Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1978-01-24 MinutesCOMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 24, 1978 PLANNING & ZONING MEETING PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CITY HALL RALPH GI ONGIE. CITY CLERK INDEX MINUTES Of SPECIAL rtETING CITY COMISSICid OF MI, 1I, FLORIDA ITEM N0, 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. SUBJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Deferral of Consideration of: Granting Cond- itional Use to Permit MedicaliDenta`i Offices.. Prepared Resolution of Amendments incorporated into the Convention Center Agreements Amended esoluc .on : Permit Opening in Wall at Central Shopping Plaza Direct C3ty I4 nagger to Investigate alleged Zoning Violation by Intercontinental Bank at Central Shopping Plaza. Close portions of N.W. 17 Ct. - Lawrence Park Amd. - Tentative Plat #1003-A-Betty's Island SECOND READING ORDINANCE: Change zoning class ification 17-51 N.W. North Riverdrive from R-4 to C-4. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: Change zoning class ification Tigertail Avenue; Natoma Street; Secoffee Street and Amathla from R-1 to R-1B. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: Change zoning class- ification 2,100 S. Dixie Hwy. Lots 11-18,etc. - "Biscayne Park Terrace from R-1 to RCA ORDINANCE 09 RESOLUTION No. Deferral Res. 78=74 Res, 73-75 Mot. 78-76 PAGE N0 1 1-13 14-23 23 Res. 78-77 1 24 Ord. 8754 1 25 Ord. 8755 1 25-26 1st Reading FIRST READING ORDINANCE: Amend Article XIV-1 1st Reading SPECIAL COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL C-2A District,etc FIRST READING ORDINANCE: Amend Art. XXV Base 1st Reading Building Lines -N.W. 9 Ave. bet. 15 St. & 18 S . & N.W. 10 Ave. bet. 19 St. & 20 St. 70' R-O-W. Close Alley bounded by NE 1st Ct. & 2d Ave.So. Res. 78-78 of the south right-of-way line N.E. 16 St. Tentative Plat 976-B "Jefferson's Addition." 26-39 39-40 40 41-42 FIRST READING ORDINANCE: Change zoning class. 1st Reading 42-44 ification N.W. corner of N.E. 4 Ct. at NE 55 Terr - from Cl to C4. ?; Appeal by Applicant - Manuel Del Portillo - of 1st Reading i 45-50 Zoning Bd.'s denial of Variance-3513 S.W. 17 Terr. (Discussion and Defferred). Review of Res. 72-415 which permitted Off -St. Mot. 78-79 1 50-53 Parking Lot at 1570 N.W. 26th Avenue, Grant one year extension of Conditional Use toi Res. 78-80 53 Permit P,U,N, 1684 S.W. 24th Avenue. i N1 I ? y k 1 J A N 41978 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA * : s 3e * On the 24th day of January, 1978, the City Commission of Miami, Florida met at its regul:l.^ meeting place in the City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida in regular session. The meeting was called to order at 7:15 o'clock P.M, by Maurice A. Ferre with the following members of the commission found to be present: AU.;O PRESENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr, Commissioner(Rev.) Theodore Gibson Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor ?Maurice A. Ferre Joseph R. Grassie, City Manager R. L. Fosmoen, Assistant City Manager George F. Knox, City Attorney Ralph G. Ongie, City Clerk Matty Hirai, Assistant City Clerk A motion to waive the reading of the minutes was introduced and seconded and was passed unanimously. ALQINSIMRAT�QNOFA�IGCONDITIONAL USE TO PERMIT MEDICAL/�OWF�GS� Mayor Ferre: Item #1. This is an appeal by the Applicant, Fernando Nunez -Perez, of the Toning Board's Denial of Conditional Use to permit medical or dental offices at 4370-72 West Flagler Street. Is there anybody on this subject other than the applicant? Is there anybody who wants to be heard on this other than the applicant? Mr. Plummer: Seeing that it will inconvenience no one but the Applicant, I move ... Mayor Ferre: We're grateful for all the deferrals we can get. Rev. Gibson: Seconded. A motion to defer this matter to another time was passed and adopted by a unanimous vote of the Commission. 4, PREPARED RESOLUTION OF AMENDMENTS INCORPORATED INTO THE CONVENTION CENTER AGIITS, Mayor Ferre: Now, Mr, Worsham I see you walking in, You've been at it all afternoon, Have you come back to us with a conclusion? Mr, Worsham: Yes Mr. Mayor we have, Mayor Ferre: Look like you were lucky enough to go home and change clothes, that's more than I can say, Mr, Worsham: No in fact I wasn't, but we have come back wl.th an N 24 mg MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMIs FLORIDA On the 24th day of Januarys 1978s the City Commission of Miami$ Florida tnet at its regtzlo.r meeting place in the City Halls 3500 Pah American Drives Miami, Florida in regular session, The meeting was called to order at 7:15 o'clock P.M, by Maurice A. Ferre with the following members of the commission found to be present: ALS') PRESENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer$ Jr, Commissioner(Rev.) Theodore Gibson Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A. Ferre Joseph R. Grassie, City Manager R. L. Fosmoen, Assistant City Manager George F. Knox, City Attorney Ralph G. 0ngie, City Clerk Matty Hirai, Assistant City Clerk A motion to waive the reading of the minutes was introduced and seconded and was passed unanimously. AL OF CONSIDERATION OF: GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE TO PERMIT MEDICAL/ AL OFFICES - 4370-72 W. FLAGLER STREET: Mayor Ferre: Item #1. This is an appeal by the Applicant, Fernando Nunez -Perez, of the Toning Board's Denial of Conditional Use to permit medical or dental offices at 4370-72 West Flagler Street. Is there anybody on this subject other than the applicant? Is there anybody who wants to be heard on this other than the applicant? Mr. Plummer: Seeing that it will inconvenience no one but the Applicant, I move ... Mayor Ferre: We're grateful for all the deferrals we can get. Rev. Gibson: Seconded. A motion to defer this matter to another time was passed and adopted by a unanimous vote of the Commission. PREPARED RESOLUTION OF AMENDMENTS INCORPORATED INTO THE CONVENTION CENTER AGREEMENTS. Mayor Ferre: Now, Mr. Worsham I see you walking in. You've been at it all afternoon. Have you come back to us with a conclusion? Mr. Worsham; Yes Mr, Mayor we have, Mayor Ferre: Look like you were lucky enough to go home and change clothes, that's more than I can say, Mr, Worsham: No in fact I wasn't, but we have come back with an ' AN 2A 1°7 1 answer and I think we have responded to the Commission's requests the various requests made by you and Mr, Plummer and Mrs. Gordon and the other Commissioners. I think that Mr. Connolly has a synopses of those conclusions and the negotiations that took place this afternoon. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Connolly, can we have copies of the synopses? Mr. Connolly: You got them, Mayor Ferret Is this it? Mr. Connolly: Yes it's a resolution with a blank number on it. Mrs. Gordon: Mr, Connolly as a point of informationsthese changes that are on this sheet to be included in the contract when they are included in the contract will it come back to this Commission before it's signed by the City Manager? Mr. Plummer: Background Comment, Mrs. Gordon: That's what J. ice. and I just talked about. Mr. Plummer: Wells let's incorporate it in here, Mayor Ferre: No, I think she got a valid point. What we would do is we would approve in substance the contract and it would authorize you to proceed to put it in final form and then I think the final signing of it we would do after it was put in final form and the Commission had the opportunity to see it. I would be even willing to do it this way, that once we get it,that we would have three days. We would have three days to study it, read it, and if anybody had any objections I would call a Special Commission Meeting, otherwise Mrs. Gordon: I thought that's what J. L. thought the interpretation of the wording in here was. Didn't you say that to me before? Mr. Plummer: What I read here is Rose,"that these things that have been deleted from are things that are still open and subject to finalization". Mrs. Gordon: Right. Mayor Ferre: No. No, that's not it at all, is it? Is that what it is? Mr. Connolly: No sir it's not. Mayor Ferre: I didn't think so. Mr. Connolly: It is a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute these two agreements. Once all these changes which are the result of this morning's meeting with the Commission incorporated. Mayor Ferre: Well, that's exactly what I'm saying and what I'm recommending Jim that we do is that you put this into the new document and submit it to the Commission,hand delivered and then we will pass a resolution three days after it was delivered, the Manager would be authorized to sign it. Unless one member of the Commission, any member of this Commission has veto power. You follow me Rose:' If it's anything that you have any questions on... Mrs. Gordon: I have one right now I'll bring it out and you can change it so that it .. , Mayor Ferre: Fine, ,., I would recommend that we do the following; Let's take five minutes to read it, It's only a three page document. Let's read it and then we'll come back and see if we are covered alright? 2 ` � 24197% tt Mayor Fetre: Everybody finished reading? Mrs, Gordon: Yes sir, I have (one) change in wording in (b) to read; The Agreement will provide the City of Miami Ad Valorem tax will be the only tax credited against the rents payable to the City of Miami", Mayor Ferret That the City of Miafni Mrs, Gordon: Ad valorem tax will be the only tax to be credited against rents payable to the city; and the reason for that is the yes, and the possibility of taxes that might come about in the future, Also, franchise tax or other tax, There are many areas of possibilities, Mayor Ferret It means the same to you except that it closes out of the loopholes. That's better. Alright, any other changes? Mrs. Gordon: Well, I questioned the sentence above it,but I was told that the last paragraph took care of that,and my question was the developer will have the right to generate such revenue producing sources. Certainly we don't object to producing revenue but what kind of sources would they be, but the last paragraph says that any substantial changes must be approved so I have to feel that that's covered by that. Am I right? Is that covered Jim? Mr. Connolly: Yes. Mrs. Gordon: Ok. Then the only or whatever I don't know, you know anything could be a revenue producing that I don't foresee. Paragraph (h) I just want you to explain that to me a little bit more fully that's the one relating to the first refusal. I don't have my contract with me. Mayor Ferre: What it says as I understand it,is that no matter what happens, no matter what stalling there may be or anything else,that it cannot go beyond five years. Mr. Connolly: That's correct. _ Mayor Ferre: In other words, they'v,- got an option in which they can, they've got six months but they can't push that six months more than the five year period from when? Mr. Connolly: From the date of execution of this contract. Mrs. Gordon: To do what? I know. Mr. Connolly: To come up with a developmental plan for phase (b) that would be accepted by the City Commission. Mayor Ferre: Suppose we get into a phase (b). See the reason why I'm not too worried about it Rose is very simply because if they get this thing approved tonight it'll be three years before they open up that ... Mrs. Gordon: I'm not worried about them having the first refusal. Mayor Ferre: And so they have another two years, you know. Mrs. Gordon: I have no objection to them at all I just want you to you know, bring it out to it's fulliest of what specifically the development of (b) phase would include. Mr, Connolly: What we're including now is that under no circumstances, no matter what the excuses it cannot be extended beyond five years, Mrs, Gordon: Yes, I realize that but you're not answering my question, What is the first refusal permit to be done on (b)? The garage or the parking is our responsibility. ['That is their first refusal? The hotel or something else? 3 °JAN 24 197(3 Mayor Ferre: If we decide to go out and put a fashion mart or hotel or a world trade center or an exhibition hall or what have you they've got the right,,, Mrs, Gordon: ,., they want to be guaranteed that they can do the same thing before anybody else can do it, Mayor Ferre: What ever deal it is somebody comes in and says look, the City of Miami we want to do this and we are going to give you a million dollars a year for it, that's it, It's got to be a bona fide offer, they've got to meet it and they've got six months to meet it, Mrs, Gordon: I have no objection to the developer having first refusal, I just want that understood. I just wanted the clarificat- ion on the record ok. That's my questions and that's it, Mayor Ferre: Mr, Plummer. Mr, Plummer: Mr. Mayor in section (d) I have no trouble with the wording as it appears but I think the University might have. It gives equal rights to the developer in the city but it doesn't spell out an equal right to the University of Miami which I think we're in this together... Mayor Ferre: Very simple, why don't you just add and the City of Miami's contract with the University of Miami is hereby recognized and make it part and parcel. Their rights are recognized. Mr. Plummer: Well, ok, I just think, you know, spell it out. Mayor Ferre: Yes, but look, if you spell it out if new wording you're going to get yourself in trouble because that is the subject for a lawsuit. You know what this, what the University of Miami contract says, right, you accept it, then you just say that this recognizes the University of Miami's rights as per agreement of such and such of thing that's all. Mrs. Gordon: I think it's clear to this extent J. L., because what- ever rights the city has,which is, the University is getting first crack anyway, so we're going to share what's leftover equally, correct? That's it. Mr. Plummer: Mayor Ferre: Mr. Connolly: developer to As long as it's understood. We don't want to end up with a tri-party lawsuit here. We can't commit on the part of the University for the Mayor Ferre: That's not the point. Mr. Connolly: I think it is the point. Mayor Ferre: No it isn't the point. The point is... Mr. Connolly: The University is reviewing this agreement now by the way. In final form they will ,.. Mayor Ferre: You cannot agree for the University, Mr, Connolly: That's what I'm saying. Mayor Ferre: I understand that. But that's_ not the point, The point is not University, it's the Developer, Will the Developer recognize universities contractual arrangements, you end up with two contracts,ao you know I'm not a lawyer, but I know enough about law that if you have two documents there always has to be recognition of which one supersedes. The constitution supersedes, you know, federal law supersedes state law and certain things, You've got to say that since you have two contractual arrangements for the city, the city has a contractual arrangement with the University and now it has a contractual arrangement with the developers,suppose there's a conflict between those two documents you don't know you're not perfect,so the only way you can preclude 1 7JAN 41978 1 that is by putting into this document that they recognize and accept the University agreeriient► You follow me? Mrs Connolly: That is in the document. Mayor Ferret That is in the document. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I would like... Mayor Ferrer Alright, Mr. Knox that's an very important point. Mr. Knox: Well it's always preferable to specify which -- as between two documents in the event of conflict which one should have precedent otherwise the court could do it. Mayor Ferre: I think the thing to do is just say that they recognize, they, the Developers recognize in this document the document signed between the City and the University, that's all. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, look, you know, what we're trying to do... Mayor Ferre: Alright, is that acceptable to you? Mr. Plummer: What I understand we're trying to accomplish in the wording and the cleaning up of this document is to try to forestall problems in the future. Now, I would feel much more comfortable Mr. Grassie?if prior to your signing the execution of this contract, that you have a letter in your file from the University of Miami. Number one, they have reviewed it, and number two, that they have no objections to this contract and I would want so stipulate that that be, I want that to be a pr,rccgsisite of your signing the contract that you have such a letter in your files... Mayor Ferre: That's all very nice Plummer but that's second rate because that's not binding. ine only way you can make it a factor and all this islif you put it into this contract. Mr. Plummer: Fine and there's no reason you can't do both. Mayor Ferre: Yes, but then a lot ... doesn't mean anything. See the important thing is that they recognize University of Miami existence in a contractual obligation to the City of Miami so that later on,there won't be any conflict as long as they do,that there are no conflicts. Now, I think, I agree with you and I would sub- scribe that that's finejthe University of Miami ought to send a letter to Mr. Grassie and say that they've read it and they think it's fine. Obviously, that's not a binding document, because later on you know if you get into lawsuit somebody can say well, but that was Dr. Henry King Stanford's opinion' but that doesn't bind the University of Miami. It's not a legally binding document. Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, a comment that I didn't make this afternoon and because of your comments now•I will put on the record that it bothered me that during a very critical time of this project that there was no university of Miami representative here today,and they are part and parcel of this very critical project, but yet when we're talking about the very nitty gitty of theproject they had no- one here,that bothered me, and because of that is the reason that I said what I did. Number one, they've read the document and number two, they have no objections and I see nothing wrong with that Mr. Mayor, I mean if the University is here, you know they can speak for themselves or they could have voiced an opinion today on these particular items that we were talking about. Rev, Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I move you sir that prior to the signing of that document by the Manager that we have a written document from the University of Miami certifying that they have read it and they are in accord. I know that isn't binding in a lawsuit, but what it doesitserves notice on us that they have read it, they've investi- gated it, explored, and all of that, and I don't want it for the Manager's file because the Manager isn't going to be doing, you know, this is part of the contract, The Manager is not going to be voting, 5 TAN 20978 We're going to be doing the voting, The Manager is going to carry out our instructions and I want to have the consulationj whatever that iss that the University of Miami has been fully notified3 fully aware and have fully read it, Mayor Ferre: Fathers I'll tell you we will incorporate that in the final motions made here if there is one, That's one condition alright? Rev► Gibson: Yes sir, Mayor Ferre: Any further questions? Reboso? Father? Rev, Gibson: No sir. Mayor Ferret 0k. I got one question: I kind of like this proportion, How come you changed it from what we had before and you made it kind of tougher now? Now, I'm very happy that you're going to have 607 rooms rather than 500, but why would you want to penalize the City of Miami from making a little bit more money out of. that? Mr. Worsham : It actually is not a penalization. At the same dollar level of gross room receipts. The same number of dollars come to the city but the total performance changes between 500 and 607 rooms quite appreciably, but the same level of gross receipts is reflected in the same number of dollars to the city under both of these sets. Mayor Ferre: Yes, ok. You think that's nice, do you Jim? Mr. Connolly: Well, it damages the developer's proforma which of course is the thing he goes to his mortgage holder with. And, just let me say that there was an appreciable change if we kept the same numbers as 607 rooms to the point that it probably could not be feasible. Mayor Ferre: Let me ask you this Jim. On the Watson Island Project we get a 2% alright. Now if the project ends up being a 40 million dollar project or if it gets to be a 50 million dollar projects we're still getting 2% of the returns. Now the reason why I'm happy it's going to be a 50 million dollar project, even though the amortization schedule and the debt service goes up; the fact is that this will make it possible instead of having 21/2 million visitors,hopefully we'll have 3 million visitiors, ok. Now with 3 million visitors, I would assume that the return and 2% for the City of Miami is going to be larger than the smaller project. Now, my question is this, the developer is going from 500 to 607 rooms because that is more feasible. It's ri.Skier, sure, but I guess they feel strongly enough that this is a good enough piece of property where they're going to go for a larger hotel. I'm happy. Are we going to be beneficiaries along with them? Mr. Connolly : Yes we certainly are. Mayor Ferre: How do you figure that when the percentages are lower? Mr. Connolly : The percentages are lower but the dollars are con- sistently higher. Mayor Ferre: Precisely the point. In other words, as I read this the column on the left and the column on the right are fixed because you're trying to figure out how it comes out at the schedule that you had this morning which basically averages out of the $400,000 for a ten year period, is that correct? So $400,000 is what we get on the left column and $400,000 is what we get on the right column and that's why the percentages had to be lowered, Mr, Connolly: I'o Mr, Mayor, in fact, that's not actually the case•'rne the right hand side on the 607 rooms reflects the additional capital cause with an escalating rent from 2% to 5% as against 20% of the net operating profit responding to your request this morning which- ever is higher, col uiutI JAN 241978 Mayor Ferre: Well, 20% is probably going to higher because you'tie lowered this to the point where,,, Mr, Worsham: No in fact, according to our ptoformance your request produced in this particular scale which you will notice also goes out at the rate of $5005000 per increment on that same percentage that we proposed before, What it boils down to is that,' explicitly according to our projections of income inthe sixth year, 20% of the net operating profit would yield to the city $3535000, In the sixth year the percentage rent over here would be $3635000 or roughly $10,000 more so you would be going into,,, Mayor Ferre: Yes, but you're not that much of a magician that's all dependLng on what, a 75% occupancy- six year. Mr. Connolly: Well, 72% is what this is proposed. Mayor Ferre: Alright, suppose you have 90% occupancy in the sixth year? Mr.. Worsham: Then so much the better for you, you see, because you would then participate if we have like 90% occupancy the revenues would be up in the 13 million dollars level. Mayor Ferre: Alright, but Mr. Worsham, I guess what I'm trying to get at is this in the sixth year with a 500 room hotel granted your increase to motor station and interest expense and operating expense the difference between a 500 room hotel and a 607 room hotel is got to be what, 20% more? At 72% occupancy... Mr. Worsham: Would you repeat that. I'm not sure... Mayor Ferre: What I'm trying to say is that obviously if you got an airplane that carries more passengers and if you have 72%, you know of a plane that carries 150 passengers and you have 72% occupancy than a plane that carries 300 passengers;obviously the bigger plane has more money involved even though the debt is going to be greater and the ;iri-,r i;ation is greater.your cash flow is greater, your depreciation is greater in the amount of revenues greater. So in other words, if you can keep that plane full you're making more money. What I'm saying is 72% occupancy in a 607 room hotel has got to be cash flow wise and profit wise more than a 72% occupancy or a 500 room hotel. Mr. Worsham: That's correct and the city participates in that. Mayor Ferre: Not if you lower Mr. Worsham, the percentages like you've done. Mr. W asham: No I really haven't. I haven't lowered the percentages. The percentages have stayed exactly the same as they were proposed on gross room revenues,but the base begins at a different level. If you'll notice again the percentages,and if you looked back to the original proposal Mr. Mayor the percentages are exactly the same. The incremental percentages' as it goes from 2% to 2.3% for example, are exactly the same. In other words, another $500,000 worth of revenue but the difference is where do you start? On 500 rooms we started at 5 million dollars in sales. On the 607 rooms we started at $8,500,000 in sales. Mayor Ferre: I accept that. Mr, Worsham: And, the reason for that is because our cost is greater and obviously we have to have more sales as a beginning point. Mayor Terre: I understand that, Because your breaking point obviously is, so you have to ,,, I understand that and I have no objections with starting higher up the ladder where I think what has happened here and I don't know our negotiator, I'm asking him because he represented us but I think what you did is you took the figures that you estimated as a return that the city should get and you adjusted the scale to that, Mr. Worsham; No sir I really didn't exactly, It was based upon 7 JAN 241978 keeping the percentages. We discussed the possibilities of corning back on i you know 3 just a fixed percentage 4 but we felt that in the cont-rit of our original proposal of where we had a scale percentage so that where the hotel became more successful the city d uld participate more and more 3 that's our basic concept and so we kept the percentage scale exactly the same but we changed the beginning point because of the extra cost, That's all we did, It really is exactly the same if you compare it with exception of where do you start and what level of sales do you start, Mayor Ferre: I accept starting at a higher level because your cash flow is different, What I have problems with again is how you changed the percentages and I think that what that in effect does, is that in your sixth year,there's not going to be a heck of a lot difference for the city as far as revenue is concerned,having a 500 room hotel with your left schedule,as having a 607 room hotel without schedule, Mr. Worsham: Oh absolutely, I have a chart for the city's participat- ion that I could give you a copy of to show you the difference, The City will get at least *100,000 more to the city as a result of the 607 rooms. Mayor Ferre: Well, I'm going to accept that, you know, on its face but let me be very specific in the sixth year if you were to sell 9 million dollars with a 500 room hotel we would get 4.10, ... Mr. Worsham: Yes sir. Mayor Ferre: You know, for that increment between 8% and 9 and then 3,8 for the increment lower and so on, ok, and I'm saying that if you figured that out, that's exactly 9 million dollars and if on the other hand you go over to the other point and that is that 9 million dollars at the other scale we started 20. I realize that it won't be 9 million for both because obviously you got a bigger hotel so it's different, but I question very much whether we'd be much better off. I know what I'm saying Earl, I guess is that I don't see where the City of Miami is getting any value out of the additional expenditure in the larger hotel. Mr. Worsham: If you'll give me just a moment,I have a chart and I will, do you have some copies of that Jim? I have a specific chart and will show you the difference. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Worsham,' understand what this is but you see, I saw this. This is the figure you showed me yesterday, but as I see this, this only speaks to the 20% of profit participation. Mr. Worsham: That's correct Mr. Mayor. Now, I have worked out the numbers based upon your request of today pursuant to this schedule based upon this exact same figure, these exact same figures. First of all let me draw your attention to the original proposal on Year II the city would get $277,700. On the 600 room proposal,at 20a of the profits,the city would get $313,000.alright that's considerable more money. Now going to the formula ... Mayor Ferre: Earl, don't waste any time because I agree with what you're putting up here but that's not what we're talking about. Mr. Wb rsham: Yes sir. Yes sir it is because what I was going to go on to point out is that in the loth year based upon this exact same proforma;in the loth year you will be into the 5% level of sales. You will be getting *562,000 plus the base rent, plus the base rent now which will be $250,000 so that's about the same. So it's approximately the same but it wasn't.. You get $562,000 from the percentage room sales as against actually $515,000 Mayor Ferre: 515, I see 829 on the 10th here, Mr, Wcrsham: Yes, that's plus the base rent you see this is the participation rent and the participation rent, but let me assure you it's exactly, if you go back to the proposal it's exactly the same percentage scale going up exactly the same amount of money for each level as each 8 JAN 241979 percentage goes up but it starts at a higher base because we have higher capital cost. Mr. Plummer: Are you saying the 829 in the 10th year includes the base rent? Mr. Worsham: Yes sir. Mr. Plummer: What is the base rent? Mr. Worsham: The base gent in the loth year was $2505000 and the participation rent that we have calculated on the 600 room level is $5765000.That compares to our original proposal on 500 rooms of 55950005 say 5605000 so it's almost $3005000 difference. No Mr, Mayor I'm not trying to box you in at all. It's an either or situation. The hotel does not perform on the 20% level. You will get it from the gross receipts level and that's what we tried to do, but we don't want to construct a formula on gross receipts that doesn't make any sense with relation to our bottom line. It really, that's what we tried to do. Mayor Ferre: Ok. I got a point here. In effect what this means is that even though it's harder for us since you're going to have a larger hotel. What you've done is you made 8 million dollars in sales with a smaller hotel comparable to 11/ million dollars in sales with a larger hotel,and so,we end up getting the same amount of money in the small hotel at 8 million dollars,to do as well as with the larger hotel;this bar means that we got to get up to 11.5 million, see. Mr. Worsham: Mr. Mayor that's if we want to back off to the option of gross hotel sales. Mayor Ferre: No, not back off. What I was trying to do is I was trying to get a difference, an additional formula so that if hotel rooms do well we have that as a back-up. On the other hand I don't blame you for being very conservative about it because you're not going to give away anything. Mr. Worsham: Well, basically what you have is this we had come, the developer had made a proposal where the participation of rent would be based upon the gross room sales. That was turned down by the CommissionAthen we went to a 20% of net profit and then you asked for something to go back off onto on back off to net room sales again,and what we did :as we took the 500 room proforma and of course, that reflects directly into what is in the agreement and then we took the 607 room proforma based upon the same proforma coming out with basically the same number of dollars either way,and that's what the scale comes out to as listed here;so that we're not looking at any changes. We're saying that if for some reason,the retail business collapses and that we only have a hotel we will be able to garner the same amount of revenue to the city under either option. Mr. Plummer: When was this sheet put together? Mr. Worsham: That sheet. It was over the weekend, Mr. Grassie: I wonder Mr. Mayor if the answer to your question lies in making a judgment about whether or not the proforma on a 500 room hotel and the proforma on a 607 hotel progress the way this schedule is laid out. In other words, does it take us the same amount of developer effort to get the 8 million dollars with 500 rooms as it does to get 11/ million dollars with 607 rooms? Mayor Terre; Well, I think the question is much more basic than that,and the real question is this,when this hotel goes to it's maximum potential,whether it's the 8th year or the loth year and it gets to its maximum rentability. Under the 500 room formula are we better off financially than we are with the 607 motel ?That's the key question. What happens at the maximum: What happens when 9 JAN 241978 the hotel is fully sold out to maximum amount of money? Remember you're talking about, I want to remind you that you're talking about a 90 year contract. Mr. Grassie: Mr. Worsham is the Mayor's question clear? As I understands you knows what we're asking is,this schedule gives the impression that it makes no difference whether you build 500 rooms or 607,the amount of return to the city will be the same, It gives that impression. Mr. Worsham: I'm sorry that it does Mr. Grassiesbut it's very explicitlysmathematically it does not, and I would be, you know very happy to 'assure you absolutely that the city will make more money with the 600 room hotel than they will the 500 room hotel by either formula, either the p<rcentage formula or the... Mayor Ferre: I'm not interested in the 20% formula. We're just talking about this formula. Mr. Worsham: By that formula they will make more money, the hotel will make more money than it would, I mean the city would make more money under that formula than they would under the same formula with the 500 room hotel. Mayor Ferre: You understand that I'm not in any way questioning your word on this,but you know the city has to look at it from the city's point of view. Did Mr. Gunderson or somebody in our Accounting Department reject that out or did you Mr. Connolly? You personally did? Alright, then let me ask you the question then. With the projections when this hotel reaches, whenever it reaches a 90 or 95% occupancy in your opinion what will be the return for the c_ty under the 607 room formula as projected here: Assuming cott._atants, you know. Mr. Worsham: flr. Mayor. at 95% occupancy it would appear that you would be into the maximum 50, ok. That the city would make $1,150,000 approximately on participation rent plus the $250,000 base rent at 95% occupancy. Mayor Ferre: Is this how you figure things this afternoon? Mr. Worsham: No. I have a ... Mayor Ferre: I'm not asking you Earl., I'm asking Jim, because Jim is the guy that's supposed to be doing the figuring for the City of Miami. You noticed I asked him the question and you calculated and answered. I'm asking Mr. Connolly as a Representative of the City of Miami)have you on your own looked at this9 calculated it and gone to whoever you want to here in the City of Miami that may have the formulas or the computer to figure out what this return is? Mr. Connolly: I hadn't checked with the revenue to the city yet. This is done from 60% up to 72% which is the average, however,I myself projected beyond that at 5% ... I don't have that here, but I'd like to point something out to you. If you look at this table that's in this resolution you're talking about there's a reflection of a 40% differential in the trigg9r levels between a 500 room and 607 room. 607 rooms is actually equivalent to 630 rooms which is a 26% level alright and change. Mayor Ferre: I accept that. Mr. Connolly: There are some things that influence that and number one is that the level of investment per room in those additional rooms are appreciably higherrand the other thing is that the average daily rate is appreciably higher because they are rooms that are really suites,so that when you look at the number of rooms being rented you will find that they are not c'orre3 at i ng as you go across here. Mayor Ferre: Ok. I accept the whole proforma, I think we've gone through this enough and I am satisfied that we're going to be relying on that 20% formula I think most of the time unless the 10 BAN 241978 motel is just one hell of a success and it's 100% occupied or 80 or 90% and then I think,,. Mrs. Gordon: I think we are too because the hotel itself doesn't take in the retail shops and we know for sure that they're going to be a bang=up.., got to be. Mayor Ferre: So in other words, this gives up another leg to stand if the retail doesn't go or the hotel,., we'll see,.. Mr, Plummer: Mr., Worsham, who is going to operate the hotel? Mr. Worsham: Mr. Plummer we have had serious, serious discussions with several other very major chains in America, I would like to answer your question but I don't know, We want to get the best operator that we possibly can that can do the best job for the City, University of Miami and for us that would do the best job for the City... Mr. Plummer: The only answer you're giving me then at this time is you're not going to operate. Mr. Worsham: Oh, absolutely not. We will have a nationally recognized name hotel operator, professional. Mayor Ferre: He's negotiating right now so he can't tip his hand he's got two or three people, Mrs. Gordon: Can we move along Mr. Mayor, it's 8:00 o'clock? Mayor Ferre: What's the will of this Commission at this point then? Is there a motion on this with the stipulation that Father Gibson put into it about the University of Miami. Mrs. Gordon: And the change that I recommended. Mayor Ferre: And the changes that Mrs. Gordon read into the record. Now, Mr. Grassie, let's understand what the game plan is on this. This is all to be put into a new document. The document is to be sent to the Univepsity of Miami for a letter of approval upon receipt of the document this Commission will have three days, three working days, I don't mean the weekend, three working days, ok. And, by the end of the third working day at 5:00 o'clock in the afternoon no Commissioner has put in any objections you go ahead and sign it. If there is an objection to you and the Commission will address their objections to you and you will so notify me and I will call a special meeting to work out whatever ... Mrs. Gordon: I would suggest you say in writing so that there would be no question. Mayor Ferre: In writing if by the end of the third working day at 5 P.M. in the afternoon you have not received any objections by any members of this Commission then you are authorized to proceed and sign it. Otherwise we'll call a Special Commission Meeting. Mr. Plummer: I have another question Mr. Grassie but let's let this go because it's related indirectly... Mayor Ferre: .... Now we're talking about both of these contracts because you got one for construction and one for the lease. Mr. Plummer: But we're going to do them separately I assume. Mayor Ferre: We don't need to do them separately do we ? Mr. Plummer: Then the next question has to be who is the Construction Manager? Mayor. Ferre: The company itself, Mr. Connolly: The Construction Manager is Miami Associates, Inc. 11 JAN 2 41978 motel is just one hell of a success and it's 100% occupied or 80 or 90% and then I think,.. Mrs. Gordon: I think we are too because the hotel itself doesn't take in the retail shops and we know for sure that they're going to be a bang-up,., got to be. Mayor Ferre: So in other words; this gives up another leg to stand if the retail doesn't go or the hotel.., we'll see.,, Mr, Plummer: Mr., Worsham, who is going to operate the hotel? Mr, Worsham: Mr, Plummer we have had serious, serious discussions with several other very major chains in America. i would like to answer your question but I don't know. We want to get the best operator that we possibly can that can do the best job for the City] University of Miami and for us that would do the best job for the City... Mr. Plummer: The only answer you're giving me then at this time is you're not going to operate. Mr. Worsham: Oh, absolutely not. We will have a nationally recognized name hotel operator, professional. Mayor Ferre: He's negotiating right now so he can't tip his hand he's got two or three people. Mrs. Gordon: Can we move along Mr. Mayor, it's 8:00 o'clock? Mayor Ferre: What's the will of this Commission at this point then? Is there a ;notion on this with the stipulation that Father Gibson put into it about the University of Miami. Mrs. Gordon: And the change that I recommended. Mayor Ferre: And the changes that Mrs. Gordon read into the record. Now, Mr. Grassie, let's understand what the game plan is on this. This is all to be put into a new document. The document is to be sent to the University of Miami for a letter of approval upon receipt of the document this Commission will have three days, three working days, I don't mean the weekend, three working days, ok. And, by the end of the third working day at 5:00 o'clock in the afternoon no Commissioner has put in any objections you go ahead and sign it. If there is an objection to you and the Commission will address their objections to you and you will so notify me and I will call a special meeting to work out whatever ... Mrs. Gordon: I would suggest you say in writing so that there would be no question. Mayor Ferre: In writing if by the end of the third working day at 5 P,M. in the afternoon you have not received any objections by any members of this Commission then you are authorized to proceed and sign it. Otherwise we'll call a Special Commission Meeting. Mr. Plummer: I have another question Mr. Grassie but let's let this go because it's related indirectly... Mayor Ferre: .,.. Now we're talking about both of these contracts because you got one for construction and one for the lease. Mr. Plummer: But we're going to do them separately I assume. Mayor Ferre: We don't need to do them separately do we ? Mr. Plummer; Then the next question has to be who is the Construction Manager? Mayor Ferre: The company itself, Mr, Connolly; The Construction Manager is Miami Associates, Inc. 11 JAN 241979 which is the .:. Mayor Ferre: Which is the same people .,, Mr, Connolly: It's actually a joint venture of Turner Construction Company with Frank J. Rooney will be retained by the principles of the development firm, Mr. Grassie: One clarification Mr. Mayor, The same rules that we've outlined for the City Commission also apply to the University. Mayor Ferre: I would three days is plenty of time and I would out of courtesy to them Joe, please would you call up Henry King Stanford and tell them personally so that he doesn't... don't let the mail, you know, get us into a problem. ':r. Knox, would you please call up Mr. Cole, the Attorney for the University of Miami and let him know that the contract is underway that they've got three days, ok? Mr. Connolly: The University was given copies of the document and they sent a letter that they did not have enough time to review it by today. Mayor Ferre: Now, they got plenty of time now. Alright are there any further questions on this? Mr. Plummer: Mr. Connolly, I'm assuming now that we are speaking in the area of the 607 room hotel, and we have discounted the 500 room hotel. Mr. Connolly: I believe so, yes. Mr. Plummer: I direct your consiaeration that we never spoke of the 600 before. We spoke of the 500. I am now concerned of parking. As spelled out in this contract and let's admit the truth you're going to need more parking when you have more hotel rooms anc: doesn't that alter 9.1 where it spells out the number of automobiles. Mayor Ferre: Sure it does and you're going to have to adjust that in your final document. Mr. Plummer: Got to adjust that. Mayor Ferre: Well, you look at your final document ,you got three days to look at it. If you got any problems all you got to do is write up a letter to the Manager... Mr. Plummer: Hopefully if I can bring it up now then I don't have to call for another meeting. Mayor Ferre: Alright, further discussion, and I would hope Mr. Manager that you would give us the right to talk to Mr. Connolly directly on any questions that we have or do you want us to go through you? Mr. Grassie: No I think that the most expeditious thing for you to do would be to ask him the questions directly and get those answers. Mayor Ferre: Alright further. discussion. Call the roll. 12 JAN 24197E The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO, 78-74 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACTS WITH MIAMI ASSOCIATES LTD, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT, OPERATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI CONVENTION CENTER/UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI JAMES L, KNIGHT INTERNATIONAL CENTER SUBSTANTIALLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE LEASE AND AGREEMENT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT AND THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT ATTACHED SUBJECT TO PROVISIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY COMMISSION, (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk). Upon being seconded by Commissioner. (Rev.) Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson Vice Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. Mayor Ferre: Good Luck. Mr. Connolly: Thank you very much Mr. Mayor, Mrs. Gordon, Commissioner thank you. Mr. Plummer: My question now Mr. t•'crsham will involve you. Mr. Grassie, this man is under a timetable for as I recall six months. Now the question has been raised about the archaeological dig. Is the time frame going to be permissible to allow him to start in six months? Mr. Grassie: My impression is that archaeological dig has a specific time limit of 60 days. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grassie: Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grassie: now, but the Mr. Plummer: Total? Yes. Even if they find something? Yes they are finding things. They are finding things length of time allowed for the dig is sixty days. Let me get the answer about the dig. Mr. Connolly: Alright, the contract with the state and then we, of course,we let a local contract for the diggers work of the state people was for a total period of 15 weeks there might be an extension we've worked out with the critical ... people from the Turner when... Mayor Ferre: Jim, I'm going to cut you off because I'll tell you, that's fine but you call J. L. tomorrow and talk to him because he has nothing else to do, but we Mr, Connolly: Just let me say again that the agreement with the federal government and the state is that there will be a statement of no effect issued by both. That means we can go ahead and .,. that's the most important thing we have, JAN 241978 MOM RESOLUTION: PERM OF NING IN WALL AT cumx SH PING PLAZA. Mayor Ferre: Alright; at this time Iid like to recognize a former City of Miami Commissioner who served this community with great distinctioniGeirge Du Breuil, Mr, Du Breuil: Thank you Mr. Mayor, ladies and gentlemen of the Commission. I'm here as I think most of us are well aware about the hole in the wall at llth Street between 37th & 39th Avenue. We have presented this probably about five times. We've met with the Grapeland Heights people on two or three occasions now. I have great respect for the people in the Grapeland Heights Area. This boils down to the fact that the area that is in question is the Driver's License of the City of Miami in the State of Florida for the approval of it. The area we have met with your Planning Staff. Planning has recommended this hole in the wall as it's been called, where the Driver's License , State has assured us that they will open and close the wall. It would be opened, the entrance way from 8 in the morning until 5 in the afternoon and at that time they would close it. They would open it in the morning. I think all of the Commissioners is very much aware of this hole in the wall and it's the emergency nature that we see that if they cannot work out something with the City, then they intend to look elsewhere to try and find a place where they can operate and also for giving_ the Driver's License test, therefore because of properties and so on they can talk for themselves , but the Major has been down from Tallahassee on about five occasions that I'm aware of and they are here again this evening. They feel that at the recommendation of Mr. Plummer,one time they looked at the Commissioner Plummer, they looked over at the Orange Bowl and other areas and facilities. The only area because of the cost of land, would possibly be somewhere located in the County, this therefore, would then have an effect on the entire population of the City of Miami for automobile inspection, therefore we feel that the necessity of this taking the automobiles off the road trying to cooperate with the Grapeland Heights people, there's any number of specifications if we put on this. At this time the Planning Staff, if they would let the Commission know and spell it out. I think you all have the Ordinance and Planning has recommended this to my understanding. Thank you. Mr. Plummer: George, I had asked you at the last meeting to bring somewhat of a diagram as proffered by the Shopping Center owner of the course that he would place on the site as he proffered to help alleviate the testing and stuff in the neighborhood and I hope you brought a copy of that. I've seen it. Mr. Du Breuil: I have our Architect here ... Mr. Plummer: But my fellow Commissioners, I don't think, have had that opportunity. Mr. Du Breuil: Mr. Bill Lyon, an Architect, would you.. Mr. Plummer: Did you bring the diagram? Mr. Lyon: I'm William J. Lyon, Watson Deutschman, Kruse & Lyon Architects... Mr. Du Breuil: Mr, Lyon would be happy to try to explain that diagram to you it would be built very similar to this particular one as far as the diagram and it would fit into the area that's designated on the map. Mrs, Gordon: This isn't the property. Oh, I just want to see the property that you're on now, Mr, Plummer: What I'm trying to bring out to you Rose , ok, so you all understand and you did not have the opportunity that I did, 14 JAN 241978 Don't you just have a plot plan? Mr, Du Breuil: This area here would be the drive=in area, Mr, Plummer: The existing place is here where they have the testing ok, Now what he is offering to dois in this area here put a course such as this which today it has been said by everyone, that's not the only thing they agreed on th t they used the neighborhood to teach people how to drive before they take the test, Now what he is saying and has offered to do is to put this here in this area so that it will take as proffered relief off of the residential area and let them use this area here to teach and I guess test, both,.. Mayor Ferre: Well, where is the hole in the wall? Mr. Plummer: Here's the hole in the wall here. Now there's also another hole somewhere for pedestrian. Mr. Du Breuil: It would be adjoining that ... Mr, Plummer: No it cannot be. It's spelled out, It's to be two individual because this hole in the wall ... this is not to be any larger than to accommodate a passenger car, It is to be small enough in size that it will not accommodate a truck, so if you... Mayor Ferre: Is that the one where you can go and can't go in? Mr, Plummer: Well, yes, but this is to be used for existing only. Well I'll tell you if you do like this shopping center that's coming up later it'll last because if not it'll sure pump you some tires. BACKGROUND COMMENTS MADE OFF THE RECORD. Mr. Plummer: Why not exist here? Ok, the problem, when we been through this before Rose. If you come out here the light is here, ok, and you cannot accommodate this traffic by this light. Rev. Gibson: Right. Mr. Du Breuil: The traffic is coming this way back up to the light there's no way to get out .... Mr. Plummer: Now one other thing, is this the avenue? Mr. Du Breuil: It's in line with the avenue. Mr. Plummer: Alright, because the one thing that the neighbors were most insistent upon that if they do get beat and the hole in the wall appears,that they would want it at the avenue, not, I think its been shown properly up here before that they wanted it here at this avenue so that people could go this way if necessary. Mrs. Gordon: Now this is the reason you brought this one to show us what you put in here. Mr. Du Breuil:This is what we've got at Coral Reef. What we would have to do is take their format and steel this down to fit that format and then by doing this Mrs. Gordon ... you would not only save us time going out here all the way around involving people over here and would be able to test our people here and we would be able to test our people here and then the afternoon when we got through Mrs, Gordon: Yes. Where do you test them now? Mr. Du Breuil: We're testing over here in the ..... .... .................._.... Mrs, Gordon: You wouldn't be testing in the streets at all anymore. Mr, Du Breuil; No ma'am, Mrs, Gordon: Well, do the people know that, do they realize that? 15 J 2 197B Mr= Du Breuil; We've tried to explain it to them) yes ma'am, Mrs, Gordon: Alright,., BACKGROUND COMMENTS MADE OFF THE RECORD, Mayor Fevre: at this time? Alright; is there anybody else you'd like to present Mr, Du Breuil: I would like just the Major to repeat what he has said before it's all in the record ,,, just he's come all the t4ay from Tallahassee, Mayor Ferret Major I know that Tallahassee is cold and we're warm down here' perhaps you might want to tell us how much you enjoy coming down to visit us all the time. Major Keith: It's a real pleasure Mr, Mayor, but for the record) it's been a long ordeal and we realize that this is a real tough decision for you people to make and ... Mayor Ferre: It affects the neighborhood and the people that live there. Major Keith: Right, but I do feel like that if the Commission sees it's proper to go in this direction that it will eliminate us from going over there in that section. It'll also eliminate the commercial driving school from teaching people over there and I think it'll be best for everyone)so we'll abide by your judgment. Thank you. Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, may I please, there are eight items presently incorporated as conditions. I think that a 9th and 10th has to be incorporated regardless of which way the vote goes assuming Number 9, would be that the opening be (I don't want to say parallel) what do I want to say, that the opening coincides with 38th Avenue, ok,, aligned with... Mr. Du Breuil: We moved it that's where it is on the drawing. Mr. Plummer: Well, I'm putting it here to incorporate if this thing passes that in fact it will part of the resolution. Item # 10 of condition would be that the on sight course as volunteered by the owner will be constructed. Do you want to call it, what do you call it? I call it an on -sight course. What's the proper terminol- ogy? That's close enough? Mr. Du Breuil: Close as you could get to it,yes sir. Mrs. Gordon: Would youu_call it on -sight testing course? Mr. Plummer: 0h wait a minute, I'm sorry, I'm sorry number 8 addresses itself to that. 8 says provide an on -sight driving course at the Northwest corner of the Shopping Center for use by the State Division of Drivers... well now wait a minute. If you did that you're limiting it just to the state's use and I think that as I understood it, it was to encourage the schools also to use that course, am I correct? 0h I see what you mean, it accomplishes the same,ok. It makes sense. Mr. Fosmoen: I asked if the Commission would add the department's review and approval of the interior lay -out we noticed some problems with it in the very cursory review that you were having. Mr, Plummer: Well, let me ask this question. We've got an item coming up later in reference to that shopping center on 27th Avenue, does anybody have their sheet on that handy: Mr, Davis: It's item number 13 Mr. Plummer, Mr. Plummer: May I borrow this here? Mr, Fosmoen would you come over here and look at this and then you can understand what I'm saying by picture more so than by „ what do you call that thing? I' call that a tire tear -upper. Alright... 16 JAN 24197B Mr, Du Breuil: Please don't involve us for that, This is the state road police thatts going to be protecting and opening and closing and.,, Mr. Plummer: This is bad news. I withdraw it, Mr. Rebosot Any other speakers on behalf of the opening? Mr, Du Breuilt I think that's all and in fairness to this Commission you all have heard it, Mr. Plummer: God knows we've heard it a11. Mr, Reboso: Will you please state your name and address for the record please? Mrs, Gentry: Yes. I'm Mrs. John Gentry. I represent Grapeland Heights Civic Association, I don't know why we're here, but we're here. I don't know where to start. I'm suppose to put everything in the record tonight, and I'm a little nervous. In 1959 when this was started, I'll be brief. 25th of May, 1959 is when this was all started we were given a 50 ft. set -back from the streets on N.W. llth Street & 39th Avenue. We were also given 200 ft. inside that as a buffer zone where there would be no buildings erect:ei. Ok. In 1974, the Central Shopping Plaza asked to have that changed to allow a bank to go in and we lost the 200 ft. inside the buffer zone. We lost 30 ft. of a 50 ft, set -back. We now and for that we were given a solid wall on N.W. llth Street and also on 39th Avenue. We've been done here so many times. It's been deferred so many times, ok. They are amending your resolution 74-970. Do you want me to read that to you or just the parts that affects us? Mr. Plummer: I would say the parts that affects this evening's application. Mrs. Gentry: Ok. That the wall which exist be raised to a level of 6 ft.,that landscaping be adequate to hide the wall from the outside view,that any egress to the north shall be permitted to exist on 37th Avenue. That there be compliance with the code as to lighting and adequate drainage;that all the above shall be subject to review 12 months from the date of occupancy. Now, this 12 months review apparently has not taken place because this is still tied in with the bank. You allow them to put in the drive-in teller windows, they now are using that area as a storage. There is five trailers in there. The two that was the original temporary bank on the other side of the shopping center and three other trailers are stored back there. So it's becoming... Mrs. Gordon: Where Dottie? Mrs. Gentry: Next to the drive-in teller windows. Mrg. Gordon: Is that the space that we're shelling for the course? Mrs. Gentry: I haven't seen that. We haven't seen that. It's to the north of the drive-in teller windows, right next to them. Ok. It's beginning to look like a junkyard back there. So, let me see now, the next thing... Mr. Plummer: Well, now wait a minute, because what you're saying is a different, somewhat different animal. Now, Mr. Grassie, she is, as I understand it is bringing up zoning violations that exist because somebody hasn't followed through. Now I'm hoping that somebody, is anybody writing down these things? Mr. Davis: Mr. Plummer, Mrs. Gentry's husband, Mr, Gentry called me this afternoon and I relayed this complaint to the Building Department, Zoning Division this afternoon, Mr. Plummer: Ok, As long as it's followed through, Mrs, Gentry: We turned this complaint in several months ago Mr, Whipple has it and,,, I bring this up because we are reviewing the whole 17 JAN 24197 situation as it affects us, ok, Now your motion, this resolution was to give us the solid wall and since then we've had to re= confirm that about four or five times and as you know this has been deferred for reasons that the Commission just couldn't get to it a few times. Now in September I believe it was Mr, Reboso asked me if we would get 200 names on a petition. We got over 200 names Mr, Reboso and here they are that I would like to present to your These are people objecting to any opening ih the wall on N.W. llth Street, Now when the wall was put in they left a paved driveway at the end of 38th Avenue I suppose hoping some= day they would be able to get the opening, but they put that in from the beginning so this has been in the works all the time and I don't know if anyone from the city ever caught that,but we did, We just waited to see. We have several people that want to speak. We have a lot of people from the area. One little Spanish lady that lives right at 38th Avenue, her husband had a heart attack and she's not here. She's home taking care of him. I will turn the floor over to someone else and then maybe I'll speak later. Mayor Ferret Alright are there other speakers? Mr. Bush: My name is Ken Bush. I live at 3725 N.W. llth Street. I think Dottie has pretty much covered it but I would like to go back just a little bit. I've heard many times what Grapeland Heights has been given by the City of Miami, but I would also like to tell you what has been taken away from Grapeland Heights. The area itself was cut in half with the expressway that's number one. Number two, they threw the Marriott Hotel up in the back of us there. They pulled down the huge hedge they had along there which more or less hid the theatre that was there. It was nice with the hedge there. They come down and cut that all down. They also threw an exit or an entrance from that Marriott into the residential area in there then they come along with the Shopping Center. They built the Shopping Center against our wishes which we fought. They did put restrictions on but this Commission seen fit to lift those restrictions. We were against that bank. We advised and said that at the time that 39th Avenue would become unbearable which it has,and I would like also to tell now that it's not being enforced there on 39th Avenue the cars are parked all the way down 39th Avenue. Tney've put up No Parking signs all along there it just looks like a business area there. Now the only thing that we ask was that that wall not be opened that we asked but it was the only thing we were given and it was promised by you Mr. Plummer that if we conceded to these wishes that these people wanted that, you would see that that wall was kept closed. Now we're down here again for about the fifth time on this thing. Now I think that it's been proven by Mr. Highsmith and them that they can put that driving school and testing area inside the boundaries of that shopping center. Why do they need the hole in the wall if they can do that? There's no need for it.. The only reason they want that is because the shopping center itself wants it for the bank to let the people in and out of that bank. The License Bureau has got no reason for it, no reason whatsoever. You can't tell me that that shopping center is going to let the License Bureau there when they're getting a revenue and a rent from those people. There's no way they're going to let them go out of there. They're going to go ahead and pave that thing and do just the way it is so they won't lose those people. Right now you're talking about that place being opened between 8 and 5. Between 8 and 5 I can't get out of my yard now the traffic since they're put the light at llth Street and 37th Avenue and the one at LeJeune Rd. and 37th Avenue they used it for a thoroughfare you can't get in and out of your yard. So I think it's really unfair. There's just a one thing left that we have in our neighborhood and that is to try to keep that traffic out of there and I think we deserve that much. Thank you. Mayor. Ferre: I'll tell you that's a very well succinct expressed statement of how the neighborhood feels and I appreciate your statement. Are there any other speakers? Dorothy, you want to add anything else? Mrs, Gentry: I just want to say that nothing has changed, The wall is the only thing we have left, Please leave it that way. We'll work with them with everything else, We helped them get the 18 JAN 241978 shopping center in there. Mayor rerrei .... let me ask you and I'm not in anyway guessing nor am I privy to what this Commission is going to do, I'm just thinking ahead in case the Commission does vote in faVor of opening that hole in the Mall. What are the amenities in the things that you think might iinpt* Ve7 I'm not saying that anything makes it acceptable, but if it does go through and there is three votes on this Commission, What are the things that you think would make it a little bit more palatable. Mrs. Gentry: Well, we haven't seen the plan. We don't know any- thing about their plan for inside. Mayor Ferre: Would you show Mrs. Gentry the plan for inside and would you show it to the neighbors that are here so that they understand exactly what your intentions are? Mr. Du Breuil: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners we appeared at their club facilities and so on,Oh Gosh,sometimes back. Mayor Ferre: Oh, but Mrs. Gentry doesn't know about it and she's the President of the... Mrs. Gentry: We didn't see your plan. You just mentioned it. Mr. Du Breuil: ... There is a couple of things that has been said. I only wanted to take a couple minutes of your time. Mayor Ferre: Let's not get into a debate George because that wouldn't be fruitful. Would you also show it to the neighbors? How many neighbors are here, would you raise your hands? Mrs. Gentry: If they are going to do all of these wonderful things inside then they don't need the opening in the wall. It'll be taken care of inside. We compromise. Mayor Ferre: Alright, while the neighbors are looking at this we're going to have a five minute recess to let them look at it and discuss it and ask questions of the Major or anybody. Let's see if we can do a little ... If we can get a majority of this Commission back we'll continue unless you'd like to stay here all night we can stay here until midnight. How would you like to get out early tonight? Mr. Wall: I'm Don Wall. I live at 3930 N.W. 13th Street which is two blocks north of the area we're talking about. I've lived there for 22 years. It's an R-1 neighborhood and there's been encroach- ments on it for the past 20 years and this is just one more and I think you should stand behind the taxpayers of Miami and not allow this resolution to go through. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: They're all taxpayers that's the problem. Everybody is a taxpayer that's the problem. Mrs. Charles: Mr. Mayor and Mr. Commissioners, Mary Charles 820 N.W. 41st Avenue. I'd just like to call your attention to the fact that there is, because if they do close the opening there to the Shopping Center with this proposed driving coursejthe Fire Station is at our corner at 40th and 7th and in case they need to go to the back of Zayre's or the launderette and there are some other little stores along that avenue there. The fact that they could prolong and get longer to put out a fire or any mishap that's there if they have to go all the way around and core in by Zayre's where they could in the avenue and go through the back. I just wanted to call that to your attention to, No I am for a solid wall with the driving course going in.I understood that the bank was going to close the exit there where we come in off of 38th Avenue you go through the parking of the bank and you can take a little jig of the jog and go back to the launderette and around to the back over by Murphy's and to 37th Avenue, and if they close that exit there where the bank has bumpers leaving and opening. Sometimes there's a chain across there, most of the time it's open, but the fire truck could 19 go through there very easily and cut down on time, Mayor Ferre: Mr, Manager, would somebody make a note of that and check that out? Alright any other speakers at this time? Alright, what's the will of the Commission? Any questions from the Commission? Well, is there a Motion to defer? What are you here to tell us that we haven't heard? Mr, Du Breuil: I think it was read back to the Commission all the provisos in there that Would have a bearing on it and so on, Actually the resolution is recommended by your staff, Mr, Plummer: Well, just for the record I'll do it George,but I almost know them by heart. These are the conditions if accepted. Mayor Ferre: They're all here, proposed opening will be for egress only, right? Mr, Plummer: Well, he wants it read into the record. Mayor Ferre: Read it... Mr. Plummer: (1). The proposed opening will be for egress only (exiting the site only). (2). Provide appropriate stop signs at the exit. (3). Clearly mark the exit that it is to be used for exit only and for passenger vehicles only. (4). The width of the exit to be less than required for commercial trucks. (5). Install necessary speed bumps to limit vehicular traffic exiting speeds. (6). Provide a permanent pedestrian opening in the north wall to N.W. llth Street. (7). Install a conventional steel gate at the vehicle egress which would only be opened during the hours of the Drivers License Testing Facility. This gate would be opened by the officials of the Testing Facility in the morning and locked by them in the afternoon. (8). Provide an on -site driving course at the N.W. corner of the shopping center for use by the State Division of Driver Licenses. (9). That the opening be in alignment with 38th Avenue. Mr. Du Breuil: And, there was a tenth one Mr. Plummer, the approval by the Department of the Interior Plan. Mr. Plummer: Yes, ok. The on -site plan. Mayor Ferre: That's nine, and ten, that this matter be brought back for review before this Commission in one-year to see if it's working out alright. Mr. Plummer: That's number 11. Mayor Ferre: That's ten. Mr. Plummer: Excuse me that's 11. Mayor Ferre: Alright, anything else? What's the will of this Commission? Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I told you before and I'll tell you again sir, when everything else fails I'll make the motion. You might not like it. Mayor Ferre; One way or the other I don't you know and we just can't sit on this anymore that's all. Mr. Plummer: I agree. You want a motion? Mayor Ferre: Yes. Make your motion. Mr. Plummer: It's going to be a damn unpopular motion because I got friends involved and that automatically tells you how I feel. Mr. Mayor this past week I have receieved calls from Tallahassee as I have in the past. There is no question in my mind, none that if this is not granted that that location and that inspection station will be moved out of the City of Miami, Mr, Mayor everything that 20 JAN 241978 i Mrs, Gentry said is true. I was the one that made the motion and at the time that was the way I felt, but things changed, Unfortunately things changed,that's why we have a Commission because things have to change: Mr, Mayor there's no question in my mind that these people on llth Street are going to be inconvenienced, but what I have to weigh is the inconvenience to a few as opposed to the inconvenience of possibly thousands of people of this city who will have to travel a distance in which I realize only once every four years but they will have to travel to a location which in my estimation will be a great deal away from the heart of the central core, I would like not to have to make this motion, I wish this item was not before us, but it is and a decision has got to be made, At your direction Mr, Mayor I went to this Committee Meeting and tried every avenue there was, explored everything that could be explored to try to make this compatible and unfortunately,the only thing that the neighbors agreed to was that if you force it down our throats, and yes we are forcing it down your throats, let's don't kid around, Please put the opening in alignment with 38th Avenue. I am going to go on the faith of the developers. You did not understand as I understand what Mrs. Gentry said before,and I'll tell you it's going to have a bearing on my thinking on the one-year site,(are we putting that in is that correct)? The one-year review. Mrs. Gentry was concerned with the outside appearances and you were speaking to the inside. Now you cannot convince me that you can make it acceptable. I under- stand that, but let me tell you something it's going to cost you a few bucks but I believe that you can make it a little bit more pleasant than just a bare wall with an opening, and I'm going to tell you as one, not a threat, but I'm going to look real serious God willing that I'm here in a year as to what that outside opening with Kenny Bush and some of these other people are having to look at. Mr. Mayor there's no question what my motion is and I make this motion with regrets that I have to do such, but I make a motion of approval with the ten conditions as applied by ... as stipulated by the Planning Department I move for approval. Mayor Ferre: There is a motion stipulated. Is there a second? Mr. Reboso: Mr. Mayor I'm going to second the motion. I want to say that until tonight I was against the opening in that wall, but for the same reasons that J.L. stated and the plan that I just saw I am seconding the motion. I think it's in the best interest... Mayor Ferre: Alright, there's a motion and a second. I would, in case this thing passes I would like to (you did accept that this will be reviewed in a year)? Mr. Reboso: Yes. The ten points. Mayor Ferre: There is a problem Mr. Grassie with non-compliance of a previous motion to pass this Commission with the bank that several of the neighbors in Grapeland Heights has pointed out that these people have totally violated and I am going to... I guess we shouldn't incorporcte it as part of this but I'm going to make the motion or ask somebody to make the motion after we finish that the bank be advised that they have to tear down those tellers since they are not using them for drive -through windows and they're using them to store boxes and they've got trailers back there and that's not the intention and they're in complete violation if that's the case and we are to immediately ask them to remove the whole thing. Would you answer that before we get to a voting because that may be important? Mr. Fosmoen: Mayor Ferre: Mr. Fosmoen: Did I understand you to say tellers or trailers sir? No, Suppose told me that there were some bank tellers, They are trailers I understand sir. Mr, Davis: Trailers were used as a temporary drive-in site originally until the tellers were ,,, Mayor Ferre; But they're using them for storage purposes I understand, You tell there, matter -of. -fact I'd like to make a condition on this, 21 JAN 241978 that this doesn't happen until those trailers leave, Mr, Du Breuil: That's the bank property Mr, Mayor, We completely agree with you3in fact when Mr, Gentry called me almost two months ago I called Mr, Lopez Castro who is in charge of that and told him that they would either have to get those trailers out of there or the city would see that they got out, Mayor Ferre: Alright, Ok, we'll make it as a separate resolution. Alright is there anything else that anybody else wants to speak on this? Mr, Plummer: Ken Bush wants to speak and I'll ask him, Mayor Ferre: Yes, alright, go ahead, Mr. Bush: Speaking in the background with a microphone.., What I would like to say is that if the State Driving people moved out what would that have to do with that wall? Mr. Plummer: Well, as I understand it since t'm the maker of the motion1I'll give you my intent, It is my intent that this thing stipulates that that shall be opened and closed by the State, If they're not there to do itiit cannot be opened. Now that's my intent. Mr. Bush: .,. In other words, say next year or the year after some- thing comes up and these people move out of that area... Mayor Ferre: We'll close down the 'all.. I mean we'll put it back up again. Mrs. Gordon: Put 11 on that 10 J.L. Mr. Plummer: If you wish to do it that way I just... the Department brought that up Rose, and I felt that it was part of this. Number 11 word it for me. Mayor Ferre: I understand... if the Drivers License Testing Facility . • . Mr. Plummer: This approval is only granted for such time as the State of Florida Testing... Mayor Ferre: Drivers License Testing ... Mr. Gordon: Is depending on that property. Mr. Plummer: Exist on that property. Mrs. Gordon: Is an occupant on that property. Mayor Ferre: Alright, anything else? Is that accepted by the Seconder of the motion? Further discussion. Call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 78-75 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO, 74-490 TO PERMIT AN OPENING IN THE WALL ALONG THE N.W, 11TIi STREET SIDE OF THE CENTRAL SHOPPING PLAZA SUBJECT TO THE 10 CONDITIONS ENUMERATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk). Upon being seconded by .'ice -Mayor Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Plummer, Vice -Mayor Reboso, Rev, Gibson, Mrs. Gordon, and Mayor Ferre, NOES: None, ABSENT: None, ON ROLL CALL: Mrs. Gordon: I want to tell the people that I'll go along on it but one of the considerations that I'm considering is the Driving Schools will be less encouraged to travel through streets With new drivers that haven't learned how to drive, That was a very important consideration in my voting for it, The second important consideration is the oneyear and the third is that if they vacate,that wall gets closed, FURTHER DISCUSSION: Mr, Du Breuil: Mr. Mayor I would just like to just summari:,e this I want to thank the Commission very much, Mayor Ferre: Well, you got your vote it's all Mr. Du Breuil: Heights that I personally see I know. I want to assur personally will see that that the property owners over. e the people of Grapeland that grass is cut. I'll out there.assure them ... l Mayor Ferre: ... Don't get angry at him he doesn't have to say that at this stage of the game. Mr. Du Breuil: You ask Mrs. Gentry I went over and picked up her garbage personally when she said they didn't... Mayor Ferre: George I'll tellit is important. This is going to come back in a year and I think it's very important that you have good public relations. Mr. Du Breuil: Thank you very much. 4. DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGED ZONING VIOLATION BY INTERCONTINENTAL BANK AT CENTRAL SHOPPING PLAZA. *fayor Terre: Alright, now I'm going to make another motion George while you're here. I'm going to move and I'll pass the gavel, to the Vice -Mayor, that the Manager immediately look into the violation or the bank by keeping those supposedly,temporary trailers for other than the purpose originally outlined and that they be immediately notified they will move them if they are in violation. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, would you also incorporate in that motion the 39th Avenue problem addressed by Ken Bush that the signs have been erected of no parking and it is being violated daily. Mayor Ferre: Alright, and that in the first portion that that letter go out before the end of the week. That gives you til Friday to clarify this situation. Mrs. Gordon: I second your motion. Mr. Reboso: Ok. We have a motion and a second. Any further dis- cussion. Will you please call the roll? The following motion was introduced by Mayor Ferre, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 78-76 A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGED VIOLATIONS BY THE INTERCONTINENTAL BANK LOCATED AT THE CENTRAL SHOPPING PLAZA TO DETERMINE IF THE TRAILERS STORED IN THE REAR OF THE BANK CONSTITUTE A ZONING VIOLATION AND THAT THE ADMIN- ISTRATION BE INSTRUCTED TO ORDER THE BANK TO REMOVE THE AFORESAID TRAILERS IF IN FACT SUCH VIOLATION EXITS. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Mayor Ferre, Rev, Gibson, Commissioner Gordon, Commissioner Plummer, and Vice -Mayor Reboso, NOES; None, ABSENT; None, P.i JAN 241978 ir CLOSE PORTIONS NWI 17 Cr, - LAWRENCE PARK Atti - TENTATIVE PLAT #1 -A 13Lrr s ISLAZ Mrs. Gordont Mr. Mayor, Mr. Make our 'Tax Assessor is Ilere on #99 it's a short item. Mayor Ferre: Oh, Mr, Blake I apologize.I didn't see you sitting back there, Why don't you come right on up? I'll tell you sometimes you're not a very popular fellow but here we like you Mr, Blake we want you to know that. Mr. Davis: This application Mr. Mayor is by Mr, Blake as you know and it was to close that portion of N.W. 17th Court as will be shown on the map in just a second here. The Planning Department recommended approval, The Plat Committee recommended approval and the Zoning Board recommended by 7-0, There were two objectors present at the Zoning meeting. Mayor Ferre: Alright, are there any objectors on item 9? Mrs. Gordon: I move approval. Mayor Ferre: Alright, it's been moved by Mrs. Gordon. Is there a second? Yes, put the light on again so we can all see the pretty pictures. Seconded by Father Gibson. Further discussion. Call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 78-77 A RESOLUTION CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING THE PUBLIC USE OF THAT PORTION OF N.W. 17TH COURT LYING BETWEEN NORTHWESTERLY PRODUCTION OF THE SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF LOT 66 OF LAWRENCE PARK AMD (7-140) AND THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF N.W. 17TH AVENUE; ALL IN CONJUNCTION WITH TENTATIVE PLAT #1003-A "BETTY'S ISLAND". (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk). Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner J. L. Plummer, JR. Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson Vice Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Blake it was nice to have you and your husband here. JAN 241978 1 SEA SING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING GLAS FICATt 9NN 17-1 N.W. NORTH RIVERbRIVE FROM R-4 to C-4 Mayor Ferre: Are there any objectors on item 3? If not, read the ordinance and call the roll. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE N0, 6871, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF W28' OF N144.88' OF LOT 1, AND THAT PORTION OF LOT 2 LYING NORTH OF TRACT A; NEW ROOSEVELT OFFICE SUB (104-50) AND THAT PORTION OF LOT 3 LYING NORTH OF N.W, NORTH RIVER DRIVE; PIRATES COVE SUB (1.92), BEING APPROXIMATELY 1751 N.W. NORTH RIVER DRIVE, FROM R-4 (MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE) TO C-44 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL); AND BY MAKING THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, MADE A PART OF THE SAID ORDINANCE NO. 6871, BY REFERENCE AND DISCRIPTION IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 2 THEREOF: BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION. Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of January 24, 1978, it was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Plummer, seconded by Vice -Mayor Reboso, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner (Rev.) J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8754. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. 7. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION TIGERTAIL AVENUE; NATOMA STREET; SECOFFEE STREET AND AMATHLA FROM R 1 TO R1-B. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY TIGERTAIL AVENUE, NATOMA STREET, SECOFFEE STREET AND EMATHLA STREET, INCLUDING PROPERTIES ABUTTING SECOFFEE STREET TO THE NORTH AND EMATHIA STREET TO THE WEST FROM R-1 (ONE FAMILY) TO R-1B (ONE FAMILY), AS PER THE MAP, ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF: AND BY MAKING THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, MADE A PART OF THE SAID ORDINANCE NO. 6871, BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 2 THEREOF; BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION. 9 JAN 24 1978 SECCND SING ORDINANCE: CHANGE 20NING CLASStPtcArmw -51 NA NORTH RIVE RIVE PROM R-4 to CC4i Mayor Ferret Are there any objectors on item 3? If not, read the ordinance and call the roll. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO, 6871, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF W28t OF N144,88t OF LOT i, AND THAT PORTION OF LOT 2 LYING NORTH OF TRACT A; NEW ROOSEVELT OFFICE SUB (104-50) AND THAT PORTION OF LOT 3 LYING NORTH OF N.W. NORTH RIVER DRIVE; PIRATES COVE SUB (1-92), BEING APPROXIMATELY 1751 N.W. NORTH RIVER DRIVE, FROM R-4 (MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE) TO C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL); AND BY MAKING THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, MADE A PART OF THE SAID ORDINANCE NO, 6871, BY REFERENCE AND DISCRIPTION IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 2 THEREOF: BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION. Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of January 24, 1978, it was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner. Plummer, seconded by Vice -Mayor Reboso, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner (Rev.) J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8754. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION TIGERTAIL AVENUE; NATOMA STREET; SECOFFEE STREET AND AMATHA FROM 111 TO R1-B. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY TIGERTAIL AVENUE, NATOMA STREET, SECOFFEE STREET AND EMATHLA STREET, INCLUDING PROPERTIES ABUTTING SECOFFEE STREET TO THE NORTH AND EMATHIA STREET TO THE WEST FROM R-1 (ONE FAMILY) TO R-1B (ONE FAMILY), AS PER THE MAP, ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF: AND BY MAKING THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, MADE A PART OF THE SAID ORDINANCE NO. 6871, BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 2 THEREOF; BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION, 25 JA N 24 1978 Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of January 24, 19785 it was taken up for its seond and final reading by title and adoption, On motion of Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote. AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner (Rev,) Theodore R. Gibson Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr, Vice -Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A, Ferre NOESt None, SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO, 8755. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. 8. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION 2,100 S. DIXIE HWY LOTS 1148, LESS THE SOUTH 1419 FEET OF BLOCK E- "BISCAYNE PARK TERRACE FROM R-1 TO RCA. Mr. Davis: Item #5 Mr. Mayor was passed by motion at your last meeting since the original recommendation and the original petition was not followed in that the northerly portion was passed. The Law Depart- ment deferred the 1st and 2nd readings until this meeting. Mayor Ferre: Alright, I see, I assume you want to speak on this Mr. La Casa. Where are all the neighbors from the Tigertail Associat- ion? We got 2 , 3 , 4 , .. . Mr. Davis: They were all notified as usual. !'lr. La Casa: For the record, Armando La Casa, 1408 S.E. Bayshore Drive. Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute Mr. La Casa,because you know,for the life of me I cannot imagine that if in fact they were notified.F!ow were they notified• Now Mr. Davis let's get that on the record. Did the notice to them appear as it appears on our agenda? Mr. Davis: No sir. It is described as a courtesy notice mailed on January 12th. It was addressed to the same property owners within the 375' radius as it was originally notified. Mr. Plummer: Well, what did it say? Mr. Davis: I'll read it off., Miami City Commission , meeting of Thursday, January 24, 1978 at 7 P.M., City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Dinner Key, Miami, Florida will consider the following: 2100 S.Dixie Hwy. lots 11,12,13,14,15,16,17, and 18 less the south 149.9' therefore. Also that part abutting the north boundary line of said lot 11, Block E of Biscayne Park Terrace. A resolution recommending the nine change of zoning classification in above describedI:roperty from R-1 to R-CA. This item was deferred from the City Commission meeting of December 15, 1977. Important - The City Commission request a petiotioner to be present or request a petitioner to be prc:,,nt or a representative at this meeting and all interested real estate owners are invited to express their views. The petition and supporting papers concerning this item are available for review at the Planning and Zoning Administration Board 3318 Pan American Drive, Dinner Key, Miami, Florida. Rev, Gibson: Read that letter. again. Mrs, Gordon: The letter states,,, Mr, Davis; Pardon me sir, 26 JAN 241978 key. Gibson: Read it again, Mr, Davis: The entire thing sir? Mr, Plummer: What is it,you said Thursday? Mrs, Gordon: No, the reason I can explain .. Mr, Davis: Tuesday sir. I said Tuesday, January 24th, Mr. Plummer: I heard you say Thursday. Rev, Gibson: I heard you say Thursday. Mr, Davis: Tuesday, if I stated Thursday I misread it. It says Tuesday, January 24th. Mrs. Gordon: Ok. The letter that you read and the information on the agenda recites that the south 149.9' are not being considered, Mr. Davis: That is correct, Mrs. Gordon: And for this reason you don't have a crowd of people here tonight, because tl13 is what those people who were here last time agreed it was acceptable to the neighborhood. That's why you don't have a room full of nople. Mr. Plummer: Just get the record straight. Look, let's put all the cards on top of the table, ok. Let's all know where we're coming from so there ain't no sneaky P.11, around here. It is my under- standing that Mr. La Casa is going to ask of this Commission this evening for his original application . Ok, Mr. Davis: I have no information on that. Mr. Plummer: Ok. And, based upon that what is being said among this Commission and the neighbors who are here if it were their understanding when they left here at the last meeting that the Commission action was that that south 149' if that's what it was had been excluded. Mr. Davis: That is correct. Mr. Plummer: Knowing that they didn't show up tonight. Mr. Davis: That is correct. It was advertised and in other words it cannot be heard as I would read the law and I referred to the Law Department for this, the southerly 149.9' could not be considered tonight. (Mrs. Gordon- I know that) Mr. Plummer: Alright, then if that's the case then we know where we're at. You know, I mean all I'm trying to say in the interest of fairness,you know,I went to Fosmoen this afternoon and it was my understanding before Mr. La Casa told me of his intent that this was just merely a second reading. Now I find that it's a first and second reading, Mr. Davis: As I explained the Law Department did not have an opportunity to re -draw the .., Mr. Plummer: I understand that but these people don't, ok. Mr, Davis: Surely, Mr, Plummer: Now these people are saying what in the hell are you trying to pull? Mr. Davis; Well exactly what the notice states that it is for only that property less the north/southerly 149.9'. Mr, Plummer: Well, obviously Mr, La Casa doesn't understand that because I didn't. 27 Mr. Davis: Well, it could well be sir I don't have any information on this, Mr, Plummer: Ok, Let's set the record straights let's don't have anybody walking out of here saying this Commission is trying to pull something sneaky or Mrs La Casa is trying to pull something sneaky, I will now refer to the Law Department. You have heard the state- ment of Mr, Davis. If Mr, Daviss if I understand him correctly, it is with the understanding that legally we cannot hear the southern 149', is that correct or not? Mr, Knox: If the notice was to hear less the 149,9' then you can- not hear anything else. Mr. Plummer: Then I understand further that if Mr. La Casa wants to reinstigate that portion since it was not denied he would then have to start a new application is that the procedure? Mr. Davis: Either that or the Commission could ask for deferral for re -advertising. Mayor Ferre: There is only one way that this, that legally this can be brought back and changed as I understand it and that is that somebody who voted on the winning side last time around... Mrs, Gordon: No. It was advertised tonight as a reduced application, There is no way that you can go to anything else tonight. You can at the future time but you cannot tonight because the advertisement was as it stated now at some future time a reconsideration could be done. Mayor Ferre: That's right. Rose, all I said was that the only way there's only one or two or three things in this can happen tonight. (1). We can defer. (2). You can vote for it or you can vote against it. (3). Somebody can move that for re -consideration at which time you'd have to calla new public hearing. Mir. Davis: Since the Board considered the entire site it could be held if you wished to reconsider the southerly 149'. Mayor Ferre: There's only way that this can be brought up for re -consideration that is somebody who voted on the winning side. Now that means there's four of you that can bring it up. I can't because I voted against it as you know. Yes sir and the vote was 4-1 let me remind you. Mrs. Gordon: Would you clarify what you're saying Mr. Mayor? Are you saying that even if a re -consideration was held tonight that this item could be heard tonight? Mayor Ferre: No, of course not. Mrs. Gordon: Then, I see your point. Mayor Ferre: There's no way it could be heard tonight as a re- considered item. If somebody moves it to re -consider and it gets a second and then it passes on three votes then they would have to call another public hearing to the full re -consideration. We can't vote on a final basis tonight. Is that correct? Mr. Davis: You could vote on the portion that's advertised tonight, Mayor Ferre: I repeat there are three things that can happen tonight: (1). You can defer. (2). You can vote for or against the motion as it is presented, or (3). if you want to change it, If somebody wants to change it you got to move to re -consider it and that requires a motion and a second and then it requires three votes. Once that passes then it would have to be called upon for a public hearing. ,,, Now make your motion, I'm willing to go anyway you want, You have your choices, dealer's choice, now deal, Mr, Plummer: I did all the talking before, What's the concensus of 2 JAN 241978 the Commission? Mayor Ferret Well, you don't know that until somebody speaks, Mrs, Gordon: The only thing that's before us tonight is the reading of an ordinance and,.. Mayor Ferre: Mrs, Gordon moves, Mrs, Gordon: The way you have this agenda prepared the 1st and 2nd reading is this suppose to tell us this is an emergency? Mr, Davis: No Mrs, Gordon the Law Department did it in this manner because they were not able to get the 1st reading prepared for the meeting when the motion was passed and they figured rather than hold up the applicant because they were n&t able to do it. It would be satisfactory this way. Mayor Ferre: Alright, Mr, Plummer moves, Mr. Plummer: Well, first of all Mr. Mayor, Mr, La Casa let's put on the record usually a re-considerating is based on new evidence, What new evidence do you have to present this evening for the re -consider- ation? I think that's most important to be put on the record. Mr. La Casa: Definitely so. The situation is like this, as you might recall when we had the lst reading which never was a lst reading, Anyway, there was a motion made in a hurry by Mrs. Cordon. With (lit due consideration to the realities of the piece of property being discussed as part of the architectural possibilities concerned. As you might recall, after a three hours hearing in a last minute effort to get to a compromise,she proposed what she felt was a compromised type of a situation. That didn't give anyone, not the Commissioners, not the opposition, not ourselves, the opportunity to see the impact of that motion on the subject property so what we did is)with that on hand, we went back to the drawing tables and the new evidence that we have is that with this proposed situation,there is absolutely nothing decent that can be built. In other words, the city will lose because by keeping this property this way as you will see the 149' feet,suppose that we could have several small lots which do not conform in any fashion with the pattern of the neighborhood that is as far as the lots for R-1 is concerned. On the other hand, what is being left on R-CA is completely sufficient to build a decent building in accordance with what we had in mind and what we proposed to this Commission and what this Commission appreciates as a decent and creditable building to the city. In other words, landscaping, security arrangement, all that would be destroyed and actually we will end up with a piece of property useless for the city, useless for the owners and useless for anyone because it will come to a slum type of a situation as far as the office buildings is concerned and by the environmental aspects, the esthetics aspects will be totally destroyed on the account of the lack of land possibilities and this is exactly the kind of new evidence that we will like to propose to this Commission. In other words, we will have the chance to prove to the Commission that with this type of a situation there is nothing to gain by anyone in quote... Mayor Ferre: Let me ask you a question. The principle, I understand the principle of what was tried. What I have a problem with is the extent and I'm trying to be pragmatic about it. Your problem is that you can't do it 149 ft. I understand that. Well, how many feet Mr. La Casa: Ok, then I will have to show you the plans. Mayor. Ferre: Because if what you're telling me is that you can live with the 5 ft. that you had before,,, Mr, La Casa: This here is the proposed building, Mayor Ferre: Right, Mr, La Casa: As you can see the type of geography that this piece of 2,9 JAN 4 1978 lands itts not a regular piece of land doesn't lend itself to much flexibilitys so this is the building, We have 5 ft, here, Oks so here you have the proposed building, If you take this line here which actually goes like this what you're doing here is you're cutting the building in half; ok4 so then the only possibility was to try to move the building heresbut as you can see there is no Way you can do itlso actually it's totally impossible; then we talk about how many feet we can go deep in heresso obviously we cannot move the building over heresso then it will have to be at the expense of the buildings of courses but how many feet? If you go something reasonable in this line over here what you will see is that you will end up with the of lots here that you cannot build anything residential in this particular lot, Mrs. Gordon: Why not? Mr. La Casa: Becauseshow many feet can we go deep in order to maintains not even this building, something even smaller than this but something original. No,here is impossible, Here is absolutely impossible Mrs. Gordon. Mrs. Gordon: Why? Mr. La Casa: Because we won't have the space here and remember that you have all the considerations here in this situation. You have here this... This is the original plan. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: This is the original plan. Sure but that's not what we're concerned about. We're concerned about only the residential area. We're trying to protect the residential area, not something that doesn't even exist. Mr. Plummer: Let me ask a question, ok. Mr. La Casa do I understand you correctly that what you're asking for here this evening is the entire amount that was in the original application or are you willing to try a compromise to get a buildable site? Now I'rn just trying to ask for clarification, you understand? Mr. La Casa: I understand what you asked sir. Mr. Plummer: As 1 recall your original plan showed 5 ft. setback. Mr. La Casa: Right. Mr. Plummer: Now, is that what you are asking for this evening or are you asking for more space to build but let,- and more setback what are you asking for? Mr. La Casa: What we are asking for is for an office space as to build this building. The question of the setback here we can go, we have 5 here, we can go 10 here at the expense of second re- arrangements over the parking area, but what we cannot do, I know we can't because we have gone to the drawing tables on this ... is to cut this propertyjlike for instance if you cut this property over hereyou'11 end up with lots, the best you can do. Mrs. Gordon: of course, that's .... Mr. La Casa: In order to rebuild. Let me explain to you. Let me explain to you this,in order to build here or any place in the City of Miami you have to have at least 6,000 sq.ft., ok. So actually if we were to cut down this property and we will come down to 100 ft. deep here in order to have a 6ft. x100 we will come out with about 5 lots here, Now, 1 submit to you when you are thinking in order to preserve the integrity of that neighborhood you are thinking and you are proposing to this Commission on another item to rezone that whole area from R-1 to R-1B because you feel that the kind of lots you have there and the kind of property that you have there deserve that type of thing. We will end up here having a slum kind of a situation as far as the office building is concerned because then the concept that 1 propose to you with the landscaping the preservation of the trees, etc, the security of sidewalks and speed lanes cannot be built for lack of space and on the other hand what you would end up is with 5 lots of 60 x 100 which is the minimum you can build which are for the type of houses that you don't want in your neighborhood. Mrs. Gordon: What is the size of those lots Mr► Fosmoen? From this distance I cannot tell. Mr. Fosmoen: Seventy... Mr. Davis: They're 72 x 150 approximately. Mrs. Gordon: 72 x 150 that is a platted frontage anyway, ok. Mayor Ferre: You want my advise,there's no way in the world that you're going to come out with this building... you don't have the votes here, I mean, all you got to do is count and you know that you have four votes that voted for this situation right here. Now, the only way that I see that you're going to be able to do this,in my opinion is if you create a buffer of some kind that comes right across here, perpetuity and as far as your parking is concerned you're just going to have that less parking and you're going to have to adapt to somewhere within the plat or make the building smaller. I don't see ... Mr. La Casa: Well, this situation that you have picked here could be acceptable to us Mr. Mayor. This situation that you have picked here. The only thing is that we will have to sacrifice a certain space... Mayor Ferre: You're going to have to do it. Mr. La Casa: Ok. We'll go for this. tNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It's not acceptable to the neighborhood. Mr. La Casa: This will be acceptable for us. This that you have shown here is acceptable to us. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: BACKGROUND) COMMENTS. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, I don't think you're conducting this meeting in the fashion we're accustomed to. Mayor Ferre: You're right Rose. I can't argue with that. Alright, Mr. Davis: Mrs. Gordon, You asked a question about the depths of those lots. Those lots extend all the way from Secoffee up to Dixie Highway so they are deeper than the 150. The 150 is the line across which the zoning line... Mrs. Gordon: Exactly, and multiplying that 150 x 72 is the square foot of what? 8,000? Mayor Ferre: You do whatever you want. Go ahead. Mr. Fosmoen: 72 x 140 Commissioner would give you an R-1B size lot along Secoffee. 72 x approx. 90 would give you an R-1 size lot along Secoffee. You recall that this Commission directed us to undertake a study of rezoning... Mrs. Gordon: That's 10,500 ft. Mr. Fosmoen: Yes. Mrs, Gordon: Well, that is the R-1B fine, Mr, Fosmoen: That's correct and you'll recall this Commission.,.. Mrs, Gordon: And, that is what the Commission has approved, 01. Mr, Fosrnoen: No, Mrs, Gordon: What if the Commission had Mr, Fosmoen: We're studying the rezoning of this Secoffee and 22nd Avenue frontage to R-1B, It is currently zoned R-1, Ok, Mr, Plummer: We're damn if we do and we're damn if we don't, Mayor Ferre: Alright Mr, Plummer and Mrs, Gordon and Father Gibson, Commissioner Reboeo, I don't want to spend all night here, it's already 9:30 so whatever you want to do let's go, Call it, Mrs, Gordon: There is only one or two things that can be done and one is to read the ordinance as passed, which passes the portion that we approved last time and if the applicant wants to go back and apply again or whatever on the rest of it,that's another story, but you know that when the people of this neighborhood come back it's going to be exactly the same thing as it was last time. Yoft can't do anything tonight... Mr. Plummer: Let me ask a question, and maybe I'm ready to make a motion if I get the right answer, Mr. Davis as I recall we did not deny that 149 ft. is that correct? Mr. Davis: You did not include it in your motion. Mr. Plummer: Alright sir. What I'm getting at is this Mr. Davis tomorrow morning he can come in and file a new application. Mr. Davis: I would have to review the law on that. There is some- thing in our law that I would like to have interpreted about whether or not he can re -apply on the same change of zoning that he was dropped on.... for a little study on the ordinance Mr. Plummer. Mr. Plummer: The point I'm trying to make is this Mr. Davis. It would be immaterial to me whether we sent it back for re -consideration or he tomorrow morning applied, 're till going to be back before this Commission with that parcel of property. Mr. Davis: With the exception there maybe a period of time ... depend upon the law. Mr. Plummer: Well ok, yes. Ok, in other words what you're doing in fact is drawing this thing out even longer, ok. Now if that is the case in the essence of getting the damn thing behind us once and for all I would prefer to do it, you know, you're making me wish now I had denied it in the motion before which we didn't. Mrs. Gordon: Denied what? Mr. Plummer: The other 149 ft., you know because I said before and as I just said to the Mayor Rose, you know, I said before and I'll say again, this is a beautiful compromise. Mrs. Gordon: I think it is too. Mr.. Plummer: But financially it's not feasible in my book. I said that before. Mayor Ferre: That's why I voted against it. Mr, Plummer: Ok. Now Mr. Knox answer the question if you can sir. Is it possible that knowing the particulars of this case)that tomorrow morning the applicants could come in and re -apply for that other portion? Mr, Knox; We're checking the answer right now. Mr. Plummer: Ok, Mrs, Gordon; J,L, you say it's not whatever you said about the financial feasibility and yet when you figure the square feet of the larger portion of the property we're re=zoning to a commercial use it is not a little tiny piece of ground, It would permit a pretty good size development and it would still have 132j3&4&5i6 building sites to build on which would buffer the residential neighborhoods which would not intrude into it and I know there's a lot of people here who won't agree& I'rn sorry but there is integrity here and it's integrity of a neighborhood that's at stake and that's the way I look at it and everything isn't the dollars and cents of it, It's the quality of life that counts& and the investment in the quality of life that people have put into this neighborhood, Mr, La Casa: What we have proposed doesn't have any progress with the quality of lifer actually by this proposition the quality of life of that particular neighborhood is being affected because what we're proposing is the sort of a building that exists there; that all of you are familiar with that building and that is a credit to the city. What you are proposing through this change of zoning half and half;is to have a small lot which will conduct to resident- ial situations that are not inconformative with what already exist in that particular area;and what better example to back up that premise than to say that at this point, these very same neighbors are requesting from this Commission a change from R-1 to R-1B and besides what you are also proposing will create a situation whereby,in that R-CAoyou will be able to build an office building according to zoning, but What kind of an office building? Will it have the quality of the one that now exists? Does it have the kind of landscaping that now exists? Will it be able to conserve the trees that now they have? that, Mrs. Gordon: I would appreciate it if you weren't shouting. Mr. La Casa: Will it preserve the kind of security that it has there? Mayor i"'erre: Lower your voice. It so happens that you get excited and you get close to the microphone and see what happens when you get close to the microphone. Ms. Valis: Mrs. Gordon let me tell you I'm an Architect. That triangle is very difficult to do anything that is good. You have the acceleration lane that has to go all the way in the part of the Dixie Highway. You have setbacks that will take out of that triangle. The triangle you eat up almost the whole triangle. A triangle is a very, very narrow triangle. It's impossible to do anything there that's worthwhile. That land is completely, you cannot do anything with it. You have like 59 sq.ft. and maybe you can do a building of 9,000, you know what I mean? It's impossible. I under- stand the whole idea of you is to have the neighborhood with a lot and which is what they like and to have us where our office building on Dixie, but the thing is this we have the lottwhichithey are small lots and we don't have any office buildings,because you cannot do any office buildings in that triangle that is worthwhile, because you have set -backs, you have acceleration lanes, all the trees are on Dixie Highway exist and they have to come down because of the acceleration lane eats them up. I have been studying that triangle all this time since last time you said so I have been studying and we cannot get anything that is worthwhile there. We have to lose that triangle really it is incredible but we have to lose that triangle. Mayor Terre: You're going to end up knocking down all the trees... Ms. Va115: Because the triangle is very narrow triangle and you need setbacks you know. Mrs, Gordon: I don't want to argue with you, I appreciate your point of view. There are four men here they can do what they please, they don't have to agree with me, I have my philosophy and I have my feelings about preservation of residential neighborhoods they can do whatever they want. My ve)te will not change, ok. J A N 241978 Mayor Fevre: Alright5 Mr. Fosmoen you want to say something? Mr. Fosmoen: I was going to attempt to respond to the limitations of the site from some very' auick calculations that looks like approximately 255000 sq, ft, of building could be provided one'story 12,500 upper level of 12,5°0, Mayor Ferre Minus all the trees, Mr, Fosmoen: Including parking. I think that it's possible to work on that site and not lose all the trees. Certainly if you're building a larger building on this site you're not losing them, you can build a smaller building, Mayor Ferre: Ok. What's the will of the Commission3 Mr. Sugarman: Could I gay few words as a neighbor of that property? My name is Lee Sugarman. I live at 2212 S.W. 27th Terrace within 100 ft. of the subject property, The integrity of what neighborhood are you concerned about Mrs. Gordon? Mrs. Gordon: Coconut Grove neighborhood. Mr. Sugarman: I live in the Coconut Grove neighborhood, Mrs. Gordon: Sir, I'm very willing to hear your point of view and I appreciate your expressing yourself. Mr, Sugarman: Thank you. You seem to be, I get the, Gather fro your tone of your voice that you're only concerned with the integrity of the neighborhood on the east side of 22nd Avenue. There's quite a bit of neighbors that live on the west side of 22nd Avenue that are just as close if not closer to the subject propertyland we are all in favor of a change of zoning of that property because we are sick and tired of the vacant lots there for the last 20 years,and if it's not changed it will be vacant for the next 20 years. Now if we can't get the type of zoning that Mr. Valis has proposed there, I wonder Father Gibson if you could get HUD interested in that property, and we could get some nice low-cost housing there of the type that we have at 37th Avenue and Dixie Highway,and we can get some of your people and her people and my people out of the ghetto;and out from behind those barbed wire fences on Dixie Highway and maybe we can better them,and cut down on the crime. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: That's what's going to happen. Mrs. Gordon: Are you saying you want to change it to apartment house zoning, is that what you're saying? Mr. Sugarman: I don't want anything there but vacant property. Mrs. Gordon: Well, if you will allow us to proceed with this evening's application that is the chance that you will have some houses going up on that property. Mr. Sugarman: I can see that. Mr, Plummer: May I ask Mr. Knox a question? Mayor Ferre: Go ahead. Alright sir, now wait a minute now you had your chance now let's have some decorum here and now Mr. Plummer you'll proceed before my wife calls me again. Mr, Knox: As I understand it your question was whether or not the applicant could, if this Commission approves the north half of the lot this evening whether or not the applicant can make an application tomorrow morning for the south half is that correct? Mr, Plummer: Correct. Mr, Knox; Alright, If the Commission approves the north half this eveningothen that would mean that the south half is still pending before the Commission and if it is pending before the Commission then 31 JAN 241979 some action must be taken within 90 days or the application is deemed to have been denied. Mr, Plummer: Then there would be a proposed one=year wait, Mr, Knox: 18 months, Mr, Plummer: We115 can ,,66 Mayor Ferret No, They can't bring it back somebody on the Commission would have to bring it back, Mr► Plummer: Well j that was the question I was going to ask. Some- body on the Commission would have to? Mr, Knox: Right. The Commission would have to take some action as to the south half within 90 days, Mr, Plummer: I think the developer has the right to the.... Mayor Ferre: You may not agree with it Plummer, but..., Mr. Plummer: Then the applicant has the right to call for question on that,.., Mayor Ferre: You see Irwin everybody wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die, you follow me, you know that same old story, you seen this before. Mrs. Gordon: I move you sir that we move this ordinance. Mayor Ferre: I will now accept the second to that motion. Is there a second to that motion? Mr. Plummer: Well, if -you can't get a whole cake you at least take the half, sure I second the motion. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Knox, you're reading it as an emergency which requires a 4/5 vote. Mr. Knox: No ma'am this is not an emergency ordinance. The difference between this type of ordinance and an emergency ordinance is that an emergency ordinance tak s effect immediately. Mrs. Gordon: But you said 4/5 vote. Mr. Knox: I know, if you pass this ordinance by a 4/5 vote it still does not become effective until 30 days after your vote. This provision is provided for in the charter. Mrs. Gordon: Sir, if it doesn't receive a 4/5 vote what is the status of this ordinance? Mr. Knox: If it doesn't receive a 4/5 vote then it would be necessary to have a second reading. Mrs. Gordon: Ok. Mayor Ferre: 0n discussion, I vote once again, although I am a minority of one that's my opinion against this. This motion does absolutely nothing. It is half fish and half fowl, it will emasculate the property;you will end up with a series of little houses on little lots and some little dinky office building with all the trees torn off and you're going to live to regret it. I'm going to tell you and I made a prediction Irwin Christie sat with me. I sat where Plummer is and Irwin Christie sat right here and a matter came up before us on U.S, 1, in which some builder and I'll tell you who it was. It was Mr. Lorit had a one-story building right next to the Dixie Highway on U,S, 1, you remember that, and it was a very nice designed building with all kinds of green trees around it and a little .,. and a park and the whole thing and I want to tell you,,, oh boy, that's a low blow and I haven't given you any low blows so you just changed my JAN 241978 attitude for a while. Now it'll take three meetings to get me back to be nice again. Mrs. Gordon: I know it. Mayor Ferret Yes it will. Mrs. Gordon: I said I know it. Mayor Ferrer And, I want to tell you that that building would have been a beautiful addition and the neighbors came here and they stormed and they said, and we had a model here, and the guy said, look, if you don't let me do this, this is what I will build, and it was a monstrosity. It is a monstrosity, three little white block buildings that are there now they tore down all the trees. It is a monstrosity, horrible little buildings. We denied it, sure enough Christie denied it and I denied it, we were all chickens and because all the neighbors were there, and sure enough... No maybe you and I voted the other way, I don't remember how it went, Mr. Plummer: I'm glad to see in ten years you ain't changed a bit. Mayor Ferre: But I want you to know that sure enough they built that monstrosity there and next time when you drive down tomorrow downtown you'll look at it on U.S.1 at about 17th right there on the corner, three horrible little white buildings three stories tall. Mrs. Gordon: When the Mayor is through I'd like to remind the Commission where you see the two lots in green the proposed plat is to put in there lot of 6,000 sq. ft. for little dinky houses like you're describing those lots that we are permitting to remain residential each of them have over 10,000 sq.ft, and let me tell you that is not�a dinky little lot. Mayor Ferre: Alright, call the roll. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor I want to make inquiry after that roll is called. Mayor Ferre: I'll recognize you for that purpose. Call the roll. ON ROLL CALL: SECOND ROLL CALL: Mr. Plummer: I'm not going to vote on a second roll call. This is not an emergency item. I see nothing of an emergency nature which you can defend in court and I'll vote no, because I don't think it's right. Mr. Knox: Can I explain to you about what this 4/5 vote is.... Mr. Plummer: Not listed as an emergency reading. Mr. Knox: I know, but this is... there are two provisions in the charter sir, one provides for a procedure whereby emergency ordinances maybe adopted and section 4(g) of the charter provide that if the Commission passes a measure by a 4/5 vote then the requirement for a second reading maybe dispensed with. Mayor Ferre: You want a second reading? Mr. Plummer: I want a second reading. Mayor Ferre: I vote no consistent, 3 AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE N0, 68715 THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF LOTS 11, 123 135 145 153 163 17 AND 185 LESS THE SOUTH 149,9' THEREOF; ALSO THAT PORTION ABUTTING THE NORTH BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID LOT 115 BLOCK "E" BISCAYNE PARK TERRACE (2Y36), BEING APPROXIMATELY 2100 SOUTH DIXIE HIGHWAYS FROM R-1 (ONE FAMILY) TO R-CA (RESIDENTIAL OFFICE); AND BY MAKING THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAPS MADE A PART OF THE SAID ORDINANCE NO. 68715 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE I115 SECTION 2 THEREOF; BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES5 CODE SECTIONS5 OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION; AND DISPENSING WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF READING THE ` AME ON TWO SEPARATE DAYS BY A VOTE OF NOT LESS THAN FOUR -FIFTHS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. Was introduced by Commissioner Gordon and seconded by Commiss- ioner Plummer for adoption pursuant to section 4, Paragraph (f) of the City Charter dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days by a vote of not less than four -fifths of the members of the Commission- AYES: Mrs. Gordon, Rev. Gibson, Vice -Mayor Reboso. NOES: Mr. Plummer, and Mayor Ferre ABSENT: None. Whereupon the Commission on motion of Commissioner Gordon, and seconded by Commissioner Plummer, adopted said ordinance by the following vote - AYES: Mrs. Gordon, Mr. Plummer, Rev. Gibson, and Vice -Mayor Reboso. NOES: Mayor Ferre ABSENT: None. There being insufficient votes in favor of dispensing with the requirement of reading said ordinance on two separate days the ordinance was passed on first reading only. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and copies were available to the public. FURTHER DISCUSSION: Mr. Plummer: Alright, now Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer. Mr. Plummer: At the sake of getting you decapitated,which I'm really trying to do and keep you here. The longer I do/the better chance you got of getting decapitated. Mr. Mayor, this is not going to be popular with my friends in the neighborhood. The man is entitled to an answer. This Commission has not addressed the south 149 ft. and I think the man is entitled to an answer. Now all I'm saying to you is that yes this is presently being studied in your study and that at such time that that study is completed and I think it's what 60 days? Mr. Whipple: Mr. Plummer: Mr. Whipple: February 1st before the Planning Advisory Board. Well, before this Commission, because.... It'll be March meeting sir. Mr, Plummer: This matter in my estimation should be settled once and for all, and that this south 149 ft. which this Commission has not addressed should be addressed at that time, What am I saying, place the 149 ft, back on the agenda for some kind of answer. The man is entitled to it, Mr, Whipple: Mr, Mayor if I may, if that is the wish of this Commissiion it would take as I understand a motion for deferral of that south 149,9,. JAN 2 4 197B Mr. Plummer: We're not addressing that, Mr, Whipple: Yoare if you defer it until March sit. If you ignore it it dies, If you defer it until March meetingthen it stays alive, Mrs, Gordon: Mr. Davis, do you remember whether or not the 149 ft, was addressed in any fashion at the last meeting? Mr. Davis: In the meeting of December 15th, it was fully addressed, it was in the proposal, it Was advertised, it was recommended for denial by the Zoning Board, (Mrs. Gordon: ok,) Mr. Davis: What I'm stating at this point is that if it is the wish of this Commission to hear the southerly portion at the March meeting they would have to defer that portion of this entire applicat- ion until that meeting. Otherwise it would automatically expire by being in process with the Commission over 60 days. Mr. Fosmoen: May I try and clarify at least one point? Mrs. Gordon: I wish you would Mr. Fosmoen. Mr. Fosmoen: If there is no action taken on the southerly 149 ft. this evening it stays as R-1 which is a minimum 6,000 sq. ft. coming up before the Planning Advisory Board on February lst,is a public hearing on the question of re -zoning those lots as well as the 22nd Avenue frontage to R-1B that will come back to this Commission in February for your consideration,(I'm sorry March for your consider- ation). Your action this evening leaves that property as R-1,6,000 sq.ft. and either the Commission, the staff or someone else would have to initiate an application for any R-CA consideration. Mayor Ferre: Alright, one way or the other what's.... Mr. Taylor: Mr. Mayor, can I say something? I haven't had a chance to speak. My name is Robert Taylor and I live at lot 11 there on Secoffee Street, myself and my father-in-law were down here at the last meeting Thomas Tatham is his name. Mayor Ferre: Alright Mr. Taylor. Mr. Taylor: Basically, what had happened toward the end of the last meeting1Rose Gordon and Mr. Plummer reached a compromise. I said ok let's compromise and draw the line,and at that point there was no further discussion from the people, that ,including myself that were in favor of re -zoning that entire corner RCA. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Taylor that matter is not before us and therefore your statement is really out of order. Mr. Taylor: Let me just say this, even though I was in favor of having the entire corner zoned RCA living on lot 11 if you cut down the size of that lot it means that I'm going to have about 4 or 5 small office buildings jammed right behind my house. Mayor Ferre: You bet'cha. Mr. Taylor: Whereas, before I would had some nice open space trees and parking and when Rose Gordon made the motion she never gave us a chance to come back up here and speak. She just shoveled it down our throat, Mayor Ferre: No, no, that's not her, no you can't blame that on her. Mr. Taylor: And she's been shoveling this thing down our throats since the beginning, Mayor Ferre: Mr, Taylor please, please, Now, Rose and I can have that kind of discussion and we often do but I'm going to pretend,., I'm certainly not going to let you talk to her that way. c p JAN 241978 Mr. Taylor: Well I pay taxes I can talk to her, I pay her salary. Mayor Ferre: That's fine.,,► Mrs, Gordon: I`ll tell you the amount of salary that we get paid believe me,,., Mr, Taylor: Well you ought to resign then Mrs, Gordon if you're not,.. Mrs. Gordon: Pardon me sir, what did you say to fine? Mr. Taylor: I said you ought to resign if you're not satisfied with the salary. Mrs, Gordon: To satisfy you? Mr. Taylor: No.... Mayor Ferre: Mr. Taylor you are out of order, Thank you sir for your deliberations here. I'm the one you have to blame, not Rose Gordon because I'm the one that's running the meeting and if some- thing is crammed your throat it was my fault not her's ok. Now, let's move along and unless I hear otherwise it remains as R-1, Alright, we'll move on to the next item. 9, FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ARTICLE XIV-1 SPECIAL COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL C-2A DISTRICT - PERMIT CERTAIN GROUND FLOOR LEVEL OFFICES AS CONDITIONAL USEk Mr. Whipple: Item #6 is a Planning Department application to modify the zoning ordinance to revise the C-2A District to permit certain ground -floor level offices as conditional uses in the Coconut Grove Business District. Mr. Plummer: meeting. Mayor Ferre: Well, I expressed my position to on the record. Mr. Plummer: I'm telling you the way I felt at the last meeting.... Mayor Ferre: Well, item #6 on First Reading - Ordinance- Planning Department_Application, amending Article XIV-1, Special Community Commercial -C-2A District of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 6871. Now, this passed the Plannin€, Advisory Board by 7-0 it was recommend- ed by the Planning Department.... Are there any objectors to it? Alright, what's the will of this Commission? I'll wait a moment. Let's see if we can save some time. Did anybody want to move this? I expressed my feelings pretty damn clear at the last Mrs. Gordon: I want the Department to speak to this please. Mayor Ferre: Alright, go right ahead. Mr. Whipple: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, in very few words this is a clarification ordinance with respect to the intent and the existing provisions of the C-2A. There was some conflict within the C-2A Districts regarding which uses should be subject to a conditional use approval in which amount of square footage. This erases that conflict and that question that makes all office usage in the Coconut Grove District as a conditional use of when it falls within 65% of the street frontage your intent here is to maintain the pedestrian character and orientation and the retail activity in the central core area. Mr. Plummer: You think this is a good thing? Mr, Whipple: Yes sir. 39 JAN 24 1978 AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE NO: 6871, ARTICLE XIV=1, SPECIAL COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, C=2A DISTRICT, SECTION 2(57)(5) AND SECTION 4(1)(a), TO PROVIDE THAT ANY GROUND FLOOR LEVEL OFFICES, INCLUDING BANKS AND FINANCE OFFICES, EMPLOYMENT OFFICES, MEDICAL OR DENTAL LABORATORIES, MEDICAL OR DENTAL OFFICES OR CLINICS, OFFICES PROFESSIONAL OR BUSINESS, AND REAL ESTATE AND TICKET AGENCIES WITHIN THE 65% RESTRICTED FRONTAGE, MAY BE PERMITTED ONLY AS CONDITIONAL USES; BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION. Was introduced by Commissioner Gordon and seconded by Commissioner Plummer and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice --Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. 10, FIRST READING ORDINANCE: FIEND ARTICLE XXV BASE BUILDING LINES - MAKE N.W. 9 AVE. BETWEEN 15 ST. AND 18 ST. AND N.W, 10 AVE. BETWEEN 19 ST. AND 20 ST. 70' "RIGHT-OF-WAYS." AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE XXV, BASE BUILDING LINES, SECTION 1, BY ADDING PARAGRAPH (97-A) MAKING N.W. 9TH AVENUE, BETWEEN N.W. 15TH STREET AND N.W. 18TH STREET, A 70' RIGHT- OF-WAY (35' TO CENTER LINE); BY DELETING PARAGRAPH (98) IN ITS ENTIRETY AND ADDING A NEW PARAGRAPH (98) MAKING N.W. 10TH AVENUE, BETWEEN N.W. 19TH STREET AND N.W. 20TH STREET, A 70' RIGHT-OF-WAY (35' TO CENTER LINE); BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION. Was introduced by Commissioner Gordon and seconded by Commissioner Gibson and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. 40 JAN 24197B L CLM E ANY MIME P r Ci ►tb2b A SO. OP THE StifIll RIGHTatFaWAY LINE NiEf 16 St. ItaTATIA PLAT 97& "JEFFER N'8 ANir1I I" Mayor Ferre: You want to be heard? I'm sorry, I'm glad you stood Up, Anybody else want to be heard? Would you like to be heard? Anybody else? Yes, we have some objectors, I beg your pardon, Mrs, Gordon: The reason that it's not apparentis there aren't any red drawings on the board and that's where we know there are people here in objection, Mayor Ferret Alright sir' you right ahead. You are recognized. Mr, Green: Robert Green, I'm the owner of a restaurant on 1st Ct. and 17th Street called the Tree Top, Mrs. Gordon: Would somebody point to his restaurant please? Mr. Whipple: What's the address of your restaurant sir? Mr. Green: 128 N.E. 17th Street, Mayor Ferre: On Biscayne Boulevard? Mr. Green: No, on the corner of 1st Court and 17th sir. Mayor Ferre: I see. Mrs. Gordon: Did you send in a written objection sir? Mir. Green: I just got notice of this today and I beg your indulgence in the fact in the way I'm dressed:y&;:' e tired, I was buying at 4:30 this morning. Mayor Ferre: I bet you're tired, go right ahead. Mr. Green: As I understand this right now access to my restaurant, we've been open seven months and I've enjoyed very, very good success there. My brothers and I invested over $100,000 to make this a worthwhile project in the Omni area. Mrs. Gordon: What's the name of your restaurant. Mr. Green: Yes, the name of the restaurant is Tree Top. Mrs. Gordon: I'll have to try it. Mr. Green: I'm sure you'd enjoy it. Mr. Whipple: If you see where this is located sir it's a block away from your restaurant. Mr. Green: If you'll allow me to continue sir I'm sure you'll understand my objection. What we have -- N.E. 17th Street is a one-way street it happens to be going towards Omni which makes almost impossible getting to my restaurant unless you go all the way around the back way to 1st Avenue. What you're proposing is to put me out of business which makes it even more difficult. Now unless you can show me differently I would be very happy ... Mr. Whipple: Sir, I don't see how it would affect, because the closure of the alley, if you see the yellow portion of the alley, point it out Mr. Perez, is a short end of a stub alley that does not go through the block that is already on Jefferson's property and they own the property all the way around it at this point. There's all the property in blue is the Jefferson property, The yellow alley at the northerly end of that block is the alley which is proposed to be closed, There is no traffic through that alley sir, It has no effect on your restaurant, JAN 241978 Mrs. Gordon: t think you thought it Was a block further north sit Mrs Green: Well as its explained on the notice it was kind of a1 most impossible for me to figure it out and it looked liked 16th Street, As it is you have to come in from Biscayne Boulevard, You have to come around the whole dog leg just to get into tne, Any possibilities of closing 16th Street, 17th Street now is half one-way and half tt4'o=way. Mr. Whipple: But there is no street closure sir. This is a closure of a little stub alley. Mr. Green: Then you're more than welcome to close it. I withdraw my objection. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: Ok. Next speaker. Mrs. Gordon: know before. now we know where your restaurant is, We didn't Mayor Ferre: You will have a couple of customers now. Ok, who is the next speaker? Anybody else? Any objectors? Alright. Now call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 78-78 A RESOLUTION CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING THE PUBLIC USE OF THAT PORTION OF THE ALLEY LYING WITHIN NORTH MIAMI (A - 49-1/2), bounded by N.E. 1ST COURT AND N.E. 2ND AVENUE SOUTH OF THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF N.E. 16TH STREET FOR A DISTANCE OF - 120', IN CONJUNCTION WITH TENTATIVE PLAT 11976-B "JEFFERSON'S ADDITION". Upon being seconded by Commissioner (Rev.) Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson Vice Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. 12. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION N.W. CORNER OF N.E. 4 CT, AT NE 55 TERR - FROM Cl TO C4, Mayor Ferre: We are now on item 10. First Reading - Ordinance, Application by Food Fair to change the zoning from the N.W. corner of N.E. 4th Court at N.E. 55th Terrace from C-1 to C-4. Now the Planning Department recommended a denial and the Zoning Board recommended a denial 6-1. Their are no objectors. Now, we have a distinguish counselor, Mr. Aronovitz, we're always happy to have you here. They want to change it from C-1 to C-4. Mrs. Gordon: Bob, or Dick, wasn't that C-4 at one time, this property that we're considering right now, sometimes back? Mr. Plummer: I don't believe so. Mr. Whipple: I don't believe so. I believe the only thing that,.. where General Tire was, I believe lot 11 was originally in the C-1 category but .., in early 60's it changed to C-4, Mr. Plummer: Whipple, what is to the left of there, across the railroad track; 42 JAI 24197a Mr. Whipple: We have the railroad immediately to the left of to the west then you move into a sparsely developed' partially developed I should says G 5 mostly a warehouse area with residential use in back. Mr. Plummer: We got C=5 , C1 i C4 . Mr. Reboso: You have C=5 to the west side of the FEC? Mr. Whipple: Yes sir. Mr. Reboso: C'S. Mr. Whipple: One of our primary concerns Mr. Mayor and Commissioners is the overall condition of commercial development in this area and other areas of the city. We have a substantial amount of commercial zoning as we've indicated in the past and a good portion of this zoning in fact almost the majority, if you will in excess of 40% is either C -4 or C-5 more liberal classifications. Our suggestion here is that we maintain a neighborhood or community type characteristic for restrictive type uses. Well, this was a food fair outlet. Mrs. Gordon: Dick, can I ask the applicant to identify himself, tell us what he wants to do on it and this and that? Mr. Aronovitz: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, my name is Alfred Aronovitz. I'm an Attorney representing Mr. 6 Mrs. Reudidge and Food Fair, Inc. I'm with the firm of Aronovitz & Wexler and our address is 1117 City National Bank. Bldg. I'm here tonight to seek a re -zoning of the parcel that is bounded on the south, as you can see, by N.E. 55th Terrace, on the east by 4th Court or Bayshore Unit #4, and on the west by the FEC Railroad tracks. This property consists of approximately 150 ft. of frontage on 55th Terrace and 263 ft. on N.E. 4th Court. Presently, on the site at the south side is a building housing and appliance store and immediately north and adjacent thereto is another building of approximately 121 thousand sq.ft. that has been vacant for approximately 8-years. I'm here to request that this property be changed from local -commercial (C-1) to general -commercial (C-4). I believe this to be a meritorious request for the following reasons: This property is adjacent to C-4 property at its south side. That is on the south side of N.E. 55th Terrace. On its east side and it is adjacent to the FEC tracks on the west side that's C-5. In other words, it's just a peninsula. This is just a peninsula of C-1 in a C-4 .... Mrs. Gordon: What do you want to put in it? Mr. Aronovitz: My client desires to put a vitamin compounding and processing plant. In other words, he is not going to make vitamins but they blend them and compound them in packages. I could tell you that to deny this request it seems to me would be very anonymous. This is not a C-1 zoning area. The Tire Store across on the east side requires C-4. The Gasoline Station south of that requires either C-2 or C-4. The Mortuary on the west side of.... Rev. Gibson: Come on,you're going to lose a vote now. Mr, Aronovitz: No, I was merely trying to say what the use was. I was saying that this was not a C-1 use, that the Planning Director is in error calling this a C-1 zone. Mrs. Gordon; I agree. I really do, honestly, you can't always be right fellows. I'm with you a lot of times but I move that this be granted. Mayor Ferre: Father Gibson seconds, Further discussion.,. Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr, Mayor, I'm sorry if I've got to ask a question, Look, to me,.., Mrs, Gordon: I'm sorry I didn't ask if there was any objectors? JAN 241978 Mr. Plufnrner: I'm not an objectors but let me draw you a logical conclusions and I don't know if we can even do it. I'm all in favor of uthat Rose is saying swith a logical conclusion to Mes Fosmoens you know what I ' m sayings I just showed you 4 that you draw the Cm4 line across the top and even it out. Now; those people are not before us.... Mr. Aronovitz: Yes they are before you. May Is I was about to tell your... Mr. Plummer: Wells but it's not advertised, so I don't think we can do it. Mr. Aronovitz: I don't want it done. We don't want that done, I represent... Food Fair is also the owner of 305 ft, north of the property that we're seeking this re -zonings but we want to use that for the parking facility that we presently have. We do not seek re -zoning. Mrs. Gordon: They don't need it. Why should we give it? Mr. Plummer: Ok. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion. There's a motion and a second. Mrs. Gordon: I really mean if e+'er there's been an application that was an easy one for me to make a decision this is it. The railroad and the C-4 and the C-5 and this thing coming down like a root into it. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF LOTS 31 thru 40, BLOCK 14; BAYSHORE UNIT 114 (16-30), BEING THE N.W. CORNER OF N.E. 4TH COURT AT N.E. 55TH TERRACE, FROM C-1 (LOCAL COMMERCIAL) TO C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL); AND BY MAKING THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP MADE A PART OF THE SAID ORDINANCE NO. 6871 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 2 THEREOF; BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR 'DARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION. Was introduced by Commissioner Gordon and seconded by Commissioner Gibson and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. 44 JAN 241978 i APPEAL f' APPLt(`-MANUEL DEL P fit LL( OF ZONING BOARD'S DENIAL OP VARIANCE - 3513 SA 17 TERM ( DISCuSSED AND DEFERRED ) 1 Mayor Ferret Iteitt 11(a) and (b) have been withdrawn. We're on item # 12. This is an appeal by the applicant, Manuel Del Portillo, The Zoning Board's denial, Is the applicant here? Is there anybody here on item 12? Alright, The Planning Department recommended Denial, The Zoning Board recommended Denial, There are no objections, Where is the property, I don't see its Mr, Davis: The center lot of those three on 17th. Mayor Ferret How big a lot is it? Mr, Davis: 42 x 70, Mayor Ferre: You want to build a duplex there? Ms . Del Portillo: It has an existing duplex, If I may give you... I know you're in a hurry to get home so am I,but we've been on this since October ---Lot 13. Mv.name is Sonia Del Portillo and I'm talking in behalf of M. Del Portillo. It is an existing building. It's a two-story duplex right now. It's a solid CBS structure with almost a new roof and a life expectancy like any new building in a similar area. The ground floor apartment has tile floors. It has an existing $30,000 mortgage and provides enough income to off -set the mortgage payments. On the other hand, it provides no parking space. It is built flush with the street within the 25 ft. setback that is required, you know, by the Planning Board, Zoning regulation, what- ever, you know. It has very poor floor plans, no air conditioning. It's an unsIrrht y old structure, old windows, and ten years from now the City decides to widen the streets from 32 ft. to 50 ft, it will be burden with the additional expense and demolishing and re- constructing the existing duplex that is right now on the property. The owner requested in order to make the most reasonable use of this land... Mrs. Gordon: You're not the owner? Ms. Del Portillo: I'm not the owner. I'm the owner's sister-in-law. Ok. To make the most reasonable use of this land and at the same time to make it economical feasible he requested a variance so that permission will be granted to the demolish the existing building there. The existing duplex and in it's place build a new one. The new one will bring more revenue to the City , it provide for green area. Mrs. Gordon: Ok. Just let me ask the Planning Department. What is the dimension of the existing building, do you know? Is there a survey of the existing, does anybody know? Mr. Whipple: I think Bob has it in the file there. Mr, Davis: I'll check,just a moment. This is the one right here. The existing building is approximately 20 ft. deep by 40 ft. wide. It encroaches upon this side lot line. Mrs. Gordon: The existing building is 20 x 40? Mr. Davis: Approximately ma'am. It's an odd shape building... Ms. Del Portillo: Ok. Number two, what we have there on lot 12 and 15, the two corner lots. One is a complete building, the other one is an approved building site with a building permit. The one we're talking about is the new lot and that's what we propose to build right in alignment with the other two buildings and not flush with the side- walk as it presently stands. The sketch number three, we show the two building sites as they have been approved and what is constructed and then the existing structure with about 800 sq.ft, on each floor JAN 2419A sitting flush with the street and it's a duple t. Mrs. Gordon: What is the dihensions of the new building you're proposing? Ms. Del Portillo: It would be roughly about the same size 800s pet floor and that's on sketch number one. I'm showing, you know, two proposed things, you know things that could be done Without that building.,,. Mrs. Gordon: Are you asking for,., you're not asking for any variances on setbacks or anything? Mr, Davis: Yes ma'am he's asking for a variance on the rear set- back of 15 ft.,20 ft, is required. It also, with a lot of that size 20 - 3250 sq.ft. approximately, A duplex normally cannot be built on That size lot. Mr. Reboso: Hold it for a second. You say the rear setback, what is the variance they're asking for? Mr, Davis: They're proposing 50 ft.... Mr. Reboso: 5 ft. Mr. Davis: A 5 ft. variance. Mr. Reboso: Ok. Ok. Mr. Davis: The lot size, this is a complicated situation. These people have those three lots in a line on 17th and... They have already received variances on the easterly lot and the westerly lot which bound this lot to construct duplexes. The Zoning Board in reviewing this denied it because they felt that the lot was too small to support a duplex with a duplex on either side would make... Mrs. Gordon: But it already is a duplex. Mr. Davis: It already is a duplex but there is nothing on either side lot. Mr. Reboso: But, let me tell you the only reason .... Mrs. Gordon: Yes, but wouldn't it improve the looks of the neighbor- hood if it was torn down? Mr. Davis: Well, this is up to the Commission and the Board. The Board didn't feel so. Ms. Del Portillo: .... At the time it was denied, they said, why don't you modernize, and we proposed that modernation plan, you know, re -building and so forth and they denied because the building right now is within the 29 ft. setback and we have to demolish in order to comply with the regulations. Mrs. Gordon: Just a minute. Mr. Fosmoen, is this the way it would look if all three buildings would come down? Mr. Fosmoen: Yes, if all three. Let me try and clarify a couple of issues for the Commission. There are 3 parcels of property, 50,50,and 42 ft. wide. The end parcels are 50 ft. There is currently a building, a duplex across this parcel and this parcel existing. They have received approval on a single-family dwelling on the westerly parcel with variances I might add, There were variances granted on the setbacks. They have received permission to build a single-family unit on the easterly parcel with variances, with setback variances. They're going to tear down the existing building, put up another single-family unit on the easterly building and are now requesting further variances for a duplex on the center parcel of 42 ft, wide. Mr, Reboso; Let me ask you, what's the zoning R-2? JAN 2 41978 Mrs, Gordon: If she pulls down the duplex Mr. Fosmoen she could still put up a unit, a building, a single.,fainily unit? Mr, Fosmoen: She currently has permission to put up a single.,family unit on the eastern parcel, She is now seeking a variance for the center parcel for a duplex, Mr, Plummer: With five units on two parcels, Mr. Fosmoen: No it'll be four units on three parcels where there is currently two units on three parcels. Mr. Plummer: I'm talking about units now. I'm not talking about buildings. Mr, Fosmoen: I know. There will be three buildings, four units on three parcels of property. Mr. Plummer: You said on lot 14 they have just received permission for a single-family residence. Mr. Fosmoen: That's correct. Mr. Plummer: Alright ... Mr. Fosmoen: It's under construction. Mr. Plummer: Alright, and that's the only thing on that parcel. Mr. Fosmoen: That's correct. Mr. Plummer: Alright, you now explained that they have a duplex up toward the north lot line. Mr. Fosmoen: Covering both parcel 13 and 12. Mr. Plummer: Alright. Now you also say that they're building down from your pencil there a single-family. Mr. Fosmoen: No, they're going to tear down the existing duplex that covers lots 12 and 13 and build a single-family on lot 12 and they're requesting a variance for a duplex on lot 13. Mr. Plummer: Oh I see. Ms. Del Portillo: Mr. Mayor, if I may talk, because last time we got no where we spent a lot of time and the fact is that whenever I tried to talk, you know I'm wasn't allowed and if I may express completely, ok. Right now, alright, we requested to have on lot 14, there's a new structure a single-family residence, one unit. On lot 12 there's a building permit that lot 12 has an encroachment of three feet. The duplex itself will not be completely within 12 lots, 12 and 13 as you may see by my sketch number three. Mayor Ferre: If you look at sketch number three you'll see what she's talking about. She's saying that this building has a three foot encroachment on lot 12. Mrs. Gordon: It's terrible. It has to come down. Ms. Del Portillo: Well, the encroachment will have to come down, but necessarily the building. Mrs, Gordon: No I didn't say that. I just say it will be improvement if it came down. Ms. Del Portillo: Right. That's what they say that I would have to tear down the duplex completely so I can build there. We got the building permit and all we have to do, you know, it was not subject to anything, but in order to comply with the lenders requirement we'll have to remove that 3 ft. encroachment from that building site and `7 JAN 241978 what we're talking now tight from the beginring,they've been trying to tie up three lots and that's the reason why I'm here appealing. It's specifically about lot 135 bk Where there is a two=story CBS structure duplex that will have the encroachment removed and What we want to do is to replace a new (the structures ok). It will bring more revenue to the City in case this street will have to be widened; it will have room to do its it will have green areas it willprovide for parkingspaces it will enhance the area. P s We feel that the denials of the boards you knout last time was due that they were taking too much time and there wasn't no(with due respect and all no solid grounds). If the owner were requesting granting a variance to build a new duplex on a vacant lot.then it would be a different storys but we're requesting the granting of this variance in order that an existing duplex be demolished and that we will build a new building instead of the old ones that's the difference that exist right there. Oks to replace that is not to be build a complete ones it's not a vacant lot. The recommendation of the Planning Department was because of the area density..., Mrs. Gordon: May I ask you a question? Ms. Del Portillo: Yes. Mrs, Gordon: Why are you putting up single families where you have the larger lot and here on the smaller lot you want a duplex? Ms. Del Portillo: Because of the setback. Even though it's a smaller lot the setbacks are smaller, you only have to leave 5 ft. on each side and the variance that we're requesting for the back it'll make it 11. It's the same variance that we requested on the other two units and that was granted. On this particular block there are five lots. These five lots, the two lots, 11 & 15 are for duplexes. Mayor Ferre: Alright, I think Ms. Del Portillo that you are a very good lawyer. Ms. Del Portillo: No I'm not a lawyer. Mrs. Gordon: Are you an Architect? Ms. Del Portillo: Neither. I'm a builder's wife. Mayor Ferre: I'm just trying to be nice to you that's all, but I don't know what the wish or the will of this Commission is so let's see if there's a... Mr. Reboso: Mr. Mayor, I think one of the main problems is the base building line that is reducing the lot 9 ft. in the frontage. I myself don't see any problem to give that variance. Mayor Ferre: Alright, there's a motion. Mr. Reboso: I move it. Mayor Ferre: That the Applicant be... Mrs. Gordon: This is all zoned duplex, right? Right, Mr. Fosmoen, this is all zoned duplex? Mr. Reboso: It's only the duplex and the Planning Department recommendation that the block is already crowded, UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It's a duplex existing .., Mrs. Gordon: I know, but,.. Mr. Fosmoen: Yes it is zoned for a duplex, however we require a minimum of 3,500 sq. ft, - 4,000 sq,ft, for duplexes, Mrs, Gordon: Do the corner lots have that sq, footage or not? Do the corner ones have that? I don't have any dimensions on this JAN 24 1978 thing, Mr, Fosmoen: This lot is 3400 sq, ft, Mrs, Gordon: The one we're discussing now? Mr. Fosmoen: 3,040, Mayor Ferre: Versus 45000,4. Mr, Davis: Versus 45000 minimum. The Board I might add, felt by denying this it still gave the applicant permission to put up a single-family dwelling on this lot which they felt was more suitable. Mrs, Gordon: Ok. How many square feet are in the corner lots? Mr. Davis: I don't have a survey on that,.,. Ms, Del Portillo: The house that I'll build there; there are 50 x 70 feet. Mr. Davis: There is a street widening situation on these that narrows those lots down from 50 ft. Mrs. Gordon, that's what I don't have here it takes off either five or ten feet and I don't show that, Mrs, Gordon: You mean the base building line is ten feet? Mr. Davis: Yes, so it really makes the lot smaller than the center one. Mrs. Gordon: Than they really are. Mr. Davis: Yes ma'am they are smaller lots than the center ones. Mrs. Gordon: They have the setbacks further. Mr. Davis: Yes ma'am. Mrs. Gordon: That's not their fault. Mayor Ferre: Alright, well, look this may all futile because we have a motion and if there's no secondthenit's dead, so I'm going to call for a second... Mrs. Gordon: Well, I'll tell you I'd like to go and look at the neighborhood to tell you the truth and I'll tell you I could make a more logical decision. Mayor Ferre: Alright, Mrs. Gordon moves that this matter be deferred until the next meeting so that we can go look at it. Mrs. Gordon: Will that cause you a great hardship because we aren't going to hear it until the end of February? Ms. Del Portillo: Well, it will in a way because, see the recommend- ation to build a single-- I know you all want to get home ( I have six kids... I have ... Mrs. Gordon: No. I would like, I don't know about the other Commissioners but I think before I could vote to grant you a duplex on 3,040 ,sq.ft. I have to take a look at that neighborhood. Ms. Del Portillo: See, what we want to do there, you know, it is there it's bigger than the area, none of the neighbors has objected. Mr. Plummer: Ma'am. Ms, Del Portillo: Yes. Mr, Plummer: In very brief, you either accept it or you lose. Ms, Del Portillo: Excuse me, I couldn't get it, All JAN 241878 Mr, Plurnnier: You either accept the deferral or you lose, Ms, Del Portillo: Nos then I'll accept the deferral► Mayor Ferre: Alright, there's a Motion to defer; seconded by Father Gibson, Further discussion, A motion to defer this matter to next meeting was passed and adopted by a unanimous vote of the Commission, Mayor Ferre: Yess we'll see you next month, Ms, Del Portillo: Alright, I hope I have number two or three on the agenda, Mrs, Gordon: Let her have number one or two on the agenda Mr. Homan, or whoever makes the agenda, 141 REVIEW OF RESOLUTION 72-415 WHICH PERMITTED OFF-STREET PARKING LOT AT 1570 N.W. 26TH AvENUt, Mayor Ferre: 72-415 of July 20th, which permitted an off-street parking lot on approximately 1570, the Zoning Division indicates the intent of the Resolution is not being met. Mr. Davis: You have with you a report from the Building Department on this matter Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Yes. Tell us what's going on. Mr. Davis: The Building Department has not been able to obtain an enforcement of this item by and have this under notice and therefore it's back before this Commission. Rev. Gibson: I didn't get that. Mr. Davis: The Building Department has not been able to obtain compliance with the intent of the Resolution which was to keep the bar up over the entrance on the 29th Avenue I think it is, I'm sorry 24th Avenue-- 26th Avenue, alright, and to have the ingress only with no egress and therefore I posted the notice of violation.... Mrs. Gordon: You mean the cars have been going in and out through that entrance? Mr. Davis: Yes ma'am, as well as trucks. Mrs. Gordon: Ok. Let me ask you a question, have you received complaints from the neighborhood? Mr, Davis: The neighborhood has not, to my knowledge, I can't answer for the Building Department on this but to my knowledge they have not been complaining, however, this item was not set for a public hearing. I don't know what would be the reaction if they were to feel this were being changed. Mrs. Gordon: I see one red, so somebody is.,. Mr. Davis; This was the original hearing Mrs. Gordon. Mrs, Gordon: Oh, ok. Mr. Davis: This is not a new map. Mrs. Gordon: Well, I don't know, I didn't give you a chance to say, can you tell us why this thing is down and so on so forth? • Mr. Vidal: My name is Sergio Vidal, 2351 W. Flagler Street, I represent the owner of the property, rIF JAN 241978 Mrs. Gordon: You ate one of the owners? Mr& Vidal: First of all, we have vandalism all over the shopping center and all their security device has been Vandalized three or four times& We have been replacing the lights devices. Mrs& Gordon: How wide is the opening that you have? Mr. Vidal: The actual one is 10 feet, Mr& Davis: The opening is supposed to be 10 feet wide Mrs. Gordon& It's supposedly limited to 10 feet. Mrs. Gordon: What is it? Mr. Davis: I'm not sure. It's probably wider than that at this point. The owner would be able to state. That's another point of miscompliance. Mayor Ferre: Don't you remember the shopping center... Mrs. Gordon: Yesi I know the place exactly. My question is directed at finding out whether or not we can take a different position than we did a couple of years ago when the neighborhood was and we didn't know what the track records would be and that's the reason I'm questioning you. Mr. Davis: That's exactly why the Commission asked that this come back for review. Mrs. Gordon: Ok. Alright. Mr. Vidal: Mainly, we have no problems at all in the neighborhood anymore and the people is using for ingress and egress due to the vandalism of the devices. We are living in peace altogether and I don't see why not just to waive all the re5 rictions. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Davis, if there complaints coming in you would know about it wouldn't you? Mr. Davis: The Building Department would. I wouldn't necessarily, no ma'am, but we've had no indication of this from the Building Department. Mrs. Gordon: Well, I'm going to tell you how I feel about it. I would say that I would feel comfortable in permitting the device to be removed for a period of whatever period of time we feel comfortable with and then review it again, because now we're doing something else we had instructed them to put up a device, which through no fault of his the devices been removed. Is that correct? Mr. Davis: That's what I understand, yes ma'am. I might add that this is not a public hearing. This is a review by the Commission of this situation. Mrs. Gordon; Alright, we're reviewing it, ok. Mr. Davis: If that resolution were to be changed need a new public hearing. Mrs. Gordon: Well, are they here tonight because here? Mr. Davis: Yes ma'am we asked them to come. Mrs, Gordon; Ok, Mr, Vidal; May I say something? I and I just asked him for waiving of have future complaints in regard of we just want to,,, I think it would you brought them consider this a public hearing repair of the devices, If you that entrace or ingress or egress er JAN 241978 Mrs, Gordon: Mr, Fosfnoenj how do we handle this? Mr. Plummer: Are you asking sirs to repair the device and leave it there is that what you're asking? Mrs. Gordon: No; he wants to leave it alone. Mrs Vidal: To waive the repair of the device, Mr, Plummer: To waive the repair? Mrs, Gordon: He doesn't want to repair its and he doesn't want to have to come back here and answer to us every month or two► He wants us to either pass a resolution which permits him not to have to repair it or not to have to put it back or if we have to have a public hearing in order to do it then hold the public hearing. Mr. Reboso: Mrs. Gordon: Mr, Reboso: Mr. Davis: Mr, Reboso: legally? Mr. Vidal: To be this is a public hearing. Mrs. Gordon: No. This is not a public hearing. Mr. Vidal: Ok. I know what you mean with a public hearing and we'll take it .. we can't repair if you'd like it to be repaired, but it is going to be vandalized again, it's going to be broken and ... Mr. Plummer: From the looks of these pictures they must have hit it with a bulldozer. Mr. Reboso: Let's put it in a public hearing. Mr. Plummer: Put it in a public hearing. Mrs. Gordon: How does it go by the public hearing, did we call for it? Can we grant the relief for certain... Only if we have a public hearing they say. Only if we have a public hearing? That's right sir. That is a revision of the It's nothing that we can do without a public resolution. hearing, Mr. Davis: If it is the desire for this Commission to have a public hearing to revise that resolution we would so advertise it. Mr. Reboso: I move it. Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute let's get the options Lere as I understand the public hearing the worst that can happen to him is to have to repair it. Mrs. Gordon: Right. Mr. Davis: That's right or lose his ... Mr. Plummer: Ok. So he's got everything to gain and nothing to lose, is that correct? Mr, Davis: Yes sir. Mr. Reboso: I move it that we bold a public hearing. Mr. Plummer: That's called an offer you can't refuse. Mr. Davis; Due to the.,, we're getting a lot of things in March and we were trying to hold this down to one meeting in March. Mr, Plummer: So put it in April. JQN 941 7R NOES: None. Mrs: Gordon: So put it in April ON _ROLL „CALL : Mr: Plummer: With the proviso that the man has been put at the end of the agenda this evening which should entitle him to the first item of the agenda in April. I vote yea. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Reboso, who moved its adoption. MOTION NO. 7879 A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO REQUEST THE ZONING DEPARTMENT TO TAKE NECESSARY ACTION TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING TO REVIEW CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN RESOLUTION NO. 72415 DATED JULY 20, 1972 WHICH PERMITTED AN OFF-STREET PARKING LOT AT APPROXIMATELY 3570 N.W. 26TH AVENUE. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson Vice Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. 15. GRANT ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF CONDITIONAL USE TO PERMIT P,U.N. - 1684 S.W. 24TH AVENUE' The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 78-80 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF THE CONDITIONAL USE AS LSITED IN ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE VI, SECTION 1 (4-A) (a), TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A DEVELOPMENT OF A PLANNED UNIT NATURE (PUN) ON LOTS 24, 25, 26 - ALL LESS S70' AND LESS E10' OF LOT 26, BLOCK 14, GRAPELAND REVISED (3-196), BEING 1684 S.W. 24TH AVENUE, AS PER PLANS ON FILE, CONSISTING OF 3 ONE-STORY DWELLING UNITS IN 2 STRUCTURES; ZONED R-2 (TWO FAMILY). (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk). Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner (Rev,) Theodore R. Gibson Vice -Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A. Ferre ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the City Commission the meeting was adjourned at 10:30 P.M. ATTEST; Ralph G, Ongie City Clerk Matty Hirai Assistant City Clerk MAURICE A. FERRE Mayor 53 JAN 241978 ITEM NOi 2 3 4 .J 6 Ci'V cF IWAI%I DOCUMENT INDE DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION COMMISSION AGENDA AND CITY CLERIC REPORT AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACTS WITH MIAMI ASSOCIATES LTD. FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OPERATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI CONVENTION CENTER/UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI JAMES L. KNIGHT INTERNA- TIONAL CENTER AMENDING RESC1UTION NO. 74-970 TO PERMIT AN OPENING IN THE WALL ALONG THE N.W. 11TH STREET SIDE OF THE CENTRAL SHOPPING PLAZA CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING THE PUBLIC USE OF THAT PORTION OF N.W. 17TH COURT LYING BETWEEN NORTHWESTERLY PRODUCTION OF THE SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF LOT 66 OF LAWRENCE PARK CLOSING, VACATING ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING THE PUBLIC USE OF THAT PORTION OF THE ALIE'Y LYING WITHIN NORTH MIAMI GRANTING A ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF THE CONDITIONAL USE AS LIST IN ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE VI, SEC- TION 1(4-A) (a), TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A DEVELOP- MENT OF A PLANNED UNIT NATURE OF LOTS 24, 25, 26 MEETING DATE: January 24, 1978 COMMISSION AC'ION. R-78-74 R-78-75 R-78-77 R-78-78 R-78-80 RETRIEVAL CODE, No. 0016 78-74 78-75 78-77 78-78 78-80