HomeMy WebLinkAboutO-08548bit tNANCE NO t
AN ORDINANCE; A tE tb1Na ORDINANCE Not 68715 fist
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR Teat CITY of
HIAMI, BY CHANGIIC THE TONING CLASSIVICAT'ION
of LOTS 12 THROt1Gii 165 'mock 15 MELON VILLA
GARDEN oR EDEN AMD (30-20) AND N`4PLATtED
PROPERTY TO THE NORTH A8 SHot1N ON THE MAP ATTACHES)
HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF, BEING APPROXIMATE-
LY 515 N,E, 15Ti STREET, FROM C-i (LOCAL COMMERCIAL)
To C-3 (CENTRAL COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT, AN EY MAkING
THE NECESSARY. CHANGES IN THE ZoNtNC DISTRICT MAP
MADE A PART or THE SAID ORDINANCE NO, 6871 BY
REFERENCE.AND DESCRIPTION'_ IN ,ARTICLE III, SECTION 2
Tt1EREOF; BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS
OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A
SEVERABILITY PROVISION.
VHEREAS, the City.of ?Miami Zoning Board,, at its meeting
of December 15, 1975, Item No. 7,,following an advertised Hearing,
adopted 'Resolution No. ZB 184-75 by a 5 to 0 vote recommending
change of zoning classification to C-3 (Central Commercial) District;,
and
.,WHEREAS, the City Commission,deems it advisable in the
best interest of the general welfare of the City of Miami and its
inhabitantsto grant a change in zoning classification as herein-
after set forth;.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Ordinance No. 6871, the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for the City of Miami, be'and.the same'is hereby amended
by changing the
Block 1, NELSON VILLA & GARDEN OF EDEN AMD (30-20) and unplatted
:property. to the north as shown on the map attached hereto and
made a part hereof, being approximately 535 N.E. 15th Street, from.
C-1 (Local Commercial). to C-3 (Central Commercial) District; and
zoning classification of Lots 12 through 16,
by making the necessary changes in the
zoning district map made a
part of Ordinance No, 6871 by reference and description in
,Article III,. Section 2 thereof,
.Section 2,
.That all ,laws
or parts of laws in conflict
herewith be and 'the same are'hereby repealed;insofar as they are
in conflict,
11
12
13
14
15
31
32
33
34
35
36
Se :boil 3. Should ahy paft ,off p.foVisioh of this
ordihance be declared by a court of competent,jutisdiotioh to be
ihvalidy .the sable shall. hot affect the, validity of the ot=dihanc e
as a who3.e'.' .
PA88Eb , ON FIRST AtAbINd BY ''tTLE ONLY this
day of
JANUARY
1976,
PASSED AND ADOPTED ON SECOND ,ANb.'INAL READING BY
TITLE ONLY this 13 day of HAY , 19766
Maurice A. Ferri
H. D. outhern
CITY, CLERK
PREPARED AND' APPROVED BY :
MICHEL E . ANDERSON
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
APPROVED .AS TO FO AND RRECTNESS:
_ S. LLOYD:
TY ATTORNEY (/
_ , •
o
l I 5 "413
�� ' is3
:"
2 I 3
SI?L
,n 15 7
•
Uii.l
.N,(ryERS
3 A O 1`v ••• q M A'v.
r
is
rL•� ' {
ce
t sEaENnr.MIAM1 8ROADCAST1NG CO
. CARK1 r
�. ITV N9I I - 17i, br e, �'4 t,�'';• b0'j �f+f'
i t1. 1z .
;,:- :�✓ 2
r j �
N E. 14 ST./
• eFFzNADM
3
••...^l:i ,(COURT AN:
&•;;�
�
�)i7 rJect.J QI
,,, �/ ta I,'..
I�)
O.11 E ti
10 <' ,
400,'0
S :RNA
_ JARK.a
' TRACT
.1 V sNErtAN caU Zwfi
�E ;: ,,,..) . 4.: :i 1 I
N 1
i I i
h7 ije.! Vj ... VAS% t
t " rP! 11 t .--,- • . .: ..14,...,4-i
i., ,:_,,.. -----
�►�.C.��1i-iUR.
CAUSEWAY'.
ettV 8i=,'MiAMt. Plbfftf3A
INfrtttil5F tC€ Mt MBllAP4t3UM
Nbticsrahle Methtlers of the
City CCoiiii'Hissibti
atiSeei4t4)*te.
P. Ws Atid revs
City Mattager
PETITION:
MAY 107
Agettde Item #i3 = City C iirii'ihissioti
lvieetittg M.a y 1 i, 1976 n Aisiirb3ti=
ttiately Nt 15th Street
Ra'EktNCk5:
iN6L05URtS•
Z01\11N0 13OARb PACT
PUU
Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 6871, the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance for the City of Miami, by. changing the Zoning
Classification of Lots 12 through 16, Block 1, NELSON VILLA
& GARDEN OF EDEN.AMD (30-7.0) and ttnplatted property to
the north as shown on the map attachedhereto and made a part
hereof, being approximately 535 NE 15th Street, from C -1'
(Local Commercial) toC-3 (Central Commercial) District; 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 con-
taining a severability provision.
APPLICANT:
Florida' East Coast Properties: November 18, 1975
REQUEST:
For zone change from'C-1 to C-3
PLANNING DEPARTMENTRECOMMENDATION:
Approval subjectto the standards outlined in the Miami Urban,
Development and Zoning Plan titled "C-3D District" and "Special
Central 13usiness Districts."
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD ACTIONS:
Recommended by motion that the property be rezoned to C-
116hdr4ble Metiibegs o.t the City Corhistlofi
PAY fi. 1978
based upon the ap13)ieaiitle aeeeptaiice of the 3aiv;tbWin Zotiitig Study
C.S13 standards, (referred to Zehltig beards
ZUNiNC 1 W 1th 1U MivitNDA ttt�iv:
Approval by 5=2 Vote on Dece'rriber 15, 1975. (Resolution Z13.1$405)
CITY C C7iVllvli8510N A C T1oN:
December 1, 1975 resulted in Commission rescinding. its process of
hearing zoning matters less than ,five (5) days after Zoning $oard,acttot
December '19► 1975 Commission directed 'administration to expedite
(75-1131).
January 8, 1976 First Reacting (five day rule invoke(1).
January 22,. 1976,7.. First Reading; passed 5.0.
February 26, 1976 - Deferred
March 25, 1976 Deferred
April 8, 1976 - Deferred (five day rule)
DESCRIPTIVE SKETCH:
r•abM:
t ifi Kok MIAMI. iiLbiiIBA
INfitftvi5P Ier MkMeflAMIRINI
i33stislt Metiibet=s of the
City ebtiittiissioti
P, WY Andrews
City Manager
S�JFtJEtO•
APR , l975
tt
Agenda ttern .4b
pity Cott:mission Meeting
April 8, 1976
wltEREftCES ApproRitriaLety 535 NE 15th Street
CLos URES'
ZONING 13OAl2D FACT SI#EET
PETITION:
Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 6871, the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for the City of Miami, by changing the Zoning Classifica-
tion of Lots 12 through 16) Block 1, NELSON VILLA & GARDEN Or
EDEN Alvlb (30-20) and unplatted property to the north as shown on
the map attached hereto and made a parthereof, being approximately
535 NE 15th Street, from C-1 (Local Commercial) to C-3 (Central.
Commercial) District: 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 con-
flict: and containing.a severability provision.
APPL?CANT:
Florida East Coast Properties
REQUEST:.
For zone change from C-1 to C-3.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION:
Approval subject to the standards outlined in the Miami Urban Develop-
ment and Zoning Plan titled "C-3D District" and "Special Central Busi-
ness Districts. "
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD ACTIONS:
Recommended .by motion that the property be rezoned to C-3, based
upon the applicant's acceptance of the Downtown Zoning Study's C-3D
standards, (referred to Zoning Board).
GFFIG�-oNIMp2cIp.L
I A.P.
itoti ratite Mttnlidr§ bf 'did City ebfHtiiissit5fi
ZON1Nd HOARD i ECOivlMENDATION:
Approval by 5=2 With sn Detetiiber 15, 1975, (Resilt tio1 t1i 184=75)
CITY' CciMMt881bN ACTION:
December 1, 1975 a resulted iti Cbtntnissioti rescinding its process of
hearing zoning matters less than five (5) days after Zoning board actittis
Deceti-iber 19, 1975 Corninissioti directed administration to eispcdite
(75-1131).
January 8, 1976 - First heading (five day rule invoked).
January 22, 1976 - First Reading, passed 5-0.
February 26, 1976 - Deferred
March 25, 1976 - Deferred
DESCRIPTIVE SKETCH:
rRoJcT; uaMNI"
1-16k7A. V R1\ ET I
12I13ENTIAt-
SIo APATME.Nr Ugiry
PAlZKwG-130D SPAS
In
TAN irY
ci-1W4l
etti o€ MIAMI. PLOit15A
It•Ittleb P Idt MtMo AWbUM
tot CS L. Z rut pt t 6Ait: Mated i 9 6 hat
Aa§istant City Manager
kROM:
rt &i'
irec o
artMeht cif Administration
Planning , and Zoning Boards
tufliEc : Ve et jail Rh rtibier S ite
hEFtRENet:S:
ENcLOSURt=S;
At their meeting on March $, 15760 the Zoning hoard deferred
Mr, iiollo' s applications fort
(1)
Conditional Use for` apartment
proposed C-3 Zoning. •
(2) Conditional Use for parking garage in
proposed C-3 Zoning.
(3) Variance regarding open space for proposed
apartment structure.
structure
in
The reason for the deferral was that the fee for the Variance
in the arnount of $10,437.45 had not been paid on the adviceof
Mir. Watson to Mr. Hollo (letter attached). For expediency,
this matter had been. advertised and placed on the agenda prior
to' payment.
Mr. Rollo states, that he wishes to discuss the fee with the
Commission at the meeting of March 25, 1976, when the Second
Reading for the proposed Change of Zoning on the site to C-3
is again scheduled.
cc: Law Department
Planning Department
Att6 RNt9 Ai. LAW
tiii6NONi
A0 A't6ol: ''5OS
Mardi 91
N•1`, 1 ilitir t ollo
1 it11•Itin t ant Co t t roTertic(B
'14 rti•ict,ell /venue
?•`1."1reti, Florida
.he:,r Tod..
1@1366 OLD CU LER.P6AC
Mulciic i'txiliihA 1diltt►
ritrt111nnt'to your rCrtuosI, 111nvc' rcvicwrd tilt City. of ;\'ianpi'r=
i
Ott., •.,nt fl;e tlrt,r,(lule. ff)r filing : oniut;, apolit.•ationtl. It ira niy ttil�atJr:3taliti-
in, that the. City it: rrluirinr a coo in r•'t c^a of ";.lit, 010.')0 to proceS0
a 1 C'it1r:!tt (.ry1' A V;1 ri't lit.e. In Illy o!ih i.ii1 o. flit, in tlli!1 ailloU11ti, for a
t;ittrl ! V"11.1'tlll_C, Witiith you !m .or tin-). not ;'t't., 1!' t't)nfll=C:►tOry %1i1ti,
11l1C( lIStLitittl.tn'1 ,,.'ind, ttlr',refore, 1 '.4'onl'l n1.1vise yO'1 not tO pay ;Janie•
Fitii
is
ilir'ort ly.:yi Art ,
1.)1.11..W. 1'::11 znll .
•, t
t* J.
•CC: . 1.r1: (.:ity of t,'.initl/ ! ) •..:F12:; :'{),IL'CJ
—6 11P(Fls 1:•411) \1)11)1.--)t—'71\
1JJ .t
1
"" t••AR il 137«1
• CITY, Or 1.1 t1111i1
PLANNING & ZQNING.GQ!RDS'
f Jfi i3=6FFIC M MCUi3.ANblUM
t4oiiorabie Mteti-ibers of the
City Coirii-n�ssiott
t s W. ,Aridrews City Manager
SL9JECT
JMiM4 1 9 )976
Agenda tteths
City Comtissiott Meetifig : 1.22- 76
C-3D Zoning District; Petition for
a rEF=_t�=_sChange of Zoning Classificatidii
Verietiati Rahtbter Site
E�iCLfl5 iLS:
At the January g, 1976, meeting the Commission,
after considering a) adoption of a proposed C-3D
(Residential -Office -Central) Commercial Zoning
District, and b) the petition for change of zoning
classification from C-1 (Local Commercial) to
C-3 (Central Commercial.) for the Venetian Rambler
site, approxirnatety 535 NE 15th Street, invoked the
5-day rule, This memorandum presents the chronology
of events leading up to January 8,1976, and alterna-
tive actions for the Commission's consideration.
Background:
The chronology of events pertaining to a) consideration of a proposed C-3D
Residential -Office -Central Commercial District and b) the petition for change
of zoning classification from C-1 (Local Cornrn rcial) to C-3 (Central Commer-
cial) for property located at approximately 535 NE 15th Street, known as the
Venetian Rambler site is as follows:..
April 22, 1975
The City Commission accepted the report "Downtown Miami
1973-1975: An urban Development and Zoning Plan" pre-
pared by the firm of Wallace, IvtcHarg, Roberts and Todd.
for the City of Miami and the Downtown Development
Authority. Consideration was given to the reports of four
Downtown Zoning Study Committees appointed by the
Commission to make recommendations on the report.
(Resolution 75-416)
•
HoYiorable Metnbei:,zof thy: City Cothit ission
JAh 1 6 Wit
flay.uJtily, 1915
5
June 16, 1975
November 18, 1978
December 1,1975
December 2,1975
December 10, 1975
December 15, 1975
December 19, 1976
The Planning Advisory Board held five public hearings
oh the zoning ordinance fevisions reeorntnefitled by the
consultants In the Dot htoti}n Zoning repiitts ('the C4D
District Was considered in these hearings),
At the request of the applicant, a petition. Was. peepat'eci
by the Department of Administration for Planning and
Zoning Boards for a change of zoning classification. froth
C,-1 to Cz3 on the property knoizti as the 'Venetian l at abler
site.:
The petition and application fee were returned to the Depart-
ment of Administration for. Planning and Zoning Boards and
accepted for public hearing.
The Commission directed the Administration to expedite
action on the petition. (Motion 75-1087)
The Planning Advisory Hoard by motion recommended to the
Zoning Board approval of the change ofzoning to C-3, subject
to the project meeting therequirements of the proposed C-3D
zoning district.
The Planning Advisory Board by motion further recommended.
that the change of zoning be hound with a time limit in order
to facilitate construction.
Zoning Board Hearing. . The Planning Department recomm-
ended approval of the change of zoning subject to meeting
the guidelines of the proposed C-3D zoning. The Board
Attorney stated that the Board could not attach conditions
to a recommendation for change of zoning, and the Planning
Department, based on this opinion, verbally changed their
recommendation to "Denial." The Board, byvote of 5-2,
recommended the granting of the change of zoning from C-1
to C-3. (Resolution ZB-184-75).
The City Commission deferred the petition for change of
zoning from C-1 to C-3 and directed the Administration to
expedite hearings on the proposed C-3D District (Motions
75-1130; 75-1 131).
Page 2 of 3
-loni3Fab1d iviei 'oe/ of the Ciilr Co fit sign
ttattuary 7319 7 6,
Sa.nttary 8,106
January- 22, 1976
Piahhing A1visdt y oat d_i- a ing: The Plar°initig Advisory
i#oai:d by a 4=3 vote recotratiended the C=31, legisiatio:i td
the Cotttitiissiot . (PAi3 Resolution 1=76)
The Cotritnissioii deferred action oti the C=3D legislation afid
the petition for change of zoriirio based on the t'=da.y=rule".
The Cot abissiort ivi11 again consider a) the C=3D o:tins
district and b) the petitio:ieris request for a change of tofiitig
classification froth C=1 to C=3 zot litg.
Alternative Actioris:
The Commission could consider the following actions:
1. Accept or modify the C-3D District Ordinance as recortimerided by
the Planning Advisory $oard and then adopt the Ordinance.
2. Grant the applicant's request for C-3 zoning.
3. Grant theapplicant's request for C.3 zoning and accept the applicant's
voluntary covenant that would restrict the development to the C-3D
regulations.
4.
Deny the applicant's request for a change of zoning, and the property
would remain C-1.
Deny the petition for a change of zoning, and request the applicant to
consider filing a new application that would request variances from the
C-1 Ordinance.
6. Apply the C-3D zoning classification to the applicant's property.
Page 3 of 3
•
.,w
�ItY pe ti.diiibA;
INtEtt.OPPICE MEMORANbUM
MOnOrable Mayor and
City CoMrniaaianera
gobel
"dmi Acti
bet
Pia
ector
ent 8f Adtilihittration
tnd 2 mini Boards
bAtEi bei emh'ef 17 , ' 1§7S
buflitctt Venetian Rambler. property
Chaticle a toning petition
htOsptNctei
tNCLeisURRtst
The chronology of Mr. Tibor`t4o11o`s petition for a Change of Zoning
. " _ ..
Classification from C-1 to C-3 on the property known as the "Venetian
Rambler" site is as follows
!rune 16,"1975: petition prepared by this office.
Nov. 18, 1975: petition and application fee returned to
this office and accepted for public hearing.
Dec.
1975:
Commission waived "5-Day-Rule" to permit pe-
tition to be heard by Commission on 12-19-75.
1975: planning Advisory Board recommends to Zoning
Board approval of change to C-3, subject to
project meeting requirements, of proposed
C-3D zoning..
Dec. 9, 1975: planning Advisory Board further recommends
that the Change of Zoning be subject to
immediate commencement of construction.
Zoning Board Hear.i.na. Planning Department
recommended approval of the Change of Zoning
subject to meeting thestandard guidelines
of the proposed C-3D Zoning. The Board
Attorney stated that the Board could not attach
conditions to a recommendation for Change of
Zoning,and the Planning Department, based on.
his•..opinion, verbally changed their recommen-
dation to ''Denial:!' a,: The Board, by a vote of
5 2 Recommended the cxrantinci:. of the Change
of Zoning from C-1 to'C-3.
Dec. 15, 1975:
cc: Planning Departmen
wed
419(
HohOrabl.e City Corninission
Attentions Mr• P• W, Andreas
City of Miattli , Florida
Gentlemen:
The Miami Zoning Board, at its meeting of December 15, 1975, Item #7,
following an advertised Hearing, adopted Resolution: No. ZB 184-75 by.
a 5 to 2 vote recommending a Change of Zoning Classification on
Lots 12 thru 16. Block.1, NELSON VILLA AND GARDEN OF EDEN AMD (30-20),
and UNPLATTED, being approximately 535 N. E. 15th Street, from C-1
(Local Commercial), to C-3 (Central Commercial).
One objection was received in the mail
An ORDINANCE to provide for this Change of Zoning has been prepared
by the City Attorney's office and submitted for consideration of
the City Commission.
Deeernber 16, 15/5
re : CHANGE OP ZONINd - RECOMMENDED
Approximately 535.N.E. 15th Street
Dots, 12 thru 16, Block 1,.
NELSON VILLA AND GARDEN OE EDEN
AMD (30-20) and U PLATTED
Applicant: Fla. East Coast Prop.
cm
Z. M. 23
Attached: Minutes
cc:, Law Department
Planning Department
NOTE: Planning Department
Sin erely,
..ert A. Davis, Acting Director
Department of Administration
Planning and Zoning Boards
recommendation: "APPROVAL".
Tentative City Commission date: December 19, 1975.
Lots 12 thrti 161 Block 1,
t4t;Lgc3N VILLA AND 0.1t5tN OP EDEI4 AHD (10..26) and
ONPIA Ttb .
Chahle of Zonifi c1atsifieation of above from C..1 (Loda1
Commerdial) to C.,1 (Central dommereiai)
Secretary filed proof of publication of tegaiNotide of hearing and
administered oath to all persons testifying at this hearing.
MANt4J tdO Dt pAiergEN`i'tl
.- tt COMI DA 1Oi3 i "APP OVi11i ►... 8U1118CT .`i'O
TIi1 STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES OUTLINED IN THE CITY Or .MI1L�1I
URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND ZONING PLAN ENTITLED "C-3DDISTRICT".,
AND "SPECIAL CENTRAL BUSINESS DIST1ICT.'r
The applicant in an appearance bofotte the City of Miami
Planning Advisory board on December3, 1975 announced
his plans to develop a ,nixed residential-conunercial
complex as an extension of project Omni. The applicant
in his presentation to the Planning Board announced his
acceptance of proposed Downtown Zoning and Urban Design
standards assigned to the subject property. The
applicant's request to establish additional high intensity
commercial -residential development in the midtown area is
in accord with the City's Urban Development and Zoning Plan.
Mr. Davis: Mr. Chairman, at the City Commission meeting of
December 1st, the Commission asked that this matter be heard at their
next 'meeting which is December 19th, Commission meeting of December the
19th, if this Board sees fit to recommend 'up or down'. The Minutes
of the hearing of this Board are being transmitted to the City
Commission in time, that means like tomorrow or the day after, in time.
for their meeting of December the 19th, that is, if you reach a firm
decision tonight on this matter.
The City Commission also requested that the Planning Advisory
Board consider this matter as is permitted under Article XXX, Section 7.
They can do this in public meeting without a published agenda. The
Planning Advisory Board considered, this matter and recommended it, to
this Board with the consideration that any developments that are produced
on this area meet the requirements of C-3D.
C-3D is a proposed zoning classification under the Zoning
Study that has been adopted in principle by the City Commission but has
not yet been adopted per se.
Mr. Alfonso: _ It's not in effect.
Mr. Davis: C-3D has certain limitations that C-3 does not
have. With this information, I pass to our Planning Department.
Mr. Dean: Alright, Mr. Whipple?
Mr. Whipple: Mr. Chairman, for the record, my name i
Richard Whipple, City of Miami Planning Department.
The Department's recommendation to the Board dated December
the llth indicates Item #7 (notwithstanding what I said on Item #6),
"approval subject to the standards and guidelines outlined in the. City
of Miami Urban .Development and Zoning Plan, entitled,'"C�-3D District
and Special Central Business District's,"
The applicant, in an appearance before the City of Miami
Planning Advisory Hoard on. December 3rd, 1975,.announced his plans to
develop a mixed residential -commercial complex as; an extension of project
Omni.. The applicant in his presentation to the; Planning Board announced
Pecember 15, 1975
Item #7
his acceptance of proposed boVihtoWil &ming and urban. design standards
assigned to the subject property, the applicant's request to establish
additional high density commdreialaresidential development in the mida
town area ie in accord With the City's Urban beVeloprn t t and Zoning
Plan
.Mt. mean: Alright,
before you get started,,.?
me Watson: Yes Sir.
Mr. Dean: ; okay. State your flame and address for the records.
Mr. Watson: For the record, my nameis Jack Watson. Ay
address is 12600 Old Cutler ltoad. I represent the applicants
Mr. Tibor Iloilo, and Florida Bast Coast Properties.
Wo are requesting a change of zoning from C-1 to C-3• you'll.
note thethe zoning immediately to the north of us is already:C-3 and
the zoning to the south of us iA C-4. 'There arc only three or four
property owners within the prescribeddistance of notice. They are
large property owners. For the record this evening, I would like to
file waivers of objection of the Miami herald Publishing. Company who
owns seven pieces of propertywithin the C-4 area. I can file that
with Mrs. Callahan....
We would like to conform this property with the existing
zoning tothe north. If we are successful in obtaining the ,C-3 zoning,
we would then come back before this Board and ask for certain conditional
uses to develop it into a residential -type apartment.
Mr. Rollo is here this evening. I know he'd like to say a
few words. Mr. Rollo?
Mr. Hol1o: Good evening, Honorable Board. My name is
Tibor Hollo, 444 lrickell.
We are here now for a particular purpose. As you know, our
City has undergone a very extensive study of our core area and, we have,
made some recommendations and the professional staff that we have engaged
in the City also made some recommendations and t will come in front of
you in the next few months.
Normally I would not be here and ask you for this particular
change at thistime because the course of events would take care of it
in. this next coming.year....my plan was', to start on what you see, Tract "B"
or Plaza Venetia Project, which is approved and we have the complete
concurrence of this Board and City Council. We had obtained that several
years ago.
NOW, you understood the recdmmendatiori,
What happened however, in Bayshore Drive which is separating:
Omni from Plaza Venetia, there is such a tremendous construction activity
and people activity occasioned by (1) by Omni who are in the very midst
of 'building their project somewhat, late -- we expected them to be mostly
finished by this time of the year --plus. the Jordan Marsh traffic itself.
So, to put anymore construction into that area would create a bedlam,
wouldbe logistically impossible. We have left what you see. in 'yellow'
as our Phase II and we were to do that next year only, much in time for
the new.C-3D zoning that will be coming' through, probably, in the course
of the next eight or nine months.
Whathas happened to us in between that we'd like to proceed --
we have obtained the financing to proceed with the Phase I' but we would
like to put the Phase I on the 'yellow' parcel, leaving the later activity
on Bayshore Drive which was originally Phase I and now will be Phase II.
That is our major reason of being here, We would liketo apply for the
December 15, 1975 Item #7.
2ohing that would di 8W ua to proceed with its Thank you.
Mr. bean: Altights Anyone elae'7
Mss hasscy: tadiea and gentlemen, try name is Minh tto Maasey.
I'm the treasurer and the attorney fog Trinity Spiacopal iathed.ral,
mailing addresa, 464 IVY n. 1Gth Street; I have the legal if you wish
it or I will rdad it into the record later. I am authorized by the
Diocese of Southeast Florida, specifically by nishop butican, to
represent the Diocese; the mailing address is 525 W. 8. 15th Street.
The legal is quite long but l shall be happy to read it to the reporter
if you wish.
We concUr in the recomMendation by Florida East Coast Property;
We likewise. respectfully request that the property,Whose.mailing address
for the Diocese is 525 N. n. 15th Street, similarly be zoned C-,3 and
ultimately all of, them will be C-3b.
If you have any questions, I'd be pleased to try and answer
Mr. Dean: Well let me ace if I can getthe record straight.
Are you for the recommendation of Staff or opposed to it?
Ms. Massey: I'm for it, sir.
Mr. Dean: Oh, well I was just trying to get the record
straight...
Hs. Massey:. I thought I'd give you a refreshing change for
the evening
.
g
Mr. Dean: Okay, alright. Is anyone in opposition?
Dr. Rich: I'm not in opposition but I'd like to have a
word before the Board, please.
V1r. Dean: Alright sir.
Dr. Rich: try name is Dr. Maurice Rich, and I -along with..
two of my medical collegues own the building which is on North Bayshore
Drive and N. E.15th'Street which is the corner lot. We have been in
the practice of medicine there for approximately eight years. Prior.
to that time, I was around the corner.. for another twenty-five years so
I've been in this area for a great deal of time.
them.
Again, I have no objection in principle to the change of
zoning. I would certainly urge and hope that whatever takes place in
the future inthis area takes place without what has happened alongside,
Jordan Marsh. What I'm indicating is that we have a faceless mass of.
concrete which is approximately eight stories; tall without any sort of
decoration, without any kind of landscaping: which I think detracts a great
deal from the area.
Again, I would certainly urge .and coerce, if possible, the
owners . (if they, get this change of zoning) to please, please put the
necessary decoration and beautification there to keepthis, area what it
should have been all along. Thank you.
Mr. Dean; Alright, thank you very much.
Mr. Rollo; Mr. Chairman, may I say one word?
?$r. Dean; Yes sir,
Mr. i aa1Q I just would like to say how much I concur with
December 15 , 1975
bri } ieh's cabs+ rVationt and upon try 66ntadt ne Me''. , (�6Usins in ��tia ita,
Wh6 is doing the O�ii Proj cot as you know, , they adviddd Md tint'. it's
still not complete and t should really wait until they put their
'filigrees' on it, but their beatiti ieations on it, beforei Wduid
COMMent on it for theiti 'that's what they told fie. I convey that to
1ii itioh. .
Mr, bean: Aright, thank yeti very much,
Mr. Silverman: Mr. chairman
Mr. bean: Mr. Silverman?
Mr. Silverman: I'd like to ask Dean Massey "i canyou show
me where the church and the other property is on the map? Now as I
understand it you agree With the recommendation and you want that
property re2oned also?
Ms. Massey: The church property need not be.. The Diocese's
offices should be, for proper zoning, yes sir.
Mr. Silverman: Where is that on the map?
Ms Massey : 6666 The Cathedral is located (Mr. Iloilo proceeds
to point out the location on the map), correct. That covers the
Cathedral. The Cathedral, and then there's a parri,h hall. They're
two separate and distinct buildings. They are the large buildings
across from the 'Wall of China' that used to not exist and we have
lovely Jordan harsh. The Diocese of Southeast Florida is located as
Mr. Hello is drawing it for you. We adjoin the property both from the
church side; as I say, I'm here representing not only the Diocese but
also Trinity Episcopal Cathedral. We had a chapter meeting last
Wednesday and discussed this at great length and I was given authoriza-
tion as the treasurer and as the attorney. Today I received a call from
Admiral Kern and Bishop Duncan asked me ,to represent the Diocese, on
the Diocese's behalf also, so I'm representing two separate and distinct
clients. The only change that I would suggest would be in regard to
the Diocesan facilities so that they, similarly, would be C-3 and
hopefully eventuallyC-3D. And thattherefore,we could tie in with
Plaza Venetia and make for a more beautiful Miami.
Mr. Dean: Mr. Davis?
Mr. Davis: As I remember, the proposed plan for that area
from the Downtown Study -= it is proposed to be rezoned C-3D, M'am.
Ms.
Mr. Davis:
Ms. Massey:
Mrs. Basila:
Massey: Yes sir. Concur.
That is not before the Board
at this point, however.;
I'm delighted. Before, after or when.
Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Dean Alright, Mrs. Basila?
Mrs. Basila: For the benefit of the Board, I would like to
hear from the Department as to what C-3D is going to be.
Mr. Dean: Mr. Whipple?
Mr. Whipple: Ladies and gentlemen, I'm not prepared to
present to you tonight a the C-3P Zoning District. I can indicatein
general terms that it is a district of which the basic intent is to
� lied
recognize the waterfront character in the areas in which its app.
which indioatoa a conaiderAtion of waterfront walkways and other, amenities
December 15, 1975 Item #7
that you might dttbdiate with the Wdter and it . dads suggest an
intefisifidatib1 diightly beyond the category of d..1 as far ad flbbe
area ratio and e ovdrai di bete are dertain i lderitiVoa and certain
c rode sts herd which I do not have bdfore tile, howevef, l suggest to you
that it id considerably dare limited than the C-1 toning that is being
p The klob , area Patio is ooi�sideraiiy less
petitioned here tonight..
and it has all the other controls by whidh to Meet the objedtiVes of
the boWnthWn Plan and the specifid G.,3U District.
Now, if you'd like me to come back and suggest to you or
indicate to you these regulations, fine, but do not have theta before
me this evening.
Mrs. 13asilat sty other point was that Mr. flollo is aware
of that. I think he helped write some of these ordinances, clid you
not sir?
Mr. 11o11o: Yes. I would be very happy to elucidate on it..
Mrs. ` 13asi1a: In presenting his plan to the Planning Department,
the intent is for C-3D, is it not sir?
Mr. Rollo: Absolutely correct. Our only problem is,at this
time, it's not on the books. I wish it were, I would not be wasting
the time of these wonderful people you see..
Mrs. Basila: Iunderstand that. But it can, in other words,
be regulated by the Department from the plans, is that correct sir?
Mr. Iloilo: Yes. Actually what we have donein the past, we,
just -- the Legal Department wrote a Covenant with it...
Mrs. I3asila: The intent is there.
Mr. Hello: That's right.
Mrs. Callahan: Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Dean: Mrs Callahan?
Mrs. Callahan Have we had a letter,of any kind from
Traffic and Transportation?
Mr. Davis: We have not had any indication from them as
to recommendations, Mrs. Callahan.
Mr. Alfonso: ' Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Dean: Just a moment, uh, Mr. Whipple?
Mr. Whipple: Mr. Chairman, just for the record -- unless
I ammistaken, I know there has been presentation before the planning,
Advisory Board .and I also believe, an informal presentation before the
City . Commission, but to the best: of my knowledge, the Department has
had no specific plans by whichto evaluate and to makea determination
that the plan is"in accord with the C-3 Zoning District" and with all
clue respects to Mr. IIollo and his counsel, I have not seen these plans.
It may have been a part of conversation and I believe it is verbally a
commitment here this evening, but as far as specific plans which was
the point made, 1 have not seen such.
Mr. Dean. May. Mr. Alfonso?
Mr. Alfonso: Mr. Iloilo, do you want to answer that first,
Docembolb 15 1975 atom.
;
Mr, Milo: Yes, till be very pleated tos Mrs Alfonso.
What will dome up after this hearing Wd have to go step by step.
Unfortunately there is no such thing ad a package deal. After this We
will have to coMe for conditional use permits. burinq the time -- same
Way as it happened With Plata Venetia, at fil'St a .onincIwag obtained*
tftet the 2onineg is obtained, then We can dome with a eonditienal use
request. In that, the building and parameters of .the whole plan is
defined by a CoVenant that Will be running with the land and that will
donforn to what is the required item.
Mr. Alfonso: Mr, Chairman, Want to ask a question of
Mr. Dean: Alright, Mr. Alfonso. Mr. IIollo?
Mr. Alfonso: Mr. Rollo, hoW long have you owned this
property?
mt. llollo' Approximately three, and a half, four years.
Mr. Alfonso: bo you presently own the property? You have
no intention to buy -- do you own the property in question now?
Mr. Rollo: Three and a half four years.
Well, you knot, the problem here when you ask
Mr.. IIollo
your intention now is to develop this property
according to the C-3D z
Plaza Venetia...
Mr. Alfonso:
for a change of zoning,
•
oning -- you told me one time you dreamed of
Mr. Iloilo: Right.
Mr. Alfonso: ...and you ,old half of that dream: I want
to know, what is your intention? Are you going to develop this property?
Are you going to sell this property? What are you going to do now?
Mr. IIollo: Mr. Alfonso, I'd like to have the record very
clear.
Mr. Alfonso: Yes.
Mr. Rollo: When we have come up to this Board, in 1971 and
the early 1972, as you recall we; came up with a gentleman by the name
of Itr. Maurice Alpert who is 'Omni' and we hadsubmitted a joint plan
to you --not Tibor Hollo--Mr. Alpert and myself, and if you will look
in the Minutes, you will see so noted. Mr. Alpert was to do the
commercial part : of the project, Mr. IIollo was to do the residential part
of the project, the. Plaza Venetia part.' Omni part was Mr. Alpert, and
his name;is in the records, his name is in the Minutes of your meetings,
as well as the Council's meetings.
Mr. Alfonso: Plaza Venetia was the only name at that time.
that I recall. Omni' was later on when you sold half ofthe.. project.
Mr. IIollo : Absolutely correct.
Mr. Alfonso: That's what I wanted to know.
Mr. IIollo Ile was to do the commercial part of it,,. I was to
do the residential; under the same meeting, hisname was presented to,
you, he appeared in front of you and he has made his statements in front
of you at the 1971 and 1972 hearings.
I lr, A I..I_t,n'l0; 'Moult you, 'Mut mus ic:r'3 mj iltta:J am:1,
Mr. Dean:. Alright, Mr. Campbell.?
Popombor 15, 1975 'tom #i 7
Mr. Campbell: M. Chairman, if i itay ► for the tdeord We
note that f ettuhateiy the area ih queetioh herd Whidh Wouid be the
horthetiy, little better than half of the et is unplaMted at i the
ptesent tithe. t' m ihteteeted and dehoethed ae a dititeh.Mit,
part and pared ofthe proposal that; thit area be re -platted along With
the other. , ..that id, let . me...
Mr,. bavis: Mr. Chairman, the property has to be platted in
order to get a building permit.
Mr. Dean: It has to Meet all requirements► at the time that
they submit an application for it.
Mr. Davis What's right. Nothing at be donstructed on that
property except for a single family house unless it is platted.
Mr. Dean: Alright, Mt. Campbell?
Mrs. 13asila: You know that, Mr. Hollo?
Mr. Hollo: Yes, of course. Yes, Mrs. Basila.
Mr. Dean:. That's okay, ttr. Campbell?
Mr. Campbell: Yes, as long as we and, the applicant are all
aware that this is part of the whole thing, that this has to be
replatted. I was concerned that there might be a possible request for
waiver of plat or something of that sort.
Mr. Iloilo: No, there would not have been.
Mr. Dean: No. Alright, we'll close the public . hearing
discussion and have discussion among Board members. Alright, there
being none, Chair is ready for a motion. Chair is ready for a motion.
May I have a motion, all at one time?
Mr. Gort: P1r. Chairman, I would move subject to the
conditions set forth by the Department here.
I4r. Dean: Alright. Mr. Davis? There's a motion made in
accordance with the recommendation of the Planning Department by
Mr.;Gort, seconded by Mrs. Basila.
Mr. Davis:, Mr. Chairman, I'm going to ask the attorneyhow
we can word this resolution.
Mr. Dean: Is the recommendation by Staff outlined,Counselor?
Is it worded properly?
Mr. Anderson: There's one thing you can't do and that'sput
the conditions on the change of zoning. You'll have to make the change
of zoning just as it's stated on theagenda, from C-1 to C-3, and when
Mr. IIollo comes back for conditional use, at that` time you will be able
to review his plans. Buta change of zoning is based on the proper
zoning for the property without any limitation except those which are
outlined in the zoning regulations.
Mr. Dean; Now the motion is, on Item ;}7, inaccordancewith
the recommendation of the Planning Department.' Is that worded properly
or not?
Mr. Anderson; The recommendation may be worded properly but
you cannot include.,.
Mr. Whipple; Mr. Chairman, if I may, based upon the. Assistant
City Attorney's legal concern here, the Department would recommend, that
December 15, 1975 Item i 7
no ehangd of Zoning to
Mrs Alfeh§61 Co to again/ ihat's not cider to me, please,
ter. t1ile'.
n 3 be granted:.
Mr. Whipple: based upon . the interpretation that; %3e oaunot
attach conditions to a change of zoninrt, the Department would recom►nend
thatno ehange of toning to C-1 be granted.
Mr. Watson: What we did before and We've done it a number
of times was just to -- where you couldn't put a condition on year
change of 2ohing "i' Wt clid it on the basis, of a restrictive covenant
and that's what we did on the other property, the Plaza Venetia
property. We filed with the City a 'restrictive covenant, embracing What'
you were talking about, everything Within the C»3D classification.
That's What We did. on that one. It's the same problem.
t tr. Dean: Counselor?
Ms. Massey: :lay I speak please? The Rambler building is
totally deteriorated. It's a fire hazard, a health hazard, there are
rats, and we have children and one of them is my eleven--year-old, and
hc''3 down there every Saturday morning for choir and he's down there
every Sunday for church. We're over there pulling thosechildren out
and we're terrified they're going to be killed by some of the derelicts;,
if not, then from some of the falling debris.
If you don't grant this and permit these people to pull the
building down, I urge you to get the owners and get that building down
in the name of safety and humanety,
Mr. Dean: Alright. Counselor?
i•ir. Anderson: Its I told you before this evening there have
been restrictive covenants placed on property bythe owners and the
I 1. Y
last one that I can recall, I was given the restrictive covenant prior.
to the Commission meeting and the owners made representations that they
would --they had placed with the City Attorney a restrictive covenant
that theywould follow provided that the zoning were granted. I
can't make any: guarantees except the fact that these people have done.
this before, in other . words, this isn't the first time that they've
done it and they'vo honored their commitments before....in other words,
I don't know what the Court would say if they were to change their mind.
We would, have to litigate that,but they've honored their commitments,
apparently, before and that's maybe one of the questions that's before
you tonight.
Mr. Dean: Couldn't they have it by the time
the Commission level?
Mr. lollo: Yes, of course.
Mr. Alfonso: ?lr. Chairman?
Mr. Dean: Mr. Alfonso?.
Mr. Alfonso: I hate to vote on an item that is not clear
to me. We are talking about C-3D and the application on Item ¶7,.we're
only talking about from C-1 to C-3. The intention can be changed.
That's the problem with the change of zoning, etc., we don't seeany
legal hardships to justify this change. We can, wait for the C-3P to be
in effect and then I can make an intelligent decision by that time. I
am opposed to a change Of zoning now, moreover, when the Department
recommends denial after hearing the begat. Department's expression.
Mr t Dean; Alright, Mr, Whipple? In view of 'a trinity', Let's.
December 15, 1975 Item #7
get yOuf` recommendation clear here nova.
Mt, daft: bet Me ask ...
Mr. bean: We have a rddOmmendation here Stating you're
recommending approval tubject to. , . ,now the attorney raised one c1tte? ti ih,
and t fii also asking the c1uestioho appropriate do' t11c11 t.andehage itet hreac V'enant,
'couldn't
y at
the property owner% get the app p
the Comnlisaion leVel through the appropriate Departments b1 Legal
Department?.
Mr. Iloilo: Mr. Chairman, I'm willing to do that and submit
it to them.
Ir. bean: okay. Mr. Whipple?
Mr. Whipple: Mr. Chairman, the Department has not, to the
best of my knowledge, ever encouraged any conditions to the granting of
a change of zoning nor has the Deparment, except for it's recommendation
tonight in the thought that it could proceed on this matter, recommenced
a pseudo condition or an approach to this, and based . upon the fact that
it's been indicated that thisi5 not a proper legislative action, .the
Department yields to this decision, agrees with it as we have in the
past that you cannot attach conditions to a change of zoning.
Now, if the applicants want to offerthe covenants as
indicated here tonight, that's fine: But this does not necessarily
indicate. that the Department should, has or will agree to such covenants..
The actions of covenants between the City outside a Department is
another .tnattnr. I:t the City Commission wishes to do this or if this
Iloarcl su.jrje:; t ; that it be Clone, fine: nut I'm flat-out suiting that
the Department has not been informed of this. The Zoning Law, through
the State, indicates that you cannot attach conditions of change of
zoning and therefore I am changing our recommendation based upon this
that (1) we are improper and illegal for recommending the way we have
tonight and we should have recommended yes or noon the petition change
of zoning. Recognizing this, the Department recommends a denial of
the requested change of zoning.
Mr. Iloilo: ;sir. Chairman, if I nay shed some light for
dr. Whipple on it because his boss,t1r. Acton, has agreed that according
to the law, the, Ordinances of our City -- if the applicant (me) willingly
offers the conditions, it is then an acceptable item and then you as
the Board can,in fact, vote on it, recommend it, with myself's offered
conditions. They cannot attach a condition to it if'I don't want it
but Mr. Acton, at the hearing that we had a week ago Monday -- Mr. Davis
will attest to it -- has agreed to that.
Idr. Watson:
Mr. Davis:
Mr. Dean:
Let me come back in, here and say something...
I didn't agree to anything, Mr. Hollo.
Just a moment, just a moment...
Mr. Davis: I just wanted to clarify Mr. Iiollo's statement.
I was not in the conversation. I did not state anything to agree; or
disagree, except to state...
Mr. Rollo:: Mr. Acton, Mr. Acton I meant. Not P1r. Davis.
Mr, Dean: Oh, he just said you were present. He didn't say
that you...
I4i. DaVi.s: 1 just wanted to clarify it for you.
Mr, Dean: Well 1 think what he's saying is concurrent with.
what Mr. Whipple said.. * •that the Department has never recommended it.
December 15, 1975 1t m ;7,
And that he's Sayin i§ that he hi tgel1 othuld do it, bk the board.
What's hot the Department if t Understood yoU eorteet1y.
Mr. DAVIS: I•fr. Chairman, if / may, When these t;ituytiond
haVe arisen before, the hoard has taken its action Without Condition+,
either recommending or dehying the dhahge of toning as shown in the
petition. They have loft it to the applicant to work out with the
Commission any voluntary CoVenarith that he may Wish to offer but they
have taken their oWn action at the Hoard level on their ot9n.
Mr. Watson: This is What 1 Was going to say. tie' Ve got a
hearing before the City Commission on rriday, if we don't dome up with
the type of coVeriaht that they like, they can turn us down.
Mr. t)eah: But then on the the hand, Mr. Whipple has
changed their (Planning Department) recommendation based on the Attorney
saying there was something in their recommendation. Ism I right,
Counselor?
Mr. Anderson: i111 I'm saying is, you cannot approve --
you can't approve the Ordinance or recommend approval of the Ordinance
subject to certain standards and guidelines,: etc.It just can't be
written up that way and those conditions can't be put on it in that
form. It's possible that....
iir. Watson: You could, however, approve it as is with a
memorandum to the Commission that it was approved with an understanding
that a restrictive covenant would be, filed. In other words, it would
not be part of the -- you wouldn't :approve the C-3 subject to conditions
one, two, three, you'd approve C-3 with a memorandum to the Commission
that the applicant has voluntarily agreed to file certain restrictive
'covenants which the Board is in agreement with, and I' believe you could
do that and then it would be up to the City Commission. They know
what's going on, and if they like it,fine: If they don't, they can
turn it down.
Mr. Davis: iir. Chairman, the Board could well deny -- recommend
denial of this situation in the same sense. The Minutes would stand
as any matter that was discussed before them as far as why it was
denied or recommended.
Mr. Alfonso: That means it doesn't affect the presentation
to the - City Commission. We deny or approve -- anywaywe do, they're,
going to go there.
;•ir. Davis: The City Commissionwill consider this matter,
of course using the recommendation of the Board ias a very strong
influence or input.
Mir. Alfonso: Yes but what concerns me as a Member of this
Board, that we have a recommendation here and at the last . moment it's
changed. I was ready to congratulate Mr. Rollo that he got a winner for
the first time and now, everything is wrong... 1,
Mr. Dean: Alright. Mr. Whipple?
Mr. Whipple: May I just remind the Board that the petition
before this Board this evening is "Change of zoning Classification of
above from C-1 toC-3", and I indicated the Department's change in their
recommendation based upon the testimony here tonight, and we're
recommending against the C--3. I don't mean to prolong it or disagree.
with learned counsel, Mr, Watson. I think he has stated quite ably.
Mr, Hello? We have no problem there. 1 think they're both in 'under-
standing that:. all I'm suggesting is this Department cannot, based upon
counsel hero tonight and other beliefs, recommendsconditions.to a change-
of zoning, and without these conditions, we suggest that the requested
December 151 i975
Item *7
kid tdhat he's saying is that he himddlf could do it, or the hi arc r
'hat` § not the bepar'tmeht if t understood you doftoot1y.
hairman, if Y May, when these litutionS
fi�tr. � Davis:is : i�1f�. .. a 3
haVd afjiseft before, the board has taken its action without conditions,
'dither recommending or denying the dhange of toning as shown in the
petition. They have left it to the applicant to work out with the
Commission any voluntary dovenafits that he may wish to offer but they
have taken their own action at the board level on their own.
Mira Watson: '1 his ie what I was going to say. We've got a hearing before the City Commission on t'riday. If we don't dome up with
the type of covenant that they like, they Can turn us down.
Mr. Mean: taut then on the other hand, itr. Uhipple has
changed their (Planning Department) recommendation based on the Attorney.
saying there was something in their recommendation. 11m I. right,
Counselor?
Itr. Anderson: All I'm saying is, you cannot approve
--
you can't approve the Ordinance or recommend approval of the Ordinance
subject to certain standards and guidelines,. etc. It just can't be
written up that way and those conditions can't be put on it in that
form. It's possible that...
ilr. Watson: You could, however, approve it as is with a
memorandum to the Commission that it was approved with an understanding
that a restrictive covenant would be tiled. In other words, it would
not be part of the you wouldn't approve the C-3 subject to conditions
one, two, three, you'd approve C-3 with a memorandum to the Commission
that the applicant has voluntarily agreed to file certain restrictive
covenants which the Board is in agreement with, and I believe you could
dothat and then it would be up to the City Commission. They know
what's going on, and if they like it,fine: If they don't, they can
turn it down.
Mr. Davis: Iir. Chairman, the Board could well deny -- recommend :.
denial of this situation in the same sense. The Minutes would stand
as any matter that was discussed before them as far as why it was
denied or: recommended.
i•ir. Alfonso: That means it doesn't affect the presentation
to the City Commission. We deny or approve -- anyway we do, they're
going to go there.
Mr. Davis: The City Commission will consider this matter,
of course using the recommendation of the Board as a very strong
influence or input.
Mr. Alfonso: Yes but what concerns me as a Member of this
Board, that we have a recommendation here and at the last moment it's
changed. I was ready to congratulate Mr.`liollo that he got a: winner for
the first time and now, everything is wrong...
Mr. Dean: Alright. Mr. Whipple?
lir. Whipple: May I just remind the Board that the petition
before this Board this eveningis "Change of Zoning Classification of
above from C}1 to C-3", and I indicated the Department's change in their
recommendation based upon the testimony here tonight, and we're
recommending against the C-3. I don't mean to prolong it or disagree
with learned counsel, I1r. Watson. I than% he has stated quite ably.
Mr. . Rollo? We have no problem there. I thin* they're both in under-
standing that all I'm suggesting is this Department cannot, based upon
counsel here tonight and other beliefs, r-ecommendjaonditions to a change
of zoning, and without these conditions, we suggest that the requested
December 15, 1975 Ite ► .#7
ohange of hitting, from to C= r be denied%
Mf.s bean: Alright, ' noW.
We had a motion oh the floor and
It Wd11t i by the. Wayside's 86 hoW, I' M going toll's
Mr. SiiVeiman: Mr. Chairman
Mr. .Dean Mr. Silverman? Are you ready to give the a motion
Me. 8i1Vermant Well, let me say a couple of quidk words.
First cif all, I voted Against Plaza Venetia for WhateVer that's worth.
Secondly, let's stop, wasting each other's time. We're all tuned in.
The Commission's meeting on Friday;. The Commission is aware, of this
project. The Commission has already instructed us to take action. The
Commission will have final authority whether this Board approves it
or disapproves it. Let's make a motion and let's approve it or let's turn it clown, let the Commission take final action.... and it's not going
to make any difference what this Hoard does, and ultimately, the
Commission, by its majority, is going to either approve it or not
approve it and let's not kid each other with legal nicitics which I'm
sure Dean Massey enjoys being out here in the real world but I really
think we're only kidding ourselves and why spend all night here discussing
covenants and not covenants...okay, let's get it over with.
Mr. Dean: Alright. Let me get a motion and let's try to
move on here. Let's get it off of the side of the road, in the middle
of the road. Alright, I'm ready for a motion.
Mr. Gort: Mr. Dean,I move for approval.
Mrs. Dasila: I second.
Mr. Dean: The motion by Mr. .Willie Gort, to move for
approval, seconded by Mrs. I3asila. Other discussion? Being none, call
the roll.
Mr. Davis: The motion is to recommend the change of
zoning from C-1 to C-3.
One objection, was received in the mail.
Mr. Gort offered the following resolution and moved its.
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. ZB-184-75
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE CIIANGI: OF ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF LOTS12 TIiRU 16, BLOCK
1, NELSON "VILLA AND GARDEN OF " EDEi1 AnD (30-20) AND UNPLAT'TED, BEING APPROXIMATELY
535 N. E. 15TI1 STREET, FROM C-1 (LOCAL
C0MIIERCIAL) TO C-3 (CENTRAL COi•1MERCIAL).
Upon being seconded by Mrs. Basila, this resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES; Messrs, Gort, Silverman, Dean.
Mmes. I3asila, I3aro.
NAYS: Mr. Alfonso, t1me. Callahan,
AI3SINT; Reverend Johnson,
Kr, Davis; Motion passes.
Mr. lot Lo. Thank you very much. Appreciate it very much.
Mr. Dean; Thank you very much for coming.
December 15, 1975 item t7
TF1tS AGREEMENT, entered into this � . dsy of Decetribe ,
19T5, by and between the CITY OF MIAMI) a nnunicipal subdivision of the
State. of Florida (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and FLOttlDA EAST
COAST1PROIIERTIES, INC. , a Florida corporation authorized to do busi=
ness in the State of Florida (hereinafter referred to as "Corporation').
Wl4EREAS, the Corporation is desirous of constructing a thirty
(30) story apartment building on the property legally described as:
Approximately.535 N. E. 15th Street, Miami, Florida
Lots 12 through 16, Block 1, NELSON VILLAS
& GARDEN OF EDEN AMD. , Plat Book 30 at
Page 20 and unplated and containing 51, 725. 25
square feet of area.."
and currently referred to as Venetian Rambler property, and
WHEREAS, the Corporation has requested the City tochange the
zoning on the property described above from C-1 to C-3, and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Department and others have recom-
mended that the above described property be rezoned as C-3D, and
WHEREAS, said new Zoning classification, C-3D, has not yet
been enacted by the City Commission of the City of Miami. and is still
in the formative, changes
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department of the City of Miami has
made a draft of the proposed amendment to. the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Downtown Miami entitled "New C-3D Zoning District"
which draft is dated April 23, 1975 and is attached hereto and made a
part hereof as EXhibit.A, and
WHEREAS, the Land Owners and Developers Committee of the
.1
City of MiamOlas recommended certain modifications to the said new
C-3D propofed amendment, which modifications were transmitted to the
City Commission of the City of Miami and its Planning Advisory Board
on June 1Z, 1975, a copy of said proposed modifications are attached
k 8.titte. I C ` NANfi
T1 15 A4T OitEEME ,.. entered into this �.,� ...�.__ ,day of Deoen�be1,
1975, by and between tbe. CrrY OF MIAMt) a nhuhicipal subdivision of the
State of Florida
(hereinafter referred to as "City"), and FLOR.UDA EAST
COAST PROPERTIES) INC. , a Florida corporation authorized to do busi=
ness in the State of Florida (hereinafter referred to as `'Corporation").„
WHEREAS, the Corporation is desirous of constructing a thirty
(30) story apartment building on the property legally described ass
Approximately 535 N. E. 15th Street, Miami, Florida
Lots 12 through 16, Block 1, NELSON VILLAS
& GARDEN OF EDEN AMD. , Plat Book 30 at
Page 20 and unplated and containing 51, 725. 25
square feet of area.
and currently referred to as Venetian Rambler property, and
WHEREAS, the Corporation has requested the City to change the
zoning on the property described above from C-1 to C-3, and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Department and others have recom-
mended that the abovedescribed property be rezoned as C-3D, and
WHEREAS, said new zoning classification, C-3D, has not yet
been enacted by the,City Commission of the City of Miami and is still
in the formative changes
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department of the City of Miami has
made a draft of the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Downtown Miami entitled "New C-3D Zoning District"
which draft is dated April 23, 1975 and is attached hereto and made a
part hereof as Exhibit A, and
R
}
WHEREAS, the Land Owners and Developers Committee of the
City of Miami ihas recommended certain modifications to the said new
C-3D propo fed amendment, which modifications were transmitted to the
City Commission of the City of Miami. and its Planning Advisory Doard
on June 12, 1975, a copy of said proposed modifications are attached
hereto and trade a part hereof as Exhibit ii1 arid
WHER:EA8, the Corporatibfi desires to restriet itself to the rise
Of. this property in eoiifortiiity to the proposed C.Sb zoning district as
Modified by. the Land OWiiers & beVeiopers Cohiiiittee& s recornt iendatiohs
to the City Cotiimis sion of the City of Miami, and
WHEREAS, time is of the essence for the construction of the pros
posed thirty (30) story aparttrient bttiiding) and
WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to formalize this Restrictive
Covenant Agreement and proceed with immediate construction by the
Corporation of the proposed apartment building.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby covenanted, contracted and
agreed as follows:
1. The Corporation is the owner of the property legally
described as:
Approximately 535 N. E. 15th Street, Miami, Florida
Lots 12 through 16, Block I, NELSON VILLAS
& GARDEN OF EDEN AMD., Plat Book 30 at
Page 20 and unplated and containing 51, 725. 25
square feet of area.
2. The . Corporation does hereby covenant and agree that it
will restrict itself to the use of this property in conformity to the new
proposed. C-3D zoning district as recommended by the Planning Depart-
ment of the City of Miami, as modified by the Land Owners & Developers
Committee's recommendations which are attached hereto and made a part
hereof as Exhibit "B":
3. That notwithstanding the fact that the proposed new C-3D
zoning classification ordinance has not yet been adopted by the City
Commission of the City of Miami, the City Commission does hereby
agree to permit the Corporation to begin construction of the proposed
new thirty (30) story apartment building on the above described property
within thirty (30) days of the date of this Agreement, .within the limitations
imposed by the Corporation in paragraph Z of this Agreement.
fist . W1 tNtSS i#tittOP) w have hereto sot out hands and billet -at
seals this ..... clay of i ee rntier, 1975 at Mimi.th Bade ebtttity, Ploridat
PLOtW11iA EAST, ebAST Pkoptivri S, imps
Tibor Ho110, President
Attest:
Secretary
CITY OF MIAMI
By
City Manager
Attest:
City Clerk
t-►at►liitta titttial tIt
I raft
April2S 1V1§
PROPOS b AMENI5MENTS TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE
'OR DOWNTOWN MIAMt
NEW C.115 ZONING DISTttIC`l'
12. Add a now AItTICLt XV'4 to read as follows:
ARTtCl,E XVi4 RESIDENTIAL.OI`F'ICE CENTRAL. COMMERCIAL, C31) InSTRICT
Section 1: Purpose
This District is designed as a residential-office,commercial district for
parts of the central business district enjoying the special advantages of
proximity to waterfronts and parks. Residential development is encouraged
in this district for the purpose of accommodating people disposed to urban
living close to places of employment.
The following regulations shall apply in the C -3D District!
Section 2:
Vise Regulations
No building or structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used,
or land or waterused, in whole or in part, for other than one or more of the
following specified uses:
(1) Apartment building and apartment hotel not exceeding a density
of one dwelling unit for each 220 square feet of lot area.
(2) Hotel or Motel.
(3) Office for the conduct of real estate, mortgage financing, account-
ants, tax consultants, . engineers,dental or medical. (including.
clinics), or office of other professions, or businesses not involving
sale or handling or merchandise on the premises.
(4) Bank and Finance Offices, exclusive of drive-in tellers.
(5) Broadcasting Stations for Radio and TV.
(6) The following retail or service uses
Antique
• Art supply store
Bake shop
Barber shop
Beauty parlor
Camera shop
Confectionery
Delicatessen
Eating and drinking places including the providing of outdoor
table $ e rvice
Florist Shop
Gift. and Card shop
Health spa
Jewelry'Store
Laundry and Dry Cleaning Agency
Medical and Dental Laboratory
Museum
Music Store
Newt3stand
Optical. Service
Photographer
Stationery Store
Travel Aooncy
l riVate Club, lodge, fra'tcrhity, t rarity, and other sitii lar ut of ,
hot operatig for profit
tirug litttre
8aak stare=fdr use by the g+eheral public
i obd, ;'heat, fruit be vegetable market, iithit:ed to 2.60 sgttare
Net of float' area per es'ta13lishttient
buplicatioti center, tint including tyliesettitig and letteriirest;
(7) Accessory parking facilities frig apaettiient buittlings, with vt'ihiele
capacities hot exceeding 60 percetlt of the tiutiiber of dwelling ttiiitss
(8) The following aceessory parking facilities, parking ibis tie p:irkltig
garages, subject to the protiisions of Section 8 of Al `p1CLt XX1,5t
(a) Accessory parking facilities toe tlon=residential uses be hotelt3+.•
(b) Accessory parking facilities tot aparttylent buildings. with
vehicle capacities exceeding 60 percent of the nutlibet' of
dwelling units.
(c) Parking lots or garages for the parking of automobiles by the.
public.
Accessory Uses or Structures
(9)
Section 3i Limitations on Uses
All activities, including sales, display, preparation and storage. shall
be conducted entirely within a completely enclosed building,.
except outdoor table service for eating and drinking places..
No second-hand or used merchandise shall be offered for sale, dis-
played or' stored.
(3) All products shall be sold at retail on the premises.
Section 4: Area (All new material)
There shall be no minimum required area or width of lot in this District.
Section 5: Yards and Minimum Distance between Residential Buildings
(1)
FRONT AND STREET -SIDE SETBACKS: In all instances, except
as provided for Arcades in ARTICLE XXI-5, Section, 5, and except
as hereafter provided. a minimum front setback of 10 feet for the
first 9 feet of building height and a minimum street -side setback of
5 feet for the first 9 feet of building height,shall be provided and
maintained in accordance with the following requirements:''
(a) The required setback area shall be treated with landscaping
so as to present, in perpetuity, a neat and orderly appearance.
(b) The required setback area shall not be used for off-street
parking.
(2) Where a lot is adjoined bya building which has less than the above
required setback, the following exceptions shall be made
(a) If the lot has a lot line dimensions of less than 50 feet abutting
any street, then the setback required along that particular
street shall not be greater than the deeper of either adjoin-
ing setback.
(b) If the lot has a lot line dimension of 50 feet or more abutting
any street, but not greater than 65 feet, then the setback
required along that particular street shall not be greater
than the deeper of any adjoining setback, unless such adjoin.
ing; setback is less than 5 feet. in which case the required
fatback shall be 5 feet,
(1) No pttht oil a building sltail be eial er to the aeriterline of a street
than 1/2 the height of said paint above grade, provided that such
restrietihii shalt hat require a setback greater than i5 feet ffe i the
base building line,
(4) INT2R1011. 81112 VA11i =. No Interior side yard is required; 1-1oWeVer;
if any open area ektending along an intefk,r Side lctt line is life,
vtdkd, it shall be at least 10 feet wide. nit resideptial bt:tidtngs
or residential portions of buildings, any portion of a building wall
which has windows shall be set back from an anterior side lot ,line a.
distance of not less than 25 feet or 1/6 of the height of saki building
wall, whichever is. greater, The niinirr urn setback may be retlueed
by 1/2 when the lot line is .tntriediately adjacent to a public park,
`or residential portions of buildings which combine residential and
non-residential uses, the height of the building wall :;hall be trirastited..
from 'the :floor level of the lowest story used for residential use,
(5) REAR YARD:
(a) For non-residential buildings, no rear yard is reriolredl ex.
cept 4/here a lot in the C-3D District abuts upon a lot in. any
"R" (Residential) District; a yard at least 10 feet in width
shall be provided adjacent to the "R" District, However, if
any open area along a rear lot line is provided, it shall be
at least 1.0 feetwide.
For residential buildings or residential portions of buildings,
a rear yard shall be provided having a minimum depth of
25 feet, and any portion of a building wall which has windows
shall be set back from a rear lot line a distance of not less.
than 25 feet or 1/6 of the height of said building wall, which-
ever is greater. The minimum setback may be reduced by,
1/2 when the lot line is immediately adjacent to a public park.
For residential portions of buildings which combine resi-
dential and non-residential uses. the required rear ;ard for the
residential portion may be provided at any level not higher
than the floor level of the lowest storyused for residential use, ...
and the height of a building wall containing windows shall be
measured from such floor level of the lowest story used for
residential use.
(6) MINIMUM' DISTANCT BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS: The
provisions of ARTICLE' IV, Section 15 shall apply in this District
except that the formula for determining minimum horizontal;
distance between any two buildings on the site is modified to read
as follows:
S = LA plus LB plus HAylus HB
6 8
All provisions of ARTICLE IV, Section 15 which refer to the formula
in said Section shall instead refer in this District to the formula' as
modified herein.
Section 6; Height
There shall be no absolute height limit in this District, except as required
by ARTICLE IV, Section 37.
Section 7; Floor Area Ratio
(1) Non -Residential Uses
Except as provided in Section 8, the floor area ratio for non-
residential uses exceed 1,,5,
(Z) Residential UJses,
Except as provided in Section 8, the floor area ratio for resit.
dential uses shall not exceed 1, 5,
(3) Except as provided in Section 8, the floor area ratio for all
uses inebuilding shall not exceed Z 5,
45,
Iot3t' 'A ee'a eft tu1Ri
the floor a eea Ratios perrnitteti ib Section 7 tray be i.tiC rr af3ed ih aeeordatice
- With.the pPeitiitilbtit3 of this Set:tiatis
(1) Pot lotti having an area of at' least 20, 06O, squat*e feet, the floc
area for residential uses and .the floor area ratio for.all uses in
a building may be increased by '1,
(2) 1+`ttr lots_ oh' which public facilities at'e specifically mandated by-
: the'provisions of ARt`tCLi XR1=5,' floor area bonuses, if any,
shall be in accordance with the provisions of said AterICL8,
except that bonus floor area -allowed thereunder 'and allocated•
for residential uses mays be increased by .0 percent.
(3) Optional features not specifically mandated by the provisions
of Atkir1CL1 XXI=S will entitle the lot to bonus floor area as
•
fol lows
(a) 'For arcades conforming to.the definition of areale as. set.'
forth lit AR`T'ICII.t it, Secttc n 2, four srluare feet of non-
residential floor. area 'or slat square feet of residential' floor
area for each square foot of,arcade area within 20 feet
of the basebutidtng line, or urban open- space. boundary which
it adjoins.
(b) For through block connections .conforming to, the definition
of through block connection as. set forth in ARTICLE_ 11,
Section 2: 6 square feet of residential floor area for each
square.foot of through block connectioi area.
(c) • For urban open spaces conforming to, the definition of .urban
open space as set forth in ARTICLE II, Section 2 and receiv
ing approval by special,permit of the City Commission in
accordance with the provisions of ARTICLE XXXII -1, Section
1: 8 square feet of residential or.non-residential floor area
for each square foot of urban open space area.
(d) For that portion of total usable open space in excess of 50
percent of the lot area, four 'square feet. of residential floor
area for each excess' square foot'of usable open Space', pro-
vided that na urban, open space for which bonus floor area i s
allowed shall not be included in the total Usable open space
for purposes 'of determining the excesa•.usable open :,pace ',
eligible for' bonus.
Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs (1), (2) and (3) of,,,
this Section, total, floor area ratios including all, premiums 'shall not
exceed. the limits .setforth as follows:
(a) For non-'residential'buildings or portions of'Uuildings: 2.4...
(b) For residential buildings or portions of buildingsi
(c) For entire'buildings which Include both- residential and non-
residential portions: 6. 0.
(4)
Section 9: Usable Open Space
For each dwelling unit a minimum of 120 square feet of usable open, HpRoe
shall he provided on the site.. In this District, notwithstanding the pro-
visions of the definition of usable open space as set forth in ARTICLE il,
Section 2 the requirements on distribution of usable open space bylevel
are as follows
(1) At least 80 percent at ground level ornot more than 50 feet above
level.
(Z) Not more than ZO percent above a height of 50 feet.
Not less than 50 percent of total usable open space shall be landscaped
including trees and shrubbery,
LAND. OWNERS _&....DEVELOPERS.._COMMITTEE
Tibor Rollo
Chairman
Alvah Chapman
Co -Chairman
Represented by James Renbarger
Alert Aznares
Kenneth Bluh-
Armando Alejandre
Paul J. Nasrallah
June 12, 1975
.� .c -s a� �rRPI'94.0VN4�'SYim+snl&I��1't�•Y.:wsiYf..fmdw
TO
MAYOR, CITY OF MIAt1I
CITY COUNCIL OF MIAMI
MIAMI PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD
1
A group Or. dedicated
ititehs Were dhlled to task to eoUhtei and
bide the inotivatiohs to arrive at a Comprehensive . zoiiing piati tot the rteitt
decade that wottid Make . fora better and well rounded downtown Miami and a
Wholesome development ptaocess in it; whereby riot only offices and commerce
were blotting its core but sorely needed residences as well.
The findings of our Committee pointed, crystal clearly to the dire
need to induce developers to plan and bring downtown residential develop
meets. (teference hereby, is made to oir work product and report submitted
to you November 25, 19740
A downtown residential zoning district, was established (C3-D).
In it, it became apparent to our Committee that the original draft of the
planners blatantly disregarded the most important additiveof the core
City; the residential developments. Some of the regulations as proposed by
the planners were more restrictive in the core City than the ones currently
governing the outskirts of Miami. Or even in Miami, an example is the R-5
zoning that permits a 2.0 FAR while in the case of the core City, the planners
in their proposal, restrict the FAR in the.C3-D district to a mere 1.5. The
addition of such an irresponsible proposal would have, once again, duplicated
• the uselessness of the dust -gathering Doxiadis Plan and would have guaranteed
no viable residential development in the core of Miami and its support area.
Your Commission, in its foresight, appointed our Committee to seek
Milt and ififuse into the heW toning p1ahl prepated by Wallace; Moharg, tioberts,
Todd) those elements that will motivate developers to bring the resident'al
developments into dowiitoWf. Out goffiMittee worked diligently for 10 months
in behalf of out City in do`tens of workshop meetings and public hearings
for the sole recompen8e of the satisfaction that we helped to create a
better and more viable yiami._
Thus after long deliberations that ended today) June) 13, 1975,
we respectfully submit to you the following recommendations as changes to
the 03-D district that will help to create a more wholesome Miami in the
next decade.
e suggest the fo1iowifg ehahges: peixtieii1at .y ih the =3b tiihing
district.
SEGTI.0. 1_2 _(-),
Should read: "115 square feet of lot area".
SECTION., 2_(6)
Delete 2nd like from top of page 24:
SECTION 2_(6). Line 4
Should read. "10,000 square feet".
SECTION 5 (3) 2nd Line
"not operated for profit".
Should read: "1/10th the height", and at the end of the paragraph adds
"except parking".
SECTION 5 (4). Line 6
Should read "5 feet", and eliminate the rest of the sentence.
SECTION 5 (5), Paragraph B, 3rd Line
Should read: "5 feet".:5th line should read: "5 feet", and balance of
the sentence should be eliminated.
SECTION 7 (2)
Floor area ration should read: "8", instead of "1.5"•
SECTION 7 (3)
Floor area ratio should read: "10".
SECTION 8 (a) b
Should read: "10",
Should read: 1115" r
Should read: 5 square Feet".
Should read: "at least 65% at ground level or not more than $0 reet above
level.
SECTION 9 _(2)
Should read! "not more than 35 o above a height of $0 feet. Not less than
30% of total usable open space shall be landscaped including trees and
shrubbex .
MIAMI R VI1=W
ANb BAIL' Itedeittb
Published bath except 5afurday, Saftday and
Legal lloliday3
Miami, bade Coithty, florid&
S1A7t bt`. f=i.bkibA
COUNTY- bt bADE:
Refute the undersigned authority personally at*
Peered Martha brobnle, who on oath sayt that the
Is the V.P., Legal" Ads of the Miami Review end
Daily Record, a daily (except Saturday. Sunday end
Legal ,Holidays) newspaper published - at Miami In
Dade County, Florida; that the attached copy of adver-
tisement, being a Legal Advertisement or Notice In
the Matter of cit" O Ii,3liti
Notice - May ,13 f . 1976
RR: ORDINANCE NO. 8548
In the X .•X •• Court.
was published in said newspaper In the Issues of
. a... 2.Q.,...:19.16
Afflant further says that the said Miami Review
and Daily Record is a newspaper published at Miami,
In said Dade County, Florida, and that the said news.
paper has heretofore been continuously published In
Sundayend Legal Holidays) anddhas(been entered Saturday,
second
class County aFlorida.tho for post
operiod ofioneiyear
next preceding the first publication of the attached
copy of .advertisement; and affiant further says that
she has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount. rebate, commission or
refund for the purpose_ot.securing this advertisement
for publication in td neWs4ape .
20t
(SEAL)
My commission expire 1977.
worh to and subs abed before me this
May 7' At D. 19 7 6
;J
''��� r".l....'>< : t'is �.-
h3lattyr
>atb 'Florida at Largo.
(ATV. OE .MIAMI:. DARE; Ct11'N 'Y► 1'I.01til)A
i.:nAi.'S t)TtC'i : •-
MI thterr.(A *qt Mil ttnitee that nn the e daY or,�ln3-.,
1t�74 the Citg C<numlxcinu nt Mlunti. 1•turidn d trd the (o1iow--
? Ink titled utdinnhcra:
ORDI\A\CE NO. g.4
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. G571 THE
0F` M1\.tI. th CHANGING TILEiZON1 FOR AS 1FIC1.
VON. OF LOTS 12 THROUGH 16. BLOCK 1:, NELSON '
VILLA & GARDEN` OF' ED_EN: AM)) (39-2O) 'AND• UN• '
PLATTED PROPERTY .1'0 TINE NORTH AS SHOWN
ON THE MAP ATTACHED HERETO AND MAT*: A PATtT
IiEREOF'. REINO APPROXIMATELY 533 • N.E. 15T11 •'
STREET. FROM' C-1 (LOCAL COMMERCIAL) -TO C-3
(CENTRAL CUMMERCiAL) DISTRICT; AND BY.11AKING•
THE • NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE 'ZONING D1S-
TRICT. MAP 'MADE' r A PART OF THE SAID ORDINANC}I
NO. 6S71 BY REFERENCE ANi) DESCRIPTION IN ARM' •
CL1. Hi, SECTION 2 THEREOF: BY, .REPEALINn ALL'
C)RnINANCES,: CODE SECTIONS' OR PARTS THEREOF
IN ' CONFLICT;. AND CONTAINING . A SF:VERAT,ILITY
PROVISION. ,. .
' ORDINANCE' NO. 6349
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 'NO. 6S71. THE
- COMPREHENSIVE. ZONiNG ORDINANCE; FOR THE
CITY OF MIAMI: BY ADDING A SUI3-SECTION (170-11)
TO ARTICLE ' XXV. SECTION " 1. -, ESTABLISHING A
REDUCTION IN THE ZONED STREET WIDTH FOR
. SIIIPP1NG AVENUE FROM ',HIBISCUS-, STREET.,- TO .
PLAZA STREET: REPEALING 'ALL' ORDINANCES. CODE
'FICTIONS OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT INSO-
FAR AS THEY ARE IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING.',
A SEVERA1311.ITY PROVISION. "',
ORDINANcr NO:' S;50
AN ORDINANCF. AMENDING: SUBSECTIONS --(a) ..AND
t e) OF t39-5 'OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI.
FEES, FOR USE
it
OFORIDA. AS AMENDED.; MUN CIPAL SIVINIMING
F THE CITY OF MIAMI
-i'OOi.S: REPEALING' ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS;:
' OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH: CONTAIN
ING"- A SEVERABILITY PROVISION AND PROVIDING„
FOR' AN: EFFECTIVE, DATE. : .
ORDINANCE NO. "S551
AN ORDINANCE AMr'\DING . ORDINANCE NO.....S323. ;'
...ADOPTED •FEBRUARY- 10. 1976. FOR- THE :PURPOSE
OF WAIVING THE FEE FOi1 CLASSES. AT CITY PARKS`,
FOR PERSONS OVER 62 .YEARS OF :AGE WHO ARE;;'"
RESIDENTS OF THE CITY' OF'M 1AMI: PROVIDING 'A.;',
SEVERABILITY PROVISION:• REPEALING.:.►LT. ORDI-
NANCES - OR PARTS THEREOF IN • CONFLICT; AND
PROVIDING:FOit, AN EFFECTIVE DATE.;:.° 'r
'RDINANCE NO. 6352'
O
. AN EMER(W..NCY ORDINANCE 'CAKING 'APPROPRIA-
TIONS OF UNEXPENDED BALANCE OF FEDERAL
REVENUE S1IARING FINDS IN -THE SUM OF 52.667.
outi.13 FBOU THE FISCAL ,YEAR ;ENDING..S1:PTP.11111i.»,,:.
3). 1975: TO RE EXPENDED FOR. APPROVED PURPOSES.
. DURING -THE .FISCAL YEAR 1975-76: REPEALiNG.ALL;-
ORI)INANCEs IN C0NFI-ICT.;' PROVIDING,.A,,SEVERA-;'
13ILITY TROVISION.
IT. D.' SOUTHERN,
CITY CI.ERI'
Publkutlun of this ounce on" the 30' do) of Mny, *976`1 1¢4
5/30
All .itttetested Wi1l take notice that oft the 13th day of May, 1976
the. City Commission of Miami, Fiotida adopted the following titled oedittarcest
ORDINANCE NO._,
AN ORDINANCE AattoING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF
MIAMI, BY CHANGING 'THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION
OF LOTS 12 THROUGH 16,, BLOCK 1, .:ELSON V.ttLA
& GARDEN OF EDEN AND (30-20) AND HNPLATTED
PROPERTY TO THE NORTH .AS,S'i{Ot!N Oti THE MAP ATTACHED
HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF, 'BEING APPROKIMATE-
LY 535 N.E. 15TH STREET, FROM :C-j (LOCAL COMMERCIAL)
TO C-3 (CENTRAL COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT; AND BY MAKING
THE NECESSARY CHANGESIN 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.
8548
ORDINANCE NO. 8549
AN ORDINANCE' AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE
COMPREHENSIVE' ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF
MIAMI, BY ADDING A SUB -SECTION (170-13) TO ARTICLE
XXV, SECTION 1, ESTABLISHING A..REDUCTION IN THE
ZONED STREET WIDTH FOR SHIPPING AVENUE FROM
HIBISCUS STREET TO PLAZA STREET; REPEALING ALL
ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS OR PARTS THEREOF IN
CONFLICT INSOFAR AS. THEY ARE IN CONFLICT; AND
CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION.
ORDINANCE NO. 8550
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (c)
OF §39-5 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA,
AS AMENDED, CHANGING FEES FOR USE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI MUNICIPAL .,SWIMMING POOLS; REPEALING ALL.
ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT
HEREWITH; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
eikbINANd NOs
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING OP.DI ; .NCE NOs 8523,
ADOPTED PEERUAR Y 10, 19/6, F'OR tit PURPOSE
OP WAIVING THE FEE FOR CLASSES Ni, CITY
PARRS FOR PERSONS OVER 62 YEARS ORS AGE WHO
ARE RES/DENTS OP THE CITY OF MIAtMI: PRO-
VIDING A SEVERAtILITY'PROVISIOV; REPEALING
ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS THEREOF` IN CONVLICT;
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE,
ORDINANCE; NO.. : 8552
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE MAXING APPROPRIATIONS
OP UNEXPENDED EALANCE OF FEDERMJ REVENUE :SHAR—
ING PUNDS IN. THE SUM 0P $ 2, 067.096.13 FROM THE
FISCAL YEAR END/NGSEPTEMBER 30, 197S, TO $E
EXPENDED FOR APPROVED PURPOSES DURING THE FISCAL
YEAR 197 5-76 ; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CON—.
FLICT; PROVIDING A SEVER. BILITY PROVISION.
Ii ►U. SOUTHERN
CITY CLERK