- I think, on the other two projects, were [sic] there an agreement with the property owners? No, no, no. I'm not -- you're -- going to ask you any questions. I open it up to you, and then there's going to be questions. Ms. Chiaro: I'm sorry. I didn't understand what your question is. Chair Sanchez: The other two projects that were approved that -- were 35 feet in that area? Ms. Chiaro: The Bert Harris claim on the -- on one of the projects, I know, was abandoned, and I'm not sure which one -- Chair Sanchez: Okay. Ms. Chiaro: -- so I don't know the -- Chair Sanchez: But they did sue? Ms. Chiaro: They made a claim. Chair Sanchez: They did -- City ofMiami Page 86 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Ms. Chiaro: They didn't -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Now -- Ms. Chiaro: -- pursue the claim letter. Chair Sanchez: -- let me ask you, Madam Attorney, based on your recommendation as -- being that you're the City Attorney, do you see this as the City being in a position where they're going to be liable for the -- for this action? Ms. Chiaro: I believe you have created a sustainable record for whatever action you take. Chair Sanchez: The sustainable -- Ms. Chiaro: A record. I -- Chair Sanchez: -- record on the appeal. Ms. Chiaro: Yes, if there is an appeal. And you have made the findings that you need to make to sustain the action that is proposed in the current motion. Again, I can never tell you what a court will do, butl think that you have listened to the evidence and acted in a way that has an adequate record to sustain a decision. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chair, if it were any comfort to you, every project must meet a 1305 analysis -- Chair Sanchez: No. Commissioner Sarnoff -- regardless of what their claim -- their maximum heights are, and as you heard, heights are not as -of -right maximum. Chair Sanchez: Well, I understand that. And you know what? I'm more comfortable in denying the project because it doesn't meet some of the requirements of 1305; that I'm more concerned about the height restriction, which is going to open us to liability with that project in the next months to come. That's just a concern that have. So there's discussion. I just wanted to put that on the record that based on this decision, ladies and gentlemen, the property owner, who has rights, can sue this city on the Bert Harris Act, and we will have to defend that, and hopefully, we could prevail in court, or we'll be paying whatever we -- the 35 feet to the 10 stories, whatever, the City will be picking up the check for that. All right. Vote. Any further discussion? It's a resolution, correct? Ms. Thompson: That is correct. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Any further discussion on this? All right. Madam Clerk, roll call on this. Ms. Thompson: Chair, just wanting to make sure that your motion and your legislation is recorded properly. Madam City Attorney. Ms. Chiaro: This is a motion to deny the appeal and to add the condition of a 35-foot restriction to the application as submitted. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Roll call. Chair Sanchez: Roll call. City ofMiami Page 87 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Ms. Thompson: Roll call. Vice Chair Spence -Jones? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Regalado? Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Sarnoff? Commissioner Sarnoff Yes. Ms. Thompson: Chair Sanchez? Chair Sanchez: Yes. Get ready to pay. Ms. Thompson: And the resolution has been adopted, 4/0. Chair Sanchez: All right. We're going to take a five-minute recess. City ofMiami Page 88 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 MAYOR AND COMMISSIONER'S ITEMS CITYWIDE HONORABLE MAYOR MANUEL A. DIAZ DISTRICT 1 COMMISSIONER ANGEL GONZALEZ DISTRICT 2 COMMISSIONER MARC DAVID SARNOFF D2.1 08-00173 DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE APPOINTMENT OF A CITY ATTORNEY. 08-00173 E-mail.pdf MOTION A motion was made by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Gonzalez absent, to reject former City Attorney Jorge L. Fernandez' resignation, and conversely terminate his employment for having confessed to making false statements and using public funds inappropriately; to reject entitlement to severance pay; further, directing the City Manager to perform an investigation to determine whether the plea agreement and the restitution proposed by Miami -Dade County State Attorney's Office was adequate to compensate the City ofMiami for the inappropriate expenditures claimed by former City Attorney Jorge L. Fernandez; and further, to contend with any attempts made by former City Attorney Jorge L. Fernandez to receive any of the alleged contractual compensations. Direction by Chairman Sanchez to the City Manager to begin the process offormulating a selection committee for the sole purpose of reviewing candidates for the position of City Attorney and to report back to the Commission at its meeting currently scheduled for March 13, 2008. Chair Sanchez: City ofMiami Commission meeting is back in order. We have several items. These are items pertaining to Commissioners' district pages, also known as blue pages -- district pages -- district items. All right. We'll go ahead. Commissioner Gonzalez did not have any items. Commissioner Sarnoff did not have any items. Commissioner Sarnoff No. I did. Chair Sanchez: You did? Which item do you have? Commissioner Sarnoff I had an item regarding the City Attorney -- the former City Attorney. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Commissioner Sarnoff And what I would like to propose we do is -- as you all recall, we had the City Attorney submit to us his resignation, I believe, at our last Commission meeting. And since then, we learned that he has pled guilty to providing false statements, and I believe, inappropriate use of public funds. I'm going to make a motion -- and I hope I have a second on it -- and I'm going to move to reject his resignation; that we immediately terminate him for City ofMiami Page 89 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 admitting that he gave false statements and inappropriate use of public funds. Through these admissions, whether or not they raise to the level of felonies, are a violation of the public trust. As such, this Commission should voice its opinion and clearly state that there shall be no entitlement to severance. I equally ask the City Manager to perform an investigation and determine if the plea agreement and the restitution that was made by the Dade County State Attorney Office was adequate to compensate the City for the inappropriately -claimed expenditures by the former City Attorney. Chair Sanchez: All right. There's a motion by Commissioner Sarnoff. Commissioner Regalado: I'll second the -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Second. Commissioner Regalado: -- motion. Chair Sanchez: The -- Commissioner Regalado: Discussion. Chair Sanchez: -- item has been second by the Commissioners. Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized for the record. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I think it's important that we set the record straight. Number one, the former City Attorney resigned because he had a plea bargaining with the State Attorney. He was not terminated nor -- I guess, resigned voluntarily. There is important also to remember that the Code of the City ofMiami states that the City Attorney, the City Clerk, and the Auditor General must present their contract or reappointment the next meeting after the general election. The City Clerk did it. I asked the City Attorney when he was going to do it, and he said he was too busy and he couldn't do it, so he forfeited his possibility of being reappointed according to the Code. There is also a lot of discussion about the contract. I have consulted to -- with several attorneys regarding this notion of a contract, and these attorneys, who are experts in the field of contracts -- on the media actually that I know them -- they have done contracts for me in media outlet -- consider that what the City had with the former City Attorney was an arrangement, an appointment, a benefits packet, but it's not a contract. This is -- I think it's important because everybody talks about the contract. And number three, I think we should also send a clear message that if there is a legal challenge by the former City Attorney trying to get some of the benefits, the City should be aggressive in going to court to fight any attempt and even if we need to spend an equal amount or more money to fight giving away the people's money to somebody who has betrayed the public trust, it is worth it. That is my position. It is worth it because the people ofMiami cannot afford any more scandals. They are still waiting for the fire fee which, by the way, was the result of a scandal, an inappropriate deal made by a former City Manager, the Mayor, and the City Attorney. And I just think that it's important that we go on record as stating that, you know -- if we were to do this, we will be judge by the people in a harsher way than any other official, but it's important to also send the message that not only elected officials need to be on the spotlight for any ethics or betraying the public trust, but also every public servant; and this will send a clear message that it is the intention of the government of the City ofMiami of regaining at least a little of the public trust that we have lost with all these -- the scandals and the perception of corruptions and ethics violations that have been committed in the City ofMiami. So I will second the motion. I will ask, though, the maker of the motion to add the fact that the City will do in court any effort and incur any expense to fight any attempt to receive any of this alleged contractual issues by the former City Attorney. Commissioner Sarnoff Accept the amendment. City ofMiami Page 90 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: The -- once again, I do support my fellow Commissioners in their decision to do this. I think that there was such a negative perception out in the public and -- with our decisions to support, you know, any unethical behavior in any kind of way being rewarded. I think it's really important, though, that it is at least communicated on the record by the current City Attorney to at least express why the decision was even made that the former City Attorney would be even receiving this type of compensation because I think that there was some confusion about that from the general public's perspective. Because if we had the opportunity -- and what was communicated to us from an Administration standpoint is that we had no choice and no decision on that because it was already -- there was already an existing contract in order or in place. So I want you to just clear up that matter. And then the question for me -- because I've been asking the same thing for the last two or three weeks, how are we making a payment on this issue or even settling on this issue or even providing the City Attorney with any compensation without getting a full written opinion? Maria, if you can speak on the fact that -- was there an official written opinion secured regarding this issue? I mean, I don't know -- I think that's more of a legal question and that's why I'm not really speaking to Pete as of yet. Was there a written opinion secured or -- Maria J. Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): At the time -- Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Commissioner -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- requested on this issue of the contract? Ms. Chiaro: -- I was informed that there would be a resignation, sub -- there was an issue as to whether a contract existed. I determined, and at the statement of the City Commission, that an outside counsel opinion should be obtained. I then informed Employee Relations -- the City Manager, through the Department of Employee Relations, to obtain an outside opinion. After that time, I have not been involved in any of the substantive determinations. I can factually recount for you what the resolution with the compensation and emoluments, the timing of that. However, all of that was turned over to the counsel, and it is my understanding that the City Manager has received that opinion in writing -- or not -- but I have not been involved. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And then I just want to say for the record, you know, while you give us -- Mr. Manager, you're going to give us the -- I'm assuming you're going to let us know what the written opinion is on it. Regardless of what the written opinion, we still have the right to make a decision -- correct, Ms. City Attorney? -- as to whether or not we want to provide the compensation, correct? Ms. Chiaro: If you're talking about the severance -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Ms. Chiaro: -- compensation -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Ms. Chiaro: -- because there -- based on this motion today, you have made a determination that the severance should not be paid, and you have the authority to do so. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. I just wanted to make sure, and not just for us because we've been briefed on it thoroughly, and I think we're all on the same page regarding this issue, but I just want the public watching it to understand because for some reason, people see it and then City ofMiami Page 91 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 they don't really fully understand what the issues were, but I just wanted to make sure at least you brought that out. And Mr. Manager, you look like you can't wait to say something, so do you need to go 'head [sic] and speak in reference to -- you want to add on it? Mr. Hernandez: Yes. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Mr. Hernandez: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, on -- as the Madam City Attorney indicated, when this matter came up, obviously I think that there would be a conflict for the CityAttorney's Office to be assisting us on that matter. And we have contacted outside legal counsel, who I have spoken to, and more than once they have given me an opinion based on all the information that we have collected for them. And in short, the opinion is that we should be honoring the contract, period. We do have in the confract that was approved by the City Commission, dating back to December of 2006 -- there is a -- there was a change from the original terms of '04. In '04, the -- under severance, it was at the discretion of the City Commission. That severance term was changed in '06, and it reads that upon separation, six months of employment should be paid to the City Attorney. Upon separation, period. So whether it's termination, retirement, resignation, whatever, he gets six months. And when December of '07 came around, which is when the City Attorney should have been reappointed, there was no affirmative action taken by this body to do otherwise and by doing so, the resolution and terms from '06 are in effect. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Who was responsible for making sure that itgot put on the agenda? Ms. Chiaro: By custom and policy, the City Attorney placed the item on the agenda after each municipal election, at least from the last ten years, from my experience with the City. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And the reason why he didn't put it on? Ms. Chiaro: I do not know. Chair Sanchez: Well, the reason is very simple. He was going through this issue and it was not going to be put on the agenda to reappoint him to a City Commission [sic], so -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: It's not like we made a decision and said no, not to put it on, Mr. Manager. Chair Sanchez: All right, so you know -- Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Man -- Mr. -- Chair Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado -- Commissioner Regalado: -- Chairman. Chair Sanchez: -- you're recognized. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't know if you were listening, but I said that I asked specifically the City Attorney why he didn't have his confract in the agenda as required by Code, and he said that he was very busy; and as the Chairman just said, he was under investigation by the State Attorney's Office. Actually, he went to my home to tell me that he was under investigation. And he did say that in case that he was indicted, he was hoping that the City Commission would give him a leave of absence until he can challenge those charges in court. It is not the fault of this City Commission because if we had put it in the agenda, we would have broken the main rule, and actually, the new rules that the new Chairman City ofMiami Page 92 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 reestablished. We cannot place an item on the agenda that has a monetary impact. It has to come with a paper from the Administration -- in that case, from the City Attorney -- of the monetary impact. The fact that the City Attorney choose [sic] to violate the Code is not the fault of the City Commission, so don't come blaming this City Commission for not taking any action. And I would suggest that you do get a second opinion, and the reason that you need to get a second opinion is because when you're dealing with a heart on an open-heart surgery, you do need a second opinion. And this is the heart of the City ofMiami. This issue goes beyond any numbers. This issue is about right and wrong. This issue doesn't have to do anything with the fault that you want to lay on the City Commission that we didn't take action. It's about we [sic] stopping the perception of corruption and betrayal of the public trust in the City ofMiami or just keep doing what people perceive that the City has done. I am really, really disappointed that this is even an issue. I mean, you know, there is a person that -- I don't know what happened to him -- served the City for many years, made a mistake, but you know, everybody pay for its mistakes. Those who commit a hit-and-run, they go to jail. Those who have a rage and kill a person, they go to the electric chair. So it's not our fault. The City Attorney brought this into himself. It's not that we lack the action that we have done. But if you mean that we should take care of the agenda, then so be it. You know, the Chairman's office, like in the County, should take care of the agenda and take away the agenda from the City Attorney and from the Manager's office, and then it will be our fault if we don't place the agenda. I just think that if you get a second opinion -- we keep talking about a confract, and this is a benefits package, not a contract represented. The same provisions of the severance is on the contract of your contract, right? Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): That -- honestly, I've got to go back and check now. I'm not really sure. Commissioner Regalado: Yes, in your contract and in the Auditor General's contract. And I just think -- I -- and you know, some people say, well, you know, you should have placed -- if you are accused of a felony, imagine having a new City Attorney or a City Attorney or City Clerk -- Madam City Clerk, if you are arrested, you get no severance. That's -- because she is the one that runs the files of the City. She's the keeper of the treasure, and the City Attorney is the person that tell us what is right and what is wrong, and the Auditor General is the person that tell us what is going on because we don't know, so I am really disappointed that we even have to listen that we need to honor the contract, which is not a confract. You know, as of now we have spent, I think, $3 million, I don't know, almost $3 million fighting the fire fee mess, and nobody is complaining. I mean, we have to do it because we have to do it. We just -- we need to clean up after somebody else made a mess, and it costing the taxpayers $3 million or whatever -- almost, maybe more when we get done with all this mess. So I don't understand what is the problem here, you know. I don't understand what is so wrong about frying to defend the little trust that the people still have in the City. So, you know, I hope that the maker of the motion stand by that -- with the motion. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chair. Chair Sanchez: Commissioner -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones, and then Commissioner Sarnoff. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. I just wanted to add -- and I'm glad that you, you know, at least put on the record that was the reason why -- I'm assuming that the Administration feels that the City Attorney deserves to have his contract. Basically, it's based upon the fact that his -- he never had an opportunity to come back in front of us for us to approve it. You also cleared up the fact that he's the person responsible for -- or at least, Maria -- our City Attorney has basically stated that it's really his responsibility to put it on the agenda, not us, anyway. My question is, my City Clerk and my auditor -- the auditor is not here, but the City Clerk is here. We approved your item, correct? City ofMiami Page 93 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Ms. Thompson: That is correct. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Did you put it on the agenda? Ms. Thompson: Yes, ma'am, I sure did. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And we all approved it, right? Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: We all approved it, right? Ms. Thompson: Yes, that's correct. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So I'm -- I just -- I -- so the response -- if it's his contract, he should be responsible for putting it on the agenda. Mr. Hernandez: Well -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I mean, we're not re -- I mean, we should not be held responsible for an action that he did not make or take. And then beyond that -- then I'm done with it 'cause I think we're beating a dead horse. We -- I think you do see where we're all coming from. I do think that -- as we move ahead with our new City Attorney, I think that we definitely need to look at issues like this, not just for the City Attorney, the auditor, or the City Clerk. If there is anything that's attached from a criminal perspective, this should not even be a discussion. So I'm hoping, as we move in a direction of appointing a new City Attorney and, of course, dealing with our new contracts for the auditor and the City Clerk, that we ensure ourselves or we make sure that that -- if this kind of issue ever comes back up again, it's already in the contract or in the agreement so we don't have this as an issue anymore. Chair Sanchez: Commissioner Sarnoff. Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Just building on what Commissioner Spence -Jones has said, there is not a person in the private sector that I'm aware of that has a one page agreement. They are at least five-, ten-, fifteen page agreements. They contain morals clauses. They contain proper decorum clauses. They contain clauses that when you bring sordidness into your world, if you will, that you may in fact lose your position just ftom that. This one -page attachment -- and I don't even want to use the word contract -- the genesis of it is September of '04. At the time, it was Commissioner Gonzalez who was charged with the negotiation, but listen to what was put in in severance at that time. It says, "At the time of separation, the City Commission may" -- and I stress may -- "consider the payment of six months compensation as severance at its discretion." That was September of '04. Then in July of '06, a new attachment is provided. Who wrote this attachment? The City Attorney. What does he write? "At time of separation, payment of six months compensation as severance." Now the drafter of the agreement bears the ambiguity of the agreement. He drafted his own agreement, or I should say attachment. His -- under the Charter, his term of office ceased as soon as the new Commission was elected. That new Commission was elected sometime in December. It was incumbent upon him to put his nomination back up no later than January, and he chose not to do so, and he chose not to do so maybe for good reason. But there's no way, shape, or form that we, as elected officials, should allow a man who has admitted to giving false statements to the prosecution for the state of Florida, or I should say for Dade County, and has admitted to taking from the public trust, that we should do anything other than what Commissioner Regalado suggests, which is oppose that. We cannot just simply turn around and pay on a contract -- or I should say an attachment because it's not a contract an attachment that says what he wrote. So I'm not going to amend my motion. I'm not going to change my motion. You know, you can get a lawyer to give you an City ofMiami Page 94 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 opinion as to many things, and there are certain principles that are worth litigating over, and this is one of those principles. Chair Sanchez: All right. No further discussion on the item. Mr. City -- Mr. Hernandez: Mr. Chairman, if you allow me a second. Chair Sanchez: -- Manager, and then we'll close it up for a vote. Mr. Hernandez: I'm not representing the former City Attorney, nor defending him. I think I have done my due diligence and presented facts that, whether we like them or not, have to be dealt with. But definitely, you know, we'll follow the will of the Commission and pursue whatever action we're directed to. Chair Sanchez: All right. No further discussion on the item. The motion was made and second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion passes. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Mr. Chairman, I just -- I would like to at least say to my fellow colleagues, it is imperative that we do get a City Attorney on board as quickly as possible. I do know that our acting City Attorney, Maria Chiaro, has been acting, and it was stated in the last Commission meeting that we would bring something back at this Commission meeting. We cannot continue to not have someone there in that seat. I do know that Commissioner Gonzalez is not here, and I'm sure there's a strong feeling that you would want to have him here, but I would want to at least state to the City Manager that you come back at the next City Commission meeting with at least -- I'm assuming -- Has everyone --? Let me ask this question with my fellow Commissioners. Has everyone had an opportunity to at least talk to the candidates that have an interest in this position? What do you guys feel is the next step in us identifying where we go with the next City Attorney? Chair Sanchez: I think the appropriate action is the one that -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: -- you're taking now, which is directing the City Manager, which I was going to do as the Chair -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Chair Sanchez: -- to have it be put at the next regular Commission meeting, the process to start, whether we decide that day to appoint or start a process of a selection committee or a search committee to hire the next City Attorney. I do want to ask -- and I think that, first of all, it would be improper to have this item be put in a Commission agenda or as a pocket item. I think it's an item that needs to be put on the regular agenda and have, if so be it, public participation from people. I think today we've learned a lesson here at the City. And you know what, we just voted on an issue that could be morally or it could be based on laws. But you know what, the decision was made, And the thing that we have to look at is if there's an upcoming contract with somebody who might we soon appoint as a new attorney for the City, the City Clerk and the auditor general's contracts, ladies and gentlemen, if the language is not there and we don't put the language to protect the interests of this Commission, then you open yourself to a dispute in court, a different process. If we would have voted on the first original that clearly said at the discretion of this Commission, then this discussion today would have been very simple. This City ofMiami Page 95 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Commission, under the current language of the confract, will not. We vote on the issue, and it's over. So may I suggest that at times like this, instead of rushing forward, we sit back and create a new process so neither one of us, nor you, Mr. [sic] City Attorney, or anyone is ever put again in such an embarrassing situation -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Ms. Chair Sanchez: -- in this Commission. So we have an opportunity now with the next attorney coming up that we will decide their confract, and you know what? Maybe a new dawn -- day in the City where these generous contracts are given to people, because I just had to go through one at the DDA (Downtown Development Authority), which I inherited, and as my father used to say, "Without smoking it or drinking it, you're going to get blamed for it, " and we had to settle on a binding contract, apples and oranges to this one, ifI may say, but it is a binding confract. So let this be a lesson to this Commission that next time that we sit down -- and I don't care how much talent you have -- and we do have great people working in our city -- we have the proper language to make sure that if you go out there and you embarrass this city and the taxpayers and the people who sit up here, then you have no right whatsoever on a confract written by the people and for the people, that you walk out of here with nothing because you've been a total disgrace to the people you represent. City ofMiami Page 96 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 DISTRICT 3 CHAIR JOE SANCHEZ DISTRICT 4 COMMISSIONER TOMAS REGALADO DISTRICT 5 VICE CHAIR MICHELLE SPENCE-JONES D5.1 08-00185 DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION REGARDING THE NEED FOR CHILDREN RECREATIONAL EQUIPMENT FOR LIBERTY PARK. 08-00185 E-mail.pdf DISCUSSED Direction by Vice Chair Spence -Jones to the City Manager to meet with Miami -Dade County and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to discuss the transfer of land to the City ofMiami in order to create green space in the area of Liberty City Park; further directing the Administration, in an effort to avoid the perception of impropriety, to report back to the Commission, in writing, with the list of projects earmarked to receive bond dollars so that a determination can be made as to whether those projects should be funded. Direction by Commissioner Regalado to the City Manager to follow up on the electrical issues at the mini park located in Silver Bluff on Southwest 24th Terrace, between 19th and 20th Avenues. Chair Spence -Jones: The other item I have is my recreation park. I'd like to have Ernest step to -- all right. This is in reference to green space that is located in the heart of Liberty Square, which is a housing facility that I'm sure we're all aware of that -- but over the last couple of years, we've had a lot of shootings take place in the heart of Liberty City. There's a big patch of grass that's located in the center of this facility, and I have asked for TPL, the Trust for Public Land, and several other people to work along with us to make something happen there for the children and it still has not happened. The residents of Liberty City Square have come to me to really ask that we do whatever it takes to improve that green space to create a new green park, a park in that area, which will include recreational equipment and, of course, park and benches. So what I'd like to do is direct the City Manager -- the land itself is owned by, I believe, between HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) and Miami -Dade County, butt know in the past Miami -Dade County has given land to the City for various things, for parks or for projects, but I'd like to instruct the -- or direct the City Manager to do is to get with Miami -Dade County and HUD to see if there's any way that they can transfer that land over to the City of Miami so that we can create some green space. I believe, Ernest, if I'm -- Mr. Parks Director, you've already seen the green space, so you're familiar with it and you're comfortable with what -- the way -- the size of it and our ability to get that done, correct? Ernest Burkeen: Ernest Burkeen, director of Parks and Recreation. That's correct. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. So -- and I think that Capital Improvements has also had the opportunity to see the green space, correct? Ola Aluko: Ola Aluko, director of Capital Improvements. Yes, Ms. Commissioner. City ofMiami Page 97 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. I just want to be clear on the process, though, to avoid any future confusion or any unethical activities, or whatever the case may be, transparency or whatever we might want to call it. I really want to make sure that if-- once this action is taken by this body --and I'm assuming that you will have to come back in front of the City Commission on this issue. I want to be real clear with my Parks director on what are the key steps in designating it as a park or creating it as a park. What are the key steps that have to take place before any green space or any open space can be created as a park or anything of that sort? What are the key steps? Mr. Burkeen: If you're talking about creating a park, then we would naturally work with the Planning Department to find out what, in fact, the plans are for the City, and you do a feasibility study, and that sort of thing. But when you're talking about property that's already owned by another agency, it's simply a matter of getting the ownership of the property before we can spend any money. After we get ownership, then we would work with the community to establish whatever it is that we were going to build. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. So, in other words, the procedures or the steps to any green space, whether or not we own it, the County own it, or whatever, would be that it would -- Planning would be a part of that process and a feasibility study would have to happen first, correct? Mr. Burkeen: If we were going to build a park any place in the City, that's correct. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. So I'm assuming that we're doing that on a consistent basis, correct? Mr. Burkeen: Yeah. 'Cause we haven't built a park in some time. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Mr. Burkeen: Yes. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Or any green space, correct, that Parks would manage? Mr. Burkeen: I wouldn't go so far to say any green space because there are times when there is public right-of-way that you might want to create green space with -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Mr. Burkeen: -- which you wouldn't do feasibility studies. It's simply a matter of -- and I'm not the expert on right-of-way. I'd have to have Stephanie speak to that, but -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Well, I don't think that this is a right-of-way, so it's not really an issue. Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): No. We will -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I don't think this is a right-of-way. Mr. Hernandez: -- be dealing with property in this case. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I just want to make sure, for this particular green space that we have or we'd like to have given to the City ofMiami, that there's a process put in place that is accountable and things are in place so that we don't create any other issues of not having a transparent situation. City ofMiami Page 98 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Burkeen: Right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So that's the first thing I had. The other question I had, which was really directed to Capital Improvements, I -- Mr. Ola -- would like to use some of my capital improvement dollars. I know that there's some projects that may not be happening in my district now. I know that you've explained to me that if it's quality of life dollars, then, you know -- Can you explain to me the steps on how if I'm utilizing those dollars to build this particular park and utilizing quality of life dollars, what the steps are from the standpoint of the Bond Oversight Board, so that I'm clear on that? I'd like to have that on the record. Mr. Aluko: Ola Aluko, director of Capital Improvements. The request first comes from the Commission that -- Commissioner, rather, that you would like to use your quality of life funds for a particular project. You are aware that you're allocated funds at your discretion. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Mr. Aluko: What we'll do is we will meet with you, identify the project, and obviously identify a cost. We then go towards two -- before, rather, the Bond Oversight Board for approval. Once the Bond Oversight Board is presented with that project and they approve the project, then if a contract is required to be issued to a contractor or to an architect, we then come before the board and advise the board that we are awarding a contract to either an architect or a contractor to build the actual project. Should we not have to issue a contract to an architect or a contractor and we can do the -- actually engage the project either through our Purchasing Department or our forces in-house, whether it's -- when I say forces, meaning that if we can utilize Public Works or GSA (General Services Administration) or whatnot, we just use the money and we go ahead and proceed with the project. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. What I'd like to say to my -- Mr. City Manager -- and I'm not really sure whether or not all my Commissioners agree with this, but I think that it's really important, Ola, you know, for a lot of reasons. A lot of times, as a newly -elected official, the existing Commissioner prior to you might have set plans for his quality -- or her quality of life dollars that may not be the same priority for me or the other Commissioner that might be transitioning into that new position. I think that it's very, very important, Ola -- and I'm going to say it to Mr. Manager -- whether or not it be quality life dollars or Homeland Defense fund dollars, I think that it's imperative that whether or not the Bond Oversight Board approves anything on this level, it should always come in front of the City Commission to at least approve it. That way, if there is some issues or community residents are concerned with something that's being built in an area and they have not been properly notified, at least they have an opportunity to voice their opinion about something being built in an area that they don't want to have built there. So I think that it is really imperative that -- and I'd like to at least ask the City Attorney and ask for the City Manager to get together to come back -- I don't know if there's a resolution or it's a policy, whatever it is that we need to put in place, there needs to be an exfra step on those type of dollars to make sure that there always remains some form of transparency on what's happening with these -- with the citizens' dollars. I think it's absolutely important. And as we get ready to build Liberty Square Apart -- the Liberty Square Park in that particular community -- and hopefully, my Manager will be able to secure those dollars to do that and work along with many of the folks from the community to do that -- we want to make sure that anything that we improve from the standpoint of putting that park there, that everybody in that particular community has been notified and they understand exactly what's happening in the overall area. It's absolutely important. Mr. Aluko: IfI understand you correctly, Ms. Commissioner -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Sure. City ofMiami Page 99 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Aluko: -- you're saying that once the Bond Oversight Board approves -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Mr. Aluko: -- the use of the funds -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Mr. Aluko: -- then we bring it forth towards -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Whatever the project so that -- you explained, Ola, that no matter what, you know, on your particular projects, the bigger projects -- Mr. Aluko: That's correct. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- you normally do that, correct? Mr. Aluko: That's correct. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. I don't consider this park being a big project. I consider it to be a small project that we're working on. Regardless of the situation, so that there's never any confusion or anyone felt -- feels as though something was done underhandedly or whatever the case may be, I think that the process needs to stay and remain out in the open. Mr. Aluko: Very well. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. So I want to make sure that you, Mr. Manager, bring that back to us. So in light of all that, the only thing that I want to really add -- I'm assuming you understand what the direction is. Stephanie -- Ms. Grindell, I believe in this big patch of land there is a right-of-way in the middle of that land where a sfreet could have been put or was supposed to go, but the public housing unit never did it. We want to keep it open, you know, open space and not actually put the streets in between. So I'm assuming since there is a public right-of-way, 'cause those are City sfreets in the heart of the Liberty Square project -- I mean, Liberty Square housing, we want to make sure that you work hand -in -hand with City staff to make sure that we don't have any blunders on the issue of closing sfreets or not being clear about what's happening with those streets. Stephanie Grindell: Stephanie Grindell, director of Public Works. No. That's not a problem. I'll -- we'll coordinate with them. And the decision on whether or not any sfreet has to be vacated will depend on whether or not there's improvements planned for that particular strip, so Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. But the normal process on that, Stephanie -- just to make sure that I'm really clear -- is to notify -- would you notify the Liberty City residents that that sfreet is going to be vacated if that's the case? Ms. Grindell: It's a public hearing item, so yes, it would come through the City Commission. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. I just wanted to be clear. So, in closing, Mr. Chairman -- I'm sorry for taking so long. Thank you so much. In closing on this, I just want to say -- just in the spirit of all of the transparency that we've talked about today, Commissioner Regalado, and the perception of what the public sees and hears on radio and on television and everywhere else that they hear or have heard about things that are happening in City Hall, I think that it's really, really important that we go the exfra step, just like we did today regarding the issue of the City City ofMiami Page 100 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Attorney's contract, that we do that on all of the things that we're doing in the City ofMiami. I think that is extremely important. I think that, as Commissioner Regalado has stated and Commissioner Sarnoff has stated, you know, the public has or has had a perception that there's a lot of corruption happening here in City Hall. So to avoid -- or not just corruption, but unethical behavior, too, so in the midst of all of this, I think that it's really important that we put the necessary steps in place to avoid the perceptions that something's going on that's not right or correct. So I would like to ask as I get ready to get my beautiful park that we're going to have for those kids in the heart of Liberty Square and we do -- we have identified those dollars, just as I'm able to impose that on me as to make sure that this comes in front of the City Commission, I'm asking that this be -- you guys bring back to us something in writing to state that any dollars, any bond dollars should be back -- or projects that are used from bond dollars should be brought back in front of us for us to make a final decision as to whether or not those projects should be funded. That's my statement. Chair Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My question for the Parks director and the Manager. About a year ago -- no, two years ago, Alicia Cuervo did a tour with Commissioners about parks, you may remember; and there is an empty lot owned by the City ofMiami on Southwest 24th Terrace between 20th and 19th Avenue that was designated a park many, many years ago. During the economic crisis, the City tried to sell it but at the end, the zoning was never changed. It is -- has been always a park. It is a property that was deed to the City in the '20s, and as a result of that, the City decided to do a mini park there. And steps were taken, the fence was fixed, but the problem there is that by nightfall, there is crack addicts that go inside the park because it's very dark, the little park. It's just a lot, and the neighbors are really, really upset. There is people having sex in the park, drugs; even there was a shooting and actually the police responded to that site. Many months ago the Administration agreed to place lights on that park -- I don't know if you remember, Mr. Parks Director -- and they went and they dug the holes and placed some poles but never came back. And I don't know -- you may not even remember this, but we have e-mails (electronic) that dates back to almost a year about that park. Actually, that would be the only park in the Silver Bluff area. There is no park from 32nd Avenue to 17th Avenue, from US 1 to Coral Way, and the people of Silver Bluff were really happy to have the park. There is some furniture that the Parks Department placed there, and I still don't know if you remember. Mr. Burkeen: I do remember a project that we had there. We did some work there -- Commissioner Regalado: Right. Mr. Burkeen: -- and I'm not sure about the lights. I'd have to follow up on that. Commissioner Regalado: Well, I can research and bring you back the e-mails from the Administration that the lights will be installed. The reason of the lights is very simple. If we place lights there, we would avoid at least three or four calls to the Police Department, 9-1-1, during the week; drugs, prostitution, people trying to break in into the apartment building next door or the houses next door, so it's just a matter of getting the lights. The Parks Department went there -- I was there -- dug the holes, have the light poles on it, but there's no light. I think that there was an issue with the electrical connection, and according to an e-mail dating back several months ago, it was resolved. So if you please have someone check that, because the lights will resolve all the crime issues and people would have a park just to rest during the day. Thank you. Mr. Burkeen: I'll get back to you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Ernest, can I just ask you something.? Ernest -- I'm sorry. On his -- City ofMiami Page 101 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 D5.2 08-00186 on the mini park that Commissioner Regalado just mentioned, who would be responsible for paying the light bill? Mr. Burkeen: We would. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So the City would pay the light bill on the mini park? Mr. Burkeen: Yes. DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION REGARDING TITLE ISSUES FOR 1291 NW 55TH TERRACE AND 1436 NW 61 STREET. 08-00186 E-mail.pdf DISCUSSED Vice Chair Spence -Jones: On D5.2, for this afternoon -- and I meant to mention it earlier, but I'm going to withdraw title issues because I think the Law Department has addressed that issue. Chair Sanchez: It's been withdrawn. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: My D5.2. My personal item, D5.2. But I wanted to ask, in exchange - - because I really would like to have clarity on the donation of the fence item. So I would like to have that -- for me, I have some questions on that. I'd like my D5.2 item to be replaced with that, or I just have a question about the fence. Chair Sanchez: Commissioner, the item has been withdrawn. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. So I won't -- Chair Sanchez: You -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- make it an -- I won't make -- I won't necessarily talk about this particular item that was put on by the Administration, but I do -- I would like to replace my D5. 2 item to just get clarity on the fence items. Chair Sanchez: All right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: I could accept that, but I could also accept, if you want -- since the item has been withdrawn, you have every right to put it on your blue pages at the next Commission meeting, which is the 13th; that way, you know, we don't have swapping of resolutions and swapping of pocket items. So once it's on the agenda -- and she is entitled to put anything on the agenda she wants to discuss, but it is not in the order of the day. So I would respectfully, as the Chair and you as the Vice Chair, state that the item has been withdrawn; you could put it as a blue pages [sic] at the next Commission meeting, and we'll be more than happy to entertain your discussions or questions you may have on that. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Okay. So, Mr. City Manger, she has requested that that item be put at the next Commission -- Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Right. City ofMiami Page 102 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: -- meeting on her blue pages. Mr. Hernandez: Understood. And, Mr. Chairman, what I'll fry to do also is reach out to the Commissioner during the break and provide her an update on the subject matter as best can. Chair Sanchez: Well, that's up to you. "[Later...]" Chair Sanchez: Vice Chair, you're recognized. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: My item, you mean? Okay. All right. Thank you. My item is -- again, Mr. Chairman, the title issue I told you we're not going to take up now. I believe the City Attorney has addressed that issue for me regarding my blue page item, right, so -- I'm sorry. Mr. City Manager, it's already addressed, my title issue? You just signed off on it, right, so that my homeowner can move in, right? Mr. Hernandez: That's my understanding. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So it's a dead issue. Mr. Hernandez: My understanding, those issues have been resolved. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: All right. Only thing that I just want to add to Madam Attorney, City Attorney, is that whatever you can do, and I really appreciate your hard work on that, Madam Attorney, really pushing to make sure that this title issues are -- get cleared up in the -- with the Model City Trust -- or Liberty City Trust because we have several houses that are, you know, in limbo, so whatever we need to do, I would hopefully have your support in pushing that along. Maria J. Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): Yes. I am aware of the problem, and I'm moving forward on getting the documents in order. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And thank you for making it happen. NA.1 08-00244 DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE FEBRUARY 23, 2008 RIBBON -CUTTING CEREMONY HELD BY THE VIRGINIA KEY BEACH TRUST FOR THE REOPENING OF VIRGINIA KEY BEACH. DISCUSSED Chair Sanchez: Before we go to the consent agenda, Commissioner Sarnoff you're recognized for the record. Commissioner Sarnoff Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to recognize the Virginia Key Trust, who had their opening ceremonies this past weekend; and emphasized the importance of -- this beach had and now has again to the African American community during the days of segregation. And it becomes now a tremendous asset and regional park for all of Miami -Dade County, and now it's reopened for everyone to enjoy. There was ribbon -cutting ceremonies this past Friday, and people from the Caribbean, West Palm Beach, all over Miami -Dade County came; and it was well attended by our Legislature, our officials, state, county, and city. I'd like to acknowledge the board trust members and, more importantly, President Gene Tinnie, the Executive Director Shorter and his staff for a great job. I did go out there on Saturday, and I was able to spend family day out there; and it was truly a unique experience. Dr. Lowery provided a great speech, which can be still heard, I believe, on the Miami Herald;; and the family City ofMiami Page 103 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 day festivities the next day were great. I did make an interesting challenge to them. I created a grand challenge. They have a carousel out there that they're operating this past weekend, and that carousel, to keep in place, will cost about $200, 000. I agreed to give them one hundred thou -- up to $100, 000 from our quality of life funds for every dollar that they raise. So I will match them up to $100, 000 for every dollar that they can raise to keep the carousel at Virginia Key Beach. And I just wanted to acknowledge the great work that they're doing out there, and to look forward to the next phase of the project, which is the museum out there; and give them a great commendation. It's a great beach. Everybody from all walks of life should go out there and visit Virginia Key Beach. It's fruly a unique experience for everyone, for all of South Florida to enjoy. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Thank you, Commissioner. NA.2 08-00245 DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION CONCERNING PRIMARY SOURCE OF SECURITY AT THE MIAMI MARLINS BASEBALL STADIUM. MOTION A motion was made by Commissioner Gonzalez , seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed unanimously, directing the City Manager to ensure that the City ofMiami Police and Fire Departments are the primary sources of security at the Miami Marlins baseball stadium. Chair Sanchez: All right. Now we go to PZ (Planning & Zoning) items. PZ items. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, if you allow, I have a question about the police also -- that is not related to this -- to the City Manager. Could you allow me to do it now, before the PZ, or -- because he's going to leave the dais? Chair Sanchez: All right. Well, we'll -- Commissioner Regalado: Okay. Chair Sanchez: -- take it out of order. Commissioner Regalado: It's a -- it's -- briefly. It's a question about the 30-days window that you have to finish negotiations on whose police force is going to work in the stadium. Because I got the letter -- I'm sure that you did -- I got the request from the union, police union, that they want the City Commission supporting the fact -- or telling you that we support the fact that the Miami Police Department should work in the Orange Bowl. What is the process of this negotiations? Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Commissioners -- Commissioner, the process -- Mr. Chairman and all Commissioners -- would be for both administrations, the City and the County, and their respective police and fire departments to come together and agree on an equitable way to resolve this matter. I think the word 'fair" is very important. Both the City and the County police and fire departments can make very strong arguments as to why it should be a hundred percent City or a hundred percent County. I think that the Board of County Commissioners, at their meeting last Thursday, I think that they were wise enough not to pass any fixed restrictions that they wanted to do initially, and they backed off of that position to allow the administration and to allow Police and Fire of both City and County to come together and find a reasonable way to handle the public safety services required at the stadium. Commissioner Regalado: But the County Commission has to take action; we don't. That's -- I was watching on TV (Television). City ofMiami Page 104 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Mr. Hernandez: But it would have to be -- you're right. It would have to be on a plan that there would be an agreement on between the forces from Police and Fire from the City and the County. Commissioner Regalado: And what is your opinion? Mr. Hernandez: My opinion is that it will be very difficult to have a hundred percent by either one of the forces. Honestly, I think that there should be a joint pool of officers, either in Fire and Police, to come together to provide that service, and in my opinion, they should be under the charge of a City officer, whether it be City and/or County. And the reason for that is that the stadium is in the heart of the City ofMiami. If you ever have a disturbance, something significant, the person in charge has to be somebody that can communicate immediately and take charge to provide additional City services that may be needed, either from Police or Fire. We have a fire station that is half a mile away. We have a police station that is nearby. But I think that there should be a shared pool of officers to participate and partake in the needs. We're talking about 81 games. Neither the County or the City by themselves are going to be able to manage to just man 81 games. I think it's extreme. I think that it's a great opportunity for both forces to share their pool, to share their people, and provide the support. But my only issue is one of the control. The officer in charge of the operation has to be somebody who is a City Fire person or a City Police person, whether it be a captain or a major or whatever. Commissioner Regalado: But my question still -- because I'm troubled. If there is an agreement, the County Commission is the one that needs to take action, whether to approve it or reject it; not the City Commission. That was the wording. Mr. Hernandez: That was the wording that was used last Thursday; however, it doesn't mean that I couldn't bring back the solution to -- let's say that we have something between now and the next City Commission meeting. It doesn't prevent us from -- or myself to bring it back to you on the 13th, if we have a solution or a proposed plan. And in essence, what I've given you here today is something that, in my opinion, is extremely logical. It doesn't mean that it'll be accepted. It's just a logical approach to solving this problem. Commissioner Regalado: And what if you don't succeed? Because what you're saying makes sense, but what if you don't succeed? What do we do as a body here to represent the Police and Fire? Mr. Hernandez: Commissioner, I hope that common sense will prevail. I would like to get -- Commissioner Regalado: Common sense -- Mr. Hernandez: -- both unions in the same room -- Commissioner Regalado: -- never -- Mr. Hernandez: -- and tell them to solve it; I won't let them out until they have a solution. Commissioner Regalado: -- is present in any dealings with the government. Mr. Hernandez: I know it's not easy, Commissioner. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Mr. Chairman, I just have a quick question. Chair Sanchez: Commissioner Spence -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones, you're recognized -- City ofMiami Page 105 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And this is -- Chair Sanchez: -- for the record. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I mean, this is really a question for the City Attorney, butt mean, I just think it's even crazy that we even having this discussion. It's City land, you know. Forever, you know, the Police Department and the Fire Department has provided the services. I just don't even know why this is even really a discussion, and I support Commissioner Regalado on making sure that if nothing else, we send a very solid message of unity to the Board of County Commission [sic]. Even if he wants to introduce a resolution on that, I think that we should be doing that. So that's just -- that's crazy that we're not even considering that. My question, though, is for the City Attorney. In the last meeting we had about the baseball stadium, I don't remember which Commissioner actually mentioned it, but the question came up -- it was Commissioner Regalado -- about substantial changes on our -- remember, Commissioner Regalado? And you kind of drilled down on the issue ofwhat is substantial, and you kept saying what is substantial? Commissioner Regalado: And she said important. And I said that everything was important. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So my question to our City Attorney is -- because it seems as though the County made a lot of I would say, some substantial suggestions. I think that based upon what happened at the County, we can consider those changes substantial. So why couldn't we introduce some of these changes? Maria J Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): My understanding ofwhat happened at the County was that subsequent to the approval of the agreement, there were directions given to be included in the agreements that put the master agreement, if you will -- Commissioner Gonzalez: And the administration -- Ms. Chiaro: -- in effect. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- agreement and also in the construction agreement. Ms. Chiaro: Yes. And so there will be coming before you the agreements involved in putting the functions and operations in effect. Included in those agreements coming before you will be the issue of who provides the safety services. And there will be information provided to you in terms of what's involved in your labor agreements and what the legal positions are, at least coming from my office, so that you have a handle on what your safety services officers are entitled to and what kind of leeway you have in terms of approving the subsequent agreement. Mr. Hernandez: Mr. Chairman, I think that -- I have to thank the City Attorney. She brought up something that I should have mentioned before. There are four so-called definitive agreements that must be agreed upon by the City and the County before July 1. One of them -- one deals with the construction detail. It's mostly County, but we have some involvement. There is one that it's a management agreement, and that's the one that, in essence, one of its components is the public safety aspect. And when we were working, the City and the County were working on negotiating and finalizing the baseball stadium agreement that was approved last week, the issue of public safety at the stadium was left for the management agreement that is one to still be approved. What happened at the County Commission the other day is that the component of the management agreement having to do with public safety was accelerated to 30 days rather than July 1. Chair Sanchez: Commissioner Gonzalez, you're recognized for the record. City ofMiami Page 106 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I think that this discussion is very, very good. But I need -- I believe that we need to take some action because the County Commission already did that. And in order to do that, I would like to move a resolution that -- where it says that we, the City Commission, support a hundred percent our firefighters and our Police Department to be working at the new Marlins Stadium. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: IfI may? Chair Sanchez: There's a motion and a second for the record. Commissioner -- Commissioner Regalado: IfI -- Chair Sanchez: -- Regalado, you're recognized. Commissioner Regalado: A friendly amendment. Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Go ahead. Commissioner Regalado: I think the Manager is correct, so ifI would add the primary source of security, Fire and Police. Commissioner Gonzalez: The amendment is accepted. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you very much. Chair Sanchez: The motion has been amendment. The maker of the motion accepted the friendly amendment. Mr. City Manager, would you like to say something for the record? Mr. Hernandez: Yes. I think it's important that I state that -- or clarify the resolution because, honestly, I cannot be in a situation where I'm boxed in in a negotiation where I cannot negotiate. I think that when we walked in, the Mayor and I walked in the County Hall the other day, they were trying to, in essence, force us to make a decision on the spot. And we said, look, we have been working on the baseball deal for six years, and we're not going to agree to something here now. If you want us to agree to something here now having to do with public safety, there is no deal. So then they backed off from that position and allowed for the 30-day period to be used in order to -- for both City and County to work this out and then come back. It has to come back to them, but it has to come back to you too as part of that management agreement. And thank you, Madam City Attorney. But I think that I still have the ability to continue to negotiate. What I have is a sense of direction from the City Commission as to what they would like to see. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chairman. Ms. Chiaro: That's correct. Commissioner Regalado: IfI may? Ms. Chiaro: That's the way I hear the motion to be. Chair Sanchez: Commissioner Sarnoff, you're recognized. City ofMiami Page 107 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Commissioner Sarnoff We're not the first city to ever address this issue. New York and New Jersey have the Port Authority, which is a task force of both New York and New Jersey police officers. And what had suggested was maybe we start thinking a little bit outside the box. Primarily, the thing that we should be most concerned with is not a political solution, but necessarily a safety issue. It's the public welfare that we're talking about here. We're speaking about in the event somebody has a heart attack, who's there to revive them? In the event there's a disturbance, who's there to protect us? And we all know that stadiums can be the choice of many people that don't necessarily see themselves as friendly to the United States. So it's an issue that we should be looking at from a public safety standpoint. I think -- and I'm just giving you a suggestion -- to the two unions, I think the two union heads should actually go in a room and they should actually try to work out -- no, not fight with each other. If you have to at the end, that's your choice. Butl think you actually should sit in a room, because truthfully, to Armando, 81 games with the number of police officers you have is going to put a strain on you. And to the County, anything that goes wrong, it's going to be the City that necessarily has to respond; and I'll suspect -- although, I have -- I don't have stadium security plans -- most of the police officers will probably be exterior of the facility managing traffic and managing, you know, the things commensurate with bringing 30, 40,000 people, God willing, to a baseball stadium. Equally for Fire, Fire can arrange -- you know, the fire itself is going to be fought, I would imagine, by the City ofMiami. It's the rescue part that becomes somewhat, you know, an issue. I just think that Bobby Suarez -- and forgive me, I don't know the County's comparable. I know it's John Rivera, I think, is your comparable. Butl think it's time for you guys to sit in a room and not politicize this, but to say how is it best to serve -- I won't even say County residents or City residents. How is it best to serve South Florida? And how are we best able to protect them -- you from, you know, harm and danger, and the Fire Department from, you know, essentially somebody having a heart attack. I'm not saying it's the only thing you guys do, but equally for fire protection as well. And I just believe that this is where you can -- I don't want to say compromise, but come up with a solution that you've maybe never had before. Have you ever operated as a unit before? Have you ever considered operating as a unit? I could tell you this, before the New York and New Jersey Port Authority was created, they never operated as a unit before either; and it is considered one of the best units in all of the United States, and the most desirable place to work. So maybe where I -- maybe where some see this as a problem, I hope you see this as an opportunity because I certainly do see it as an opportunity. We're going to have many more projects between the City and the County, and maybe it's our time to say there's a joint task force with these projects. Sergeant Armando Aguilar (Police): Mr. Chairman, can I speak? Chair Sanchez: You may. Before I allow you, listen, this was an item that was not on the agenda. I allowed it as a point of privilege because I think it's an important item that needs to be addressed, okay? But it is not on the agenda. The item has been discussed. There is a motion and a second directing the City Manager to take the action that was directed by this legislative body. I'm going to allow about three minutes, maybe I'll allow the firefighters representation union three minutes, and then we need to vote on this and move on with the agenda, okay? Sergeant Aguilar: Thank you, sir. Chair Sanchez: You're recognized for the record. Sergeant Aguilar: Armando Aguilar, president ofMiami Fraternal Order of Police, 710 Southwest 12th Avenue. It's interesting that you brought up the Port Authority issue because when 9/11 hit, the Port Authority police had no communications at all with the city of New York; and it was total chaos. The same thing happens with the County. We're not even on the same radio frequencies. I'm not saying that I'm not willing to sit down with them and negotiate something, but think they're forcing it down our throat. And it's extremely important for this City ofMiami Page 108 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Commission to take a stance and say that you're behind your police officers and firefighters so that at least we have some leverage when it comes to being able to sit at the table. Thank you. Commissioner Sarnoff Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Robert Suarez (President of Fire Union, Fire Rescue): Robert Suarez, Miami Association of Firefighters. Fellow Commissioners, this is really an issue of public safety. I know the media and the County unions have focused on the overtime issue, but when we look at our responsibility to provide a service to the visitors and residents ofMiami that visit that location from a public safety perspective, it makes absolutely no sense to hand over the public safety keys to an outside agency when all the infrastructure and support that's in place is City ofMiami Police and Fire. Within a three-mile area of that stadium, there are over 40 Miami Fire and Rescue units staffed around the clock. There is one single County unit in that three-mile area, and it's at -- a unit that's dedicated solely to the Port ofMiami. It doesn't make any public safety sense to have an agency like that run a public safety operation at that location. And we're just asking you to -- aside from the issue of work and overtime, which is clearly one of the -- our motivating factors, from a public safety perspective, it does not make sense to just simply hand over the keys to this agency. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Before we close on this issue, I think it's important, as they stated, the County Commissioners stood by their police officers and firefighters; this Commission should do the same. We should stand by our firefighters and our police officers. I think that with the individuals that are at the table, they -- the part of the suggestion was 30 days for them to sit down and come to an agreement. There's still like 20-something days left. So what Commissioner Sarnoff suggested is something that could -- something could still be worked out. I mean, but it's important that at least we vote on something, sending a clear message that we, as the legislative body, will support our men and women in Police and Fire Department. So having said that, there's a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion passes. Thank you. All right. PZ items. Applause. NA.3 08-00246 DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE WITHDRAWAL OF A REQUEST TO PLACE AN ITEM RELATIVE TO THE DONATION OF A FENCE FROM BERIMBAU INVESTMENTS TO GROVE HERITAGE GARDEN PARK ON THE MARCH 13, 2008 CITY COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA. DISCUSSED Chair Sanchez: Before we do that and the presentation, I'd like to recognize Commissioner Spence -Jones -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones for the record. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't see anyone from the Manager's -- at least the Manager, butt guess you're here, Orlando. I just want to -- earlier I had mentioned about putting on the agenda, the next agenda, information regarding the donation of the fence. I'd like to withdraw that off of the next agenda. Chair Sanchez: All right. City ofMiami Page 109 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: So, for the record, the item that was requested by the Vice Chair to be placed on the agenda as a blue page district item, she has respectfully requested that the item be withdrawn. NA.4 08-00250 DISCUSSION ITEM Direction by Chair Sanchez to the City Manager to report back to the Commission with an itemized list showing how the $75,000 donated from the Bayfront Park Trust to Henderson Park was used at the park. DISCUSSED Chair Sanchez: All right. Any other questions? Sir, come on up. You're the next contestant on "The Price is Right." Ernest Burkeen (Director, Parks & Recreation): You didn't see I was trying to get out of here. Chair Sanchez: How's your golf game? Mr. Burkeen: It's like the army, left, right, left, right. Chair Sanchez: Left, right. My blue page item has to do with one of my parks, which you are very familiar with, Henderson Park. You know, about two years ago I was in a -- I was invited to a presentation given by Joe Riley, who's the mayor of Charleston, and he made -- he gave a quote that stuck to my mind that said, "Great cities should not deprive their communities ofgreat parks." And if you look around and you see our city, we're doing that. I have to say that our new parks are coming along. I had the opportunity to cut the ribbon at Fairlawn Park, and what more of a success story that the City could showcase that we took an area that was completely abandoned, where the City dumped its frash and even contaminated the site, it was cleaned up, and today they have a class act park with two baseball fields, basketball courts, and a park where people could go and enjoy and take pride. Now, you know, as the Chair I get to drive around our community and see what's happening. I've been to Little Haiti. I've seen their park, fabulous. Every chance I get, I drive down 836 and I see the new water theme park. Man, I'm proud of that, 'cause you know what? My kids are going to go there, and one day, maybe my grandchildren will go there, but drive through my district and at times I'm brokenhearted. Henderson Park -- and I'm just going to give you some pictures, and they say pictures are worth a thousand words. This park, in the heart of my district -- let me give you the pictures taken this morning by my staff. And I want you to look at those pictures 'cause I want you to see with your own eyes that am justified in sitting -- in standing here in front of you and addressing the issues that are ofgreat concern to my staff and the people that represent. Look at that, look at those pictures. That is one of the smallest parks thatl have, and I am the Commissioner with the less [sic] green acreage and parks in the City of Miami. That park -- we gave $75,000 out of the Bayfront Park Trust for that park, and I'm going to ask you to do me a favor. Through the City Manager, I want you to give me back line per item of how you spent those $75 [sic] in that park 'cause I'm embarrassed to go to that park. The residents of Little Havana are embarrassed to go to that park. Look at that park. It's heavily used because they play a lot of soccer in that field, and there's not a single grass in that -- it's basically dirt, but that's fine 'cause people are using it. But look at the tennis courts, graffiti, frash all over. Just look at the pictures. I -- you know, I think you need to look at the pictures. I'm not done yet. All right. Look at the pictures where there's bags of dope on the floor [sic] in those parks. It is such horrible conditions that have here that mothers are telling my staff they do not allow their kids to go play in that park. Our parks should reflect what the City is all about. The other parks do. I took great pride going to cut the ribbon at Fairlawn Park. I took great pride when I went to see Little Haiti Park. I took City ofMiami Page 110 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 great pride when I walked and cut the ribbons at the new baseball facility over near the Grapeland Park, but this park, with all the graffiti and stuff I just don't see -- maybe it's not in a maintenance list or something. I don't know 'cause this is not the first time we've talked about this park. Director, we're going to go out to lunch and you and I are going to go visit that park, how's that? When was the last time you went to that park? Mr. Burkeen: If lunch is on you, it's okay. Chair Sanchez: When was the last time you went to that park? Mr. Burkeen: It's been a little while. Chair Sanchez: Do you even know where it's located? Mr. Burkeen: I know where it's located. I've been there. In fact, if you -- as you can recall, we have a staff person we put out there that we hadn't done before, and he ran -- Chair Sanchez: Well, that person -- if you have a staff person out there, that staff person should be fired 'cause look at those pictures -- look at those pictures. Mr. Burkeen: Excuse me. He ran a number of programs there. We just recently got an irrigation contract back which has Henderson at the top of the list. Once we can go in and get the irrigation in, we can then put grass in and maintain it. Chair Sanchez: The grass is the least of my concern, sir -- Mr. Burkeen: Well, part of it is the programming. Chair Sanchez: -- because the kids could play there. I mean, they play -- they use that park to the ground. They play soccer there from 9 o'clock in the morning 'til 10 o'clock at night with car lights. That park is heavily used, but look at the condition that it's in. Look at the graffiti. Look at the garbage all over the place. That is not a reflection of you. That is not a reflection of this city. That is certainly not the reflection of this Commission, nor the Mayor. So, please help me help you make that park one of our jewels. Please. Mr. Burkeen: Yes. Chair Sanchez: So whether you want to do lunch, you want to play golf you'll embarrass me, but I'll still go out and play golf with you, but let's get together and go to that park so I won't have to be back up here in six months again. Mr. Burkeen: Okeydoke. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Let me just add to your park, your beautiful park, Mr. -- the beautiful park in the making. Ernest, can you come back? Chair Sanchez: And the hits just keep on coming. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No, no, I'm not going to hit you. I just want to say because I know, you know, we ask a lot of the City employees, and I have to honestly say, in the very beginning you and I were at it all the time about my parks, and I want to at least acknow -- you know, it's okay to say the things that aren't right and aren't good 'cause that's the only way we improve, but it's also important to tell you when you're doing a great job. And I have to say that, at least in City ofMiami Page 111 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 District 5, there has been a huge turnaround on what's happening in my parks, and I truly, fruly appreciate it. I hate I'm giving you another park to now add to your list of parks with the Liberty Square Park because already you're having a issue with having enough personnel to do what you already -- what you're already frying to do. So I just wanted to at least commend you and your team for all of the great work that you're at least doing in my district. And I'm sure Commissioner Sanchez -- or Chairman Sanchez feels the same way. We just want to make sure that -- I'm sure he just wants to make sure that the park -- the few parks that he has, that the same type of attention that's going in other areas throughout the City, okay, that there's some focus on those -- the two little parks that he does -- oh, well, not little; one little, one big -- gets the kind of attention that it really needs. So not that I'm trying to explain away you beating up Ernest on the dais, butt just wanted to at least acknowledge you for -- you and your team for doing a great job. Mr. Burkeen: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Hey, Ernest, it's tough love, man. It's tough love. Mr. Burkeen: Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Now, Mr. Manager, real fast -- so -- as we close out, regarding this park and other parks, park equipment and donations of equipment, period, like if I'm able to get someone to donate something to Liberty Square Park, what is the procedure on that so I'm clear? Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Commissioner, if it's less than $25, 000, the Manager can accept it. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: If it's less than $25, 000, you can accept. Then why did you have the - Maria J. Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): Up to $25, 000. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- $14, 000 fence on today if it's less than 25,000? Ms. Chiaro: He said the right thing. Because it's a -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Why did you have --? Then my question -- Why did you have the donation of -- it's not a park now because you told me it's not a park in the West Grove -- why did you put that on the agenda for $14, 000 if you didn't have to bring it in front of us? Commissioner Sarnoff Well, I'll bring it up at the next Commission meeting on my blue pages, so I'll describe it and explain it 'cause I asked it to be put there. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Oh, you did? Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So -- okay. So -- 'cause you didn't have -- in other words, I can get any donations less than $25, 000 and you can accept it without it coming in front of the City Commission, and the only reason -- Mr. Hernandez: Commissioner -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- the one in the West Grove did not come on is because Commissioner Sarnoff asked -- I mean, did -- well, the reason it was on was 'cause City ofMiami Page 112 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 NA.5 08-00252 Commissioner Sarnoff asked for it to be placed on the agenda, correct? Mr. Hernandez: Yes. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And he also asked for it to be removed off until the next meeting. Mr. Hernandez: And I also participated in that because I felt that it wasn't right to be discussed by the City Commission. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. All right. So -- but he's bringing it back for us to have an understanding about why it was --? Mr. Hernandez: I think the Commissioner wanted to have some discussion on it. I felt that it wasn't right at this point in time to discuss the item. There are certain things that have to be still discussed on that item. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Chair Sanchez: All right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you. DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION CONCERNING CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED MURALS ORDINANCE. DISCUSSED Chair Sanchez: Any further item? If not, I think that takes care of-- oh, there's -- Commissioner Sarnoff Yes. I have one issue. I know you have a pocket item. We'll talk about whether you have your financial disclosure in line. Chair Sanchez: And they better have it. Commissioner Sarnoff I don't think they do, but we'll talk about it. I just learned, Mr. -- Chair Sanchez: Then we vote it down. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Manager, I just learned that you put your murals ordinance on your March 13 agenda. I thought the instruction from this Commission was for us to sit down and try to work on it together. Just so you know, I've made myself available. That has not happened, and I'm finding out that your ordinance is on the agenda. Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Commissioner, ifyou come over to my area, you'll see big notes saying to get together with you to discuss the item, and I'll -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well, I think it was this -- I think it was the intention of this Commission Chair Sanchez: We lost the quorum. Let me know -- I don't think we're going to -- Are we voting on your issue? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I'm going to the -- I just need to go to the --- City ofMiami Page 113 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Commissioner Sarnoff No, not voting. Chair Sanchez: All right. It's not a voting issue, so -- Commissioner Sarnoff I just thought it was the will of this Commission that we try to work on one ordinance -- Mr. Hernandez: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff -- and, obviously, you feel confident enough to put your ordinance on, what I was told. I haven't read it. I justgot this message put up here. All I'm suggesting to you is if we're going to work on something, we should work on it before we put it on the agenda. I have done everything I could do to make myself available to this City for that ordinance. Mr. Hernandez: Commissioner, at this point in time, we're working through the preliminary stages of the March 13 agenda, so it's within plenty of time for us to work together and develop it. It's just that I need to start formulating the skeleton of that ordinance, so it's far, far from a -- Commissioner Sarnoff So we'll be using your skeleton? Mr. Hernandez: I'd rather put in the meat. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Chair Sanchez: All right. Yours is going to require an additional -- Oh, Regalado's back. You just got back, right? Okay. All right, 'cause we didn't have a quorum. All right. NA.6 08-00251 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO GRANT WAIVERS OF THE NOISE RESTRICTIONS CONTAINED IN SECTIONS 36-4 AND 36-5 OF THE CITY OF MIAMI CODE, FORA NINETY (90) DAY PERIOD, COMMENCING ON MARCH 1, 2008, TO FACILITATE THE FILMING OF MOTION PICTURE PRODUCTIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF MIAMI, AS STATED HEREIN. Motion by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Sarnoff, Sanchez and Regalado Absent: 2 - Commissioner Gonzalez and Spence -Jones R-08-01 02 Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman, I do have -- Chair Sanchez: Mr. City Manager, you're recognized. Mr. Hernandez: -- a pocket item that I think was delivered yesterday, and I think that Mr. Parente briefed each one of you on it. It deals with a waiver of the noise ordinance for film productions between March 1 and June 1, and that it's with your approval to allow the Manager to grant waivers, as necessary, during that time period in order to proceed with the filming ofI think it's three productions. And Mr. Parente will assist me in making sure that this creates the least inconvenience to the general public. Robert Parente (Director, Mayor's Office of Film and Cultural Affairs): That's correct. City ofMiami Page 114 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: All right, sir, you're recognized -- Mr. Parente: Robert Parente -- Chair Sanchez: -- for the record. Mr. Parente: -- director of the Mayor's Office of Film and Cultural Affairs. If you have questions -- we've done this before with Miami Vice, with Christmas in Miami. It does not grant the productions a 90-day waiver. It grants them -- Commission -- you grant the Manager permission over that 90-day period to waive working past 11 o'clock on the noise ordinance, should they ask. We've been indicated that one production with Renee Zellweger and Harry Connick, Jr., entitled Chilled in Miami, is going to ask for -- to work past 11 o'clock on one night, and another production is going to ask to work late on Watson Island past 11 o'clock, but the timings of those things usually don't fall into place with the Commission meetings, so therefore, we're asking you to grant the Manager the right to grant those waivers on a case -by -case basis. Chair Sanchez: Is there a motion? Commissioner Sarnoff So moved. Chair Sanchez: There's a -- Commissioner Regalado: Second. Chair Sanchez: -- motion and a second. No discussion on the item. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: All right. That was quick. Mr. Parente: Thank you very much. It's a great day for a film in Miami, 25th anniversary. Miami International Film Festival kicks off this week, tonight. Chair Sanchez: Well see you there. Mr. Parente: Great. NA.7 08-00253 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING A CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE MAYOR'S INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. APPOINTEE: NOMINATED BY: Caramenza Jaramillo Mayor Manuel A. Diaz 08-00253-Submittal-Memo. pdf City ofMiami Page 115 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Sarnoff, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Sarnoff, Sanchez and Regalado Absent: 2 - Commissioner Gonzalez and Spence -Jones R-08-0103 A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Sarnoff, and was passed unanimously, with Vice Chair Spence -Jones and Commissioner Gonzalez absent, to appoint Carmenza Jaramillo as a member of the Mayor's International Council. Chair Sanchez: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, the City ofMiami Commission -- Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Sir -- Chair. Chair Sanchez: -- need a motion to adjourn. Ms. Thompson: You do have a pocket item that was submitted by the Mayor. Chair Sanchez: Oh, I do apologize for that. Your -- which is? Ms. Thompson: The Mayor has submitted for your approval for the Mayor's International Council the appointment of Caramenza Jaramillo to the Mayor's International Council, please. Chair Sanchez: All right. Is there a motion? Commissioner Regalado: I move it. Chair Sanchez: There's a motion and a second. Commissioner Sarnoff Second. Chair Sanchez: No discussion on the item. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: The individual has been appointed to the Mayor's International Council. Is there a motion to adjourn? Commissioner Sarnoff So moved. Chair Sanchez: One is always in order. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you so much. This meeting is adjourned. NA.8 08-00254 DISCUSSION ITEM DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE SCHEDULING OF A SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING TO DISCUSS THE STATUS OF MIAMI 21. DISCUSSED Chair Sanchez: What do you have? You have another pocket item? Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): No. I just have a -- information that I wanted to pass on City ofMiami Page 116 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 to the City Commission. As you recall, at the last Commission meeting, February 14, we discussed the status ofMiami 21 and the fact that we will be ready to provide that information and have it on the Web March 7. We are doing well with respect to that date, and we plan to have it available to the general public on March 7. We had promised to have that information available to the general public for four weeks, so my recommendation, Mr. Chairman, would be to have this item before the City Commission on a special City Commission meeting on April 8, at 9 a.m. Commissioner Regalado: Whoa, whoa, whoa. We said that not until the whole City is mapped. Mr. Hernandez: Well, as I discussed at the last meeting, this is the code amendment portion of it. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, yeah. I know you -- what you discussed -- Mr. Hernandez: And -- Commissioner Regalado: -- but I'm telling you what we said. Mr. Hernandez: -- the mapping of the other three quadrants has to be done, so the idea here, Commissioner, is at the end, when -- if you ever approve Miami 21, if it gets approved, that it would apply to the whole city. There would be no period where you have two codes in effect. So even though you do the code amendment, the mapping for the other three quadrants has to be done, and then you have to deal with the four quadrants at the end of the year. Commissioner Regalado: Then we wait. Chair Sanchez: Listen, I thought we discussed this the last time and we set the process as -- how we -- Mr. Hernandez: Yes. Chair Sanchez: -- were going to handle it. Commissioner Regalado: That's what -- he brought it up. Chair Sanchez: To bring it up -- Commissioner Regalado: I support it. Chair Sanchez: -- now at the last minute, when Commissioners are rushing out -- Mr. Hernandez: Right. Chair Sanchez: -- is inappropriate, so let's just -- listen, let's -- you want to give us an update, give us an update at the next regular meeting, and -- We set out the process. It was very clearly defined. Mr. Hernandez: Right. But all wanted to do is to start, you know, at least putting out the potential date so the -- Chair Sanchez: Well, the first thing you got to do -- Mr. Hernandez: -- proper planning. City ofMiami Page 117 Printed on 3/21/2008 City Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2008 Chair Sanchez: -- is post it up. That was the first thing that we agreed. Mr. Hernandez: Right. Chair Sanchez: Then the first meeting was in April sometime. Mr. Hernandez: Right. Chair Sanchez: Okay. And then the second reading on the Code -- Mr. Hernandez: Right. Chair Sanchez: -- and then the mapping goes forward -- Mr. Hernandez: Yes. Chair Sanchez: -- and then the mapping, when it's all done, it comes back to the Commission. However, it is not implemented 'til everything is done. Mr. Hernandez: You're totally right. Chair Sanchez: And we vote on it citywide, not per quadrant. Mr. Hernandez: Yes. Chair Sanchez: That was the agreement that we had. Mr. Hernandez: And that's what I sort of provided the update on right now. Chair Sanchez: All right. Thank you so much. Commission meeting's adjourned. A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Sarnoff, and was passed unanimously, with Vice Chair Spence -Jones and Commissioner Gonzalez absent, to adjourn today's meeting. City ofMiami Page 118 Printed on 3/21/2008