Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppeal LetterTEW CARDENAS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW AMANDA QUIRKS: Direct Line: (305) 536-8216 G-Mail: aq(* tewlaw.conl December 29, 2009 VIA HAND DELIVERY Mr. Anel Rodriguez Administrative Assistant II City of Miami Hearing Boards 444 S.W. 2nd Avenue Miami, Florida 33130-1910 FOUR SEASONS TOWER 15TH FLOOR 1441 BRICKELLAVENUE MIAMI, FLORIDA33131-3407 T 305.536.1112 F 305.536.1116 WWW, FEWLAW.COM Re: Notice of Appeal Regarding Outdoor Advertising Forms Submitted September 25, 2009 Dear Anel: On Friday, September 25, 2009, Carter -Pritchett -Hodges, Inc. ("Carter") submitted FDOT Forms 575-070-04 for the following locations (collectively, the "September 25 Locations")1: a) Contemporary Contractors - Miami Dade County Folio 01-3124-003-1440 b) GT Used Trucks - Miami Dade County Folio 01-3125-035-0360 c) Brickell Village Land Company - Miami Dade County Folio 01-0205- 000- 1131 d) CanPartners Realty - Miami Dade County Folio 01-4137-036-0020 e) The Little Old Real Estate - Miami Dade County Folio 01-3125-025-0280 f) Tanaka - Miami Dade County Folio 01-3113-025-0041 ' Outlook Media of South Florida has filed this appeal because Outlook has an agreement with Carter Outdoor for the placement of outdoor advertising signs in the City of Miami, pursuant to which agreement the applications for the September 25 Locations were submitted to the City of Miami. Therefore, Outlook has standing in accordance with Section 1800 of the City Zoning Code, which provides that "appeals to the zoning board may be taken by any person aggrieved or by any officer, board, or agency of the city affected by: (1) Any decision of the zoning administrator..." Since Outlook is is entitled to some of the September 25 Locations in accordance with the Carter/ Outlook agreement, Outlook is an aggrieved party and has standing to file this appeal. Mr. Anel Rodriguez Administrative Assistant II City of Miami Hearing Boards December 29, 2009 Page 2 of 3 On December 16, 2009, the City denied the applications for the September 25 Locations in an email to Rex Hodges, attached as Exhibit A. The reason for the denial cited by the City is "because Carter has no entitlement to such under the authority of either the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance, Carter's Settlement Agreement with the City, dated August 18, 2003, or the City's/FDOT's 1000 FT Pilot Program." Carter is Entitled to Permits Pursuant to the Carter Settlement Agreement Carter has a settlement agreement with the City of Miami (attached as Exhibit B), which permits the relocation of outdoor advertising signs. Since the Carter Settlement Agreement was approved in 2003, the City has issued at least five (5) relocation permits without asserting that Carter "has no entitlement" to permits for outdoor advertising signs. It is a mystery why the City is now asserting that Carter "has no entitlement" to permits, when the City has previously issued Carter permits in accordance with the Carter Settlement Agreement. Carter is Entitled to Permits Pursuant to City of Miami Zoning Ordinance Section 10.4.5 of the City Zoning Code permits outdoor advertising signs pursuant to settlement agreements. Carter has a settlement agreement with the City, and the City has previously issued at least 5 permits for outdoor advertising signs in accordance with the settlement agreement and the City Zoning Code. Therefore, Carter is entitled to permits for outdoor advertising signs in accordance with the City Zoning Code. Carter is Entitled to Permits Pursuant to FDOT's Pilot Program The City has implemented FDOT's Pilot Program to permit outdoor advertising signs that are at least 1,000 feet apart on the same side of the highway. The resolution implementing the program was approved on September 24, 2009. There are no further actions required to implement the program, and Carter is entitled to permits pursuant to FDOT's Pilot Program. The City is Estopped from Denying the Peiiuits "The doctrine of equitable estoppel may be invoked against a municipality as if it were an individual." Hollywood Beach Hotel Co.v. City of Hollywood, 329 So. 2d 10, 15 (Fla. 1976); Sun Cruz Casinos, LLC v. City of Hollywood, 844 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). See also Castro v. Miami -Dade County Code Enforcement, 967 So. 2d 230 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). The City has previously approved at least 5 other outdoor advertising permits for Carter, and is estopped from denying the applications for the September 25 Locations based upon the bare assertion that Carter "is not entitled" to the permits. TEw CARDENAS LLP Four Seasons Tower, 15th Floor, 1441 Brickell Avenue, Miami, Florida 33131-3407 • 305-536-1112 Mr. Anel Rodriguez Administrative Assistant II City of Miami Hearing Boards December 29, 2009 Page 3 of 3 For these reasons, there is no basis for the City's denial of the applications for the September 25 Locations. Please accept this notice of appeal, in accordance with Article 18 of the zoning code. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 18, all actions are stayed pending resolution of this appeal. Therefore, no outdoor advertising applications should be accepted or approved within 1000 feet of the September 25 locations, pending the outcome of this appeal of the zoning administrator's determination. fc cc: Pedro Hernandez Warren Bittner Orlando Toledo Veronica Xiques Pieter Bockweg Sincerely, anda Quirke 7 TEW CARDENAS LLP Four Seasons Tower, 15th Floor, 1441 Brickell Avenue, Miami, Florida 33131-3407 • 305-536-1112