HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal- Barbara K. BisnoComments to Miami City Commission —
Revenue Sharing Agreement re Children's
Museum Outdoor Advertising Sgicns ,sh4
Oct 25, 2012
Barbara K. Bisno
Pres. Scenic Miami -Dade County, Inc.
For the following reasons, we request that each
of you vote no on the revenue sharing
agreement before you today or at the minimum
defer the matter:
1) This matter adds to the proliferation of LED
outdoor advertising to the degradation of our
unique subtropical community, reducing our
quality of life and nullifying our special tourist
attraction.
2) These signs are illegal pursuant to the
County Sign Code.
3) Consent for these signs has not be obtained
from the Miami Exhibition and Sports Authority
�2-011b5 SUbtuitAbaraKB►sno
and therefore these signs violate the sublease
to the Children's Museum — also, by the way, as
does the Charter School located on the
premises of the Museum and occupies a
substantial portion of the "Museum."
4) We would like to point out a few instances,
though not all, of the violations of Article 6,
Miami 21, adopted in April, 2012, by these
signs:
a) If closer than 200 feet from the MacArthur
Causeway, these signs violate Article 6 of
Miami 21.
b) These signs violate Article 6.5.1.8 c as no
outdoor advertising sign is allowed east of 195
and south of 36th Street.
c) The ordinance enacted in May, 2012 to
authorize these signs states that intermittent
signs are prohibited but allows mechanically
changeable signs. Article 6.5.1.8 c2 (d) states
no mechanical devices may be used in outdoor
advertising signs. Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item RE.19 on 10-25-12
Dwight 5. Danie
City Clerk
d) There are several other provisions of the
Miami zoning code including the restriction of 1
sign per building that these signs would violate.
4) Within the authorizing ordinance is a
provision that these signs will not be allowed if
they interfere with any driver's operation of a
vehicle. Therefore, these signs should not be
allowed to be visible to drivers on MacArthur
Causeway. If that is so, what is the basis for
the revenue sharing document you are
considering today?
5) As the authorizing ordinance denotes the
Children's Museum as operating on city -owned
property, how is it that nowhere in the revenue
sharing document is there an explanation of
how the projected revenues were determined or
how much money the Museum will make and
how much money the outdoor advertising
company will make.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item RE.19 on 10-25-12
Dwight S. Danie
City Clerk
4
These are just a few of the reasons that you
each of you should vote no or to defer this
matter.
Thank you for your consideration.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item RE.19 on 10-25-12
Dwight S. Danie
City Clerk