Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHEPB 01-05-10 Transcripts1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CITY OF MIAMI HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD TRANSCRIPT OF JANUARY 5, 2010 HEARING AGENDA ITEM # 2 MIAMI SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 2450 SW 1' STREET APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NOT TO ISSUE A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR EIGHT BISHOPWOOD TREES LOCATED ON SW 3RD STREET BETWEEN SW 24' AND SW 25T" AVENUES 3:00 PM CITY HALL 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE DINNER KEY, MIAMI, FLORIDA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 » Chairperson: THANK YOU, AND YOU MAY BE SEATED. ANYONE WHO IS GOING TO GIVE TESTIMONY TODAY, WOULD YOU PLEASE STAND AND BE SWORN IN BY THE PRESERVATION OFFICER? NOW, IN THE ABSENCE OF OUR ATTORNEY, I'M GOING TO MAKE AN ATTEMPT AT THE LOBBY ANNOUNCEMENT, AND THAT IS IF YOU ARE HERE ON -- IF YOU ARE BEING PAID BY SOMEONE TO BE HERE, ON THEIR BEHALF, YOU ARE CONSIDERED A LOBBYIST, AND YOU MUST REGISTER WITH THE CITY CLERK. AND HERE IS OUR ATTORNEY NOW. AND HE WILL DO A BETTER JOB OF MAKING THAT ANNOUNCEMENT. BUT WHILE HE'S GETTING HERE, I'LL GIVE YOU MY ANNOUNCEMENT, AND THAT IS, IF YOU HAVE A CELL PHONE OR A BEEPER, PLEASE TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO TURN THAT TO VIBRATE OR OFF. THANK YOU. YOUR TURN. » City Attorney: I IMAGINE THE LOBBYING -- THE LOBBYING, AS I'M SURE YOU HEARD FROM OUR CHAIR, IF YOU'RE BEING PAID FOR YOUR APPEARANCE TODAY AS A THIRD PARTY, YOU NEED TO REGISTER AS A LOBBYIST WITH THE CITY CLERK BEFORE YOU ADDRESS THE HEP BOARD. BUT IF YOU'RE APPEARING, LET'S SAY, ON YOUR OWN BEHALF, FOR YOUR OWN PROPERTY, OR A PAID VOLUNTEER ON BEHALF OF A CIVIC GROUP OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU WOULD NOT QUALIFY AS A LOBBYIST. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE SEE US. THANK YOU. » Chairperson: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AT THIS TIME WE'LL HAVE THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE. *** THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS MIAMI SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL. 2450 SOUTHWEST FIRST STREET. JUST THIS IS AN APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF -2- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NOT TO ISSUE A TREE -REMOVAL PERMIT FOR SIX BISHOPWOOD TREES LOCATED ON SOUTHWEST 3rd STREET BETWEEN SOUTHWEST 24th AND SOUTHWEST 25th AVENUES. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? »Board Member Grafton: AND MR. CHAIR, I HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM THIS CASE, BECAUSE IT'S A PROJECT I'M WORKING ON AND MY COMPANY IS WORKING ON, THANK YOU. » Chairperson: OKAY. PLEASE GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. » Mr. Garcia: GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN, AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. I'M LUIS GARCIA, HERE ON BEHALF OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE, FLORIDA. » Chairperson: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE HAVE A STAFF REPORT? » Preservation Officer: YES, SIR. AT — [ INAUDIBLE ] YES, AT OUR LAST MEETING, THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT THE PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS, AND AT THAT TIME, THE FILE WAS UNAVAILABLE TO US AND WE SENT IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER A MEMO TO YOU WITH THE DOCUMENTS SHOWING THAT IT WAS PROPERLY NOTICED. SO THIS WAS CONTINUED BEFORE SO THAT WE COULD, IN FACT, MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD DONE EVERYTHING CORRECTLY, WHICH WE DID. THIS TIME WE NOTICED, AGAIN —AND HEARING SOME CONCERNS FROM THE NEIGHBORS ABOUT THE NUMBER OF POSTINGS AND SO FORTH -- WE MADE AN EVEN GREATER EFFORT. THREE TREES WERE POSTED BEHIND MIAMI SENIOR HIGH, AND WE NOTIFIED ALL OF THE ADJACENT PERSONS OF THIS HEARING. THE STAFF ALSO WANTED TO KIND OF EMBELLISH WHAT WE'D -3- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WRITTEN BEFORE SO THAT WE WERE CLEAR ON WHAT IS BEFORE THE BOARD. WHAT IS BEFORE THE BOARD IS WHETHER OR NOT THE EIGHT BISHOPWOOD TREES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE MIAMI HIGH SCHOOL PROPERTY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE REMOVED. WE HAD SAID IN OUR ORIGINAL REPORT THAT THE BISHOPWOOD TREE IS CLASSIFIED AS AN INVASIVE. AND THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE USE, CITY CODES AND CHAPTER 23, OUR CODE, AND CHAPTER 17 OF THE CITY CODE, WHICH DEALS WITH ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION, ALL SPEAK TO THE BISHOPWOOD TREE AS AN INVASIVE SPECIES. BECAUSE WE THOUGHT WE SHOULD MAKE THAT EVEN CLEARER, WE ADDED AN ADDENDUM TO THE STAFF REPORT AND INCLUDED SEVERAL EXCERPTS FROM MIAMI-DADE COUNTY. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY DOES NOT SUPERSEDE THE CITY OF MIAMI'S ORDINANCES. IT SUPPLEMENTS THEM, REINFORCES THE POSITION. SO WE ADDED EXCERPTS FROM CHAPTER 24, WHICH SPEAKS TO THE BISHOPWOOD TREE AS A PROHIBITED SPECIES IN THE LANDSCAPE MANUAL, SPEAKS TO IT AS A PROHIBITED SPECIES. AND THEN SECTIONS 8.1 OF OUR TREE -PROTECTION ORDINANCES, AND THERE ARE NO FEES. AND THE REMOVAL OF INVASIVES ARE ENCOURAGED. AND LASTLY, WE INCLUDED AN EXCERPT FROM JULIA MORTON WHO WAS CONTEMPORARY OF MARJORIE STONEMAN DOUGLAS AND SHE SPEAKS TO IT IN THE FLORIDA HORTICULTURE PROCEDURES -- PROCEEDINGS, RATHER, ABOUT THE BISHOPWOOD TREE, AND IT WAS INTERESTING FOR ME, BECAUSE I AM NOT A BOTANIST ORA PLANT PERSON, OTHER THAN AT HOME, SHE SPEAKS TO THE FACT THAT THE TREES WERE IMPORTED FROM CHINA, AND THAT THEY WERE CONSIDERED GREAT TREES AT THE -4- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 BEGINNING AND LATER, CERTAIN THINGS WERE DISCOVERED, THAT THEY WERE FAST-GROWING, WHICH WAS A GOOD THING, BUT THAT THEY ALSO HAD ATENDENCYTO DEVELOP DIFFERENT DISEASES, ET CETERA. AND I'M NOT TRYING TO BE THE BISHOPWOOD TREE EXPERT, BUT I WANTED YOU TO SEE THERE HAS BEEN A LOT WRITTEN ABOUT IT AND IT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED IN MIAMI-DADE COUNTY AS AN INVASIVE SPECIES, AND IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT IT BE REMOVED, AND SPECIFICALLY IN ONE OF THE EXCERPTS WE GAVE YOU, IT SAYS WHEN DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY OCCURS, WHICH IS WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED HERE, THAT THE TREES SHOULD BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH A NATIVE SPECIES. AND WE STILL CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN OUR RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS THAT THE INVASIVE SHOULD BE REMOVED AND THAT IT IS NOT CONTRARY TO OUR MANDATE OF PROTECTING THE TREES IN MIAMI. THANK YOU. » City Attorney: MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY, I DON'T WANT TO SOUND LIKE A BROKEN RECORD, BECAUSE I SAID THIS THE LAST HEARING. BUT I WANT TO EMPHASIZE WHAT WE'RE HERE TODAY ON, ON THIS PARTICULAR PROCEEDING OF A PERMIT APPEAL, IS THE CRITERIA AND CONDITIONS FOR TREE REMOVAL AND TREE RELOCATION UNDER 8.1, TREE PROTECTION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. AND I'D LIKE US TO PLEASE ADHERE TO THAT CRITERIA, BECAUSE IF WE GET WAYLAID, WE'RE NOT HERE ON SCHOOL SIDING, OR TRAFFIC PATTERNS, TREATMENT AND SO ON AND SO FORTH, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WITHIN OUR PROVINCE. THANK YOU. » Chairperson: THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD -- -5- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 » Mr. Garcia: NOTHING REALLY, BASICALLY WE'RE HERE ON THE APPEAL GIVEN BY THE DEPARTMENT, AND WE'RE VERY PLEASED WITH THE DEPARTMENT'S RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVAL, FAST RECOMMENDATION THAT WE APPROVE THE REMOVAL OF THE EIGHT BISHOPWOOD TREES. ONE THING, I DON'T KNOW, IT WAS POINTED OUT LAST TIME, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT HAS AGREED TO REPLACE THE TREES WITH 12 OAK TREES THAT ARE NATIVE TO THE COMMUNITY. AND THAT'S BASICALLY IT. IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR SPECIFIC QUESTION, WE'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. WE ALSO HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM OUR ARCHITECT IF THAT IS NECESSARY TO ANSWER ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS. IF NOT, THEN WE WILL NOT TAKE ANY OF YOUR TIME WITH THAT. » Chairperson: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. » Board Member: I HAVE A QUESTION. » Chairperson: YES? »Board Member: THE OAK TREES ARE GOING RIGHT IN THE (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- » Mr. Garcia: RIGHT, THE SAME AREA. » Board Member: IN THE SAME SPOT? » Mr. Garcia: NOT IN THE EXACT SAME SPOT, NO. » Chairperson: EXCUSE ME. NOT EXACTLY THE SAME SPOT, BUT CLOSE PROXIMITY? ? »Mr. Garcia: IN CLOSE PROXIMITY. » Chairperson: ON THE INSIDE OF THE FENCE OR THE OUTSIDE -- » Mr. Garcia: INSIDE OF THE FENCE. -6- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 » Board Member: SO YOU'RE — » Mr. Garcia: WE HAVE NOTHING FURTHER TO ADD. BASICALLY AS WE STATED BEFORE, THIS IS IN ORDER -- WE NEED THE TREE REMOVAL IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE NEW RENOVATION AT THE HIGH SCHOOL, MIAMI SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL. AND WE ARE REPLACING THE EXISTING EIGHT TREES THAT ARE NOT PROTECTED AND THEY'RE DESTROYING THE AREA IN AND OF ITSELF. WITH 12 TREES THAT ARE NATIVE TO THE COMMUNITY. » Chairperson: THANK YOU. ARE THERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. ALSO PLEASE LIMIT YOUR REMARKS TO TWO MINUTES APIECE. » City Attorney: WHATEVER ANY PARTY PUTS INTO THE RECORD HAS TO BE GIVEN TO THE OTHER PARTY. OKAY? » Board Member: MR. CHAIR? » Chairperson: YES? » Board Member: WHILE WE WAIT FOR THE PERSON, CAN I ASK STAFF OR ANY OUR EXPERT, THE ARCHITECT A QUESTION, LAYMAN'S TERMS THAT'S ON THE BOARD? » Chairperson: I'M SORRY -- » Board Member: CAN I ASK A QUESTION OF STAFF -- » City Attorney: WHATEVER IS GIVEN TO THE BOARD, I REPEAT, MUST BE GIVEN TO THE OTHER PARTY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AS LONG AS SOMEONE DOES IT. » Board Member: JUST A QUESTION, IN THE STAFF REPORT, COULD YOU -7- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 EXPLAIN TO ME AND PROBABLY MAYBE PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC THAT MAY WANT TO KNOW, THE TERM "AN INVASIVE SPECIES," COULD WE GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT, PLEASE, IN TERMS OF THE TREES? »Board Member: IT'S NOT A NATIVE SPECIES. AND IT IS -- IT WILL MULTIPLY AND SPREAD AND AT TIMES BE DANGEROUS, THE BOCIFEOUS WILL WEAK -WOODED AND WILL LOSE THEIR HEADS IN HIGH WINDS. » Board Member: UH-HUH, OKAY. THANK YOU. » Board Member: I GUESS I'M CURIOUS IF WE HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE NET OFFICE WHO ORIGINALLY DENIED -- OR DENIED THE REMOVAL? » Chairperson: OKAY, SIR, MR. MITCHELL IS WITH US, AND IT WAS A PUBLIC WORKS DENIAL, BECAUSE THE TREES ARE IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS IS OUR ASSISTANT PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. » Asst. Public Works Director: GOOD EVENING. FRANCIS MITCHELL REPRESENTING THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. THE DEFINITION OF INVASIVE SPECIES IS A SPECIES NONNATIVE TO THE AREA AND THAT TENDS TO PROVIDE IT, BECAUSE THERE'S NO NATURAL CONTROL THAT WOULD PREVENT THAT TREE TO ACTUALLY RUN WILD, TO (UNINTELLIGIBLE) WITHOUT CONTROL. » Board Member: AND JUST THE STAFF, WOULD THAT BE THE REASON WHY OUR PRESERVATION STAFF HAS APPROVED THE -- WHAT DID YOU DO, GRANTED THE APPEAL? THE RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU GAVE, IS IT BECAUSE OF THE INVASIVENESS OF THE SPECIES? » Preservation Officer: THAT'S CORRECT. » Board Member: SO MY REAL QUESTION, THEN, IS TO PUBLIC WORKS, OKAY, THE TREE IS GROWING IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. WHY DOES -8- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PUBLIC WORKS OBJECT TO IT BEING REMOVED IF IT IS AN INVASIVE EXOTIC? »Asst. Public Works Director: WHEN WE GRANTED TREE REMOVAL PERMIT, WE WENT FIRST BY POSTING THE TREE. ANYTIME WE RECEIVE ANY -- ANY OBJECTION FROM THE PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, WE TAKE THIS INTO CONSIDERATION, AND WE RECEIVE, WHAT, SIX, I BELIEVE — FIVE. FIVE OBJECTIONS. SO THAT WAS THE REASON FOR DENIAL. » Board Member: THANK YOU. » Chairperson: THAT WAS IT? » Board Member: YEAH. » Chairperson: GO AHEAD, SIR. » Mr. Kolner: THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS NEIL KOLNER. I LIVE AT 2420 SOUTHWEST 3' STREET. I PRACTICE LAW IN DOWNTOWN MIAMI. I LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM THESE EIGHT BISHOPWOOD TREES. WE'RE HERE ON APPEAL FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, WHO'S MADE A DETERMINATION THAT THESE TREES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY SHOULD NOT BE CUT DOWN. YOUR FUNCTION IN THIS APPEAL SETTING IS TO FOLLOW THE INTENT AND PURPOSE ESTABLISHED BY THE ORDINANCE CALLED TREE PROTECTION. AS YOU'LL SEE, THE INTENT OF THE ARTICLE IS TO PROTECT, PRESERVE, AND RESTORE THE TREE CANOPY WITHIN THE CITY. THE PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE IS TO ASSURE THAT THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF ALL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY IS EXECUTED IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE PRESERVATION OF EXISTING TREES TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS. IT DOES NOT SAY, EXCEPT -9- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 INVASIVES. IT DOESN'T SAY, EXCEPT WHEN THE SCHOOL BOARD OF DADE COUNTY WANTS TO CUT DOWN THE TREES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE ROLE OF THIS BOARD ON AN APPEAL FROM THIS IS THAT YOU MUST CONSIDER THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR'S DECISION. IF YOU WERE TO OVERTURN THE DECISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, IT WOULD BE UNPRECEDENTED, IN MY RESEARCH. I REVIEWED THE MINUTES OF THIS BOARD FOR 76 MEETINGS DATING BACK TO JANUARY 2003, WHICH ARE THE ONES AVAILABLE ON THE INTERNET. ONLY ONCE DID THIS BOARD ADDRESS AN APPEAL OF A PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DECISION, DENYING A TREE -REMOVAL PERMIT. THAT APPEAL WAS DENIED BY THIS BOARD. WE WOULD ASK YOU TO DO THE SAME TODAY. I HAVE PROVIDED YOU COPIES, FIRST OF ALL, OF 58 LETTERS OF NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE SIGNED A PETITION TO THIS BOARD. 58 PEOPLE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY WHO ARE OPPOSED TO CUTTING THESE TREES. MANY OF THEM WOULD BE HERE BUT FOR THE NOTICE INADEQUACY AT THE LAST MEETING, AND WHEN WE ADJOURNED, WHEN YOU ALL ADJOURNED THE LAST MEETING, IT WAS PUBLICLYANNOUNCED WE WERE GOING TO RESUME THIS MEETING TOMORROW, JANUARY 6th. AND I HAVE THE TRANSCRIPT OF THAT MEETING IF ANYONE'S INTERESTED IN SEEING IT. BUT HERE WE ARE ON THE 5th, AND PERHAPS SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE BEEN HERE TODAY TO VOICE THEIR OPPOSITION IF IT HAD BEEN PROPERLY ANNOUNCED. » Board Member: MR. CHAIR? A QUESTION, I DO APOLOGIZE. » Chairperson: YES. Board Member: POINT OF CLARIFICATION. STAFF, WAS THIS ITEM -10- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ADVERTISED? » Preservation Officer: YES, SIR, IT IS. IT WAS NOTICED TO THE PEOPLE BY -- I'M SORRY, ADJACENT TO THE SCHOOL. THERE'S A NOTICE THAT IS PUBLISHED IN THE NEWSPAPER. IT IS ON OUR WEBSITE. » Board Member: SO THAT WOULD SUPERCEDE OUR DATE ANNOUNCEMENT AT THE NEXT MEETING? » Preservation Officer: YES, I MISSPOKE. » Board Member: OKAY, THANK YOU. » Chairperson: GO AHEAD. » Mr. Kolner: I WROTE A LETTER TO THE PRESERVATION OFFICER AFTER THE LAST MEETING ASKING HER TO CLARIFY HER DECEMBER 1ST STAFF REPORT RECOMMENDING THAT YOU OVERTURN THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR'S DENIAL OF TREE -REMOVAL PERMIT. AND I ANALYZED HER STAFF REPORT, AND THE SUM AND SUBSTANCE OF HER STAFF REPORT WAS WHAT STAFF DID WAS TO READ THE ORDINANCE AND SEEK COUNSEL FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AS TO HOW TO HELP THE ARCHITECTS ACHIEVE THEIR GOAL OF APPEALING THE DECISION. STAFF'S JOB, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE PRESERVATION OFFICER'S DUTY, IS TO CARRY OUT THE DUTIES DESIGNED BY THIS CHAPTER. HISTORIC PRESERVATION, AND THE OTHER APPLICABLE LAWS, LIKE THE TREE -PROTECTION ORDINANCE. I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S THE TREE PRESERVATION OFFICE -- OR THE PRESERVATION OFFICER'S DUTY TO ASSIST SOMEBODY TRYING TO OVERTURN A DECISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. INSTEAD OF CLARIFYING HER DECISION, SHE SIMPLY ADDED MORE ABOUT THE INVASIVE TREES. I ALSO HAVE PRESENTED TO -11- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 YOU A LETTER FROM COUNTY COMMISSIONER OF DISTRICT 5, BRUNO BARREIRO, WHO HAS SAID AS COUNTY COMMISSIONER THAT REPRESENTS THE CITY OF MIAMI, I SUPPORT THE DECISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NOT TO ISSUE A TREE -REMOVAL PERMIT FOR EIGHT BISHOPWOOD TREES BETWEEN SOUTHWEST 24th AND SOUTHWEST 25th AVENUES. THE RESIDENTS OF THE VICINITY OF THE MIAMI SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL DO NOT WANT THE TREES REMOVED AS THEY HAVE BEEN THERE FOR MANY YEARS. MANY RESIDENTS HAVE INFORMED ME THEY WERE NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FUTURE CHANGES PLANNED IN THIS AREA AND WERE NOT INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS. I GREATLY APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION IN THIS MATTER AND URGE YOU TO DENY THE APPEAL. SINCERELY BRUNO BARREIRO, COMMISSIONER, DISTRICT 5. I'VE ALSO ATTACHED AND PROVIDED FOR YOU SOME OF THE ARCHITECT'S MASTER PLANS FOR THE RENOVATION IN WHICH THEY DISCUSSED THE LANDSCAPING OF THE AREA AND THEIR PLAN. AND TUCKED IN THE CONCLUSION ON PAGE -- WELL, THEY'RE NOT NUMBERED, BUT THE LAST PAGE OF THE PACKET, THE LAST PARAGRAPH, IMPROVED GREEN SPACE ON THE GROUNDS OF THE CAMPUS, AND AT THE PERIMETER WILL GREATLY IMPROVE THE AESTHETIC QUALITY OF THE SITE. LANDSCAPING IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAYS AND CAREFUL ATTENTION TO STREET IMPROVEMENTS WILL COMPLETE THE RETURN OF THE SCHOOL TO THE POSITION OF PROMINENCE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT IT ONCE HELD. FOR THE LIFE OF ME, HOW CAN THIS MASTER PLAN, TALKING ABOUT LANDSCAPING IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAYS BE CONSISTENT WITH CUTTING THE ONLY TREES IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ON SOUTHWEST 3rd STREET? -12- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 FOR ALL THOSE REASONS, AND FOR THE REASONS THAT 58 OF MY NEIGHBORS HAVE SIGNED A PETITION TO THIS BOARD, AND THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER FOR OUR DISTRICT, WE URGE YOU TO UPHOLD THE DECISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR AND DENY THIS APPEAL. THANK YOU. » Chairperson: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE SOMEONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK? »Preservation Officer: MAY I ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT MR. KOLNER ASSIGNED TO ME? » Chairperson: YES. JUST GIVE US ONE MINUTE. » Preservation Officer: I BELIEVE MR. KOLNER SAID I WAS STATING THAT I WAS ADVANCING THE ARCHITECT'S POSITION ON THIS, AND I WANT TO ASSURE YOU THAT ON MY REPORTS, THEY SPEAK ONLY TO THE TREES AND DO NOT DEAL WITH THE MASTER PLANNING FOR THE MIAMI SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL. ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID DO, ALSO, TO MAKE CLEAR WHAT THE PROCESS IS, IS TO FIND OUT WHETHER OR NOT THE NEIGHBORS HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED OF ANY PREVIOUS HEARINGS. AND WE HAVE WITH US THE HEARING BOARD'S OFFICIAL LIST OF A NOTICE OF THE REPLATTING FOR MIAMI HIGH AND THIS PLAN. AND AT THAT TIME, THEY NOTICED 500 FEET AROUND THE SCHOOL, WHICH IS A HUGE BLOCK AREA. WE DID WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT THAT HAPPENED, SO THERE WAS AT LEAST ONE NOTICE SENT THAT THERE WERE THINGS HAPPENING IN MIAMI SENIOR HIGH. I DO THINK THAT TAKING OUT OF CONTEXT THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF CHAPTER 17, OUR 8.1, INDEED IT IS OUR JOB TO PRESERVE THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE NATURAL FEATURES IN MIAMI, -13- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 BUT THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS, AND CHAPTER 17, ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION, IT NOTES THAT THE BISHOPWOOD IS AN UNDESIRABLE EXOTIC SPECIES. IN 8.1, IT ALSO SAYS, IN 8.1.1.5-C ENCOURAGES THE REMOVAL OF EXOTICS AND REPLACEMENT WITH NATIVE TREES. IN 8.1.6.3, IT EXPLAINS THE REMOVAL OF A PROHIBITED SPECIES, WITH TWO EXCEPTIONS —A FICUS VARIEFICUS VARIETY --WE INCLUDED IN PARTS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY'S ORDINANCES, AGAIN NOT SO THAT YOU WOULD THINK THAT MIAMI-DADE RULES. BUT RATHER THAT THERE IS NOT ONLY A COUNTY COMMENT AND CONCERN ABOUT INVASIVE TREES, BUT ALSO THE STATE HAS WEIGHED IN ON THE TREES. SO MY JOB WAS TO FOCUS PERHAPS VERY NARROWLY AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE TREES WERE -- SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE LEFT OR WHETHER THEY SHOULD BE REMOVED. THANK YOU. » Chairperson: OKAY, THANK YOU. YOU MAY COMMENT. » City Attorney: AND ANY HANDOUTS IN A QUASI -- ANY HANDOUTS IN THE RECORD MUST BE GIVEN TO THE OTHER SIDE. THE BOARD CANNOT ACCEPT SOMETHING THAT IS NOT GIVEN TO THE OTHER SIDE. »Preservation Officer: THE OTHER THING IS DO WE HAVE THE 80 LETTERS MR. KOLNER PUT INTO THE RECORD? DO YOU HAVE -- » Clerk: YES, WE DO. HE GAVE ME THE ORIGINALS HERE. »Preservation Officer: OKAY, THANK YOU. » City Attorney: PROCEED. » Mr. Mazzaroppi: RON MAZZAROPPI, 2534 SOUTHWEST 3' STREET. THE AREA WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS ONE THAT HAS A -- HAS THE TREES ON IT FOR THAT SIDE OF THE STREET. NOW, IF YOU GO AROUND -- AND I HAVE -14- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SOME PICTURES HERE TO SHOW YOU -- ALL OF THE VARIOUS STREETS IN THAT AREA ARE ALL CONSISTENT. THEY'RE ALL LINED WITH TREES. NATURALLY IN THE AREAS WHERE THERE'S DRIVEWAYS, THERE CAN'T BE. THE CURBING IS BASICALLY THE SAME, OR LACK THEREOF. AND IT FORMS THE BASIC NEIGHBORHOOD. THE RENOVATION THEY WANT TO DO AND WHAT THEY WANT TO DO REMOVES THE TREES, REMOVES THE SIDEWALK, PUSHES IT BACK, AND MAKES A PARKING LANE IN THERE, WHICH WOULD TAKE THIS OUT. THEY SAY THEY WANT TO REPLACE THE TREES, BUT THAT'S NOT A REPLACEMENT. THE REPLACEMENT IS TO TAKE UP AND PUT BACK IN THE SAME PLACE. THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. THEY WANT TO MOVE THE TREES OVER ON THEIR PROPERTY. YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO PLANT SOME TREES AND WE'RE GOING TO LET THEM GROW, AND I'LL PROBABLY BE DEAD BEFORE THEY GET TO BE ANYTHING LIKE THIS. AND THEN WHAT'S TO SAY IN FIVE YEARS THEY DECIDE THEY JUST WANT TO TEAR THOSE TREES OUT, THEY WANT TO DO SOMETHING, THEY DON'T MAINTAIN THEM PROPERLY? THE NEIGHBORS HAVE NO STAND IN THIS. [ BELL SOUNDS ] AT ALL. THIS IS WHY WE WANT TO MAINTAIN THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY AND MAINTAIN THE TREES IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, SO IT'S UNDER YOUR CONTROL, BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY PROTECTION THE NEIGHBORS HAVE. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THESE PICTURES, THESE TREES AND THIS CURBING AND THE WAY THIS IS DONE IS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD. YOU TAKE THAT OUT, YOU DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO ON THEIR DRAWINGS, IT'S GREAT FOR COMMERCIAL AREA. BEAUTIFUL FOR A COMMERCIAL AREA. BUT IT'S NOT PART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. [ BELL SOUNDS ] -15- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 » Chairperson: THAT'S THE SIGNAL THAT YOUR TWO MINUTES HAVE EXPIRED. IF YOU COULD PLEASE WRAP IT UP. » > Mr. Mazzaroppi: OH, OKAY, THANK YOU. » Chairperson: THANK YOU. » > Mr. Mazzaroppi: SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS WE WANT TO PRESERVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE WANT TO PRESERVE THE LOOK OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS A TWO -- A TWO -PLUS BLOCK RENOVATION PROCESS. WHATEVER THEY WANT TO DO THERE, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO ON PART OF THAT OTHER PROPERTY, ON THEIR OTHER PROPERTY. YOU HAVE ALL THESE NEIGHBORS. THIS BIG PROJECT, NOBODY IS SAYING ANYTHING. [ BELL SOUNDS ] WE WANT A FEW LITTLE CRUMBS HERE TO GIVE US TO PRESERVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE HAVE, THAT WE'VE ALL SPENT MONEY FOR, AND WE TAKE CARE OF. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. » Chairperson: THANK YOU. I'LL LET YOU GO AT THE END, IF YOU DON'T MIND. » NO PROBLEM. » Chairperson: BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. » Mr. Ray: MICHAEL RAY, CLASS OF '69, ALSO TAUGHT THERE, AND INVOLVED IN THE INTERNSHIP THERE. AND I HOPE BEFORE MY TWO MINUTES START -- » Chairperson: ADDRESS, PLEASE. »Mr. Ray: IS 124 SOUTH MIAMI AVENUE, MIAMI. I RAISED THE DUE PROCESS ISSUE BEFORE. AND I CITED VERY SPECIFICALLY, AS WELL AS THE FACT OF NOTICES BEING MAILED TO HOMEOWNERS, THE CITY CODE 62-1292A AND B WHICH WOULD REQUIRE SIGNS POSTED ON BOTH SIDES -16- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 OF THE STREET, WHICH WERE NOT, AND I POINTED THIS OUT SPECIFICALLY AT THE LAST MEETING, SO I TAKE ISSUE, I SORT OF FEEL LIKE MY INTEGRITY HAS BEEN IMPUGNED HERE, THE STATEMENT MADE THAT NOTICE WAS PROPER WHEN IT WASN'T. AND, ALSO, THAT SAME SECTION "B" WOULD HAVE REQUIRED NOTICES ON EVERY TREE, SINCE THAT'S WHERE THE ORIGINAL NOTICES WERE PLACED. AND I WOULD URGE THIS BOARD TO BECOME MORE FAMILIAR WITH THEIR OWN NOTICE REQUIREMENTS SO THAT THESE PROBLEMS -- » Preservation Officer: MAY I -- » Mr. Ray: -- EXCUSE ME, PLEASE. SO THESE PROBLEMS DO NOT ARISE AGAIN IN THE FUTURE. NOW, AGAIN, THE CARDINAL RULE -- PRESERVE THE TREES TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE. YES, THERE WAS NOTICE ON A PLAT, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT TEARING DOWN TREES IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND MAKING A BUS STATION. THEY'RE NOT REPLACING THESE TREES. THEY'RE TAKING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM THE PUBLIC AND USING IT FOR SCHOOL BOARD PROPERTY. THAT'S NOT REPLACEMENT. THEREFORE, YES, IF YOU LOOK AT 8.1-3 -- 8.1.5, CRITERIA FOR REMOVAL OF TREES, THERE'S FOUR THERE. THE ONLY ONE THAT COULD POSSIBLY APPLY IS "D," THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC THAT THE TREE BE REMOVED FOR A REASON OTHER THAN SET FORTH ABOVE. THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY REASON SHOWING WHY THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE PLAT DEDICATION SAYS THOSE TREES EXIST IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE PUBLIC'S FUTURE USE. EXCUSE ME. CITY RESOLUTION, 09-0113. BY THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION. SO WHAT -- THE SCHOOL BOARD HAS THE -17- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 BURDEN OF PROOF HERE. THEY LOST THE RIGHT TO TEAR DOWN THESE TREES. MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW IS THEY LOST. THEY DIDN-- HAD THE BURDEN OF PROOF. WHAT OTHER PROOF HAVE THEY SHOWN THERE'S NO OTHER PLACE FOR PARKING? IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT TREES. LET'S FACE IT. IT'S ABOUT A BUS STATION. YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT, HAVE THEY DONE WHAT THEY NEED TO TO SHOW WHY THESE TREES HAVE TO GO, AND THIS IS THE ONLY PLACE? PEOPLE CAME HERE THE LAST TIME, COMPLAINED, YOU DIDN'T TELL US WHAT YOUR PLAN WAS, NOT IN THE PLAT, WE DIDN'T GET NOTICE. WE AGREED TO HAVE A MEETING, MET AT MIAMI HIGH, COOKIES, FOOD, DRINKS, AND OH, WE WANT TO WORK WITH YOU, TRY TO DO WHAT WE CAN. MAYBE WE CAN PARK ON 25th AVENUE, THE BUSES THERE, MAYBE WE CAN PARK ON 24th AVENUE, SOMETHING THERE. WE'LL WORK WITH YOU. THIS PICTURE I TOOK ON 25th AVENUE. THE DAY AFTER THAT MEETING, THEY GOT BACK WITH OUR CONTACT, TILLIE FOX, AND IT SAYS FROM RUDOLPH HERNANDEZ, THE ARCHITECT, AS TO OUR PROPOSAL THAT YOU ALLOW THE 10 BUSES TO PARK ON 25th AVENUE, WHERE THEY PARK NOW. THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER --QUOTE, THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION DID NOT FIND A PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION ACCEPTABLE DUE TO FLORIDA STATUTE 316.1945. WELL, HELLO! THAT'S SUBSECTION "A" OF THE STATUTE. IF YOU LOOK AT SUBSECTION "B," YOU CAN SEE THAT EXACTLY WHAT'S DONE NOW IS AUTHORIZED. HERE IS THE INTERSECTION, AND THIS SIGN IS 20 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION. SUBSECTION "B" OF THAT STATUTE SAYS THAT YOU CAN STOP AND PARK IF IT'S MOMENTARILY TO PICK UP AND DROP OFF PEOPLE. NOW, THEY DON'T EVEN MENTION THAT. THEY IGNORE THAT. -18- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 AND THE NEXT DAY THEY TELL US THAT IT CAN'T BE DONE. BUT THAT'S THE WAY IT'S DONE RIGHT NOW. THIS SIGN IS 20 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION -- » Chairperson: EXCUSE ME, COULD YOU MOVE TO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE? AND WRAP IT UP. »Mr. Ray: SORRY, AND COPIES TO EVERYONE. » Chairperson: AND WRAP IT UP, PLEASE. » Mr. Ray: AND, THEREFORE, IT CAN BE DONE. BUT THEY CHOSE NOT TO. AND THEY SAID THEY'RE WORKING -- WE WILL CONTINUE TO EXPLORE OTHER OPTIONS AND KEEP YOU UP TO DATE. WHAT OTHER OPTIONS? THEY NEVER EXPLORED ANYTHING. WHY ARE THEY EVEN HERE TODAY IF THEY'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH THE PUBLIC TO WORK SOMETHING ELSE OUT? [ BELL SOUNDS ] IT'S RIDICULOUS. THIS IS ABOUT THE SCHOOL BOARD THINKING THAT THEY'RE THE ALMIGHTY THAT CAN JUST COME HERE AND GET YOU ALL TO DO WHATEVER YOU WANT -- WHATEVER THEY WANT AND NOT HAVE TO BE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND TO THE COMMUNITY AND TO THE TREES, AND THEN THEY HAVE THE NERVE TO SAY US TO, WELL, YOU DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT THE TREES. IT'S JUST ABOUT THE BUS STOP, ISN'T IT? WELL, THAT'S RIDICULOUS AND IT'S INSULTING. I KNOW MR. FRIEDMAN WENT TO MIAMI HIGH, AND YOU KNOW THEY CAN BLOCK THE STREET IN THE MORNING. [ BELL SOUNDS ] THEY CAN BLOCK FOR AN HOUR IN THE MORNING AND AFTERNOON AND LET THE BUSES SIT THERE. WHY DO THIS? THEY HAVE $5 MILLION CONTINGENCY MONEY SET ASIDE TO WORK OUT OTHER ISSUES THAT EVOLVE. WHY SHOULD THIS BOARD GO ALONG WITH THIS INSANITY? -19- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THANK YOU. » Chairperson: THANK YOU. MADAM -- » City Attorney: MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY, JUST WE DO BELIEVE THAT THIS MATTER WAS PROPERLY NOTICED, AND I HAVE JUST SOME BRIEF FACTUAL STATEMENTS THAT STAFF WOULD LIKE TO PUT IN THE RECORD JUST CONFIRMING THAT TO YOU. » Chairperson: OKAY. » City Attorney: WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE THE SECTIONS IN 62 AND WHAT WE DID? » Clerk: OKAY, LET'S SEE. CHAPTER 62, WHICH WAS CITED, OKAY, WHICH WE HAVE PRINTED HERE, STATES THAT THE SIGN SHALL BE -- THE SIGN SHALL BE ERECTED IN FULL VIEW OF THE PUBLIC ON EACH STREET SIDE. WHERE LARGE PARCELS OF PROPERTY ARE INVOLVED, EXTENDING OVER CONSIDERABLE DISTANCES, IT MAY BE ON STREETS, AS ADEQUATE TO BE APPROPRIATE. WE HAD THREE SIGNS. GOING ON, WE DID NOTIFY THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS, AND WE DID ADVERTISE IN THE PAPER, IN TWO, AS A MATTER OF FACT, "THE MIAMI DAILY REVIEW" AND "MIAMI TODAY," AND ON THE WEBSITE, SO WE DO BELIEVE IT WAS MORE THAN ADEQUATELY NOTICED. »City Attorney: HOW MANY SIGNS WERE POSTED? » Clerk: AT LEAST THREE. » City Attorney: HOW MANY SIGNS DID THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER SAY THEY POSTED FOR TREES? » Clerk: THEY SAID THEY POSTED ONE PER PROPERTY. » Preservation Officer: MR. CHAIR, IF I COULD COMMENT ON THE CRITERIA -20- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 AND CONDITIONS FOR TREE REMOVAL AND LOCATION, WHICH WAS ALSO CITED. SUBPARAGRAPH C. » City Attorney: ID LIKE PUBLIC WORKS TO RESPOND TO THE NOTICE. WAS THE NOTICE -- » Asst Public Works Director: THE NOTICE TO REMOVE FOR THE TREES WERE POSTED ON EACH TREES. A TOTAL OF EIGHT TREES. » City Attorney: WAS THAT DONE IN THIS INSTANCE? » Asst Public Works Director: YES. » City Attorney: THANK YOU. » Preservation Officer: YES, AND THE CRITERIA FOR REMOVAL, THE GENTLEMAN MENTIONED IF IT'S IN THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC, THAT'S SUBPARAGRAPH "C," AND PRECEDING IS, IF THE TREE IS AN EXOTIC TREE SPECIES AND WILL BE REPLACED BY NATIVE TREE SPECIES TO PROMOTE GOOD FORESTRY PRACTICES, AND THAT IS IN THE SECTION. » Chairperson: OKAY, THANK YOU. » Board Member: MR. CHAIR? » Chairperson: YES, MR. HOPPER. » Board Member: THIS IS AN ITEM WE LOOKED AT LAST YEAR AND IT WAS CONTINUED. AND SINCE THEN, I'VE BEEN ABLE TO PERSONALLY, BECAUSE OF MY APPOINTMENT TO THIS BOARD, DO MY OWN HOMEWORK IN TERMS OF VISITING THIS ISSUE. » Chairperson: MR. BARBER? » Board Member: YES, SIR. » Chairperson: WE HAVEN'T CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING YET. -21- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DO YOU WANT TO WAIT? » Board Member: NO, IF I CAN RESPOND TO -- BRIEFLY TO WHAT WAS SAID INITIALLY. I THINK -- » Chairperson: TO -- » Board Member: FALLS IN PLACE TO THE LAST PERSON SPEAKING. » Chairperson: OKAY, GO AHEAD. » Board Member: BECAUSE THE COMMENTS WERE DIRECTLY -- THEY WERE DIRECT COMMENTS AT THE STAFF, AT THE SCHOOL BOARD. » Chairperson: YES, SIR. » Board Member: THINGS OF THAT NATURE. IN NO WAY DO I WANT, AND I KNOW PEOPLE OF THIS BOARD, WANT TO SEE ANY GREEN SPACE OR CANOPIES BE LOST IN MIAMI. I DO THINK THE KEY ISSUE HERE IS THE FUNCTIONALITY OF THIS ISSUE WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD. IT IS NOT ABOUT AN ISSUE OF REMOVING TREES. I THINK IT'S FUNCTIONALITY. I DON'T WANT IN NO WAY TO SAY THAT THE SCHOOL BOARD HAS NOT DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE. BECAUSE I'VE NOTICED AROUND MIAMI, DADE COUNTY, THAT SCHOOLS HAVE BEEN CHANGING IN TERMS OF THEIR ABILITY TO HANDLE THE AMOUNT OF STUDENTS THAT EXIST. THERE'S A SCHOOL IN MY AREA THAT HAS BEEN TOTALLY REBUILT. THEY DIDN'T WAKE UP A YEAR AGO AND TELL US ABOUT THIS. THIS WAS SOMETHING ESTABLISHED YEARS BEFORE THEY BEGAN TO BUILD THE BUILDING AND REBUILD THE SCHOOLS. SO I CAN'T SAY -- AND SAY THE SCHOOL BOARD ALL OF A SUDDEN DISREGARDED AND THESE PLANS WERE TOP-SECRET PLANS, THEY WERE NOT AWARE THAT THIS WAS GOING ON. I KNOW LAST MONTH MY THOUGHT WAS THAT THERE COULD BE A CHANGE, OR THE -22- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SITE COULD BE MOVED. BUT THEN WHEN I LOOK AT THE PLANS, I LOOK AT THE ISSUE OF FUNCTIONALITY, HOW WE COINCIDE WITH THE SAFETY OF THE STUDENTS, WHERE IS THE BEST PLACE TO PUT THE ROUTE FOR THE STUDENTS TO ACCESS IS, AS TO WHERE THE BUILDINGS ARE. AND I THINK THE DUE DILIGENCE HAS BEEN DONE AND THE RESEARCH HAS BEEN DONE AS TO WHERE THEY'RE LOCATING THIS PARTICULAR SPACE. I'M SORRY THE TREES ARE THERE. LIKE THE ATTORNEY SAID, OUR ISSUE IS TO LOOK AT THE LAW AND HOW IT STATES IN TERMS OF THE TREE. THE TREE REMOVAL. AND BASED ON WHAT THE STAFF HAS GIVEN US, IT'S WRITTEN AS TO HOW WE'RE SUPPOSED TO ACT AND HOW WE'RE SUPPOSED TO MOVE ON THIS OPTION IN TERMS OF THE TREES, WHETHER IT'S INVASIVE SPECIES OR IT'S NOT. IT'S AN INVASIVE SPECIES, WE HAVE CODES WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY IN TERMS OF HOW WE DELIBERATE ON THIS ISSUE. AND I THINK THAT WE'RE GOING ON AND PUSHING, WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE FACTS. THE ARTICLE 8.1, AND THEN WE HAVE SEVERAL CODES AND ARTICLES GOING WITH 8.1, POINT FIVE, AND HOW WE LOOK AT THIS OPTION. WE'LL GO AROUND AND AROUND, AND THE ACTUAL FUNCTIONALITY AND WHAT THE CODE SAYS. THAT'S WHAT I BELIEVE WE NEED TO LOOK AT TODAY. » Chairperson: THANK YOU. ARE THERE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? PLEASE COME FORWARD, GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. »Ms. Dove: HI. -- GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS GISELLE DOVE. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT I SEE THE ROAD TO BE, AND IT IS ABOUT PRESERVING NEIGHBORHOODS AND WE CANNOT LOOK AT THE SCHOOL -23- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 OUTSIDE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE LIVE THERE EVERY DAY. AND THE REMOVAL OF THE TREES, WHEN THEY ARE THE ONLY TREES ON OUR STREET, WILL HAVE A DEVASTATING IMPACT ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND IF WE WANT TO PRESERVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, I THINK WE SHOULD DO EVERYTHING WE CAN. I JUST HEARD THE PUBLIC WORKS GENTLEMAN SAY, YES, THESE ARE INVASIVE TREES, BUT THEY POSE ABSOLUTELY NO THREAT TO PERSONS, ENVIRONMENT, OR ANY OTHER SPECIES. YES, WHEN THINGS ARE DESCRIBED AS EVASIVE OR EXOTIC, MEANING NONNATIVE. HOWEVER, I THINK THIS BOARD LOOKS AT WHAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE MIAMI STAY MIAMI WHENEVER POSSIBLE. THESE TREES POSE NO THREAT. ARE THEY CLASSIFIED AS EXOTIC AND INVASIVE? YES. BUT ARE THEY POSING A THREAT? NO. WILL THEY MAINTAIN SOME SEMBLANCE OFA NEIGHBORHOOD? YES. WHICH IS WHAT I THINK THIS BOARD IS CHARGED WITH. WE ARE THE RESIDENTS. WE LIVE THERE. WE WANT TO LOOK OUT AND SEE TREES, NOT BUSES. DO REMEMBER THAT WHO OWNS THE OTHER PROPERTIES ADD JAS END TO THE OTHER STREETS. WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IS PUSHED THINGS THEY DO NOT WANT ON THEIR BEAUTIFUL, BEAUTIFUL CAMPUS OUT INTO THE ONE STREET THAT BORDERS THE NEIGHBORHOOD. YES, THE TREES ARE INVASIVE, BUT DO GO TO THE HIGHER CALLING OF THE BOARD, WHICH IS TO PRESERVE NEIGHBORHOODS. LEAVE OUR TREES ALONE. WE WANT THEM THERE. THEY POSE NO THREAT TO THE CITIZENS. THEY POSE NO THREAT TO THE NATIVE GREENERY. THEY POSE NO THREAT. SO WE URGE YOU TO PRESERVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. » Chairperson: THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO -24- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? PLEASE COME FORWARD. GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. » Ms. Fox: HE'S PASSING OUT SOME MATERIALS. MY NAME IS TILLIE FOX, AND I HAVE LIVED AT 302 BEACON BOULEVARD FOR HALF A CENTURY. MY PARENTS BOUGHT THE HOME IN 1960, AND I'M ALSO FOUNDING FACULTY AT FIU. THERE'S SOME MATERIAL BEING PASSED OUT. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO WAIT? » Chairperson: NO, PLEASE GO AHEAD. » Ms. Fox: OKAY. AND I WILL BE REFERRING TO THE AERIAL MAP BEING PASSED OUT. THOSE TREES WERE PLANTED OVER THREE DECADES AGO BY THE CITY OF MIAMI TO BEAUTIFY THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO SEPARATE THE BACK OF THE SCHOOL FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY CREATE A BORDER IF YOU SEE ON THE MAP THAT IS BEING PASSED OUT BETWEEN THE ATHLETIC FIELD. THE ATHLETIC FIELD WAS NOT THAT SIZE, ON 24th AVENUE, THERE WERE HOMES ALL ALONG 24th AVENUE AND THE CORNER OF 3rd STREET. BUT MIAMI HIGH PURCHASED THOSE HOMES IN THE 1960s AND ENLARGED THE ATHLETIC FIELD SO TO SHIELD THE NEIGHBORHOOD, TREES WERE PLANTED ALL ALONG THE PERIMETER OF 3rd STREET AND 24th AVENUE, ON THE "L" SHAPE. BUT NOW, OUR PROBLEM IS THAT WITHOUT ASKING, WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING WHAT THE PLAN IS — [ BELL SOUNDS ] -- THEY WANT TO TAKE OUR TREES. THEY WANT TO TAKE OUR SIDEWALK. THEY WANT TO TAKE OUR RIGHT-OF-WAY AND PLANT INSTEAD 12 BUSES IN FRONT OF OUR HOMES. THAT'S THE REAL ISSUE. THEY'RE TAKING THE TREES AND REPLACING THEM WITH 12 BUSES IN FRONT OF THE HOMES. AND WHO WOULD WANT THAT IN FRONT -25- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 OF THEIR HOMES? THIS IS DETRIMENTAL TO OUR HEALTH — [ BELL SOUNDS ] -- AND WELFARE. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE EXHAUST FUMES, NOISE, 700 KIDS RUNNING AROUND, SCREAMING, LOOKING FOR THEIR BUS. AND WHERE ARE TREES? WE NO LONGER ARE IN NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS GOING TO BE DETRIMENTAL TO OUR SAFETY BY WIDENING THAT ROAD. YOU'RE GOING TO CREATE MORE TRAFFIC. RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE TRAFFIC GOING BOTH WAYS. THE WIDER, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE DANGER TO THE STUDENTS, MORE DANGER TO US, BECAUSE PEOPLE WANT THE ROAD THAT'S LARGER, ARE GOING TO SEE THEY WON'T OBEY THE SPEED LIMIT AND BY HAVING A NARROW ROAD, YOU WILL SLOW DOWN TRAFFIC. » Chairperson: COULD YOU WRAP UP, PLEASE? COULD YOU WRAP UP, PLEASE? » Ms. Fox: YES, SIR. » Chairperson: THANK YOU. » Ms. Fox: REMOVING THE TREES IS ALSO DETRIMENTAL TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO OUR ENVIRONMENT BY PUTTING A BUS LANE. IT'S MAKING US COMMERCIAL. IT'S MAKING THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AND DESTROYING PROPERTY VALUES BECAUSE NO ONE IS GOING TO WANT TO LIVE IN A BUS DEPOT AND ACROSS THAT RACKET 10 TIMES A WEEK. THEY SAID IT'S ONLY TWICE A DAY, BUT IT'S REALLY NOISE, POLLUTION, AND WE'RE NO LONGER IN NEIGHBORHOODS. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF OUR HOMES, AND WE'RE WILLING TO WORK WITH THE ARCHITECT, TO MAKE THE OFFER, BUT WE HAVE NOT HAD TIME TO MEET. AND AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PICTURES, I'VE ALSO -26- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DRAWN SOME ALTERNATE PLANS WHERE ON 25' AVENUE, WHICH IS OWNED ON BOTH SIDES BY MIAMI HIGH, MIAMI HIGH OWNS THE PROPERTY ON BOTH SIDES OF 25th AVENUE, THEY CAN PUT A BUS LANE THERE, WHICH WILL BE SAFER WITH MEDIAN TRIPS. WE HAVE SEVEN PLANS DRAWN IN THAT HANDOUT THAT I HAVE. SO I AM AN ALUMNI OF MIAMI HIGH, AND I WANT MIAMI HIGH PRESERVED, BUT I ALSO DO NOT WANT THE NEIGHBORHOOD DESTROYED BY CREATING THIS BUS DEPOT IN FRONT OF OUR HOMES AND TAKING AWAY THE ONLY TREES THAT WE HAD, AND THOSE TREES WERE DEEMED SAFE BY THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THEY'RE RIGHT ALL OVER COCONUT GROVE. YOU CAN FIND THEM ALL OVER THE PLACE. AND I NEVER SEE ONE SEEDLING IN 50 YEARS THAT I'VE LIVED THERE SPROUT FROM THAT TREE, THE MALE AND THE FEMALE. [ BELL SOUNDS] » Chairperson: THANK YOU. » Ms. Fox: OKAY, THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? » Board Member: I HAVE A QUESTION, MR. CHAIR. » Chairperson: YES, SIR? » Board Member: I'M HEARING PEOPLE MAKE REFERENCE TO A BUS DEPOT. A DEPOT IS PARKED VEHICLES THAT WILL BE THERE FOR STORAGE, RIGHT? IS THISA BUS DEPOT? CAN SOMEBODY ANSWER THAT? » City Attorney: I WANT TO -- » Board Member: LOADING AND UNLOADING. » City Attorney: PLEASE EXCUSE ME, BUT AGAIN, I JUST WANT THE HEARING TO ADHERE TO THE TREES, BECAUSE WE REALLY -- THIS BOARD QUITE SIMPLY DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THE SCHOOL -27- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 OPERATIONS. » Board Member: THAT'S WHY I ASKED MY QUESTION, MAKING REFERENCE TO THE BUS DEPOT. AND I WANTED TO CLARIFY. IS IT A BUS DEPOT? » Chairperson: THE POINT IS THE BUS DEPOT, IT DOESN'T MATTER. IT'S ONLY ABOUT THE TREES. WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A BUS DEPOT, IT DOESN'T MATTER TO US. ONLY WHETHER WE CAN REVERSE THE -- THAT WE SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT REVERSE THE FINDING FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS. » Board Member: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. » Chairperson: PERIOD. » Ms. Fox: THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE IS OUR TREES ARE BEING REPLACED BY BUSES, AND THEY'RE NOT BEING PLANTED IN THE SAME LOCATION. » Chairperson: THE TREES ARE BEING CUT DOWN. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT'S COMING BACK. THE TREES ARE BEING REMOVED. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC WISHING — » Board Member: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THIS LADY, IF I MAY. » Chairperson: GO AHEAD. » Board Member: MS. FOX? I'M LOOKING AT THE AERIAL? » Ms. Fox: YES, SIR. » Board Member: AND I'M LOOKING AT 25th AVENUE WHERE THERE ARE INITIALS ON MSH ON SEVERAL -- » Ms. Fox: MIAMI SENIOR HIGH. » Board Member: CAN YOU TELL ME TO WHAT USE ARE THOSE PROPERTIES CURRENTLY BEING PUT? -28- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 » Ms. Fox: CURRENTLY, THE ONE BY 3rd STREET USED TO BE A BASKETBALL COURT. ALL OF THOSE WERE ATHLETIC COURTS, AND NOW THEY'RE GETTING TURNED UP AND TURNED INTO A PARKING DECK. AND THE NEXT ONE ARE PORTABLES. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY USE FOR STORAGE, OR WHAT. BUT WE USED TO CLOSE OFF 25th AVENUE WHEN I WAS A STUDENT THERE, AND STILL RECENTLY 25th AVENUE WAS CLOSED OFF. BUT THAT LAND ON BOTH SIDES BELONGS TO MIAMI HIGH. AND ON 27th AVENUE, ALL THAT IS COMMERCIAL. » Board Member: THANK YOU. » Chairperson: ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? PLEASE COME FORWARD. GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. » Ms. Young: HI, LISA YOUNG, 2534 SOUTHWEST 3rd STREET. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY I DO NOT WANT TO SEE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD DISTURBED FROM THE TREES. AS WE'VE POINTED OUT, THE TREES ARE NOT HURTING ANYBODY. I UNDERSTAND THEY NEED TO PUT THEIR BUSES SOMEWHERE, AND THAT'S WHY THEY WANT TO TAKE THE TREES DOWN. THEY HAVE THREE OTHER STREETS, 25th, 2nd, AND 24th. I WOULD THINK THEY COULD FIND A WAY TO PUT THE BUSES SOMEWHERE, OR EVEN WITHOUT TAKING THE TREES DOWN, PUT THE BUSES ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY AND MAKE A BUS LANE INSIDE. THE INTEGRITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS WHAT'S AT STAKE HERE, AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE — WHY WE ARE ALL UPSET. WE BOUGHT HOMES. WE'VE PAID VERY GOOD PRICES FOR THEM IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. WE DO NOT WANT TO BE SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. THANK YOU. -29- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 » Chairperson: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. BUT I WILL ALLOW REBUTTAL FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD. » Mr. Garcia: THANK YOU. » Chairperson: LET ME JUST ASK A QUESTION FIRST. NOW, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, YOU ARE TAKING OUT EIGHT BISHOPWOODS, PUTTING BACK 12 LIVE OAKS? » Mr. Garcia: THAT'S CORRECT. » Chairperson: AND HOW LARGE ARE THESE LIVE OAKS? »Mr. Garcia: 22 TO 26 FEET HIGH. » Chairperson: OKAY, THANK YOU. » Board Member: IF WE WANT TO DO THE REST OF THE CLARIFICATION THERE. IF THESE TREES WERE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THEY WERE TO BE REMOVED AND MITIGATED, WOULD THE TREES THAT YOU ARE PROPOSING DUE TO THE MITIGATION FOR THESE TREES AT THE SIZE THAT THEY ARE -- THE SIZE THAT THEY ARE TODAY BY THE CODE? » Mr. Garcia: I BELIEVE SO. BUT WE ARE ACTUALLY NOT REQUIRED TO MITIGATION, WE'RE DOING IT VOLUNTARILY. » Board Member: I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO. ALL I'M ASKING IS, WOULD THESE TREES, OKAY, IF YOU TOOK THE CALLIPER OF THE BISHOPWOODS, ALL RIGHT, AND IF YOU APPLIED THE CITY OF MIAMI TREE CODE FOR REMOVAL AND MITIGATION, WOULD THE TREES THAT YOU ARE PROPOSING MEET THOSE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS? » Mr. Garcia: WE BELIEVE THEY WOULD. -30- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 » Ms. Curtis: NO. THE ANSWER IS NO. » City Attorney: OKAY, I'M SORRY, YOU NEED TO -- ANYONE THAT ADDRESSES THE BOARD, YOU NEED TO PLEASE GIVE YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, SO FORTH. THANK YOU. » Ms. Curtis: MY NAME IS AIDA CURTIS, AND WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD. THE DIFFERENCE IS BY DERM STANDARDS THEY WOULD, AND THEY WOULD, IN FACT, MEET AND EXCEED THE STANDARDS. THE CITY OF MIAMI REQUIRES THE REPLACEMENT ON A CALLIPER BASIS. CALLIPER BY CALLIPER. THERE IS NO POSSIBLE WAY THAT ONE COULD ACQUIRE, A NURSERY -GROWN TREATMENTS, THE SIZE OF WHAT'S EXISTING. SO WE'RE PLANTING WHAT IS REASONABLE TO BE PLANTED, WHICH ARE NATIVE TREES IN THE LARGEST THAT YOU COULD POSSIBLY GET THEM IN A DECEMBER ENLT SIZE TRANSPLANTED AND SURVIVE EASILY, AND WE ARE PLANTING 12 OF THEM. SO WE ARE DOING THE BEST WE CAN. BUT AGAIN, WE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO MITIGATE ANY OF THE BISHOPWOOD, SO WE DON'T NEED TO PUT ANY TREES. » Board Member: ARE THE TREES BEING REPLACED BEING REPLACED IN THE SPOT WHERE THE TREES BEING REMOVED? » Mr. Garcia: THE TREES ARE BEING REMOVED FROM ONE SIDE OF THE SIDEWALK AND PLACED ON THE OTHER SIDEST SIDEWALK. THEY WILL STILL BE ON SCHOOL BOARD PROPERTY. THEY'RE PRESENTLY ON SCHOOL BOARD PROPERTY AND ARE PRESENTLY -- [SHOUTS] » Chairperson: EXCUSE ME. EXCUSE ME. » Mr. Garcia: CITY PROPERTY. THEY'RE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. -31- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 » Board Member: SO ARE THE TREES BEING REMOVED FROM THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE REPLACEMENTS IN THE SAME SPOT? » Mr. Garcia: THE REPLACEMENT IS, THEY'RE GOING ON THE OTHER SIDE-- » Board Member: YES OR NO IN » Mr. Garcia: NOT THE EXACT SAME SPOT. GOING ON THE OTHER SIDE. » Board Member: THE ANSWER IS NO. » Chairperson: EXCUSE ME. » Asst. Public Works Director: IF I MAY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YEAH, THE TREES, THEY WILL BE REPLACED -- THE TREES ARE CURRENTLY ON THE SWALE, AND WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING WOULD BE ON THE SCHOOL BOARD PROPERTY. THEY WON'T BE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE BOARD MITIGATION REQUIREMENT, WHEN A TREE IS AN INVASIVE SPECIES, WE DON'T DO THE MITIGATION BASED ON CALLIPER. WE DO IT ON ONE TO ONE. IF THE 12 THEY ARE PROPOSING IN NO WAY WILL MATCH THE CALLIPER REQUIREMENT OF THE — » Board Member: MR. CHAIR? » Mr. Garcia: IF I MAY RESPOND TO ALL THE SPEAKERS, ALL THE DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS RAISED BY SOME OF THE SPEAKERS. FIRST OF ALL, THE FIRST ARGUMENT RAISED WAS THIS WAS A REVERSAL OF THE DENIAL FROM PUBLIC WORKS, AND THAT'S AN UNUSUAL THING FOR THIS BOARD TO ACTUALLY BE DOING. BUT THE ONLY ARGUMENT THAT WAS GIVEN BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FOR ACTUALLY DENYING THE TREE PERMIT IS HE RECEIVED OBJECTION. AND BECAUSE HE RECEIVED OBJECTION TO THE TREE REMOVAL, THEN IT'S A MATTER OF COURSE, THEY DENY THAT PERMIT. THAT IS ARBITRARY CAPRICIOUS. THERE IS NO -32- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CONSIDERATION WHATSOEVER AS TO THE REASONS WHY WE'RE REQUESTING THE TREE REMOVAL, SO THERE'S SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR THIS BOARD TO ACTUALLY GRANT THE PERMIT AND REVERSE THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT'S DENIAL OF OUR PERMIT. THERE WAS NO REASON OR BASIS IN FACT OR IN LAW GIVEN BELOW FOR THAT -- FOR THAT DENIAL OF THE TREE PERMIT. THE SECOND ISSUE THAT WAS RAISED WAS YOU HAVE 58 PETITIONS FROM THE PUBLIC, THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT WHY ARE THEY REMOVING THESE TREES? BUT LOOK AT THE PETITIONS THEY'VE PROVIDED TO YOU AND THEY PROVIDED TO THE NEIGHBORS TO SIGN. THE PETITION SAID, HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT THEY THINK TO REMOVE THE EIGHT TREES WHICH ARE MORE THAN 30 YEARS OLD AND THEY DO NOT THINK TO REPLACE THEM, A RESIDENTIAL STREET WITHOUT TREES? BUT WE ARE REPLACING THEM. SO THE PEOPLE THAT WERE GIVING — [ SHOUTS ] » Chairperson: EXCUSE ME. » City Attorney: LISTEN. LISTEN TO ME. WE'RE GOING TO KEEP ORDER HERE, AND THERE WILL BE NO OUTBURSTS, AND ANY COMMENTS WILL BE MADE THROUGH THE CHAIR IF THEY RECOGNIZE IT. WE FOLLOW DECORUM HERE IN ROBERT'S RULES. THAT GOES FOR EVERYONE. THANK YOU. » Chairperson: GO AHEAD, PLEASE. » Mr. Garcia: IF I MAY? AS STATED IN THEIR PETITION, THEY'RE TELLING THEIR NEIGHBORS THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE REPLACED. MAYBE THEY'RE BEING REPLACED ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SIDEWALK. BUT THEY ARE BEING REPLACED BY 12 TREES. NOT EIGHT THAT ARE THERE. -33- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 IF YOU LOOK AT ONE OF THE OTHER ISSUES RAISED, AND THAT'S THE TREES PROVIDE A SHIELD FROM THE SCHOOL AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, THERE'S NO SHIELD THERE. THE TREES ARE 20 FEET APART. YOU SEE THE SCHOOL IN BETWEEN. THERE IS NO BY BIFURCATION. THE SCHOOL IS NOT LEAVING. THE STUDENTS ARE NOT GOING AWAY. THEY WILL ALWAYS BE THERE. THERE WILL BE A BUS DROP-OFF FOR THESE STUDENTS NEAR THAT SCHOOL AT SOME POINT. THE ONLY PROBLEM IS THAT OUR SAFETY CODE SAYS YOU CANNOT HAVE THAT BUS DROP-OFF IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SCHOOL. AND THAT IS ONE OF THE OPTIONS THAT WAS PROPOSED BY THE NEIGHBORS OF THE SCHOOL. AND THAT IS ONE OF THE OPTIONS THAT WAS REJECTED BY BOTH THE CITY AND THE CODE. THE OTHER ISSUE THAT'S BEEN RAISED IS NO DUE PROCESS HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE PUBLIC OR THE NEIGHBORS. I THINK THAT'S SUBSTANTIALLY BEEN CLARIFIED BY THE TESTIMONY YOU HAVE FROM YOUR OWN BOARD AND STAFF THAT SHOW THAT WE DID PROVIDE NOTICE THE FIRST TIME, WE DID PROVIDE NOTICE THE SECOND TIME. I PERSONALLY WENT OUT THERE AND SAW THE NOTICES ATTACHED TO THE TREES THAT HAVE BEEN PLACED NEAR THE SCHOOL PROPERTY. BASICALLY, WE'RE NOT REPLACING THE TREES WITH A BUS STATION. THIS IS A BUS DROP-OFF. WHETHER WE HAVE THE TREES THERE OR NOT, YOU WON'T HAVE A BUS DROP-OFF. IT'S VERY CLEAR. WE ARE ACTUALLY ENHANCING THIS NEIGHBORHOOD BY PROVIDING 12 TREES THAT ARE NATIVE SPECIES, THAT WILL ENHANCE THE LOOK AND FEEL OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. IT WILL ACTUALLY IMPROVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WILL ACTUALLY PROVIDE A BETTER BARRIER THAN -34- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WHAT IS THERE BETWEEN THE SCHOOL AND THE NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY, BECAUSE YOU WILL HAVE A LOT MORE TREES THAT HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE A HIGHER CANOPY THAN THE 12 BISHOP TREES FOREVER THERE LINGERING AND CAN FALL IN A STORM AND THEY'RE BREAKING AND UPROOTING THE SURROUNDING SIDEWALKS. SO WE'RE IMPROVING THAT WHOLE AREA FOR THE SCHOOL. AND BASICALLY, WE HAVE TAKEN THE COMMUNITY'S CONCERNS, WE HAVE ADDRESSED THEM. BUT THIS IS THE BEST OPTION THAT WE HAVE. AND AS YOUR OWN ATTORNEY HAS TOLD YOU AND YOUR OWN STAFF HAS TOLD YOU, WE'RE HERE ONLY ON THE TREE REMOVAL AND WE HAVE BASICALLY COMPLIED WITH THE CODE AND ORDINANCE THAT SAYS WHY WE CAN DO THIS TREE REMOVAL, AND THERE'S NO REAL REALLY-- REAL LEGITIMATE OR ACTUAL REASON. THE BUSES ARE THERE FOR 30 MINUTES IN THE MORNING AND 30 MINUTES IN THE AFTERNOON. AND THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, ID BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM OR OUR CONSULTING ARCHITECT CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS WITH REGARD TO THAT ISSUE. » Chairperson: AND NOW WE GO TO THE BOARD FOR QUESTION, COMMENTS. MR. BARBER, I BELIEVE YOU -- » Board Member: YEAH, JUST ONE QUESTION, AND I KNOW RAFAEL WILL SHUT ME UP IF IT'S NOT IN ORDER. HAS THERE BEEN ANY CONSIDERATION TO PROVIDING A BUFFER BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN TERMS OF — MAYBE SOMETIMES I SEE STRIPS OF TREES IN THE DRIVEWAY GOING INTO THE SCHOOL. ON THAT STREET? HAS THERE BEEN ANY THOUGHT OF A BUFFER, TREE BUFFER OR -35- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SOMETHING, SMALL MEDIAN IN -CUT? TO ADDRESS THE -- » Mr. Murguido: JOSE MURGUIDO, ARCHITECT. THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DOES NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT WIDTH TO PROVIDE A MEDIAN IN THE MIDDLE. SO IT WAS EXPLORED, AND UNFORTUNATELY, IN ORDER TO DO THAT, THE SOUTHBOUND LANE WOULD HAVE TO BE CLOSER TO THE RESIDENTS, WOULD ONLY EXACERBATE THE PROBLEM AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO EXCHANGE THE SWELL FOR A MEDIAN AREA. SO THAT -- THERE'S JUST A NARROW ROAD, AND UNFORTUNATELY, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH SPACE FOR A MEDIAN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. » Board Member: IT WAS A THOUGHT BUT -- » Mr. Murguido: IT WAS EXPLORED, YES, SIR. » Chairperson: YES? » Board Member: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. MITCHELL. WHEN THE SPEAKER FOR THE SCHOOL BOARD SAID THAT THE DECISION OF PUBLIC WORKS WAS ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS AND MADE ONLY BECAUSE PEOPLE COMPLAINED, YOU STOOD UP AND I THOUGHT YOU WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING. BUT PLEASE DO SO IF THAT WAS YOUR DESIRE. » Asst. Public Works Director: YEAH, REMOVAL OF TREES IS MOST, I WOULD SAY, CONTROVERSIAL SUBJECT IN THE CITY OF MIAMI. AND IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE DO LIGHTLY. SO BEFORE WE ISSUE ANY TREE REMOVAL PERMIT, WE WANT TO BE ABSOLUTELY SURE THAT THE IMPACT OF THE REMOVAL WILL BE OKAY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WITH THE RESIDENTS. AT TIMES I'VE DENIED A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT. LATER, MY DECISION HAS BEEN REVERSED. SO IN ALL CASES, I JUST DON'T WANT THESE TO BECOME -- TO BECOME BIGGER ISSUE THAN WHAT IT IS. -36- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 » Board Member: CURIOUS WHETHER THIS HANDOUT WE GOT WAS A COPY GIVEN TO THE SCHOOL BOARD TO REVIEW? DO YOU HAVE ANY -- THIS WAS GIVEN TO US -- »Mr. Garcia: WE JUST RECEIVED THE COPY TODAY. » Board Member: JUST CURIOUS. DO YOU HAVE ANY COULD COMMENTS THEIR QUOTE/UNQUOTE ALTERNATIVE PLANS, POSSIBILITIES? » Mr. Garcia: WE DID HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING. WE WENT OVER THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF PLANS. WE MET WITH THE CITY SUBSEQUENTLY TO GO OVER THE POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES. THE ONLY ALTERNATIVES, THE CITY BELIEVES IS THE BEST ALTERNATIVE, IS THE ONE PROPOSED. » Board Member: THE CITY OR SCHOOL BOARD? » Mr. Garcia: THE COUNTY, I'M SORRY. THE COUNTY. » Chairperson: YES? » Board Member: I THINK THIS IS A QUESTION OF NOT WHETHER CAN TREES BE REMOVED. TECHNICALLY, ACCORDING TO CODE, ACCORDING TO SPECIES, ACCORDING TO CLASSIFICATION, BUT WHETHER THEY SHOULD BE REMOVED IN THE PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCE? WE'VE HEARD SEVERAL TIMES ABOUT THE CODE PROVISION THAT EXOTICS OR INVASIVES THAT CAN BE REMOVED AND REPLACED. WE ALL KNOW WHAT REPLACEMENT IS IN THIS CASE. IT'S NOT REPLACEMENT IN THE SENSE OF PUTTING ANOTHER TYPE OF TREE WHERE THE TREES CURRENTLY EXIST. THESE TREES, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, HAVE STOOD UP THROUGH ANY NUMBER OF HURRICANES OVER THE PAST 30 YEARS AND DON'T SEEM TO BE A THREAT TO FALLING OVER. SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WHAT WE HAVE IS A DECISION FROM PUBLIC WORKS, AND DUE TO ITS BEING -37- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 APPEALED, WE HAVE TO GO TO THE CODE AND SEE WHAT JUSTIFIES REMOVAL OF THESE TREES. AND THE ONLY PROVISION IN CODE THAT SEEMS TO APPLY, IF AT ALL, IS WHETHER REMOVAL OF THE TREES IS NECESSARY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF SOME ISSUE OF PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE. NOW, I SUPPOSE IF THESE TREES WERE VERY UNIQUE TREES -- THEY HAD GOLDEN BERRIES, THEY WERE HISTORIC MONUMENTS -- ONLY 10 OF THEM IN THE WORLD, THEY WERE SO RARE THAT THEY COULDN'T BE REMOVED, I'M SURE THE SCHOOL BOARD WOULD FIND SOME OTHER PLACE TO PUT THEIR BUSES. THE PROPERTY ON 25th AVENUE THAT THEY OWN. I MEAN, THEY'RE WILLING TO GO INTO THE ATHLETIC FIELD AND PUT TREES THERE, BUT APPARENTLY NOT BUSES, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF THEY NEED A VARIANCE TO USE THEIR OWN PROPERTY FOR THEIR OWN BUSES, THEY SHOULD DO THAT FIRST. SO I UNDERSTAND THEIR DESIRES TO MOVE THE PROJECT ALONG, AND I HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH NOTICE AT THIS POINT. I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S BEEN A SHOWING BY THE SCHOOL BOARD THAT THERE IS SOME OVERRIDING NEED OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE THAT REQUIRES THE REMOVAL OF THESE TREES SUCH AS WOULD WARRANT REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. » Board Member: I WENT TO MIAMI HIGH, TOO, AND I COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT BETTER. » Board Member: I GUESS IT'S TIME FOR THE ARCHITECT — [ INAUDIBLE ] -- I REALLY DON'T. I KNOW HOW DANGEROUS THEY CAN BE. I'VE SEEN THEM IN HURRICANES, AT LEAST IN THE FT. LAUDERDALE AREA, COME APART, ON TOP OF CARS, BECAUSE THEY'RE AS WEAK -WOODED AS THEY ARE IN -38- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 HIGH WINDS. I HAVE NO IDEA AND NOBODY HAS PRESENTED ANY INFORMATION HERE THAT SAYS THAT THESE TREES HAVE NOT BEEN TORN APART BY WIND IN THE PAST. THEY'RE SO FAST GROWING THAT IF YOU'RE TWO YEARS DOWN THE PIKE FROM A HURRICANE, YOU'D NEVER KNOW IF A BRANCH HAD BLOWN OUT OF ONE OF THESE TREES. THEY'RE JUST THAT NATURED. I'M LOOKING AT THE PLANTING PLANS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED. AND I GUESS I COULD ASK THE SCHOOL BOARD -- I KNOW THERE IS NO MITIGATION REQUIREMENT FOR REMOVAL OF THE INVASIVE EXOTIC. NOTHING. NO REQUIREMENT. HOWEVER, I BET IF ONE LOOKED AT THE PLANTING THAT ONE IS PROPOSING FOR THE RENOVATION OF THIS SCHOOL, THAT THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF PLANTING THAT SOMEHOW IS BEING DONE THERE WOULD MORE THAN MITIGATE FOR THE REMOVAL OF THESE TREES. I JUST -- I'M ALSO -- I MEAN, I'M STRUCK BY SOME OTHER KINDS OF THINGS. I'M LOOKING AT THE GOOGLE AIR -- OR THE AIR PHOTO FROM GOOGLE. AND I'M LOOKING AT THE EIGHT TREES THERE, AND I'M LOOKING ACROSS THE STREET, AND I GUESS THESE ARE THE NEIGHBORS WHO ARE -- WHO ARE REALLY OBJECTING TO THE FACT THAT WE'LL REMOVE THESE TREES. I DON'T SEE ANYBODY THERE. I DON'T SEE ANYBODY THERE TRYING TO PROVIDE TREE CANOPY. SO TO SOME DEGREE, IT'S KIND OF AN EMPTY ARGUMENT. IF THE PEOPLE ON THAT SIDE OF THE STREET DON'T CARE, YOU KNOW, THEY WANT SOMEONE ELSE'S TREES TO TAKE CARE OF THEM. I ALSO WANT TO TALK ABOUT ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS, IS THAT ALTHOUGH THE TREE PROTECTION INTENT AND PURPOSES IS TO SOME DEGREE TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT, THAT OUR JOB IS TO PRESERVE AND RESTORE THE TREE -39- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CANOPY WITHIN THE CITY, OKAY? BUT IT'S PRESERVE AND RESTORE. AND THE ISSUE WITH INVASIVE EXOTICS IS THAT THEY CROWD OUT OTHER TREES. AND, IN FACT, THEY TAKE OVER THE CANOPY IN MANY, MANY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. I KNOW ALL OF YOU -- WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF MANY OF YOU OR ALL OF YOU KNOW ABOUT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE A CYPRESS TREE GROWING ANYWHERE YOU CAN TAKE A FICUS TREE DOWN, YOU KNOW, WITHOUTA PERMIT. THE REASON THAT IS IS BECAUSE THE LITTLE BERRIES GET EATEN BY THE BIRDS AND THE BIRDS RUN OVER TO THE HIGHWAY, AND THEY ELIMINATE THEIR LITTLE BERRY OVER THERE ON THE HIGHWAY AND THE SEED ROLLS IN THE GUTTER, THE SEED IN THE GUTTER TURNS INTO A LITTLE TREE AND BLOWS THE ROAD APART. THAT'S WHAT INVASIVES DO. NOW, WHETHER OR NOT ONE CAN GO OUT AND FIND A BUNCH OF BISCHOVIAS AROUND THAT HAVE SEEDED IN, I DON'T KNOW. KNOW FICUS DO THAT. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THE NOTION OF TAKING EIGHT TREES DOWN AND PLANTING OAK TREES OF THE SIZE THAT THE SCHOOL BOARD IS PROPOSING TO PLANT IS MORE THAN ADEQUATE TO GAIN MY SUPPORT. I GUESS IF I HAD ONE OTHER ISSUE, I THINK IT'S THE NOTION THAT -- I KNOW OUR PUBLIC WORKS ARE KIND OF STRETCHED ALL OVER THE PLACE. I GUESS I WISH IN A CASE LIKE THIS WHEN THERE IS A CODE THAT TALKS ABOUT EXOTIC INVASIVES THAT THERE WERE SOME REAL - SOME REAL -- SOME HORTICULTURE KNOWLEDGE THAT IS, IN FACT, A PART OF THAT. AND I ALSO NEED TO ADDRESS ONE ISSUE THAT ONE OF OUR SPEAKERS -- ONE OF THE SPEAKERS FROM THE PUBLIC TALKED ABOUT, THAT THESE TREES POSE NO THREAT. THEY ARE THREATENING, OKAY? THEY ARE TREEING THAT, -40- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 IN FACT, DO COME DOWN QUITE OFTEN IN HIGH WINDS AND CAN, IN FACT, INJURE PEOPLE AND PROPERTY, OKAY? AND THEY DO POSE A THREAT BECAUSE OF THEIR WEAK -WOODED NATURE. THANK YOU. » Chairperson: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? MOTION? [ INAUDIBLE ] NO, YOU MAY NOT. NO. NO. YOU MAY NOT. PUBLIC HEARING IS OVER. MOTION? » Board Member: I HAVE A MOTION. » Chairperson: GO AHEAD. » Board Member: IF I MAY? I MOVE THAT THE APPEAL BE DENIED AND THAT THE DECISION OF PUBLIC WORKS BE AFFIRMED. » Board Member: SECOND. » Chairperson: IT'S BEEN MOVED TO AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, SO IF YOU VOTE "YES" ON THIS MOTION, YOU'RE VOTING TO RETAIN THE TREES. » City Attorney: AND WE'VE HEARD A LONG HEARING ON THIS. PERHAPS LONGER THAN OUR OTHER CASES. SO I'M JUST -- I'M JUST MAKING -- INQUIRYING. IS IT IMPLIED, OR IS IT INTENDED BY THE MOVANT, WHEN THERE IS A DENIAL, IT'S BECAUSE THE CRITERIA FOR TREE REMOVAL AND RELOCATION HAS NOT BEEN SATISFACTORILY MET. » Board Member: MY THOUGHT IS THE APPEALING PARTY HAS NOT MET THE BURDEN TO REVERSE THE DECISION FROM PUBLIC WORKS. » City Attorney: OKAY, VERY WELL. VERY WELL. » Chairperson: ANY QUESTIONS ON THE MOTION? » Board Member: SECOND. » Chairperson: I'M ASKING IF FROM ARE ANY QUESTIONS. ROLL CALL, -41- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PLEASE. [ ROLL CALL ] » Clerk: THE MOTION CARRIES, A VOTE OF 6-3. » Chairperson: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT ITEM. [APPLAUSE] » City Attorney: THIS DECISION IS FINAL UNLESS APPEALS OF THE CITY COMMISSION IN THE MANNER PRESCRIBED BY THE CODE. » Chairperson: NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA *** -42- 05/14/2010 13:11 3053779100 RAY/KOLNER, LAWYERS PAGE 02 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1© 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFICATE PAGE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the attached foregoing is a true and accurate Transcript Excerpt of the January 5, 2010 HEP Board meeting transcribed by me from the certified DVD copy provided to' -ne by the City of Miami Historical and Environmental Preservation Board, from Ma nit -mad -captioned data track, to the best of my abilities. SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this day of ' ay. 2010, at Miami, Florida. 4460 1 eil D. olner iberty Building 124 South Miami Avenu Miami, Florida 33130-1 05 �`;:"•�;b, Nava DEAN RAY MYCOMMON 6DOR1Ml i 414,4-' iva ."44.tc„ Rau Molloy woe aefrliA E](PIRE$. Apia 24, 2013 -43..