HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-77-0603• •
RESOLUTION NO. 77-603
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING A PLANNED AREA
DEVELOPMENT (PAD) CONSISTING OF A NEW APART-
MENT STRUCTURE AND THE EXISTING APARTMENT
STRUCTURE ON LOTS 51 AND 52 LESS NW'ly 70',
BLOCK "B", MARY & WILLIAM BRICKELL SUB
(B-96), AND SUBMERGED LANnS LYING SE'lv
THEREOF TO THE FORMER DADE COUNTY BULKHEAD LINE
(74-3 SHEET 3), BEING 1809 BRICKELL AVENUE,
AS PER PLANS ON FILE, WITH A COMBINED TOTAL
OF 366 DWELLING UNITS, SUBJECT TO REPLATTING,
AS PER ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE XXI-1, AND
SUBJECT TO RECOMMENDATIONS AND APPROVAL OF
THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD AND THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT, AND APPROVED BY THE DEPART-
MENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE AS AN ELDERLY (HOUSING PROJECT; WITH NO
UNION ACTIVITIES ON THE PREMISES; ZONED R-5A (HIGH
DENSITY MULTIPLE).
WHEREAS, the Miami Zoning Board, at its meeting of
June 20, 1977, Item No.12, following an advertised Hearing,
adopted Resolution No. ZB 112-77 by a 5 to 2 vote, recommended
a Planned Area Development (PAD) as hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission deems it advisable and
in the best interests of the general welfare of the City of Miami
and its inhabitants to grant a Planned Area Development (PAD)
as hereinafter set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE C O ;� 1(J IIISSIO�N- OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
"DOCUITEM I\' ._D)-..._ ,5'tX
Section 1. A Planned Area Development (PAconsisting
of a new apartment structure and the existing apartment structure
on Lots 51 and 52 less NW'ly 70',Block "B", Mary & William Brickell
Sub (B-96), and submerged lands lying SE'lvthereof to the former Dade
County Bulkhead line (74-3 Sheet 3), being 1809 Brickell Avenue,
as per plans on file, with a combined total of 366 dwelling units,
subject to replatting, as per Ordinance No. 6871, Article XXI-1,
and subject to recommendations and approval of the Urban Develop-
ment Review Board and the Planning Department, and approved by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development for financial assistance as an
elderly housing project; with no union activities on the premises; zoned
R-5A (High Density Multiple), be and the same is hereby granted.
CITY COMMISSION
MEETING OF
JUL 27777 A
RESOLUTION NO. ......
REMARKS:....... .._... I..* • &woo IA. .
•0
•
•
107i
ATTEST:
PASSED AND ADOPTED this A day of July
City Clerk
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
CL, -
MICHEL E. ANDERSON
Assistant City Attorney
APPRQ3ED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:
/
ORGE F. KNOX, JR.
City Fitton -ley
v
vJ
- 2
Maurice A. Fetre
MAYO R
t 7 7w603
MSC
FORM 4 MEMORANDUM Of. VOTING CONFLICT
PART A
Name:
Address:
DA'►"' ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED:
19_
(LAST)
rst� •1
(STREET)
(FIRST) (MIDDLE)
(CITY)
Telephone:
(ZIP CODE)
to/C) (NUMSER)
(COUNTY)
PART B
Agency is a unit of [check one] : ( ) State of Florida; ( ) County, City or other Political Subdivision;
Name of Agency
Position held in Agency:
PART C
MEMORANDUM OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN A VOTING SITUATION I Required by § 112.3143, I.S.. 19751
If you have voted in your official capacity upon any measure in which you had a personal, private, or professional interest
which inures to your special private gain or the special private gain of any principal by whom you are retained, please
disclose the nature of your interest below.
1. Description of the matter upon which you voted in your official capacity:
;
2. Description of the personal, private, or professional interest you have in the above matter which inures to you special
private gain or the special private gain of any principal by whom you are retained:
3. Person or principal to whom the special gain described above will inure:
a. ( ) Yourself b. ( ) Principal by whom you are retained:
(NAME)
PART D
FILING INSTRUCTIONS
This memorandum must be filed within fifteen (15) days following the meeting during which the voting conflict occurred
with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who shall incorporate the memorandum in the meet-
ing minutes. This form need not be filed merely to indicate the absence of a voting conflict. Florida law permit's but does
not require you to abstain from voting when a conflict of interest arises; whether you abstain or not, however, the con-
flict must be disclosed pursuant to the requirements described above.
PART E
51GI1(ATURE OF PERSON DISCLOSING DATE SIGNED
NOTICE: 1JNDER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 112.317, FLORIDA STATUTES, 1975, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUS-
PENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED
$5,000.
CL FOHM A • EFF. 10/1/75
LOCATION/LEGAL
OWNER /DEVELOPER
APPLICANT
ZONING
REQUEST
EXPLANATION
RECOMMENDATION
- PLANNING
DEPARTMENT
-URBAN DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW BOARD
- ZONING BOARD
- COMMUNITY
R EACTION
PD 6-15-77
r 7-5-77
ZONING FACT SHEET
1809 Brickell Avenue
Lots 51 & 52 less the N'ly 70', Block ''B"
MARY AND WILLIAM BRICKELL SUB (3=96) anti
submerged lands lying S'ly thereof to the bade
County Bulkhead Line (74-3 Sheet 3).
U. T.D. Towers, Inc.
Stanley Axelrod, Executive Director
1809 Brickell Avenue 33129 Phone: 854.0224
R-5A (High Density Multiple)
Conditional Use Application to permit a Planned
Area Development (PAD) consisting of a new
apartment structure and the existing apartment
structure with a combined total of 336 dwelling
units and subject to replotting.
PAD provides a flexible comprehensive development
and promotes an economical and efficient land use.
APPROVAL: Subject to site plan approval by the
Planning Department. The proposed
PAD has several commendable features
as indicated in the Urban Development
Review Board recommendation. The
Planning Department concurs with this
recommendation.
APPROVAL: See attached memo.
Deferred, June 6, 1977, for two weeks.
Recommended Approval, June 20, 1977, Resolution
ZB 112-77, by a 5-2 vote.
Forty-three objectors were present at the public hearing
and fifty-six objections were received in the mail. The
majority of opponents reside in the Brickell Place condo-
minium Apartment immediately southwest of the subject
project.
► 77•603
A
•••d• (.4
\ •/`
•••
• /
szki"
\ \
\
.<2.• /04"414elfw
• •
\it /
• •
• •••
e
•
•
•
•
•
701•0"
TO' -0"
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
IVI:ARYa WILLAM LRICKELL SUB.
1809 BRICKELL AVE
oio'- iota"
PAZ4ING
1111111irl
L
EXIVTINIO 1!)1-00
reo
00 2' .1:6"
•
■
2,
411
zfu of (Miami, T
r.•
Brian R, Hersh
Attorney at Law
19 West Flagler Street
Suite 602
Miami, Florida 33130
a
ba
P.A.L. Application
U.T.D. Towers, Inc.
1809 Brickell Avenue
Dear Mr. Hersh:
In answer to your letter of June 30, 1977, the following responses;
are made to your questions raised:
1. During Board Meetings, exhibits are distributed to
Board Members during the hearing. Exhibits are not,
as in a Court of Law, received, numbered
y new naaeriald'
However, if the exhibits containa
which is not in the file, it is placed in the file.
In this situation, all exhibits except one were copies
of filed material.
2. Official objections which are shown on the file map,
are those objections which re received
of the fiintmy office
prior to 1:00 P. M. of theday
hearing In this: case. `i6 objections were received
and mapped prior to 1:00 P. M. of June 6, 1977. All
other objections and petitions were placed in the file
but not recorded.
3. The Resolution by which theZoning
oardcirecommended
eces mmend
the p,h,I), for U.T.U. Towers,royal of
state-
ment, "Subject to the recommendations and approve
the Urban Development Review Board
Eft
•
ll 111111111111•Em
i riat% R. Hersh
Attorney at iaW
recommendations state the
iresuir requirement
then'
With all H. U. D. regula ►
20' easement.
l you have further questions, please contact me.
Very truly yours,
Davis, Dire •' or
epartment of Administration
Planning and Zoning Boards
be
cc: Joseph R. Grassie
City Manager
cc: Maurice Ferre, Mayor
cc:= Rose Gordon, Commissioner
cc: J. L. Plummer, Jr.,Commissioner
cc: Theodore R. Gibson, Commissioner
cc: Manolo Reboso, Commissioner
cc: Richard Fosmoen, Director
Planning Department
1 1
itj cef 414.iatui,
I • „
Honorable City Commission
Attention: Mr. Joseph R. Orassie
City of MiaMi, Florida
Gentlemen:',
The Miami Zoning Board; at its meeting of June 20, 1977, Item 412,
following an advertised Hearing, adopted Resolution No. ZB 112-77
by'a 5 to 2 vote rec&nmending a Planned Area Development (PAD) con-
sisting of a new apartment structure and the existing apartment
structure on Lots 51 & 52 less N'ly 70', Block "B", MARY & VILLIAM
BRICKELL SUB P-96), and !,ubmered 1nds lying S'y thereof to the
Dade County Bulkhead Line (74-3 neet beino 109 BrickelL Avenue,
as per Plans on file, with a combined total of 366 dwelling units,
subject to replattina, as per Ordinance i:s171, ART:.CLE XX1-1, and
subject to recommendation2 and approval of the Urban Developf.Aent
Review Board and the Planr:ing Del:Jartr;ent, with no union acivities
on entire ste; zoned R-'3A (High Densit.: Multiple).
Forty-three objectors were Present at the meetinci: Fifty-six objectifY
were received in the mail.
d RESOLUTION to provide for this Planned Area Dev.Aopment 11,1.;, been
-prpared by the City Attorney'office and submitted for considerat-
of the City Commission.
June 24, 197/.
PLANNE0 AREA DEVELOPMENT
1809 Brieell Avenue
Lots 51 & 52 less N'ly 70', Bloc'.
MARY & WM. BRICKELL (B-96)
and submergtd lands lying S'ly
thereof to the Dade County
Line (74-3 t',het 3)
Apolicant: United Teachers of
C111 ,
Z .ty.l.37
,,,
cc: , LaW Department
Planning Department
Planning Do1.artment'k6com64.n&itioA:
_ .
_..• .... ....
Sincerely,
Robert A-.VDavisi, birector
Department of Administration
Planning and Zoning Boards
- -=
•
•
TO:
Mr. Robert A, Davis
Executive_ Secretary
rn,A-rts Bo •
E
= ,UoMt �►'(,len .13uft, Chairman
Urban Development Review Board
t:NCLOIStRCs:
The Urban Development Review 13uard recommends
the application for Planned Area Development for the
property at 1809 13rickell Avtnur presented by United
Teachers of Dade, sttl,iect to certain modifications in
their plan, as presented May •1, 1'l77.
The urban Development Review Board (lJUR131 mt-t at 4:00 PM May 4, 1977 in
the Planning Department Conference Room to review the application. Those
present were Messrs. O'Leary, 13orruto, Forfar, Middle brooks and the
writer.
INTER•OF ICE MEMORANDUM
DATL.
5U8JEGt:
M a y l 7, 1977
piAtitiltiO BOARDS
FILE
Application for PAD:United Teachers
of Dade; 1809 Brickell Avenue
t4EFE taNcLS:
The proposed project is a high-rise apartment building for retired teachers
(housing for the elderly) which is adjacent to a similar structure on the same
site. The existing, zoning i5 High Density Multiple R- A. The UDRI3 consider-
ed the deviations 'metre the 1t-�A zoning district (:gee Attachment) as presented
by the applicant.
The UDRI3 recommended, and the applicant accepted, a proposal to moe•e the
building ,:pprt-tximzitely 20 feet tt, the east, thereby providing additional land-
scaping at the gr•ut:ncl surface. The anoc,unt of parking Which Wright be lost from
this relocation is not critical.
'nit! I'DRI3 additionally considered the amount of parking, and exit/entrance
ramps to the underground parking garage. Recently changed legislation requires
.3 spaces per .apartment unit for housing for the elderly and the project is
supplying . !t•d spaces per apartment.
The UDRB found that the deviations requested by the applicant resulted in
benefits to the City of Miami, as follows:
1. The UDitB recognizes that. applicant has agreed to dedicate a
70' strip of land across the front of the property as required
• by the City but that no specific bonus will be given for this
dedication. However the amount of land outside pavement,
Mt, Robert A: Davis May 1.7. 1977
pProximatety 40' wide is included in area calculations,
''-Moreover, the applicant has agreed to pave a future service
;road to City standards and to join this service road with the
eXiSting service road to the south when the City requests it.
The applicant has agreed that in order to avoid a significant
stand of landscaped plant material (ficusl that the service road
should be curved and that additional dedication extending to
a point 20' easterly from the aforementioned 70' ,di cation
wilt be made. The 1.1DR13 coromt.nds t hi nvi routn k!nt a
servatitm effort_ and considers it merits a deviation.
2. Over 50 percent of the parking will be placed in a below -surface
enclos.ed parking structure. This feature irit 5 FAR bonus
consideration in the1 -CB District, and the considers that.
it merits a deviation in this instance.
• 3 The property nic...a sures approximately 200' wick street frontage
,•.,,_,,
y 670' fleptli. In the I: -(.'ll Dist Het, lots having a depth of 150'
, by 200frontage qoalify for an .02 1:A1: bonus. In the sarrie district",
tots having a cle.piti exceeding 300' with street frontage of 150' ..
qiialify for an . I() YAI.: bonus. The l'.1)RP has considered btith Of
• .,,:,:,.,,,-;. — these bonus pr.,visions in recommending the deviations.
4
The 1.11)liti recognizes that, moving the building easterly will
provide roo,•,.. round level landseaped upon space, thereby nearIY,,,
meeting the requirement for usable open space in the R -5A
Di strict.
This project may utilize Section 2112 'liaising for the Elderly
Program funds and in any case will provide residential accom-
modations for retired elderly teachers and then-1)y serve a social
need. Although the density (residential units per acre) exceeds the
allowable density in the1 -5A District, these apartments will have
I.. 2. persons per apartment nnit, considerabl‘,,, than the 2..2
'triedian persons per rental apartment unit throne,Ruit the City,
thereby lessening the impact on City services and traffic. As
this impact is comparable to a development with half this number
of units • ..ind recognizing the social purpose this project serves,
the LIDItli considers that it merits a deviation. •
Page 2.of 3
Ivl : iRotert A, Davis May t7, 1971
The ?JDR13 noted that the Plat and Street Committee should review service road
dedications and future connections, that the service road dimensions are: 26'
pavement; 2 7' curb -to -curb, 30' hack of curb -to -back of curb and center line
to back of sidewalk is 20'.
The Department should review they interior ramp entry clearances
(curb -to -curb) so that they are 2 i'.
On a motion by NIr. L'-orroto, seconded by Mr. Forfar the recommendation to
approve the project, with modifications, carried unanimously 4-0. The Plan-
ning Department is to check plans as submitted for conformance with the recom-
mended modifications. Mr. O'Leary, because of his interest in the project,
confined his remarks to explanation and clarification and abstained from the
evaluation or vut'ink,.
GI3:JWM:rc -
Attachntent
414.
•
1
•
City of Miami Planning bePartMent
APt'LltATIO0 PORM
UPrsM4 , bEVFILOP MINT _ !VW P.14 tloARD
PAD A PP LICA TION
Backaround bata
The Urban Development Review t3oatd reviews applications and uses the Underlying (or
other) zoning regulations as a standard for comparison, The column "PerMitted" should
inelude ,ppropriate data from the underlying zoning district ; while the "Propo:,t2d"
column sould include data from the applicant's project.
Name of rroject:
A(.1dresst
T.1711) Tower
180) 11,rick.oil Avenue
Applicant:
Lenal
Tinitoci Teachers of Ilide
Zoning Dir; ict 1)
Surrounding:
EPD or other:
Pormittod
Prom:sod
Site Area
loss 1','It service reJad
-
I
) r S. ,"
i I,. 9, 9 ' :' 1 •
,
( 2.. 98(ter..$)
i I
I
1
1
Ulit:s
/Type/Area
ryo/d,:ro
(Y7
'
1
i
1 !
,
!
I
126 i
1 .
I
I
,
i
i
Floor Art,!a Ratio
Rot-1.o
0 2.
I
1
,
.1
i
1
221
.
lAuildiliq Alea by use
I ni1(lin,..*1.-,;
t.4.,,/t1!) ,1•11)i Mi. Ilg
' ) rl •j),.1.;,!Pil, Ttyy. c•j•
1
I
200 096 SP'
I .. 1 ,
1, 2.00
Rr),
Aroa (S.F.)
Yor onntage
t.-..,rvious Surface Averle
17. )
,
1
1
1
23,839 ',1
18. 3 ,
i
i
",:niblo 01-, Space
Ar..,a (s.r.)
Pt7tcohicige .. ,..,
73,200
1
',
1
,
1
63,0 i0 1
1
,
. •
,
t I 0
Opt, :-.41rtace: Standard/compact
Fn,,..-1,-,:d Cover.d: :'1,tandard/compact'
Romoto: Standard compact
1
1
-236 1
108
, .
,
Y(trds:
Frcnt i 20 ft.
;7:.• iki.; `I'l /l.:e r : r. . )
1,z 0 e , 18
j-irop, Tower '..,;9•F-1,-
---•--
i
! .3 0 11,
72
5
71,, 7
1......
-..—. - .. t
.-.1.1.0.1n''f,.','.(.,,4,1,)ackli;
i
1
i
'
..
rre,nt SidoWal rivo.ti,,,6
:ri ...- ,,:, ,,,. ' ",(,1:;,.; t,i ,h t 1:,,v+.4:,.,
:
1 ,
P - . :
18 ft
1;-! ft
1 5 8
...
owor
126
4 It
zt di 2I(11
I{ .
ti
tIJ 044
kr t.10N IV
I . rsItIttot 1'Jutt 1'itt:J
.11 I't ..t Mr. 1• :.ncrl, Y.t.
,Vt l•,III , (-tette ,;YJ 10104
DEPAF31EAE'Nt OF' I-I01151•4G ANF7 1.112f1AN (l;.'.i 1,14.11.40.1
AREA OFF'CE
fINSUI AR PLAZA
661 rIL'f.Rsiur ALEF+tf
JACKSONVILI E, FLORIDA 3?20i
Mr. Pat E. Totnil1o, Jr.
Executive Vice President
United Teachers of Dade
1809 airickell Avenue
Miami, Florida 33129
Dear Mr. Tornillo:
Ray 26i 1977,
Subject: Section 202/8 Proposal.
063-E11007-L8-WAII and
FL29-0280-201
Miami, Florida
u� 1.... ..
V
tit. 1t!01, V Rl1'Ltt T 7:
We have reached a point in our Preliminary Processing of the subject
project to where, in our opinion, continued processing is unwarranted,
unless some major changes can be accomplished.
In partially completing our technical reviews, we have discovered two
major problems which must be resolved before processing can continue.
These problems are as follows:
1. Sponsorship of the Project - our position on the sponsorship
is that a separate legal entity is necessary for each separate
project so as not to seriously affect continued rentability,
' marketability and value. We prefer that the proposed site be
separated from the existing project through partial release
and access easements granted the existing project. if this is
to be accomplished, close coordination and concurrence of the
Coral Cables Insuring Office is essential.
When the sLparate legal entity is formed, a new application and
exhibits, which are affected by the formation of a new mortgagor
corporation, must be submitted for review.
''`'`t 2..•; A recent management review has uncovered some problems which
r,, ''t' must be resolved to the satisfaction of the Coral Cables Insur-
.ng Office before any final determination can be made with re-
,,t spect to the approvability of a proposal for this project. Your
• , ,
cooperation with their office in resolving ally problems will
greatly expedite future processing by their office and ours.
-S.
in VieW of the above, your proposal as submittcd is not acceptable.
You ate invited to submit an acceptable Preliminary Proposal within
a period nut to exceed thirty (30) days from the date of this letter.
If submission is not receivJd, or if the submission is unacceptable,
Section 202 fund reservation will be submitted to the Secretary for
cancellation, as the current Handbook does not provide for extension
of the thirty day response period.
Your immediate attention to this matter is appreciated.
Sincerely,
R. W. Buskirk
Area Director
cc:
Mr. Robert P. Renfrow
R.G.R., Inc.
4148 Central Avenue
St. Petersburg, Florida 33711
11.4.•
411.111,..11•1•
•
...•
—
PL----X5 b JS C PP` 7'4) ce i4-i) f 77 Aj
/6 (I a. 6' R./ /1-c
lt3 ( 4.4 C)etc,
fie 50 13A-ii 5 It-0 /Le' de: ve Ve"
g 5.4-4) • /c 9 M
g g_..9 4344
9eo u)&5r cig ST7-t--7" 41/4-mc teL14c#
/ 9 / 8 0/2-1 4-0 &Ai
g_7 64_1 CALez_c_. 4-11 exi
/51 S. E . cit
0 8So <- (Of &NS/to/E 61e--/e).-
/c/ 0 s cxx_m_ 464t4.5fien,c47. (Re ,,c,r 4// e_D0/4e-`712A-P
/el Ckez 4-c) t33-4
IcisT) 3&iz.4a
exe 61Q-1cie-eUd /9-(1 GA.At-e-
02 / 8 0 / te..4 ck--z-4..
I 70 I dCL1. AtA - cur
,2.0b /34 t
Loi 2, 0 tR-)It (,(A:ir ESP 1.4./v/)1)(-:7-- 41 I k/4 / 80+ e4
ta P4LM617-o t) • 4114mi
13030 2-4 416 rill /VA- cp - 64g/
Y. 21 AteR'N.,/4 4-1} E OM
• IN Om 4 0/4! ( ef47/-.1
3 t cla'• ?, 4- 0
7 7 t5 //f ,171--:7
?v /-) //-/cHz04--ti (1,e) xi 4? 7
12-2-3 DAY M-)F r (--7-
92.0 /Q. • 5 sr. m/441/
7'' 564 /7 .5r , /
Z.V30 5(.1.74/.4)0c6 3r.
2. 3 Y s' 5 • c..o • 2 3 TP>E7 . 42/
112.5 Pri 7-/Q CE DR/ 0E"
Or, 5. co . 2.5/4 -Sr. /11/4-,-)1
SO S , . 514 kb • / 1E41 /
ik./5/ 8k. lc tc 41-v
5,e. IL.1.4-retek.ftctro
ISY -5.e. Rix thAJF ini4-Ati
(70)
P 4 ki 333 9' c /(( 5 /34-ees-f-/&yet--
i
lj 1 AA ' 4 .77 - a l to (i) i f u e! c ,1
f� �! g3+1 (t9) In Qc• �24. 4eLtee � ~ e'1
. / e s 1 -,L
t\L
(13)
•77- 1-7S ? (IL
.;
10-1 7 7,
Not„
oko
Tc,b �
rr •r V �'`1 � ti
v n r �
- _ ._ S • - :Iv ti: o c t� wt
0.N L) A c,LCA. r... i� - t� `CA,) C-SL
PU.160,k1 Cat-cL.� r _ G/62 5 (p/ 77
f
1
MR
frukAA-A-t-k FAS- k./..1 kt, .""." C10444 %Al' 6* L.i". Issk //
_ V cc-k �wr .,�,�� �- - ! 9.3 -O /J. cw 1'4/ ,e
'i•
A mow
Dmw
MENI
MMW
Mat
TO,
Ore'? OF MIAMI. FLORtUA
'Men -Orrice MEMORANDUM ' F C E R/E n
Mr. Harold Young
Special Counsel
Law Department
FROM, Ro
3u
encik, Director
artment
ENCLOIJIIEU
DATE:
$USJECt:
t pril IL - 1972 F'LE.
1.ft LI I ( OF MNI, f lli.
/rr
23.4'i Brickell Avenue -
Northwesterly 70' of
REFCRENCLE Lots 70-71-72-73, Bloc
MAR'._ 3RICKELI, SUB, 5-44
This is in response to your memorandum with which you
forwarded a copy of a letter from Mr, John W. Watson,
Attorney for Mr. Michael Forte.
Mr. Watson's suggestion that Mr. Forte be permitted to
use the 70-foot service -road reservation in the com-
putation of floor -area ratio, setbacks, lot coverage,
etc., is not consistent wit'1. the provisions of the
zoning ordinance nor is it consistent with the practice
that has been carried out in simila': situations, both
on Brickell Avenue and in other areas of the City.
Where zoned -street rights of way exist, whether or not
the City holds title to the property, they are not
counted as being a part of the parent tract when making
the various computations necessary in calculating the
floor -area ratio. setbacks, etc.
In a number of s inilar cases that have come about in the
past, the City cf. Miami Planning Board has accepted an
application for a variance from the provisions of the
zoning ordinance and the City Commission has, on occasion,
weighed. the :act that a zoned right-of-way did exist. The
Commission has at times ?rented such variances, but has
denied them in other cases. Exampleo cf both positions
are as follows;
1. The property at the intersection of South Bayshore
Drive and the extension of S. W. 27th Avenue.
The developer of th:.s building was granted a
variance which allowed him to take into consideration
the zoned right-of-way in various computations.
• •L 111111
Mr. Harold Young
Page 2 of 2 April 18, 191
2. The developer of the office building which is
currently under construction at 7th Street and
Brickell Avenue, made a similar request and
was denied.
1 am not saying that the two cases were similar. As a
matter of fact, there were other.considerations that
occasioned the Commission's granting the variance on one
hand and denying it on the other.
It is my feeling that I cannot agree to the conditions
proposed for Mr. Forte through Mr. Watson unless the
City Commission amends Ordinance 6871 by repealing
Ordinance 7111, or grants a variance based upon proper
application.
I should point out to you that all of the development
that has been carried out along Brickell Avenue since
the adoption of Ordinance 7111, has been constructed
without counting the 70-foot reserve area into the
floor -ratio area, lot coverage, etc.
REF:gj
cc:
City Manager
Planning Board
Department of Public_ Works (-- ; •'"' fa
Building Director's file
Building and Zoning Division
Zoning Section
Reading file
11
11111111111111111[111
111
Iliii1111111111111111
I
111
11 111111)1i
11"11111111111011101111111111tiolowl
r'r
u
13 fan 0 I 4:0
120
2.2.,
•
: FOR E , 3 c 1-4.7-
. A *Hit)/ 41 u rit ( er 20
V 0
• ' . -,e,.., • __ • .
to --vfSi fi-Q:
Ferer e
q, .1 l -c uAlce--
__,.
'11, / /490
' Jae pieaulte4rfot—
s9, $1.
69-7-- ' Si7e,
2-6,•
_ • ,
•
;H.;-.;;•.;';;';;;H'
N1 ok
E LL
=
FLOOR
EA
RAT o
34L
FE . 1, 77 FE •
7 7 Rg-41-0t.) hc TotL Re7a.,1,-RE"fitTS
RE140 4.1 554/31,E-
,
• D. R E CP:L•
.1351,35- i Z4,935 i.Z3fq,i/35-' {-130,1,80 m ( m 4,0k4
i
2.79 2.49 E
•
C5,oBo 63,030
"-*
•
/15-
4 -
t;) PT r7.
• _ -
5t)
4
•
SP:
-; - 444-4-
Z.3(0 221
. .
7 •
14
:
41r
: APIIRT In &it)r Bcf le....6/.1e Ado r-
•EY c. E-e---40/AJG if "OE 771
OF 4buieLe.t.LiCv r
FOR, &AC*4/5 &0jA1C
Feer r G07
3s-60 .4. 47'50
114i OP 4.07
A.ga e
14peeg.e*A
/7
re.c2o, 6 41:12 -YA-1‘ .1', •^P 4. 4-
Lot7.'
TR. in% yC eaE2 cD1/,c, ;
-40, 02 Fok sa*: ;' -,•-•0 54:p r (
fiRk- All• 7,4A. - 7M j&A
,.)c 4.1‘ 44/ /../ • 6 /Z e
A
e3o A.; /4 cc: t; .5e- z- 7 0 r--
;
1.4111)..01514.,?i) plot VI,H1 I
'1111.11 1'7,4
CI ",
a 1,) a' ()to I t CP
13.s. DimAtir,
ANn 1111),Ai
Atir,uat_ I(), .1976
kr.))t.Y
41'1'
1t1.0MH-111i11pii t t1111-tOt Ikti dn ProdUotiOn &-tiorLi,-,,ige Credit, 4F
•
StIOPrAnUn't'itd e-feachers of hide, Section 202/8 Project, MiaMi,',rlorida-
, . . .
.. .'. -
. . ..
. .
.. . . . .
.. ' .
. .
., ...
Reference is made to your w000randun dated July l',.) 1976 in 'which k.ou requested
. .
advice ru.k.tiv- 1_0 the disOo';ition o: the nublcot mnitor. IA' ha.vo reviewed your
memorandum and illt attachments theryto. We find that ruithi:r your memorandum
no)'. Cho inlknm,ation submitted by the Corottot. H,..cs -ii;!ielent ovtatin. to
permit us Co rIalie Nn in-depth analysi4 ot the Const,i'„:,nt's propos,il, re3 it per-
taliv. to parti,1 rolease of the site irom tho e..-,Ii:J-inv, 202 pro:Ject.
A review of our records dRci6se tlt-A: the sporor did rvit request the additional
125 nulls referred to in your moror;_niem. Accordinly, we cunnit proceed on the
assumption that a riquest for addition:11 units would not he appuoved, until such
titIO as the tponsor subrjts a proper request and such request .i.F4 denied. Howev(-r,
we do know that other requests for citkirional units, suiwiitted throuc,h thin office,
have hetn approved whc.n :nr.h requests were acco:1:panied by appvo:)riJte justifica-
tions and w.?ro. reco:::Ted by the rep. vo area offices. Wo recomTond zia t
first eption 111;.L 00 sponn.er exhauti.r. ti iT.. m..'enne of aproacir before procoedinr '.
wi th the propo,•a! i.o _coniU.ruct the 1.(A) ealt project on the site of the exi st inu
......... ... _.. ..._.. _ ._„....
202 proi eel..
_
In view of the sponsor' S dClny in submit in as request for additional units, ge
arc not iA a position to indicate whether such request: wi11, or will not be
npprovod ot this 1,no ante. We eircct your altontion to the 1.-.1st paragraph of
our m::-4.uandum dated July 19, 1976 to All AY ca Office Diroctor. In such com-
munication, we ltql:,-2sted thAt all. Section 202 applicants necdir units or loan
fund a:11kmumfults shou.h1 forw.ird such requests to this olfic.e in accordancr with
Fir. Wartield's tic::ovandum. '....o are anin attachin for your information a copy
of Mr. Warr,eld's lAuporandum dated Juno 17, 1976. Please note that such momorandum
stresses the importance of hs\inf; ce11 2n2 funds roqorvod prior to Septemhor 30,
1976. However, the related Section S itmdiug for any ddditional units, which
may be approvcd, vist be provided by your office from the allocation assiood
to you for such purposos.
•
•
ib'teferonco to tho socond option availnble lo thy sponsor, Lei, constritei
. .
tho it iect ,,o tiw ,,ir, 01 the c-,Istin ,M2 and se)nre a pntliml release of
s(enrity frinq the 1-.+A ing )0? project. We do not see anv insup..ountnble
problom-: with approving !loth iely;Ise hy tho h-partm,u0; howovor, oo do ctivon
numerow; prehl,ms with the pre!,(Id tote.nt!:, local aothorities and environmentni
considernt ions. Howev, r, it is our ondorslading that voor oifi,.e has not
determined livit Ute existing 202 site will necommodato an odditioaal 100 living
units without ndversely ntlecting the existing project. Accordingly, it is
our position that. nny attempt at this Lime, to resolve such potentiol problemS
or developing the TvechAnics for releasing a portion of tho security is pre, -
mature and counter prodnctive.
Analysis of the limited information availnblo lo us indicates tiv,t locating an
additional 100 units on the existing 202 site could, in several respects,
adversely affect. such facility. We offer in suppottof this pohition the following:
1. The preLnint site consists of 3.07 acres.
2 The
The current density
present project has 266 units.
is approximately 87 units per acto.
Ily additr!, nil additional 100 units, the density would be. iiirreilsed
120 units per acre.
5. 'The increase in density would he appro:Awntely 37Z, which in our opinion
would be except:10)1;111y high, considering that elderly housing should be
planned Lo provide an nbundinee oi open spaco suttably designed for both
active and pasive rverontion.
6.A 368 unit complex would tend to impnct the area thereby adversely affecting
the lite stylo and pl.,inning cicii.Acristics of the eAsting 202 project.
The above comm..nts should not be construed as bci ny conclusive since stwh iniormn-
Lien is hasod pri-larily on discussions with indiviouals who are familiar with
the existing project, and the limitod information furnished in the Consultant's
letter.
Thu sponsor has n third option which approach should not be inored. Such option
places the n:spensihility on the sponsor and his consultant to Yind a suitable
site on which LO eret 100 units. Wo reconize thlt this may net be an easy
task; however, ve do teel that 1 IS neither impossible nor inpractienl. We
further realixo that, from an administrative vnd operational 5taad1'oinl, a 100_
unit project is considerably ler.s desirable than a 1nrger complex. iiMt'Ver, we
do no: subscribe to the argument that operating a 100 unit facility is infenoible.
4-)
%itfifttt.)'tdly, :;(}rll !min I1('r fat. flf.tit-, 7('tt!}lt't. mort• ('xjk'rii!;t' :intl ('lfi'ii-lit planning
�t"t I'ht 'I('V1'It)j}7:'r-Ilt( roi)':t rli•'t ion ciliti t117('rn1.1O;ht1 j+ll:l:;+.':t. Such j)lanniIn; !-.i}O1}1ti
flr('i)1 ;n kO a 1:1)()t; i t'(I;;t';tl) i (; },i't)11:;01 1 itt) f h( in); ativi:;rd by n r:,til.th I (�
Cunt,uitant .
l•1(t lintCoat fit ; I,t'tli 1'7lJ ift hi:; let Lint' 1,1 .'11111'.: Lit, 1976, Lo yt)itr orrice, Is
so] i C i s i 11;; LIR: i 1"V f ('(•C; (It y0111" 1.:1i1rl i' i :i11i1C'r, 1 01• 1 11U 11111 1)ur.(.' of deterini n i.ilf;
1 lthew in ; of f f c i ent rurp I u:, 1:}t}d, Anti sat i f y h i nv,;0l f` rt ; to the :1(!coi)t.,11) I. I i ty
of the 1:t(Itl ti::c' 111L('ll';1t;', rot. r('.IL1'1i1a1 ;ir(.':, .t_C. 111 r(':;j)(+ilf:t' I :iu' h r('(lu(";L,
Lhr r;j)ons'or and h i:; (;onnu 11 ,tilt Sho i I'I h(' ,ltly i s!: d that it i:: their ro:;f1Ont; i h i 1 i Ly
to rei.rtin .t rc);!,peli'nt Land Plat -mop to 1,cr(()►n; 't)1\• land pi anti which they play
det:l!1'i:'i ilc' i:-; n• c1"''"1!"y t t) tj,j'+..t"t: Clti•ii' r(•r1)I. ;t Our 1.:1i+,1 I'1.:nnorn are uV:111;11)1e
to ass i:it nn(i ,,(IVii;t tIit :.pt11!"')r1;; 11•!Il(1 1'1mint r lit t.}lt• ;)1"('14Sra1ion of ili:i s'1LC
plan. 11u',:._vl'r, 1t i:; not a 1unC'Li.tln of lit' th l,nrl;,.'nt t`, I:;I,+i l'lrttt!'c•r:; 1()
fnftlat(' ;Itit1 tlt.'V.'lop :1 1)1:ui for the `..po;1:;Or. 1t_ t'nlr 1'l•+'t):.7.'h:tn;i In.l 1,ofer(`
the Hp+ninnr I {1r'Utll',lr't'tl tt.l rot ,;in a Land rll:!t''li'r, Or •:17.'Ittl .!:t\' nlhot funds
1T1 t:Otiiti'r'Lio '.:} I it +} :: t t!:";',:1)1_ 171'.'p '';.11 , Ll1:tL ::t'i.rt-11.1E. rti•:ri1 1111' Ili VI :I(lll mrilt(_'
a pt'('i 1Pt11! !; y •Lt 1'i••'•ilrit (•)11 rt t tl i\t } ) Li;_' .:c'r('j)(,:ilt 1 itv t)f 17111.1djil;; 100
Fi(1(Ii t i U11;11 il): 1 Ls U11 t f'+' :: 1 4 i' l it;; . (I•' > c Lt.' .
if It is your intent ion tr pro,..c-(:i 4:.ith Hi is proposal, U:iitlr (?ithe'r options 1.,,
2 or 3, this of f i c(y ,;t •iln;s 1'c:nc j` t.o n ;r i;;f: you.
Wi•z;,:}!'t. 1` l,1U11:11. t�ttlitlil)Z;LI'nl(11'
•
Att ichn nit ,.
Yard_:
Front
.iiae
Side
Side
k(ar r -
l;ui lci inq Seti,acks;
t a,en !3lri,ewoi1: El
lit Ode
• isWe1
1t c c
�. •J It 1.c► ''i
All A t:1111/4,1 ENT
APPI.ICA'1'ION FORM
URBAN DEVELOPMENT RE V I E'W BOARD
/:-/)
PAD APPLICATION
City ut Miami Planning Departmtllt
eackgtouhd, data
The Urban Development Review Board reviews applications and uses the underlying (or
other) zoning regulations as a standard for comparison. The column "Permitted" should
include appropriate data from the underlying zoning district; while the "Proposed"
column should include data from the applicant's project.
Name of Project:
Address:
Applicant:
United Teachers of Dade
•
Legal Description:
Zoning District:
R -5A Surrounding:_ LTD or other:
Permitted Proposed
U'I'U 'Powers
1809 Iirickell Avenue
Site Area
lass 30' service ruad
Dwelling Unita
Size/Type/Area
DU/acre
Building Area by use
Existing Buildings
Recreation Building
Lot. Coverage
Area (S.F.)
Percentage
Impervious Surface Averaqe
Usable Open Space
Aces (S.F.)
Percentage
Parking Spaces
Open Surface: Standard/compact
Enclosed Covered: Standard/compact
Remote: Standard/compact
IL
1
17. 6
73, 200
110
(2.9Sacres
287,736
2.21
200, 996 SF
1,200
23, S i') S1'
IS.
63,030
236
'.US
148
City tit Miami Planning De)artmtnt
APPLICATION ION FORM
URBAN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW HOAkt)
PA D A 1'P LICA TION
Backgto'hd bats
The Urban Development Review Board reviews applications and uses the underlying (or
other) zoning regulations as a standard for comparison. The column "Pera:itted" should
include appropriate data from the underlying zoning district; while the "Proposed"
column should include data from the applicant's project.
Name of Project:
Addreee:
Applicant: United 'reat:hers of Dade
Legal Description:
U'I'l) 'I'uwe r s
1.809 I3rickell Avenue
R -5A Surrounding:E 'U or other:
Zoning District: —
Permitted Provosed
Site Area
less 30' service read
Dwelling Units
Size/Type/Area
DU/acre
Floor Area Ratio
Area(S.F.)
Ratio
Building Area by use
Existing Buildings
12 ecreatiun Building
I'ly
Lot. Coverage
Area (S.F.)
Pet ce:itaye
Impervious Surface Avera•Je
Usable Open Space
Area (S.F.)
t'ercentage
Parking Spaces
Open Surface: Standard/compact
Enclosed Covered: Standard/compact
Remote: Standard/compact
17. 6
73,200
ll0
Z3,839 SF
lS. 3
63, 030
Y,:rd ,.0 )1• , l3 U (e.
Fiont
i'i.Wt•1 ..
�i�l�
i i,ie Re: - 18
S •lc l'rup 1, 'IL:' ,'1 fit .
t t a r R_ ._ _�.,_
.
r B1: i 1ii e ri.J Sett/at:ks;
1'$ .7v.lt
n•JF•1 1,3e c•i adt!
i. •T It 1 1 11,1,
;U.
UM.
r
<1
1v1t. Rohurt A. It.lvis
Executive Se( i•e•ta ry
13e
•Glen Null, Chairman
Urban Development Review Huard
•
CITY OF MIAMI t l_uitiDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANt)1JM
bAf!
IeltiJLC 1
li i`., ..t• , .al r t
i ;I,
I,
L.`., 1' 1 _
tom.—
t .. i e• ...• .. ,..e1
�'`Jlilitlill� Si l t.Yl,iii ii1J'11f1
May 17,
I+ef 1lIL CI:tl
Application for 1'AD:United Ti .,e'It& i
of I)ade, 181)9 13riekell Avenue
LNCl.UbuRLS
The Urban Development Review .Beard recommends
the applic'at:on for Planned Area Development for the 1�
property at 18(19 13ric kell Avenue presented by United
Tea( hers of Dade, subject to certain modifications in
their plan, as presented play 4, 1977.
The Urban Development Review 13uard (UI)R13) met at 4:00 1'M May 4, 1977 in
the Planning Department Conference Room to review the application. Those
present were Messrs. O'Leary, l3urrotu, Forfar, Middlebrooks and the
writer.
The proposed project is a high-rise apartment building for retired teachers
(housing for the elderly) which is adjacent to d similar structure on the saint
site. 'The existing zoning is High Density Ivlult►plc It-5A. 'The UDR13 consider-
ed the deviations from the 11-5A zoning district (See Attachneent) as presented
by the applicant.
The UD1(13 recommended, and the applicant accepted, a proposal to move the
building approximately 20 feet to the east, thereby providing additional land-
scaping at the ground surface. The amount of parking which might be lost from
this relocation is not critical.
The UD1(13 additionally considered the amount of parking, and exit/entrance
ramps to the underground perking garage. Recently changed legislation requires
.3 spaces per apartment unit fur housing for the elderly and the project is
supplying .64 spaces per apartment.
'['he UDR13 found that the deviatiutls requested by the applicant resulted in
benefits to the City of Miami, as follows:
1. The UDR13 recognizes that applicant hag agreed te,t_dcdicate a
70' strip of land across the front of the property as required
by the City but that no specific bonus will be given for this
dedication. However the amount of land outside paveiilc•ut,
13a812 1 u1 3
M )tiL t't A. U,►v ► s
a i�lt'Uklittdte'ly •lU' 19 iirc laded 11► art'a eii)C'11l�ttli)i15:
Mtircu er, the applicant has agreed to pave a future serVic•c
road to City st:.tridartis anti to join this service road with the
ettisting service road lu the south wht.•ii the City retluests
The applicant has agreed that in order to avoid a significant
stand of Iandstapt•d plant material (tcusthat
the
sL.cri/ietroad
should he curved and that additional ila
o
a point 20' easterly from the aforementioned 70' dedication
will be made. The U1)1(15 commends this environmental
preservation effort and considers it merits a deviation.
2. Over 50 percent of the parking will be placed in a below -surface
enclosed parking 5truiture. '1•his tt•ature merits . L5 1'AR bonus
considerdttt,i► in the 1( -('it District, and the UDR13 considers that
it riterits a deviation in this instance,
eet
j, The property measures °'I'I'iXst ►riot tyluts}h�itling atittepthof rUfltt)1
by (70' depth. In the t(-C.I3 I>
by 200' frontage quality tar ail
AlI( strum trintthe
same district
exceedinglots having a depth txceedig 3U 1' wi
quality for an .10 VAR honeshe`otltul13thtasdev1i sidered both of
these bonus provisions in i tt•ttiltt
4. The t)U[(li recognizes that ittovtt'l; the building easterly will
provide more ground level landscaped upon space, thereby nearly
meeting the requirement for usable open spade in the 11-5A
District.
This project may utilit.e Section Lt►L Ilouhitig tur the Elderly
Program funds and in any talc will provide residential accom-
modations for retired elderly teacher_ and thereby serve a social
need. Although the deit;ity t resident.ial units per acre) cXCeeds the
allowable density in, th�•T�"rA Dist ric t, these spa t tti►cttts will have
1.2 persons per apartment unit, ct,nsld,.r,thly lust, than the .'..L
median persons per rental jpartill CIO unit throuphoul the (.:its,
thereby lessening the ►iiip t. t nn City services and traffic. AS
this iiilpatt is .ttioparal,le• it, a dc•vt•lt,ptitent with hall this ilutlli,er
of units, and re, ogttir.ing the social purpnse this project Serves,
the i)1)103 eonsidt:l•5 that it merits a t1c•vistlut1.
tvi rt l i)bttt•t A. 11,►vt.,
-approxitttatuly •IU' widt! is incliided tct a eua calculations,
,.Moreover, tlil' apj>lic'atlt h.ts agreed to l)avt: a future sert%ice
road to City staudar,ls and to jolt) flub service road with the
existing service road to the south when the City requests it.
The applitallt has agreed that in order to avoid a significant
stand u[ laridstapt r! plant material (Iiuudedication)thatextending
tservice
ice road
Should be curved and that additional
a point 20' taslc:l'ly Ltilltlt{3the
rutatnc•ndsttlt►a)Ietd 70' ltvi environmental
dedication'will be made. The
preservation effort and considers it merits a deviation.
µ, OVer 50 percent of the parking will he placed ints a below SUr2.5 FAR fa us
ce
enclosed parkin] stt•utture. 'This tt �ttut•e merits
consideration in the It -CB District, and the UDR1i considers that
it merits a deviation In this instant,.•.
The property measures approximately 2001 v,'ttfe street frontage
by 670' dt•pt1t. 1n the It -CD 1.)Istrlt t, lots having a depth of ld0strtct,
by 200' frontage qualify ter ant U2 1'!1lt bonus. In the satlit
lots having a depth ext. ceding 300' with street frontage of 150'
s
nsidere
qualify for an .10 VAR bonus.
ttThe
l,entlu1j:13t111t� deviations.ev,iatluns. t! butt) of
these bonus provisions In recommending
4. The UU1.t11 recognizes that tt,uvittg the building easterly will
provide more ground level landscaped upon apace, thereby nearly
meeting the requirement for usable open space in the 1t-5A
District.
5. This protect may ut1lit.e Section 202 lluustng for the Elderly
Program funds and to any ,:sae will ],motive residential accom-
modations for retired eldferly teat hers .oltl thereby yetve a exc4b`tl:+llhu
need. Although the density (residential units per acre)
allowable density iiI the t- e 1)Istrttt, these aparttttents will have
1.2 persons per aparttllt•IIt t,nit, tonsi,l.-.r,thly less than the 2...'-
median persons per rental .tpartln':tlt unit throughout the City,
thereby lease•I,ttIt:, the tIiiptt t on City servtct!5 .tt)d tratfle . AS
this impact 15 tou,paral,lt• to a 'levrlopitle1,t N.vitll halt this number
of units, and i•etugnlJ.tng the social purpose this project serves,
the 111)1t15 cunyic.lt:r5 that it merits a deviation.
Mr, Robert A, Davis
The noted that the flat and Street Committee should review service road
dedications and Iutu►•e connections, that the service road di►Ilenstons are: 26'
pavement; 27' curb -to -curb, 30' back of eurb-to-back of curb and center line
to back of sidewalk is 20'.
The Building Department should review the interior ramp entry clearrttlCes
(curb -to -curb) so that they are 23'.
On a motion by Mr. Borroto, seconded by Mr. Forfar the recommendation to
approve the project, with modifications, carried unanimously 4-0. The Plan-
ning Department is to check plans as submitted for conformance with the recom-
me
nded modifications. Mr. andal�sta.il►ed
O,atin and clarificatiobecause n interest
the
f ro111 tltproject,
confined his remarks to explanation
evaluation or voting.
G13;SWM:rc: •
Attachment
MATtY HIRAI
Assistant City Clerk
btPUTY CLERKS
Robert Norris
Wilhelmina B. Porter
Robert E. tingle/
tarns, r Isms l
a
(fftrr of thr (Ittg dirt~ k
tttt Matt
MOO Vatt Amrrwttt Detur
Attains, IFtnetbtt
TO WHO M IT MAY CONCERN
The present written statement is extended at the request of
Arian Hersh, Esq.
On this date, and upon inquiring from our office as to the
status of the transcription of Agenda Item "No. Application11,city by m-
mission Minutes of July 21, 1977, namely,
UTD TOWERS to permit a Planned Area Development at 1809 Brickell
Avenue, etc.", Mr. Hersh was informed that as of this date, said
item has not been transcribed. Due to the nature of our work
responsibilities and the variables which we are presented with,
it would be quite impossible for us to exactly determine the
moment of completion of any given Agenda item.
WITNESS MY HAND AND THE Official Seal of the City of Miami,
Florida, this 16th day of August, 1977.
►t,
RALPH G. ONGIE
City Clerk
City of Miami
I$. HIRAI
Assistant City Clerk
tay G4i`i4k
(0:
Joseph 12, Grassi
City Manager
IN
17
t t.lI'.11 •
ROM: RObert 4 t ‘l'or
Depart tnts1 -ation
Plann an.,1' Zoning Boards
OA rt.
stirin‘A
June 29, 1977
Northside Bank of Miami
Request for temporary office
trailer at 1000 Brickell Avenu,
HU- 1I41t1C1:
1
The attached letter is a reouest from Northside Bank to operate
a Branch Bank from a temporary trailer at 1000 Brickell Avenue until
rental space is available in some six months.
The Zoning ordinance provides for such tmporary use after approval
by the Zonino Board of a Conditional use. However, duo to no
scheduling (it' meetings tlurintj August, the first meetinq at wnich
the Bank could gain approval is Lieptember 19, 1977, which is beyond
the date necess.iry tor the!1 to open LO maintain their francl,isc.
Theri,:fore since no administrative relief can be granted, the
Commission i uested to consider the Bank ; request as a
special exception.
cc: Law Department
Plannin9 DepartMent
Tci:rvat .ve C1ty Comtnision c3ate July 21, 1977.
77.-603
M.-4,-4144J
10;
IN FL14-(:)FFICE.
Joseph R, Grassie
city Manager
RObert OS tor
Depart /‘(`‘rtirnist
Piann tt *ran;1' Zoning Boards
L)klt
1411- 1.14
June 29, 1917
Northside Bank of Miami
Request for temporary office
trailer at 1000 Brickell AVenue
tit
The attached letter is a request from Nortbside Bank to operate
a Branch Bank from a temporary trailer at 1000 Brickell Avenue until
rental space is available in some six months.
The Zoning urdinance provides for such temporary use after approval
by the Zonino 3oard of a Conditional Use. However, due to no
scheduling oe muetings durinq Auoust, the first meeting at which
the Bank could gain approval is L;eptember 19, 1977, which is beyond
the date nece!,sdry for ttie!t to onen to maintain their franc'hisc.
Therefore since no administrative relief can be granted, the
Commission is requested to consider the Bank'request as a
special exception.
Laid Do.partmOnt
;:ylanninq Dopartment.-:,
- -
Tenta:t,ive.0ity-.Comthonjiate: July
77 • 6 OS
Mr: Rbbert A. Davis.
Executive Secretary
Zoninci Board
City of Miami
Barr Amer i can Dri ve
Miami, Florida 33133
Dear Mr. Davis:
The tlorthside lank of Mi)altli ihas ub Avenue Std ate et.japproval
—for-Opening a Branch Bank at i0UI
It is the desire of fr.rrihside bank tt1 open
.September f;, i �J7 l . especially +r 1
this branch on or before this ditU, espe_:i ly a S there is some
Lkt,cer•rt th.tt, the State 116y notextend
c
huirtybis cunSlening deadline
idured inthevllcFin�ityt.
us
of other br<trl�,t hank �IpiallcaL
It is the intention of t;rlrthside bank to
locate
its
permanent branch oftice on the ground floor of the 11.) �ickell
Avenue Ja1lIr!, however, si.ti space is presently being leased by
+ �� to re locate
r)�avin it.tlty, (.011.r it Will be neCeS•7V.i r,
Stockton Whatley Morris Company ! that �it!}{:4'.t.o11
`he Alen Mor�ri, ol.pa IY.
thLrll. It is estimated by ,
H.could net he relocated elsewhere in the 1000 Brickeil Building sooner
'than StX IIuntrla.
Consequently, tlorthside Bank desires to temporarily locate
located south of the
1L
double wide office trailer
it:5t;ianala+tn}.. in<tt� the ui !ding in t present parting lot area. is our
t()t1e ll'1C:k.il Building temporary
.understanding that r.ity approval for thioffice trailer
-_would normally he given by the Zoning Board. We further understa
nd
t.hai., the earliest 7.oniny Board meeting that could hear our case is
' 1077, which date is after tit expiration
scheduled fur September ,
date for ot•el1ln j the Branch Bank.
-1 54 1D E.
0/ taIII 6
N O R t H 5 1 U E SHOPPING CENTER
0300 'hi. trtr Avt NU( • P O. bOl 037
�AIAMI, FLORIDA 33141
(� itk.t.PHoNE 6bES' WOO
BANK
Jurte 27, 1977
t Northside Bank of Miami
Branch - 1000 Brickell Avenue
Miami, Florida
•
( , 1
JUN kbCiTY
y .,.
& 7.ii:;ttlti bUAitu
Mr. Robert A, Davis
June 27, 1977
Page Two
Due to our September 8 deadline, we wish to appeal your
decision to wait until September 21, and ask that our case be
heard directly by the City Commission as provided under Article XXXI,
Section 6.1 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, We understand
a Planning and Zoning meeting of the Commission is scheduled for
July 21, dnd we ask to have our case placed on the agenda for that
Comission mueting.
4,- '• :t;
Sincerely,
NOPTHSIDE BANK OF MIAMI
r 4 )171
L. Allen Mrs'i
Chairman of the Board
• : ,