The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC 1974-10-03 MinutesCITY OF MI SPECIAL COMMISSION MINUTES PART II SPECIAL MEETING-OCTOBER 3, 1974' ISLAND DISTRICT:, OF MEETING HELD ON CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 23, 1974 PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OFTY THE HALLITY CLERK CI H. D. SOUTHERN CITY CLERK RALPH G. ONGIE ASSISTANT CITY CLERK ITEM NO, SUBJECT 1NOEX MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION NO. PAGE NO 1. 2. 3. SPECIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTFICTS Biscayne Bay at Mouth of Miami River CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION Claughton or Burlingame Island METRO "BLUE DASH" CONTRA -FLOW BUS SERVICE Temporary trust account to pay off -duty officers for providing traffic control ESTABLISHING DATE OF ARMISTICE DAY November 11, 1974 FIRST READING Page 16 FIRST READING Page 35 FIRST READING Page 40 RES.74-1096 MOT.74-1097 1===41: 41 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA On the 3rd day of October, 1974, the City Commission of Miami, Florida met at its regular meeting place in said city in Special Session to consider business of public import. The meeting was called t) order at 6:05 o'clock P.M. by Mayor Maurice A. Ferre with t.ze following members of the Com- mission present: Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A. Ferre Also present: P. W. Andrews, City Manager Andrew P. Crouch, Asst. City Manager John S. Lloyd, City Attorney H. D. Southern, City Clerk Ralph G. Ongie, Asst. City Clerk An invocation was delivered by Reverend Gibson, who then led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. Mayor Ferre: This is a special City Commission meeting for the establishment of special planned development districts; the special planned development district -island district, and the Biscayne Bay and mouth of Miami River. Before we get into this Mr. Burton Goldberg called me and wanted to make a brief statement. Mr. Simeon Spear: I am a certified public accountant. Our firm represents Sailboat Key Developers, which is the venture that is developing, or has been developing Fair Island. I have been requested to come before this Commission to indicate the total costs that have been incurred in connection with that development, and based on the review of the records we find that the total amount expended in connection with that development is twelve million, six hundred and fifty-three thousand, projecting the interest that will be due until the end of the year. Mr. Goldberg: The purpose of Mr. Spear coming here is the fact that the proposed bond issue is ten million dollars, and this wouldn't cover the vendors and the suppliers, and the people who have exerted their goods, plus the lenders and whatever. The total bills are twelve million, six hundred thousand dollars. Should this bond issue get passed, this is the amount of dollars it would take to purchase the island. Mr. Plummer: I think it would be inappropriate at this time to make any comment., I concurred with you to give the right to Mr. Goldberg to make this statement, and I think it behooves not only the administration but the legal department to take into con- sideration what Mr. Goldberg has said, and then have any discus- sion on our regular agenda on Thursday, so that they can come back to us with all of the legal and administrative ramifications, but I don't think it would be appropriate at this time to make any statements into the record. Mayor Ferre: Let me make into the record this statement: Number one; Mr. Goldberg did call me and inform me, I think it was yesterday, and inform me that he had been out of town during the proceedings where the City acted both on the plan as it was accepted with the modifications, which of course included Fair Isle. Secondly he informed men that in his opinion a ten million dollar bond issue would not be sufficient to resolve the amounts of moneys that were invested in the total property, and since in his opinion the appraised values were much higher than that that it would be a problem in the proceeds of --and I saw Mr. Lowell here --and Mr. Goldberg said that it would create a prob- lem in the legal fight that is forthcoming, and that of course would affect the City's posture. Now the point I am trying to make is this: That's his position, and with all due respect to Mr. Goldberg, I am not his lawyer; I have no interest in his property or anything that he is doing with it, or intends, in the past or in the future. So that's your problem. I have got nothing to do with that. I am only looking at it strictly from the City's point of view. The point of view that I am expressing here is this --and Mr. Andrews and Mr. Lloyd I want you to think about this. If we have a successful vote in November for the purchase of Fair Isle for that amount it is quite obvious that, since it is in a foreclosure procedure, that the foreclosure procedure that we would have to see the end of that procedure before we could successfully negotiate with the new owners of the property should they be successful. Now, I am sure Mr. Goldberg isn't going to permit that to happen if he can avoid it, and he may find a way to avoid it; so we might find ourselves in a situation where we have passed a bond for ten million dol- lars, but these people may not be successful; he will remain with the property, and we are back to nowhere again, you see. So I am trying to figure out a realistic way, and this is just some- thing that I think we ought to take into consideration as to what the reality of the present posture is, and that might be to take into consideration --now I don't know whether it is twelve million, six, or eleven million: three, or eleven million, four; I don't know what the figure is --but the point is that if we can get permission up to that. That doesn't mean that that's what we are going to end up with, because at that point we are going to negotiate --and then the City of Miami Commission is going to have to decide one of two things; one, we will go with the creditors of Cavet and Cavet, and let them take this thing through liquidation, or whatever it is called, and then deal with them, or in turn deal directly with Mr. Goldberg, which of course would mean them also, but it would mean other people. And that might be the safer route to take. I think it is something that we have to think about, and I think Mr. Plummer is right. This is not the time to do it, but I think this is something that on the record I wanted to state, because I think it is something that ought to be our consideration. Mr. Goldberg: In this twelve million dollars is several million dollars of money due to architects like Mr. Reboso for their work, small businessmen, suppliers, steel men, contractors, and all businessmen here in Miami who have contributed so far on this island. So it is a question of protecting our business people. Mayor Ferre: lid you say that Mr. Reboso is owed money for architectural services? Mr. Goldberg: No; architects like Mr. Reboso; Thurston Hatcher, -- I am just saying, Mr. Reboso, you are an architect. If you were in this position and you were an architect, and you were owed a hundred thousand dollars, how would you feel? And Mr. Ferre, if you were in the concrete business and you were supplying us, and we owed you three hundred thousand, how would you feel? And Rose Gordon, you are in the real estate business --- Reverend Gibson: Mr. Goldberg has a valid and very definite interest, but in view of the fact that we have invited these people here to be our guests, and this meeting was called specifically for them, I wouldn't want to impinge upon their time, and I would hope that we right now would commit ourselves to have Mr. Goldberg come here at the next meeting and present his case, along with his attorney and the appropriate parties to present his case. Mayor Ferre: I don't think a motion is necessary. I think the Manager understands that he is to schedule Mr. Goldberg at the Thursday meeting. P. W. Andrews, City Manager: Before you go to all that trouble, Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, you had better hear an opinion from the City Attorney, just in one area. Mayor Ferre: Paul, this is the reason why I am bringing it up now, so that we will get'an opinion, because the:7e may be legal ramifications to all this. Mr. Andrews: And that is, is it what you are considering now a point of changing that which might appear on the ballot? Is that what you have under consideration? Mr. Plummer: No, that's the request. Mr. Goldberg, if I understand, very simply what he is saying is he would like to see the bond issue be twelve million, six hundred thousand. Mr. Goldberg: If you are going to take the island I don't want to see my people wiped out; the people who have invested their efforts and money in this deal. They ought to be compensated. At least that's decent, and I think you all want to do what is de- cent. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Goldberg, I might in conclusion --not that I distrust you or your CPA, but I think that it would be to your benefit that you furnish to the City a copy of these expenses for the City's perusal before we make the decision, and I would sug- gest to you, sir, that you make a break -down and supply it to the City Attorney and the City Manager, and maybe copy us in. Mr. Andrews: And include the contracts that they have entered into to support these charges. Mr. Plummer: Well, I think an itemized statement. Me knows what I mean. Mayor Ferret So that nobody misunderstands, it is not a simple matter that the people of Miami vote for a bond of ten million dollars to buy Fair Isle and then the electorate is ex- pecting us to buy the property, and then all of a sudden we find ourselves in a posture that Mr. Goldberg has been able to refinance, for whatever reason, and then you are out of the pic- ture (to an unidentified person in the audience) and we are dealing with Mr. Goldberg. What I would like to see is as we go into the people to vote on this thing that we have this suc- cessfully negotiated based on the premise openly here, or on the public record before the people, that if this is success- ful we can conclude it, because I think the people are getting a little bit tired of passing bond issues and then not having sufficient money when it comes down to the wire to accomplish what the people voted to accomplish; so I don't want to go into a run around where we do sometr ing in futility. So, therefore, I would expect that by the time we get around to election day we could have some kind of an agreement on the realities, all based on the fact that Mr. Goldberg has repeatedly, and others have stated before these microphones, that that property is ap- praised in figures in excess of fifteen million dollars --and I don't know whether this is true or not. We have got to get our own appraisers to verify that, and obviously if our appraisals say it is less than that, I don't care if you have got ten mil- lion or twenty million in it, that has nothing to do with our a Braised values. • Mr. Goldberg: Well, the purpose of my coming here is so that you don't get boxed in at a ten million dollar figure that can't be hit, because the island cannot be delivered for ten million. There are too many debts against it. The figure, as of the first of this year, will be twelve, six; and appraisers, I can bring you an appraisal that is in excess of sixteen million or eighteen million dollars. Mayor Ferre: But it isn't your appraisal that counts. Mr. Goldberg: I am just saying --because you will have to make your decision prior to your inserting money for an appraisal. This island has been appraised by Bank of America for eighteen million dollars over a year ago. The Commission now took up for consideration the subject matter for which the meeting had been called. George Acton, Director of the Planning Department: To con- tinue on with our discussion which was deferred, a little bit of background information for the Commission. The United States is entering an era of land use controls that is commonly called the new zoning. This has happened mainly as a result of the awareness on the part of both the general public and our 4 OCT 31974 legislators of the need to control what happens to our urban environment. Examples of this new type of zoning are contained in planned unit developments and -- --- zoning. And today the City Commission is considering two ordinances which are an outa- growth of this type of land use control based on the Commissionb request to develop island zoning. The special planned develop- ment, or SPD enabling ordinance is legally grounded in the re- quiretent that a zoning ordinance must bear a substantial rela- tionship to the public interest. We need this type of enabling legislation to achieve the proposed controls as recommended by both the Coconut Grove Study and the Downtown Zo►ing Study. The SPD controls can either substitute completely. for all pre- vious zoning, as is the case in the SPD-1, or it can modify existing regulations, as we intend to have it do in the case of the Coconut Grove overlay district where we are recommending that tight restrictions be placed along Bayshore Drive of ten stories, and along 27th Avenue of four stories. In this case the SPD enabling legislation would allow us to come in and modi- fy all the existing underlying zoning controls. Since the last meeting on these two ordinances the Planning Department, in cooperation with the Law Department, has been working to simpli- fy the ordinances and to incorporate those recornmencations brought forth during the discussion on this ordinance by the City Commission. You have two ordinances before you; the SPD enabling legislation and the SPD Central Island District; and I will explain to the Commission how these two ordinances have been modified. On the first that you consider, the SPD, we have made it very clear in the ordinance that SPD controls can only be initiated by the City Commission. That's very clearly spelled out. It is a good point that was raised by the Mayor, and in- corporated as a major element in it. We also deleted Sections that pertain to preparation and procedures for SPD Districts, and we also deleted that section that pertained to transfer of development rights. ]: is our intention to come back later to the Commission with the transfer development rights legislation and perhaps put it in the general provisions part of the ordi- nance. Now in the case of the SPD-1, we have modified that ordinance so that the Commission can pass it by itself; it's a self-contained ordinance, or if they pass the enabling legisla- tion we will just delete those sections of the Island District that are redundant, or contained in the SPD. Are there any questions to this point? Mayor Ferre: Mr. Acton, from what I can see now, we have a new vehicle to go on; is that right? Mr. Acton: That's right. Mayor Ferre: I assume obviously that you have done this in concurrence with the City Attorney. Mr. Acton: We have worked together; yes sir. Mayor Ferre: Does this meet your requirements. In other words, the point I am trying to make on the record is do you all recommend it? Mr. Acton: Yes; it will meet our requirements. 5 OCT 31974 Mr. Ferree Nyw, Mr. Attorney, you have gone over this and you feel that the legal, from a legal standpoint this meets the requirements? John Lloyd, City Attorney: Yes, sir. May I call Your Honor's attention and the Commission's attention to one thing. What we have prepared, as you will notice in the memo, are ac- tually two enabling ordinances. NoW the first one is the ordi- nance which Mr. Acton explained about. The second one --and these are alternatives --you can pass either one, and .if you will just let me explain briefly the difference. The other one simply adds the procedural requirements, and if you wish to pass that you can pass that, you may or may not pass it with the procedural requirements. However, if you pass it with the pro- cedural requirements in your enabling ordinance, then in your subsequent SPD. District ordinances you will not have to put these procedural requirements in each successive SPD ordinance. Mayor Ferre: Which is your recommendation; that we pass them with the blanket procedural requirements? Mr. Lloyd: I would pass the enabling ordinance with the procedural requiremements in the enabling ordinance. Mayor Ferre: Lbw would you point out physically, because we have three documents here, which is which. Mr. Lloyd: All right. One is an ordinance amending ordinance No. 6871, the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinan^e, and it is a six -page ordinance if the one with the procedural re- quirements in it. The other one is a four -page ordinance. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Manager, have you read this new ordinance? Mr. Andrews: Yes I have. Mayor Ferre: Are you satisfied that this is the appropriate ordinance? Mr. Andrews: Ws I am . Mayor Ferre: Are.you recommending it? Mr. Andrews: Yes I am, and I am particularly calling atten- tion to Page 3 of 6, which is Section 2 (d), which is the most significant aspect of this ordinance, and that is that planning studies for special planned developments, SPD districts, shall be initiated only on request by the City Commission. That's an important area. None of these can be initiated without a pre- sentation first to the City Commission, and then the City Com- mission saying, this sounds reasonable; let's have the Planning Board and the Planning Staff go ahead and process this as a special planning district. Mrs. Gordon: I am in concurrence with the procedure of the enabling ordinance, and I feel, if the other Commissioners are in accord I am ready to make a motion to adopt it, but I am not making the motion at this moment. One question, Mr. OCT 31974 Acton, to you. This does not preclude you, your staff, or the Planning Board, from performing the kind of duties that we ex- pect of you, which is that you search out and make recommenda- tions for areas that need attention to this Commission. What this does by this amendment as requested by the Commission in the previous hearing is that the final decision to have these hearings, public hearings and changes, would be a decision of the Commission. But that doesn't preclude you from doing what you are supposed to do as professional planners, does it? Mr. Acton: No. If I can back up --it was made very clear to me as Director of Planning, during the time that I first worked with Mr. Reese, that the City Commission in all cases is responsible for policy, and we have always followed the guide- lines that any type of innovative approach to zoning or planning or whatever else, must first come to the City Commission so that they would be able torespond to it, at that time the Planning Department, but in this case the Planning Department and the Planning Advisory Board. What the Mayor has stated before --and I agree with him --is that he wouldn't like to see the depart- ment or the Planning Advisory Board doing a lot of unnecessary work on their own without getting some kind of policy guidance from the Commission. Mrs. Gordon: Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Mr. Acton: What I am saying is it is not us, as professional planners, from doing the and zoning that is necessary for the City of we go to any extensive work, the policy must Commission. going to preclude kinds of planning Miami, but before be st t by the Mrs. Gordon: You are not going to wait for us to go tell you what area needs to be planned, are you? Mr. Acton: No, not any more than we wait for --- out and Mr. Andrews: I think this is one instance where the Com- mission has in hand both the chicken and the egg, in that if de- velopers, or the Planning Department, or the Planning Board think that an area should have this special criteria,,will come before the Commission and present factual information, and in the judgment of the Commission you would say, then, all right, go ahead and initiate it. This in no way precludes the proce- dural aspects that follow, which this Commission then has final authority at the very end of the whole process, and that's covered further on page 5, Section 4 (f), which is the final action by the City Commission, in which the ordinance would provide that the City Commission would either grant the appli- cation, with or without modification, or deny such application after it has been returned to the Commission. Mayor Ferre: What you are saying then, Mr. Manager, is that in this document you recognize that the City of Miami Commission has both chickens and eggs. 7 OCT 21974 Mrs. Gordon: I have another question that is in the same line With this for clarification. We have engaged, or are about to engage a consulting firm to do a total comprehensive plan for the City of Miami. At what point are we, Mr. Andrews, with re- gard to the consultants --or Mr. Acton? Mr. Acton: I think I could better answer that question. We want to be very sure before we execute that contract that whatever data is required by the new Community Development Act which will entitle the City to many millions of dollars in the future is contained in that contract, so that has been one rea- son for the delay in the execution, a clarification of the federal guidelines, so it can be plugged into the contract so that when the contract is finished we hive the data necessary to fulfill the federal guidelines. Mrs. Gordon: Do those consultants have to come before this Commission every time they start a section of their plan? Mr. Acton gestured in the negative. Mrs. Gordon: No; they just go on and do their work, through the Planning Board and your department? Mr. Andrews: I am not going to enter into the contract until the Commission has ratified that this is the contract that you want me to enter into. I don't have the carte blanche auth- ority to just go ahead and enter into a contract. You have authorized me to sit down and negotiate a contract. When I get through negotiating that contract it has got to be presented to this Commission, and we may have those people here so you can raise some questions with them. And you will then give me the authority then to enter into the contract with or without modifications. Mrs. Gordon: Would that then delineate each specific area that we are going to be discussing with regard to the development of a comprehensive plan for every particular segment? Mr. Andrews: The elements of all of --- Mrs. Gordon: flow can you develop a total city-wide com- prehensive plan on a piece -meal basis? Suppose some Commission- ers don't want a certain area planned. Mr. Andrews: It's not an area that is planned.' What will be before you is a document that describes every element of the planning. process, so that we make sure that when we are finished we have a thorough and complete comprehensive plan. Mrs. Gordon: Nothing in this ordinance is going to pre- clude the completion of that total, city-wide comprehensive plan. Mr. Andrews: No. Reverend Gibson: Before we have a motion I want to raise some questions, so that when I proceed to vote I will be intelli- gent. Number one; I would like for, to know how we would get on and off any island that you have. You are about to pass an island ordinance. Mr. Acton: No. OCT 1974 Mr. Plummer: Once we get this passed, then we get to the island ordinance. Mr. Andrews: I want to make sure that Commissioner Gibson understands that what he has before him is merely enabling legislation; the authority to create districts; no matter what districts are considered; the basic authority for the Commission to entertaih and begin the creation of any district. Mayor Ferre: But the enabling legislation has great im- pact. This.is like saying, this is not pulling the trigger, but we are putting the bullets in the chamber. Let's not have any misconception about what we are doing. Mr. Ken Clifford, 4940 SW 83rd Street: My business address is Burdines, 22 East Flagler Street. I probably should talk later but I have a church meeting to go to. I am here wearing two hats. One; the downtown Miami business interests; and secondly, the new Miami Action Committee of the Chamber of Commerce. I don't have a prepared presentation, but because I have lived and fought the battle of downtown for so many years I feel that I can speak extemporaneously on it. During the past five years many good and positive things have happened to your downtown, from the educa- tional interests, such as the Dade County Community College, the cultural interests in Gusman Hall,°and the interests of safety downtown with the sodiim vapor lights that have been' installed. We have beautification; everything from palm trees cn Flagler Street to the River Walkway, which is now under construction. I feel so strongly that all of these things are fine but unless we put some life and some residents downtown we are not going to have a great downtown. Our dreams are that we will have residen- tial apartments on both the north and south sides of the Miami River. I certainly feel very strongly that the dream of Ed Claughton will come true, because what that project there will do is to bring people there; to bring life there. Mr. Plummer and I have occasionally walked the streets of Flagler Street at night, and it's a pretty dreary scene. Flagler Street at night is a pretty dreary place and not: very exciting, but once we get these things I am talking about, people living downtown, you are going to find a vibrant downtown that will rival any other major city in America. I certainly hope that this Commission w ill -- I am not smart enough to know what needs to be done, but to get some- thing done --but I certainly hope that this Commission will look favorably on any action that is necessary, because I know ten years from now you will be very proud of what you have done. Mr. James Sweeney: I am an attorney with offices at 1400 First National Bank Building. I represent Southeast Banking Corp- oration, and on behalf of my client I would like to strongly ob- ject to the passage of this ordinance at this time. I have had only a short time to review the ordinance. I think it was only drafted a short time ago, because I see, nine, thirty, seventy- four, and I take it it was drafted within the last two or three days, although I understand that a previous ordinance was drafted about two weeks ago, but now there have been substantial changes. It is our position that an ordinance of this nature, with the 9 OCI '1974 far-reaching implications it will have on the development of down- town Miami requires some further study. I, as I said, had only a short opportunity to review the ordinance and have only some cur- sory observations, but I think they are pertinent. Mr. Actor, at the beginning of his presentation, said the zoning must relate to a great extent to the public interest. Well, more specifically, as I understand it, it should relate to public health, safety, welare and morals. Paragraph one of this ordinance, on the other hand, states that its intent in part is to make development in an orderly manner consistent with the public objectives of the com- munity. Further, in paragraph C it says, in other cases where special public interest requires modification or replacement of existing zoning regulations. This causes me to ask the question: Are there two types of interests; are there public interests on the one hand and special public interests on the other? And if there are such things, then what is the difference between a public in- terest and a special public interest? These are questions that are going to come up and are going to have to be answered. I don't know. I don't like the word special interest. I think it has a bad implication; and putting public in between doesn't seem to add a whole lot. So I don't know what thzt means. Secondly, the ordi- nance, I think, contemplates a PUD development in reverse. Instead of the owner being able to come to the City and say, I have a piece of property that I would like to develop in this manner and work out with the City Planners a method by which it is to be developed, instead we have the City coming to an owner and saying, this is how we want you to develop your property. It occurs to me that the City is putting itself in a position of planning the development of a person's property. I don't think that is the way it should be. Mr. Sweeney, let me interrupt you, because that really is not the intent of this. Mr. Acton, on the record would you so state that it is not the intent for the,City to be telling property owners what to do with their property, is it? Mr. Acton: That's correct. Mr. Sweeney: Well, I am glad to hear that is correct. I don't think, Mr. Mayor, that's what this ordinance provides. As I read it-- and this would be my criticism --it provides that the City can tell an owner how his property will be developed. Mr. Acton: Yes; absolutely. Mr. Plummer: We can tell him how it can be developed. We are not telling him that he should. This City Commission always re- serves that right, through zoning and other legislation, to tell a man what he_ can do with his property. Mr. Sweeney: Well, it occurs to me that when you tell him what to do and if he can't do it that way you have confiscated his prop- erty. Mr. Plummer: You are getting confused. We are not telling you to do something with the property, but yet we do reserve the right to tell you what you can do with the property. 10 OCT :11974 Mr. Sweeney: Mr. Plummer, let's assume that we have a piece of property that's zoned R-1 for instance. Now that's telling a man what he can do with.his property. Now, let's take a bigger piece of property that has a zoning on it, but the City says, we don't like this; we think something else should be put in there, and we are going to change it around and put in streets and houses and build- ings, and this, that and the other thing. Mr. Plummer: That's true, Mr. Sweeney, but maybe you are not aware --do you know presently what the proposed island is zoned? Mr. Sweeney: I am not talking about the island. I am talking about the act. I'd like to make that clear. Mr. Plummer: Well, I'm getting to the point. The point,is that this island presently is zoned R-1, and under that kind of a concept of zoning he can do a lot more --now I am speaking in philosophy now, but it's to the issue also --what I am saying is that this City is trying to put forth an enabling ordinance so that we can see it done in a proper and orderly manner. I think it's a good step in the right direction. Mrs. Gordon: I have a question which I think will clear up the objector's viewpoint and our understanding of what we are doing. Mr. Acton, where which Commission might feel that the application should be developed under a special development plan, this doesn't mean that it is mandatory to the owner to do it under that plan. He can develop it under its current zoning, can't he? Mr. Acton: Yes. Mrs. Gordon: A11 right; so you have the choice, and.I under- stand the use of this enabling ordinance would permit certain kinds of bonuses, and transfer of certain development rights and other goodies that would come along with using this, so that an owner, in all probability would want to use this, but there would have to be an agreement by the Commissioners that you can't --- Mr. Plummer: No, that isn't tha way I read it. This is a change of zoning, and if you change the zoning that's the only thing you can do. Mrs. Gordon: This is an enabling ordinance. You are not forcing this upon a specific location. Mr. Acton: No, it's an .enabling ordinance, but.in and of itself it doesn't accomplish a change of zoning anywhere in the City. It just simply enables the--. I think one of the problems is that we are talking about the enabling ordinance and yet we keep referring to the second ordinance, which is the island dis- trict. Mayor Ferre: We are getting confused again, because we want to confuse apples and oranges, or apples and fruit. Now this one that we have before us talks about fruit. This on'here is talking about a specific kind of fruit. It's called an island zoning, or whatever it is called. So we are talking about a specific. We keep confusing one and the other, and what you are 11 OCT 319 saying is, if I understand it, Mr. Sweeney, is that you are con- cerned about the general enabling legislation. You are not here to speak against the island. Mr. Sweeney: I have nothing to say about the island. I would take X piece of property - Ma yor Ferre: Let me interrupt you. Are there any other objectors besides Mr. Sweeney to speak tonight? (Several unidentified persons in the audience responsed) Mayor Ferre: Mr. Attorney, is it possible, if we get to that point, to pass the SPD-1 Island District ordinance without passing the enabling act? Mr. Lloyd: Yes, sir; you have -- Mayor Ferre: Is it legal? Mr. Lloyd: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: How strenuously are you objecting to this? Mr. Sweeney: Well, I am here, and I think --my feeling is that it really has been rushed.through, and that further thc.ught and draftmanship should go into it. If it is not necessary to pass it to take care of the further matters before the Commission it occurs to me that there are substantial enough problems with it to at least give some time and thought to it. Mayor Ferre: How long would you need? Could you do it by Thursday? Mr. Plummer: I can appreciate that Mr. Sweeney has just come into this at the last minute, but, Mr. Sweeney, for your in- formation, sir, this has been under way I think since last April. Now, many modifications --even since our last meeting there have been many modifications, but I want to tell you, Mr. Mayor, how one Commissioner feels. If it is the motion of Mrs. Gordon --and if she doesn't, I will --I am going to offer to move this motion on first reading. Mr. Sweeney then has thirty days in which to make his thorough investigation of this and come back before or during the second reading and make any objections that he has, but I don't want to walk out that door tonight until this thing is finished. Reverend Gibson: You ought to also state that, because we pass it on first reading does not mean it will be passed on second reading; so you still have a chance. Mr. Sweeney: Of course, if you change something I think we are back at the first, though, aren't we? Mayor Ferre: Oh, no; we can change it, and it will be final at the second reading. 12 OCT 31974 • Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Acton, what you didn't answer with my question was the clarification of the application of what the enabling ordinance will permit the Commissioners to be able to do. Now, let's say somethingis zoned C-1,three or four blocks are zoned C-1, and some --let's say your recommendations to this Commission are that'it be, the four -block area be placed under this enabling act. Is that applicable? Mr. Acton: No. Mrs. Gordon: Now explain to us how this enabling ordinance will be used off of the island, because we are not talking only of islands; we are talking about upland areas, too. Now you tell us where you are going to need this. Mr. Acton: I said there are two ways to use it. Number one, it can entirely replace an existing zoning district, which is the case in Claughton Island, where it is presently zoned R-4. The second case is where you want to modify certain portions of existing regulations as they are applied to other areas of the City; and I keep going back to the downtown zoning study, where one of the recommendations is that a second level pedway be es- tablished in connection with the future rapid transit system. In that case we can overlay the many zoning districts that lie in the central area with this special planned developed overlay, and it will modify the existing regulations to that extent, but it still has to come back as an ordinance before this Commission, and the policy in the matter also be established by this Commission if they would like to use it in this manner. So in an of itself it does absolutely nothing except permit the Commission, at some future date, to use the two vehicles that the ordinance establishes for their use. Mrs. Gordon: It could combine several blocks into a planned area. That's what I said. Mr. Acton: Yes. Mr. Sweeney: I would like to ask one other question to see if I really understand what the intent of this thing is. Do I understand that given --because Mr. Plummer said you can tell us what to do with a particular piece of property --if a particular piece of property came to the attention of the Commission and an SPD was initiated on Commission action, and based on that a PUD for that property was created by the, or adopted by the Commission, based on this SPD study, that the only way that property could be developed after that point would be in accordance with what the Commission has said. Is that the intent of this? In other words -- Mr. Plummer: It's not the intent, but it is possible. Mr. Sweeney: That is the effect of it. Let's put it that way; which I really don't think is proper. Reverend Gibson: I think I misled you earlier when I said that on first reading doesn't mean we are going to vote for it on the second. Just to make sure that you don't misunderstand me; 9, OCT c? 1974 once you vote that first time I think you are morally obligated for some overriding reason not to vote again. I just want to make sure you understand that, because I don't want to mislead this public thinking now Gibson is going to vote for you on the first go -round and then on the second go -round, you know, unless there is an overriding reason. I want to make eat understood, because I think if I do otherwise it is deceptive and is misleading. the public. Mrs. Selma Alexander: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission: This item of my personal knowledge was passed by the Planning Board unanimously. In the introduction, according to the minutes, they made reference to what happened elsewhere in the country. This is enabling legislation, and I am personally very much for it. But they mode reference to areas, such as the special Greenwich Street development district in New York City. Two weeks ago I was in New York and I spent two hours with Mr. John Petit West, who published a paper on this particular item -- and I have the book --and one of the things that concerns me, and I don't know whether it should be in the enabling legislation, or in the SPD District as they will eventually come up, because I think the need for greater flexibility in large developments is evident; and I would like to quote from the article. It is a case study of the Greenwich Development, and it --zoning combined with adequate mandatory improvements and floor area bonuses to develop- ers for other improvements can achieve the type of environment for a community which the community desires with a minimum expend- iture of public funds, essentially the developers rather than the cities provide public amenities and improvements. And nowhere in this ordinance, nor in the Special District Ordinance do I see anything about these mandatory requirements or the charging back to developers for any special funds towards the impact that nec- cessary follows great development. Can this be answered? Mayor Ferre: If you want my opinion it is that that may be a valuable thing to have, but not in this ordinance. That should be a separate item altogether. Harold Greene: I am an attorney, 320 NE]Bth Street, City of Miami. As I was going to remark, I believe that the City does have that authority; to require special improvements of a public nature from developers. It's a part of the general code. I am pretty sure that if you check that out between now and the rext meeting you can find out, and if it is not in there the lady that spoke before me is quite right, you should have the authority. I just wanted to say that this is a substantial change from the ordi- nance that I read and objected to last time. I want to commend the staff of the City, particularly the City Attorney and the Planning Staff, who worked long and hard to make such a concise ordinance out of what was a very cumbersome and difficult to understand one to begin with, and we do commend them. We think they have done a tremendous job to simplify it and make it much easier for a de- veloper, or even his attorney, to look over this thing and find out what it means. I would only make some very small suggestions, and I think that they can be easily corre cted after first reading before the second. I think there is a question of what is meant on page four of the six pages of the new ordinance, which is the October 1st ordinance, the six -page ordinance, under paragraph D the second paragraph, I believe the word, if you read the third line down you will find that it reads, the board, within thirty days, subparagraph one, of receipt, and so forth. I think the 14 OCT 31974 clarification --it should read, colon, after the word board, and then State, sub -paragraph one, within thirty days of receipt of the application, and sub -paragraph two, within thirty days of termination of conferences with the applibant, and sub -paragraph three should then read, or immediately at time of request by peti- tioner. In other words, there is no reason for a thirty -day delay to occur on the third go-round.Immediately upon request of the petitioner the Planning Department can come forward with their recommendations. Mayor Ferre: You are just talking about cleaning up the legal language in there. Mr. Greene: Yes, so that there won't be a misunderstanding as to what is meant. I don't think that there is an intention that there be a thirty -day delay if the petitioner asks that it be brought up before the Board immediately. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Lloyd, did you follow that? John Lloyd, City Attorney: Yes, I understand it perfectly. I am making a note on that. Mr. Greene: Ibw it might be possible that the Planning Department will need ten days, or something like that, and I think that is something you ought to wo::k out, but I don't think it is the intention in each of these cases to indicate a full thirty -day delay. The second thing is in paragraph four on the same page the question of residential character of the SPD District and desirable character of any adjoining residential area --and I am thinking specifically of districts which may not adjoin residential areas, or an SPD District which may not be residential. So I think those words don't belong. I think that should be clarified. Paragraph five, the only word that bothers me is the word conform- ity; conformity with the development with applicable zoning or other regulations. Mr. Plummer: Page four, paragraph five under D. Mayor Ferre: What's your objection to that? Mr. Greene: I just think that it is not clear. Mayor Ferre: How would you suggest that it be clarified? Mr. Greene: I really don't have any language to give you at this time, but I think that within the next thirty days cer- tainly I'd be able to --- Mrs. Gordon: Right; by the time the second reading takes place. Mr. Greene: I just read this tonight. This isthe first time I have seen this one. Mayor Ferre; Would you discuss this, then, with Mr. Lloyd? Mr. Greene: I'd be happy to. I think he understands what I am driving at. 15 OCT 31974 Mayor Ferre: Anything else? Mr. Greene: And the only other thing I would request is on page five of six, following the words, transmitted to the City Commission, on the third line from the bottom at the very top of the page; line number fikre, between five and six up at the very top of page five. I know it is customary to do it in written form, and I would suggest that the words in written form be ad- ded there, so that there won't be any question about how it should be sent. I think this will go a long way in providing a method for implementing these planning districts, and I disagree with the other learned counsel who just read from this a few minutes ago. The City Commission will be the only authority by which this is done, and I think the public in this City has reposed in this Commission the power and authority and the need to do this, and the public has given you their full confidence, and I think that's where it should always rest; in the hands of the elected public officials. Unidentified person: My name is Bob . I am from Tulsa, Oklahoma, and I am the Manager of Claughton Island, and we support the ordinance. Thereupon an ordinance entitled - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COM- PREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY ADDING TO THE GENERAL PROVISIONS, ARTICLE IV, A NEW SECTION 43, ENTITLED "SPECIAL PLANNED DEVELOP- MENT DISTRICTS" PROVIDING FOR (1) INTENT, (2) SPD DISTRICTS, WHERE PERMITTED, (3) EFFECT OF SPD DIS- TRICT DESIGNATION, (4) PROCEDURES FOR SECURING AP- PROVAL OF A SPECIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICA- TION, (5) VARIATIONS FROM GENERAL REGULATIONS AP- PLYING TO A SPECIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (SPD) DISTRICT, AND (60 CONFLICTS WITH OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AS HEREINAFTER SET FORTH; REVEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT, INSOFAR AS THEY ARE IN CON- FLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION was introduced by Mrs. Gordon, seconded by Mr. Plummer, and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote - AYES: Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon, Mr. Plummer, Mr. Reboso and Mayor Ferre. WES: None. Reverend Gibson: I don't want that gentleman to leave thinking that you don't have the right to make any suggestions further on this matter. If for some reason you could convince us that some of the terminology in here is not right and proper I can promise you from the Commission that we will listen with particularity. Mr. Andrews: Before Mr. Sweeney leaves, a point of clari- fication: you had indicated in your discussion that this would be heard on second reading in thirty days. I don't think the Commission intends to have, unless it does, a special tmmission meeting thirty days from now. The next Commission meeting is November 14th, so you might want to set that specifically as a date. 1ti OCT 31974 Mayor Ferre: All right, November 14th. The Commission next took up for consideration a proposed ordinance to include a new zoning district SPD-1 Central island District in the City's general zoning regulations. Mr. Acton: We hav,a prepared a series of transparencies to illustrate how we arrived at our recommendation for the F.P.D. 1 Central Island District as they pertain mainly to the intensity of development and certain other regulations that we placed in the recommended ordinance. I would like to start out by familiarizing the Commission once again with the existing zoning in the area. The island as we know, is zoned R4 and the mainland zoning is either RC1 or RCB, and as the Commission recalls, we had extensive hearings and these two districts - the RC1 and RCB, before they mere established for the Brickell area. The next one we are going to look at are the planning concepts that we tried to incorporate in our recommendations for any type of -- this attempt graphically to illustrate to the Commission the planning concepts that we tried to incorporate in the island district. They are self explanatory but very basically they try to relate the development of that island to the Brickell area, and what we attempted to do, especially as it relates to intensity of development and the generation of traffic: is to encourage those types of uses. of the island that will reduce peak hour traffic on and off the island across the bridge, especially in the intersection of (inaudible) avenue. The other thing that we are very interested in doing, is to provide incentives to the developer to provide certain types of public amenities. This relates back to the public interest part of the island district. We also were cognizant. of the fact that its in the interest of the City to preserve the scenic views of the island, as used in the mainland, and the various penetrations of use that should occur in the • development of the island as its used in the mainland. Very briefly, these illustrate graphically for the Commission, plus we have given you paper that explains what is showing on the wall, so you can follow it. To encourage the development of residential uses on the island, which in and by itself will meet the - one of the objectives which is to reduce peak hour traffic. We have placed in the recommendation to the Commission by a minimum of seventy five percent of uses on the island to be developed in residential use - either apartments or hotel. The second is to promote the development of the island as a self contained community __again to reduce traffic, by allowing a certain portion of the island to be developed in commercial use - to provide for the needs of the residents and visitors to the island. The third one is to encourage those lane uses (inaudible) which will not create excessive traffic congestion of Brickell Avenue, and we've done 17 this -.-again I relate back to permitted uses that we have recom- mended. We have limited the percentage of floor area devoted to commercial, especially in offices, by the restriction of 75% of the island to be devoted to residential use, and also, getting again to traffic, that the ultimate intensity of the development should be plugged in with the ability of the bridge to conduct: traffic to and front the inland in light of the peak -hour traffic. The next one is to promote open space and recreational opportun- ities for residents and visitors to the island. Now, this is quite important, because again it relates to the special public interest the City has in the development of this island. What we have recommended is that 50% of the district must be devoted to pedestrian open space. Thirty-five per cent. of the district area must be devoted to ground level pedestrian open space. In other words, landscaping --thirty-five per cent of it would be landscaped pedestrian open space. Mayor Ferre: Is the 35% part of the fifty, or is that in addition to? Mr. Acton: No; 50%, Mr. Mayor, would be achieved at second level types of urban---. We are saying thirty-five per cent. should be devoted to ground level open space. These are all ele- ments that the applicant is in agreement with in terms of the open space. And again we have a provision in there that no usable open space shall be related to the number of residents on the island by plugging in there a reference to 1. 25 acres for each 1,000 persons residing in the district. This directly relates to the master plan that has been established for Dade County in terms of neighborhood parks., The next one is to create opportunities for public access to pedestrian bayfront areas. Now here we have required that pedestrian open space at ground level be established at the water- front. In other words a continuous pedestrian open space at ground level --again the public interest part of SPD--and also plugged in a bonus incentive for a landscaped bayfront public easement which would allow residents on the mainland to enjoy part of the peri- meter of the island by establishing the type of walkway that pre- sently exists to a certain extent on the north and south banks of the Miami River in the downtown area. To protect views through the island and to promote aesthetic views from the mainland the next objective --and we tried to reach this by establishing a 25% maximum lot coverage for principal structures. In other words, making sure that the island is not covered to any great extent with buildings; limiting the amount of lot coverage by the principal buildings. And I'll skip the next one, since we have gone over that, and we have also plugged in a bonus incentive for innovative planning and design. The last one I'd like to discuss with the Commission is the goal to insure that development will be in ac- cordance with sound planning principles and will not overburden existing traffic, public utility and ecological, educational and public service systems. Now, to protect the City of Miami and the public we have in there that the allowable FAR to be determined only after review of the development concept plan and environmental impact study. This, of course, gets back to --although I am trying to separate it --the recommendation by the South Florida Regional Planning Council at this time; gets back to what their evaluation did on Claughton Island. And the last one is that the Planning Department shall review the final working drawings after the Com- mission has approved the preliminary concept plan to make sure that the final plan is in accord with what was presented to the City Commission. 18 OCT 3 1974 meg Mr. Plummer: With the final approval by the Commission. Mr. Acton: Well, you can do that, too, Mr. Plummer. We haven't done it that way because what you will be reviewing the concept plan is very detailed information as it pertains'to lot coverage and the type of development; nimber of stories and everything else, and all we are saying is that we review their final working drawings prior to the time they go to the Building Department to get the permit to make sure that what they have done in the working drawings agrees with what they presented to the City Commission, rather than going through another step. We tried to relieve the Commission as much as possible of additional work. This is an administrative procedure which we have used in other ordinances where we review the final working drawings to make sure they are in conformance with what was presented to the City Commission. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Acton, I draw your attention to the enabling ordinance which we just passed, on page five of six, line eight, sub -paragraph F, action by the City Commission. The City Commission shall either grant the application with or with- out modification, or deny such application; and that's in its final form. Mr. Acton: That's true.. That's what I am saying. They will not prepare final workinrr drawings of all phases of the de- velopment to present to the City Commission. There is a tremen- dous expense involved in that. What the Commission is reviewing is the final preliminary plans that contain all the documentation necessary for the Commission to evaluate it; and all we do is take a look at their final working drawings to make sure that they are in accord with what you have agreed upon. Reverend Gibson: And it makes sense, too. Mr. Acton: The next thing I'd like to bring to the atten- tion of the Commission is the intensity of development --- Mayor Ferre: Do you have a copy of that, on a page that we can look at? Mr. Acton: No; we can have some run off. But all this attempts to do is to show the Commission that we must establish intensity of uses that are in fact compatible with the maximum allowable intensity of use that is allowed in the Brickell Area, and not give preferential treatment to the development of an island that is off -shore. This simply shows the Commission graph- ically the amount of intensity that can be achieved in this Brickell area, in either the R-C-1 or the RCB, and what we have recommended in our ordinance to the Commission is the maximum allowable intensity of development that should be allowed on Claughton Island. It is simply stating that it must be compatible. We cannot allow intensity of development out on Claughton Island that is greater than what we allow on the mainland. That's what that does. The next one I show you --which I am sure the applicant will also show you --is the difference between the developer's proposal and what the Planning Department is recommending to the �;� OCT 31974 City Commission. We were able to agree with the applicant on virtually all parts of the'SPD-1 ordinance, with a few excep- tions, and this tells the Commission where the disagreements are, in the recommendation by the Planning Department and by the ap- plicant. The major disagreement obviously is the base FAR that would be allowed on Claughton Island. What we are stating is that it should be 2.5 maximum, so it is compatible with the Brickell area allowed intensity, whereas the applicant would like to have 3.0. The next one pertains to the definition of floor area ratio, as to how it is computed on the island. The Planning. Department in their recomzfiendation said FAR should be based on the net land on the island, which would exclude the arterials on the island. This is the same policy that exists throughout the city. In other words, we don't allow FAR to be included on ad- joining.circulation areas. The next one is --we have recommended, as I pointed out before, a requirement of 75% of the island be developed in residential. The applicant is willing to go to sixty- five. Again we feel that the primary purpose of the development of the island should be to meet one of the objectives of the down- town area, and that is to encourage, whenever possible, the es- tablishment of permanent residential development in the area, to add vitality to both the Brickell area and the downtown area. The next one pertains to the lot area per dwelling unit; and what we have recommended is that seven, fifty be established as the base figure, which relates to the existing R-4 district, but does allow up to 58 units per acre. In addition to that we had recom- mended that a bonus incentive be added where up to 15% of the density could be increased, or in other words, about 67 units per acre, provided that 10% of the units be for either low or moderate income families. We have done.this realizing that there would be a certain amount of commercia:. on the island. We felt that it should not be all devoted to Luxury type living; that there should be a place on the island for residents to live that are of either low or moderate income;. so we plugged that in as one of our bonus incentives. The last one pertains to a disagreement between the department and the developer as it pertains to a bonus floor area ratio to be given to the developer if he agrees to a pedestrian easement on the perimeter of the island. I am going to switch to the last transparency, which will graphically illustrate the recommenda- tion of the Planning Department, and what the applicant would like to see. We had recommended a maximum of .5 be -allowed for the dedication of a pedestrian easement on the island. The developer was seeking 1.0, which in effect would be the same amount of in- tensity that is presently allowed on the island. R-4 is 1.0. We felt this was far in excess of the amount of intensity that should be allowed for a bonus, and we are recommending that if what amounts to about half of the island is devoted to pedestrian easements that the developer could achieve a .5 FAR; whereas what he is seeking would amount to an FAR of 1 if what amounts to about a third of the island. And that concludes my presentation, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Plummer: I have an observation and a feeling --and I spoke with the City Attorney about it this morning. My concern is this: To me the whole concept of offering bonuses is a concept of "let's swap. lbu give me something for the City and I will give you something to enhance your property." Now I called to the rest of the Commission's attention --I don't believe you were here, Mr. Mayor --that we in fact did this once down in the Brickell area --and I have got to call it by name, Mr. Alien Morris, who came before this Commission and asked for an additional story on his 20 building, and I believe it was Mrs. Gordon --and I compliment her for it --that said Oit, if you want another story what are you go- ing to do for the City? At which time we got into a bartering session, which to me is the basic concept of bonuses, and I am happy to tell you that right now the City is the owner of a mini- park, with perpetual maintenance kept ap by Mr. Morris. 3t is used by the people of the area. The point that I am trying to make is that as I recall under the bonus system the additional floor exceeded that of what was proposed in the bonuses, and had we stuck to the rules and not given him that additional floor or half of the floor this city would not be the recipient of that mini -park. My feeling on this is in the area relating to bonuses, which is page 15 and I will go on record as telling you, Mr. Mayor, that I feel that with the Urban Review Board that this is good parameters for that board on their consideration; but I do not feel that this Commission should be placed in a position of having our hands tied when we are negotiating for the good of this city. I have heard many arguments, forwards, backwards and sideways. I think it was Mr. Pancoast, who is here with us this evening, who said to this Commission once before; the point :7.s that 'I feel that this Commission shouldn't be bound by these parameters or maximum bonuses. That's the point that I am trying to make. Mr. Acton: I think the City Attorney, as well as myself, can straighten out your point; because you are not bound. The words used in here, the floor area ratio may be increased. It doesn't say shall. But even beyond that, if you will look at Section number 12 that deals with variations from regulations I want to point out to you, Commissioner Plummer, to alleviate your well taken point, because I realize that in drafting an ordi- nance you can't always foresee everything. It's section number 12. John Lloyd, City Attorney: Let me say that in my opinion I do not feel that Section 12 allows a variation from these maxi- ma that are established. I think we are going to have to buttress Section 12 to specifically include that if we have it the way the other is written. Mr. Plummer: Well, fine; you are saying no; George is saying yes, and I am saying, why not? I think that obviously George, if I can put words inOhis mouth,agrees with me that there is a good reason and can be incorporated --- Mr. Acton: Absolutely. Mr. Plummer: So it's just a matter of getting the termin- ology. I want an amendment in this that this Commission is not bound by the maximum provisions stipulated under the Section --- Mr. Lloyd: All we have to say in here is, this includes the maximum provisions --- After brief informal discussion on the proposed amendment to the ordinance, Mrs. Gordon made the following request: I am going to ask if you could consider your amendments until the second reading. I would like to become more familiar with what is in this draft. 21 Brief informal discussion on the proposed amendment oc- curred. Mrs. Gordon: I am going to tell you how I feel. I am going to feel like, if we are going to make some changes in the first one that we made we can make some changes in the second one, and we can accept it as it is tonight. If you are going to make, changes in this tonight then I am not going to go along with it, because I want to know what I am vcting on, and I want to know specifically what the ramifications are, and I have not had ample opportunity to read this thoroughly and to make judgment on it. I am willing to accept the recommendation of the Law Department and our Planning Department that the document they handed me this evening is proper and in good form and will provide the kinds of permission that we desire, but if you are going to start making any changes from that then I want to re -read this whole document and judge it on that basis. Thereupon the proposed amendment, offered by Mr. Plummer and seconded by Mr. Reboso was adopted by the following vote - AYES: Reverend Gibson, Mr. Plummer, Mr. Reboso and Mayor Ferre. NOES: Mrs. Gordon. Mr. Andrews: One other policy decision that the City Commission can determine right now; on page'three you will find under use item five, Broadcasting stations for radio and TV. It would be my recommendation to the Commission that they make it known that you will not entertain television and radio towers as part of the --- Mayor Ferre: I think that's a very good recommendation. Mr. Andrews: So there is no planning in advance, or any- thing. Mr. Plummer: I think it's a good recommendation, hilt isn't it also a fact that the FAA says where they can go and where they can't? Mr. Plummer: I'll make a motion that this be amended on article five, Broadcasting stations for radio and TV not including antennas. Thereupon the amendment, upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso, was adopted by the following vote - AYES: Reverend Gibson, Mr. Reboso, Mr. Plummer and Mayor Ferre. NOES: Mrs. Gordon. In casting her vote Mrs. Gordon made the following state- ment: I take the same objection to making changes in this docu- ment and not doing it in the first one. I vote no for the very same reason. Mayor Ferre: I think this might be an appropriate time for me to make a statement into the record. I know this is not the time for us to get into this, because eventually there will be a specific plan to be presented, but I just want to go on the record in saying this --and I say it very emphatically --I am for the concept of the development of Claughton Island in a residential vein. If I am sitting on this Commission and you come back with a plan which has a high commercial development. By that I mean 22 OCT 31974 a shopping center Of large magnitude, or a commercial development that goes further than just the serving of that particular residers- tial area, I am going to be strongly against it. I am just making that statement. I think it could be of great harm to the commer- cial area of the downtown aree as a whole. The purpose of Claughton Island, as I understand it, and what we are doing is to bring people to live near the downtown area. I think it is perfectly acceptable to have shoe stores, stationery, travel agencies, watch and jewelry repairs, optical service, hobby stores, etcetera, provided it is a matter of service to the residents of that community. If, however, the purpose of it is to bring traf- fic from the outside for this to be a commercial center per se, then I am against it, and I just want to go on the record as stating that right now. Mr. Plummer: What you are saying is, and I think we all concur, that the commercial portion sho►ld be accessory uses to the residents living on the island. Mayor Ferre: That's right, and I want to put it on the record right at this early stage, because I know that's the intent, and that's what Mr. Acton has said here, and that's what everybody has discussed, but I want you to know that this permits, by specifically saying what we can have here --you go into hotels, banks and churches and day cares and garages, and then you go in antique shops, bake shops and book stores, and so on. It opens the door for this to become a commercial development. A11 right; I just wanted to get that on the record. Are there any other amendments or changes? Mr. Plummer: If there is no one who wishes to speak --- Mayor Ferre: Wait a minute. Now for the public. Is there anybody here who wants to speak? We have heard from the proponents. Are there any opponents? Reverend Gibson: I want to make sure before we get any further that three things were made clear to me, so that we, that I can vote intelligently --and I say this out of great agony. Number one, I hope that somebody here who is an authority on the traffic could tell us whether or not we could get on and off that island. Number two, I want to make sure that since the water and sewers system was ours and we turned it over to the County that the County won't say to the developer, if we go with the develop- er, what they said recently. They told us, Oh, no, we can take care of you, and then they cut us off. You remember that? OK, I want all of that on the record. And then the third thing I want on the record is that at no time are you going to have any island development that excludes the public. Those three things. Mayor Ferre: I see Mr. Gene Sims is here, and perhaps we can call him forward and ask him if he would to make --- Reverend Gibson: And as you answer -it I want you to under- stand that I am not opposed to this development, but, Mr. Mayor, you and I attended the meeting, and if I am not --if what I am saying is not right, you just say, no, Gibson, that's not right. We went down to the Miami Library, and you remember that study 23 OCT 31974 group we had here, telling us about what was going to lappen around there by the DuPont Plaza and the First Nationa.a Bank; remember that? I just don't want --you know why I am saying this, my brothers out here who are going to put your money into this; listen to this: You saw that man named Goldberg come to that mike with heart heavy, and I am sorry you all got the public record; I have another adjective to add --you know what I mean -- his heart was heavy as"H". Now I don't want to lead you on and then later on turn back; you understand? Oh, you do understand. Let me take off my glasses to make sure. You know in the church when we think we have got a guy converted we get him to say Amen. I want to make sure you understand what I am saying. Mr. Claughton: Amen. Reverend Gibson: Brother Stack, do you understand what I mean? Oh, you don't. Well,. wait a minute. So that nobody goes from here tonight --you see I am going to find this difficult, if the State Department told us --Mr. Mayor, who was that group? I just want you to know that I am going to put your judgment against theirs. You understand? They were there raising the devil with us in this community. I want you to understand this now. And I purposely said to Mr. Andrews, you bring me a traf- fic man here to night. Bring me those people from that Water and Sewers Board, because they did us in on.a fast commitment they made, and I don't want you all to get an OK from us and then they tell you later on, well the traffic is so --man, they tell you, well you can't hook up; and you would have spent your money, man. I would have been mad as hell if that happened to me, -because I would have led you on and misled you; understand? I just want you to get on the record. Mayor Ferre: Father Gibson, I am going to recognize people to answer these three questions, but I want to point out for the record that I am not talking about -the actual place for that is in item three, rather than item two, but I am going to go ahead. Reverend Gibson: A11 right, let's take all that I said back, and when we get to item three I am going to make a state- ment. Mayor Ferre: No, I think it is perfectly all right for us to take it out of order. I just want it for the record, so that later on we don't have any legal problems on this; that this is really item three, but I don't see any harm in discus- sing it at this time. Reverend Gibson: OK, Mr. Mayor, I just want to reiterate this, because you said it earlier. You know, if they give me a piece of legislation, an enabling act, the only reason for the enabling act is that other thing I want to do. And I want to raise the question so that when I get ready to vote on number three it is in the record that the transportation people said it is OK. Mayor Ferre: Amen. OCT 3197,4 Reverend Gibson: That the sewage people said, OK, we aren't going to cut those folks off. And number three, I am going to do you like I did the man up there at Jordan Marsh. t said I will never vote for any development that inhibits, prohibits or excludes the people from access to the water. Mr. Eugene Singh, Director of the Department of Traffic and Transportation of Dade County, made the following statement: My specific answer, sir, Reverend Gibson, is OK, but. If I may I will elaborate a little bit Very briefly, our department has worked with the consultants concerned with the traff:c for this project since January. There is very little of the kind of de- tail that we worked with that hasn't been very thoroughly ex- amined. It has been one of the most thorough and professional like analyses that we have ever participated in. We commend them for their responsiveness and willingness to deal with us on things which we thought were debatable. So we agree on the basic facts that go into an analysis like this. Secondly, we have examined the traffic generation characteristics, or possi- bilities of anticipated development in the nearby area, which would also impact Brickell Avenue. We have committed our findings and our conclusions and recommendations to writing; they have been transmi:ted to the consultant and to the develop- er, the City of Miami Planning Department, and the South Florida Regional Planning Commissioner. Now the essence of what we say is this: The development will not cause severe traffic congestion if developed and/or managed in such a way that no more than eight hundred vehicles exit the island during the peak hours, specifically between five and six PM. Now then, the plan that we examined could generate more travel than eight hundred vehicles in that specific hour. However, in consider- able discussion with the developers and the management people and specialists they say that there are a number of things that can be done to control that level of of exiting volume. The mix of land use, the nature of the development is one thing. It is perfectly obvious that if it is`all office buildings you are going to generate a tremendous exiting volume at just this hour, five to six. They would all have to enter Brickell Avenue so as to disperse itself throughout the mainland. .f it is all residential, for the most part people are going to be going home, entering the island, leaving Biscayne Boulevard, leaving the mainland at that time. Those are probably the two extremes. I suspect that the logical development is some place in between. They further said that they are capable and experienced in such things as the establishment, requirement for and the management of staggered hours, which would minimize this situation; provid- ing ferry service, for example, and a type of transit service. We found no basis in our dealings with these people to say that they couldn't do that. We do conclude saying this --and it re- lates to the last item on George's (Mr. Acton) chart --if in the final analysis the plan is reviewed by you and the Planning Department --which we, incidentally, participate in --we reiterate, we see --the development will not cause severe traffic congestion, if developed and managed in such a way that no more than eight hundred vehicles exit the island during the five to six PM hour week days. Mayor Ferre: In other words, Mr. Simm, it's a qualified yes. Is that the way I understand it? OCT 31974 Mr. Simrn: That's correct. Mayor Ferre: And, of course, you will have input as they come forward with specific programs that you will say yea or nay; but you will come to this Commission, or your repre- sentatives to partake of all these discussions? Mr, Simm: At your invitation. Mayor Ferre: We are inviting you now. We are not only inviting you; we are respectfully requesting you. Mr. Simm: I'll be glad to be here, but in the meantime we work hand in hand with George (Mr. Acton). Reverend Gibson: You made a copy of that, your recommen- dation, available to all of us? Mr. Simm: They are available to you, I am sure. Reverend Gibson: Mr. I.ndrews, I'd like to hav a copy, please; so i won't come back to haunt me later. And I think the developer,, out of fairness, ought to have a copy. Mr. Simm: The developer has a copy. Mr. Plummer: Gene, let me ask one question. Is it fair -- you made mention of some kind of mass vehicle movement --is it reasonable to believe, with the development within the parameters of what we have heard or seen, that the County, within their wisdom, would see fit to run the transit service over there? I think that would be a big factor; that if you have four thou- sand people on the island, that they would run the bus system over there and have a regular bus stop. Is that good thinking? Mr. Simm: Yes. I would just say this: When you say run transit, it bothered me for a minute, but then you said bus, because I am sure you are aware that in the County is evolving the preliminary engineering and planning for a transit system which consists of probably rapid, of possibly two kinds, people movers, of possibly many kinds, some of which are buses. It is not inconceivable that the function you asked about could be a part of the public system. It could just as readily be a part of a private system and work just as well. Mr. Plummer: If I am not mistaken presently, at the in- sistence of this Commission --I won't go into the financing of it --but doesn't the mini -bus run right now as a regular stop to the Four Ambassadors, the mini -system? Mr. Simm: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: So it would just be a matter of conceivable running that right across the bridge as another stop. Mr. Simm: It's entirely_conceivable. Mr. Plummer: Well that's --I think it's important. Reverend Gibson: Let me get this on the record. Has the transit company been in conversation with these people? 26 OCT 31974 Mr. Simm: Not to my knowledge. I would guess it might be a little premature, but these are pretty thorough people. They could well have spoken to them. I don't know. Reverend Gibson: You know what I heard the other day; that sometimes you might want to eat the whole hog. What I am saying is all of us are in this thing together, and we know know that transportation is a part --will spell the success or failure of that development; and I can't see in 1S74 that we are planning such a monumental development and we 'aren't talking to the transit --or perhaps they have in mind doing it themselves, so that at least I would hope that the Miami Transit Authority would be given an opportunity to at least list.en to what is being planned and said. Mr. Simm: Perhaps I should have said that in talking will us, they are discussing with transportation planning people the point Commissioner Plummer made. Now I think if they were, let's say, in business today, it would be quite proper for them to speak to them about the routing Commissioner Plummer suggests. There is absolutely no reason why they shouldn't speak with them. I couldn't say whether they have or they have not. I agree with you entirely in principle, sir. Mr. Garrett Sloan, Director of the Department of Water & Sewers of Metropolitan Dade County: On the water question; there is now a 20-inch water main laid over to Claughton Island that was paid fot by the developers. It actually crosses the bridge; and it was designed for a 5,000 gallon per minute fire flow. It was predicated on the concept that there would be high-rise office build'.ngs. Originally that was what we heard discussed several yearu ago. However, this is quite an adequate capacity for any type of development on the island; so I don't think there is really any problem of any kind concerning water. The sewer situation is always much more restrictive. For one reason it isn't as amenable to expanding capacity to serve a given point in the system as it is to increase the capacity for water, but the sewer investigation, and has been planned thus far, to provide an average daily flow of one million gallons a day, and a peak of two million, and a 12-inch sewage force main is now installed on the bridge and was paid for by the developer there. So we feel that the situation is under control. Now we do have --and I want to take a minute to bring you up on this -- an expansion program underway at Virginia Key. We have currently the completion of what we call our first stage of expansion there, which is not intended to meet the laws that are in effect that require 90% removal, but we are now beginning to really move on the second stage, and we had forty and a half million dollars of federal funds released to us on June 29th. We took bids a week ago today on five and a half million dollars of major machinery that has to be ordered about two years in ad- vance, and we are proceeding to advertise with other parts of theexpansion. So we feel that we are now moving along. You did alude a few minutes ago to the moratorium of limiting sewage connections. That moratorium has now been lifted in conformance with the good faith bill, and we have a 10% additional capacity available to us, plus lots more restrictions and monitoring requirements, and things of that sort that we must comply with. 27 OCT 31974 Mayor Ferre: And now the moratorium is on money. Mr. Sloan: Right. So we feel that we are somewhat out of the woods and moving along now with this big program. I'd like to take this opportunity to remind you that we need to work more closely with the Commission in the next two or three months towards the acquisition of the additional land on Virginia Key necessary for the expansion of the plant. This is something that has to be resolved. Mr. Plummer: 'bu better believe it. Mayor Ferre: We have been waiting for you. Mr. Plummer: That last appraisal you put out, Garret, looked like a funny book. Mr. Sloan: I wasn't the appraiser. That's a profes- sional function. Mr. Plummer: Yes, but you are going to sign the checks. Reverend Gibson: Let MB make sure I understanu. If we were to say to these men in the morning, OK, you are saying that you could take care of them. Mr. Sloan: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: Mr. --- you had better answer the one about access to the public. That is something that I think a repre- s entative of the owner, either you or Mr. Claughton, either one, should talk to. Unidentified person from Tulsa, Oklahoma who spoke earlier: The question is will the island be in any way avail- able to the public. One of the --- Mayor Ferre: No, it goes a lot deeper than that. • Unidentified person: No island development that excludes the public was his statement. The question was you didn't want any island development that excludes the public. Isn't that what I am to speak to? Reverend Gibson: No, I am talking about the island -- you remember that big outfit we had here? Mr. Plummer: Plaza Venetia. Reverend Gibson: Yes. I said, where are you going to build it? I said, can I get to it from any point? Meaning, you see, all that waterfront would belong to the --would be accessible to the --you see, unfortunately God made green apples and God made water, and we haven't been able to make no water; you know what I mean? So what I am trying to say is I hope that water will be accessible to the public. I hope I am clear. Unidentified person: I understand what you are saying exactly. My answer, sir, is this. The ordinance as it is drafted, as you have it in front of you, provides for bonuses 28 OCT 31974 for making the water'a edge available to the public. What we anticipate doing with this Commission, the Planning Advisory Board and the Planning Department, is to negotiate, so to speak, that availability for various improvements in our pro- ject do that it is truly beneficial to both of us. Very similar, hnd in fact t think it is fair to say, the identical process that took place with the .Alien Morris development that has previously been referred to by this Commission. Now the amendment that Commissioner Plummer stated simply removes the word maximum, as I understand it, in this Commission's oppor- tunity to apply those bonuses, and we want to explore that with you. Mr. Andrews: I don't want to have Commissioner Gibson's question misunderstood; and that is that the maps that were shown you on the wall, in one instance, provided for certain accessibility of the total shoreline of the island to the pub- lic. What they were contemplating was somewhat less than what the Planning Department was hoping we could achieve, but it doesn't mean that all of the shoreline, all of it, will be avail- able to the public. A portion of it will be, as I understand it. Mayor Ferre: That's why I kept asking. Mr. Plummer: Well, of course, here again we can keep that in mind when we are talking about negotiating. That's the basis that I didn't want to be hemmed in by. If you want to give us three hundred and sixty degree access, we will think very favorably on that. Give us ten per cent. and we aren't going to look too well on that. But these are the areas that I think we ought to leave ourselves open for. Mr. Andrews: And if I may use the Mayor's favorite phrase, I think what you are trying to put these people on notice is that you individually as a Commissioner would look very favorably on a plan which gave maximum access to the public as far as that total peripheral area of that whole island. Mr. Jack Lowell, representing Cavett, Cavett and Forbes: We are currently foreclosing on the piece of property known as Fair Isle, an island in Biscayne Bay. You are consider- ing an island ordinance, but the way I read the draft there is no way that what you are considering can apply to other than one island in Biscayne Bay, and that's my objection. I think you are passing a very generous ordinance, and I think it allows tremendous flexibility on the part of the City staff and on the part of the developers to do a good job in developing it. I think that to deny those flexibilities to another island --- Mr. Plummer: Mr. Lowell, may I stop you for the sake of brevity. There is nothing that precludes this Commission initiat- ing for another island or another district. We are only speaking to one tonight, but if this Commission, in its wisdom, on behalf and for the betterment of this city, wishes to take and instigate action in this regard to Fair Isle, there is nothing to preclude it, sir. Mr. Lowell: Well, you have the opportunity by changing about three words. 29 OCT `61974 Mayor Ferrer Let me speak to that. Mr. L swell, io u are a very nice man and very talented, and you are representative of your company, and so on, but you know there is a difference between Claughton Island and Fair Island, and we could stand here all night and say anything you want, but the fact is that Fair Island is in a residential area, or in front of a residen- tial area, which is zoned for residences, and tili property is in front of downtown Miami. Mr. Lowell: Yes, sir. Fair Island has been -toned for years R-5 and this property is R-4. 15u are giving :remendous flexibility to the developers here. I think that's wise. All I am saying is I think you should convey the same consideration. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Lowell, what I am trying to say to you, sir, is if in fact you are successful in your foreclosure suit and you came before this Commission, and this gives us the latitude to listen to a request from you, that this be applied to your island you have that enabling process right now. There is nothing to preclude that. Mr. Lowell: Mr. Plummer, you passed a master plan that calls for R-3 zoning en Fair Island. Mr. Plummer: No, sir. That has not been applied. We have not developed it. There has not been any change. All we accepted was the Coconut Grove Master Plan in principle --and I made this point very clear; that. there has not been any changes of any zoning, even as suggested. Today Mr. Deen's property is still zoned R-4, and if and when this Commission and the Zoning Board hear that particular parcel, yes, conceiv- ably it will be changed, but we have not, per se, today changed any zoning in the Grove. Mr. Lowell; All I am saying is that the City staff is considering the ordinances that will then make that plan ef- fective, and at this point in time I would like to raise the question of having this bill apply to that island, and giving the same flexibility there as you are contemplating doing for Claughton Island. Mr. Plummer: I would say to you, sir, that the proper procedure, if this ordinance passes, that you then would set -- well you can't, you are not the owner now. Mayor Ferre: I am going to rule this whole conversation out of order, because it really doesn't speak to the issue as such. It only is asking that this matter be considered for another island, and I have no objections to hearing that after we vote on this. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Lowell, why don't you speak to the City Manager and he can explain it to you while we are going on. Mr. Claire Filer, 1740 South Bayshore Drive: If you will bear with me just one minute, I am here on behalf of our Bayshore Home Owners Association and the Coconut Grove Civic Club and the Tigertail Association. We have had a series of conversations with Mr. Acton with reference to the possible, to Ju OCT 31974 the possible application of this to Fair Isle. Now we have one suggestion for you to please consider as to an amendment to some of the wordings It's quite simple, and if I might please simply pass it to you, and it is in connection with Section two, use regulations. If you would please turn to that. The following specified uses may be permitted in the Central Island District. Mr. Plummer: Page 2, line 25. That's already covered, Mr. Filer. Mr. Filer: It is'covered over to page 14 to an extent. However, it is covered under the basic floor area ratio. How- ever, this ordinance permits water uses; piers, docks, fueling docks. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Filer, let me tell you where it is more broadly covered, sir, and that is that this Commission -- we are talking about page 2, line 25---oh, I see, you are coming at it through the back door --this Commissio:l reserves the right to initiate, and this Commission reserves the right of final site approval. Now, that covers it. Mr. Filer: I know it. Now this Commission; a future commission may have different ideas on final site approval, and all this does is nail --- Mr. Plummer: That's the name of the game. Mr. Filer: That may be, but I think we are offering something here --- Mr. Plummer: If another Commission thinks differently all they need to do is change the ordinance. Mr. Filer: I know that, but believe me I have been down here for the third time on this thing and we have spent a lot of time with Mr. Acton, and I understand he agrees we have got something in here to help protect the owners of thE.. mainland properties. Notice that we say that it must be compatible in terms of use with all these factors involved. The only ques- tion as I understand it Mr. Acton has is the word night lighting; to night lighting glare. Mayor Ferre: Let me ask this question , too, Mr. Filer. Mr. Claughton and Mr. ----, do you have any objection to this? I don't see that it really --- Mrs. Gordon: ?t . Acton, in the original draft of the ordinance it was my understanding that this was already in it. These things are given to us with very little time to study all t he words in it, and I assumed that it was still in here. Now I see that it is not. What else has been left out that was meant to be in it? Mr. Acton: Mr. Filer's comments are quite correct. He brought this to us after the last hearing on the SPD-1, and I reviewed it and I told him I didn't think there was any harm in adding this to the ordinance; that it would give additional protection, especially as it relates to the intent of the de- veloper, but it was not included in the draft that was prepared 3' OCT 31974 by the Law Department, and that is the Department's fault; we just didn't get it to the Law Department to include it. But it doesn't change the ordinance in any manner. Mr. Plummer: George, what he is speaking to is this sheet which you furnished us called the objectives, and you weak to that, as far as I am concerned, in the last paragraph; to insure that the developmeut will be in accord wish sound planning principles, and wil._ not overburden the ex:sting traffic, public utilities, ecological, educational and public service system. Mr. Acton: I agree with you, Commissioner Plummer. All I said is I don't see anything wrong with adding it to it, but I agree with you it is covered. We were just trying to --Mr. Filer and all of the civic groups, especially along the bay shore are concerned. We were just trying to work that out. Unidentified person: The way we would view this is that this is an amendment that would be very compatible with the Grove residential district and compatible with what needs to be done on the Claughton Island ordinance, provided that the language, except that only be deleted,and the language, to the extent that, be inserted, because otherwise you may end up putting limitations upon the development of the island which a re unnecessary and which are prohibitive. Mr. Filer: Well, then it wouldn't be compatible. Mrs. Gordon: The word compatible is in there, and you wouldn't want anything that was incompatible in there anyway. Unidentified person: I think wl.at I am doing is I am dealing in semantics, but I don't want to limit what the Com- mission has already apparently agreed would be appropriate for the island, and I would like to agree with this gentleman that the amendment is appropriate provided that we don't limit what the Commission is already dealing with. Mrs. Gordon: I want to say once again that I believed that this was already in this 25-page document that was given to me just a short time ago. Now, if it is not I would like it included. It bothers me that we have to be handed a document as big as this in this short a period of time before we are asked to act on it; I'll tell you that right now. Mr. Filer: Mrs. Gordon, when I was here the first time you heard this , I brought up the fact that we were working on s,mething, and Requested a little longer than just a week or ten days for the next hearing, because I knew Mr. Acton had to get this and print it and get it in your hands. Mayor Ferre: The point, as Mrs. Gordon well made a little while ago, is that this is the first reading, and we will have thirty days or more to read it and study it in detail. Now, what we are going to do is, hopefully we are going to amend it, and we might amend it again; I don't know. Would you like to make a motion, Mrs. Gordon? OCT 31974 Mrs. Gordon: Although in principle I objected to making amendments to this document, two have already been made; so there- fore we must make this one, because this one is one I thought was already in it. It doesn't change the intent, in my opinion, but the attorney just handed it to me, which says, except that only, be changed to, to the extent that. I am not finding any fault with the difference; does that make a difference? Mr. Filer: Then that knocks it out. You permit those uses and others, too. We are trying to limit it to uses that will be compatible to the mainland adjacent to the bridge and in the adjoining area. Mrs. Gordon: Well, then, td the extent that, would per- mit more than, accept that only? Mr. Filer: I think you should only permit such uses as are compatible with the property in the adjacent area, whether it is downtown at Claughton Island or it is up at Fair Isle. Mrs. Gordon: Would you take this, Mr. Filer, and look at it, and then tell me? Unidentified person: I don't believe that the language which I have asked the Commission to consider creates any type of dilemma at all to residential properties in the Grove section, because as long as you say, to the extent that, you are merely saying that to the extent that it is provided for under presently existing mainland land. You are not going further than what they already have down there by this type of thing. Mr. Filer: I think you are. I think you are permitting these uses, but you are not limiting it to uses that are compatible. It should be limited to uses that are compatible; and I like things cut and dried and clear in the beginning of a document. I don't like them buried over in the basis of floor area ratio. Mayor Ferre: I think you are right. Mr. Filer: This protects you from compatible uses. Mrs. Gordon: I don't think it makes any big difference, Father, at this point. We are going to go over this document by the time second reading comes around anyway, and so I'll move to include this. Mr. Plummer: I'll sego nd the motion, and if Mr. Claughton has any objections he can express them at the next hearing on this. Thereupon the motion was adopted unanimously. Mrs. Julius Alexander: At no point --and of personal know- ledge I know that the Planning Advisory Board voted four -to -three against the Claughton Island District, because call it by what- ever name you will it is Claughton Island District, or Burlingame Island. If you are going to call it Central Island District, or Island District you are literally changing the zoning ordinance to one island, and it was on this principle that we voted against it for one thing. Now, I think that the--- OCT 31974 Mr. Plummer: I hate to hear that, because if that's the only principle you voted on --- Mrs. Alexander: M►; that's not it at all. I would like to go on.: It was a question of principle, for one thing. I think that the developers may, with good reputation, come here in all good faith --and they have a great plane -but let's call it by what it is. Maybe this is a central development district named Burlingame; maybe it's a special deielopment district, or a planned area development, whatever, but you do not adopt an ordi- nance for one island. That's contract zoning. I agree with Mr. Filer. Or else it will apply to Fair Isle, which is twenty acres or above, and we were very, very opposed to this. Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Alexander, let me express my personal opinion on this. I think that there mast be in all these matters a sense of justice, and that's why when the owner of Fair Isle came to talk about it I think we have got to recognize that we have got to be just. It has got nothing to do with whether we like Burton Goldberg or don't like him, or whether he, has short hair or long hair, a beard or shaves his mustasche, or what have you. It has got to do with a sense of justice. We have got to also be just in our concepts as we deal with the City as a whole. You cannot --I know there are some people that want to stop all growth in Miami and in Dade County, but I am not one of those, and the reason why is that I think we must recognize that if you say you are going to have high-rise areas and low density areas you have to accept the premise that somewhere, someplace you are going to have to have high density areas. Now, the question is not how many people you stack, it's how you stack them together. That's what I think that the planning concept of a special planned development district is all about. Now, what we are doing, in effect, here on this Commission is we are recognizing that this concept can be applicable to Claughton Island, or Burlingame Island, and in effect what we are doing is applying it to that particular island. We may apply it to Fair Island. We may apply it to the DuPont Plaza area. We may apply it to Brickell Avenue. We may even apply it to Grapeland Heights. These are things that we will have to --this Commission --the only thing I wanted to be sure of; the only thing that I, on the record, wanted to be sure we had is that this Commission, the elected body, has the initiat- ing power and the final say-so; that's all. Mrs. Alexander: I appreciate your comments. I am not against development. I am not against high-rise, strategically placed, and I am not against the development of Claughton Island. I haven't seen the development. But I am opposed to not having the entire perimeter of this for the public. Mayor Ferre: Selma, that's not before us at this point. Mrs. Alexander: That's my point; but it is before us. It is before us, because every reference that is made is to Claughton Island. That's what I am trying to say. So let's call it what it is and deal with it as it is legally. Mayor Ferre: Claughton Island eventually has to come here with their plans and we can turn them down under this SPD District. Is that right, Mr. Acton? If we don't like what they come up with 34 OCT 31974 • with 8PD-1, can we turn it down? Can we tell them that they have got to lower this, or put that, or do some other thing? Mr. Acton: Yes; you can reject the entire plan. You can do whatever you want to in your wisdom. Mayor Ferre: Well, then, at that time I am sure you will be here and we can talk about all these things. Mrs. Gordon: Let no one misunderstand that I am in favor of planned development. I very definitely a year and a half ago asked the Planning Department, long before Mr. Claughton, or Mr. Pope, or any of these people connected with Claughtor Island came before this Commission, recognizing there was going to become a situation where we were going to have to deal with Claughton Island and have to deal with it in a proper manner. Therefore, I asked the department --and I just checked with them to see how long ago it was, and they said at least a year and a half ago, which means it could have been two years ago that we first started, thinking along the lines of planning a total community when it exists on an island. So I am not raising objections to that, and I understand Mrs. Alexander's objection, thinking that it applies only to this island. It does not. The reason why I am in favor of this amendment which I moved was because this is the controlling factor. This factor regulates the kinds of development that can take place on an island that would be compatible with the island area, and this is the only real criteria that we must live with. Having a planned development on an island means that the people living on that island have the necessities they need for daily living. They don't need major department stores, as the Mayor said before, but you do need necessities, places of necessity with regard to the kinds of living that people have to do when they are on an area like that, or else they have to go off every time they have to get a quart of milk. But it is a limited kind of commer- cial development, generally speaking. Now, the upland, or the mainland area, will regulate a great deal of the amount of com- mercial activity that could take place on an island, but evan on an island which was surrounded by residential it would be a low- rise kind of development; it would still have some small necessities of some kind to serve people that live there. Otherwise the ingress and egress of traffic would make it unbearable. Unidentified person: I'd like to state, Mayor, that on Central Island, we are in general accord with it. The Planning Department did present a slide that indicated that we had some feelings about it, which I would like to not discuss because the amendment by Mr. Plummer undoubtedly would change our opinion on much of that, and we need to reflect more on that. Thereupon the ordinance, as submitted and as modified, and entitled - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, TO INCLUDE A NEW ZONING DISTRICT, ART- ICLE XXI-3 SPD-1 CENTRAL ISLAND DISTRICT; PRO- VIDING FOR INTENT, USE REGULATIONS, MINIMUM GROSS AREA OF DISTRICT, APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES, FLOOR AREA RATIO AND BONUS PRO- VISIONS, SPECIAL LIMITATIONS ON LOT OR BUILDING SITE COVERAGE BY ALL BUILDINGS AT VARIOUS ELE- VATIONS, OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS, SPECIAL YARD 3.5 OCT 31974 • AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS, ELEVATED CIRCU- LATION ROUTES., SPACING BETWEEN BUILDINGS OR PORTIONS OF BUILDINGS, VARIATIONS FROM GEN- ERAL REGULATIONS APPLYING IN SPD-1 CENTRAL ISLAND DISTRICT, CONFLICTS WITH OTHER PROVI- SIONS OF ZONING ORDINANCE, PARKING REQUIREMENTS, AND SIGN LIMITATIONS; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT INSOFAR AS THEY ARE IN CONFLICT; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION; P.ND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE was introduced by Mr. Plummer, seconded by Mr. Reboso, and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote - AYES: Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon, Mr. Plummer, Mr. Reboso and Mayor Ferre. NOES: None. The Mayor announced that all members of the Commission had copies of the ordinance before them, and that copies were available for the public. REZONING - CLAUGHTON (OR BURLINGAME) ISLAND: The Commission next took up for consideration a proposed ordinance changing the zoning classification for Burlingame (Claughton) Island from R-4 to SPD-1 classification. George Acton, Director of the Planning Department: This is the application of the SPD-1 District to Claughton Island. P. W. Andrews, City Manager: Perhaps you should ask Mr. Acton to explain what happens to this ordinance if the Commission finds that they do not have an acceptable plan, what happens to the zoning there. Mayor Ferre: I imagine it reverts to R-4. Is that right'' Mr. Acton: No, sir, it is a change of zoning. Mr. Plummer: No, sir; if they don't come up with an accept- able plan before this Commission they have two opportunities, as I see it. They either go back to the drawing boards and find a plan that is acceptable, or they have the opportunity to come back in through a new application and request that it go bac k to R-4 or some other classification, Mr. Acton: That's exactly right. Reverend Gibson: It doesn't automatically revert. Mr. Plummer: No; this is a change of zoning. Reverend Gibson: All right; I hope you all are fully cog- nizant of what was said. I don't misunderstand it, but I want you all to understand it, because I get real up -tight when the public comes and says, you know, when we have these able, brilliant educated people, and they come up and say, you know, we didn't really understand it; so let's make sure you under- stand what Mr. Plummer just read into the record. 3G OCT 31974 Mr. Edward Claughton: I apologize, Mayor and Commissioners• We were conferring, and I think Father has a good point. If you don't mind, we would like to have the City Attorney or Mr. Plummer repeat what was said. Mr. Plummer: It'E very simple. We are proposing at this time to change the zoning to the SPD-1. If you do not profer to this Commission a plan which is acceptable, you have one of two choices. Number two, go back to the drawing board, that's number one, and cane up with a plan that is acceptable, or, number two; you have the opportunity to go and file an appli- cation to have it rezoned to either what it was or something else. Mr. Claughton: We have no objection. Mrs. Gordon: The ordinance which was acted on first read- ing is not yet law. How can we act on this one when we don't have this one yet? Mr. John Lloyd, City Attorney: It would be better to wait until the other one is passed on second reading. .')f course, actually neither one will be effective until thirty days after, so it really doesn't make too much difference. Mrs. Gordon: What's your legal advice? Mr. Plummer: Well, wait a minute. All right; go ahead and answer her question. Mr. Lloyd: You can pass this one on first reading, if you wish. Then if you don't pass the second one on second reading you just done pass this one on second reading. Mayor Ferre: How can you pass something on first reading that doesn't exist? Mr. Allen Dakin: I am with the firm of High, Stack, Davis and Lazenby. I would like to state to you that the developers came to us at the very beginning in approximately May, and re- quested that we specifically research this question -and I can give you a little background myself, so that you are aware of it. Prior to coming with High, Stack, Davis and Lazenby I was the Assistant County Attorney in Volusia County, which encom- passes Deland and Datona Beach, and my primary area of respon- sibility was zoning. At their request we did research this very carefully and came to the conclusion that the City has the power on first reading to adopt all three of the ordinances, the two that you have already adopted, and this specific ordinance, provided that none of them would go into effect until after your second reading, until it is finally adopted; and the other proviso to that would be, naturally, that you would have to adopt first the enabling ordinance, second the island ordinance, and third the adoption to Claughton Island. Mayor Ferre: ilr. Lloyd, do you concur with that? Mr. Lloyd: Yes, I believe that's what I said. Only it was a little shorter. 37 OCT 31974 Reverend Gibson: Mr. L13yd, how can I accept al applioa- tion for something 1 do not rave? Somebody says to -le, Gibson, I want you to sell me some apples, and I ain't got no apples. Mayor Ferre: You can sell apples without having them in hand. Reverend Gibson: Yes. Then you say to me, you know, man, sign that contract, and then put down X number of dollars in good faith. You can't have good faith in something that you don't have. I like the apples and oranges thing. That's my line. So let me answer. What you are saying is, how can you sell me the apples if you don't have the apples. The answer is, you ain't selling me apples today; you are selling me apples in thirty days. Reverend Gibson: No, sir. Here is what you are doing. It may not materialize. And all I am saying is this: I am for -- we have come this far --and I don't believe in misleading you and saying I am going to do something that I am not going to do. I would feel far more comfortable if I had an ordinance that en- abled me and entitled me to act. To be doing other than that, somebody may really take you into court and you may really have some problems. Mayor Ferre: You see, number three is not even valid un- less number two is valid, and number two isn't valii until number one is valid; so if we pass number three today and don't pass number one it means nothing. If we pass number three today and don't pass number two it means nothing, because one is de- pendent on the other. What they are trying to do is get thirty days head start. Mr. Claughton: Father's point is well taken, but the answer is simply to say that voting on number three, Father, when you finally pass it into law, there will already be the'laws one and two; but I also call your attention to the fact that the sale of apples or anything else in the future happens all the time. If you sold me a magazine subscription for a year in monthly edi- tiors I would pay you the money now and then send you magazines for the next twelve months; so it is done all the time, and I think with your legal counsel's approval and ours, it would help us on a time basis. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Lloyd, are you advising us that legally we can pass this number three on first reading today, even though one and two have not been finalized? Mr. Lloyd: Yes. Mayor Ferre: And you can defend this in court if it should be a court case? Mr. Lloyd: '*s, sir. Mayor Ferre: And you are sure that the precedent in law has been established? 38 OCT 31974 Mr. Lloyd: What you are passing is an ordinanca amending the ordinance based upon the ,proposed SPD-1 Central ,}Island District. Note also that right in the body of the ordinance at the end it says passed on first reading by Title only this blank day. Then it is not actually adopted until the second reading; passed and adopted on second and final reading by title only. You will pass this on second reading and adopt it oh second reading only after you pass and adopt the number two ordinance, the previous ordinance. Mrs. Gordon: I think maybe we can do that to show an in- tent to do it, but I think we had better do it on emergency on second reading, be cause I don't think this first one is ---I am not a lawyer; I didn't even go to night school --but I don't think we can pass on first reading something we don't have. Mayor Ferre: But our City Attorney has given us a legal opinion on the record. Reverend Gibson: I want to say to the members• of the Commission this: I am going to abide by the legal answer I got, but morally I think it is wrong. I don't think you and I, nor any of the rest of us ought to have that public judge us on the basis of that. I don't care who wants it; all of the Chamber and all of the rest of the people. I have to live with Theodore Gibson. Elizabeth Virrick taught me something that I want to share with you tonight. I am trying to bring zoning for the first time in the black area some twenty -odd years ago, Elizabeth Virrick said this. II1 never forget this. She said, you know, you have to live with yourself, gentlemen --she was talking to Abe Aronovitz and the rest of them --there is nobody between you and that white sheet that you cover up with, and you have got to look at yourself. Now, I just can, in making the same analysis somewhere else, I remember that, you know, your wife gets in the bed with you, and I said, what I discovered most of the time she is on the side; she isn't between you and the sheet; so what I am trying to say is, I want to live with Theodore; and I say this to you: Morally I don't think --now technically it may be all right --but I want the record to reflect that I raised the ques- tion of moral issue to the counsel, and legally he says we could do it, and I am going to do what he says, because if I go•to court he has got to defend me, but I'll tell you one thing, he dog gone sure can't defend my conscience. I have got to defend that. Mrs. Gordon: Father, I am going to go along on it because I think all it does is show an intent tonight, and I want to reiterate that I believe if anyone challenges it on second read- ing, unless it is done as an emergency and read twice then that I don't think it is a valid ordinance, because we don't have this ordinance tonight; we don't have that classification. I'll vote with it because I am going to vote for the intent. Mayor Ferre: I think this: As Mitchell Wolfson is always saying, democracy is the application of --no, the changing and altering of detail without changing principle. I don't think that what we are changing on here --this is a lot of legalistic stuff, the thirty days and this and that --as long as it is legal I don't see anything wrong with it, because we can vote against 39 OCT 31974 this thirty days from now; number one. Number two; if numbers one and two on these items don't pass that's the end of it; so I don't think we are doing anything that we can't reverse or that is wrong in any way. Thereupon an ordinance entitled - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FOR THE UNPLATTED PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS "CLAUGHTON OR BUBLINGAME ISLAND", LOCATED AT : BISCAYNE BAY AT THE MOUTH OF THE MIAMI RIVER, FROM R-4 (MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE) TO THE PRO- POSED SPD-1 (CENTRAL ISLAND DISTRICT) AND By MAKING THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP MADE A PART OF SAID ORDINANCE NO. 6871 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 2 THEREOF; BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTION, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT, AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION was introduced by Mr. Plummer, seconded by Mr. Reboso, and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote - AYES: Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon, Mr. Plummer, Mr. Reboso and Mayor Ferre. NOES: None. Reverend Gibson, on roll call: I want the record to re- flect that Gibson isn't voting against the application. I am voting against the principle; that is the methodology of doing it. If it helps you for me to vote and register my protest against the methodology of doing this I '11 do whatever you say. And I want you to know I am for what you are asking, but I just believe as I have, and I want to vote No against the principle and Yes for the project. Mrs. Gordon: Well, Father, I am against the principle, be- cause I brought it up, but I just think what we are doing is simply a vote of confidence and intent; and of course I don't think it's legal. I don't care what our Law Department says about it's legal. We don't have such an ordinance. OK, but it's an intent. I'll vote with it, but if this is the real first read- ing, and we are not going to take it by way of an emergency or a second reading and a double reading on the next reading I am going to vote with the Father. Mayor Ferre: Even though it is not allowed I will permit, as the Chair, for you to change your vote, and --- Mrs. Gordon: I didn't vote yet. Mayor Ferre: I thought you voted yes. Who has voted on this? Could you tell me? H. D. Southern, City Clerk: Mr. Reboso votes Yes, and I would like for the City Attorney to clarify whether or not Reverend Gibson's vote is a Yes or a No vote. Mayor Ferre: No, don't do that. 40 OCT 31974 Reverend Gibson: That's all right; I don't mind. I want the project, because that's what you said. I just don't like the procedure, the methodology. Mayor Ferre: The man is clear. He says that he is for the project, but against this motion, and he is voting No. Reverend Gibson: The principle. I am saying Yes, but I am against the principle. Mayor Ferre: Are you voting Yes or No. Reverend Gibson: I am going to vote Yes, with the full understanding. that I just don't believe the principle is right because the lawyer tells me. Now if somebody takes you to court, Mr. Lloyd, I am going to be here saying I told you so. Mayor Ferre: OK, he votes Yes. Mayor Ferre: Now, everybody keeps saying we are voting on the principle. We are voting on the first reading of number three. Is that correct, Mr. Lloyd? Mr. Lloyd: Yes, sir. This is the first reading, item number three as written on this thing. Is that correct? I am not voting en the prin- ciple; I am voting on the facts. This is first reading. I vote yes. 2. METRO "BLUE DASH" CONTRA -FLOW BUS SERVICE - TEMPORARY TRUST ACCOUNT TO PAY OFF -DUTY POLICE OFFICERS FOR PROVIDING TRAFFIC CONTROL: The following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 74-1096 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PROPER CITY OFFICIALS TO ESTABLISH A TEMPORARY TRUST ACCOUNT THROUGH WHICH PAYMENTS FROM METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA WILL BE DIRECTLY DISBURSED TO PAY OFF -DUTY POLICE OFFICERS FOR PROVIDING TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICES FOR THE METRO BLUE DASH U.S. 1 - DIXIE HIGHWAY CONTRA -FLOW PROJECT (here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerk's office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon, Mr. Plummer, Mr. Reboso and Mayor Ferre. NOES: None. 3. ARMISTICE DAY - ESTABLISHING ON NOVEMBER 11TH FOR CITY: The following motion was introduced by Mr. Plummer, who moved its adoption: 41 OCT 31974 MOTION NO. 74.4097 A MOTION DECLARING THE POLICY OF THE COMMISSION THAT THE CITY OF MIAMI OBSERVE THE VETERANS' DAY HOLIDAY ON NOVEMBER 11, 1974 Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso the motion was adopted by the following vote - AYES: Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon, Mr. Plummer, Mr. Reboso and Mayor Ferre. NOES: None. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Com- mission at this time the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 o'clock P.M. • ATTEST: H. D. SOUTHERN CITY CLERK MAURICE A. FERRE MAYOR 42 OCT 31974 CITY OF MIAMI DOCUMENT MEETIINDEX October�� DATE:. ITEM NO. 1 2 3 DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION COMMISSION AGENDA & CITY CLERK REPORT (2 pages) TEMPORARY TRUST ACCOUNT -PAY OFF -DUTY POLICE OFFICERS -TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICES AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871-COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE -"SPECIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS" COMMISSION RETRIEVAL ACTION CODE NO. R-74-1096 0004 74-1096 0005