Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2009-09-04 MinutesCity of Miami City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33133 www.miamigov.com Meeting Minutes Friday, September 4, 2009 10:00 AM SPECIAL MEETING 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 Julie 0 Bru, City Attorney Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 10:00 A.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Present: Commissioner Gonzalez, Commissioner Sarnoff, Chair Sanchez, Regalado and Vice Chair Spence -Jones On the 4th day of September 2009, the City Commission of the City ofMiami, Florida, met at its regular meeting place in City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida, in special session. The meeting was called to order by Chair Sanchez at 10:38 a.m., recessed at 1:11 p.m., reconvened at 2: 24 p.m., and adjourned at 6:18 p.m. Note for the Record: Commissioner Gonzalez entered the Commission chambers at 10:46 a.m. Note for the Record: Vice Chair Spence -Jones entered the Commission chambers at 2: 37 p.m. ALSO PRESENT: Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager Julie O. Bru, City Attorney Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk Order of the Day SP.1 06-02095 ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF MIAMI TO ADOPT A NEW ZONING CODE TO BE KNOWN AS THE "MIAMI 21 CODE", INCLUDING DEFINITIONS, GENERAL PROVISIONS WHICH ALSO INCLUDE THE ADOPTION OF THE MIAMI 21 ATLAS FOR THE ENTIRE CITY OF MIAMI, REGULATIONS GENERAL TO ZONES, STANDARDS AND TABLES, REGULATIONS SPECIFIC TO ZONES, SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS, PROCEDURES AND NONCONFORMITIES, AND THOROUGHFARE GUIDELINES; REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS APPLICABLE, AND REPLACING IT WITH THE MIAMI 21 CODE; PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City ofMiami Page 2 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 06-02095 PAB 04-18-07 Reso.PDF 06-02095 PAB 12-17-08 Resos.pdf 06-02095 Miami River Commission Recommendations.pdf 06-02095 PAB 01-07-09 Resos.pdf 06-02095 CC FR Legislation (Version 4).pdf 06-02095 Exhibit A (Miami 21 Code).pdf 06-02095 Exhibit B (Miami 21 Atlas).pdf 06-02095 CC FR 09-04-09 Fact Sheet.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Petitions Opposing the 35' Height Limitation to Miami 21.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 1.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 2.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 3.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 4.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 5.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 6.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Illustration of Changes requested by Eileen Bottari.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Correspondence-Grace Solares.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Charles Tavares.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Little River Business District Document.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Asian American Hotel Owners Association.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Map. pdf 06-02095-Submittal-MNU Proposed M21 Changes, Bullet Points.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Miami Neighborhoods United Analysis of Miami 21's Final Draft of 06-02095-Submittal-Towers of Blue Lagoon.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Silvia C. Wong.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Miami River Commission September 4, 2009.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Proposed Amendment Detail Changes to Miami 21.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Barbara Bisno September 4, 2009.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-File Number 05-01536c Document.pdf LOCATION: Citywide APPLICANT(S): Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager, on behalf of the City of Miami FINDING(S): PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. MIAMI RIVER COMMISSION: On March 5, 2007, unanimously found the draft "Miami 21" East Quadrant to be consistent with the Miami River Corridor Urban lnfill Plan, subject to conditions*. Also, on January 5, 2009, by a vote of 11-0, found the revised draft "Miami 21" to be consistent with the Miami River Corridor Urban lnfill Plan and the Miami River Greenway Action Plan, subject to conditions*. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD (PAB): Recommended approval with conditions* of the Miami 21 Code and East Quadrant to City Commission on April 18, 2007 by a vote of 7-2. The PAB also recommended approval with conditions* to City Commission on December 17, 2008 of revisions to the Miami 21 Code since the April 18, 2007 vote. On January 7, 2009, the PAB also recommended approval with conditions* of the Miami 21 Atlas on each of the three remaining quadrants (North, West and South). *See supporting documentation. City ofMiami Page 3 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 PURPOSE: This will adopt the new "Miami 21 Code" and the "Miami 21 Atlas" for the entire City of Miami. Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING WITH MODIFICATIONS FAILED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 0 Noes: 3 - Commissioner Sarnoff, Regalado and Spence -Jones N/A: 2 - Commissioner Gonzalez and Sanchez Note for the Record: Chair Sanchez suspended the vote after three "No" votes. Motion by Chair Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez and Spence -Jones Noes: 1 - Commissioner Regalado Direction by Commissioner Sarnoff to the City Manager to prepare a "white paper" (signed off by the City Attorney) within one year of adoption ofMiami 21, explaining exactly how it has been implemented, how many people have utilized it, and the number ofBert J. Harris claims filed and/or constitutional takings. Direction by Vice Chair Spence -Jones to the Administration to prepare and provide to the Vice Chair before second reading a response to each of the 36 Miami Neighborhoods United proposed changes to Miami 21. Direction by Commissioner Sarnoff to the Administration on Item 32 ofMiami Neighborhoods United's recommendations, reference Article 7 "Procedures and Nonconformities, " Section 7.1.4.4(b), that the staff produce and make available its report on applications in an electronic format in order to make it convenient for various organizations and residents within the City of Miami to access and view said documents. Direction by Commissioner Sarnoff to the Administration that the following be studied and that position papers be created for Miami Neighborhood United's prosposed changes, Little River Business District, as well as the Bennett Pumo issues. Chair Sanchez: This is a brand-new hearing, and we must have the record to support it. However, I'm going to take into acknowledgment all the testimony that was presented at the last hearing, so therefore, if you made any statements in front of this Commission, it will be on the record, as we want to make sure that no one is left off in giving testimony on this very important legislation to our city. But if you already gave a statement, it will be on the record as we stated. We're going to go ahead and start the procedure on SP.1, which is the first item on the agenda. We have SP.1, SP. 2, and SP.3. We're going to go ahead and at this time recognize the Mayor, followed by the Administration, and then we will open it up to the public where everyone will have two minutes to address the Commission. Mr. Mayor, you're recognized for the record. Mayor Manuel A. Diaz: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, members of the public, City ofMiami, good morning. I will make a brief statement since, as you indicated today, my prior statement has already been -- has been incorporated into the record of this meeting as well. First of all, I've called this special meeting because of the tremendous outpouring of support from many of our constituents and the expressed desire of many ofyou as well to revisit this issue. This plan has been before you numerous times. Last month alone we heard about eight hours of public testimony about the benefits ofMiami 21. I was exceptionally proud, as I'm sure all ofyou were, of the number ofMiamians who were here with us that day who embraced Miami 21. In fact, by our numbers, close to -- probably close to 70 to 75 percent of those who spoke spoke in support City ofMiami Page 4 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 ofMiami 21, so I was proud to sit through that debate that night. All of those speakers stressed the importance of sustainability, climate change, walkability, pedestrian friendly streets, bicycling, historic preservation, open spaces, health concerns, obesity, and all the kinds of things that really make me proud to be part ofMiami today and really the kinds of conversations that we should be having about the future of our city, as opposed to so many of the disruptive and destructive conversations that we've had over the course of the last few years as it relates to land use and zoning. Speaker after speaker, I believe, reflected the new Miami, a different demographic that we're seeing daily in our city that embraces the urban experience and advocates for a very different type of future for our city. What we're attempting to accomplish today is not an easy task. Some will, no doubt, be disappointed in certain aspects ofMiami 21. But assure you that a vote in support ofMiami 21 will be a radical departure from the past that we've all come to know, which is a past that is best exemplified by the philosophy of "Build Now and Plan Later." The time to take this step to protect our city is now. Now is the time to rid our city of a code that places the special interests over the interests of the people. Miami 21, as I said before, has become everybody's plan. It doesn't belong to me; it doesn't belong to you, to our staff or to our consultants. Rather, it belongs to the people ofMiami. It is not a code that has been written by lawyers and special interests in a way that only lawyers and special interests can understand. It is a plan that has been written by all of our residents who have participated in over 500 public meetings and through our website with more than a quarter of a million unique visitors, over 4,000 subscribers, and 7 million hits alone to our website over the course of the last seven years. As such, this is the most democratic planning document in our city's history. Our citizens have spoken and their voice is reflected in three very important goals accomplished through Miami 21: Protecting our neighborhoods, enhancing the livability of our neighborhoods, and achieving environmental and economic stability and sustainability. Miami 21 reflects a growing desire among our residents for a lifestyle that includes vibrant mixed -use, live -work and walkable communities with varied transit choices, a lifestyle that is not currently allowed by our existing Code. If we want our city to succeed, the status quo simply cannot remain. We can no longer get by with a code that has created the hodgepodge of zoning and the uncertainty with which we have lived for decades. We don't start today with a blank canvas, clearly. And while, unfortunately, we have to be bound by many of the mistakes made by our predecessors, that does not mean that we are bound to inaction. So now is the time to take a stand, protect our neighborhoods, enhance our city's sense of community, and build an economic and environmentally sustainable future for our city. Now is the time to pass Miami 21 for the sake and the future ofMiami. Thank you very much. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Well have the Administration make its presentation. Once again, if anyone walked in and has not had an opportunity to sign up with the Clerk to speak, please do so. And also take into consideration that if you gave testimony at the last meeting, the acknowledgment will be made into the record of this meeting on your behalf. You're recognized for the record. Ana Gelabert-Sanchez: Good morning. Ana Gelabert, Planning director. This morning, what will do is go through the presentation that gave August 6, pretty much the changes, the modifications that we had made to the Code, so I'll start with the technical changes, and I'll run through them quickly. It was -- we did several ones. Modified -- the first ones that I'm reading, the technical, as you might remember, are those things that might have to do with just language clarification, types, and some corrections, technical in nature. Modify the definition of general commercial to clarify the intent. That's in Article I. We expanded the definition of marine -related indusfrial establishments as it was recommended to us by the Miami River Commission. We made a revision of the technical aviation language in Article III, as required by Miami -Dade Aviation Department. The successional zoning for Dl: In order to be able to move from light indusfrial to heavy indusfrial, the DI to D2, we made that clarification; Article VII included language in CI for parking requirements for sports facilities. That was an amendment that was made by this Commission, and we are incorporating and absorbing it into Miami 21; a setback designation diagram in Article IV, Table 8, to correct a typo; an update of City ofMiami Page 5 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 the Neighborhood Conservation Districts to maintain the consistency with existing language previously approved by City Commission; revision of the language on CI -HD, which is the health district, to address accessory uses related to the University Hospital Research Facility or governmentally owned facilities. Article V, Section 58.3: Clarification of the intent of language that establishes liner requirements on the buildings; an addition of text in public benefit section to reflect the bonus as per an illustration that we have on 5.9, Article III; a clarification of T5 L and T6 L on supplemental regulations to specify the intent of commercial and offices uses in the limited category; reduction of parking requirements of office category in T6-24 and above to reflect current conditions of the urban core categories, and inclusion of de novo language in exception regulations for consistency in the process. Those are the technical revisions. We then -- I'll go through other directives we received from the Commissioners arising from additional community input that came after the PAB (Planning Advisory Board). I'll go with the text first, and then after I finish with the text, then I'll show it in the map on the slide. The text was we are proposing a new regulation to protect view shed of national historic places. On the legal side of things -- and this is not as Commission directives. Like I said, I'll go back to the maps just to -- I think it'll flow better. Legal, there were just some corrections we needed to make. Revisions of uses in the civic category to conform to legal standards as per the Federal Regulation [sic] Land -use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000. We had the removal of failure to give notice language for waivers, warrants, exceptions, variances, and Code amendments. This is presently in Zoning Ordinance 11000. We are removing it. And then wireless regulation revisions to meet the Florida State Statutes. There's two additional things that the Planning Advisory Board had asked us as part of the discussions at the PAB, which were Resolution 08-044 of the PAB. They seek to increase the residential development under DJ. We've increased that and made -- and are proposing the change. We used to have, as you may remember, one unit per lot of record. We are proposing changing that to nine units per acre. And then a refinement of language addressing nonconformities. That is something that comes up periodically about the -- I think a little bit of confusion of what it is. We're frying to streamline it. I do have some slides and presentation. If you want to go into that, I can. Or we can wait for questions, but we have addressed these questions. Chair Sanchez: All right. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: As far as -- I'm almost through on our part -- on mapping amendments, and this goes back to the directives we received and that we are presenting on the floor for your consideration would be -- the first one would be Northeast 79th Street, between Biscayne Boulevard and Biscayne Bay, we had T6-8 0, and we are proposing that to change to T5 O. The Virginia Key at North Point, from T6-8 to CS. This is also a recommendation made by PAB. We have the north side of Southwest 26th Road and Brickell Avenue, from T6-8 0 to T5 L. The area east of the Omni, Miami Women's Club, from T6-80 [sic] to T6-36. The area north ofI-395, south of 16th Street and east ofMiami Avenue, from T6-8 0 to T6-24 O. The area across from the Frankie Rolle Center on 37th Avenue and Day Avenue, from T3 0 to T4 O. And then from Northwest 37th Avenue and Northwest 36th Court at Flagler, T6-8 0 designation to the rear of the properties facing 37th Avenue and modifying designation along 36th Court from T3 0 to T4 L. And lastly, Edgewater, north of Omni, from T6-24 L and 0 to T6-36A, L, and 0, respectively. Those are the changes, like I said, that I presented. And Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk can go again through the mapping, which will go through the quadrants. After Elizabeth goes through this, I'll do as I did. This is the Administration's recommendation. I also have as part of what presented on August 6 the PAB recommendations, the resolutions they passed and presented to you, and I also have that. I can go through them as soon as we finish our part of the presentation. Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk: Good morning. Liz Plater-Zyberk from Duany Plater-Zyberk and Company. These -- this is, in effect, the same thing that was presented at the last meeting in which I'm going to make a few statements about each quadrant to give you its general character as it evolved throughout the process. Starting with the north quadrant, the large red area, which City ofMiami Page 6 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 is CI -HD, is essentially to equivalent to SD-10 as it was recently formed couple of years ago. This does encourage a special area plan in order to do further planning in this area. Throughout the north quadrant, mixed use is provided along the corridors to encourage economic development. The industrial area, which is the purple band along 20th Street, has additional uses provided through D1, including commercial and work -live. There's also the creation of a D3 zoning category to address marine- and water -related industrial uses along the river. This is very similar to the current Code's SD-4 regulations and so this maintains waterfront industrial uses. Riverfront properties to require water -related uses, except T3 and T4 R, the lowest density residential areas, and there are additional incentives for public access to marina uses along the river. Next, the south quadrant. Establish the TI conservation designation for the Spoil Islands conservation parks in Virginia -- much of Virginia Key. NCD, the Neighborhood Conservation Districts 1, 2, and 3, as they exist in the current Code are maintained. They're part of the appendix. The residential -- largely residential character of this quadrant is maintained RI becomes T3 R residential only throughout. There's no T3 L. There is a new massing regulation which reduces the massing in T3 R, which responds to concerns about McMansions. And around the 27th and 37th Avenue Metro stations there were some small modifications to encourage those areas to function as transit -oriented development as they evolve. And finally, it was this quadrant which helped us to readdress CI with regulations related to abutting zoning for neighborhood compatibility. West quadrant: Also largely residential; has mixed use to encourage economic development along the corridors. The East Little Havana area reflects comp plan changes. The stadium area there encourages mixed use around the new stadium. And there are several areas where parkland was protected with zoning changes, making some pieces that were commercial zoning into the CS park zoning. East quadrant, which is, of course, the one we began with. The east map, which we spent a lot of time on with you in earlier meetings, has additional protection for the homeowners of Spring Garden and Town Park. There were some adjustments made there. Of course, along the way, the creation of the MiMo Disfrict which is described in Chapter 23, which is related directly to the transfer of development rights which Miami 21 proposes for historic properties. And there were some adjustments made to the Little Haiti Cultural Center area to promote work -live. That concludes my presentation. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: All right. Does that conclude your presentation? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes. The staff recommendations are the ones that read. What would like to add there, there are PAB recommendations that were made that staff also has no objection and perhaps I can read them on the record? Chair Sanchez: All right. Go ahead and put them on the record, and we'll take 'em [sic] up at the end. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: And there were other -- and then I have other things that had been brought up in a hearing that staff doesn't have a recommendation, if you would like to act on it. On the PAB recommendations that were made on December 17, there was a resolution on structures and uses in the event of disaster on multifamily explosion, fire, act of God, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) shall be approved for permit, the reconstruction of any nonconforming single residence, duplex multifamily residential structure. The staff doesn't have any objection to that recommendation. That's PAB 08-043. There's another -- there's a recommendation, also PAB 08-044, which is the one that dealt with the D1, increasing it to nine units per acre. Like I - - that was also staff recommendation. We have no objection. PAB 08-045, which spoke to administrative waivers and the restoration of structures other than single-family, multifamily that are nonconforming in the event of destruction to less than 50 percent. We have no objection to that either. There was PAB 08-046, we're correcting midpoint of roof measurement language within the NCD-3. We have no objection. There was another 08-047, which is the Design Disfrict setback areas to Northeast 40th Street, excluding 41 st Street in order to protect the single-family houses in the district. We don't have any objection to that. As far as the City ofMiami Page 7 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 recommendations on the atlas changes that we do not have an objection to are PAB 09-001e, between South -- 1st Avenue on Southwest 23rd Street on Southwest 16th Court. We had -- proposing T5 0 and they -- PAB recommended T4 R; we have no objection. Second one was 09-001f, which are the properties next to Vizcaya station, roughly Southwest 1st Avenue from Southwest 32nd Road to 28th Road. We had T5 L. The PAB proposed T4 R. We have no objection. And lastly, the last two are 09-001j is Southwest 12th Street between 21stAvenue and 20th Avenue. We had 24 [sic] L and it's being recommended to T4 R. Staff does not have an objection. And lastly is the Virginia Key, which, again, was a part of our recommendation that the PAB also requested that it be changed from T6-8 0 to CS, and staff does not have an objection. And at the hearing -- and I'll just add it for your consideration -- that staff doesn't have any objection, and it would be part of our presentation. It's -- it was brought up at the last hearing that notice of application for zoning interpretations would be given notice when the Zoning administrator provided interpretations; staff doesn't have an objection. The distribution of all decisions and recommendation of Zoning administrator and Planning director and the Planning and Zoning and appeals board to neighborhood associations; staff doesn't have an objection. And the application of Section 1305, which is a design guidelines in the criteria for a variance, we don't have an objection, so all those that I just read, plus the presentation, is where the Administration would seek your recommen -- your approval. Chair Sanchez: All right. In order to have a smooth procedure here, what we're going to do is we're going to allow now the Commission, if you want, to ask some questions to the Adminisfration, that there may be some questions from the Commission. Then afterwards we're going to go ahead and open it up to the public. The public will address the Commission. Afterwards, we'll come back; we'll get a motion and a second to -- pertaining as to the expert's recommendation and to the staff recommendations. I think we didn't have any issues with the technical changes. And then what we'll do is to make sure that each Commissioner knows exactly what he's voting on, we should take the PAB's recommendations independently, one by one, and vote on them. I think that is the smoothest procedure that we could have. So at this time, what we'll do is -- I believe Commissioner Gonzalez has a question to the Adminisfration, then we'll go ahead and open it up to the public, allowing you to address this Commission, and then we'll take it from there. Commissioner Gonzalez, you're recognized for the record. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I will -- also will feel more comfortable if we vote on the Miami 21 concept alone, and then we vote on each independent amendment -- Chair Sanchez: Exactly. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- separately. Chair Sanchez: Okay. That's what we'll do. Commissioner Gonzalez: Okay. Ana, I do have a question. Let me say that even though I was not here at the last Miami 21 meeting because being ill, I did get a copy of the meeting, and I saw the entire meeting, which lasted about eight hours, maybe a little bit more than eight hours, and I also saw the Planning and Zoning meeting of yesterday or day before yesterday, and there was an issue -- well, I do have various concerns in reference to Miami 21, but one of the concerns that I have is that it was said during the Planning and Zoning meeting that if one of your tenants decides to set on fire your factory or your apartment building or whatever -- because I might decide to raise the rent of my tenant. He may get pissed off and set my place on fire, okay, or maybe he doesn't like me and he decide to burn my place. Then I will not be able to get a building permit to rebuild my structure, and that I have a serious problem with that. If you tell me that if it's proven that the owner of the property sets the place on fire -- first of all, he's not going to be able to rebuild because he's going to end up in jail, okay. So he won't be able to rebuild, but if -- because a tenant of mine decides to set my building on fire, I will not be able to get a building permit to rebuild. I do have a serious problem with that, a very serious City ofMiami Page 8 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 problem. And if that is one of the conditions that need to be rectified because I will not, I will not support it. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Commissioner, ifI may -- ifI can ask Lourdes Slazyk, to come in, the Zoning administrator. Talking about the nonconformities, that might be the issues that -- if you want, I can go through the presentation on nonconformities. I don't think we were dealing with accidental -- the type of -- the issue that you just described to, I would like to ask Hs. Slazyk, but I just -- as she comes to the podium, I would like to say that as far as the nonconformities, we have tried to make it better under Miami 21 that we -- than what we have on the present Code. Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, I hope so. Because under the new plan, 85 percent of the City properties will be nonconforming -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Right. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- so I don't know how you're going to address that, you know. Lourdes Slazyk (Zoning Administrator): I think the language that they're referring to actually exists already in 11000. When you can get a special exception for reconstructing a structure that was destroyed, if it's an act of God or something like that, Miami 21 is actually going to be more liberal than our current 11000 to give you the rights to rebuild a structure that was destroyed by an act of God like a hurricane or a fire, but the -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah. But the case that I'm talking about, it won't be an act of God; it would be an act of the devil. Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. Commissioner Gonzalez: So, you know, we have to provide for the devil -- Ms. Slazyk: Right. This -- Commissioner Gonzalez: -- to, you know, have some remedy on the devil's actions. Ms. Slazyk: Right. And this is something I guess that is before you as a policy decision, if you want to amend this language, but the language that they're talking about -- let me read it because it is in 11000 today, and it's not going to change in Miami 21. Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, you know what the problem is? That I was not -- that I was not aware of that -- that existing -- Ms. Slazyk: That it was already there. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- on the Code -- Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- because ifI would have been aware of that, I would have been fighting that all my entire life -- Ms. Slazyk: Right. They -- Commissioner Gonzalez: -- because I don't think it's fair. Ms. Slazyk: No. I understand. It -- what it -- City ofMiami Page 9 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Gonzalez: I don't think it's fair. I don't think it's just. Ms. Slazyk: Right. What it says is if the cause of destruction -- you're allowed to rebuild by special exception if the cause of destruction was not the deliberate action of an owner or occupant of the structure or their agents. If something is an -- you know, it's deemed to be arson, if it was a deliberate action for the purpose of being able to do this, then they would not qualify to rebuild. But that's in today's Code. If you want to propose some amendment that would take care of that, this would be the time to do it. Commissioner Gonzalez: I would propose an amendment because once again, I believe it's totally unfair. I believe it's totally unfair that because one of your tenants get upset at you, decides to set -- or let's say that you have an employee that you fire and that employee comes back at night and set your factory on fire, okay, "X" amount of people are going to lose their jobs, my business is going to be destroyed, and then the City will prohibit me from rebuilding my building. Ms. Slazyk: Right. Commissioner Gonzalez: That is totally -- that's totally insane, totally insane. Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. Commissioner Gonzalez: Okay. Ms. Slazyk: I think you could probably insert some language there excluding acts of -- you know, criminal acts. So if it's a criminal act of arson and not you doing it yourself -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yeah. That's my -- Ms. Slazyk: -- there should be able to be some sort of exclusion. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Could I -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Exactly. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Commissioner Gonzalez, what I don't want to do is open up the door for individuals that have properties that know that this language exists and if they want to change use, they're going to go burn their own buildings down. Commissioner Gonzalez: No. That's why I say if it is proven that it is done by the owner, then, you know -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yeah. Ms. Slazyk: Right, but -- Chair Sanchez: As -- Ms. Slazyk: -- if it's a criminal act of a tenant -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yeah. Ms. Slazyk: -- or something, but there -- City ofMiami Page 10 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Gonzalez: Exactly. Chair Sanchez: Can we go ahead and -- as a friendly amendment later on, can we add that too to change the language and we'll bring it back? That'll be brought back at the end when we vote. All right. Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized for the record. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I had a -- Commissioner Regalado: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, members of the Commission for your support a few minutes ago. This is for the City Attorney. What is the purpose, Madam City Attorney, of the Planning Advisory Board? Julie O. Bru (City Attorney): The Planning Advisory Board serves as your land planning agency and it gives you advice as to comp plan amendments. Commissioner Regalado: Because I've been listen to Ana. She's been accepting some of the -- most of the Planning Advisory Board recommendations, so this is a state -created agency, and it's supposed to deal with the comp plan, right? Ms. Bru: The Planning Advisory Board that we have in the City ofMiami was created by the City ofMiami by ordinance. It is, under state law, something that is authorized and required. You could do it by serving as the land planning agency yourselves or you can appoint a board to do that for you. In the case ofMiami, you've appointed a separate board to do it. Commissioner Regalado: Okay. And it's -- this board, according to the ordinance, many years ago, is created by residents, right? It's formed -- residents are a part of this board. Because the Mayor said that, just a few minutes ago, this is a plan that has been written by the residents, that the citizens have spoken, but the day before yesterday, seven members of the Planning Advisory Board recommended, voted that this item will be deferred until November 18. I guess part of what I saw is that they wanted more time and they want to iron out some details, so are we supposed to accept a recommendation of the Planning Advisory Board? Are we supposed to dismiss the recommendation of the Planning Advisory Board or ignore the recommendations? Ms. Bru: Commissioner, the Planning Advisory Board has entertained this comp plan amendments previously and they entertained Miami 21 previously. They had recommendations that they made in December of '08, they made recommendations in January of this year, and they made recommendations this week. As with all advisory boards, they are advisory and it's up to you to take their advice or their recommendations. You can take their advice and recommendations -- Commissioner Regalado: No. But -- Bru: -- as you see legislatively fit. Commissioner Regalado: -- however, the reason that they heard this last Wednesday is to cure something that is in the Code, and of course, we cannot violate the Code. So what I'm saying to you is as the City Attorney -- you're the officer of the Court here -- are we, if anyway, skirting -- violating the Code by not having the Planning Advisory Board vote on a certain time before the City Commission hears a comp plan, which is the main issue that the Planning Advisory Board should address? Ms. Bru: Commissioner, that issue came up when we heard Miami 21 back in August 6, and quite frankly, what I opined at that time continues to be my opinion, and that is that the rule that requires that proposed plan amendments be heard by this Commission within 60 days of the Planning Advisory Board public hearing is a rule of this Commission. It's not a state -mandated City ofMiami Page 11 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 rule, and all rules exist for a purpose. And in my opinion, that rule is to make sure that the data and analysis that's considered by the board is not stale when it comes to the Commission. Also to prevent any kind of inordinate delay on the part of this Commission with respect to considering plan amendments that have been heard by the Planning Advisory Board and there being, you know, proposed by an applicant. Having said all that, we took it back to the Planning Advisory Board in an abundance of caution to make sure that we complied with that technical procedural requirement of the City. And indeed, there was a public hearing, and that is precisely what the Code section requires, that this Commission hear it within 60 days from the date of the Planning Advisory Board public hearing, and that happened, so therefore, it is properly before you. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chair Sanchez: You're welcome. All right, any other questions from the Commissioners? If not Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I just have comments. Chair Sanchez: Vice Chair Spence -Jones, you're recognized for the record. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. I'm not going -- thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm not going to take long. I just want to -- some -- few points that want to make sure that I'm understood, Ana. One of the things I want to make sure that we're clear on is the transition period, how long is it going to take for us to transition from the current system to the -- to this new system. I don't need to know the answers now, but I'm just letting you know that's going to be something that's very important to me. And I did ask in the last hearing that you provide us the fiscal impact. I know there was a comment made that there's no fiscal impact or very minimal fiscal impact, but think all of us Commissioners should be aware of that. So I think that that's something that you should definitely work on. Ninety-eight percent of the changes in my district have been made, so I have to say that the team and the City staff have worked hard to make those adjustments. The only areas that have still concerns on that we -- we're closing the gap on -- and I'm feeling a lot more comfortable with, butt want to make sure are included, which is the Little River industrial area, that park area. And we have a committee that's been working on that for almost a year, so Mallory and his team is here now, the Buena Vista East area, which you should already be aware of. I'm hoping that those changes and adjustments are made. And then there was a certain section in Overtown that was a question. I just want to make sure that has been addressed as well. And then the last but not least on the river, next to the East Coast Fisheries: From the last meeting that we had to this present one, there was supposed to be some discussions around those items, so I really wanted to make sure that that was -- we were clear on those as we move ahead. We do all understand that this is the second reading. Well, not the second reading. This would be the second reading if this passes today, but the question becomes -- Chair Sanchez: No, no, no, no, no. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: It's the first reading. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I mean, if it passes today, we would then have a second reading. I just want to be clear though whatever those suggestions that come up from any one of the Commissioners that all of those things should be addressed and be added in there, which, you know, would be very important. And then last but not least, I just want to be clear because Commissioner Regalado already addressed my concern, which was the PAB issue deferring the item to November, but he's already addressed the issue so I won't bring that up. But the CI -- for properties that were government use. I want to be very clear -- and I know you said it to me, but I always like to make sure it's on the record -- that items that are zoned G/I (Government/Institutional) now become CI, which means -- what was communicated to me is City ofMiami Page 12 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 that those G/I properties remain governmentally used -- government -use based properties -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Governmental uses. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- no housing happening on them. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: No housing. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: You mentioned dormitories or something along that -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Only dormitories, but not residential. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Right. But I just want to make sure that that is the case and that has not changed. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: It is the case. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: With that being said, I'm pretty much fine with everything, but I really want to make sure that the other con earns that my residential residents and business owners have expressed have been addressed, and that's really it on my side. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Okay. Chair Sanchez: All right. Does that -- at this time we'll go ahead and open it up to the public. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: She got to swear them in. Chair Sanchez: Have we sworn them in? Ms. Thompson: According to our City Attorney, there is no need to -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Oh, okay. Ms. Thompson: -- do a swearing in. Chair Sanchez: All right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. All right, so I guess what I'm going to be doing is basically hearing -- handling the hearing, and I really want to make sure that it's very clear that we have two minutes per person that's actually coming up, and I want to move the hearing along. As Commissioner Gonzalez has stated earlier -- he wasn't here the last time we were here, but he watched it on tape; eight hours of testimony, so we kind of know what the issues are, but we do know that it's important to hear everybody's issues today. So what I'm going to ask to have happen is I'm going to call the first ten people. I'm to go ask the people that are for Miami 21 to stand here; the ones that are against Miami 21 to stand here. So I'm going to call the first ten people and I'm going to ask for you to be -- the for and against to at least stand. Horacio. I know I saw him earlier. Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry, Commissioner. I'm going to need to know the last name, if you don't mind? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Aguirre. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. City ofMiami Page 13 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. So that's the -- this is the -- For or against? Horacio Stuart Aguirre: Against. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. So against here and for here, okay? Ray Allen. I'm calling your names, and I'm going to keep it moving after that. Jacques Addison [sic]. IfI say your name wrong, please forgive me. Just stand in -- I just want to line them up. Horacio, you were right. I'm letting you -- you're running the show. You're starting the show off. You are against it. We're going to move this thing. And you are -- sir, what are you? Unidentified Speaker: I'm against it. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Jacques Addison [sic]. For is on this side or against on that side. Barbara Bisno, Judy Brostoff Joseph Canale, Ashley Chase, Jaime Correa, Elvis Cruz, and Mariano Cruz. Chair Sanchez: Alphabetical order. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Let's go. We're going to get it moving, guys. So this -- Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry. Would you just like to repeat them for me, please, so we can actually pull them for you? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Well, I was going to repeat them as they come up. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I just wanted to make sure the people are standing and ready to go, okay. So we're going to start it with Horacio. Mr. Stuart Aguirre: Good morning, Madam Vice Chairman [sic]. Horacio Stuart Aguirre, president of Durham Park Neighborhood Association. Commissioner, I'm glad to see you back. I stand here -- I reside at 1910 Northwest 13th Street, Miami, Florida, Durham Park, on the Miami River. We oppose Miami 21 as presently prepared and formatted. We believe that it has some potential, but until it is properly done, until it encompasses the recent decisions in the last 18 months from the Third District Court ofAppeals providing for the proper maritime use of three Miami River properties, namely, the Hurricane Cove property, Brisas Del Rio property, and Crystal on the River property, we stand in opposition for this and other reasons. Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you, Horacio. Okay. Chair Sanchez: Mariano Cruz. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Mariano. Mariano Cruz: Yeah. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Mariano Cruz. Mr. Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. Will be -- only be two minutes 'cause what I say the last time, but now I like to agree because a lot of people made comments that I like to see whatever -- somebody told me it going to be a retrofitting (UNINTELLIGIBLE) property. No. I wanted to see like -- when Miami 1100 [sic] was implemented, they grandfathered everything that was done before, okay, and that should be done because -- don't retrofit -- well, sure, unless you have the money to retain Lucia Dougherty or somebody, then you can have a lot City ofMiami Page 14 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 of variance, but you don't have that money, what you got to do? You got to simplify it. Not only that, grandfather -- let's work Miami 21 two or three years to see how it works. Then bring it back again to see if it works because we don't know yet. This is a new thing. 'Cause on the grandfather, when I move to my house at 1227, there was a house -- a rooming house at 1221. I say how could that be possible? Oh, yeah. Eventually, the house was destroyed and they put a duplex there, R-2, that's what it is. So time will take care all this old problems, okay. But remember that like to have this simplified because a lot of people don't have the money. Even if you call the Zoning Department and you call Mr. Aldo Reyes there, he never answered the phone. He (UNINTELLIGIBLE) say, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) you, and never calls you back. Who they think they are? Aldo Reyes, I don't mention him. And you know what he did? He complain to the labor people, no, to harass me, to intimidate Mariano Cruz. Oh, ho, ho, ho, ho, ho. He got a lot of problems, he want to intimidate me, okay. And I mention him by name because what he doing? Smoking outside the MRC (Miami Riverside Center). No. If you say ASAP (As Soon As Possible), you call me back because you are a public servant, okay. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: In conclusion, Mariano. Mr. M. Cruz: In conclusion, please grandfather whatever it is, and make a -- give a trial period. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you, Mariano. Mr. M. Cruz: Two, three years. Okay. Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay, Madam City Clerk, I want to make sure that you remind us of the time frame, okay. Ms. Thompson: Yes, ma'am. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Next person, please. State your name for the record. RayAllen: That's a tough act to follow. For the record, RayAllen. I'm an attorney with carton fields. I'm here representing Mercy Hospital. Given the amount of time, I had a lot of background to go through with Mercy, but just very simply to say, I think y'all are very familiar with Mercy. It's a 38-acre campus on the water. It, unfortunately, is in a residential neighborhood and has been that way since 1949. We believe that the designation changing us from G/I to the CI has a great impact on the hospital in the future plans that the hospital has, which they have been in the process of doing for the last couple of years. They are doing a ten-year plan. The tensity, intensity going from the G/I to the CI is the concern that we have. As -- one of the things that can point out would be the height where we have a ten -story building existing today. Reading the regulations as they exist today, there would be a limitation of five stories with a possibility perhaps go up one or two other stories. Those are concerns -- the FAR (floor area ratio) are concerns because the intensity has now been diminished. In looking at it -- and we're still in the process of having our planners go through this, the planners at our law firm are going through it to analyze it. What came to mind and what may very well be what think may be a solution to this is a special planning district or a special planning area, which is what has been taken in consideration in other health complexes. It may very well give the hospital and the campus the planning that they need and the future plan that they need. I think it would also key the residences in to what the future of that plan is, and have those discussions early on where the hospital is not necessarily spending a lot of money on planning and going forward, then has to go through a series of public hearings -- Chair Sanchez: In conclusion. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: In conclusion. City ofMiami Page 15 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Mr. Allen: -- that may be denied. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: In conclusion. Mr. Allen: So it's -- very simply, it would be our request that we look at this area for a special planning district. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you very much, Mr. Allen. Commissioner Regalado: Madam Chair, can I ask a question? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Sure. Commissioner Regalado: Who recommended that, is the staff the changes? Mr. Allen: Their -- my understanding was that the staff has discussed this earlier, and this was many months ago. I think there were some meetings with some of the planners in the hospital; that idea did come up, and it also is in the plan that suggested this is a alternative for this site. Commissioner Regalado: But mean, what it is now, it was recommended by the staff right? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Presently, is government/institutional. We have made the CI, which is the equivalent to the government/institutional. The issue that the gentleman is bringing up is the issue of height, not the use. The uses are the same. They can do the development. Actually, what it says that if they were to develop within the G/I -- within the CI, it can only go to five stories, just like the virtue of the height. That was an issue that has come as to CI properties being developed within neighborhoods. Now, where the gentleman talking about height, it might be what we have said, and it's also in the Code that exist, through a special area plan, which it would be a master plan, approved by the City Commission, then they can work with a master plan that may allow them more height. What they have is two things. One is the limitation as the CI reads, and it's in order to protect the neighborhoods that are adjacent to any CI. In addition to that, there is the view shed that is also proposed that basically would also control some of the height in the event that they do the special area plan, but that allows them flexibility. At the same time, that is giving protection to the neighborhood. So that's what he's referring. But as far as uses, it's the same, it's the equivalent. Commissioner Regalado: I just want to make sure the staff recommended this. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: The staff recommended the -- we made the change from G/I to CI. Commissioner Regalado: To limit heights, right? The staff recommended limiting height. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: It's the way that the CI reads. Commissioner Regalado: I understand. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: So the way any CI, you would go into the Code and basically it says that if it's mostly -- and I can read it to you to clarify it. Commissioner Regalado: No, no. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: But if it's mostly surrounded by single-family homes, then they can go up to certain amount. Obviously higher than a single family in the case -- so it's a rule that applies citywide. It's not just for Mercy. City ofMiami Page 16 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Regalado: Okay. I just want to understand. 'Cause I thought that we were talking about other Mercy Hospital because the staff recommended the condo buildings on the Mercy Hospital ground. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: The staff -- at the time, the staff recommended the land use and the zoning. The staff recommended different design than was presented to you. We did -- we had a different recommendation for the design and the height of the buildings, and we were seeking for more transitions. The staff did recommend a land use and a zone change. Commissioner Regalado: Okay. Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: All right. Next. Commissioner Gonzalez: I -- excuse me. I believe that Mercy needs to be look at very deeply, okay. I will oppose any high-rises, especially that will obstruct the view of -- Chair Sanchez: Vizcaya. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- Vizcaya or that interfere with Vizcaya. But Mercy need to be looked at very, very close, okay, because the hospital is in need of expanding, and I'm telling you for firsthand experience. I've been to that hospital in the last month three or four times, okay, and they need to expand, they need to improve their facility, and they need to do certain things. So I -- I'm telling you -- you know, I'm not telling you what to do, but I'm telling you that you need to look at it very closely and work with Mercy and see to -- to try to come up to a solution, okay, where they can do whatever they need to do to service the community, all right. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We -- Commissioner, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) that they will meet with Mercy. I just wanted to clarify that in the Code -- and we did took a look at this particular property when we did the view shed ordinance -- that if they come -- if it's any property, nine acres or more, comes for a master plan, which is a special area plan, they can actually get higher. The view shed, what it does is -- it's kind of like a glass ceiling, if you will, that coming from Vizcaya -- and it was done to protect Vizcaya, but the -- they can go higher as they get farther away from -- the buildings that are existing today are not affected, so we're talking about if in the future, they decide to develop their property away from Vizcaya -- so now we're talking from the existing buildings to the water to where the area of Grove Isle is. They could develop probably higher than what they have today. The view shed is a glass ceiling, and it was done in order to kind of be able to allow for the hospital, through a master plan, to be developed, yet at the same way, protect Vizcaya and have a proper transition into the neighborhood, so -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Okay. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- but we was there -- we definitely will follow up with them and meet with them, but I just want to make the clarification. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And if you can definitely get with Commissioner Gonzalez regarding that issue, and I guess the folks from Mercy to figure out what makes the most sense. But I'm sure that the acreage also -- you have -- you guys have at least ten acres over there, right? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: They have more than that. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So you have the ability to have a special area plan. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: They would meet that. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: All right. Thank you very much. Let's -- City ofMiami Page 17 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you. Jacques Ardisson: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen from the board. My name is Jacques Ardisson. I'm a MiMo (Miami Modern) District owner; own a restaurant, and I do represent Mr. (UNINTELLIGIBLE), who owns five buildings in the MiMo District. We are for Miami 21, but we're opposing 35-feet limit for -- we believe it's stopping the growth of our neighborhood. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Mr. Ardisson: Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you very much, Jacques. Joseph Canale: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm not used to speaking in public, so I'd like to read this e-mail (electronic) that I sent to Commissioner Sanchez. Basically, what I wrote to him is -- Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry. I need a -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Your name for the record -- Mr. Canale: My name is Joe -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- and address. Mr. Canale: -- Joseph Canale. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Joseph Canale. Ms. Thompson: Yes. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Go ahead. Mr. Canale: Okay. This is what I wrote to the Commissioner. I said, Commissioner Sanchez, we met some time ago when you came to my area, the MiMo District. You were kind enough to take us to your community, and I walked with you on tour. I now you're proud of your community, of 8th Street, Little Havana, the commercial district. Now we're coming to a ruling regarding height limitations for my community. Commissioner Sanchez, your community has been a thriving business district, one- or two-story buildings that do (UNINTELLIGIBLE) oversight -- at least through your oversight -- with strong police presence has made it a thriving community. Your community is thriving not because of high-rise buildings on 8th Street, but because of business owners and community leaders who help put in place a variety of shops, stores, theaters, and vest pocket parks for residents where they could gather and have a sense of community. You kept the scale human. This is what makes a street/commercial boulevard work, not towering buildings. Please don't allow the greed of business owners and developers who knew the heights of buildings when they bought in our communities and now only want air rights to profit at a cost to all of us in one- and two-family homes in historic districts. This can be done in the MiMo area, and I ask your fellow Commissioners for support. Commissioners, please keep the MiMo area in a human scale. Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you very much. Barbara. Barbara Bisno: May I have a --? May I distribute some handouts? City ofMiami Page 18 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes, you may. Ms. Bisno: Thank you. My name is Barbara Bisno. I live at 1000 Venetian Way, Apartment 603. And I -- just to take a little bit of my two minutes to thank the Commission and the Administration for the tremendous strides in notice, which is a issue that I've been concerned about for years in this Code, and to have said that they support several of the amendments that were brought to the attention of the Commission at the last meeting. First of all, I have to say I'm a little bit uncomfortable the way you organize this -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I understand. Ms. Bisno: -- because my -- I'm president of a neighborhood association, which has not authorized me to speak in favor. There are some -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Whatever way you want to speak, it's fine. Ms. Bisno: I'm going to move it right over there. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Go 'head, Barbara. Ms. Bisno: I'm very sensitive to the concern of the neighborhoods that oppose Miami 21, so I'm just here for amendments. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No problem. Ms. Bisno: I appreciate the opportunity to speak again because the hand out that we gave out at the earlier meeting was -- did not include everything it should have, particularly about the waivers and a new issue about signs that ifI could just take a minute to address -- ifI understood what Ana said, she -- the Administration is not supporting the amendment for exhaustion of remedies. Is that correct? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Where's Ana? Ana. Okay. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes, we are. I didn't include it, but yes, we are. We would not have an objection to that. Ms. Bisno: You do not have an objection to that. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. What did you say? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We don't have an objection. Ms. Bisno: How 'bout the one on reducing waivers? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes, we do. Ms. Bisno: Yeah. Okay. As you know, 25 waivers are in this Code. The last one is a ten -- the last one is an omnibus section that says ten percent change from any existing standard. Some of the Code -- some of the waivers are about parking, which are still a subject for waivers. Some of them -- which is a very, very sensitive issue in all neighborhoods. Some -- so -- our suggestion is that there -- the waiver -- the only waivers that remain be those that regard single-family residents' requests and the omnibus one that says any standard can be altered by ten percent if the grounds are presented, and that that waiver be appealable to the City Commission. No waiver is appealable to the City Commission at this point. My final point has to do with signs. In a communication yesterday, it was confirmed that there is no notice for signs. This Code City ofMiami Page 19 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 approaches signs a little differently than 11000 and simply sets out what's required of sign -- to have a sign, and then it is a sign of right. There is one section, which I've presented today -- 6.5.1.5(c), which has to do with signs adjacent to residential areas. It says now that you can't have a flashing sign within 100 feet of a property in a residential district or directly visible from that residential property. I want to add illuminated. That's all. I hope that achieves what my goal is to keep illuminated flashing signs out of the vision of a residential property. I don't know if the Administration will indicate if that achieves what I'm trying to achieve, and there may be further tweaking before second reading, but if such a -- if this -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Ms. Bisno: -- passes -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you. Ms. Bisno: -- but those are my issues for today. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you, Barbara. You did hear the comments. She also passed out a -- the changes, the illuminating signs, and I guess really her comments is to address it before the second reading, if it has not been already. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We'll take a look at it. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Next. Judy Brostoff Good morning. I'm Judy Brostoff, 13 Southwest 7th Street, and I'm the president ofMichael Latterner and Associate, major land developers in the area of the Tobacco Road, for those of you who are not familiar with Brickell Avenue and Tobacco Road. And specifically, I'm here to request of the Commission the approval of the T36 [sic] to T60 [sic] in the east quadrant. And I thank you very much for your consideration. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you very much. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Manager, I have a request from my staff. Can I get a copy of the presentation that was provided on 8/6/09 to determine if it's the same as the presentation made today? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: You want it right now? Commissioner Sarnoff Well, we're going to vote; I'd like to know beforehand. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No, no. I'm saying do you -- Pedro G. Hernandez (City Manager): Commissioner, we'll have it for you. Commissioner Sarnoff Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. I just didn't know if you want him to pull it now before -- Commissioner Sarnoff Oh, no. I don't want to interrupt the meeting. I'm just saying that something that was told was refused to my office and I'd like to see it. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Ashley. Ashley Chase: May I submit our position? City ofMiami Page 20 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Sure. Ms. Chase: Good morning, Commissioners. Ashley Chase, of the Miami River Commission, with offices at 1407 Northwest 7th Street. The Miami River Commission maintains its original March 2009 position, which found the Miami 21 consistent with both our Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan and our Miami River Greenway Action Plan. Thanks for your time. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: All right. Ashley, ifyou can, please, I know that we have one little small river issue by the East Coast Fisheries. If you could definitely just check with staffing on that, I really would appreciate it. Ms. Chase: Not a problem. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: All right. I'm going to go ahead and call the next ten people so that we could keep the hearing moving. Andrew Dickman, Lucia Dougherty, Emile Farrah, Ben Fernandez, Robert -- I don't know how to -- Foarwsen or r -- Bob De La Fuenta [sic], Andrew Georgia -Diaz [sic], and Barbara Gimenez. Elvis Cruz: Madam Chair. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Mr. E. Cruz: Hadley Williams wishes to allow me his two minutes. Is that allowable? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Who is the person? Mr. E. Cruz: Hadley Williams. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Do we have a -- Madam City Clerk, do we have a form on Hadley? Ms. Thompson: Yes, ma'am. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So you have four minutes. Mr. E. Cruz: Okay. While I get my computer set up, is it possible for one of the other speakers to use the other --? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Sure, not a problem. Mr. Cruz: Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: You can go ahead, sir. Robert Fournier: I'm Robert Fournier, 2070 Northwest 13th Street, Miami. I have lived in Miami for 40 years, butl also have a little business enterprise in Brooklyn, New York. I have already been through Miami 21 in Brooklyn, which might surprise you. And I'll say a little story. This is in 2000. I started a grassroots neighborhood organization, and we cleaned up a sub way station, overhead trestles and all that. Well, we got from cleaning it up ourselves to a commitment from the Transit Authority to spend $30, 000 on landscaping and a paint job and et cetera. Well, Igo out my front door one morning and what do I see, 9/11. The $40, 000 disappeared overnight; nothing was done. But then they began this zoning process in the city because people were fed up with the helter-skelter construction. Right now in Miami, I look out my back window at night and I see four 14-story tombstones. There's tombstones all over this City ofMiami Page 21 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 city, and I don't know what to do with them. We don't know what to do with them. I'm talking about the condos. Now, I mentioned I had a little business in New York, the landscaping business, and I never advertised at all. It was limited to one- and two-family units. We did it by word of mouth. Now, Brooklyn decided to do some sort of rezoning, but they did it right in the area where I began. They did not do a universal whole city bureau. They're doing one area at a time to see how the people respond, and see whether they can go from one area to the next area. In other words, they're putting 20- and 30-story buildings up on -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: In conclusion. Mr. Fournier: Huh? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: In conclusion. Mr. Fournier: Yeah. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Your two minutes -- Mr. Fournier: In conclusion, I'm neither for or against this plan, but I think maybe you ought to scratch this one and take on one single area at a time and then let people see what you're doing. If it's good, they'll all want to jump on the bandwagon. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you so much, sir. You're ready, Elvis? Mr. E. Cruz: Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Elvis Cruz, 631 Northeast 57th Street, secretary ofMiami Neighborhoods United. Some of the speakers here in favor ofMiami 21 may not have read the entire document. It's 462 pages, and it weighs 5 pounds. MNU (Miami Neighborhoods United) has read it several times. There is some good, but also some bad, and we've created a list of recommended amendments. But to be positive, Miami 21's best feature is the introduction of T4 O zoning. It's a wonderful thing. It's in scale and character with low -density residential neighborhoods and it'll encourage economic activity. Remember, the higher you zone a piece of land, the less likely it is something will get built. Just look at downtown with block after block of parking lots. As Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk put it perfectly, many cities upzoned in the hope it would spur development, but we now know it was an incentive to speculation, to which I add a Johnny Winton quote. "Nothing ruins neighborhoods faster than speculation." Unfortunately, T4 0 is used far too sparingly. MNU requests T4 along commercial corridors outside downtown. Let's prevent any more situations like this. This computer graphic shows a T6-8 corridor built out to only 7 stories, not the 8 allowed. MNU also supports the 35-foot height limit in the Upper Eastside. The main opposition to that seems to be coming from the MiMo association, and I'm a MiMo member. MNU and MNU basically want the same thing: T4, which is three stories, but MiMo wants the Miami 21 supersized floor heights where three stories is 53 feet. Miami 21 proposes supersized stories with 25 foot -high first floors --14 foot high upper floors. MNU objects. That should only be allowed downtown. Outside downtown it should be the traditional 15 foot first floor, 10 foot upper floors, especially in a historic district. At this time, I'll ask all those here in favor of the 35-foot height limit to please stand and be recognized. Please know we had a lot of other neighbors that wanted to come, but this is the Friday before Labor Day weekend and a workday and many couldn't make it. Thank you. The Planning Department promised Section 1305 would be incorporated in its entirety within Miami 21. Thirteen oh five is seven pages long, but in Miami 21 it is only one page, and there have been substantial changes. One glaring example in 1305, a multifamily residential building shall use surface parking areas as a district buffer. In Miami 21 it says, design landscaping in surface parking areas to buffer D1, D2, and D3. Multifamily has been excluded. Thirteen -oh -five came into being as a result of a court case, the Omni Point case, because a previous version was too vague. If anything, 1305 should be made more specific, not less. The main verb "respond, " as in City ofMiami Page 22 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 respond to the neighborhood context, should be changed to "conform" to the neighborhood context. Also, a very tricky legal sentence has been added at the bottom, which would weaken it considerably. The applicable criteria shall be construed as a whole in evaluating the permit application. Please delete that sentence. Also include 1306 because that section gives 1305 its authority. Miami 21 seeks to decrease or even eliminate some very important checks and balances. In many sections Miami 21 allows one person to make completely subjective calls with no objective criteria even stated for increasing building height, waiving parking requirements, et cetera. People can make mistakes even when hard objective criteria is in place. Example, Section 907.3.2 requires a 2-1 sloping setback above 40 feet in buildings that abutR-1, R-2, but look at this building. It has no sloping setback at all. It goes straight up for 12 stories in violation of 907.3.2, nor does this building have the surface parking required by 1305 as a buffer. These violations of the Zoning Code should have been caught administratively. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Elvis. Mr. E. Cruz: Yes, ma'am. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Do you have anybody that want to give you two more minutes? Mr. Cruz: Ira Horrowitz, can I have your two minutes? Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Ms. Thompson: What's his name, please? Mr. E. Cruz: Ira Horrowitz. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Mr. E. Cruz: These errors should have been caught administratively. They might have been caught in a public hearing, but these buildings were approved without a public hearing because, crazy as it sounds, under 11000, there is no public hearing for a building with less than 201 units, unless the public pays $1, 000 to be able to appeal it up to our elected officials at the City Commission. In Miami 21 it's even worse. We won't be allowed to appeal. Miami 21 proposes to completely eliminate appeals of administrative building permits. Please require public hearings. Lastly, do not fear Bert Harris. Three separate legal analyses by the City Attorney, Richard Grosso and Commissioner Marc Sarnoff have shown Bert Harris has little or no practical applicability. In the 14 years since Bert Harris was passed, do you know how much money has been paid out in the entire state of Florida for Bert Harris claims? None, nothing, zero in 14 years. Indeed, this Commission has down zoned before without any problem at all. Commissioner Sanchez did a down zoning on May 13, 2008. He down zoned Little Havana from 200 units per acre to 150. It was the right thing to do. And there were no problems. There were no lawsuits. But even if there had been, they would have failed because it is completely within this Commission's power to down zone without fear of Bert Harris. In closing, these are only a few of the items on MNU's list of proposed amendments. They're all intended to protect the public interest and put neighborhoods first. Please consider them. If you feel you need more time, please continue the meeting. Remember, again, today, the Friday before Labor Day, I'm sure there's many citizens who had already made plans and couldn't be here. I thank you very much for listening. Have a great Labor Day weekend. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Elvis, I want to say well done on the presentation. Mr. E. Cruz: Thank you. Applause. City ofMiami Page 23 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: The only thing I want to ask, Ana, because I'm not really thinking you're going to go through each and every one of these things, but have you guys considered the suggestions that were made -- I'm assuming you got this before today's hearing, right? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Well, this is the first time I hear -- I mean, that I see -- that I hear the presentation. I didn't get a copy of the presentation. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: But you have the items -- I'm sure Elvis -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I did -- but I have heard Elvis before. I just want to make sure that I -- it's clear. Thirteen oh five, it is part of the Code, and it's -- a criteria to be reviewed under all special permits, everything. So 1305 -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well, Ana, it's in the Code, but not really. I mean, if you really read 1305, you've taken words from it, you've put it in a table, and it really doesn't have the same effect. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I -- what we have done with 1305, we've included a version that is the same intent of when we reviewed the projects through internal design review and the Planning Department. On 1305 it is not only as part of the Code, it makes reference when any other type of permit that comes through our department needs to be reviewed. What we also have under Miami 21 that we do not have under Zoning 11000 -- that's why I think what we end up with is something better -- is that we have a Code that dictates those step backs and those transitions that we otherwise don't have in 11000. So, perhaps, the -- I would argue that the same language that we have and the same type of review under 1305, even though it might not be so many pages, is the same things that we would review. But in addition to that, we have a Code that dictates also the form and the transitions that today in 11000 we do not have. I think that would be a better thing because it would be citywide. So we have the two components. Commissioner Sarnoff I don't doubt that in application -- although, I did it three exercises, and once you put in that very final word, I think it -- what Elvis referenced, which is this shall be -- it's like aspirational and taken -- don't take it -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: As a whole. Commissioner Sarnoff -- together; take it separately. I think it dilutes 1305, and I could tell you as a lawyer -- and I would think as a developer and I would think certainly as a resident -- you would want to be able to understand a 1305 analysis 'cause that is to put in context your neighborhood, and that's the -- what I call the last fashion of hope. Say the Zoning administrator turns around and comes up with an analysis that says this is a building as a matter of right, supposing you decide a -- I don't know -- somebody with a T6-8 gets a bonus, but it's sitting very close in proximity, but outside the boundary of an R-1, now TC -- a T3 neighborhood. Why wouldn't that person, that resident have an opportunity to say this is out of context for the neighborhood? Why shouldn't they have that right? Why shouldn't they have that constitutional notice and right to do that? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I'm not sure I -- I'm following. I know that Elvis presentation had a word. I think it was -- I wrote it down -- whole, that you thought that was weakening, and we can take a look at the language because the intent clearly is to maintain 1305. Actually, the buildings that goes through the intern design review are really only those that are, as you have known them today, Major Use Special Permits or it's a special permit of some sort. Other than that, we don't see them. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: But, Ana, I think what -- the point -- City ofMiami Page 24 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: But I will -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- and I think all of us probably agree to this. I mean, what he's -- the Commissioner is basically saying is this is something that's extremely important, which means if the language is fuzzy or not clear -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We'll take -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- or in any way makes the community feel or the neighborhood feel as though they don't have the ability to come in front of their elected officials to communicate an issue or concern, I mean, it just -- it should be straight to the point. I mean -- and I think that that's what Elvis is frying to say from that perspective. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I'll -- we'll take a look at the language on the 1305 and bring it back on - - but I always would like to add that on the appeals from a warrant to an exception to a variance, they're all appealable to City Commission. When we started the process, it wasn't. That has been changed, but it was changed long time ago, that the appeal could happen, you know, to the Planning, Zoning and appeals board, and then it comes to Commission, starting from a warrant, which it would be the equivalent of a Class II today. Commissioner Sarnoff But you know what, Ana. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff And I'll tell you, it's interesting when you have Elvis Cruz, MNU come to you with an issue and then you have Truly Burton from the South Florida Builders Association come to you with the same issue. Then you think to yourself wow, there must be something here. And that is that there is no set of objective criteria, and just so you understand. While the City may have the ability to have a subjective belief and that Zoning administrator may have a subjective ability to make a determination, it has got to be based on objective criteria because at some point, at some day, should this ever get judicial review, whether it's by this quasi-judicial body or if it's by the 11 th circuit or 17th circuit, I guess I should say, they need to see what the subjective intent of that Zoning administrator is based on objective criteria. And this book, as you will, this five pound, so many page -- 461-page book, when it comes to the Zoning administrator's determination, is replete with objective criteria. And I think they have the right, whether you're Truly Burton or Elvis Cruz, to have pinned your tail on the donkey and figured out exactly what it is that Zoning administrator's objective criteria was when they made a subjective determination. I'm not -- I don't know a court of law in this country that allows somebody to have unfettered discretion without any objective criteria to see whether there is any kind of you know, connexity between the objective criteria and that subjective decision. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We'll take a look at it and make sure we bring it back to you. Commissioner Regalado: You -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized. Commissioner Regalado: Two things. Why are you supporting so many waivers to be done by the staff and not to be decided in public hearings? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Those -- Commissioner Regalado: Twenty-five. City ofMiami Page 25 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- instead -- well, ifI -- I went through the -- we have 24 of them, and there are things, for example -- and I'll pick a few -- the setbacks to internal lots, I believe, that was today done by right, and what we're saying is that it would be done by waiver. The parking reductions for the elderly, today it's done by a Class II. It's administrative. We're saying it should be done by waiver. Zoning administrator would see it. Parking reductions for adaptive uses in the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) areas, that's something that it has been -- it's new but it's something that we hear a lot of people wanting to have some flexibility in order to allow it. We're doing it through a waiver. In the provisions of the waiver, if there's things that are not numerical going back to the criteria, the Zoning administrator -- there's the -- the process goes that they would refer to Planning and Planning again would, you know, review -- make comments and bring it back. The other one is, for example, share access for adjoining lots. That's something that comes here -- sometimes it comes for a special exception and it's a way of coming into a property that someone might not have it. We're saying -- it's presently done by Class II. It's again administrative. We're saying Class I. The barbed wire is done by Class II. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay, Ana. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: So those are the things we thought -- and then -- I'm sorry. Go ahead. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No. What I'm -- I think Commissioner Regalado has a point. You don't have to go through all 25 of them. Just answer the direct question. The direct question is why so many --? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We thought there were things that were probably more -- adding more to a process of things that are very -- should be reviewed automatically, and that it didn't seem that you would need to take someone through a public hearing process for something that seems to be -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Small or minor? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- small or that it's -- it's kind of like -- would not be affecting a neighborhood precisely. So we were trying to ease some of those things that we see that either come here that we -- through our review process, that probably are just adding to the process that we all seem to be frying to streamline. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: So those are the -- I guess, and I -- that's why I was trying to point out those things. That's what the intention was. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Commissioner Regalado, if we could -- because I do want to keep the hearing moving. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah. I -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And I know we're all going to have comments afterwards, but if you can at least make sure that you get with Commissioner Regalado on those key issues -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I will. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- to make sure. I think Elvis's points -- I mean, you were on point -- Mr. E. Cruz: May I --? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- a lot of the information that's put out there. But do want to allow City ofMiami Page 26 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 for the other people that are standing to go ahead and do their two minutes presentations, so with that being said, can you please make sure you enter those issues into the records, and when -- I'm asking that when all of this stuff comes back to Commission, then we address the staff on these issues. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We'll do. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. So we're going to move on to the next person. Andrew Dickman, please. Mr. E. Cruz: Madam Vice Chair, may I just respond briefly to the comments, very briefly? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I -- I'm already -- I've already made my statement. You've already did your presentation. I want to be respectful for everyone else that has to present the standing. So please make sure that those items are included, but I think you did a brilliant job with making it clear enough for everyone to understand. Mr. E. Cruz: Thank you. Be firm, Commissioners. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Mr. E. Cruz: Be firm. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Andy. Andrew Dickman: Andrew Dickman, representing the Miami River Marine Group. The Clerk is passing out an exhibit to you which references the three properties on the Miami River, which were addressed by your staff as well as by Mr. Aguirre from the Durham Park Neighborhood Association. Earlier this year, you adopted comprehensive plan amendments during your EAR (Evaluation Appraisal Report) amendment process, and during that review, your staff as well as your Mayor, traveled to Tallahassee for a meeting with the Secretary of the Department of Community Affairs, Mr. Tom Pelham. And one comment he had -- and this is in connection with the new laws that say you must protect working waterfronts -- is any community, any local government would be proud to have a resource like the Miami River in its jurisdiction. And part of their analysis, which they ultimately said that the sub -element that you adopted ultimately was not consistent with the Growth Management Act. They referenced not only these three properties, but they referenced the Third DCA (District Court ofAppeals) decision about these three properties, that they are not consistent with the Growth Management Act, and they are not consistent with your sub -element. The properties need to be zoned D3, just like all of the other marine industrial properties along the river. This map should have never been changed because we had a timely appeal of all three of these decisions, not only the land use amendment, which should be industrial and the zoning map should be D3. Now, in your consideration ofyour comprehensive plan amendments today, you're going to have to transmit those to the Department of Community Affairs. And I ask you to ask yourselves that question, if the Department has already made their determination about the river, what are they going to say when they see that these three properties are still zoned in land use for high -density residential? So I ask you to adopt the PAB amendments that were recommended to make these D3 properties. And with that, I would happily answer any questions later on when you take this up. So thank you very much. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you, Andy. Jaime Correa: Good morning. I'm Jaime Correa. I'm director ofJaime Correa and Associates, a small-town planning firm in the City ofMiami, and director of the Masters in Urban Design at the University ofMiami School ofArchitecture. I'm here representing more than 600 students who are eagerly following these proceedings with a huge interest that only a historic events such City ofMiami Page 27 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 as this might generate. You must also understand that I'm not a very public person. Perhaps this is the first time that you see me before you. My scholarly position at the University of Miami, I prefer to have freedom of inquiry rather than enslaving myself to a femoral political ontologist. But the issue ofMiami 21 has forced me to come out of my economic cocoon. During the last three weeks, I have received no less than 200 emails asking me to become the voice of an alumni during this meeting, and this is what I heard. The entire country is watching you. Please approve and pass Miami 21. This is not only a great moment for the City ofMiami, but one of the most important moments in the history of design in urbanism in this country. In your hands lays the responsibility of a better public future for us locally and for the rest of the world. Please, don't allow any special interests, their delusions, their fears, and their attachments to tell you otherwise. Please give us the happiest urban environment in the country. Let us make Miami 21 the paradigm that everyone is looking for. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: In conclusion. Mr. Correa: Pass Miami 21. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: In conclusion. Mr. Correa: That's my conclusion. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: In conclusion. Mr. Correa: Pass it. Chair Sanchez: Good conclusion. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you. Mr. Correa: Thank you very much. Andrew Georgiadis: I'm Andrew Georgiadis. I reside at 3671 Southwest 19th Street, Miami. I'm also a town planner with Dover Kohl & Partners. As a town planner and designer and a person who graduated with his bachelor's and master's in Architecture, I'm in the trenches of design and urban development. And I was going to come here and just praise Miami 21, as I have always done, but when I read the manipulative and dishonest attack put forth by the AIA (American Institute ofArchitects) director in today's Miami Herald and remembered Kricket Snow and her bullies and all of the people that have come forth and made a shame of our profession, I felt obligated to say that I am against this type of mean -spirited bullying. And I resent the fact that they have said that DPZ's excellent document, which is the most well thought-out, sustainable, amazing, awesome piece of work that I have ever read as a code writer and a town planner myself. And they have said that this is going to limit creativity. This is a falsehood. It's a downright falsehood. This Code will liberate and will not inhibit creativity. This Code simply asks that buildings behave on their lot to shape walkable streetscapes. It does not govern architectural expression, it does not govern facades, and any assertion on the part of those bullies to say so is a downright falsehood, and it's a shame to our profession, and it's the reason why I will not be joining AIA any time soon, and why I would like to live and practice under the amazing piece of work that DPZ has written for us. Please, see the genius that is embodied in their Code and allow my four -month -old to grow up in a city that is sustainable and that is a result of that genius Code. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thank you. Applause. City ofMiami Page 28 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Please, let's hold all applause. I want to call the next ten people real fast, too as Ms. Dougherty sets up. Next ten, Gabriella Gumaris (phonetic), Luis Herrera, Edgar Jones, Sam Van Leer, and Nathan Kurland. Commissioner Sarnoff Are you on this side of the dais? Ms. Thompson: I'm -- Lucia Dougherty: Yes, sir. Ms. Thompson: -- sorry, Vice Chair. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Mr. Kurland asks that his name be held. He had to go to work. He's coming back. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Just add Ann Levenson, please. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Ms. Dougherty: Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the board. Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I'm here today on two matters, both of them in Commissioner Sarnoffs district. We would request two amendments, specifically one that is currently in the downtown development area, and therefore, we pay the same taxes as the downtown area, and it transitions from the downtown area. There is a T6-60 [sic] B in your Code currently. However, there's no map that demonstrates a T6-60 [sic]. It's supposed to be a urban transit (UNINTELLIGIBLE) area, and we think this area which is south of the river and north of 14th and the People Mover guideway -- the guideway would be on the east and the People Mover on the west -- is the perfect transition area from the T6-36 0, which is the Brickell area and the T6-80 [sic] downtown area. We are in the downtown area. We do pay the same DDA (Downtown Development Authority) taxes that the downtown area is, and we would request that you make this amendment. Commissioner Sarnoff And without that amendment, would you still be on that side? Ms. Dougherty: I don't know that we have any sides. I personally think you ought to pass it. Remember, I told you I think you ought to pass it as an alternate, as an overlay, so -- Commissioner Sarnoff So you're not quite on that side? Ms. Dougherty: Well, I'm asking for amendments on that side. I'll go over here if you'd like, but Commissioner Sarnoff No, no, no. I just like to know, you know, knowing where a man sits is where he stands. Ms. Dougherty: Not sure I understand that, but I trust you know what you're talking about. The other one is one that you had made a motion at your last meeting, which didn't pass because Miami 21 didn't pass, but it's basically for -- to change the Cimex -- Rinker plant from a DI to a D2, which is the same as the Tarmac property, which is directly across the way. It's been there for the last 50 years, and we don't think it should be made into a nonconforming use because you wouldn't be able to clean it up, renovate it, enclose it, do any of the things that we typically do, and I know that the staff is agreeable to this amendment, or doesn't object to it. City ofMiami Page 29 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Sarnoff That's the one right next to the park, right? Ms. Dougherty: No. It's -- this is the railroad tracks right here, so the Tarmac is right across the street from the park. Commissioner Sarnoff Are those the folks thatl asked to fix their fence and they never did? Ms. Dougherty: No. Commissioner Sarnoff No? Ms. Dougherty: Uh-uh. This is the one -- Commissioner Sarnoff I seem to remember that. Ms. Dougherty: -- met with you, and we did do all -- Commissioner Sarnoff No. I remember meeting with you, but -- Ms. Dougherty: -- all the improvements. You may recall, we did a hundred -- a couple of million dollars worth of improvements in this property, including putting a brand-new wall around it. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. I must have you confused with the other Tarmac company. Ms. Dougherty: Yes, you've got me confused. All right. Commissioner Sarnoff I rarely ever confused you, though. Chair Sanchez: All right. Ms. Dougherty: Thank you very much, and we'd request this amendment as well. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Okay. Next speaker, Luis [sic] Farrah. Mr. Farrah. Yes. You're recognized for the record. Emile Farrah: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioners, Mr. Mayor. Chair Sanchez: State your name. Mr. Farrah: My name is Emile Farrah, and I'm happy to see Miami 21 back on the ticket. It is important for me as a businessman in the City ofMiami and to many others. You don't have to be afraid of change. You don't have to worry about what's being taken. Just look and see about what's being added. For myself as a small businessman -- and I believe this is who you people represent -- it will help me tremendously. It will let me operate my business, which is in the Mary Brickell Village area, and I hope that Miami 21 will pass today, and it should pass today. Just like the gentleman mentioned, the whole world is watching, and that will help our city. Thank you very much. Chair Sanchez: Thank you, sir. Ben Fernandez, followed by Bob de la Fuente, okay, followed by Barbara Gimenez. Ben Fernandez: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Here on behalf of -- Ben Fernandez, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard. I'm here on behalf ofRNG Overtown LLC. This is an item that is really in Commissioner Spence -Jones's district, so I don't know if you want to extend courtesy to City ofMiami Page 30 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 her to revisit the dais. I'd be happy to give my time over to Mr. De la Fuente. Chair Sanchez: All right. Mr. De la Fuente. Bob de la Fuente: Good morning. Bob de la Fuente, with law offices at 1441 Brickell. We are in a similar situation. I'm here on behalf of Canyon Partners, which is the owner of the East Coast Fisheries site, one of the sites that Commissioner Spence Jones wanted to talk about. Chair Sanchez: All right. Barbara Gimenez, followed by Gabriella -- huh? Okay. Sorry, I -- Barbara Gimenez: Good afternoon. Barbara Gimenez, 7001 Biscayne Boulevard. I am secretary to the MiMo Biscayne Association. I own property on Biscayne Boulevard in the MiMo disfrict. I run my business from there. And I'm also a Belle Meade resident. I am here as a proponent to Miami 21, but as an opponent to the 35-foot height restriction that is being imposed on the MiMo disfrict, solely on the MiMo disfrict unfairly, and that's all I have to say about that, except one more thing. There are also a lot of people that are in my shoes that would have been here today not because it's the beginning of a long holiday, but rather because they are back at the MiMo district running their mom-and-pop businesses and they don't have anyone to leave that to. That having been said, I've been asked to read a short statement by Nancy Liebman, who's out of the country. Nancy is the vice president of the MiMo Biscayne Association, former Miami Beach Commissioner. Dear Commissioner, thank you for your well -written Bert Harris opinion. I'm sorry you only referred to one of the Bert Harris complaints in Miami Beach. There were lots more that never made it to court, either because the owners did not follow up after the original complaint or the City mitigated the damages to quiet the owners. However, I do not think the Bert Harris -- that Bert Harris should be the overriding issue in determining the height for the MiMo historic district. Good planning principles should be the main objective, and national registered guidelines for historic disfrict must be considered. For the past three years, you've worked with the MiMo Association to enact those good planning principles. Nowhere in the record below was there a professional proposal to establish a 35-foot height limit. The last-minute proposal to enact a 35-foot restriction is not only arbitrary and capricious, but it creates a substantial burden on the property owners who relied upon historic disfrict guidelines to rehabilitate their properties and create a mixed use. These guidelines became the vested right according to your writing on page 5 ofyour opinion. Thirty-five feet would surely prohibit any owner in the historic district from adding to his property. According to approved guidelines, this is a lawful present use and a foreseeable nonspeculative future use as outlined and approved in the MiMo guidelines. Chair Sanchez: In conclusion. Ms. Gimenez: It was the City's way to compensate for the designation of historic buildings, which carries with it certain zoning burdens. I urge you to consider sound planning and zoning principles for height on the historic disfrict based upon MiMo design guidelines. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Gimenez: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right, Gabriella, followed by Luis Herrera. Xavier Lesmarie: Good morning, everyone. My name is Xavier Lesmarie, andl own the property at 5061 Biscayne Boulevard. Barton G is my tenant, and I live at the Palm Bay Yacht Club, which is at 69 Street on Biscayne Boulevard for the past 14 years. I'm for Miami 21 and I'm against high-rise on the boulevard, but I'm totally opposed to a limitation of 35 feet along our district. We do need to control the height on the Boulevard, of course. Most of our history is (UNINTELLIGIBLE) preserve 1950 (UNINTELLIGIBLE) 20 feet in the air, so why do we have to City ofMiami Page 31 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 impose a drastic height limitation in our area. We already fight to preserve the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) structure, which (UNINTELLIGIBLE) in scale, and I don't think we need to down size it any more. It will not enhance the urban integrity of the corridor. The pictures that saw a few minutes before was the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) building, which was passed over and over on both side of the Boulevard cannot happen in our district just because we have preserved some historic building, which are here to stay. I want to set at the opportunity to host the next (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Miami Beach Symphonic House ofMr. Zyscovich Lincoln movie theater, which are all above 35 feet will be a loss because of the (UNINTELLIGIBLE), and I don't think we should jeopardize our future. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right. After Luis Herrera, we'll go with Edgar Jones. Luis Herrera: Good afternoon. My name is Luis Herrera, president of Vizcaya Homeowner Association. First of all, I'm against Miami 21 because it's a lot of thing in there that they don't comply with the neighborhood. First of all, like Mr. Angel Gonzalez said about fire, the house, how we going to fix it, they don't give the -- when they apply for the construction, reconstruction, they never give it to him. How 'bout when the hurricane coming too. They taking away about 50 percent of the house or whatever. We don't have nothing in there to protect the old houses because they don't comply with the new Code. This is not right, I think. And I ask him a few times, different time in the meetings that we need 35 feet in our neighborhood because it's a residential and then nobody listen to what the people want in our neighborhood, so they put T4 or whatever, and I still ask him for 35 feet. Same way like they do in Upper side -- up north, 35 feet. So that's why I'm against the -- it's not comply with the 11000. And Miami 21, they got thing that is good. Why you don't put a Miami 22 and do one thing together to help the citizens. Thank you. Commissioner Gonzalez: I -- Mr. Chairman. Chair Sanchez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Herrera just pointed out to an issue that have been discussing with my Chief of Staff all week long, and that's another concern that have. You know, we're changing the Code. We're changing the system. And up to this point, major developers had the privilege and they had the money and they had what they needed to come to this Commission and lobby this Commission for their clients. I believe that we are the lobbyists of the people that can't afford to hire attorneys, and that is the concern that have, you know. Everybody tells me, yeah, the -- Miami 21 has problems, but they will be solve along the way. Yeah, but you know my concern is that to solve these problems along the way, would regular citizens have to hire attorneys to solve their problems? They can't afford to pay thousands of dollars to a law firm in Brickell, in downtown, or whatever, to come before this Commission and solve their problem or go before the Administration and solve their problem. So we need to make sure -- because you know, I hearsay that this plan is to do away with the special interests and with the people with power and all that, you know, that -- people with the special -- people -- there would be a certain group of people that will always have a special interest and that always have more power than other people, okay. So that will never be eliminated. As long as life is life and as long as humanity is humanity, there will be two groups of people. Those group of people that are privileged that have the money, that have the power, that have the, you know, ways to get things done, they don't have to worry, and we don't have to worry about them because they can take care of them. But we need to make sure that we take care of the people on the neighborhoods that can't afford to hire attorneys, that can't afford to hire lobbyists, and that can solve their problems throughout Miami 21. That is one of my concerns. You know, I have gone through the plan with Frank, and we have found "X" amount of problems, and those are the ones that we have found. I don't know how many more there are, okay, because I haven't read the 500 pages. Every time I find a problem -- and I'm going to talk about the problems at the end, whenever it comes back to the Commission -- the Administration tells me, "Don't worry; that will be taking City ofMiami Page 32 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 care of" Don't worry; we will solve that. These are the problems. Don't worry; that is going to be solved. The -- well, now we have this other situation. No, no. That's going to be taken care of. My concern -- one -- another concern that have is that November 2, we're going to have a new Mayor. Is the new Mayor going to have the same vision of the champion ofMiami 21, which is Mayor Manny Diaz? Are we going to have the same Planning director? Are we going to have the same Building and Zoning director? I don't know. If this plan would have been approved four years ago, I wouldn't have had problems. You know why? Because I'm confident that can talk to that -- to our present Planning director and Zoning director, even the Mayor and solve problems with the Mayor and with the Manager, but are we going to have -- are we going to be able to do that with the new administration coming into the City. Are they going to have the same issue with Miami -- are they going to be approving Miami 21? Are they going to like Miami 21? They may want to change it all. They may want to do away with a lot of things. They -- you know, there are so many problems in Miami 21, but happen to agree with Mr. Herrera. Another issue that he mentioned is, you know, when a property is partially destroyed because of a hurricane or because a storm, you know, what are we doing to help, once again, the little people in the neighborhoods, the people in Shenandoah, the people in Allapattah, the people in Little Havana, the people that don't have hundreds of thousands of dollars or millions of dollars in a bank account that can issue a check and hire "X" amount of -- you know one thing that we think that we're doing? We are securing the jobs for many law firms in the City ofMiami for the next ten years. Applause. Commissioner Gonzalez: IfI had a chance, I would go to university tomorrow and start studying law to see ifI get a piece of the action. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, Commissioner, you know what I'd recommend? Look at Table 4. Look at all the waivers that can occur, let's take them out. And here's another thing we should do. It's been $500 historically for folks to get from the Planning Advisory Board, you know, an appeal, to this Commission, let's lower that to $200. Let's make it affordable. If they want this to be the people's court, then let's set -- let's put some objective criteria so that when you see a Zoning administrator that you don't like and you don't frust over there, and you say to them what did you base this decision on, and he says, well, there are four criteria right here, but didn't use them. Well, why didn't you use them? Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. Commissioner Sarnoff What was wrong with using it? Well, I really like the design of this building so much that I just decided not even to bother to look at that full criteria. That person pays $200 to get in front of this board. Many things that are on that list of famous 25 are no longer there. We change it right here, and we bring before -- we become the court -- the quasi-judicial board you want us to be. We can do that. And it is a as simple as that. And we can make it better than 11000 'cause, remember, it was -- I think Elvis said, $1, 000 to get in front of this board. Make it $200. I don't think it should be free because you know what you'll have. Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff You'll have those that like to sit here -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Oh, yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Commissioner Gonzalez: I know. I understand that. Another thing -- and Mr. Chairman, I'm City ofMiami Page 33 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 sorry for interrupting the meeting. But another thing that really concerns me is that not only we're going to have a new Mayor, but we're going to have two new Commissioners. Are these people elected to be Commissioner familiar with this plan, whoever those persons are? Do they agree with this plan? Do they agree with the changes? Because after all, they're the ones that are going to have to live with Miami 21 for the longest because I'll be out of here in two years. Both of you will be out of here in four years, and then the Commissioners is coming in, they're the ones that are going to be here for the longest time. And they going to -- they are going -- they're going to be the ones that are going to have to face reality and they're the one that are going to have to face the problems, and find the solution to the problems of the residents of the City ofMiami. So those are my concern, and the Administration needs to be aware of my concerns, okay. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Before we go any further, Lourdes, I think it's important, it's paramount, once again the nonconforming about hurricanes and natural disaster that you put on the record once again that those property owners are grandfathered in. Ms. Slazyk: Right. And I think Mr. Herrera seemed to think that there was some sort of 50 percent rule for that; there's not. If your property is destroyed by a hurricane, a fire, an act of God, you can bring it back 100 percent. If -- Commissioner Gonzalez: And also by an act of the devil -- Ms. Slazyk: No, no, no, no. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- caused by a third person. Ms. Slazyk: Let me finish. No. Let me finish. Single-family homes, the T3s, which is your single-family homes and duplexes, don't even require a special permit to do it any more. This is one of those vast improvements over 11000. If you are a single-family home owner and your house is demolished, destroyed by a hurricane or by a fire, you don't even need to file a special permit. You don't have to pay any money. It's not appealable. Your neighbors don't even get noticed. You come in and you get a building permit and Zoning signs off. It is permissible by right for your single-family and your duplex. So the concern you had about the single-family home owners having to get an attorney and having to put up with possible appeals from their neighbors, no, not for single family and duplex. Chair Sanchez: All right. Let's get back on track. Once again, at the end, when we open it up with a motion and a second, we'll have an opportunity to address issues that may come up during the whole meeting. So Mr. Fuentes [sic], I believe you were next. Mr. De la Fuente: I thinkHr. Fernandez was next. Chair Sanchez: Ben, are you ready? Why don't we get Mr. De la Fuente out of the way and then we'll get you. All right. You ready? Mr. De la Fuente: Yes, we're ready. Chair Sanchez: We -- Mr. De la Fuente: Good morning. Chair Sanchez: For your information, we're going to be taking a recess, maybe a lunch break at 1 o'clock. We'll come back at 2 o'clock, and we'll continue on, and hopefully, we could get out of here by 6 or 7. All right, you're recognized for the record. City ofMiami Page 34 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Mr. De la Fuente: Thank you. Bob de la Fuente, with law offices at 1441 Brickell. I'm here on behalf of Canyon Partners, the owner of the properties located at 40 Southwest North River Drive, the East Coast Fishery [sic] site, as well as the other properties that are across the street that go towards the highway. I am standing in for my law partner, Santiago Echemendia, who couldn't be here today. With me today are Luis Revuelta, who was here last time in August, as well as Barbara Pederzoli, his colleague. Per Commissioner Spence Jones's instructions, we did go and meet with Planning staff and with the Planning director, and it's our understanding that she does not have an objection to a -- an amendment to T6-12, and we do appreciate that. However, when we did our further studies and from what Mr. Revuelta will further explain, T6-12 still presents an inordinate burden because it is still a reduction in height from C-1, and this is a problem that's caused in particular by the location of the highway adjacent to the property. Basically, with T6-12, we would not be able to exceed the height of the highway by sufficient space in order to make this a viable parcel. So our request is on the river parcel, which is the former East Coast Fisheries site, to accept the T6-12, that we understand the Planning director is okay with, but for the parcels next to the highway, we have sort of a hybrid proposal, which would be T6-36, but with an FLR of 8 rather than of 12. This would allow sufficient height to get over the highway and would allow basically the same height that's allowed under C-1. This would preserve the desire of reduced intensity from T6-36 is FLR of 12. So with that, I'll turn this over to Mr. Revuelta, who can walk you through it and show you why this is appropriate for this site. It is a strange site. It's unique because of the highway, and that's why we need to ask for something that's a little bit different. Chair Sanchez: All right. Luis Revuelta: Mr. Chairman, I had written down my name as an architect to speak in favor of Miami 21, and I'm also part of this presentation. I'd like, ifI can, to just go ahead and read briefly what I had planned to say in favor ofMiami 21, which is less than two minutes and then just proceed with the presentation, if that's okay. Chair Sanchez: You may proceed. Mr. Revuelta: Good afternoon. My name is Luis Revuelta, with Revuelta Architecture International, with offices at 2950 Southwest 27th Avenue, Suite 110. I am in support ofMiami 21 in its -- the spirit ofMiami 21 is a good one for the future of our city, and I believe that paralysis by analysis is not a good philosophy to live by, so I hope it gets approved today. Ordinance 11000 was a good ordinance at the time it with you conceived, but after approximately 20 years, the decision and commitment was made to start new with Miami 21. I strongly believe our best approach now and the great investment of good faith effort, time, and funds is to move to the next step today. Changing a zoning code and the plan while frying to maintain fairness among so many different interests and viewpoints, I'm sure, has been a difficult -- very difficult job for staff and DPZ, and I want to compliment them today for the job that they've done. We ourselves developed an appreciation for this effort when we were fortunate to be invited by the City as a part of a group of architects that participated in analyzing some of their own projects that were developed under 11000 and how did they compare with Miami 21. In the process of working with the City and staff and DPZ, we've had a lot of very good discussions over the last two years, and a lot of changes have been implemented. I'm grateful for their consideration, specifically to Ana and Liz. There's still a few issues still pending and unresolved, I believe, with Miami 21 that can be resolved between first and second reading. Those are that the instances in which properties are located to a permanently open body of land or water, like parks, river, or bay, or substantially large public right-of-way, they lose development rights, and also corner lots. I think those properties, somehow some way, they need to be given a range of time that they can either do something to protect their rights through a MUSP or some other process or lose them after a period of time if they are inactive and they don't wish to pursue that. I think that the Urban Development Review Board should be maintained. I'm also -- I'm an advocate of another board for even smaller projects than 200,000 City ofMiami Page 35 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 square feet because I think a lot of projects got built under 200,000 square feet that really go under the radar. Staff does a great job, butl think that could use some help. And I am against the 35-foot height on Biscayne Boulevard. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Mr. Revuelta, you've had an opportunity to address this with the Commissioner? Mr. Revuelta: I did. This -- Chair Sanchez: Okay. Mr. Revuelta: -- specific issue, yes. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Mr. Revuelta: And almost through here with my statements. Chair Sanchez: All right, because you're going to have an opportunity on first reading and second reading to address that issue also. Mr. Revuelta: I certainly hope so. There's one last issue that have a problem with. I think that if an architect is designing a building that meets the FLR, that it's stipulated in Miami 21, I and my fellow architects are going to have a tremendous difficult time going to a developer and say you have to pay extra to go additional height, ifI think that your building is a better project by being thinner and taller. Right now the Code reads that if you meet the FLR and you go thinner and taller, you would have to pay for that height. I think that maintaining that requirement right now would lead to a monotony that for a City ofMiami, I am very concerned about that. But please, I strongly believe Miami 21 should be approved today. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Chair Sanchez: Very briefly. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, I mean, we've had your presentation for more than two minutes, your attorney's presentation for more than two minutes, and we've had yours on the issue. I want to be fair to the public, Mr. Chairman. I don't want to have you present on one item, then I have to offer that to other people in the audience as well. Mr. Revuelta: But what -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So I think that we've -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- gotten the point that you support Miami 21, and I think we've gotten from your legal team regarding your issue, so you know, I think that you just -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- need to continue to work with City staff regarding this issue. I just don't want -- I want to be fair. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ben, you're recognized for the record, followed by Sam Van Leer, City ofMiami Page 36 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 followed by Donna Milo, Anne Levenson. IfI called your name, be ready to address the Commission. And also Jeffrey Atkins. All right, Ben. Mr. Fernandez: Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Ben Fernandez, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard. I'm here on behalf of RNG Overtown LLC, who are the owners of an entire block of property that is at the northwest intersection of 1st Avenue -- Northwest 1st Avenue and Northwest 11 th Street. The property's currently being proposed for T6-8, which is an eight -story maximum, as you can see on the boards here, property's located right here. What's interesting about this site is that if you look into the archives that are available on the City ofMiami Miami 21 website, you will note that since 2006, November of 2006, this property has been proposed for a T6-24 designation, which is extremely different from T6-8, a much more intense designation. On eight separate and consecutive iterations of the map, DPZ proposed a T6-24 designation for this site. The new owners of this property have purchased the property, RNG, in reliance, in part, on both the existing zoning of the property, which is SD-16.1, which is a much greater intensity than even T6-24. SD-16.1 allows a floor area of 4.3 and above and unlimited height. T6-24 by itself would constitute a down zoning, but to further degrade the zoning to T6-8 is clearly unreasonable. In fact, this property is located in the urban central district of the City. It's located in the Overtown/Park West density increase area. Both of these things encourage redevelopment at high intensity. And if you look at every other similarly situated property that is zoned SD-16.1 in this part of western downtown, there's not one other parcel that is being down zoned from SD-16.1 to T6-8, not one. Typically, T6 -- SD-16.1 corresponds to a T6-36 or a T6-60 [sic]. I can understand that west -- Chair Sanchez: In conclusion, counsel. Mr. Fernandez: -- of 1st Avenue, Commissioners, it may be less intense. We suggest to you that it should be at a minimum a T6-24 fransect, which is what has been proposed on eight separate consecutive occasions by DPZ. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right, next speaker. Commissioner Sarnoff Can I ask a --? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And Mr. Chairman, ifI could just add onto the subject, and hopefully, Ana and them can continue to work with you on finding something that makes sense. Yes, we voted and approved, I believe, the issue of the upzoning in certain areas, the area that you're speaking of but the reality was in the midst of all of that, there were several community -based meetings, which I explained to you already, from local neighborhood associations, to church groups, to individuals that we've asked to have -- give their input in the Overtown area as to what they wanted to see happen in that overall area, and they had a concern with the whole canyon effect. So that is the reason why we might have voted on it here, but when it came down to doing the community -based meetings in the Overtown area, especially in that core particular area, where we have our parks and our schools, people have big concerns with it. So that's the reason why you're seeing it. The input comes from the community, not necessarily from this Commission. Mr. Fernandez: And we understand, Commissioner. Chair Sanchez: All right. Mr. Fernandez: We just want to be treated similarly as other parcels on the west side of 1st Avenue. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I understand. City ofMiami Page 37 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Chair. Chair Sanchez: Let's go -- yes. Commissioner Sarnoff Mr. Fernandez, you indicated that your client purchased on the expectation that the zoning would remain just as stated. Mr. Fernandez: Not -- Commissioner Sarnoff Is that correct? Mr. Fernandez: -- necessarily exactly as it is, but to degrade the zoning -- Commissioner Sarnoff What did he do -- Mr. Fernandez: -- two transects is unreasonable. Commissioner Sarnoff -- in furtherance on his development rights? Mr. Fernandez: Well, the rezoning, you can see from the exhibit that I passed out, was approved in 2006, three -- less than three years ago, so I would think that he would -- he's done enough already in -- Commissioner Sarnoff You simply think the purchase of land in and of itself alone vests him of development rights? Mr. Fernandez: No. I think that there is a reasonable expectation -- investment -backed expectation that the courts recognize when a property is upzoned less than three years ago from R-3 to 16.1 and then is, in eight months, down zoned again to T6-8. That's clearly an unreasonable and inconsistent position for the board of County -- for the City Commission to take. Commissioner Sarnoff But to be clear on this record, since you intend on making one, the clear answer to my question is that your client did not do or take any affirmative steps to start the permitting process and create a project? Mr. Fernandez: I can't tell you everything that they've done. I've only recently been retained on this particular issue, but we intend to research that. And I believe that their -- by simply filing their rezoning application in recent history, they've done a lot. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. So that's all you're aware of? You're not aware of any further action your client has taken, other than to purchase the property? Mr. Fernandez: I can't answer that question. I know that they've contemplated -- Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Just so the record's clear. Mr. Fernandez: I think -- there's a covenant -- I can tell you there's a covenant -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Mr. Fernandez: -- on record. City ofMiami Page 38 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Sam, you're recognized for the record. Donna Milo and then Anne Levenson. All right. Good morning, good afternoon. Good afternoon. Sam Van Leer: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Sam Van Leer. I'm executive director of Urban Paradise Guild. We are a habitat restoration and sustainability organization operating from Miami Gardens to Coconut Grove to Homestead. We have hundreds of members, both organizations and individuals. The stated goals ofMiami 21 are fantastic. The question is does the plan live up to its own goals? In the case of Virginia Key's North Point, it does not. This area is surrounded by sensitive habitats. There are turtle nesting beaches, which require protection from light pollution. There are endangered plants in the immediate vicinity. There are protected manatee breeding areas nearby, and there are shallow waters immediately offshore, which include the endangered Johnson sea grass. The zoning of this area, as proposed, CS, is incompatible with Miami 21 's goals of nature preserves. This area cries out for protection. A marina, which would be specifically a right of development in zoning CS, would destroy native habitats there that are irreplaceable. Furthermore, allowing development by warrant or by exception will bring pollution and prevent the full habitat restoration of the area. Now, this area looks ugly. It was built up with dredge spoil. By the way, I have an additional two minutes donated by Mr. Charlie Bradley, who is in the audience. Chair Sanchez: Charlie, raise your hand. Mr. Van Leer: He seems to have stepped out for the moment. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Madam Clerk wants to know -- Chair Sanchez: Charlie Bradley, does he have --? All right, continue, sir. Ms. Thompson: Yes. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Mr. Van Leer: IfMiami 21 is amended to protect the North Point up to the levels that are mandated under Miami 21 for habitat preservation, then we would be fully in support ofMiami 21, especially in light of the proposals by Miami Neighborhood [sic] United, which we fully support. Thank you very much for your time. Commissioner Sarnoff Thank you. Mr. Van Leer: Please choose wisely. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right, Donna Milo, followed by Dolly Maclntyre and Jeffrey -- Donna Milo: Donna Milo, 1074 Northeast Little River Drive. I come to you -- I had a -- something written down, prepared, a little bit technical in nature about Miami 21, and instead, I decided to come speak to you as a parent of a 21-year-old, a 24-year-old; as a builder and developer in the City, and as a member of the PAB, a resident of the City and a person that does business in the City. Miami 21, we've talked a lot over the last few years, and I've been involved with Miami 21 since its inception, and we've all been up -- we've seen a lot of people come in, and we've talked about the details and the properties, and in response to what Commissioner Gonzalez just said, the details are an issue, but don't want to lose. What want to do is take a little time to go back to the vision. Miami 21 helps to solve a problem. Our city is 110 plus years old right now, and a lot of our old buildings are just old buildings; are not historic buildings, so how do we want the fabric of this city, which isn't growing this way; it has to grow to maintain a functional growing tax base. It has to grow in density and intensity. Do we continue to do it with 11000, where the people that can afford a lawyer can come in and build a huge building in a neighborhood that changes the consistency and fabric or do we look at a City ofMiami Page 39 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 more cohesive, a more followable [sic] plan that we can perhaps predict not a perfect plan, not every option has been solved, but neither does 11000 provide solutions to every problem that comes up. So I think that having some predictability, a good example is look at the great thing, the vision you had in your district for your park. There were issues with the park. There were people that gave you challenges, but your vision to have a park there for the kids, for the people, it's there. The park is functioning. It was a great thing to move forward with. And as the problems come up with it, you'll solve them, as you did. So I see Miami 21 as a vision that allows us to do that as we redevelop a more connected, a more walkable, a more -- a city that's more predictable. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Milo: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: All right. Jeffrey Atkins, is he here? All right, I've called you three times. Anne Levenson, Dolly, come on up. Anne Levenson: Good day, everybody, my name is Anne Levenson. I've lived on 780 Northeast 69th Street for over 30 years. To hear all of these meetings and listen to all this stuff and read the papers with everything that's going on, it's kind of sad. I live in the area because I think it's heavenly. I don't like what's happened to downtown area with all those empty, tall, horrendous -looking buildings. I wouldn't want to live on Miami Beach, nor on Brickell. Our area is special. It's wonderful. It's low rise. You see green trees. I see parrots fly by my balcony. I'm disturbed that if you think you're going to build high-rise buildings there, I'm going to have to move, but where? There is none other place in Miami like our area in the Upper Eastside. I understand that a lot of people bought on spec is all motels, and I can understand that they want to make money. Well, compromise. Don't -- the greed has almost killed Miami. It's time that people say, hey, you have a piece of property; build on it. Three stories is enough. This is not downtown Miami. We want to keep this the way it is, and the small businesses can function very well. There are two buildings that's been built on my street. On the corner on 69th Street, where Starbucks is, I don't think they have enough parking. How they got to build? I don't know. Balan just build. How did they get the permit? I don't think they have enough parking either. Who passes -- who let's these people even build that without proper parking? And the cars are piling up in front of our houses. You also have to think of traffic. When the bus stop on Biscayne Boulevard, that means we're down to one lane and we don't budge. I mean, is greed going to take over and we're going to have high-rises, we can't get in and out of our streets, seriously consider this before you decide this. It's a heavenly area. It's a special area. I don't think it's anything like it in Miami. I can live anywhere I want to, but since I came to the United States, this is the area where I live. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Levenson: Andl love it. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Levenson: And please -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I just want to -- I'm sorry. I just have a question. Ms. Levenson: -- excuse me. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Finish. I'm going to let you finish. Ms. Levenson: -- do not allow high-rises. City ofMiami Page 40 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Levenson: Three stories is enough, and everybody can make enough money. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Anne, can I ask you a question 'cause you mentioned balcony? Where do you live 'cause you -- you're 780 -- what --? Ms. Levenson: Northeast 69th Street. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Northeast 69th. What -- are you in a building now? Ms. Levenson: Yeah. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: A high-rise or low? Ms. Levenson: Fifty-two oh nine. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: What building is it? Ms. Levenson: Palm Bay Club. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: You're in Palm Bay. Ms. Levenson: And fortunately. I saw that being built. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. No, no, no. I didn't -- no. I just asked the question 'cause you said balcony and was -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- frying to think 69th Sfreet, the only thing that -- I wasn't trying to be funny. Ms. Levenson: I watched that building going up. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No. Ms. Levenson: Fortunately, I -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I wasn't -- I just want to be clear -- Ms. Levenson: -- it shouldn't have been built either. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- I just want it to be clear -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- I wasn't frying -- I didn't know -- when you said 69th -- when I saw your thing, I was like 69th Sfreet, I couldn't get it. Then you said balcony, that's why asked. Not frying to -- I just asked the question. City ofMiami Page 41 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Ms. Levenson: No. I live in a high-rise -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Ms. Levenson: -- and I saw it being built. Chair Sanchez: Thank you so much. Dolly, you're recognized for the record, followed by Arthur Marcus. Dolly Maclntyre: I'm Dolly Maclntyre, 409 Vizcaya Avenue, Coral Gables. I support wholeheartedly Miami 21. I would just like to say we must be careful that we don't allow Miami to be a city that's zoned and planned by lawyers. You have made good points about the control that the legal profession has and that the simple home owner has a problem addressing a problem without a lawyer. It shouldn't be that way. The law supports zoning. It supports down zoning. You have legal precedent all the way to the Supreme Court to uphold this in the community's interest, so don't let lawyers intimidate you into thinking that if you down zone something or if you change the zoning code, you're going to be hit with all kinds of litigation. That is threats that they are trained to use. Don't let it intimidate you. Please pass Miami 21, and we can tweak it as we need to. Thank you. Applause. Chair Sanchez: All right. Let's refrain from doing that, please, so we can get out of here for lunch soon. Arthur Marcus, followed by Eileen Mehta. Yes, sir. Arthur Marcus: Arthur Marcus, 1450 Lincoln Road, Miami Beach. I'm here speaking on behalf of the Morningside Civic Association. I'm an architect in private practice in Miami Beach and also presently serve on the executive board of the Miami Design Preservation League, and I formerly served as chair of the Miami Beach Joint Design Review and Historic Preservation Board. I'm here to support -- speak in favor of the 35-foot height limit for the upper Biscayne Boulevard commercial corridor for Miami 21. And I also want to say as an architect, I strongly disagree with the stand of the American Institute ofArchitects. I really believe that DPZ has done a wonderful job in putting together a planning document that Miami desperately needs, and I certainly hope you pass this. In Miami Beach, we've successfully dealt with the issue of insuring that new buildings in historic neighborhoods fit into the existing architectural context, and through this process we've learned 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-range effects upon the quality of life in our neighborhoods. New high-rise buildings belong in neighborhoods such as Brickell or downtown, where we have already spent our tax dollars to construct the infrastructure necessary for such buildings. Miami's Upper Eastside is composed of unique and fragile efficiently declared historic neighborhoods, such as Bayside, the MiMo Historic District, Morningside, and our newest historic district, Palm Grove. A 35-foot height limit along Biscayne Boulevard makes good urban sense since this will ensure that new out -of -scale buildings do not overwhelm these vibrant, historic neighborhoods. This is precisely why the Miami -Dade County Urban Design Manual recommends three stories along commercial corridors, the Upper Eastside master plan recommended a 30-foot height limit in selected areas, and why Miami 21 should include the proposed 35-foot height limit. Chair Sanchez: In conclusion, sir. Thank you. Mr. Marcus: In conclusion, please pass Miami 21. Thank you. City ofMiami Page 42 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Applause. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Folks, please. All right. Let's go. The speakers that we called. Next speaker, Michelle Niemeyer, followed by Adrienne Pardo, and Gil Pastoriza. Eileen Mehta: Mr. Chair, members of the Commission, my name is Eileen Mehta. I'm here on behalf of Goodwill Indusfries of South Florida. I am first asked by Dennis Pastrana, the president of Goodwill Industries, to convey his appreciation to the Mayor, to our district Commissioner, Commissioner Gonzalez, and to the entire Commission for the unfailing support that you have given to Goodwill Indusfries over the years. It is as a result of the support from the City ofMiami and others with the interest in the mission of Goodwill, which is to provide employment and training for persons with disabilities that Goodwill has become, if not the largest, then certainly one of the largest manufacturers in the City ofMiami, and we are very proud of the work that we do for the disabled in this community. However, we are now faced with a proposal which would make our manufacturing facility no longer a facility that is permitted as of right. Instead, it would become something which is permitted maybe by waiver, maybe by warrant, maybe by successional zoning, maybe by something else. Certainly, we believe in your good intentions. So I don't think that anybody would ever try to hurt Goodwill, but the fact remains that, as a business, like the other businesses in that community, we are dependent on certainty to be able to expand and enlarge. By becoming a nonconforming use, there is a termination period of 20 years that puts us into that twilight zone of uncertainty, which affects any business which needs to get financing, which needs to be able to have assurances in order to expand and thrive and grow. We want to continue performing our mission in this community. We think it is a valuable mission, and when we are placed in that position of becoming a nonconforming use, which is subject to uncertainty, as are many of the other businesses in that area, it introduces an element which is not good for Goodwill and it's not good for the economic security of the businesses in the area. Thank you very much. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right, next speaker. Adrienne Pardo: Hello. My name is Adrienne Pardo, with law offices at 1221 BrickellAvenue. First, I'd like to say that I think some of the overall concepts ofMiami 21 are very good. However, I think it's filled with lots of problems that's going to cause us major problems, and we've got issues with our economy now and it's going to make it even more difficult as time goes on. For the record, I'd like to say that -- I'd like to preserve for the record that I do think it's improper for the Commission to go forward based on the PAB's action of deferral. I think it's in the Code in that they are supposed to make a recommendation whether it be for or against and then it goes to the Commission. Commissioner Sarnoff Can I address you on that? Commissioner Gonzalez: Ma'am, ma'am? Will you please call the lady 'cause -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: What happened? Commissioner Gonzalez: They clarified the issue of -- Chair Sanchez: Yeah. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- they just clarified to me the issue of Goodwill. Chair Sanchez: And that's been taken care of. City ofMiami Page 43 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah, but she doesn't know. Chair Sanchez: Well. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Sorry. Commissioner Gonzalez: Go ahead. I'm sorry. Ms. Pardo: Okay. Commissioner Sarnoff I have a question for you, Adrienne. Chair Sanchez: Whoa, let's try to stay in order here. Let's go ahead and answer -- I believe the Commissioner wants to address you, ma'am -- you walked away -- and then we'll go ahead and get back. Ma'am -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Ma'am. Chair Sanchez: -- you Goodwill? The district Commissioner -- Commissioner Gonzalez: I -- Chair Sanchez: -- wants to address your concern. I think your issue has been taken care of. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- just spoke to the Planning director, and your issue is taken care of. You don't have the nonconforming use. She's going to explain it to you. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: If you want, I can walk you and show you it is allowed. Ms. Mehta: Well, there's -- there's more than one issue, but go on. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Can we do something? Can you get with her off the record -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Maybe what we can do is get together -- Chair Sanchez: -- and then we'll come back? Commissioner Regalado: But -- excuse me. Is that only for Goodwill, or are we talking citywide on the nonconforming for indusfrial --? Because, like Goodwill, there are other institutions. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: The difference in -- what the property right now is indusfrial. Because it changed to Di, it allows for residential, which today, indusfrial doesn't allow for residential, so the use is still allowed. The only difference is that it's by warrant, and it's just by warrant because if we allow in residential, we want to make sure that the manufacturing -- whatever use they're bringing is not hazardous. The Building Department has a list that they check on those things that are hazardous where it cannot coexist with residential. That's the only thing. But the use is allowed and it's by warrant. Ms. Mehta: We understand that we will no longer be permitted as of right; that it would be permitted by a discretionary action. What our concern is is that that discretionary action introduces that element of uncertainty. And ifI may, Commissioner. You're very familiar with the parking garage. Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am, I am. City ofMiami Page 44 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Ms. Mehta: The parking garage is permitted now as long as it remains in private -- I'm sorry -- as long as it remains public parking. You know that we are planning on, when the lease expires with the City, using that as a private parking garage for our future expansion. There is no provision for the private parking facility in that area. So we have the issue of the parking garage. We also have the issue that the warrant or successional zoning alternatively, is just an element of uncertainty that lenders don't really appreciate. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Mr. Chairman, let me just say this. I mean -- and I understand we're trying to address Commissioner Gonzalez and hopefully, you guys can get it situated, but it's very disrespectful if you have somebody already on the mike, you know, making a point -- we got to figure out a better way, Mr. Chairman, to handle it. I mean, it's --Adrienne was in the middle of her presentation -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- and then Commissioner Sarnoff was in the midst of -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you, Vice Chair. Thank you so much. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- making a comment that I wanted to add on to -- Chair Sanchez: Okay. Commissioner Gonzalez: I apologize. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- but I don't know if you even remember what the comment was. Commissioner Sarnoff I do. Chair Sanchez: He knows the comment. All right. Ma'am -- Commissioner Gonzalez: I apologize. Chair Sanchez: -- what I suggest is -- what I -- hold on. Got to get this meeting back in order. Ma'am, what I suggest is that you sit -- get with the Administration, have them explain your concerns. If anything, we'll bring you back after the meeting to address the concerns that you may have. You may -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Once again, I apologize for interrupting. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: It wasn't -- Commissioner Sarnoff Adrienne, you were here to place some sort of a -- something on the record that it's inappropriate for this Commission to go forward in light of the fact, I take it, that the PAB didn't take an action or asked to defer an action. Ms. Pardo: They did defer it. Commissioner Sarnoff And I get that. But what I'm curious of is how do you unify that in the positions that Lucia Dougherty has taken before this Commission time and time and time and time again since I've been here and many times before that when she suggested I don't care what the PAB does; now it's time for the Commission to act?" Ms. Pardo: Easily. I'll tell you exactly how. Because in prior times when Lucia makes that City ofMiami Page 45 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 argument, it may be that the PAB denied it. Commissioner Sarnoff No, no, no. Ms. Pardo: But theirs is a recommendation. Commissioner Sarnoff They've deferred. Ms. Pardo: But it could be an approval or a denial; it's a recommendation. But they did something on that item. Here they did not approve, recommend approval; they did not recommend denial. They deferred it, so they didn't take action on it. Commissioner Sarnoff So if the records of the City ofMiami ever reflect that Lucia has said the City -- PAB has deferred this, but it doesn't matter; they've heard it, so you can come before you today in accordance with your Code, that wouldn't be consistent with what you're telling us? Ms. Pardo: You know what? Lucia and l are two different people. Commissioner Sarnoff No. I understand. Commissioner Regalado: Call her. Ms. Pardo: If you want to get a record -- Commissioner Sarnoff I'm just frying to figure out what the law -- Ms. Pardo: -- of what I've said at a hearing -- Commissioner Sarnoff I just want to know what the law is. Ms. Pardo: -- I haven't attended every hearing Lucia has been at, but we're two different people, you know. Commissioner Sarnoff No. I get that, but want to make sure -- Ms. Pardo: And I don't know if she has made that statement or if she hasn't. I heard her -- Commissioner Sarnoff Oh, trust me. I mean, you know -- Ms. Pardo: -- say it when they've recommended denial. Commissioner Sarnoff The best part of having this recorded, there is a record. And I'm just trying to hear from one lawyer in the same law firm -- Ms. Pardo: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff -- your take on what the PAB did predicated in the past what Greenberg's position has been that all they cared was that the PAB heard the issue. Ms. Pardo: I -- Commissioner Sarnoff Not that they made a determination. Ms. Pardo: -- personally have never made that argument, and I have never heard Lucia make that argument, so I can't -- City ofMiami Page 46 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Ms. Pardo: -- argue to it. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Ms. Pardo: I respectfully -- Chair Sanchez: Anything else? Ms. Pardo: -- disagree with you on that. Yes, there is. Chair Sanchez: Let's continue, please. Ms. Pardo: I would also like to say -- I'd like to point out a certain section -- I don't know if you're aware of it or not -- but it's a relatively recent change to Miami 21 in 7.2.6, the unconforming [sic] uses where there's a provision put in there that if you have a legal nonconforming parking use, which is basically the SD-12 districts, that those properties have to come back within 90 days. They have to get an exception. That means they have to have a public hearing, and they have to come back within 90 days of the adoption of this Code. So number one, I think you're going to have -- you have lots of legal businesses out there that have their parking -- a lot of their required parking is in these SD-12 properties. They're going to have no clue that they need to come back here. And then what happens if they don't come back here? They're then going to be out of business or -- and I'll make this real quick, in summary. If they do come back here and if the neighborhood decides, you know what? I don't like this business anymore. I don't like this restaurant; it's too much traffic, then they could, you know, tell the board don't approve it, and then they're going to be out of business. So I think that's a major problem within the current Code, and I hope you take that into consideration. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, but -- I'm sorry. Commissioner Regalado: I'm sorry. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: Just -- Mr. Chairman, just on the SD-12. On August 2, I think we discussed this, I asked Ana how many SD-12 we have in the City ofMiami. You said you didn't know, but that you will find out. How many we have now? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: There's 900 parcels. Commissioner Regalado: Nine hundred parcel, SD-12. In two blocks in Coral Way, we have three, only two blocks in Coral Way between 32nd -- no, between 31 st and 34th. IfAdrienne, what she says happens, which they have to come back here in 90 days, whatever this Commission or the next Commission will have to hear like 900 cases? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We -- Commissioner, after the hearing on August 6, we looked at the language and the issue that you had brought up and it was brought up about the SD-12. We will be making a correction to make sure that we -- Commissioner Regalado: But Ana -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- that we're protected. City ofMiami Page 47 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Regalado: -- it's still on the website, and the people are calling our offices, especially the people in Coral Way. You know, the people in Coral Way are afraid that they're going to have to close their business if the SD-12 are not made legal and, apparently, you know, there's a possibility that they won't because the neighbors will be coming here before the Commission or whatever the Planning Board or the Zoning Board. I'm just saying to you that only in two blocks in Coral Way, we have three SD-12. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I'm -- what can do -- what -- the reason why it wasn't changed, it was because we needed to be in front of this body to be able to get the input from you. Whatl can do is I understand Legal has some language and at the end of the hearing, I can put it on the record, and if you concur, we can vote and we can change it. But that's a change that can happen between first and second. And we understand and we're correcting the language. Commissioner Regalado: But who had that idea? I mean, doesn't it occur to anybody that 900 cases before a board will make the system collapse? It's like a million of appeals before the property appraiser. I mean, do you realize that in 90 days 900 property owners and business have to come if-- you didn't catch that glitch or I didn't or Commissioner Gonzalez didn't. Commissioner Gonzalez: No, I did. I have a whole bunch of property owners in Allapattah. Commissioner Regalado: Well, exactly, and that's what I'm saying. That's what I'm saying. Commissioner Gonzalez: And I'm ready to propose an amendment to that. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Commissioner Regalado: You know -- but -- you will fix one page of 700. One page of -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: -- 700 you will fix, but my point is who thought that a scenario that does not make sense at all? Commissioner Sarnoff Me. Commissioner Regalado: You? Commissioner Sarnoff Yes. Commissioner Regalado: Okay. It doesn't make sense because you know what? There is no parking in Coral Way, absolutely. What we are looking is parking in Coral Way, and for that matter, in other areas. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I -- Commissioner Regalado: And you know, SD-12 -- you know that there was a fight everyday with police because of a medical building in Coral Way and 31 stAvenue because the patients and the SDS [sic], whatever, transportation would park in front of the driveways on 21 st Terrace and on 21 st Street, and there was police and the whole situation until the doctors were able to do an SD-12, and now the situation is calm. Now, if they have to revert that -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Well, Commissioner, I have language here that would like to read to correct, and it would read like this. Parking uses abutting T3 R areas that were legally nonconforming prior to the adoption of this Code will not have continued automatic 20-year extension as provided in this section but shall instead seek an exception before the City City ofMiami Page 48 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commission within 90 days of adoption of this Code. This includes accessory parking approved as transitional uses under prior zoning codes that were always deemed a legal nonconformity prior to the adoption of this Code. And then this should exclude the SD-12 properties, school, churches, et cetera, that were legal under 11000. So we're only talking about those that were not legal. Commissioner Regalado: So 900? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: There are 900 -- when we checked the records, as you requested, there's 920 parcels that came to us for the SD-12. In the last seven years, I think we only had seven properties, but right now we have 920 from years back. Yes, sir. Ms. Pardo: I mean, I would just want to look at it again because I was looking at it real quickly and I didn't see how different that language was from the existing, but if they want to -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Ms. Slazyk: Let me explain real quickly because I -- Chair Sanchez: Explain it. Ms. Slazyk: -- think it might help this discussion. Chair Sanchez: Yesterday, in our briefing, when we had our briefing, that was taken care of and that was explained. It was one of the concerns that we had. Have you had an opportunity to explain to the entire Commission what you just explained here? Commissioner Sarnoff Well, let Lourdes do it. Chair Sanchez: Hold on. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: This issue came up, and what we were saying is we were looking at changing the language. The language was changed and that's what is being brought up here. Chair Sanchez: Okay. But you gave me that language at the last meeting that we had. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We -- when we met yesterday -- Chair Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- we had it. After that, we had some language. I think additional language the Legal Department has put in in order to make it clear -- Chair Sanchez: Okay. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- but the intent is the same, and the issue was about making the differentiations if we were not a legal use or legal -- if you were already a legal nonconforming prior to the Code. Chair Sanchez: Lourdes, go ahead and put the language into the record. Ms. Slazyk: Ana just read the language. What I want to explain what this language means -- and I think this will help Adrienne -- if you are legal conforming today -- so if you have SD-12 today and you're using it for parking as required parking for your business -- then you don't have to come and get an extension in 90 days. You will remain under Miami 21, fine. If you're City ofMiami Page 49 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 legal nonconforming today, such as some of them that were approved like under 6871, those will have to come in and get their extension for -- you know, within the 90 days. But all of the SD-12s and schools and churches and anybody else who is legal conforming today, this does not affect them. So the language was parking uses abutting T3 areas that were legal nonconforming prior to the adoption of this Code. So if you're legal nonconforming under 11000, you do have to come in. But if you're legal conforming under 11000, you're fine. You don't have to do anything. So the SD-12s are fine. Commissioner Regalado: And we know who's legal, how many legal, how many illegal? Ms. Slazyk: We know them when they come up for their CUs (Certificates of Understanding) because we do a history on each one. As they come up, we go back and we pull the histories and Commissioner Regalado: Wait a minute. You said that they have to come in 90 days. Ms. Slazyk: Within 90 days they have to come file for an exception. Commissioner Regalado: But you said that you will know when they come for their CUs, which is once a year. Ms. Slazyk: When they -- yes. Commissioner Regalado: So if they come six month -- Ms. Slazyk: Well, then, maybe the consideration should be to extend this time and give a broader amount of time, but we know -- Commissioner Regalado: But would they get -- Ms. Slazyk: -- when they come. Commissioner Regalado: -- fined? Would they get a lien in the property? Would they get fined by Code Enforcement, by --? Ms. Slazyk: Well, if they don't come in within the window, whatever window you choose to give, it would just not be allowed to continue. And there's really not very many of them that fall into this category. The older ones under 6871 have been, through attrition, they've all been going away, but there's still probably some in the City. This takes care of the SD-12s. Commissioner Regalado: But we don't know? Ms. Slazyk: No. I don't think we can find who all of them are. It was before we had computers. Commissioner Regalado: But if we don't know how, how are we going to make a law? Ms. Slazyk: If we don't know what? Commissioner Regalado: How do we make a law? Ms. Pardo: Can you give them notice? Commissioner Gonzalez: Well -- Ms. Slazyk: Maybe -- City ofMiami Page 50 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Gonzalez: -- my opinion is -- Ms. Slazyk: -- at the time of the CU, yeah. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- that we comply to the same principle that talk about about an hour ago, that a lot of my small business owners on 20th Sfreet and on 28th Sfreet will have to hire attorneys' firms to -- Commissioner Regalado: Yep. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- come and represent them and to put them, you know -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Gonzalez: Again, you know, in an economy that most businesses are falling down and they're closing their doors and firing people, we're forcing them to go and hire attorneys -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Listen -- Commissioner Gonzalez: -- to get what they have. Chair Sanchez: -- what we'll do is we'll go ahead and bring that back for clarification. Staff we're going to bring this back for further clarification. What we're going to do is we're going to take an hour recess for lunch; we'll come back. Chair Sanchez: (INAUDIBLE) are addressing Miami 21. For those of you that walked in and have not had an opportunity to be sworn in by the Clerk -- we have everyone? Ms. Thompson: We don't have to swear in. Chair Sanchez: Oh, we don't have to swear them in, okay. All right. You're recognized for the record. Michelle Niemeyer: Michelle Niemeyer, 3400 Pan American Drive. I'm here as both a member of the Coconut Grove Village Council and a resident, and let me first kind of make my quick Village Council comment to put it on the record, which is that the Planning Department approached the Village Council and gave us the opportunity to review and approve and make changes on more than one opportunity to the mapping in Coconut Grove. I saw there was an amendment in the mapping, which is one of our suggestions. I'd recommend that you please approve that. That's the recommendation that's near the Rolle Center. On a personal level, I find Miami 21 very interesting and very exciting. As a teenager, I grew up in suburbs far, far away from everything, with no public transportation. And until you were old enough to drive, it was horrible. And at 15 years old, I had the opportunity to be sent by my family to spend some time with a family who lived in Madrid, and I got to live in a real city that had public transportation where the kids could get on a bus and go downtown, go to the zoo, go to the parks. It was great. And it became my kind of vision of my life that always wanted to live in cities that had that kind of a life. Now, in Miami we have a downtown that's starting to come to life. When I moved to Miami, I chose Coconut Grove because it was a place that could live and walk to things. And I would love to see this community be a place where everyone can live and walk to things and ride their bike or get on a bus and get some place and not be bound by the chain, which is the car and the relationship to the car. Ultimately, we're not going to be able to deal with that for much longer. So it would be a great thing to have walkable communities. Miami 21 gives us that opportunity through the planning and the vision that it provides. Now, there is one concern I have, and I want to -- I'm going to ask a question. I don't know if this should be to the Attorney or to the Clerk because it was really unclear to me when I came in here City ofMiami Page 51 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 today that, at the end of the last meeting, what was voted on had an amendment, which included 35 feet on Biscayne Boulevard on a large stretch of it. I didn't see that in any of the amendments that were listed when the Planning Department presented amendments this morning. Is that one of the amendments that's being voted on, or is it part of the plan? I'm not sure what the Commissioners are voting on. Chair Sanchez: Madam Attorney. Ms. Bru: At this point what the Administration presented were the recommendations that the Administration made on August 6. Those amendments that you're referring to, I think, were made by the Commissioner, one Commissioner, and there was a vote taken, which resulted in no action, but it's not part of what the Administration has presented. Whether it get's voted on will be up to the Commission as they proffer individual amendments. Ms. Niemeyer: That was the question I wasn't sure if it was on the table now or not or what the deal was. I know I've heard a lot of people here today talk about it, but it hadn't really been discussed in any way that was clear what was being discussed. I don't want to presume to tell anyone else what they should do in their neighborhood, and you know, we had a good opportunity in Coconut Grove to do what we wanted in our neighborhood, but we also were very careful if Coconut Grove to be somewhat consistent with -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Niemeyer: -- what people had the opportunity to do along the Coconut Grove corridors and what's already been there. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right, next speaker. Nathan. Nathan Kurland: Nathan Kurland, 3132 Day Avenue, Coconut Grove. To begin with, I'd like to say that am absolutely in favor of the spirit and the goals ofMiami 21. However, I don't think it's proper to accept Miami 21 in the form that it's presently in. I brought a copy of the Bill of Rights today. It's a rather wonderful document. And I thought I'd talk about it for just a minute in relationship to Miami 21. The Bill ofRights has been around for 219 years and has only 17 additional amendments. Miami 21, which is not yet law, already has over 40 pages of amendments, revision, alterations, modifications, including changes made here this morning by our City Attorney. That's Miami. The Bill ofRights is a well -crafted document that can be read and understood by school children. I can honestly say the Bill ofRights can be read for pleasure. Miami 21, with all respect to the Mayor, is not easily understood and does, in fact, contain several examples of incomprehensibility, and this I can fairly assuredly guarantee that this document will never be read for pleasure. The Bill ofRights contains no special interests issues at its inception, and I thank the translator over there who help me to craft this little sentence in Spanish. Miami 21 is full of mucho (comments in Spanish not translated) which, for those of you who don't understand Spanish, means either fat or pork. It is my firm belief that you will try and do the right thing here. I truly believe Miami 21 is way overdue, and I congratulate the Mayor for his vision for it. The document we have before us now is just not ready to be passed. And Commissioner Gonzalez, thank you. According to The Miami Herald, this vote was a foregoing conclusion, and by your questions, I see that maybe you as well, has some questions as to whether the this should be passed today. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Next speaker. Let's refrain from clapping, cheering, whistling, twiddling. Melissa Meyer: Melissa Meyer, 3161 Ohio Street, disgruntledAlA associate member, co-owner of New Urban Architecture, Incorporated, and Coconut Grove resident. Twenty-seven thousand, four hundred people left South Florida between April of '08 and April of '09. That's an average City ofMiami Page 52 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 of 75 people a day, many of them my friends, neighbors and family members. They left to find a higher quality of life elsewhere in the country because they have given up on the City. They grew tired of showing up for countless NCD (Neighborhood Conservation District) meetings and then countless Miami 21 meetings only to still see their neighborhoods overrun with embarrassing, convoluted, misguided development trends, and so-called architecture. They've given up on your ability to make any substantial change in this city. Miami 21 is about our quality of life, and the quality of life that we want for our children and grandchildren. It's not about developers' profits. I, for one, am tired of having to worry about my son's safety when he rides his bike around the city. I'm embarrassed when my friends come to visit me in my Coconut Grove neighborhood. They want to know why these trashy McMansion-style town houses were allowed to be built in once was and still could have been a quaint seaside village. They want to know why I work so hard to pay ridiculous property taxes in a neighborhood that seems to have no future. Now, I, myself am questioning ifI really do want my children to raise their children in Miami. I am this close to joining my friends and families in the Carolinas. What you decide to do here today will finalize my decision. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Next speaker. Brian Patel: Brian Patel, 6150 Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Florida. I'm here to oppose strongly 35 feet height limit. Why? Because I have my father in the hospital right now. I have two kids to pick up at 2:30, butt had to let go of that thing and be here. Why? To fight this 35 feet. Twenty-five years in Miami on Biscayne Boulevard, not only living, but doing business and raising kids, and that time it was 110 feet. Now it's coming down to 35 feet. As time goes up, everything goes up; nothing comes down. But in our case, it's coming down. Sixty -- over 60 percent of reduction on my property right. Why (UNINTELLIGIBLE) do that? I don't want that thing because if this zoning changes is passed, small business owners like me and my -- lot of other friends will suffer significant damages, which means that an enactment of this new zoning changes will (UNINTELLIGIBLE) up to Bert Harris Act. This particular zoning specifically targets only in the MiMo district only in Miami and not others in anywhere else. We will be compelled to file claims to protect our own rights. Twenty-five -- more than 25 other small businesses owners who does the business in the Boulevard can't come or they left because they had other thing to do and take care of the business. I would like to file these papers -- petition for the record. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right. Dipak Patel is also here. Gill Pastoriza, Sam Poole, Arva Parks, Stanley Price. Those will be the next speakers. IfI called your name, just come on up and address the Commission. Henry Patel: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Thank you for your time. My name is Henry Patel. I'm the owner of King Motel on 7150 Biscayne Boulevard. First of all, for the record, I'd like to just hand over these letters from our council, from our Asian -American Hotel Owners Association in Atlanta, and I'll just pass it out to every Commissioner and the City Attorney. It just bothers me to be here again on the same issue, which was -- which has been voted down few many times on the height of 35 feet. Before I make my statement -- and I have three other people who have yielded me the time. I'm not going to take that long, but I'm going to read this as a record. Chair Sanchez: But, first of all, whose yield you the time? Mr. H. Patel: Dipak Patel. I'm Henry Patel, and there is another Henry Patel, but they have gone to pick up the kids; they can't be here. Chair Sanchez: Okay, so I'm going to take -- you got four minutes. Mr. H. Patel: Sure. Thank you. Dear Mr. Chair and the City ofMiami Commissioners, on City ofMiami Page 53 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 behalf of 9,700 members of the Asian American Hotel Owners Association and many of whom are located in Miami, Florida, we are writing to express our opposition to the proposed change that has been offered by, all due respect, Commissioner Sarnoff for MiMo district. We have been informed that Commissioner Sarnoff have proposed a severe reduction in height limitations of building from 90 feet down to 35 feet, which is more than a 61 percent reduction for building in MiMo district. If passed, this severe height resfriction on buildings through a specific action of City Commissioners would inordinately burden the existing uses of vested rights to specific use of real property in MiMo district. Remarkably, however, Commissioner Sarnoff is claiming that if the zoning changes pass, no lawsuit will be filed, and if there are any lawsuit, the property owners will never win. Commissioner Sarnoff further argues that if this is just a legal posturing attorneys who are making such claims, then there is no justification for any Commissioner to have an incorrect fear that the City would face millions of dollars in lawsuits. Regardless of whatever -- whether or not you are an attorney, common sense will tell you that many property owners will sue for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, if the Commission suddenly passes a law that imposes a 61 percent reduction in the height resfriction on buildings (UNINTELLIGIBLE) MiMo district ofMiami. As explained below, despite Commissioner's assertions to the contrary, there would also be excellent grounds on which many -- any court of law would find in favor ofMiMo property owners and issue a (UNINTELLIGIBLE) award against City ofMiami. I'll avoid reading the whole letter, as you have it, but I'll just like to go straight to my comments from my heart. I moved into this country in 1986 as an immigrant, like many of you, including Commissioner Regalado and Sanchez and Commissioner Gonzalez. I came with a dream in a real battered down area, which was Biscayne Boulevard. If you remember in '86, I was more like a security guard and a watchman than a business owner, but decided to move in with my wife. There are many City ofMiami police official to testify for my die-hard commitment to make the Biscayne Boulevard a better area to live in because I had had many opportunities to work with City ofMiami Police Department undercover operations to clean the Biscayne Boulevard, and there are a lot of newspaper articles I can support, which I don't have right now. I still live at the same place, which I proudly own with my wife. We had two kids, and my older child is already going to University ofMiami. I took proud in living on Biscayne Boulevard, but I did my more than fair share to see Biscayne Boulevard what it is today. Unfortunately, the people who are just obsessed with 35 feet height, have no skin in this game. For them, the financial losses is zero. For us, this is my blood, sweat, and hard work of 22 years. I'm not asking a 90-story building, neither 50-story building, but 35 story [sic] is just ridiculous, and I do not agree with that. And I'll be honest -- as you know, in our culture, we don't believe in filing lawsuits. I come from India. I come from the land of Ghandi, but if it so takes for me to stand up and file a lawsuit, I'll be the first one to do it if this is taken. The person who has been pushing this over and over again, I want to ask those people who are pushing 35 feet, when have you gone down on Biscayne Boulevard and bent your knees down to pick up a trash. I have done that with my wife, my kids, cleaning up Boulevard with Miami Police Department to make sure what Biscayne Boulevard is today -- and you can see downtown, there are a lot of buildings empty. County cannot foreclose them and bank can't do nothing. Those (UNINTELLIGIBLE) that way, but we will still make sure that our property taxes are paid on time because we have worked awfully hard to have what we have today, and I don't want that -- it will be irresponsible on part of you as leaders of the city -- Chair Sanchez: In conclusion, sir. Mr. Patel: In conclusion, yes. It will be irresponsible on part of you as all the leaders of City of Miami Commission to vote on something which can jeopardize the position of City's finance, which will be irresponsible and it will -- your fiduciary right as a leader is to protect City of Miami first, and Bert J. Harris Act, Miami Beach, there were a lot of settlements made out court. It doesn't reflect because the -- you know, like -- I'll say one court, and I close. Chair Sanchez: Thank -- sir, thank you. We got to -- City ofMiami Page 54 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Mr. Patel: Last line. Elvis Cruz is saying, oh, by the way, there'll be no lawsuits. Yeah, you cannot say how the poison taste till you've tried the poison and then you're dead. Chair Sanchez: You've made your point. Thank you. Mr. Patel: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Sam Poole: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, my name is Sam Poole, offices at 200 South Biscayne Boulevard and 350 East Las Olas, with the law firm of Berger Singerman, and I'm here today as an interested citizen. Stanley has been very kind to grant me his two minutes in addition. I've known Miami for more than 50 years as a child, as a young city planner, as a land development attorney, as the executive director of the Water Management District, and now as a city redevelopment attorney. I have witnessed the suburbanization of a once vibrant city of neighborhoods. I have once walked to elementary school at Santa Clara. I fought, along with my neighbors, the intrusion of parking garages from US 1 commercial into my neighborhood in Coconut Grove, and at one time, I led a movement to have Coconut Grove depart from the City ofMiami. And until Mayor Diaz shared his vision of rebuilding a great walkable city that celebrates the streets and plazas as the essence of community life, I had really abandoned all hope that Miami would realize its destiny as the capital city of the Caribbean. We seem to be willing to accept our caricature in Miami Vice and Too Fast Too Furious as our fate. For the conversion ofMiami streets to traffic sewers for commuters and the intrusion of parking garages and commercial structures into our neighborhoods is not the folly, the misadventure of public officials or elected officials; it is, in fact, the DNA of our current Code. Miami has to now choose between a drive -by city that we have built and are continuing to build; one that looks great from I-95 but is terrifying when you walk out of Gusman at night and you try to get to your car. Choose between that and the DNA ofMiami 21, which is a walkable neighborhood. People have stood in front of you today and asked you to delay to argue for perfection, for amendments. That's not what today is about. Few generations of leaders have the opportunity to change the destiny of their community, and this choice that the Commission makes today, it's about the future ofMiami and determining the future that that -- we can either be proud of or lament the missed opportunity. Chair Sanchez: Thank you, sir. Mr. Poole: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Next speaker. Stanley Price: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. My name is Stanley Price. Mr. Mayor, pleasure seeing you. I'm here today in my official capacity as general council to the Builders Association of South Florida, and I have four points just to raise, and I believe I could do that easily in the two minutes. Number one, Commissioner Regalado, you had asked earlier what is the importance of the local planning agency. The local planning agency is charged under state law that they must -- the word is "shall" -- make a recommendation to the local government as to whether land development regulations and amendments to comprehensive plans are consistent with the existing comprehensive plan. I differ from a previous speaker. I think today's hearing is perfectly legal. You have a right to convene and discuss that. What I don't believe you have to do is to pass this on second reading until you receive a recommendation from the Planning Advisory Board at a subsequent time as to whether the plan amendments, the land development regulations that you're reviewing today are consistent with your existing comprehensive plan, not a future comprehensive plan, the existing comprehensive plan. Comprehensive planning should come first, land development regulations should come second. Secondly, a point that was raised earlier -- And by the way, the City ofMiami Page 55 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Builders Association has fried to be a constructive force here. We're not opposing Miami 21. We're not opposing the concepts. There's many, many good things in this proposed legislation. But one of the failures of this legislation is there's no ascertainable standards that will let an average person understand. I believe Commissioner Sarnoff had touched upon that earlier and hopefully that will be corrected before second reading, and we're prepared to help work with the staff to do that. The taking versus Bert J. Harris that is an argument that we can have all day long. We've begun the dialogue. I've reviewed Commissioner Sarnoffs memorandum. I respectfully disagree with it. I'd like to continue the dialogue until the second meeting, but we -- that's nothing that we have to discuss here today. And, finally, the proposed TDR (Transfer Development Rights) ordinance, I believe it's too narrowly drafted. If you're going to designate an historic building on a piece of property that has adjoining property to it, the property owner should have the right to transfer development rights or other development rights which are impeded by the historic designation to the same property. To require that applicant to go and sell the rights someplace else in the City, and I'm somewhat believe that we are permitting that it be transferred is illusory, therefore would not be constitutional. But in any event, I've spoken to the City Manager. He's agreed to sit down with me and discuss that issue which we will hopefully bring before you at second reading. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Mr. Price: I thank you for your time. And I think Elizabeth and her team has done a wonderful job. We don't think it's perfect, but it's a good job. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Arva. Gil Pastoriza, is he here? This is the fourth time I called him. Move on. Mr. Bennett Pumo, followed by Tony Recio, and Luis Revuelta. I believe Luis, didn't you address the Commission already? You already did. And Terrence Reily. All right. Arva Moore Parks: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, my name is Arva Parks, and I live at 1601 South Miami Avenue. I come here today to speak in favor ofMiami 21. I know it very well. I also know 11000 very well, because I had the privilege of serving as your Planning Advisory Board for seven years and four years as Chairman. Eleven thousand has done great damage to our wonderful city. I've heard all the arguments for and against Miami 21. I'd like to share with you some facts and opinions thatl learned along the way about 11000. Eleven thousand created everything that almost everyone here opposes. We allowed intrusion into single-family neighborhoods with no setback from single-family, it created a gross lot line, which is really a mythical lot created by streets and corners where you can -- your lot can increase, your mythical lot can increase as much as two and a half times, creating terrible overdevelopment. I couldn't find any other city that had such an item. It has created intrusive parking garages, a Planning board that's only advisory; loose regulations that can be easily manipulated by talented lawyers and developers, and ease of change in land use by stealthily attaching it to Major Use Special Permits that may or may not be realized. Sometimes the Planning Department and the Urban Review Board and Planning Board have helped the suggested conditions. They're not mandatory; they are suggestions. After years of public meetings and discussions, I urge you to pass Miami 21 and give the people, professional staff and most importantly, you to see how it works. I hope you will not be swayed by those with vested interests. Miami 21 is not cast in stone. It can be amended. I would like to end with one - - with this thought. No one or no city ever achieved greatness without taking a chance. One hundred years ago Chicago accepted the Burnham plan when the city was already 130 years ago. We're 113. It took three years to pass and it with you very controversial. Burnham answered his critics by saying "Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir men's blood and probably themselves will not be realized" It is not too late for us to achieve the same kind of greatness -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you. City ofMiami Page 56 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Ms. Parks: -- if we are not afraid to embrace change. Miami 21 is a visionary plan, and to quote a favorite proverb, "Without vision, a people perish." Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Next speaker. Tony Recio: Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the Commission. For the record, Tony Recio, law offices 2525 Ponce de Leon Boulevard. Gil Pastoriza was not able to stay here. I'll try to consolidate his comment into my comment, as well. One narrow, very narrow issue, and this is applications for rezoning and comprehensive plan amendments that are already in progress. I'm here on behalf of Paradise Dairy Acquisitions. They are the owners of the McArthur Dairy property. We met back in July. That went through first reading. There is a second reading coming up, and there are several other rezoning and comprehensive plan applications that are about in the same stage. As far as those are concerned, our only concern is that if we go through the entire process and get that finalized, if this is approved on second reading two or three months after that, it could pave over everything that was just done with something else. And the only thing that I would ask is that staff be instructed that to the extent that this Commission approves a rezoning or a comprehensive plan change that is already in progress, that the map be altered just to be consistent with what the will of the Commission is. That's all we're seeking. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Mr. Recio: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: All right. Mr. Pumo, followed by Terrence Reily, followed by Fran Rollason, Judith Sandoval, Estrellita Sibila. All right. Bennett Pumo: I feel lonely on this side. This is Bennett Pumo, Ben Pumo Building Corporation. We have a number of properties around -- Chair Sanchez: State your name and address for the record, please. Mr. Pumo: Bennett Pumo, 7327 Northwest Miami Court, Little River. I've got some deals here for you. Ms. Thompson: We need one for the record, please. Mr. Pumo: Actually, I have four minutes. Silvia Wong gave me her two minutes. One thing we have to talk about -- Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry. Chair, did you hear that? Chair Sanchez: What? Ms. Thompson: Someone has given him his -- the minutes. Chair Sanchez: Who's given you two minutes? Mr. Pumo: Silvia Wong. It's in writing. It's on her statement. Chair Sanchez: Go ahead, go ahead. Mr. Pumo: Okay. On Miami 21, the devil's in the details. You know, I don't really object. I'm not the enemy. The problem is the devil's in the details with Miami 21. I've given you a set of rules and a set of amendments to Miami 21 because nonconformity is a definite issue. City ofMiami Page 57 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Eighty-five percent to ninety percent of the City will be nonconforming. The alligator teeth that has been brought over from 11000, 11000's alligator teeth and nonconforming rules was to rule uses in a facility, uses in bricks and mortar. Now they bring the rules over and the rules apply to bricks and mortar instead of uses. So now they're going to use those rules against bricks and mortar. It's kind of bad. Sustainability. Miami 21, if you pass it today, is going to go into effect in 90 days or 180 days, whatever they said the other night. The problem is what do you do with all these nonconforming structures? What do you do with all the nonconforming uses? What do you do with all the alligator teeth that are brought over from 11000 to destroy them, to freeze them in time, to freeze the job base, to make your buildings useless, to make them unfinanceable [sic]? You got to have -- you have to sustain them. You have to sustain your business. You have to sustain your job base. Some of the provisions I've made by the amendments that are up there in your hands right now will help the sustainability for jobs, sustainability for value, sustainability for businesses to exist and to stay on while Miami 21 emerges and morphs like the pretty pictures in Mr. Sarnoffs presentation. Now, we already discussed the fire by tenant. That's definitely in there. That is only one of many, many, many devastating things in the details. You say your tenant burns the building down, the owner's denied a permit. That's only one of many things, the details of the Miami 21. It's a nice deal. Miami 21 can go on. The problem is the details create problems. In Article VI, both the DI and D2 -- DI started out as light industry; now it's called workplace. In that DJ, it's subject to an inspector's determination of what is too noisy, too illuminated, or too smelly, and it cannot exceed that what is found in a residential occupancy. Now how in the heck can that be a DI light industry occupancy when it can't surpass anything found in a residential property? That is another detail within the Code. D2, which is supposed to be industrial. It is also subject to the whim of the inspector walking up and saying, '7 think it's too noisy or too smelly or too illuminated or too noxious, " or whatever it might be. It's a D2 industrial zone; it's supposed to be smelly and noisy. How can you have your CU inspector walk in when you apply for your CU to go into business or even renew your CU, and he walks up and he hears that big machine going clonk-a-da, clonk-a-da, clonk-a-da, clonk-a-da? And he's going to say, I think it's too damn noisy. I'm not going to renew your CU." All right. We heard the lady talk about sidewalks and how she wants her daughter and son to ride on -- or ride her bike. Well, the problem is in the thoroughfare issue of sidewalks, they don't deal with lanes, they don't deal with bike lanes. They say you must share the lane with a thoroughfare if it's under 30 miles an hour. You're not allowed to ride your bike on the sidewalk. You must share the thoroughfare with the traffic. That's in the detail. Did you know that? Your kid's going to have to ride in the street. He's not allowed to use the sidewalk. That's another detail they need to look at. Oh, jeepers. There's so much. Chair Sanchez: All right, you've got -- sir, you got to wrap it up. Your four minutes are up. Mr. Pumo: Okay, I'm wrapping it up. Okay. Fifty percent rule, real quick. They peg their number to the 50 percent rule for structural evaluation of an assessment in the County. That's a skewed number, totally skewed because it applies to both nonconforming and conforming structures. They say they fixed it butt haven't seen it. The problem is that figure that they use for you to rebuild your property after a disaster, whether it's a fire, lightening, or a storm is pegged to that number, and that number is determined by market value, economic weight, and replacement costs. Chair Sanchez: Mr. Pumo -- Mr. Pumo: If they want to use that number, let them use the replacement cost unweighted [sic] from the County for what that designation is -- Chair Sanchez: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Pumo: -- with depreciation only. City ofMiami Page 58 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: Thank you, sir. Mr. Pumo: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right. Thank you, sir. Next speaker. Fran Rollason: Fran Rollason, president of the MiMo Biscayne Association, 686 Northeast 74th Street. We happen to live one block from Biscayne Boulevard in Belle Meade. I want to first address the position that the Association took in February of 2008, which was a compromise to the 35-foot issue, and we have 83 members, two homeowners associations, and the membership is made up of individuals, businesses, property owners. I want you to know that we support the concept ofMiami 21. We support 53 feet as a limit, and in some areas where the space is abutting the residential areas, we support up to 70 feet as long as there is parking for that property and for the general public in efforts to alleviate parking problems like they had in the Grove. I just want to mention that the -- this is my own thoughts -- as far as down zoning the properties, it seems to be done with just an amendment, and there's no notification to those property owners. They've been paying for -- their taxes for highest and best use now for some decades. It just doesn't seem right. And in closing, I want to say a question that was posed to me and now I'm posting it to you is how will the City ofMiami mitigate the economic stagnation that a 35-foot height limit will bring to the district. Thank you very much. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right. Next speaker, Kricket Snow, Janice Talbert, Charles Tavares, John Van Lee -- I'm sorry; John Van Leer. Judith Sandoval: You forgot me. Chair Sanchez: No, I haven't forgotten you. I haven't gotten to you yet. Ms. Sandoval: I'm SA. Chair Sanchez: I do apologize. Yes. I turned it over. Ms. Sandoval: Am I next? Chair Sanchez: Come on up. Ms. Sandoval: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Judith, I do apologize. Ms. Sandoval: That's all right. Chair Sanchez: All right. Ms. Sandoval: Commissioners, good afternoon. I -- Judy Sandoval, 2536 Southwest 25th Terrace. I live in Silver Bluff and I come to ask you something for Silver Bluff. It's the only thing that my neighborhood, which started in 1885 with a homestead grant, and it's been a residential neighborhood ever since. We are along the south part of 27th Avenue. On the other side of us is Golden Pines, another residential district. All that we have asked for and have fought for for three years from Miami 21 for this neighborhood is that we are not ringed with high-rise buildings. When Miami 21 began, Johnny Winton was the Commissioner, and he said that ruins residential neighborhoods. A few high-rises that have been built, one of them, the Catalonia, which Liz herself has called the poster child for bad development, the houses behind it are worthless. One of them is in foreclosure. They're going to have to be given away. These high buildings and Miami 21, although it was promised that we could have what we want -- Liz City ofMiami Page 59 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 promised us, Ana Gelabertpromised this. There are witnesses to her telling me this, to telling others this. On the final atlases, they're allowing T6-8. And with the heights of the floors that they want to put into this Code, that could mean 12-story buildings right next to our houses. The PAB amendments, not approved by the City, but by the PAB, called for a limitation on the height of those buildings. This has been afforded to Coconut Grove. Buena Vista wants the buildings limited along their edge, so do -- does Morningside and other residential neighborhoods. We ask you to please insist and vote yes on this amendment. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Sandoval: And I know that I have written to all ofyou about this. Our Commissioner, Commissioner Regalado, knows very well that our neighborhood has always wanted it. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Sandoval: Please don't ruin our neighborhood with high buildings. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Next speaker. Ms. Sandoval: Thank you. Estrellita Sibila: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Estrellita Sibila, with law offices at 2525 Ponce De Leon Boulevard. I'm here this afternoon just to put something on the record on behalf of our client, the Towers of Blue Lagoon. They're the property owners just on the south side of the Lagoon River on -- between the water and Northwest 7th Sfreet, approximately 48th Avenue. This is a 12-acre site. It has some submerged lands. The site is the open green space that you see. This property has gone through some master planning throughout the years that the City's aware of wherein the developer has proposed buildings up to 16 floors, which is similar to the buildings that are -- you see there that are directly to the west. What we're asking for is in Miami 21 that these properties be within the transect of the T6-12, which would give them the height that they're -- that they need to accomplish this development program. What the property owners are looking at doing here is workforce housing. At the T6-8 that we have now, it's un-accomplishable because of the height limitations, even including the public benefit bonus that we would be able to afford -- that we could afford ourselves to because of the workforce housing that's within that site. Another issue that we have as well is that there are two tracks that comprise the 12 acres that are submerged land that aren't addressed in terms of zoning or comprehensive planning, and I just wanted to address that issue with staff to make sure that in the future, once these properties are able to be filled -- which we've gone through the state and federal requirements, and they are fillable lands that the City's aware of-- that we could go ahead and afford ourselves those rights to those properties as well. So what we're asking is for a T6-12 transect on those particular properties. And on a separate item, I also wanted to comment on what Mr. Tony Recio from my office said as well on the applications that are in progress. We have not only the McArthur Dairy site that he had mentioned, but also two lots that belong to Miami Dade College that are in that process as well that would need to be addressed, as well as another property under which I represent Niclas and Lissane Pierre in Ms. Spence -Jones's district. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Sibila: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: All right, next speaker. Charles Tavares: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, good afternoon. Charles Tavares, 218 Southeast 14th Sfreet. I would like to take this opportunity to hand out some documentation City ofMiami Page 60 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 to each ofyou so we have on the record. Basically, you know, I was on the first presentation back in 2005 at the Miami Dade Community College, and I have to say I embraced the concept, the vision of our Mayor Diaz, you know, beautiful. Everything was great. But, you know, after being, you know, through so many meetings and seeing what has happened here -- and I'm not going to even get into the details or the technicalities of the planning issues because I have sent you hundreds of pages documenting experts' opinions that, you know, show discrepancies, inconsistencies, and planning errors. And Miami 21 has refused to acknowledge and fix those errors and miscon -- you know, mistakes. But what I'm here really concerned about today is not, you know, the planning per se, but it's about the process. I think, you know, the consultants have misled the City, the community, and this Board because every time, you know, you're presented or we're presented with a document or something so we will have to review it and examine it and vote on it, okay, the -- you approve it or whatever the change and they add 200 pages, like what they did back in April 2007, when the east quadrant was approved and then was removed from future examinations since, you know, it just put the three quadrants. But, you know, the fact of the matter is you have all my concerns in writing. You know, we have a lot of properties in the area. I live in the Brickell area for over 20 years. I love this city. I have businesses. I have some properties that, you know, actually I'm afraid to open, you know, the tax bills. Even though that, you know, all my properties on the Brickell West area are being reduced in height, taking away, you know, their unlimited heights, my concern today is just the due process, the democratic process that I feel deep in my heart that -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Mr. Tavares: Can I just finish? Chair Sanchez: Sir -- Mr. Tavares: I represent not only this property, but Brickell West. Chair Sanchez: Sir, I understand. Mr. Tavares: As you know, I've been very much involved and I've been here, you know, Wednesday, everyday. So -- Chair Sanchez: Sir, in conclusion, please. Mr. Tavares: Yeah. In conclusion, I would like you to -- you know, ask you to deny to the Miami 21 so, you know, our city can move forward with a -- you know, our lives. And you can fix, you know, the current Code. Why are you going to approve something that you know already that's going to need the same fixing? Why not fixing -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Mr. Tavares: -- what has worked? I love to live here, you know. Why people don't like it? Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Next speaker. Mr. Tavares: You know, why -- you know, they -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Mr. Tavares: -- need a new Miami. You know, let's work on what we have. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Next speaker. City ofMiami Page 61 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 John Van Leer: John Van Leer, 1200 Northeast 89th Street. I'm on the board of the Urban Environment League, and I'm also -- Chair Sanchez: Sir, I'm sorry. Could you state your name again for the record. Mr. Van Leer: John Van Leer, 1200 Northeast 89th Street. And I'm on the Climate Change Task Force for Miami -Dade, the Science Technology Committee. I'm very much in favor ofMiami 21. It is long overdue that we have a rational process for designing a walkable, sustainable city. Yes, it may have some details that are a problem, but in generally [sic], I'm in favor of the process and also the substance of it. One exception would be the North Point on Virginia Key, which is presently zoned for marinas, and it's been turned down by DERM (Department of Environmental Resources Management) for marinas. That North Point is very shallow. It has a lot of endangered species in it, and it silts, and they dug a huge barrow pit there in the '50s to build the sewer plant. That whole thing filled in. If you tried to put marinas there, DERM wouldn't go for it. And so I suggest we go for TI zoning, which will protect it from development encroachment. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you, sir. Kricket. Janice. Okay. Kricket Snow: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Kricket Snow. I'm representing the AIA Miami, with offices at 275 University Drive, in Coral Gables. I think it's safe to say that all of us here today, whether we oppose or support the passing of this Code, want a lively, walkable, healthy, vibrant city. No one is opposed to a better Miami. As architects, we are obligated to speak out when we believe our environment may be compromised. Repeatedly, we have offered a well prepared professional opinion. As such, we are here today to state again for the record that we continue to have the same concerns that we've had over the years. Miami 21 dictates form, orientation, and building placement on its site. It is neither more predictable nor less complex than the current code. In effect, there is no evidence in this code that it promotes the development of a world -class city. It just -- it simply doesn't realize the worthy goals that it began with. It was stated this morning thatMiami has traditionally worked under the premise of "build now, plan later." Well, no one is building now, and we should be planning. I agree wholeheartedly. I must remind everyone thatMiami 21 is not a plan; it is a code. It is a set of regulations that should support a plan. Where is the plan? Let us please use what we've learned over the last few years through this very valuable process and create a plan upon which we can write regulations. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Snow: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: All right. Followed by Paul Murphy, Eileen Bottari. Did I pronounce it right? Okay. And Truly Burton. Okay. Janice Tarbert: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Chair Sanchez: Good afternoon. Ms. Tarbert: Janice Tarbert, 2520 Southwest 24th Terrace. I strongly urge you to change the floor height allowed in Miami 21 of 25 feet for the first floor and all remaining floors 14 feet to 15 feet for the first floor and 10 feet for the remaining. The need for this change is a T5 could have a height limit of 85 feet and T6-8 could have a height limit of 123 feet. This would have the effect of an 8- or 12-story building abutting residential in all areas of the City. If more residents understood Miami 21 and read the fine print of the height limits, they too would be here asking for the change. Residents believe T5 is a five -story building and T6-8 is an eight -story building. Regarding 11000, don't put all the blame of the out -of -scale projects abutting single-family City ofMiami Page 62 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 neighborhoods on 11000. One of the condos on 27th Avenue in Silver Bluff area and many others along 3rdAvenue were able to be built without the proper stepping back from the residential properties because your Zoning Department, for several years, was not following Section 907.3.2. I think it is ironic that during the public presentations by DPZ, they would show a picture of this 12-story condo on 27th Avenue as an example of bad development next to a residential neighborhood. But if 27th Avenue were to stay a T6-8, with the present height limits allowed in Miami 21, we could have another condo or 123 feet next to our neighborhood, but at least it would be the stepping back from the abutting properties. But if you allow the first floor to be 25 feet, the second floor, 14 feet, then you will have, once again, a 39-foot wall with a 6-foot setback abutting the residential property. We heard the developers will probably never use these height limits because of the additional costs, but it will only take one or two projects to use the limits allowed and you would have these tall buildings. If the height limits are not revised, then I strongly urge you to accept the PAB recommendations for the atlas for the areas of 3rdAvenue, Coral Way, and 27th Avenue. I believe there are many other areas, Flagami, Allapattah, and others where a T5 would be more appropriate than a T6-8 -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you, ma'am. Ms. Tarbert: -- when abutting a residential neighborhood. Chair Sanchez: In conclusion. Ms. Tarbert: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right, thank you. Paul Murphy: Next up. Chair Sanchez: Mr. Murphy. Mr. Murphy: Good afternoon. Paul Murphy. I'm a developer here in Miami, 5700 Biscayne Boulevard. Oddly enough, I started my construction career 51 years ago in San Francisco working for my grandfather who was renovating a famous hotel in the historic district of San Francisco. Subsequently, I have been a builder/developer, like my grandfather, for the last 43 years. During that time, I've built over 40,000 units and hundreds of those units have been in 11 different cities, where I built in historic districts; San Francisco, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore; two areas of Washington, D.C., Capital Hill and Georgetown; Old Town Alexandria, Old Town Richmond, Old Town Atlanta, Delray Beach, and none other than the Art District of Miami Beach. During that time, I have never seen any city impose a 35-foot height limit on a major corridor. So the only thing I have to say is that I'm radically against the 35-foot height limit. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Next speaker. Eileen Bottari: Good afternoon. My name is Eileen Bottari, 505 Northeast 76 Street. I live in the Upper Eastside in the Palm Grove neighborhood. I had a phone conference with Elizabeth from DPZ following the last meeting we had about the issues in my neighborhood. And this is the map that I've outlined the issues. There is four of them for my neighborhood. And what they are is I'm trying to get the zoning to reflect what is actually in the neighborhood. We've talked about spot zoning and dysfunctional zoning in neighborhoods, and my neighborhood is a perfect example. So these requests actually reflect what's in the neighborhood. And for the last item on the bottom of the page, which is the `B, " I attached pictures because the proposed zoning is T5 R and T4. I -- there's pictures of the block that's proposed zoning for T5, and then there's a list of the properties in the T4 section which shows that most of them are single-family homes and duplexes. And the goal is just to get the zoning corrected for my neighborhood. Thank you. City ofMiami Page 63 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Truly Burton, followed by Marlo Courtney, Shirley Diaz, Patel Himendra (phonetic). Truly Burton: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. Truly Burton, Government Affairs director for the Builders Association of South Florida. Mr. Price before me represented one particular issue that our organization wanted to relate to you. And I'll -- in addition to the several sets of comments I've submitted for the record before, these are two or three general comments I wanted to make. First of all, just to let you all know, we do strongly support walkable and green communities. That's what people buy. That's what my builders typically want to build. There are many excellent concepts in Miami 21, but again, I think there was a gentleman before me who said the devil's -- the devil is in the details. We live by the book. Whatever the rule says, that's what we have to do. If something needs to be changed or somebody meant something else when they really didn't quite, you know, indicate one thing or the other, that's what throws off our people. One example is the adoption of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) silver criteria. While we all support LEED, as well as the Florida Green Building Coalition, as well as other standards, this energy criterion really does require the approval of a local technical amendment to the Florida Building Code. That's because LEED silver requires not only Florida Building Code, which is the basis -- base code, but it requires building code plus 10 percent. Any jurisdiction can adopt any additional or any more stringent energy conservation criteria that they want, but they have to go through a legal local amendment -- local technical amendment process. Our recommendation is that until the local amendment is processed properly, that LEED silver be voluntary. Second, there are a series of unintended consequences. The Downtown Dadeland experience showed two things. The utilities needed to be dug up rather than change the plan. This was a very, very expensive process for the taxpayer, after which time the County then adopted a special tax district and imposed those fees onto the property owners. And then, finally, one thing. Chair Sanchez: In conclusion. Ms. Burton: Guess that's my time. Greenfield versus redeveloped cities. Of the 23 cities that have considered smart codes, two smaller towns have adopted them as mandatory on a district -wide basis, for their entire jurisdiction; 21 municipalities adopted them as optional. In today'sMiami Herald, they said tryMiami 21. We're willing to tryMiami 21. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Burton: We'd love to see that happen. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Burton: Thanks. Chair Sanchez: Next speaker. Mario Courtney: Good afternoon. Mario Courtney. I'm the managing director of Goldman Properties, Miami and Miami Beach, and I'm here today to speak in support ofMiami 21. We own and operate -- we're probably one of the largest stakeholders of property in the Wynwood area ofMiami, which is represented by Commissioner Spence -Jones to a great part and Commissioner Sarnoff. You know, our -- the emphasis, you know, right now on being able to create a wonderful live/work environment in the Wynwood neighborhood and to, you know, keep going with our Arts District and the wonderful Cafe District, which was modeled after Commissioner Sanchez's 8th Street District, is very, very important to us, and we do believe that the adoption of this ordinance will work to that end. So we are strongly in support of it. I would like to mention that the -- in -- within one of the transects, which is the D1, it is my City ofMiami Page 64 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 understanding now that -- what we would recommend is that it not be limited to one unit per lot of record. That was something that I believe is -- Chair Sanchez: That's been changed, sir. I believe to nine, correct? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes. Mr. Courtney: So -- and -- you know, and if, in fact, the -- you know, there is room for that nine to grow a little bit more, we would also recommend that. But you know, not too much, but -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you, sir. Mr. Courtney: -- that is our position. Thank you -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Mr. Courtney: -- very much. Chair Sanchez: All right, next speaker. You want to address that? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Just to clarify. The nine units per acre have been proposed. Once you act on it, the book will absorb it, the Code. Chair Sanchez: Okay. All right, Shirley Diaz, Patel Himendra (phonetic), Melanie Condra (phonetic), Beba Mann, Nina West, Bob De La Fuente. I believe Bob De La Fuente already spoke. Unidentified Speaker: Yes, he did. Mr. De La Fuente: It's for a second client. Chair Sanchez: I'm sorry? Mr. De La Fuente: It's for a different client. Chair Sanchez: You're frying to get two bites at the apple. All right, let's go. Who's next? All right. Is Shirley Diaz here? No. All right, Patel Himendra (phonetic). I think it's Mallory or Melanie. Mallory Kauderer: Mallory Kauderer. Chair Sanchez: I'm sorry, sir. It's hard to read your handwriting, sir. Mr. Kauderer: Sorry. Chair Sanchez: I do apologize. Okay, Beba Mann next, followed by Nina West, and the guy who's trying to take two bites at the apple. Sir, you're recognized for the record. Mr. Kauderer: Mallory Kauderer, 300 Northeast 71 st Street, Miami office, also on the Beach. I own various properties in the City, and I'm a chairperson of the Little River Business District Board. Am I on the right side? We have wrong sides, right sides? Chair Sanchez: It doesn't -- sir, it doesn't matter which side you're on. Mr. Kauderer: Okay. I think I'm on that side. City ofMiami Page 65 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: It doesn't matter, sir. It doesn't matter. Mr. Kauderer: I think myself personally, I'm opposed to new urbanism, as most of you know it, Miami 21, without first implementation of an effective public transportation system, a testing or phasing system and (UNINTELLIGIBLE) respect to older existing buildings. New urbanism is not only -- the only way to make a city walkable. I have a quote here from Jane Jacobs, as a lady had some quotes before. As Jane Jacobs wrote in "The Life and Death of Great American Cities" -- some of you may know this -- Cities need old buildings so badly it is probably impossible for vigorous districts and streets to grow without them. Many nonconforming commercial and industrial buildings can be used for residential purposes and offer exciting lifestyle designs, marketable to a wide range of people. Nonconforming structures in neighborhoods can accommodate walk -to neighborhood services and work. DPZ and Miami 21 -- these are my words now -- have not given enough respect to older buildings. They call them nonconforming. Miami is full of older buildings. Second, as a realist, we accept the inevitable of the tide. And as chair of my board, I must insist to our submitted recommended changes. We asked that they be read into the record by the Commissioner of our district, Michelle Spence -Jones, as required changes. We would further recommend these changes throughout the City in the DI and D2 zones, and we prefer the repair of 11000, but will accept the alteration of Miami 21. Chair Sanchez: In conclusion. Mr. Kauderer: Third, the reality check in D2, as the Code ofMiami 21 is written, a photo studio complex, where one of my properties is located, would become a nonconforming use that became adjacent to an H use, which is a noxious type of a smell, or a loud, noisy use. The buildings are already nonconforming, problem one. Problem two, in a DI use, if my tenant wishes to open a small manufacturing business, say a manufacturing -- recycling material surfaces, which is the intent in one of such property -- and that's a green business, recycling and creating something -- there is no light industrial definition that allows this in D1. In both DI and D2 zones, most of the buildings are nonconforming. So a simple fitting of a building over, say, $250, 000 would not be allowed unless the building structure as assessed value exceeded 500k. Now you can all look up on the tax roll examples of it. I have some here, and they're quite large buildings, and they -- you know, 20, 000 feet or so, and they've got assessed values of 8, 000, 10,000, 15,000, 200, 000, 320, 000, 300, 000, 400, 000. If anybody's ever built a new business in a building, they understand that it isn't a lot to spend, the number that picked out, a quarter of a million dollars. They couldn't do this under the 50 percent rule ofMiami 21. Most -- I mean, in my opinion -- Chair Sanchez: All right, sir -- Mr. Kauderer: -- that's quite an economic hardship in these times, and I think it needs -- Chair Sanchez: -- in conclusion. Mr. Kauderer: -- to be addressed. Okay, thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Mr. Kauderer: I'd like to thank you for the time, and I have some items here to hand out. Chair Sanchez: Yes, to the City Clerk. Mr. Kauderer: Okay. Chair Sanchez: All right. Followed -- Beba Mann. I'm going to be calling some names that you City ofMiami Page 66 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 have. Beba, Nina West, Andrea Rodriguez, Nati Soto, and Harry Gottlieb. Okay, you're recognized for the record. Beba Mann: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, thank you so much. My name is Beba Mann, M-A-N-N, 1665 Southwest 23rd Street, Miami, Florida. I am here speaking on behalf of myself tonight, a former PAB member, asking the Commissioners to please take into account the PAB's recommendations. We put numerous hours, days, months, almost a year in listening to the residents of the City ofMiami and their concerns. We ran meetings all the way up to 1 o'clock in the morning listening to these concerns. Those are now our recommendations. A lot of them are now being ignored by the Planning Department. They don't feel it's justifiable. One of them is the T6-8 along the main corridors, which was the whole basis ofMiami 21, to protect single-family neighborhoods. If you look at a T6-8, the height that is allowed is the same thing that's being built right now. For example, I would like everybody here today when they leave to take 17th Avenue and go north, and when you stand on the intersection between US 1 and 17th Avenue, look at the building to the right that was built under 11000, and look at the beginning to the left, which is being built under the Miami 21 concept. The height, the bulkness, everything is much larger. I wanted to get some clarification here from staff on one of the items that were read earlier today. They said that they were just going to go over as to their approval of the Miami -- the Planning Advisory Board recommendation, and one of them was PAB 09-001e. Now this was not mentioned earlier this morning, and there was no objection to it. And I'd like to find out why it was not read into the record as one of the -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Ms. Mann: -- items that there was not -- Chair Sanchez: Could we have someone from staff address --? Ms. Bru: Let me address that for a second. The planning agency, the local planning agency, in our case, the Planning Advisory Board, has the responsibility of making recommendations to you with respect to comprehensive planning. So, ultimately, before you vote today, you have got to take into consideration all of their recommendations. And whether or not the Administration put them on the record or read them into the record, I will make sure that you have each and every recommendation 'cause you have to because it is ultimately their responsibility. Comprehensive planning is their responsibility. Ms. Mann: Right. This one, it had no objection from the Planning Department, so therefore, it should have been part of -- Chair Sanchez: All right, can we address that question, please? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: It should have been read. The ones I read -- and it might have been as I was reading that it was an oversight. The ones I read were the ones that I have as no objection. Chair Sanchez: All right, okay. Thank you. Next speaker -- Ms. Mann: Well, thank you so much for your time. Chair Sanchez: -- followed by -- Thank you. Andrea Rodriguez: Hi. My name is Andrea, 8100 Southwest 164th Street. I have three words to tell -- Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry. Mr. Chair, I didn't hear a last name. City ofMiami Page 67 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Ms. Rodriguez: Rodriguez. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Ms. Rodriguez: I would like to tell you three words: Make it happen. Thank you, Mayor Diaz, for such a great idea. You've gotten such great recognition for Miami 21. You have the support of so many people, and the whole USA (United States ofAmerica) is watching us to make sure that this happens. Miami 21 doesn't need the recognition. It needs to be (UNINTELLIGIBLE). I am a mom, and I'm a green advocate. I represent the common people that can't make it here. I've been here the whole day. I understand probably the core of what's talked about, but guess what? That's what will happen to most of the people that support Miami 21. Tweak it all you want, but make it happen. If you are supposed to represent the majority of the people, then Miami 21 needs to be approved because you know very well that this has gotten great, great support from common people like myself. Now let's not lose the big picture here. We want a green Miami. And I talk -- I hear about the economic crisis and how maybe you don't want to pass this 'cause of the economic crisis. How about the environment? How about the environmental crisis? That's even worse. And the mentality that has gotten where we are right now is that mentality that I've seen here, thinking about money and economics. How about the environment? We want green peace, and it's up to all of you to make it happen, and we are supposed to be an example for the rest of the nation. Now just look at the newspapers. Look at the events. Every time there's a green event, there's people going everywhere. Miami want green. The world wants green. This is not just something small; it's huge. Now the last thing I want to say is that every time you have a major goal, there's always going to be obstacles. Do you just go back and sit down and don't tackle the goal because you see obstacles, or do you go for it and tweak things as you go? Make it happen. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right, Nina West. Nina West: Nina West, 3690Avocado Avenue, Coconut Grove. I was an original supporter of Miami 21, and I think it can still be a good plan, butl think we have to take into account what was said here today and some other things that may not have been mentioned. In reading over some of the Code that was supposed to have been changed to this point, I don't see adjacent next to abutting in G/I. There doesn't seem to be much encouragement of low low and low-income housing. And for -- the Virginia Key north end has been mentioned, and a new thing came up today, special area plan for Mercy Hospital. Well, special area plans increase density, increase intensity, and allow for amazing heights. So I don't know where that's coming from, but if that's -- that's just a new thing today. And Mr. Revuelta asked for it to go back to gross lots, with the water to be included in the heights. I would hate to see that. I would hope that you would take the 60 days that the Planning Advisory Board asked for and get everything in line and then sit down and pass Miami 21. The future land use map and the atlas should line up. And they keep changing things right at the meetings, changing things, changing things. I'm for that, but I'd also like to see it completed, and I want to have the opportunity to read it. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. All right, Bob De La Fuenta, follow -- is Nati Soto here? Okay, you're next. Harry Gottlieb, you're next, followed by Carey Press. All right, ladies first. Mr. De La Fuente: Good afternoon. Oh. Chair Sanchez: Ladies first. Nati Soto: Oh, ladies first. Good afternoon. My name is Nati Soto. I'm the president ofAIA Miami, located at 275 University Drive. This association has been referred today as a group of bullies. That's why I'm speaking today because I was not planning to speak. I have had a great - - the great opportunity to know and work with Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk. I have great respect for her and her work and her ideals. Her work on Miami 21 is admirable. However, I take great offense that my organization is called ugly names in public, as you can understand. AIA Miami City ofMiami Page 68 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 members include architects from sole practitioners to large firms. The dean is a fellow of the AIA. Our membership is open to all architects, and we encourage opinions and participation from all viewpoints as such a group of members was formed by the AIA Miami membership to study the AIA -- to study the Miami 21. And this committee has been working with DPZ and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk for more than a year and a half. These people are volunteers. They've given their personal time to review the Code, which is very lengthy, to meet with the dean, and to take part in public meetings. We've had her participate in our board meetings. We take her work very seriously, and we are fully in favor of the ideals behind Miami 21. However, as evidenced by the over 35 amendments mentioned today and some mention of upcoming corrections, it is clear to us and to this committee that the Code is not ready to become a law. We want it to be complete. We want it to reflect all the ideals of the writer. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Soto: Thank you very much. Chair Sanchez: Thank you so much. All right, Bob. Mr. De La Fuente: Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the Commission. This is my second time up here, but my first bite at the apple for this particular client. I'm here on behalf of Brickell Village Land Company, the principal of which is here, Gabriela Guimaraes. As you may know, she is a major stakeholder in the Brickell West area, where currently the zoning is C-1, which allows unlimited height. We are seeking an amendment to the proposed transect considered for that area. It's currently slated to be T6-24, and we're seeking T6-36A for this area. We were encouraged earlier today to see that Edgewater has been modified now to T6-36. We believe that Brickell West is similarly situated, even more so in terms of being central urban core. So with these characteristics, we believe that we should also be considered for an amendment to T6-36. We do have a number of architectural studies that would support this modification, and we'd ask for the opportunity to seek that with staff and to bring that to your attention. Chair Sanchez: Thank you, sir. Mr. De La Fuente: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: All right, next speaker. Harry Gottlieb: Good evening. I'm Harry Gottlieb, 3173 Shipping Avenue, Coconut Grove. I, too, believe that Miami 21 is a visionary project. I'm a big supporter of Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk. I think she is a visionary. I think she has a wonderful staff and DPZ is a wonderful company, wonderful firm that is providing us with a great service. I also am a big fan ofArva Moore Parks, and I have a great faith in what she has to say and her vision of the future. However, I don't think that Miami 21 is ready for primetime. I agree with Commissioner Gonzalez that we have a lot of is to cross, a lot of is to dot, and I think that we need a little bit more time to review this before we make a decision today. Therefore, I suggest that we defer this 'til at least after the election when there's going to be new people. As Commissioner Gonzalez said, there's going to be a new mayor, there's going to be at least two new Commissioners, and I think that they should not be left holding any bag, if there is a bag to be held. They should be here and they should be responsible for what's going to happen in the future. Therefore, I suggest very strongly that you consider deferring this decision until after the election. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Next speaker. All right, Carey Price [sic]. Carey Press: Press. Hi. City ofMiami Page 69 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: How are you? Omar Cordero (phonetic), Becky Roper, Jorge Muniz, and Luis Venezuela. All right, those that I've called, if you're here, please step up to the podium to address the Commission. All right, you're recognized for the record. Ms. Press: Carey Press, 2567 Tigertail Avenue, in Coconut Grove. And I'm here as an architect, working in the City ofMiami, who simply is discussing the effects of the Miami 21 Code with my coworkers. And the general feeling is that this Code goes too far in dictating the heights and the relationships of the building to the street front, the -- how much glass you have -- are required to have along your building and the setbacks. It seems that rather than being a zoning code which is laying out the goals for future needs of the City -- and we could all, I believe, say that a more livable, walkable city is a desire that everybody has. Here this Code is really dictating too strongly what the building form and shape of the City will be. It -- in the end, these lines created with height and shelves and that everything needs its proper place along the front will really -- instead of expressing what the City is about, which is music and culture and identity of the person, the place, we're creating a stagnancy with this Code. And I just think it's not required in a zoning code to achieve what we need as a growing city to be so rigid in what you're allowing to be built. Again, like music, there's not one classical form that'll answer and solve all problems. We need jazz and variations on a theme to really make a city special and to allow the expansion and the dynamics that a city should be. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Press: Sure. Chair Sanchez: Next speaker. Becky Roper Matkov: Hello. I'm Becky Roper Matkov, executive director of Dade Heritage Trust, Miami's largest historic preservation organization. Our board is very supportive of the historic preservation elements of this plan, and we are particularly thrilled over the possibility of having transfer of development rights, which we think will be a great asset to -- for historic properties. We totally support the concept and the vision. We respect the plan tremendously. We realize that there are many little glitches and things that may need to be tweaked, but we encourage you not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Give him a chance to be groomed, to grow, to evolve because we think this is a great plan for the future. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. And then we're going to have -- Ben, you already spoke, correct? Unidentified Speaker: Yeah. Chair Sanchez: All right. We have two more speakers and the public hearing is closed. We have Luis Valenzuela (phonetic), and then we have Ben Fernandez. Oh, I'm sorry. Well, we need to have those so we can go ahead and close the public hearing. Ms. Thompson: No. You called Omar Cordero (phonetic). You called him. Chair Sanchez: Omar Cordero (phonetic) was called. I'm out of forms. I mean, if you haven't had a chance to speak, then I suggest you register quickly 'cause I'm going to -- Unidentified Speaker: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) a long time ago. Chair Sanchez: All right. Sir, you're recognized for the record. Jorge Muniz: Jorge Muniz, 2130 Southwest 13th Avenue. I'm in general support ofMiami 21, but do have some concerns 'cause I'm an affordable housing builder, and do have some concerns in reference to mandating that any commercial property contain commercial space City ofMiami Page 70 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 underneath. When I met with staff last week, I was told that no matter the size of property, no matter the location of property, any development along any major corridor will have to have commercial space below. And when you're trying to sell at affordable housing price, these spaces will normally be vacant. If you go down Coral Way, you will see that the majority of these spaces are vacant. So if you spread the cost of that vacancy -- because if you build an affordable housing on Northwest 7th Street, where is the foot traffic in order to accommodate the commercial space? So how can you spread that cost on affordable housing? So the impact -- the way Miami 21 is written, the impact on affordable housing will be detrimental at this point. I request that if this is approved on first reading, that you really look seriously into mandating commercial space on any commercial property within the City ofMiami. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: All right, thank you. Could we address that? I think it's important to address that now and -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yeah. Chair Sanchez: -- get it out of the question [sic]. Hold -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: It's just -- yeah -- a correction. It's not commercial, it's habitable. So it could be commercial. It could be office. It could be a lobby. It's just to -- it could be residential. It's just transparency. The word is habitable. What we do not want is a blank wall, but it -- but just the correction. Commissioner Regalado: Ana -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Regalado: -- please. Yesterday, there were some people in my office, and they were asking about Miami 21 because they were trying to get some information -- they didn't get it on the Web or couldn't get anybody on the phone -- because they are going to close on a deal on a gas station in Coral Way. And they were told by the real estate agency that Miami 21 will not allow one-story buildings in Coral Way. And they said, how do we going to -- because we want to demolish that old gas station and build a new gas station because now the company is given the possibility of buying the land and being independent. And he said how do we going to do a two-story gas station? How do we get the cars on the second floor to gas up, or should we have like the mini market on the second floor, but then we need an elevator and a ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) compliance and all that. So, I guess they're waiting to see if they make an investment, which will be probably good for the Coral Way area because they going to bring jobs, jobs, jobs, if they want to build. But can you tell me? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: They can do it 15 feet instead of 14, and technically they would be able to get it through. But if you want, we can certainly talk to them. But with the 15 feet, they can do it. Commissioner Regalado: But -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: One story is 14, or it could be 25, if you do retail commercial. That's where the height comes in, but you can have 14 to -- Commissioner Regalado: So -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Actually, you can go for a 15 and you can get it done. Commissioner Regalado: -- they can only build one floor. City ofMiami Page 71 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: No. They can do as much as you want. I guess when I -- when you were expressing their concern, I understood that they were concerned because they did not want to a two-story. Commissioner Regalado: They don't want to do a two-story. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: So what I'm saying that one story in Miami 21 is 14 or 25. Twenty-five feet would be if you do a retail. So technically, if they do a 15 feet -- Chair Sanchez: Fifteen feet, that's it. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- it's already into the second story, so they would be allowed. So they're Commissioner Regalado: So they have to -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- so they can do a 15 feet story on the gas station and they are fine because they're on the second story. Commissioner Regalado: So if they build, they have to build one story with a very high ceiling? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: It could go to -- yeah, it would have to -- Chair Sanchez: Fifteen feet. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: --15 the way we have it. Commissioner Regalado: It has to be. And who's -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: But the gas station -- I think that would not -- Commissioner Regalado: Yeah. Who's going to pay for the air conditioning of that excess -- the City or --? I mean, what are the -- what is the purpose? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Maybe I should speak to stories in general, Commissioner, because people keep bringing up the story heights. The idea is to have as generous possible stories as possible. In the case of the workplace, like a gas station, that height of the story means that -- if it is a working place without air conditioning, but (UNINTELLIGIBLE) you can have better air circulation. We initially wanted to have -- you know, part of the background for all of this was to make the corridors of the city, the places the people walk for commercial reasons, to be as amendable for the pedestrians as possible and to have some continuity of street wall. The gas station doesn't provide that by its own character usually, but if it's of a certain height, it can become part of the rest of the frontage of that corridor street wall. So although we said two stories to begin to ask for mixed -use along the corridors, it also says that you can -- you become that second story as soon as you exceed the height of one story, and that's why Ana said if you went to 15 feet, you would immediately be within the Code. You wouldn't have to be building a second usable story. Commissioner Regalado: So you just need to add space. That's all that there is to it. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes. Commissioner Regalado: And who's going to pay for excess construction costs? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: But if you have a working gas station, Commissioner, you most likely have a City ofMiami Page 72 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 lift for automobiles and you have tall spaces for working on the cars. So it's not an onerous height because it's actually a typical height. Commissioner Regalado: Gas stations don't do any more, you know, like oil changes and -- they don't lift cars. They just -- actually, they make the money in their little stores and selling cigarettes and beer and all that. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Well, I would say, if you want to make that adjustment -- if you disagree -- Commissioner Regalado: I mean -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- with it as a policy issue, you could ask us to do that. Commissioner Regalado: -- I'm just saying that we are pleading with people to invest in Miami, but at the same time, we're putting a lot of obstacles for the people that -- I will tell you that these people will not buy that property because they do the numbers, and it's going to cost this, it's going to cost that, and they just move on. And the old gas station will remain there, as bad as it looks. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Some of the old ones are quite beautiful and they should remain. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, they are. Chair Sanchez: Ben. Ben Fernandez: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Chair Sanchez: And I believe we have three more, and these will be the last ones, and we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Grace Solares, Juan Carlos Garrido, J.C., and Jackie Tako. Okay, and then the public hearing is closed, and we thank you for being so cooperative with us. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman. Chair Sanchez: Yes? Commissioner Gonzalez: I do have a concern on the affordable housing issue. Chair Sanchez: Okay, can we wait 'til we listen to these three, and then we'll bring it up to -- Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Chair Sanchez: -- the Administration? Okay, let's go. Mr. Fernandez: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be very brief. Ben Fernandez, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, on behalf of 3801 Biscayne LLC (Limited Liability Company). This is a property that is located on the off -ramp from the Julia Tuttle Causeway at its intersection with Biscayne Boulevard on the northeast corner. And it is currently designated SD-8, which is the Design District zoning, special district, which permits a considerable floor area and unlimited height. Miami 21 is proposing to essentially cut that property in half and downzone it to a T4, four-story maximum height. We think that that designation is a bit unreasonable given the fact that the off -ramp from the causeway has already changed the character permanently of the frontage of this property. It should be a mixed -use property throughout, and the T4 designation wouldn't even allow a commercial use along 50 percent of its frontage. You have T5 directly across the street on the same frontage, and there's just no logical basis for that disparity. And so, we would encourage you to designate the entire property T6-12, which is what is consistent with the SD City ofMiami Page 73 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 (Special District) -- current SD-8 zoning. Thank you very much. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Next speaker. Grace Solares: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Grace Solares. Commissioner Gonzalez, before I begin, I want to, on behalf of/1-NU and myself personally, welcome you back, irrespective of how you vote; doesn't matter, okay. With respect to Miami 21, Miami Neighborhoods United opposes Miami 21 as presently drafted. With respect to the Comprehensive Plan, it is our belief that these proceedings are fatally flawed procedurally. This attempt of the City again to present the same proposed amendments of the comp -- to the Comprehensive Plan to the Commission continues to be improper. First, the PAB's review, public hearing and recommendations that you are relying upon today are well past the 60 days. Second, the Administration's placement of that matter on the PAB agenda of September 2 does not cure the defect and does not comply with City Code. Article II of the Comprehensive Plan, Section 62-33(b) (4), says applications for plan amendments -- dah, dah, dah -- if accepted, will be scheduled for Planning Advisory Board public hearing in November and May, respectively. It further states the Planning, Building, and Zoning Department will schedule the amendment on an agenda for the Planning Advisory Board within 60 days of the acceptance of the application. None of this has happened. The Administration cannot simply take an expired proposed plan amendment that was filed in 2008 then put it before the PAB in January, an impermissible month, bring it back before the September agenda of the PAB, an impermissible month, and expect the members to rubberstamp it. The PAB has deferred the item. The Comprehensive Plan is a very significant matter. It requires the actual participation, recommendation, and review by the PAB. The PAB did not consider a vote on any resolutions because the Administration failed to file the Code. Therefore, this matter must go back to the PAB on November 18, the permissible month per Code, obtain the vote of the board, their recommendations -- Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Solares: -- then in 60 days thereafter, hold a Commission meeting for the first proper first reading ofMiami 21. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Ms. Solares: Thank you, Commissioners. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Sir, you're recognized for the record, and then we'll have our last speakers, and hopefully, we'll close the public hearing and deliberate. Juan Carlos Garrido: My name is Juan Carlos Garrido, J. C. Garrido. I come here beforehand. I suggest -- in about, I think, 10 or 15 days, we're going to have the first hearing of the budget. I suggest you rent one auditorium because yesterday I was at the auditorium in Government Center in Dade County and I was appalled what happened there. It was a discrimination against public life. There was only 300 seats there. I suggest you rent ManuelArtime's or Dade County Auditorium or maybe the James L. Knight Center, and I'm willing to give $100 right now and you all follow. But next month is going to be a big -- this month is going to be a big month, and there's a lot of citizens out there who are suffering. Now let's get back to what we're talking about, Miami 21. I think Miami 21 could be a good thing, exceptI believe what's happening is like a frain going out of whack. I suggest you go and rent a movie by Harrison Ford, which is called "The Fugitive." You guys have to get into line, all of you. We all voted for you, one way or the other. Two of the Commissioners are going to be out of here in November. There's going to be a new mayor and two new Commissioners. In another three years, two other Commissioners are coming on board. You all have to go ahead and defer this. The planning commission -- the Planning Advisory Board was made up by all of you, and you have to respect their notion, their belief. And what they have said is defer this to November 16, 17, or 18. Just City ofMiami Page 74 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 defer it. This could be a good project. And in fact, Ms. Plater-Zyberk was my professor back in 1981. I know her very well. She might not recall me, but I know you very well, like I know Manny Diaz and all of you know me too. But it's not about me. It's about the citizens of City of Miami that yesterday my aunt, who's 87 years old, was sitting there for four hours to go in there, and they didn't give her a time, and that, to me, hurts. And there's a lot of citizens out there who are trying to come and for you to behave like we voted for you. And all ofyou basically is very -- this is very simple. I think zoning -- Miami 21 is going to happen. It will happen sooner or later. Like Commissioner Regalado said, that legacy is to Manny Diaz. It will happen. Chair Sanchez: Thank you, sir. In closing. Mr. Garrido: Give me one minute. Give me one minute, please. Give me one minute. Give me one minute 'cause I started going -- but -- can you give me one minute? Chair Sanchez: Sir, in closing. You got to close. I've given everybody time. You've had plenty of time to talk. I think you've addressed us. You've talked about taxes. You talk -- you spoke about Miami 21. You've had plenty of time to address us. Mr. Garrido: You only gave me two minutes. Is there anybody in the audience -- Chair Sanchez: If gave everybody -- Mr. Garrido: -- give me two more minutes? Chair Sanchez: Sir, thank you so much. Appreciate it. Next speaker. Mr. Garrido: So I have -- Okay. Chair Sanchez: Thank you. Mr. Garrido: All right. Thank you. Jacki Tako: I was gone one minute, and I'm the last one. My name is Jacki Tako. I'm president of property in Biscayne Boulevard, 5201 and 5215. And good afternoon to all ofyou. I see you're the most smartest board I ever sat down with. I want to look you in the eyes and you tell me that you're going to do Biscayne Boulevard the height of my house. My house is 35 feet. Are we putting in Biscayne Boulevard after 14 years that I own the property over 200 feet on Biscayne to put a 35 feet? A commercial building will be on Biscayne 35 feet high. We spent over $800, 000 in taxes since I own this property, and I build the property and I build it again. Every Code Enforcement comes there and put another penalty, another addition and another addition. Today you're telling me you're cutting all this up and you're reducing my building 80 percent. It used to be 120 feet. Four years ago, you reduce it to 80. Then you put historic. Then now we go to 35. I don't have lawyers. I don't have lobbyists. I have me, like other people invested in Biscayne. You asked us to come and put our effort to build Biscayne. How I'm going to have investors or me myself for 35 feet? You tell me. Be honest to yourself and look at me in the eye and tell me you're putting a commercial building on Biscayne Boulevard 35 feet because I don't believe inside you you believe that 35 feet is going to work. You don't believe it because it will never happen because I will put all my energy and all my money for a lawsuit. He said 14 years ago no lawsuit, now you're going to see a lot of lawsuits. I hate to do that, but I put my sweat on this building. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: Thank you, ma'am. Thank you so much. That concludes the public hearing. At this time, the public hearing is closed, and it's coming back to the Commission. What we want to do so we have a smooth progress -- process here is given all the input that we've had and the presentations, what I would like my colleagues to do to have an orderly fashion is to possibly City ofMiami Page 75 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 make a motion, someone, to approve Miami 21 with the staff and expert recommendations, and I believe with the technical changes that we don't have a problem with. Then what we need to do is take up the PAB's recommendation one by one and vote on 'em [sic] on a one -by -one basis. That'll make a smooth process as to where we need to get to. So if we could have a motion and a second on the recommendation by the staff and the experts, along with the technical changes. Then, independently, we'll take the PAB's on one by one. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Mr. Chairman, there's some things that I definitely want to add. I want to ask my fellow colleagues do you want to have a discussion about this first before we make motions? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I think that that would be the better way to do it 'cause this is -- you know, the -- there was a lot of testimony today. There's a lot of additional things that we would like to add. Chair Sanchez: Do you want to make a discussion, or do you have questions from the Administration -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No. I want -- kind of -- Chair Sanchez: -- before we make a motion? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Both. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I just think that before we make -- I mean, I'm not the only person up here. Chair Sanchez: No, no, no. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I'm asking the other fellow Commissioners are you -- Chair Sanchez: I just want to make sure -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- guys comfortable with that first. Chair Sanchez: Madam Vice Chair, with all due respect, I think that what we need to do is whatever the will of this Commission. I just want to make sure that we have a smooth process here where, first of all, I think that we need to make sure that we know exactly what we're voting on. It is my responsibility, as the Chair, to run a well respected meeting, where we have deliberation with respect and ask questions. I'm sure it's going to be plenty of questions. If you want to take the route of asking questions and debating the issues before we vote on it, it's perfectly fine with me. But I just want to set forth a process. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. I'd like -- Okay, not a problem. I'd like to enter some of my comments first, just to make sure that we're on the same page, if my fellow colleagues don't have a problem with that. Commissioner Sarnoff I agree. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: You're okay with that? So, Ana -- okay. And I stated a few of them earlier, but some of them have changed and expanded since the presentation. The first thing that City ofMiami Page 76 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 I wanted to just be very clear on, Ana, is Buena Vista East. And I know that we made changes, but during the last hearing, it was stated that the change that the historical preservationist area - - in that area, the association there, there was an area -- I believe it's on 42nd Street, if I'm not mistaken. The portion of that area over there that's right off of 40 -- I believe it's 42nd Street, should have been included in the historic preservation portion of it. I think it's 4 -- T4-3. You guys are saying it was T4 L when actually the community -- and they have been asking for God knows how long -- was T4-3 and not T4 L, something like that. Can I see the map? I'll show -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- you what I'm talking about. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes. I would rather -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: You told me in the last hearing -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- because -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And I don't have any of my Buena Vista East people here, butt want to make sure that that area in which we -- while they look for it -- I don't want to hold off any more on it, so I'm going to move on to the second thing, okay. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes. There was a setback -- and that's why I'm trying to get -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I know, but -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: And the setback was done. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No, Ana. It was not done. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Okay. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: You said it was done in the first hearing, but when we got a copy of the map, the change was not made. And Buena Vista -- they're not here right now, but I do know that we wanted to make sure that that land that was abutting -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I think -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- where the buildings are taking place with the Design District was lower density. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: It's not the setback. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: There we go. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Okay, it's not the setback. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) zone designation. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Right. It was supposed to be -- right. It was -- see T3 L in the historic preservation area there, right. It was supposed to go all the way down to T -- where the T4 L is, it was supposed to be T4-3. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Okay, so what you are asking is that that be changed from T4 L to T4 R. City ofMiami Page 77 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: That's what the residents have requested. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Or a three. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Three. T3. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: T3 L -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: No. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- so it comes all the way down. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No. I'm just putting -- right, exactly. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I just want to make sure. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: T3. Where you see the T4 -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Instead of T4 L, what you're request -- what the neighbors are requesting is that it be T3 R? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Exactly. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: T3 L. Chair Sanchez: Would all due respect, could we proffer those as friendly amendments so we could vote on them as she puts them on the record? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yeah, but I want to be able to have the discussion with them to make sure I don't have an issue with it, Mr. Chairman. Marina Khoury: It used to be T5, and then we changed it to T4 L because it was -- it used to be SD-8. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Right. Ms. Khoury: So it used to have a C-1. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I'm already telling you what they want, so I don't know how many -- Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Where it says T4 L, it is supposed to be T3 because that -- all those -- everything that's abutting that are really houses. Chair Sanchez: Can I interrupt you for a minute? Could you state your name for the record? Let's fry to have -- you know, we've got to have the record here. When you speak, you've got to put your name. And anything that's proffered as a friendly amendment is going to require a vote, folks. Ms. Khoury: I'm Marina Khoury. I'm with DPZ -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay, so that was -- I just want to make sure that their change is included. City ofMiami Page 78 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Ms. Khoury: -- and a resident of Buena Vista too, actually. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay, no problem. And then the other one that we talked about earlier but I just want to make sure that we're on the same page is the industrial areas, and I saw Ben Pumo and we had a group of people working on this, Mallory -- I don't know where they went. And this is regarding the nonconforming use, and this is the Little River Industrial Park area. I just want to make sure their comments, which they've already put in the record, are actually included in if it's voted on today -- included now for the next reading. So I want to make sure that there's -- their suggestions that were included regarding the nonconforming uses, they submitted in the record already. I believe we've already had a conversation with staff on this, and there's no issue on it. I just want to make sure it addresses that. I know that there's some other nonconforming issues that came up today as well for my fellow colleagues. I don't know how you're going to include those, butl do know that we have officially put it in record. We hammered it out in my office already, so I want to make sure that theirs is included. As far as the Overtown area, the only issue I had was the GI -- the CI to the -- I mean, the GI to the CI. I want to make sure that it's very clear that it can only -- the only type of housing that goes in the CI -- and I know we had something about Mercy Hospital and all of that, but if the land itself -- and I want to be clear -- is more than ten acres, then you can have a special area plan to address these kind of issues where they were GI before. I want to make sure in the Overtown area where we have that land zoned as GI, which is the Culmer Center -- I'm going to be very clear 'cause the people in Overtown do not want to see anything change unless it goes in front of them, that it remains GI. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Right now, it's CI, which is the equivalent to the GI. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Well, CI. It's going from GI to CI. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: If they have -- no residential is allowed, only dormitories on CI. If they - - they can seek a different type of transect zoning through a special area plan, and that would require a public hearing. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Which means the community would have -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: It means that it comes in front of this body so -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And the community would have the ability to participate, correct? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Definitely. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Of course. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And then last, but not least, was the -- the presentation that was made by MNU earlier that Elvis presented, there was several issues on there. I want to just make sure those things are actually submitted into the record 'cause I thought that those were some really great ideas, and I think that they should be things that are also included in the overall before the second reading, if it passes today. And I know that Elvis did not physically pass out anything. Commissioner Sarnoff He did. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: But think -- okay. Well, I got it, but don't know if every -- okay, 'cause I got two diff -- Commissioner Sarnoff He said it's the same. City ofMiami Page 79 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. So I just want to make sure that -- okay, I want to make sure that they're entered into this process, okay? And with that being said, those were the only main changes -- okay, yes. And then last, but not least, the East Coast Fishery [sic] building that is on the river. I did not have an issue with the land that was abutting the expressway because I do believe that that does need to go a little higher. I don't have a problem with it. The only thing that have a concern with is anything on my side of the river, which is, you know, on north -- I mean, not north -- on South River Drive, that whole area over there on -- near East Coast Fisheries. I really wanted to make sure that we didn't have the land zoned too high off the river 'cause that sliver is very, very small already and to crunch 12 or 14 stories on I think is a bit much. So I really want to fry to keep that area as walkable as possible. So I think that we've had a discussion on that, and I'm comfortable with it being lower density there. And that was my only comments that would like to make sure they're entered into the record. This has totally been vetted out in my district. Of course, there are going to be some people that aren't in agreement necessarily with some of the things that we're choosing to do within the disfrict, but you try your best to work as hard. I've been working on Miami 21 for almost a year and a half in my disfrict, and I'm sure you guys know that you guys have done everything that I've asked you to do from diversifying your team to diversifying your message to making all of these meetings that we have put together in our disfrict. So I'm pretty much satisfied with what have. These are the only final changes that would make me very comfortable with making a decision on it. I just want to make sure that they're included, and that's my only comments. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Any other comments? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. I do have some comments. There have been some concerns from different religious organizations. I have received calls from different pastors and reverends from different congregations in reference to their properties and the nonconforming situation of their properties. And I would like to offer an amendment where religious properties in the City of Miami must be protected both on their structures and parking. That is one concern that have. I had three or four other issues that have been resolved, but there is a new issue, and it has to do with affordable housing. Affordable housing must be encouraged, and Miami 21 needs to provide exceptions to requirements of placing commercial space on the first floor and lease certification. These requirements will increase development costs and make it harder for -- to developers to develop affordable housing. As it is now, it's very hard to find people that want to build affordable housing. So now if we put more obstacles and we put more expenses on their projects, we're going to end up without any affordable housing in the City ofMiami, and affordable housing is needed. I understand -- because first -- the first -- first of all, I was told that it has to be commercial on the entire first floor. Then I was told that the facade of the building could be a lobby, could be a mailroom, could be a meeting room, could be -- and then also on the back of the building could be parking. Is that correct? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: That is right. It's habitable space. It's not limited to commercial. Commissioner Gonzalez: It's not limited to commercial? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: No, it's not. Commissioner Gonzalez: Okay. Can you also have units on the first floor? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes, you can. Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Muniz, would you please come to the podium because you -- you're one of the builders of affordable housing in the City ofMiami. Is that -- does that, you think, cover the concerns of the affordable housing developers? City ofMiami Page 80 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Mr. Muniz: Well, my concern was that I -- when I met with staff was that the requirement was you needed to have some type of commercial space on the lower level facing the sidewalk, the entire length of the property. And is that what I'm -- am I correct or not? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: It's habitable, so it could be commercial, but it could be residential. It could be a lobby. It's habitable. What we do not -- what we would not want to see is the blank wall. Mr. Muniz: Okay, then -- Chair Sanchez: It takes care of the issue. Mr. Muniz: It takes care of the issue. Commissioner Gonzalez: All right, very good. Mr. Muniz: Thank you. Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you very much. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Are you --? Commissioner Gonzalez: Those are my two issues. Chair Sanchez: Just for the record, to be able to keep good records here, those friendly amendments that have been proffered, both by Vice Chair Spence -Jones and Commissioner Gonzalez, you have written them down. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes, we -- Chair Sanchez: Those would be friendly amendments, correct? Ms. Bru: Mr. Chairman -- Chair Sanchez: Would they be considered friendly amendments? Ms. Bru: -- at this point, they're not amendments because there isn't any motion on the floor. Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Chair Sanchez: But when there's a motion, they should be included. Ms. Bru: When there's a motion -- I think, when there's a motion, then we should go ahead and, again, with specificity, describe all these amendments -- Chair Sanchez: Exactly. Ms. Bru: -- to make sure that we don't have anything slipping through the cracks. Chair Sanchez: Madam Attorney, that is my point. Ms. Bru: Right. Chair Sanchez: We need to know exactly what we're voting on Miami 21, okay. City ofMiami Page 81 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Ms. Bru: Exactly. Chair Sanchez: And it's paramount that we put all those amendments -- and that's why it is important for us to have order -- to have the motion that we're going to proffer, sooner or later, when it's all said and done, the amendments that have been placed by the district Commissioners, the technical changes that have been proffered by the staff and the experts, and then, of course, the PAB's -- that should be taken up to include the 35 feet in Biscayne Boulevard, which is not part of the PAB's recommendation, but that should be voted on separately. So is there any other discussions before we make a motion and a second? Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. I -- Chair Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized for the record. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think -- I mean, I would talk about amendments, and I have here the MNU proposed amendment to the Commission; most of them were explained. There are several. And I thinkl will support all of the 33 amendments that they have, and -- but before that, I think it's important to sort of make some comments because a lot of people here are really interested. It seems that even people that do not live in the City ofMiami are really into this debate. Arva Parks said a few hours ago that 11000 had destroyed the City ofMiami. I don't think it's quite right. I think that the humans destroyed the City ofMiami because it was the decisions of elected officials, the lack of action by the Administration, the lack of vetoes by mayors or mayor that allowed some of the things that have attack the quality of life of the residents ofMiami. Actually, with the help of this Commission, we approve a moratorium, a building moratorium, the first one in the City ofMiami for the 27th Avenue corridor. And I remember that Commissioner Winton said "not on my district, " and we had to carve about five blocks of 27th Avenue from US 1 to Coral Way on that building moratorium, and the reason was to stop the Catalonia, which the consultant have said is a poster child for bad development. But what happened was that the Administration -- not this manager; the other manager -- dropped the ball and notice was not given. We had to had four hearings in order to have the moratorium. Notice was not given again. And meanwhile, under the radar, they gave all the permits to the Catalonia, and that's how the poster child was born because of lack of support of the staff the Planning Department, the Zoning Department, the management, and the leniency which they treat the developers. So it's not about 11000. It's about the red carpet that was placed for many years by this Administration on some of these projects. I think it's important to -- I mean, people don't like to hear these things, but you know, you cannot rewrite history. It's there. And you cannot come and claim that everything is going to be good next day if you take a vote today. I'm sure that all of us and all of you, if we're going to have heart surgery, will look for a second opinion. I mean, your doctor is not going to be upset. You look for a second opinion. You're going to have heart surgery. And we're asked here to do heart surgery on the City ofMiami, and we still have questions about a gas station with a high ceiling like City Hall, or maybe the churches that have issues, or maybe my house, somebody who doesn't like me goes and burn my house and I cannot build it. And you know, with all respect to the Mayor, I just think that it's not necessary that we vote today. And I have heard Commissioner Gonzalez and some of you that we just need to take a breathe and solve these issues. As of yesterday, we got calls from reverends and pastors in our office, like you, I'm sure, asking are they going to come down and not allow our churches in residential areas? Actually, I think that 90 percent of the churches are in residential areas, Christian churches, Catholic churches. You go Coral Way and you go Shenandoah -- I mean, in Shenandoah alone, in the middle of residential you have two Jehovah Witness temples. You have a Catholic church right in the middle of a residential. You have another Catholic church in 16 -- 17th Street. You have four churches inside residential area, and the reverends and the pastor are concerned. Now we have been told now, oh, it's fixed. Oh, it's not done yet. You know, I just think that it's important that if we going to do it, we going to do it right and, you know, we say, oh, we now have to discuss all the Planning Advisory Board amendments 'cause they are so important and we need to discuss one by one and approve one by City ofMiami Page 82 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 one so we know what we're voting on. But yet, we ignore the Planning Advisory Board when they say give us a break, give us some time and defer this item. I see here a DDA (Downtown Development Authority) condition of support for Miami 21. IfI understand the numbers, four conditions are not -- were not met. Three conditions were met, so ifI'm correct, the DDA won't support Miami 21 because it's four against three for Miami 21, unless we are in Miami, where two and two is five. But I just think that we need to give (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- give the people a break and, you know, just understand all of these 700 pages and, you know, no one is asking everybody to read the 700 pages. No one is asking anybody to read the healthcare reform, 1,200 pages, but you know, like Commissioner Gonzalez says, there are more devils than angels in this little print on the health reform or Miami 21. I think it's a necessary code. I think it's a good thing that the Mayor have pushed this, but remember something. The whole thing ofMiami 21 began when the bubble hasn't burst. And now it's totally a different scenario. And you know, to put the burden on a guy who wants to buy a gas station and rebuild because to do a state-of-the-art gas station and just say you have to build it like we want, that's his money. That's his investment. I mean, we're lucky that they didn't get to the shopping center that was abandoned for 15 years because they would have requested, you know, a Goodyear blimp or something on the roof of the shopping center. I, for one -- number one, I think we should keep considering Miami 21. I support the concept. I will support all the amendments ofMiami Neighborhoods United, and -- but I think it's not a big thing just to listen to the people, listen to the AAA [sic], the bullies, as somebody called them, association -- the architects association, hear a second opinion, and listen to what Miami 21 has to say. Again, my only -- besides the amendments thatMNU is proposing, my only friendly amendment is if we are going to have another special meeting ofMiami 21, just please don't do it on Halloween night, you know, because we keep doing these things on days that are very irregular. But I just hope that we can have time to just explain to some of the people that don't understand what Miami 21 is and what good Miami 21 will bring to Miami. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chair Sanchez: Commissioner Sarnoff, you're recognized for the record. Commissioner Sarnoff Well, having been here the smallest amount of time, I can certainly figure out how it is if you want to not get something done, you can just put it off. I suspect, if we don't vote for this today and within the next few weeks, this will probably never rear its ugly head again. I didn't mean to say ugly head 'cause I don't think it's ugly, but it will never -- it'll never come up again. Very simply, two new Commissioners will say it will take me a year to learn this. The developers will get their hooks in those Commissioners, one way or another, and I can guarantee you, you'll never see Miami 21 again. I can equally guarantee you, you will never seen an amendment to 11000 again because in this boom and bust city, people build to the development envelopes that they can build to, or at least they did prior to the crash of October 2008. What the new frontier is, none of you even know, none of you even know 'cause I believe you're in virgin territory. This city and this country have never seen nor will they probably ever see the loss of value that you have seen today. And for all of you who think you're at the end, go look down by your feet. You got about 50 feet further to go. You're far from the end. I cited Kiplinger in my response to this Commissioner -- Commission. Kiplinger holds out some hope for the rest of the country that in four years, you might see a resurgence back to '06/'07 rates, and I think Kiplinger, for its first time in its history, is being optimistic. What did it have to say about California, Arizona, Florida? Fifteen to twenty years, and you have not even come close to the bottom. So why do anything? The market will take care of it, right? Nothing will get built. But none of you really believe that 'cause this is a boom/bust city. You just came off the biggest boom, and hey, it's a bust. It's a cycle. We'll get through it. What is becoming more and more apparent to the City ofMiami and what was so apparent to me the moment I got on this dais and having lived here is this place has no sustainable industry. It's got tourism, and you lived on development. But how do you sustain development? Why is there a need for so many large buildings? What will attract so many people to live in these large, beautiful buildings? Well, one answer was South American/Venezuelan money, and that was a fair answer. The problem is, take Icon, who would have thought we wouldn't have gotten 1,400 millionaires? City ofMiami Page 83 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 They're all selling for over a million dollars, right? Why wouldn't 1,400 millionaires suddenly emerge? You have no sustainable industry in the City ofMiami, and surprise, you have a glut of expensive housing. I said on this dais there's going to be plenty affordable housing, and you know what, there will be. The Everglades will test the very bottom of this market. Five hundred and twelve units will be sold, in my estimation, for less than $200 a square foot, and by the way, it cost $262 a square foot to put the bricks and mortar into the Everglades. You will see condominiums for sale in Miami in the 150 to 120 price range, and yet, affordable housing developers will say we still need affordable housing. Well, Mr. Developer, how much is it going to cost? I can probably get it done for 290 to $310 a square foot. And you know what? This Commission will vote for it, with 120 to $150 a square foot housing available. There are reasons that we'll vote for it, but there's an irony here. And the real irony here is we had an opportunity to get a convention center in the Park West area and we probably lost that opportunity. And that, to me -- and I hope, to you -- was like a second son, a whole nother tourist base, a whole nother industry could have come to Miami. Because all you still have is boom and bust. Now when your next boom is, who knows? Because what was a very affordable place to own a second home, Florida, is an extremely unaffordable place to own a second home. When the folks from New York, Iowa, Venezuela, anywhere else, wanted to own a second home and it was 150 to $250, 000, it was affordable. And when your tax bill was 3 to $4, 000, you could do it. And when your hurricane insurance was 3 to $4, 000, you could do it. But now, 7 to $800, 000, that second home; your tax bill, 25 to $30, 000; your hurricane insurance bill, $14, 000, and at one point, it was $22, 000. Affordable? What person in their right mind would purchase a second home? So that industry went away, and for the first time in the history -- I shouldn't say the history. I apologize to you. I'd hate to misstate. The first time since 1946, the state of Florida saw 56, 000 people leave it. Fifty-six thousand people decided there was a better place to live. I saw people go back to Ohio. I saw people go back to New York. One of our most famous TV (Television) reporters, Nick Bogart, is headed back to Chicago; 24 years in the City ofMiami and he's going back to Chicago. He doesn't even recognize the city he's going back to 'cause, frust me, 24 years ago, Chicago is a much different place today, in some respects better and in some respects very different. So why pass Miami 21? I remember Commissioner Regalado over there telling us something that was going on in France when we were having the Mercy vote, and he said, what does that have to do with Mercy? He said absolutely nothing, just like the hospital has nothing to do with the vote in Mercy. But think what just said to you does have something to do with Miami 21, and it does have something to say and do, why do you pass it now. Some of you will lodge arguments that you have Bert Harris takings -- I'm sorry. It's Bert Harris claims and constitutional takings. -- and you'll do so because there's really no downside for you to do it. Why not sue the City ofMiami? It's good sport. It's good fun. We don't counterclaim. And if you lose some property rights, what do you have to lose? Sue us. I thought the memo I wrote was extremely clear, and I thought the memo written by Neisen Kasdin, the former mayor of the City ofMiami Beach, was also very telling. There has never been a successful Bert Harris claim, and the city of North Miami -- ofMiami Beach never paid out a penny for Bert Harris. This town is based on land speculation. What has that land speculation done? It has resulted in speculation stagnation. That means people bought property, somebody on Biscayne Boulevard, $85, 000 he paid for that property. I remember him in my office. He was offered $5.5 million, but he was holding out for 6.2 million. I bet it's not worth $300, 000 today. Now, what's the old saying, Ivan Boeskey, "Greed is good." Lawyers have a saying, "Pigs make money and hogs get slaughtered." And you're going to see a slaughtering. You're going to see a number of people this year going bankrupt because your credit cards won't sustain where you are. It's a reality. Some people will say there'll be some bailout money. Having had a little experience with bailout money, frust me, it's not going where you think it's going and it's not coming like you think it's coming. So I think now is the time for Miami 21. I think now is the time to take a bold action, and I think now is the time to go before a Commission that has labored with this for the better part of three years. Commissioner Spence -Jones and I have worked on Miami 21 -- From the day I got here, I was briefed, re -briefed, and briefed again on Miami 21. And for anyone who likes to write out there thatl never said 35 feet in terms of Biscayne Boulevard, I ran on it, I put it in all my literature. From City ofMiami Page 84 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 the day Pete Hernandez was sitting in a seat with me with Plater-Zyber [sic], I brought up parking and I brought up the 35 feet. Now why didn'tI justgo to my Commissioners and say, hey, 35 feet. Maybe because I'd be violating the law. Maybe because that would be a Sunshine violation. Did I tellIMMo? Absolutely. It's always been on my agenda. I (UNINTELLIGIBLE) surprise anyone. So anybody who writes where did this come from, whatever Pete Hernandez communicates, our City Manager, is entirely up to him. Whatever Plater-Zyber [sic] decided to communicate is equally entirely up to her. But what Marc Sarnoff could not do was say, now go tell the other Commissioners how I feel about this. And what didn't this Commissioner do? I didn't tell them that 'cause I didn't violate Sunshine. So anybody that wants to write "surprise, surprise, " not at all. 'Cause let me show you what motivated me to run for the City ofMiami. This. I saw this man. He didn't sue; he didn't complain. You know what he said? The City did this to me. The City did this to me. And by the way, there's a man sitting in this audience who thought this was wrong that was fired by the City ofMiami and is our former Zoning director because he said there should have been setbacks. And this was built as a matter of right. Do you see setbacks here? Of course you don't. Of course you don't, yet the person that actually interpreted 907.3 was fired for interpreting it that way. Now setbacks, you could do it. What about this person right here? That person right here that lives in that house, it's only 80 feet. What do they have to complain about? I don't know about any of you, but my backyard, I have an expectation of privacy. What I do in my backyard isn't government's business, and hopefully, it's not my next -door neighbor's business. And you know who's business it's not either? The high-rise that I put directly above me. Because that's just wrong. So that's what motivated me to run for this seat. I've not been anything but a friend to the development community when they develop in the proper places, where the mass transit exists in the DRI (Development of Regional Impact) of the City ofMiami, the downtown urban core. You want to continue to put massing of units, high-rises -- and forgive me, 80 to 90 feet, to me, and 120 feet is a high-rise, you know. Somebody said they were born in Brooklyn when they got here. I was born on Avenue I and East 28th Street in Brooklyn, New York. The first free I ever saw was when I was seven years old. There were no trees in my neighborhood. This place is lush to me. So I do have some amendments, Mr. Chair. I don't know if this is the time to bring them up, butt will at least discuss them. Chair Sanchez: You could discuss them, but I would ask that we save the amendments for later, please. Commissioner Sarnoff As to Lucia Dougherty's client, the Miami River on north Metrorail -- Northwest 1st Sfreet and West Southwest 14th Sfreet on the south and the Metromover station on the east, I propose a T6-48. They have a T6-36. About one year ago, Plater-Zyber [sic] had a T6-46 -- T6-48. I do agree with Eileen Bottari's changes; they're right here. I believe, if you -- if Spence -Jones -- sorry, Commissioner -- Commissioner Spence -Jones -- but it's a cool last name. I would just go with Spence Jones. If Spence -Jones has put in the MNU changes, then I think it covers it. Now, let me show you how bad a guy I am. The DDA changes. I happen to agree with the DDA on most of what they had to say. The DDA says, as did the South Florida Building Association, as did MNU, as did many, many others, include specific standards and methodologies for determining public benefit programs. It's Section 3.1.4. It's at page 3.25. And the Code states the methodology shall be maintained and Planning Department request that standards and methodology be included or provided with the Code. Says nothing. Doesn't say what those standards are. You must have objective criteria to create a subjective belief. That needs to be changed. Now, here's one I think that is a good one, and I think this belongs in the downtown area. They were asking for automatic extensions of existing development approvals within six years ofMiami 21's adoption and unlimited extensions beyond six years subject to City Commission review and approval. I think that's a little too generous. However, I can agree to automatic extensions of existing development approvals within the downtown area for four years ofMiami 21 adoption and two extensions subject to City ofMiami Commission review and approval and that will give them six years beyond those rights that they presently have. So I'm such a bad guy and I'm so pro -- against development that I don't want to see it happen that I'm City ofMiami Page 85 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 extending that development right. I happen to agree with them on (d), clarify the process for determining nonsubstantial deviations to development approvals remain as under the current zoning code. And they're asking for greater clarity in 7.1.3.5 (d) at page 42. It's really not responded to. Equally, at Section E, clarify the projects determined to be a substantial deviation may choose to follow either the current zoning code ofMiami 21 or the latter. I think that needs to be investigated, and again, the same subsection. The one that I happen to agree with the most is two of them here. Section I, revise the Code -- and this -- you know what's odd is you know something's wrong when MNU and the DDA are both asking you for the same thing, and that's a scary prospect -- revise the Code to provide standards and criteria for guiding discretionary reviews and approvals by the Planning director and other development review officials. Again, no objective criteria, 7.1.2, page 20, page 23. It needs to be in there. Finally, they call it add -a -glitch bill. What) -- instead of calling it a glitch bill, what I would have done, I'd like to see within the passage of this act, in one year, a white paper from the City Manager, signed off by the City Attorney, that explains exactly how Miami 21 has been implemented, how many people have utilized it, and how many Bert J. Harris claims have been filed and/or how many constitutional taking files have been filed just so that we know exactly it is where we are. And those are the DDA changes that happen to agree with. The other Code amendment have is regarding something that Commissioner Gonzalez was concerned with, and I believe this will only affect a very few number of properties. Parking uses abutting T3 R areas -- now listen to this -- that were legally nonconforming prior to the adoption of this Code will not have a continued automatic 20 year extension, as provided in this section -- and I have copies for everybody -- but shall instead seek an exception before the City Commission within 90 days of adoption of this Code. This includes accessory parking approved as transitional uses under prior zoning codes that were also deemed a legal nonconformity prior to the adoption of this Code. I've been advised that this will not affect the SD-12. Commissioner, you have agreed with the MNU changes, right? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. The only thing that I want to make a comment on -- and I'm going to ask -- because all of the mapping changes were -- are really affecting your district. That's kind of -- so I don't want to really comment on what, you know, you guys have worked out. I think that that is really -- Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- an issue that needs to be addressed with you as the district -- Commissioner Sarnoff I'm going to ask you for a friendly amendment 'cause I believe that they, on Item 15, are saying that appeals to the PZAB (Planning & Zoning Advisory Board) and the City Commission should be free and not the current $500. I would suggest to you, Commissioner, that to make it free will invite shenanigans. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Right. And -- Commissioner Sarnoff But 200 -- I'm sorry. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: All right. Go 'head [sic]. Commissioner Sarnoff Two hundred dollars, I think, would certainly make it affordable, and yet somewhat onerous enough that somebody will use discretion. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Right. And I just want to make -- if you don't mind me adding onto the suggestions that were made by MNU. Again, the requested map changes, I'm going to defer to you on those with staff because they are all your areas, most of them are all your areas or another Commissioner's, not mine. And I know that I have totally vetted out the mapping issues in my district, so I really want to make sure that that stays with you. As far as the requested Code changes, I want to make sure that -- and I agree with the majority of the stuff that Elvis has City ofMiami Page 86 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 presented, but do -- I would like a response, though, from staff regarding each one of these items, and I believe it's about 28 items. Is it 28? No. It's 36. Commissioner Sarnoff Thirty-three. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Thirty-six items, yeah. Thirty-six items. So I just would like to understand -- Where's Ana? Ana? I would -- before the next reading on this item, I would like to have a response to each one of them. I do accept his amendment on the -- on item number 15, is it? Yeah, item number 15. Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. It's Item 15 and 35. I think they said it twice. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay, so I just would want to -- I would like to have a response to the one through thirty-six. I agree with much that was presented today by Elvis -- in Elvis's presentation by MNU, but I'd like for you to give me a response to each one before we have our next meeting on the -- whenever it is. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We will do that. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Next hearing, okay? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We'll do that. Commissioner Sarnoff And ifI can, Item 32, I have a recommendation. I think you should require the applicant to provide an electronic file that can be sent out to various organizations in the City. 'Cause I think at this point we're at that electronic stage that you guys do not have to require various people to come to the City to pick up documents, et cetera, et cetera. I think that now we're at that stage where you can just produce the file by e-mail, or at least have it electronically available. You've put -- you have -- Commissioner, if I'm not mistaken, Spence -Jones, you have put Bennett Pumo -- his issues on the record as well. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. I would like to make sure that we include the amendments from Ben and from Mallory. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Let me close my remarks. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Sure. Commissioner Sarnoff I've provided each one of the Commissioners "A Guidebook to New Urbanism" that was sponsored by Elizabeth Plater-Zyber [sic]. Well, all could do is read what it says. Sponsors -- I'm sorry. It does say Duater [sic] Plater-Zybert [sic] and Company, so maybe it was your company. In this book, New Urbanism, written just when she got the contract to do Miami 21, you will find three-story buildings, 185 pictures of new urbanism. There are four-story buildings. They have 19 pictures in there. And five stories and above, you got to search. I think there are three or four. So call me outlandish, call me crazy, but a transfer of development right on the Boulevard will stimulate owner -occupied, owner -user buildings in a financial market that is more constipated than anything you've ever seen in your life. The best use of someone's property is their own use of their property, and that will stop speculation stagnation. Thank you all. Chair Sanchez: You know, when you think about where this all started -- Oh, Commissioner, are you --? Commissioner Gonzalez: No, go ahead. Go ahead. City ofMiami Page 87 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: When you think about when all this started, 'cause usually there's a start and a finish, you follow this back and really it goes back to 907.3 in the City, where the City had a building boom and under 11000, buildings were popping up all over the City, but based on the Code of 11000, when you look back, you see that 11000 probably started with a good idea. It probably started as Miami 21, but through the time, amendments were made, and the ones that benefited from 11000 were developers and land -use attorneys. They took a concept and made it into a Frankenstein. And through those years, this is what you got throughout the City based on 11000, which could have been built with all the rights, with all the air rights, with all the benefits that they were able to get. And not only in Little Havana, Flagami, all over the City, these projects went up. And if you look at -- through the City today and you see why there's a reason why we need to come up with a new code is because you have all these scars throughout the City, and these are buildings that were built that really were abutting R-1, fransitioning into neighborhoods. So that's why all these neighborhoods got together and they pushed to change the zoning code and focus on a better plan for Miami. That's when Miami 21 started. And you're right, Commissioner. This is the time for us to do it because I'll tell you -- and I agree with you. If we wait and we're going to have three Commissioners up here, you know what they're going to say? I don't know the plan. It's a very complex plan. I'm going to need two years to learn it and so on and so on and so on, and you're never going to get it done. Great cities are made with great vision and Miami 21 has that potential. We are a young city. When you compare ourselves, 117 years, to other world -class cities in this great nation of ours, we have that potential. The only problem with Miami is that it's grown too fast. And it's grown too fast because we just happen to live in paradise and people want to live here. Through the good times and the bad times, people want to live here. We have an opportunity to make this city a better place and really focus on the things that make Miami a true urban city. Miami 21 has all the elements to improve that. And believe me, it will improve the quality of life for our residents. Is it perfect? No, it's not. You know, we could sit back and say when is it going to be perfect? When are we all going to agree on something? That's impossible. We're never going to agree on everything. But when you look at 11000 and Miami 21, I could tell you this much, I've been here for ten years; 11000, with all the changes, compared to Miami 21, Miami 21 is more understandable and easier to comprehend than 11000. With all the amendments that are made now, the question is, what we approve the next generation of Commissioners and mayors here are going to have to make sure that they safeguard that plan to make sure that it doesn't get out of whack as 11000 did. I'm going to talk about some of the things that have already been proffered, and you know, I'm not going to waste any more of the time because I think some of the amendments that have been proffered based on the church, based on the charging $250 and not allowing a free process where anybody's going to come here and appeal everything. But also, the DDA was one that was proffered by the Commission, which I wanted to put out, which is I agree with the six year extension. I think it's the right thing at the right place for development in downtown and also Section 1. But let me talk to you about one thing I don't agree on. And now, I'm not going to get into the legality of lawsuits under Bert J. Harris, although I could make an argument, but I'm not. I'm not going to make an argument. I think that we all agree that we could do this to a point where we minimize the risk of our taxpayers and do something that's good for the City ofMiami, and we could do it. But I'll tell you one thing we can agree, at minimal, there will be defense expenses to address all these issues, but if we do it right, those expenses will be minimal. I do not agree with the current height limit as proposed in Miami 21 in the Upper Eastside, which is 85 to 100 feet. I don't agree, and I cannot support it. However, I cannot support the 35 feet either. And I cannot support the 35 feet because I think that it's going to do more harm than good. And in my opinion, my decision is based on policy and economic reasons. However, there can be a compromise. Because the Upper Eastside has the great potential to be one of the best corridors that Miami's got, with the surrounding neighbors and the corridor in itself and the businesses. That could be our Lincoln Mall. That could be our Miracle Mile. That can be a place of gathering for our community. But I'll tell you one thing. I personally think that the 35 feet is unrealistic. I think it would hold back the progress, and I'll tell you why. You'll be forced to have surface parking lots and Dumpsters, something that attracts a bad element in down -- in that area that the residents will love to see that area cleaned City ofMiami Page 88 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 up, get that bad element out of there and provide an infill of businesses to come to that area. There is a compromise. And that compromise, Commissioner, when the time comes -- and I'll debate it with a healthy debate with you -- I think should be the recommendation in MiMo, which is 53 feet in height, which I believe still allows you the opportunity to accomplish what we want to accomplish up there and limit the City's liability of possible lawsuits. Now you talk about Miami 21 and why I voted against it last time. And my concern was that based on the information that had, my concern was that, yes, it would open up us to legal ramifications, and the City -- when we say the "City," it's the taxpayers that'll probably end up picking up the cost to defend those costs [sic]. And the arguments could be made that, you know, when they've been settled out of court -- and most of about all of them have been settled out of court -- no matter what, it still costs the City something. So I think it's important that we now take the time to move forward and allow this City the opportunity on first reading -- and there're some issues still that need to be addressed. It is not perfect yet, butl could tell you that all the amendments that have been made and what we've been able to have a healthy debate today, we have been able to resolve some of those issues. To allow Miami 21 to continue forward and vote on this -- because I'll tell you this much, it is not about us, folks. It isn't about us. I wasn't born a Commissioner. I'm not going to die a Commissioner. I wasn't a mayor; I'm not going to die a mayor. Our decisions should not be based on the next election. It should be based on the next generation in our community. And we have an opportunity here that we have not had -- I have not had in ten years, to make a difference to make this City much, much better, but we still have a lot of work. I still have some concern on some of the amendments that would like to have opportunity to work out with the Administration and possibly before the second hearing. On the height restriction on Coral Way, for the sake of harmony, I'm going to pull back and do more research as to the properties. And let me tell you why. I'm all for protecting R-]s and neighborhoods. And if anybody can make an argument in here about protecting R-1 s and intrusions on residential neighborhoods, it's the Upper Eastside, especially Morningside. Miami 21 allows you the opportunity to look at those properties on a one -by -one case based on building capacity. There's going to be some properties that will not be that height. They will have low density because of the size of the property. So I think there is a compromise here to move Miami 21 forward. And I want to put on the record that as long as the 35 feet height restriction is there, I cannot support that friendly amendment. I am prepared to move Miami 21, but cannot support that friendly amendment on the 35 feet height restrictions. So I just wanted to put that on the record and encourage my colleague who has been a champion of that to compromise with this Commission on the 53 feet so we could move forward to the second hearing ofMiami 21. So at this time, I would yield to -- and pass on to Commissioner Gonzalez, who's the last speaker, and then we'll hopefully get a motion and a second. And as I stated before, let's have a procedure in place where we'll get a motion and a second, we'll accept the technical changes, and then we'll take up the PAB friendly amendments one by one. Commissioner, you're recognized for the record. Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah. I'm willing to support Miami 21, and I'm also willing to support the staff recommendations, but one thing that cannot support is the MNU amendments, something that was handed to me two minutes ago, you know. And this is a practice that has been used in this Commission for many, many years, and I don't know when it's going to stop or if it's ever going to stop. People are accustomed to come to the Commission meeting and during a debate, they come up and they give you letters that include ten pages, letters that include five pages, programs that include 25 pages. Do they pretend that we recess the meeting and go back to our chamber, to our offices and read the letters and read the proposals and then come back and every 15 minutes somebody comes up with a bunch of paper? You know, I have a serious problem with that. And like I said, you know, I'm willing to support Miami 21. I'm willing to support the staff recommendation, butt will not vote in favor ofMiami 21 if that includes the MO U [sic] amendments. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Let me -- Commissioner Gonzalez, let me take full responsibility for the recommendations. What basically wanted to have included -- and I think that my staff has already talked to some of the MNU folks -- was based upon the presentation City ofMiami Page 89 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 that Elvis made -- I thought the -- many of the items, I was definitely in agreement with. When I looked at the list of -- that's different from the presentation. Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: If some of those items are included in the presentation -- Commissioner Gonzalez: You know, this by itself Commissioner, is another Miami 21. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I understand. Commissioner Gonzalez: It's a second Miami 21 program. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: All right. Commissioner Gonzalez -- so my comments were based upon what was in the presentation itself that we saw here as a full body. These additional recommendations were included in that overall presentations, but there were additional things that were included as well that was not in the overall presentation. So what I've asked is to have staff at least on some of those items, get back with the MNU folks. That's why I asked the question ofAna before it comes back to the second reading, the 36 items that are on there, that she gives a response to each one of them so at least we have a sense of what -- why staff is supporting it, why they're not supporting it, and from that standpoint, we make a decision. But we can deal with this from now -- Chair Sanchez: Second reading. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- until the next reading, second reading. So I'm fine with that. I just thought that what Elvis presented today on behalf of/1-NU, what we saw physically, I thought that many of those items on there were very reasonable items. So that's -- that was the reason why -- and I asked him to give me a copy of that, but it was a different -- he gave me a copy of the presentation, but it was not the same thing that Commissioner Sarnoff actually passed out. So with that being said, I think that we have an agreement on that from MNU that we would work through those items before they're actually included in as amendments. Commissioner Gonzalez: You know, I wanted to be clear. During this week, a lot of members from the press have called me, and they had the sense that I would rubberstamp whatever the Administration would present and whatever the Mayor would present. Let me tell you. I'm not here to rubberstamp anything for anybody. IfI don't believe in something, I'm going to vote against it. And if you know, the entire program has to go down, it will go down, as far as I'm concerned, okay. So having said that, you know my position. You know, either take it or leave it. I'm ready to vote either in favor or against. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. I believe there was a -- was it a motion? Not a motion. Chair Sanchez: No, no, no. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Was it a --? Chair Sanchez: We don't have a motion and a second. What I'd like to have is -- Commissioner Gonzalez: I'm willing to make a motion to approve Miami 21 with the staff recommendation. Chair Sanchez: And the technical changes. Commissioner Gonzalez: Pardon me? City ofMiami Page 90 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: And the technical changes. Commissioner Gonzalez: And the technical changes. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Gonzalez: And then we'll take whatever amendments the Commissioner want to propose. Chair Sanchez: So we have a motion and a -- do we --? I need a second. Need a second. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I second it. Chair Sanchez: Okay. There's a motion and a second to approve Miami 21 based on the staff and the experts' recommendation with the technical assistance [sic]. Now before we vote, now we open up to the friendly amendments. However, we should take up the amendments that have been given to you since the last meeting, which are the PAB, to vote on them one by one. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I believe that we need to vote on Miami 21. I think that -- I believe that we need to vote on the motion and then take separately -- take each amendment. Chair Sanchez: Madam Attorney, that's not what you told me. Ms. Bru: There's a motion to adopt Miami 21 with the technical amendments that the Administration has proposed, which are technical changes that I think there's 13 of them. Is that correct, Ana? Mr. Hernandez: Would you allow Ana to, in essence, clarify the -- Ms. Bru: I think that -- Mr. Hernandez: -- recommendation? Ms. Bru: -- needs to be clarified -- Chair Sanchez: Yeah. Ms. Bru: -- first of all. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: The amendments -- the -- what the staff presented to you was -- when we say the technical, there was the technical modifications we made. We made the modifications to the maps that we -- the presentation I gave. And in addition to that, what I did was I went through the -- those recommendations that were made by PAB that staff did not have an objection. So I believe, if I'm understanding the motion correctly, that is what you are approving Chair Sanchez: Right. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- with Miami 21. City ofMiami Page 91 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: But now we take up these amendments one by one and we vote on them. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Well, you -- if you accept the amendments as I presented them -- and I said I had no objection to some of the PAB -- you would be taking -- Chair Sanchez: Perfect. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- the ones where the Administration had an objection. Chair Sanchez: Okay, perfect. Got it. Okay, so there's a motion and a second. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: We had a motion and a second, but I just wanted to be -- I just want to be clear. Our amendments, are we going to take it right after that? Commissioner Sarnoff Well, here's -- and here's how I see this. You may very well get this a three -- could get 3-2. You could get 5-0, for all I know. Well, probably not. That was awful dumb of me. I know how I'm going to vote. If you do it that way and you get -- you don't get a 3-2 in favor or 4-1 in favor, then we need to -- we should bring it back and see what it is that would entice the Commissioners, based on amendments, to vote. Chair Sanchez: But if it passes 3-2, it passes. Commissioner Sarnoff It does. I agree. Chair Sanchez: That's the way -- okay. So there's a motion and a second as presented. We are voting on SP.1. SP.1, Madam Clerk. Madam Attorney, is it a resolution or ordinance? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Mr. Chairman, but are we voting --? Chair Sanchez: It's an ordinance. Yeah. Read the ordinance into the record, followed by a roll call. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) our amendments in here. This is what want to know. Commissioner Sarnoff No. They're not in. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So then we -- oh. Commissioner Sarnoff They're not -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: All the amendments that talked about -- Commissioner Sarnoff They're just -- they're testing the ground. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Commissioner Sarnoff They're -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Fine. Commissioner Gonzalez: We're voting on Miami 21 with the staff recommendation, all right. Chair Sanchez: Yes. City ofMiami Page 92 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yeah, but you have -- there's amendments that your -- your amendments are not included. Commissioner Gonzalez: No. They will be included later on, right? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Oh, okay. So then it's going to be no for now. Ms. Bru: IfI may. You're going to vote now Miami 21 as recommended by staff which staff has already articulated what the recommendations are of changes, technical changes, some atlas changes, and also, staff articulated PAB recommendations that they had no objections to. So all those items that, in fact, amend the document that is before you is what you're voting on. Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, actually, I don't have any amendments because my concerns have been -- has been satisfied by the Administration. They're taking correction action -- corrective actions on the issues that we had. The only concern has been the religious organizations. And I understand that is even protected by the federal law, right? Commissioner Sarnoff RL UIPA (Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act). I have a case, if you want to read it, right here. Commissioner Gonzalez: Okay, so I don't even have to propose an amendment on the religious organizations as long as they are protected -- and I've been told that they will be protected automatically, so I don't have any amendments. Commissioner Regalado: But if they are protected by the federal law, which they are -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. Commissioner Regalado: -- what it means is that they have to go to court. Commissioner Gonzalez: Not necessarily, unless the City, you know, becomes totally insane and decide, you know, to force them to go to court. Commissioner Regalado: But what if a group or religious group wants to build a church in a residential area, a new church, not the existing church? Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, that would be different. That would be different. Commissioner Regalado: That's what I'm saying. Commissioner Gonzalez: What I'm frying -- what I've been frying to protect is, you know, same as you. I have received a lot of calls from different existing religious organizations that have concerns on what will apply -- be applied to them, you know, in their existence as they are today in reference to addition to their buildings, in reference to parking lots that they're using now, and that is my concern. That's what I'm looking to be protected. Now, if a new congregation wants to build a new church in a neighborhood, then they have to go through the regular procedure. It will be the same thing as doing it now, I guess. No? Commissioner Sarnoff RL UIPA gives them a lot of -- you remember, we voted on the Buddhist temple -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Exactly. Commissioner Sarnoff -- in north Grove -- south Grove, excuse me. City ofMiami Page 93 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. Commissioner Sarnoff And we were -- that one had some personal liability issues, and I believe a Hollywood council was actually sued in total and we were warned, and it turns out it was very true. I remember reading -- very recently they did an amendment that talked about RL UIPA in Miami 21. It wouldn't matter whether it was in there or not. RLUIPA governs, period. And I think the City Attorney, when confronted with an applicant that said wait a minute, you know, you're about to step on my RL UIPA rights, would say to the -- and I'm not speaking for you, Madam City Attorney, butt suspect what you would say is what -- regardless of what our zoning code says, RL UIPA's going to govern. Ms. Bru: Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission, I think that early on during the presentation of staff she indicated that there were three revisions that we have made since this document was printed, which were legal. And one of them is is that we revised it of uses -- we have revisions of uses in the civic category to conform to the legal standards as per the federal Regulations [sic] Land Use and Institutional [sic] Persons Act, RL UIPA. Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Ms. Bru: So -- and that is already included in Article IV, Table 3. Commissioner Sarnoff I saw that. Ms. Bru: To the extent that we still have to look at that any further to make sure that we have in fact afforded all the protections required under RL UIPA, we will do that between first and second. But I think we've already addressed most of those concerns. Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Chair Sanchez: All right. There's been a motion and a second. Read the ordinance into the record, followed by a roll call. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chair Sanchez: All right. We're taking -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Roll call. Chair Sanchez: -- a vote on SP.1. Roll call. Ms. Thompson: Roll call. Commissioner Regalado? Commissioner Regalado: Well, I can't vote on something that I don't know which amendments are going to be approve. Because what if none of the amendments or all that you want are approved? Then you're voting -- Commissioner Sarnoff I'm voting no. Well, I shouldn't tell you what -- Commissioner Regalado: So I have to vote no. And the reason I have to vote no is because we're doing this thing backwards. Commissioner Gonzalez: Okay. Commissioner Regalado: And so -- City ofMiami Page 94 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Gonzalez: Roll call. Commissioner Regalado: -- but that's the way -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Roll call. Commissioner Regalado: -- it's done here in Miami. We don't -- we do not know how many amendments are going to be approved, so we don't know if we like Miami 21 or not, so my vote is no. Ms. Thompson: Continuing with the roll call. Commissioner Sarnoff? Commissioner Sarnoff My vote is no, but I will be tendering some amendments. Commissioner Gonzalez: Okay. Ms. Thompson: Vice Chair Spence -Jones? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. I'm going to agree with Commissioner Regalado. I mean, part of me says I vote yes with my amendments, but you're saying that I can't make my amendments. Commissioner Sarnoff You -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I didn't say you couldn't make the amendments. I think -- Commissioner Sarnoff You -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- what we were -- Commissioner Sarnoff Let me help the Commissioner. I believe what they're -- they're testing the water right now to see which Commissioners will vote for merely staff -recommended changes, not including our desires. So Commissioner Gonzalez is saying, essentially, I like what the staff has recommended and nothing else, and I got a second for my motion, and I want to see if this Commission will agree with me. Commissioner Gonzalez: Not necessarily because I don't know the amendments that you're going to present -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well -- Commissioner Gonzalez: -- so how can I know or not know -- Commissioner Regalado: Exactly. That's what I said. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- what you -- what I don't know. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: But the answer's no. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Regalado: That's what I said. Commissioner Gonzalez: I might vote on -- Commissioner Sarnoff He might like them. City ofMiami Page 95 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Gonzalez: -- some of your amendments -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: (INAUDIBLE). Commissioner Gonzalez: -- on a positive way, and I might vote no on some of the other amendments. Commissioner Sarnoff Fair enough. Chair Sanchez: Come on. Let's stay in order. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Well, then it would be no because ifI can't put my recommendations - Chair Sanchez: Okay. Well, let -- before you do that, for the record, Madam Clerk, call her for a vote, and she'll vote how she wants to vote. Ms. Thompson: Vice Chair Spence -Jones? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No. Chair Sanchez: Okay, the motion dies. All right. We need to entertain another motion. Commissioner Sarnoff I'd like to do a motion. I'd like to do a motion the same as the one just proposed by Commissioner Gonzalez with the following amendments. I'd like to amend the Zoning Code atlas to change the area bordered by Miami River on the north, Metrorail Northwest 1st Sfreet on the west, Southwest 14th Sfreet on the south, and the Metromover station on the east from T6-36 to T6-48. Chair Sanchez: Hold. Let me write all the -- are you going to proffer -- how many amendments are you proffering? Commissioner Sarnoff Quite a few. Chair Sanchez: All right. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Excuse me. Chair Sanchez: Well, let's -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Commissioner, there is no T6-48. Commissioner Sarnoff Oh, I -- there was a year ago. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes. What was -- it is -- it goes from T6-36 to T6-60. Commissioner Sarnoff I know, but you remember that old -- you know that old section of your computer that said "Store All, " you'll find it in there. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: So you would be -- Commissioner Sarnoff I'd be bringing back T6-48, that grand old girl that went to bed a year ago. City ofMiami Page 96 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Sarnoff I would also, Mr. Chair, accept the recommendations by Barbara Bisno, and I believe I have those here. Everybody got them before lunch. Barbara Bisno -- Chair Sanchez: Those are the same recommendations from the previous meeting? Has there been any changes to 'em [sic]? Commissioner Sarnoff I think she added something about -- at the very end of the page -- yeah. She has a September 4 amendment. I'll show it to you. Chair Sanchez: Well, can I see the amendment? I'm okay with the original intent, but -- Commissioner Sarnoff And I'll just continue. It's not -- the amendments lodged and provided to us -- it's in my area -- by Eileen Bottari -- that's this packet that she gave us right here. Chair Sanchez: What amendment is that? Commissioner Sarnoff This is what Eileen Bottari handed us. It's all in my area. Chair Sanchez: Yeah, but what does it pertain to, I mean? Commissioner Sarnoff I believe it would be the ones -- it would be TL [sic] instead of T4 R on the west side of Palm Grove along Northeast 4th Court, 63rd to 77th. T4 L allows for commercial offices. The properties at the end of the block are small, one-story three to four apartment units that abut directly to single-family homes. Chair Sanchez: Has the staff had an opportunity to look at this and give a recommendation? 'Cause, you know, the most important thing here is that we need to know what we're voting on. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: We don't disagree. IfI could explain that we heard this earlier. We had some understanding that the neighbors who were -- there were neighbors who opposed this, one piece of this, and that's why we never changed it in the history of it. So if no one else comes out to oppose it, I think there's no need to oppose it. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Chair Sanchez: What exactly is the location of this? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: This is in -- Commissioner Sarnoff Palm Grove. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- west ofMorningside, in which there are three small areas. And the changes, essentially, are to pull these small areas back into -- Chair Sanchez: So it goes from a T4 L to a T4 R -- Commissioner Sarnoff Restricted. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes. Chair Sanchez: -- on number [sic]A? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yeah. So it's residential rather live/work. City ofMiami Page 97 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: B is changed from what, a TR-4 [sic] to a 3T-L -- Ms. Plater-Zyberk: To go -- Chair Sanchez: -- T3 L? Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes, to -- that goes back to single-family -- Commissioner Sarnoff Limited. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- with an out building. Chair Sanchez: But it also has the Boulevard at 35 feet. Commissioner Sarnoff No, no, it doesn't. Chair Sanchez: Yes, it does here on C. Boulevard at 35 feet, C. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: I would suggest that that be handled separately 'cause you're going to -- Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. I will handle that separately. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: -- talk about that anyway. Chair Sanchez: All right. So you're willing to pull that out and maybe -- Commissioner Sarnoff Yes. Chair Sanchez: -- we'll listen to it in Chapter 23? Commissioner Sarnoff Correct. Chair Sanchez: So for the amendment -- for clarification, you're pulling out C, which is the boulevard at 35 feet? Commissioner Sarnoff Correct. Chair Sanchez: Okay, that's why you got to be careful with these last-minute papers that are -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah. Chair Sanchez: -- turned in and we're voting on stuff. You know, the devils are in the detail, but the devils are in the detail when they sneak it to you in the last minute. B has also been changed from a TR-4 [sic] to a T3 L. I don't have a problem with that. I do have a problem with C, which has been taken off for the record. Thank you. Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Okay. Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Sarnoff All right. I would agree with the DDA recommendations. If you want, I'll just read them in terms of -- does anybody want to -- read them completely into the record, or can I go A, B --? City ofMiami Page 98 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: Well, it's my understanding that from gathering just so -- I don't have any problems with the six year in Section I How many are you proffering? Commissioner Sarnoff Well, I'm proffering A. C, we agreed -- I had proffered a four-year automatic approval, two-year extension in the DR'. Chair Sanchez: I don't have a problem with that. Commissioner Sarnoff I just want to make sure the Commissioners don't either. I happen to agree with them under Section D and E. There needs to be greater clarity. There needs to be objective standards proffered in the Code under which the Zoning administrator makes decisions. I would agree with them on I and J-- Well, I, again, is they need to provide standards, and J, I amended from the glitch bill that we get a report in one year to see how Miami 21 is doing. Chair Sanchez: All right. Are the rest of the Commissioners are keeping abreast of these amendments? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I am, but I'm -- Chair Sanchez: Okay. All right. What other amendments, Commissioner? Commissioner Sarnoff I would amend, as I said before, with regard to SD-12, it is no longer an SD-12. Parking uses abutting T3 R areas that were legally nonconforming prior to the adoption of this Code will not have a continued automatic 20-year extension as provided in this section, but instead, shall seek an exception before the City Commission within 90 days of adoption of this Code. This -- Chair Sanchez: And I believe the Administration has -- is okay with that. Commissioner Sarnoff Correct. Chair Sanchez: Correct? Okay. Commissioner Sarnoff All right. Commissioner Regalado: And you say that -- Ana -- how many of those cases citywide? You mentioned nine, right? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: On the SD-12s? Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Whatl told you -- the number citywide on how -- Commissioner Regalado: Were 900, but you mentioned this amendment, this kind of nonconforming, 9. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I don't know if Lourdes gave a number. She's coming. Ms. Slazyk: I don't know what the exact citywide number is, but I'll tell you, in the years that I've been kind of doing the zoning permits, I've probably only come across like a half -dozen of them. Of the 68,71 transitional use parking things, over the years, by attrition, they've sort of -- a lot of them have gone away. I've not seen enough to say that there would be hundreds and hundreds of them. There is no database for it, so I don't know if we could ever find an exact number. But City ofMiami Page 99 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 I've probably only seen a half -dozen over the years. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Now here is -- and I want Commissioner Gonzalez to listen carefully. These are some of the MNU changes. I'm not taking them wholesale. Number 6, Bayside, which pertains to my neighborhood, 61 st and 62nd Sfreet, 61st Street is Lemon City Avenue, that is the oldest street in all of the City ofMiami and has the oldest house at 645 -- 654 Northeast 61 st Sfreet, and it was built in 1901. The neighbors were told they could get petitions to change the zoning from R-3 to T3 R. They've done so, but DPZ has not agreed to that. I want to go to a T3 R. I will leave for any other Commissioner Coral Way and 27th. I'm moving down to page 2. I think they're right, that replace the phrase "by right" throughout Miami 21 with "allowable." That would be consistent with case law. There is no such thing as by right. The word is allowable. I think they're right. The public benefits bonus should apply to any T6 property that abuts a T3 zone as of today to prevent future upzonings, and this should include parkland. I think what I said earlier -- and they were the one that clued me into this -- change the design criteria of Section 4.27, Article IV, Table 12, so exactly exists of our current version of 1305 in 11000. As I said, and you were here before, what they did was they took certain words out of it and they put it in a chart. And we should also include 1306, which empowers 1305. I agree with their number 6, which is apply the 30 percent maximum second story lot coverage in M--21 (Miami 21) for T3 R and T3 L to T3 O. I think they're right. That would prevent some McMansioning [sic]. I agree with them on number 12. Permits -- do not allow a construction permit issued in error to remain. That happens to be the law. Commissioner Gonzalez: Are those your amendments? Commissioner Sarnoff Yes. Commissioner Gonzalez: Okay. Commissioner Sarnoff Section 13, I think all appeals to the City -- and I think the City has agreed to this -- should be de novo. I think they also wanted to determine that you do not have to exhaust your administrative remedies. I think that was conversed. I don't think it's exact. I can agree to that. Item 15 -- and this came up many times today. I think we have to work on the 25 waivable items in the waiver section. I think it's too many. I think it's too significant. I know one of the things that concerns me is that the Zoning administrator has the ability to waive parking requirements. And I could just tell you that I've been walking all of the buildings in the downtown area, and across-the-board, I'm hearing there's not enough parking. So all the great ideas of social engineering -- the struggle is happening, and that is, I don't think we should add to the parking require -- I don't think we should add the problems we're going to have with parking to a Zoning administrator that can unilaterally, without criteria, reduce parking requirements without a set of criteria. That has to come to some kind of review. That's my biggest issue. I agree with their item 16, change the sentence to read `failure to give notice under this section shall invalidate a decision on a waiver." Otherwise, why would you have due process? To say "shall not" doesn't give you any due process rights. Item 19, it says strike the sentence of 7.1.4.1 because it is a denial of due process. Failure to observe the procedures set out herein shall not provide a separate cause of action to challenge the decision -making of the board. You're taking away due process rights, and I think that's exactly what they want are due process rights. Ms. Bru: Commissioner, can I justget a point of clarification -- Commissioner Sarnoff Sure. Ms. Bru: -- from you on that issue? When we talk about due process, the other question that you have to ask, to whom the due process is due. And from this sentence here, I'm not clear on what is meant to happen if we accept these amendments. Anyone can challenge a procedural defect City ofMiami Page 100 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 even if they're not entitled to due process? Is that what we're saying? Commissioner Sarnoff No, but you're taking away due process rights from anybody who could challenge. You're not defining who the challenged person is. I believe that's defined in the previous sections of your Code under the definition section of what is an affected party. Ms. Bru: I just think that this provision here is very ambiguous. And obviously, just looking at it for the first time and without reading it in context -- Commissioner Sarnoff I understand. Ms. Bru: -- it causes some alarm -- Commissioner Sarnoff Well, and that's -- Ms. Bru: -- because procedural deficiencies can be cured very readily. And sometimes, you know, depending on, again, you know, to whom it is that we're frying to safeguard -- Commissioner Sarnoff It's a -- well, it's first reading, and if you want to come back with a position -- Ms. Bru: Okay. Commissioner Sarnoff -- paper explaining if this is limited to the aggrieved party or if this -- Ms. Bru: Okay. Commissioner Sarnoff If you read the sentence in and of itself, you're taking a due -- you're saying any mistakes we make don't count, essentially, or it could be read that way. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Commissioner Sarnoff the -- you're going through the list of points from the -- Chair Sanchez: Amendments. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- but -- amendments from the requested Code changes, correct? Commissioner Sarnoff I'm reading from the MNU's. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yeah. Commissioner Sarnoff I haven't taken all of theirs. There's a few of them I'm not including. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay, 'cause I -- Commissioner Sarnoff If you want, I'll just say I agree with 19, 20, 23. Twenty-three has been brought up by everyone involved in this process. There is no objective criteria set forth for the Zoning administrator. I agree with 24, 25. Why do you get 35-foot-tall antennas in a T3? I wouldn't want a 35-foot antenna next to my house. That's that one. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I think that what Commissioner Gonzalez was stating earlier, that he -- before any real decisions are made on each one of these items that -- as an amendment, he felt uncomfortable with doing that. And that's why I added on to his comments -- because I wanted to respect what he brought to the table -- and said, okay, well, fine, you know. In principle, I'm in agreement with everything that -- the majority of things that are on here, but these are new City ofMiami Page 101 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 things that are being presented to us today, and that ifMNU and staff could at least get together on the 36 items that they have and provide a response to those, that way that would give Commissioner Gonzalez and any one -- Chair Sanchez: All of us. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- of us the opportunity to fully understand what, you know, is being proffered. I think that was his concern. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Chair Sanchez: And for the sake of fairness, Commissioner, I mean, the amendments that you're proffering at the last minute -- once again, I think it's important that we know exactly what we're voting on here. The only amendments that we have had an opportunity to really go through and really study them and come up and really make an intelligent decision on have been the PAB's that we have had for quite some time, based not only on the recommendation of staff but also as to whether they object the changes that have been proffered. You know, to come out and put these amendments on, I mean, it's just -- it makes it harder for me ifI don't have time to study them and look -- to vote. I just can't vote on a blank paper that you have proffered -- How many amendments are you going to proffer, 25, 36? Commissioner Sarnoff There's probably -- the ones that I've included, probably about 25 of them. Mr. Cruz: Mr. Chair, ifI may? Chair Sanchez: No. Public hearing is closed, sir. Thank you. Commissioner Regalado: Can I say something? Chair Sanchez: All right. And I just have a concern with that. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Chair Sanchez: I have a big concern with that as the Chair. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And -- Commissioner Regalado: Would you yield one second -- Commissioner Sarnoff Yes. Commissioner Regalado: -- Commissioner Sarnoff? We can do two things. Either we sort of break the Sunshine law and are indicted by the State Attorney by going office to office, do you agree with MNU amendment? Or we can do what is done in the Congress of the United States. You put amendments. There is no last-minute amendment. The only place to place amendment is when you are voting. You cannot place amendment when you're getting a briefing or when you're out having coffee or when you're doing the budget workshop. The only way to get amendment is the American way. You put it to a vote. You -- how many amendments every bill has in the Congress of the United States? Hundreds. That's why the stimulus money was so complex, the stimulus bill, 'cause a lot of people place amendment. So I am -- it's either you like it or you don't. I mean, I -- the 25 that he's placing, I would -- ifI can -- add 14 more. Ms. Bru: May I make a suggestion, Chairman, members of the Commission? City ofMiami Page 102 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Bru: A lot of these amendments are -- we're dealing with a highly technical land regulation code that, in many respects, has taken quite a bit of time to study, to be able to give you recommendations based on analysis of how this is going to be implemented, and it has to be consistent. The document has to be consistent. To the extent that some of these discreet recommendations are technical and we have not seen them before, I would suggest that you direct the Adminisfration to consider them between first and second, as Commissioner Spence -Jones is suggesting. Now there are many other equally technical amendments that the Adminisfration is saying we have had time to study those, and in fact, you know, we have discussed them with some of the stakeholders that have proposed those. Now those we can dispatch with today because they have had time to consider them, but the ones that we are seeing for the time today that are highly technical, perhaps you should give us the opportunity to take a look at them and have your professional planning staff recommend as to whether or not this would be consistent, and we can take them up -- Commissioner Regalado: Can I --? Ms. Bru: -- on second reading. Chair Sanchez: Second reading. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And Commissioner Reg -- Commissioner Regalado: Please, can I say something? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- can I just add this onto you, Commissioner Regalado? Chair Sanchez: Vice Chair Spence -Jones, you're recognized for the record. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I want to -- I would want to afford Commissioner Gonzalez the same opportunity -- if he's saying to us, you know -- if you said it to me, Commissioner, I would like to have a little bit more time before I made a decision on something that's being presented. Now I was the one that brought it up because, quite frankly, I like the changes thatMNU has added, but when we got -- when I asked Elvis to give me a copy of the presentation, it was very different from what was passed out to me from Marc, from Commissioner Sarnoff. So I just want to respect what our fellow colleague is asking us to do. Between now and second reading, let's at least look at the 36 changes and be in agreement with them all and be briefed. No, we cannot violate the Sunshine Law. I know you're not asking for that to happen, but at least give him, me, and everybody else the opportunity to fully understand it. That's it. Commissioner Regalado: Look, I'm fine. I just want to say that this highly technical staff changed several things because we said it right here. They were really eager and willing to change even the gas station with two floors. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I understand, but your colleague asked us -- Commissioner Regalado: No, no, no. And I respect -- and I -- look, I totally -- so I have two choices, either I vote for the deferral so we can study this, or I vote no because I'm not going to vote yes on this that I don't support because it doesn't have the amendments that I think it should have. So -- Chair Sanchez: But -- Commissioner Regalado: -- that's my -- so, you know -- City ofMiami Page 103 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Commissioner Regalado: -- it's either deferral or I vote no. Chair Sanchez: But those aren't the only two choices. The choices that we could do here is that we have on the floor is the following. We could put those amendments that the Commissioner proffered, including those that Vice Chair has also proffered -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And I have something I want to proffer. Chair Sanchez: -- on the floor and she'll put. They will have an opportunity to be vested [sic] by the Adminisfration and the -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Vetted. Chair Sanchez: -- experts, and we could vote on them on second reading. But if we can move forward on the Miami 21, the Barbara Bisno amendments, and possibly the PAB's recommendation that have been presented to us, we could vote on that and move the ball. Now we have 'til second reading with these amendments. The whole thing is that when you're put out in the last minute, it doesn't give us an opportunity to make an intelligent decision on that. So giving us an opportunity 'til second reading to sit down with the Adminisfration, we may come back, it might have to take your 25 and her 10 and his 5 and -- Commissioner Regalado hasn't proffered any amendments to this -- you know, will give us an opportunity to look at them all and then vote them up or down one by one. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: IfI may? I think there's -- in addition to what I said on the PAB, the ones that we have looked at, there is some that I know it has been discussed here where we would be -- we already kind of have reviewed, so it would be accepted. It would not be an issue, at least from Adminisfration. As far as for the DDA, I know they had given it to us. We had looked at it. So the things that they're requesting, we don't have an objection. I think the 1305 and the design guidelines and what you spoken about the Zoning administrator and the Planning director being able to have criteria, we have no objection. Our intention, frankly, is to have it as clear as possible. So that would -- Chair Sanchez: But -- Lourdes [sic], but with -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- be all the DDA -- Chair Sanchez: -- all due respect, the amendments that have been proffered by Commissioner Sarnoff -- I'm the chairman of the DDA -- I am aware of those amendments, okay, so I could vote on those amendments intelligently, okay. I don't know if the other Commissioners have been briefed by DDA staff or I don't know where they're at on that issue. And I agree with about, I would say, 75 percent of some of his amendments. But I think it's important for us to study those amendments; give them to you, to the staff for you to look at and give us a recommendation. That's the only argument that I'm making here. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Okay. Chair Sanchez: And I think we could do that from first reading to second reading. So I think the appropriate thing to do here today is, once again, make a motion and a second to accept Miami 21 with the technical changes, with the Barbara Bisno amendments that we all know and we all have studied -- and I don't think there's any questions to that -- and possibly take even up the PAB's recommendations as to the ones that are no objections. Or you could take 'em [sic] up one by one and we'll vote at 'em [sic], but we have to vote on them. And then the recommendations that have been proffered by Commissioner Sarnoff and the Vice Chair could City ofMiami Page 104 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 go to the Administration and we could address those from today to second reading and vote on 'em [sic]. It's that simple. Commissioner. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Commissioner Sarnoff you have any more you're proffering? Commissioner Sarnoff No. I do. I want to respect Commissioner Gonzalez 'cause I want to respect that he hasn't had an opportunity. I don't think the Palm Grove is an issue, and I don't think Bayside is an issue, and I certainly hope the T6-48 -- I don't know if the T6-48 is an issue. Is that an issue for you? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We would like to take a look at it. Commissioner Sarnoff Okay, so that's an issue. Is Palm Grove an issue for you? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: No, it's not. Commissioner Sarnoff Is Bayside an issue for you? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Bayside -- have you looked at it? Commissioner Sarnoff 59th Street -- 61 st -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: You're referring -- 61 st Street. Commissioner Sarnoff -- and 62nd Street. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yeah. It doesn't appear to be an issue. Commissioner Sarnoff And then what you -- and then there would be a resolution passed, ifI understand, asking that the MNU changes be studied and a position paper put together for the Commissioners. Chair Sanchez: To come back for a vote on a second reading. That would be the appropriate thing to do, giving us plenty of time to sit with the Administration, study them, and then either vote them up or vote them down. Commissioner Sarnoff And I would also then equally ask that the Little River Business District equally be studied and a position paper put on there, as well as the Bennet Pumo issues be studied and a position paper put -- And what I mean by that is I want to see his position and your response; his position, your response. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We will do that, if it's approved. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Listen -- Chair Sanchez: Whoa, whoa, whoa. Vice Chair Spence -Jones. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- I do not have an issue with if there is a concern by the sitting Commissioner on here that what's being proffered now on the nonconforming use based on the industrial park that I have in my district, you want to have a position paper on that, that's fine. I don't have a issue with that. By the time we come to the second vote, we should all be on the same page as to what needs to happen. Not an issue. There are other nonconforming issues that came up that are not included in what came in the Little River Industrial Park area that applies City ofMiami Page 105 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 to everybody's area 'cause it's the same nonconforming use. I don't have a problem with that. I'm willing to work on that, not an issue. Commissioner Regalado: Simple question. Chair Sanchez: Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Wait, wait, wait. Commissioner Marc Sarnoff, are you done with all your amendments? Commissioner Sarnoff Well, I guess for purposes -- and to acknowledge Commissioner Gonzalez's concern along with yours, Mr. Chair, I'd -- I could then leave the MNU paper and I could leave the Little River, Bennet Pumo paper to be studied; and with a strong indication to this Administration to achieve my vote, I would need to understand them and be convinced. Chair Sanchez: Perfectly fine. Are you done, sir? Commissioner Sarnoff Yes, sir. Chair Sanchez: All right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones, now you want to proffer your -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Chair Sanchez: -- amendments? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. The -- let me start with Buena Vista East. I understand that there's some confusion between T3 and T4. Neighborhood is saying one thing and the business area is saying another. I would like to ask that at least that before the next reading, that both people sit down and get on the same page. I'm just going to let you know I'm more inclined to go with what the neighborhood wants to see happen, so hopefully they can work through whatever their differences are. All right. The other one, which was already mentioned by Commissioner Sarnoff, I'm prepared to proffer this, but just, again, like I would give you the same as I'm giving to Commissioner Gonzalez, I will ask for Ben and Mallory to at least sit down with staff and whatever the key issues that were not included from the other Commissioners regarding nonconforming uses are now included in what you guys are proffering. I would like to see that happen so that everyone feels as though their part is included in the overall suggestions that we made. As far as the Overtown area, Ana, I want to make sure that we're very clear on the GI being CI. I know that there were some concerns on it. I just want to make sure that the housing issue is only dormitory use and that does not change, and the only way it changes is if there's a special area plan that is vetted out by the community that lives in that area. As far as the East Coast Fisheries is concerned, I do not have --I believe I'm willing to proffer anywhere between the T6-12 or T6-24 on the side that is abutting the expressway. But again, on the river side, on that area, I really would like to see it come back a little lower, the river side staying a little lower. And I believe we've already addressed the churches issue on my side, so again, you now, I got a million and one churches in my district so -- and a lot of them are in neighborhoods, so definitely I don't want to have any issues with my churches regarding this. And then last, but not least, again, just on the MNU side, as far as the presentation that was made today by Elvis and the MNUgroup, I'm in total agreement with the presentation, but I do want to make sure I respect, you know, a district Commissioner saying that he's not aware of all of those items that were being presented at the last moment. So I just want to make sure that there's communication that takes place. I don't want to make the meeting any longer, Elvis. I just want to make sure that we're on the same page. And with that being said, I am ready to -- Chair Sanchez: Okay. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- vote. City ofMiami Page 106 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Chair Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a question. When is second reading? Ms. Bru: Second reading for the Miami 21 ordinance would have to wait until we have the comp -- well, second reading can happen at any time, but it can't become effective until after the comp plan is approved. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So when are you planning on doing it? That's the question. Commissioner Regalado: So -- Ms. Bru: If -- Commissioner Regalado: -- you have to send it to Tallahassee, DCA, right? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I have to send it to Tallahassee. I will be sending it -- on Monday or Tuesday, it goes out. They have 30 days to review and bring the comments back. At which time, I look at what they have said, respond to the comments, and then I can bring it back to you. Commissioner Regalado: So you have -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: So it's not sooner -- Commissioner Regalado: -- 30 days -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- than 30 days. Commissioner Regalado: I'm sorry? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Not sooner than 30 days, which is the time that DCA has to review the land -use amendments. Commissioner Regalado: And then you need to respond to DCA. I mean, your history with DCA is not that good, so you have to respond to DCA and send it back. Is that the procedure? That's the protocol. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We respond back to them with the comments. What I can tell you is -- yes, exactly. That is the process. Commissioner Regalado: That is the -- so it's about two month and then we schedule -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: It depends on the comments. If the comments are not -- it's -- they're -- they can address (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- Mr. Hernandez: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, Ana -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- (UNINTELLIGIBLE) quickly. Mr. Hernandez: -- ifI may. Basically, we're looking possibly at 45 days, possibly the last meeting of October -- Commissioner Regalado: Okay. City ofMiami Page 107 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Mr. Hernandez: -- if without any, let's say, you know, reliance -- we need the -- their comments. We need to address their comments, so it's around 45 days, end of October at best. Commissioner Regalado: So end of October is a week away from the general election. Mr. Hernandez: Well, the second -- I think the second meeting in October would be the 23rd [sic]. Commissioner Regalado: Ten days off the general election. So we're back to the same scenario that they're concerned. There is an election. There are two new Commissioners, and the new Commissioners say, we don't understand that. So you're really cutting it close. So we are depending on how efficient is DCA so we can do this. You are a very optimistic person, and I -- Mr. Hernandez: I think you have to be, Commissioner. Commissioner Regalado: I think that you have to be. Mr. Hernandez: In this life and line of business, you got to be. Commissioner Regalado: But listen, there is -- you see, this is transparency. From the beginning, you should have said, well, this we do today, fine. You get a headline in tomorrow's paper, but there's no -- the law of probability says that this is not coming back to this or the other Commission until November because we all know what DCA -- you guys have to go to DCA. You guys have to -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: It is a -- Commissioner Regalado: -- respond. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- Commissioner, it's -- the process is the 30-day review, but I -- Commissioner Regalado: Ana. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- just want to -- we have -- I just would like just for the record that they Commissioner Regalado: No. The record -- you just -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- actually have been supportive of Miami 21. Commissioner Regalado: -- said for the record it's the 23rd [sic]. The earliest that it can come back is the 23rd [sic]. Well, let's hope that it does, but you know, I just think that you need to tell the people the truth because the second reading is not going to be similar to this one because there is going to be other people here. Three people will be here; that's for sure. The other two people won't be here. Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, I believe that we need to do what we need to do and let the State do whatever they have to do, and then let -- Commissioner Regalado: And that's -- Commissioner Gonzalez: -- Obama do whatever he has to do, you know. Commissioner Regalado: -- and that is what I'm saying. City ofMiami Page 108 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: What I'm saying is that we should tell the people the truth. We're doing this but we don't know when is second reading. Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: You know, you're saying, oh, in second reading, we assume that we all going to be here discussing -- Commissioner Gonzalez: But -- Commissioner Regalado: -- all of these amendments on second reading -- Commissioner Gonzalez: -- Commissioner -- Commissioner Regalado: -- but it's not the case. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay, okay, okay. I'm chairing the -- Commissioner Gonzalez: But Commissioner, let me tell you. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Guys. Commissioner Gonzalez: Everybody that is here today and a lot of people that are not here today that are watching on TV know this business better than you and I, and they know that they have to wait, and they know that the possibilities and they know -- you know, they know all of that. I mean, you know, they're not new to the business. Commissioner Regalado: Fine by me. Chair Sanchez: All right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay, Commissioner Gonzalez and Commissioner Regalado, are we on the same page right now? Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. Commissioner -- Madam Chair, I'm going to withdraw my motion. Chair Sanchez: All right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Oh. Chair Sanchez: Couldl be recognized to make a motion, Vice Chair? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. You are recognized -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- Mr. Chair. Chair Sanchez: I make a motion on SP.1, which is the proposed Miami 21 Code and atlas. The motion is to approve Miami 21 by staff and experts' recommendation, with the technical changes, to include the Barbara Bisno's amendments and to include Planning Department analysis of PAB recommendation for Miami 21, the ones that have no objections from the staff. So move. City ofMiami Page 109 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Is there any discussion on this, at all? Is there any discussion on this? Chair Sanchez: Madam Attorney -- Commissioner Regalado: No. Commissioner Sarnoff No, 'cause I'm going to -- Chair Sanchez: -- read the ordinance into the -- Commissioner Sarnoff It's not -- is it an ord -- I guess it is an ordinance. Commissioner Gonzalez: I believe Ana has some concern. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I mean -- well, it seems like some of the recommendations were not included in this. Chair Sanchez: Yeah. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I guess what I'm -- just a clarification. We had recommendations of things that we had, like recommending for approval that we can take immediate action and bring it, and in addition to that, I thought we were bring back to you for second reading a white paper on MNU, on -- Chair Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- Ben Pumo, on the Little River Business District -- Chair Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- on the Design District, I understand that we got -- Chair Sanchez: Include that -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- direction to meet with the -- to get with the neighbors and the business owners, take a look at the 12 and the 24; on the East Coast Fisheries, that we would bring it back to you, and I believe -- and it was a question that I had once the discussion was over was Commissioner Sarnoff brought the waivers list, and if you wanted to include that as an analysis of bringing back as do we have any recommendations where those waivers -- either bring our position or be able to find reduction since you had expressed a concern. So that's what I was writing. That's what I thought it was going to be your direction in order for us to bring it back. Chair Sanchez: My motion would include Commissioner Sarnoffs and the Vice Chair's amendments that were proffered to come back for second reading, yes. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay, so that I'm happy with. So we had a motion; we had a second. Chair Sanchez: Ordinance. Commissioner Regalado: I would -- ifI may, Madam Chair? City ofMiami Page 110 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes, you may. Commissioner Regalado: I would request that you will (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the whole amendments because there are amendments from MNU regarding Coral Way and 27th Avenue, which is pertaining to the need of the resident. If you want me, I can make it as an amendment. Chair Sanchez: The maker of the motion does not accept those amendments. Commissioner Regalado: So you do not want to protect the 27th Avenue corridor and Coral Way? Chair Sanchez: As it is voted on, no. It could come back -- Commissioner Sarnoff Wait, wait, wait. That was -- that -- with all due respect, Mr. Chair, that was part of the MNU amendments. Commissioner Regalado: Right. That is part of the MNU -- Chair Sanchez: If you want to send them for a study and come back -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: It was -- Chair Sanchez: -- they could come back as a study. I'm not recommending them to be approved. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Right. It was a white paper in order for us to -- Commissioner Sarnoff Right. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- come back and give you our -- like the Commissioner mentioned, on one side is what the request and then our opinion. That's what's coming back for second reading. Chair Sanchez: Okay, so they will travel with the others. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: That's the -- Chair Sanchez: Okay, fine, fine. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- whole list ofMNU. Chair Sanchez: Okay, fine. All right, so I would call the question. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Madam City Attorney, are you ready? Well, we had a motion, and we had a second. Ms. Bru: Right. So we have -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Read -- Ms. Bru: -- an ordinance that -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- can you read into the record? City ofMiami Page 111 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Ms. Bru: Just to make sure that we're all on the same page, we have an ordinance that has been moved by the Chairman, and that ordinance would adopt Miami 21 with all the technical and legal and atlas changes that were described by the Administration, plus all the recommendations that the -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Staff. Ms. Bru: -- Planning Advisory Board did that the staff had no objections to, and additionally, you're accepting all the amendments that Commissioner Sarnoff referred to, Little River, MNU, Ben Pumo, the waivers list, those will come back as having been studied and having been subjected to a white paper so that they can respond to those. And then, possibly, you will be considering those for adoption on second reading. Chair Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Bru: Am I missing anything else? Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, let me be clear -- Commissioner Sarnoff Do you have the DDA in there too? Ms. Bru: We are at this time adopting the amendments of the DDA. Commissioner Sarnoff Oh, we are adopting? Chair Sanchez: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff We're adopting the amendments. Ms. Bru: Is that correct? Commissioner Gonzalez: Let me be clear. We are not approving any of these amendments at this time, right? Ms. Bru: The DDA amendments, I heard, were part of the Chairman's -- Chair Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Bru: -- motion -- Commissioner Gonzalez: The DDA amendment -- Ms. Bru: -- to be approved at this time. Commissioner Gonzalez: Okay. DDA amendments, fine. Commissioner Regalado: So the DDA amendments are the only one? Commissioner Gonzalez: Barbara Bisno's amendments, I don't have any problems. Commissioner Regalado: The Barbara Bisno -- Chair Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Bru: And the Barbara Bisno's, which is something that we've had since August 6. City ofMiami Page 112 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Regalado: But not of the MNU. Ms. Bru: The MNU is coming back for consideration -- Commissioner Regalado: No, no, no, no. None of the MNU are being approved here today. Ms. Bru: Today, no. Commissioner Gonzalez: No. Ms. Bru: No. Commissioner Regalado: That was my question and you just answer. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We have a question. Julie, I'm not sure if you had read -- was it another -- the changes, the amendments by Eileen Bottari? Commissioner Sarnoff Yeah. I was asking about that, Palm Grove -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Were those --? Commissioner Sarnoff -- Bayside. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: So those would be amendments that -- Commissioner Sarnoff Those are going to be studied or those are going to be accepted? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: On Eileen Bottari, we said Administration -- we don't have an objection to that. Commissioner Sarnoff Ask the maker of the motion if he would -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: And the Bayside, the 61 on the historic, we don't have an objection either. Commissioner Sarnoff Palm Grove and Bayside, would you agree --? Commissioner Regalado: So just the last question, Mr. Chairman, and I'll -- Chair Sanchez: Hold on, hold on. I'm the maker of the motion. What is it you're proffering, Commissioner Sarnoff? Commissioner Sarnoff I'm asking if you'll accept the Palm Grove and the Bayside amendments that staff is rec -- Chair Sanchez: I don't have a problem. Staff, do you have a problem with that? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We do not. Chair Sanchez: Okay, so accept that, as the maker of the motion. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: All right. Commissioner Regalado: So one last question. City ofMiami Page 113 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes, Commissioner Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: We are voting on changing the Code of the City ofMiami today here only on things that the Adminisfration likes? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No, no, no. We -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Not necessarily. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- I thought that we were -- Commissioner Regalado: No? Or let me rephrase. We are -- the question is, we are voting here only on what the Adminisfration doesn't want to challenge? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No, Commissioner Reg -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Not necessarily. Commissioner Regalado: The rest, we are not voting. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Not necessarily. Commissioner Regalado: The rest, we need -- they need to study and recommend. Yes or no? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No, Commissioner Regalado. What was communicated by your fellow colleagues on the dais is that some of them feel uncomfortable with some of the language that's being presented, and all we're saying is we want to give them an opportunity to understand it. Commissioner Regalado: I understand. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: You know, so -- Commissioner Regalado: And you're saying -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- I've had an item. I want my Little River Business Industrial thing to get passed right now, but if my fellow -- Commissioner Regalado: I understand what you're saying. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- colleague is saying that he wants to add some additional things on it, I'm just trying to -- we're just frying to be fair. Commissioner Regalado: I understand -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I support the MNU's -- Commissioner Regalado: But you know me, I'm slow. I just want to know. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No. You're not slow. You're not slow. Commissioner Gonzalez: No. You're not slow. Commissioner Regalado: I'm just want to know if -- City ofMiami Page 114 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Come on now. Commissioner Regalado: -- we're voting here only on what the Administration likes and wants and agrees -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No. We're -- Commissioner Regalado: -- and will not challenge -- Chair Sanchez: No. Commissioner Regalado: -- today? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No. We -- Commissioner Gonzalez: No. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Mr. -- Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Commissioner Gonzalez: No. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Commissioner Regalado -- Commissioner Regalado: Yes, we are. Commissioner Gonzalez: No, not necessarily. Commissioner Regalado: Okay. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: I'm chairing the meeting, and the meet -- I know y'all want to be here to have a evening party tonight -- Chair Sanchez: Call the question. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- but listen -- Chair Sanchez: Call the question. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- let's be -- You chairing or me? Chair Sanchez: Can't chair 'cause I made the motion. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. Let me finish. Let me -- Chair Sanchez: The proper thing to do is just call the question and let's vote on the item. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: No. The proper thing is to let me chair the meeting, okay. I just want to be clear 'cause I also want my fellow colleague, Commissioner Regalado, if he's concerned about something, we should make sure he's clear on it, and that's what we just did, okay? And Commissioner Rega -- Commissioner Regalado: What? City ofMiami Page 115 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Commissioner Regalado, I just want you to be comfortable and know -- I want you to be comfortable as to why we're making the decision. It's not based upon whether or not the Administration wants us to do it. It's based upon your fellow colleagues, a few of them on here -- Commissioner Regalado: I am -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- wanting to have clarity. Commissioner Regalado: -- comfortable. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Right. Okay. Commissioner Regalado: I am comfortable. I'm just, like you said, giving clarity. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. With that, let's call the question. Commissioner Gonzalez: May I have the floor for a minute? Commissioner Sarnoff Can I indulge the Chair of one last thing? Commissioner Gonzalez: May I have the floor? Commissioner Sarnoff And I know this is not the time to try your patience, but -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Are you --? Okay, first of all, Commissioner Gonzalez asked me first Commissioner Sarnoff Sorry. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- and then Commissioner -- Commissioner Sarnoff Okay. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- Sarnoff and then after that, we're going to call the question and we're going to get past this item. Commissioner Gonzalez: You know what -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- the solution would have been? To hire five different consulting companies and do five different Miami 21s, one for each district. Because you know what? I don't interfere on anybody's district, but when I have a group that tried to interfere in my district, then I have a serious problem because I do respect, but I demand respect. I was elected to my position to represent my district. I was not put here by a finger, okay, and I'm going to represent my people and my district as long as I'm sitting in this chair. So maybe the solution would have been, Mr. Mayor, to hire five different consulting companies. And I don't care ifMiami 21 cost $5 million. Maybe we should have spent $25 million, then each Commissioner will do his own Miami 21. I will do mine, and we will all be happy, a happy family. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Well, Commissioner Gonzalez, we definitely appreciate your comments on that. We are going to now ask Commissioner Sarnoff to briefly give us his comments. City ofMiami Page 116 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Sarnoff I'm just asking if the -- if Commissioner -- I guess he's sitting as Commissioner now -- Sanchez would accept the T3 amendment that I put in before on legal nonconformities as part of his motion, and if also you would include the study for the T6-48 for the Brickell area? I know you wanted to study that. I just wanted to make sure it was clear. Chair Sanchez: Maker of the motion accepts it, so -- Commissioner Sarnoff Thank you. Chair Sanchez: -- and the study, I don't have a problem. Call the question. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Call the question. Ms. Bru: Let me read the ordinance. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Roll call. Ms. Thompson: Roll call. Commissioner Sarnoff? Commissioner Sarnoff Very reluctantly, yes. Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Regalado? Commissioner Gonzalez: No. Commissioner Regalado: Well, we're voting here on possibilities, not on fact. I thought that Miami 21 was supposed to protect the neighborhoods. What protects the neighborhoods is only a possibility, a study, and a recommendation in the future that we don't know when, so my vote is no. Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Gonzalez? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Chairman Sanchez? Chair Sanchez: First reading, yes. Ms. Thompson: Vice Chair Spence -Jones? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Again, making sure that the recommendations for Buena Vista and the industrial area and the areas that we discussed today from MNU are all included in it before the next meeting for the second reading. Ms. Thompson: So that the -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Ms. Thompson: -- ordinance has been passed on first reading, 4-1 -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Ms. Thompson: -- as amended. City ofMiami Page 117 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 SP.2 08-01315ct ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY MODIFYING, ADDING AND DELETING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS WITHIN THE INTERPRETATION OF THE 2020 FUTURE LAND USE MAP SECTION OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT; AND CHANGING THE 2020 FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATIONS OF SPECIFIC PROPERTIES OF THE CITY OF MIAMI TO IMPLEMENT APPROPRIATE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND ELEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MIAMI 21 ATLAS; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AS MODIFIED. 08-01315ct Analysis.pdf 08-01315ct Miami -Dade County Public School Concurrency.pdf 08-01315ct PAB 01-07-09 Reso.pdf 08-01315ct CC Legislation (Version 5).pdf 08-01315ct Exhibit A OBSOLETE 08-01315ct. Exhibit A -Miami 21 Land Use Map- SUB.pdf 08-01315ct CC FR 09-04-09 Fact Sheet.pdf 08-01315ct--Submittal-Petitions Opposing the 35' Height Limitation to Miami 21.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 1.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 2.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 3.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 4.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 5.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 6.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Illustration of Changes requested by Eileen Bottari.pdf 08-01315ct--Submittal-Correspondence-Grace Solares.pdf 08-1315ct-Submittal-Charles Tavares.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Little River Business District Document.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Asian American Hotel Owners Association.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Map.pdf 08-01315ct--Submittal-MNU Proposed M21 Changes, Bullet Points.pdf 08-01315ct--Submittal-Miami Neighborhoods United Analysis of Miami 21's Final Draft c 08-01315ct- Exhibit B- New.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Towers of Blue Lagoon.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Silvia C. Wong.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Miami River Commission September 4, 2009.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Proposed Amendment Detail Changes to Miami 21.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-File Number 05-01536c Document.pdf 08-01315ct-Submittal-Barbara Bisno September 4, 2009.pdf LOCATION: Citywide APPLICANT(S): Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager, on behalf of the City of Miami FINDING(S): PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD (PAB): Recommended approval to City City ofMiami Page 118 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commission on January 7, 2009 by a vote of 5-4. Pursuant to Section 62-31(e) of the Miami City Code, the PAB will consider this item on September 2, 2009. PURPOSE: This will modify, add and delete Land Use designations within the interpretation of the 2020 Future Land Use Map section of the Future Land Use Element; and change the 2020 Future Land Use Map designations of specific properties in accordance with the Miami 21 Atlas. Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sarnoff, Sanchez and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado Chair Sanchez: All right. Well take up SP. 2. That's the land -use change, proposed Miami 21. Can we get a motion? Commissioner Gonzalez: Move it. Chair Sanchez: There's a motion by Commissioner Gonzalez. Can we get a second? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Second. Chair Sanchez: There's a second. There is -- Madam Attorney, there is no public hearing on this, correct? The public hearing was held on -- Julie O. Bru (City Attorney): The public hearing that you had this morning -- Chair Sanchez: Took care of all three of them. Ms. Bru: -- that went on through the afternoon was for all three items. Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. Chair Sanchez: Okay. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion on the land -use change proposed to Miami 21 ? Most of the debate was early on on the code and atlas. Hearing no discussion on the item, read the ordinance into the record, followed by a roll call. Ms. Bru: Chairman, I do want to put something on the record. I want to make sure that all the recommendations of the PAB (Planning Advisory Board) Board are being considered because you do have to consider their recommendations. So to the extent that they're part of this ordinance, it's fine. To the extent that they're not, then the Planning Department needs to put those on the record, and you need to consider them. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Commissioner Sarnoff All District 2 comments would also apply to SP.2. Ana Gelabert-Sanchez (Director, Planning Department): I just would like to read something on the record. We seek approval for the items of SP.1, as presented, and SP.2, modified for what is in your package, designating the Edgewater area to be identified in the 20 future land use map to allow properties designated restricted commercial in this area a maximum FLR of 17. This amendment is necessary for the consistency ofMiami 21 atlas. That was the change that was proposed on the Edgewater. That amendment needed to be made into the land use. So that's the language for Edgewater. City ofMiami Page 119 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Madam Attorney, does that take care of it? Ms. Bru: Okay. All the recommendations of the PAB have been put on the record now? Chair Sanchez: We need to do that. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We had made -- on the recommendations of PAB, there was no objection. I believe they were -- Ms. Bru: Well, if there were recommendations of the PAB as to which you had objections, you still need to put them before this Board. Chair Sanchez: So we need to put them on the record. Ms. Bru: They need to be considered and debated, either voted -- you know, approved or not. Chair Sanchez: Okay, the -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: The -- Chair Sanchez: -- recommendations as to the PAB that we voted on the last one -- didn't we vote Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: You voted on the -- Chair Sanchez: -- on the rec -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- ones that the Administration -- Chair Sanchez: Yeah. We voted on the ones the -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- had no objection. Chair Sanchez: -- Adminisfration -- the other ones -- Bru: Those were recommendations regarding the Code. Now you're talking about the comp plan. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: No. It was -- the -- what the -- the PAB made recommendations on the Code, on the atlases, and there were eight of them, out of which we had no objection -- Chair Sanchez: And we voted on that. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- to four, but there were four which we still had objections. So what the Commission voted is the ones that we had not objection. Chair Sanchez: Exactly. Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. Chair Sanchez: So we don't have to vote on the other ones. Ms. Bru: Well -- okay. All right. Well, I just wanted to make sure that there -- all the City ofMiami Page 120 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 recommendations of the PAB had been put before them for their consideration. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I believe -- I think this -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- might serve as a clarification. Chair Sanchez: For point of clarification. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: For a point of clarification, the four that we did -- the Administration did not agree are on the MNUpaper, so that would be coming back to you -- Chair Sanchez: On second reading. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- on the second reading -- Chair Sanchez: But we have not approved them. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- with our analysis. Chair Sanchez: We've approved only the ones that had no -- Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: You have only approved the ones we didn't have objection. So the ones that there is objection, those are in the MNU papers, so that will be coming back to you on second reading for discussion. Chair Sanchez: Yes, ma'am. All right, SP.2. SP.2, there's been a motion and a second. No discussion. Madam Attorney, read the ordinance into the record, followed by a roll call. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chair Sanchez: Roll call. Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Point of -- Ms. Bru: I'm sorry, as modified. Ms. Thompson: Thank you. Chair Sanchez: As modified. For the record, as modified. Roll call. Ms. Thompson: Roll call. Commissioner Sarnoff? Commissioner Sarnoff I don't mean to be dense, butt have to ask this question. When you said -- does this include then the Planning Advisory -- the Planning Department -- the PAB's recommendation where you say no objection? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: On your motion? On what was approved? Commissioner Sarnoff What I'm voting for. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes. Commissioner Sarnoff So -- and where you have no comment, that is not part of what we're City ofMiami Page 121 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 voting on? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: On the ones that -- on the -- in part of the MNU, they make reference to those four -- Commissioner Sarnoff Not MNU. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: -- so you did not -- on the PAB had eight; four is -- are the ones we have no objection and are part of what you voted on. Commissioner Sarnoff Right now what I'm voting on? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: You're voting on the land use, which is to support the changes that were made on what you're proposing for Miami 21 on the first. Commissioner Sarnoff Does that include the Planning Advisory Board recommendations where you say no objection? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes, it does. Commissioner Sarnoff It does not include the recommendations of the PAB where you have no comment? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Correct. Commissioner Sarnoff Reluctantly, yes. Ms. Thompson: Continuing with your roll call. Vice Chair Spence Jones? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Gonzalez? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Chair Sanchez? Chair Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, as modified, 4-0. SP.3 08-01407zt ORDINANCE First Reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 23 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "HISTORIC PRESERVATION" TO REFLECT THE PROVISIONS AND LANGUAGE OF THE MIAMI 21 CODE; TO CREATE A PROCESS FOR THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR HISTORIC RESOURCES THROUGH THE PUBLIC BENEFITS PROGRAM; TO CREATE ADDITIONAL DEFINITIONS; AND TO ESTABLISH PROVISIONS FOR THE GRANTING OF EXCEPTIONS, WHEN THE RESULT LEADS TO THE PRESERVATION OF A SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC STRUCTURE; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City ofMiami Page 122 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 08-01417zt CC Legislation (Version 1).pdf 08-01407zt CC FR 09-04-09 Fact Sheet.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Petitions Opposing the 35' Height Limitation to Miami 21.pdf 08-01407ztSubmittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 1.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 2.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 3.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 4.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 5.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Commissioner Sarnoff 6.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Illustration of Changes requested by Eileen Bottari.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Correspondence-Grace Solares.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Charles Tavares.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Little River Business District Document.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Asian American Hotel Owners Association.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Map.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-MNU Proposed M21 Changes, Bullet Points.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Miami Neighborhoods United Analysis of Miami 21's Final Draft of 08-01407zt-Submittal-Towers of Blue Lagoon.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Silvia C. Wong.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Miami River Commission September 4, 2009.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-Proposed Amendment Detail Changes to Miami 21.pdf 06-02095-Submittal-Barbara Bisno September 4, 2009.pdf 08-01407zt-Submittal-File Number 05-01536c Document.pdf LOCATION: Citywide APPLICANT(S): Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager, on behalf of the City of Miami FINDING(S): PLANNING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval. PURPOSE: 1) On June 26, 2008, the Miami City Commission adopted Ordinance No. 13008, codified as § 23-6 of the Miami City Code concerning transfers of development rights for historic resources, thereby instituting the provisions for the Transfer of Development Rights for Historic Resources and establishing provisions for the sale of unused base development rights in the MiMo/Biscayne Boulevard Historic District; 2) This amendment would further the intent of the Transfer of Development Rights provisions establishing a market for the sale of Unused Base Development Rights through the Miami 21 Public Benefits Program. Motion by Commissioner Sarnoff, seconded by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Sarnoff, Regalado and Spence -Jones Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez Absent: 1 - Commissioner Gonzalez Chair Sanchez: All right. The last item on the agenda is the SP.3, and that deals with Miami 21 historic preservation. Commissioner Sarnoff I'm going to make -- well, go ahead. Ellen Uguccioni (Preservation Officer): Good evening, Commissioners. I'm very happy to be City ofMiami Page 123 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 here before you. This ordinance is a companion ordinance to Miami 21 -- I'm Ellen Uguccioni, by the way -- and it reflects the language ofMiami 21, but I think the most exciting thing about this is that Miami 21, with its public benefits portion, gives us a place to put historic TDRs (Transfers of Development Rights) for many of the properties that are now historic. Thank you. Chair Sanchez: All right. And TDRs only apply to historic properties. Ms. Uguccioni: Yes, sir. Chair Sanchez: Okay. Can we get a motion? Commissioner Sarnoff I'm going to move it with -- Chair Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Sarnoff -- an amendment. Chair Sanchez: All right. Let's get a second, and then we'll see if the maker -- the second accepts your amendment. Need a second. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Second. Chair Sanchez: Second by the Vice Chair. Commissioner Sarnoff, you're recognized for the purpose of discussion or placing amendments. Commissioner Sarnoff All right. In the TDR section, there should be a 35-foot height limit at the MiMo (Miami Modern) District from 51 through 77 Street, and it should have transfer of development rights, I believe, of 2.25 effective right transfers to transfer development for those who receive the transfer development rights. Chair Sanchez: All right. Discussion on the item. I would -- discussion, Commissioner, the 35-feet height resfriction. Okay. I have discussion on it. Commissioner, as I stated before, I -- first of all, I praise you for your devotion to the 25 [sic] feet. I think it is unrealistic to have 35-feet height resfriction along the Boulevard. I think we're all -- want to work on making sure that that boulevard has some height resfrictions. The 35-feet height restriction, however, I think do more harm than good and -- to that corridor for the following reasons. One is a policy issue, and the other one is on the economic reason. Biscayne Boulevard has a great potential. As it is, I think that the resfrictions of this property will stall the merits for revitalizing the MiMo District. There is no professional planning support and no record to support that concept, and I would respectfully ask you to amend your 35 feet to the recommendations that has been made by the MiMo District, the MiMo organization, to reflect the recommendation of 53 feet in height, which I think is comparable. I think that's the proper heights there that I could support. Other than that, I have some concerns, and that was one of the reasons why I voted last time on Miami 21. So I would respectfully request that you change the 35-feet height restriction to 53 feet, the recommendation by the MiMo Disfrict. Commissioner Sarnoff I understand what you're saying. It reminds me of a movie I once saw called "An Indecent Proposal." Once we established what we were, we were just haggling over the heights. Commissioner, I respect what you're saying. I know you care deeply for the MiMo Disfrict; I do, as well. Under my plan, it would effectively give them more TDRs based on the differential from what professional staff has said, which is, I think, your primary concern that T6 belongs on MiMo, and in some circumstances, T5. To those of us laypeople, that's 120 feet to 80 feet, and that is a concrete canyon. So our professional staff is proposing a concrete canyon. Under my theory, it allows for and affords a greater differential between the height and that provides them more of a transfer development right, which must be spent on the property and City ofMiami Page 124 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 banked within the property. I respectfully understand and I respectfully appreciate your concerns for the MiMo District. We just have a difference, and we're just haggling over the heights. Chair Sanchez: All right. On the current height limits that's being proposed by Miami 21, it is 85 to 120. Now I don't think anyone here can support that height because I think the neighbors of that area really want to have some control over the height, and they are right. Those are good neighborhoods that are abutting C-1. In this case, if it changes -- But I could honestly tell you that the compromise here would be the recommendation of the MiMo, which represents business, also the support of some of the residents in the area that clearly believe that the 53 feet is more incline with the infill of the area that I think would provide that area for better revitalization. Once again, I made it very clear. The 35 feet, what you're going to have out there is you're going to have -- you're going to continue to have surface parking lots, rear Dumpsters, and really, you're not going to see the proper revitalization that that area deserves. And the neighbors have worked very hard to revitalize that area and clean it up, and basically, what you're going to do with these rear parking lots is you're going to continue to have exactly what you have out there, prostitutes, crack addicts, just a bad quality of life. And I honestly believe that through this compromise, I think 53 is very reasonable. And the way that Miami 21 is set on this, it really is based on capacity, and some of those areas will still have protection of 35 feet in some areas. In some areas, I think 53 feet is reasonable, and some, on 70. So I continue to support the MiMo District recommendation for the area and cannot support the 35 feet based on the arguments that I've made in the past. One, I honestly believe that, at minimum -- I'm not going to get on the legal aspect of it, but it is going to cost us a lot of money to defend. It is going to stop development in the area, and I think it's going to hold back the progress of a great corridor that you represent. Commissioner Sarnoff And I just don't want it left unsaid. IfI fruly believed 35 feet brought prostitutes to the area and 53 feet wouldn't bring prostitutes to the area, I certainly would not support it. But if you have any anecdotal evidence that demonstrates hookers like to come to 53, but they won't come to 35, I am all ears. Chair Sanchez: I don't have any evidence. I don't have any evidence, but I could tell you this much. When you have proper design where your parking lot is not in the rear, and you have businesses that hide themselves from the public, then any business -- and I could tell you from experience 'cause I worked very hard on Calle Ocho, where I did not have parking lots, and I had an area that was economically flat -lined based on the criminals that were out there, the prostitutes, and the rock monsters. And I could tell you this much, the only way that you're going to be able to bring revitalization to an area is to bring development to the area. And I think that based on what you're doing, 35 feet, there is no merit for revitalizing the area, and I could tell you that, trust me, at the end of the day, it's going to do more harm than good. That's just based on my experience and thinking of an area that really has great potential. Fifty-three feet -- Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So -- Chair Sanchez: -- is very reasonable and comparable. You know, it's the medium ground. I want to be the guy who lands the plane in this situation. So it's up to you. I mean, I made it very clear that I cannot support a 35 height restriction along one of the most recognized corridors in the United States ofAmerica. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So, Commissioner Sarnoff, I mean, the ball's in your court. Commissioner Sarnoff Motion stands. Commissioner Regalado: Call the question. City ofMiami Page 125 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Who's --? Chair Sanchez: I would respectfully request to see if Commissioner Gonzalez is here for this vote, if we could get him out here. If not, we'll vote on it. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Is he here? Chair Sanchez: All right, let's vote on the issue. Commissioner Regalado: They took (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- he's not there. He left. Chair Sanchez: All right, let's vote on the issue. Commissioner Regalado: Call the question. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Who's -- are you chairing -- Chair Sanchez: Okay. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- or me chairing? Chair Sanchez: There is a motion and a second. We are on SP -- Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): 3. Chair Sanchez: -- 3. Read the ordinance into the record, followed by a roll call. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by Deputy City Attorney Maria J. Chiaro. Chair Sanchez: Roll call. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Roll call. Ms. Thompson: Roll call. Commissioner Regalado? Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Ms. Thompson: Vice Chair Spence -Jones? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Just want to be clear. It -- was your motion, Commissioner Sarnoff, 35 -- Chair Sanchez: Thirty-five feet. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- and yours was? Chair Sanchez: Fifty-three, the recommendation ofMiMo. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: And your mo -- and you're voting yes to support the 35, correct, Commissioner -- Commissioner Sarnoff That's the motion, yes. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- Regalado? Right? City ofMiami Page 126 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Commissioner Regalado: I'm sorry? Vice Chair Spence -Jones: You're supporting the 35, right? Commissioner Regalado: I'm supporting what is here. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Right, 35. Commissioner Regalado: I'm supporting what is here. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: Okay. That's what love about you. Let me just say, I think -- I'm going to have to say yes because I know it's unusual for me to -- I'm going to support the district Commissioner. It's what he wants to see happen within his area, and I would want the same to happen when it's time for me to vote in my area, so I support what he's trying to have happen there. Ms. Thompson: Continuing with your roll call. Commissioner Sarnoff? Commissioner Sarnoff Yes. Ms. Thompson: Chair Sanchez? Chair Sanchez: Well, first of all, I don't think it should be what the district Commissioner wants. I think we have a responsibility in this Commission when we were sworn in to protect the charter of the state -- the constitution of the state and the charter of the City. I think that, in my opinion, this will put us in a situation where -- I don't want to get in the legal term, but it will put this City in harm's way with potential lawsuits that we are going to have to address, and that's the concern that have on the 35 feet. I think it would have been a reasonable compromise to have 53 feet, but that's just my opinion. Butl don't think that we should vote on what one Commissioner's district want. I think we have a responsibility, as district Commissioner, to represent the entire city. And the beauty of it is that we may not agree on it, but you got to make an argument as to what you think is right. And at the end of the day, I honestly think that 35 feet is unrealistic and a mistake for the area, but that's just one vote of this Commission. With all due respect, Commissioner, I disagree with you and my vote is no. Ms. Thompson: The ordinance -- the modified ordinance has been passed on first reading, 3-1. Chair Sanchez: Okay. That takes care of our properly advertised 21 -- Miami 21. I think we need a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Sarnoff So move. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So move. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Chair Sanchez: Motion is in order. There's a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Sanchez: Thank you so much, ladies and gentlemen. Have a good one. Non Agenda Items NA.1 09-01011 DISCUSSION ITEM City ofMiami Page 127 Printed on 9/17/2009 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 4, 2009 Adjournment ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF FORMER STATE REPRESENTATIVE DOROTHY BENDROSS-MINDINGALL. DISCUSSED Chair Sanchez: But before we do that, I want to take the opportunity to recognize with us former State Representative Dorothy Mendris [sic] Mindingall, who is here. Want to take the opportunity to welcome you to City Hall, a pleasure to have you here. And we'll be back -- Applause. Chair Sanchez: -- we will be back in an hour. At this time the City ofMiami Commission stands in recess for lunch. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: But before -- Chair Sanchez: Yes. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: -- we leave, though, acknowledge -- I'd like to also acknowledge our former State Representative Dorothy Bendross-Mindingall that's here with us, that's sitting in on the Miami 21. Chair Sanchez: Yes. Vice Chair Spence -Jones: So let's give her a hand for joining us. Applause. Motion by Vice Chair Spence -Jones, seconded by Commissioner Sarnoff, PASSED by the following vote. Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Sarnoff, Sanchez, Regalado and Spence -Jones Absent: 1 - Commissioner Gonzalez City ofMiami Page 128 Printed on 9/17/2009