HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-75-0692MtiVrr
RESOLUTION NO._ 4.444_
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRRCT/NC
THE CITY ATTORNW OP THE CITY OP M1AM
TO ' Al E ALL STEPS NECESSARY TO PROCEED
AS ExPEDt'toUSb? AS POSSIBLE WITH THE
LITIGATION IN THE NATTtk OP CITY or
MIAMI VS. PLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY
COMPANY, CIVIL ACTION NO. 71.47071,
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THt FINDINGS AND
DETERMINATIONS OP THt CITY COMMISSION
AS HEREIN EXPRESSED,
WHEREAS, the City Commission reaffirms the City's
need for the acquisition of all the property between Biscayne
Boulevard on the West, Biscayne Bay on the East, the Easterly
extension of N. E. 6th Street on the South, and the Easterly
extension of N. E. 9th Street on the North; and
WHEREAS, the waterfront industrial use of a portion of
the property is presently a legal non -conforming use and will
not be legal after August, 1976; and
WHEREAS, the newly filled portion of the subject
property is now being illegally used for waterfront industrial
use in violation of the existing zoning, and the City is now
seeking an injunction against such illegal use in the Circuit
Court of Dade County, Florida; and
WHEREAS, the litigation involving the condemnation
of the entire tract has been pending in the Supreme Court of
Florida for thirteen months and the City's need for the property
is pressing; and
WHEIttAgt the City intends to press to a conclusion
the taking of the entire tract as hereinabove described, anz
WIltittAS,the Circuit Court of bade County has
determined that the City is permitted to take certain parcels
of property in the above styled cause; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has determined that it is in
the best interest of the public to proceed immediately to acquire
those parcels which it is now legally authorized to take; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission desires the City Attorney
to file forthwith before the Chief Judge of the circuit Court
a petition setting forth:
(1) the City' s intention to press to a
conclusion the taking of the entire tract as
described herein;
(2) the Florida East Coast Railway
Company's present illegal use of a portion
of the subject property;
(3) the fact that the waterfront
industrial use of a portion of the property,
which is presently a legal non -conforming
use, will be amortized and illegal after
August, 1976;
(4) a request to the court for permission
to file an immediate declaration of taking
for those parcels which the City has a
present right to take;
NOW, 'TTE%SPCREt St IT Rt8CLby TNt COM2lS8 N Off'
TI4i CITY OP MIAMI, `LC ll# A s
Section 1. The City Attorney of the City of Miami
is hereby authorized and directed to take all steps necessary
to proceed as expeditiously as possible with the litigation in
the matter of City of Miami VS. Florida East Coast Railway
Company, Civic Action No, 71-17071, in accordance with the
findings and determinations of the City Commission as herein
expressed.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22ndday of July
1975.
Atte
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
M A-Y._O R
City Clerk
MICHEL E. ANDERSON, Asst. City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:
/ latHN S. LLOYD, City Atto ey
-.3
•