HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1973-06-01 MinutesMIAMI
CITY
COM ISSION
MINUTES
Pneaenxat on by Dn. Ennea-t Ban#Qey
OF MEETING HELD ON SUN " 1 1913 p Ln9 and Zoning unc.t ion4 oo the
9 9 � �
City o 6 Miami
PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CITY HALL
H. D. SOUTHERN
CITY CLERK
RALPH G. QNGIE
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING
CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
Epoggi-slucTubRINGI
Ab
On the 1st day of June, 1973, the City Commission of Miami, Florida
met at its regular meeting place at City Hall in said City in special
session pursuant to City Commission Resolution No. 73-375 passed and
adopted May 10, 1973.
The meeting was called to order at 1:30 O'Clock P.M. by Mayor
Maurice Ferre and the following members of the Commission were present:
Messrs. Reboso Plummer Mrs. Gordon, Reverend Gibson and Mayor Ferre.
Absent: N6NE
An invocation was delivered by Reverend Gibson who then led those
present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag.
The Mayor announced the chair would recognize the presence of
Dr. Bauer, President of World University in Puerto Rico for a brief
presentation.
Dr. Bauer: Mayor Ferre and members of the Council and friends:
Its an honor and privelege to be here representing the World University
in this very dynamic and exciting place of Miami. The World University
was started in 1965 with the concept that education had to become world
oriented, that we must understand people throughout the world, learn
something about them. We must be prepared to accept the fact that all
men are brothers and so we have been going along with that concept and
also with the idea that a World University must also be expanded through-
out the world, and so we are in the process now of moving from Puerto Rico
to other places in the world where there will be centers established.
We have under consideration, this beautiful and exciting City of Miami
as one of the first places, thank you.
At this time, the key .to the City oti Miami was pnesented by the
Mayon and Commi.ssLon to Dn. Bauen.
A centt.6ieate of Appneeiatt.on was pnesented to Mn. Zatd ivan in
behati olS his ebsonts to bning SpanZbh Theatne to Miami..
PRESENTATION - OPENING STATEMENTS
Mayor Ferre announced the chair would recognize Mr. George Acton,
Director of the Planning Department for this presentation.
Mr. Acton: The purpose of this special Commission Meeting is to brief
the Commission on where the City of Miami presently stands in its efforts
to re -structure the Planning and Zoning System of the City of Miami and to
inform those members of this Commission that were not here last spring, we
are going to present a brief summary of what events have taken place since
last May to date to let you know the attempts the City has been making to
re -structure its systems.
On May 19, 1972, the City Commission passed a resolution constructing the
Law Department and the Planning Department to do a study on what could be
done to restructure the Planning and Zoning system for the City of Miami.
On May 30, 1972, the Planning Department advised the City Manager that
any attempt to change the system would require a Charter Change.
In June, 1972, the Manager did submit to the Commission a study prepared
by the Planning Department entitled "A Study of the Planning Zoning System
for the City of Miami" and in that study we did make certain recommendations
on how the City could improve its structure.
001
JUN -11973
F
The City Commission authorized the employment at that time of
Dr. Ernest Bartley to prepare what necessary charter changes would
have to be made for any election to be held in the following October
and as the Commission realizes, on October 3, 1972, the citizens of
Miami approved the proposed Charter Amendment that would allow the City
of Miami to restructure its entire system as to the —way its handles,
Planning and Zoning matters.
In november the City Commission authorized the administration to hire
Dr. Ernest Bartley for consulting services in the preparation of the
restructuring of the Planning and Zoning Systems and in January 10, 1973,
the first draft of the proposed restructuring was submitted to the Plann-
ing Department and other city departments to analyze it, make comments
and send it back to Dr. Bartley. Concurrently with this, the City
Planning Department did compile a list of various civic organizations
that could be utilized for forming a citizens task force committee to
work with the Planning Department, Law Department, Publicity Department
and Dr. Bartley in trying to restructure our system.
Based upon the review by the Planning Department, Dr. Bartley did
prepare a second draft in February 1973 which was distributed to
the Citizens Task Force Committee and this task force committee did meet
on numerous occasions both in the evening and in City Hall on saturdays
for working sessions with the Planning Department, Law Department, other
city departments and Dr. Bartley. This series of events has culminated
in the distribution to the Commission the latter part of last week and
Tuesday of this week, of the third draft, the latest proposed draft for
review and comment by the City Commission.
At this time, I would like to present Dr. Bartley who will explain
to you the contents of the proposed system that presently exists in the
third draft, Dr. Bartley:
Dr. Ernest Bartley: Mayor Ferre, members of the Commission, we are
presenting here today the consultants draft as Mr. Acton has indicated,
I should like to acknowledge the courtesies extended to me in this work
by the City Managers Office, Mr. Reese, very able assistants in the
Planning Department, Mr. Whipple and Mr. Acton, David Simpson's Office,
the Law Department, while they have not had a chance to go over this
present draft and they certainly reserve their right to make comments
on certain items which may be doubtful as to legality. The Law Department
has also extended very considerable aid to me all the way back through the
drafting of the Charter Amendments. In addition, as Mr. Acton has
indicated, there has been a citizens committee which has met a number of
times,which has provided a very considerable input into this present
draft that we are presenting to you. I acknowledge the aid of that
citizens committee. It is a very important undertaking and the draft is
the better for their work.
First of all, let me point out to you, the cover memorandum on the
document that you have in front of you refers to 2 items. These 2 items
were sent separately, the Planning Department did staple them together
as a single item. The first of the documents runs down through Page 36
and the second document, that is the document that is on top runs down
through Page 36 and the second document which is referred to is stapled
right together and starts off again with Page 1, in other words there
are two documents even though the material that appears in front of you
does seem to be 1 document.
Mr. Acton has referred to the restructuring of the Miami Planning
and Plan Implementation Machinery. I should like to say generally by
way of introduction that there is considerably more than structure here,
important as structure may be, you will find upon careful reading for
example that one of the, truly significant advances of this document
relates to the establishment of standards, standards which for the most
part, are missing in your present comprehensive zoning ordinance, standards
for the guidance of the board in reaching a decision on conditional uses,
on variances, on the rezoning of property.
Let mg very briefly just go through this document with you, don't
be worried, I am not going to take a great length of time on it but I
think we should at least point out several salient points. Overall,
the first document, the one on Pages 1 through 36, would establish a new
chapter of the City Code entitled "Planning". We are trying in this
document for the first time to get the Planning program of the City of
Miami into perspective and a great deal of the material of the larger
document indeed, the material all the way down to page 7, the middle of
page 7, speak of the city's comprehensive planning program, what is
encompassed within that term, the adoption of a comprehensive plan or
plans and the legal effect once comprehensive plan or plans have been
adopted.
002 JUN -11973
The first 61 pages attempt to set the tone and to indicate to those who
read, its effect and how important the planning program is and the
commitment which the City of Miami is taking in the implementation of
that program. Starting on the middle of Page 7, the second article of
this new chapter establishes a Planning Board and the third article
which begins on Page 11 establishes a Zoning Board.
We are familiar with the fact that one of the very real problems
which has arisen under the present setup has been the fact that your
present Planning Board has been literally overloaded with a large amount
of rezoning, conditional use, variance activity, which no matter how well
intentioned, or no matter how efficient, or how professionally qualified
the members of that Board might have been, would simply have permitted
them no time for the very important job of serving as a strong right -arm
to this Commission in the area .of long range planning.
There is then, as the document is presently drafted, a Planning Board and
a Zoning Board, and each of these boards are given functions, duties and
responsibility.in connection with the Planning Board, I call your atten-
tion on Page 7, to section 2, which sets out generally the functions,
the powers and duties of the Planning Board. Various provisions on the
subsequent pages of such a board, meetings, quorum and voting, officers
the usual types of materials that have to be a part of an ordinance
relating to the Planning Board. The Zoning Board starting on Page 11 is
a more specialized Board under this draft. It has specifically the
function of serving as the Board which will make recommendations to this
Commission, for the rezoning of property where the application for rezoning
and I say this with great care, would be initiated by a private party and
in addition, it would serve as the Board which would hear petitions for
conditional uses and petitions for variance under your comprehensive
zoning ordinance. Again, starting on Page 12, we have the general materials
dealing with such items for the Zoning Board as Officers and Voting,
Rules of Procedures, Meetings etc. Now, as we get a little further into
the Zoning Board, I call your attention specifically at this point, to
page 15 starting with line 9 where we speak first of all down to the bottom
of the page of the general powers and duties of the Zoning Board in
relation to administrative review, conditional uses, and variances.
I shall return later to the function of the Zoning Board in relation to
the re -zoning of property but this page speaks specifically to what we
call the quasi-judicial aspects of the Zoning Boards authority, admin-
istrative review, conditional uses and variance's. Then starting page 16,
and running over all of the way to page 24, a very lengthy and technical,
piece of material which deals specifically with the Zoning Board's
responsibility on variances and conditional uses. These pages establish
standards. Standards, I may add based on appropriate Florida Case law
in each and every instance. Establish standards for the Zoning Board to
use when it considers the grant or denial of variances. Standards for
the Zoning Board to use when it has under consideration, the grant or
denial of conditional uses. In addition, these pages are set out the
requirements for notice and hearing in connection with variances and the
standards for notice and hearing in connection with conditional uses.
Starting Page 24, we enter upon a part of this draft which the citizens
committee considered at great length and which I am presenting to you,
in alternate forms. Starting on Page 24 with article 4, the very contra
versial and extremely difficult problem of choosing the membership'for
these Boards. This is the only place in this document as you have it
before you at the moment, where I have used an alternative form.
You will note on Page 25, a rather extensive single space discussion of
the nature of the problem. There are 2 approaches here and the 2 alter-
natives start on the next page. One approach would be the establishment
of a nominating committee. This committee to be chosen by the Commission
certain restrictions on the Commission which the Commission if it adopts,
would vote on itself in terms of the appointment of the members of this
nominating committee. The nominating committee then being subject to
certain procedures in terms of the presentation of names for vacancies
on the Board, to the Commission and the Commission then choosing from
among the names submitted. There is some precedent for this sort of
approach in connection with the choice of judges in certain states in the
United States, the State of Missouri uses a judicial commission which
presents names to the Governor who in turn appoints from those lists of
names to vacancies in judgeships in Missouri.
003
JUN -11973
I am not aware of anyplace where a nominating committee has been used
that for the purpose that we have tried to outline it here, nevertheless
this is presented as one possible alternative starting on Page 26.
The second alternative to the method of appointment starts on Page 31,
and this second alternative preserves the traditional authority of the
City Commission to make appointments to these Boards. I would emphasize
however that in the case both of Alternative #1 and Alternative #2, that
there have been written into the draft, certain elements of qualification
for membership on the Boards;in this sense then we may say that even if
the Commission were to adopt the second alternative, its still in effect
would be establishing standards for those persons that might be :onsidered
for membership on either of the two boards. Both drafts contain that sort
of approach, both of the alternatives.
On Page 34, you will note that there is a proposal for the estab-
lishment of a new department of City Government which for want of a
better term at the moment, we are calling the Department of Hearing
Administration. At first blush, this may seem to be very new and
revolutionary. I suggest to you that it is not. This Department of
Hearing Administration is in effect, Mr. Simpson's Office, which as you
are all aware, at the present time has its basic responsibility to the
existing Planning Board and I believe I am correct that the Secretary is
appointed by the Planning Board. This would in effect transfer that
function to Mr. Reese's general area of control and would make it a
Department of Hearing Administration and with no policy making function.
It would take care of, just as it does at the present time, of the
administrative aspects of noticing and holding public hearings'both for
the Zoning Board and the Planning Board,
Let me comment briefly on the second document which again takes off
on Page 1 to Page 36 the way your material is put together. This is on
Page 1 prefaced with a rather lengthy statement of the reasons why this
is a separate document. This proposes to amend Article 30 of your
present Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. It is •necessary because of the
functions of the Planning Board and the Zoning Board. You will note when
you get an opportunity to go through it, that on Page 2 various ways in
which amendments to the zoning ordinance can be initiated, but that we
break down the responsibility of the Planning Board and of the :zoning
Board in the Hearing process on such amendments. The Zoning Board would
take the responsibility for hearing and for making recommendations to
this Commission on the re -zoning of property when that re -zoning was
initiated by a private person. This of course constitutes the bulk of
re -zoning petitions. In connection and however with an amendment to the
text, or to the schedule of district regulations in your ordinance, or
where the re -zoning of property is proposed by the City itself, I use
the illustration of the recent Brickell Avenue re -zoning. In those
circumstances, the Planning Board would hear, rather than the Zoning Board.
Most important however, I refer you to the material on Page 8 of the
second document and you can see we are getting very close to the end and
you will not have to suffer much longer. On Page 8, starting line 23,
we have set out on page 8 and 9, a series of standards which the Board
would use in connection with the rezoning of property. These standards
in each instance are base don appropriate Florida judicial decisions,again
they provide a sort of airplane pilot checklist for the Board to consider.
Not all of them will be appropriate in each and every instance, but the
Board at least has to show that they have considered or that they found
inapplicable, the various standards therein set out.
So far as standards are concerned, not only for re -zoning but as
mentioned previously in connection with conditional uses and variances,
let me report to you, that increasingly the State over, the standards
are being written in the ordinances. This indeed is one of the significant
improvements of the last 8 or 10 years in this State and I view the
standards that are found in connection with variances, conditional uses,
and in connection with the re -zoning of property, to represent one of
several significant suggested improvements in your present ordinances
and activity.
The material on Page 10 gives me an opportunity to comment a bit
about the input of the citizens committee. These people met long and
faithfully and they suffered through far of me than this Commission is
going to have to suffer this afternoon.
004 JUN'11973
I have not in this draft taken in each and every instance, the suggestions
that they made. A good many of them are incorporated in the draft.
There are several reasons of why in a given situation, I might not have
taken their suggestions. To begin with, not all of the suggestions that
the sub -committees made were ever considered by the full committee. Time
prevented that. So while I had the very fine reports of the sub -committee,
in a good many instances some of the suggestions made by the sub -committee,
had not been considered by the full group.
I have tried over the issue raised by the citizens committee, was a
controversial one to make a note or as I have done on Pages 10 and 11,
simply to reproduce the report of the sub -committee on the point involved.
Thus for example, on Page 10 and 11, you have a suggested re -drafting of
the standards for the re -zoning of property, which I made previous
reference to. We all recognize that what we are doing here today is simply
one more step in a series of steps that must he taken if eventually changes
are made in your present ordinances. CertEinly this documentas it stands
at the moment, represents work session activity. I feel very certain that
there are members of the citizens committee for example, or perhaps the
citizens committee in its entirety, there are items in this draft with
which they will not agree, and certainly knowing their industry, I am sure
that they will make those views apparent to you at some future date, as
this Commission perhaps gets into the formal public hearings.
I want to emphasize as much as I can, one other matter. This document
may appear to be more unified than it really is. Mr. Rothstein and the
Law Department will be the first to tell you that if this document were
to be adopted just as it stands now, with no changes at all, that there
would still be a great deal of work that would have to be done before it
could be finally implemented. For example: There is the question of
editing your present code for the innumerable references to your present
City Planning Board. There is the question in this document certainly
article 5 of the first part belongs Mr. Rothstein I believe in Chapter 2
in the Code which establishes City Departments. The material on variance
and conditional use which appears to constitute a kind of package here,
undoubtedly belongs as an amendment to the comprehensive zoning code.
What we have done here is a set of principles, and a good deal of language
but it would have to be codified. It would have to be edited. it would
have to he placed in its appropriate position in the City Code.
I am sure, I hope that members of the Commission will have some questions.
We will be pleased to answer them. I would like to have Dr. Montel who
was the chairman of the citizens committee. and I would like to personally
thank him for his help to me individually in the preparation of this
draft and I would like to have Dr. Mantel add any comments that he may
think are fit in connection with the document, then perhaps we can throw
the entiremeeting open to questions by the members of the Commission.
Pn..otc .to addne44 Lng the Comm.Laaion, pn. Mantel waa pubJ cafey
thanked by Mayon Fenne ion. h 4 Civic ebionta and in pant. cuJ.an tion the
input into th..a zoning a,tud y.
Dr. Murry Mantel: I would like to thank the citizens committee for the
many hours they devoted to this. The Committee started out by reviewing
the 2nd draft that Dr. Bartley had presented. In there he had given
more alternatives than he has in this draft that you have before you.
The committee felt as it went through it, it would be speeding up the
process if we broke down into 3 groups. We felt the 3 groups could then
work simultaneously, we felt that there were independent sections of the
considerations that could be considered without seriously affecting the
other and we could then meet together jointly.
3 Groups - 1 looked at the overall structure and possible alternatives
ones that Dr. Bartley had posed and the committee itself
posed a number of these. We looked at some 12 different
ways the Planning Board might break down and function.
1 group looking at the very difficult problem of how do
you select the members and what would be their qualif-
ications.
1 groups was concerned primarily with the details of
procedure, standards and important things in this new
section that is being proposed.
In a number of areas, the committee itself was unable to come to an
agreement. We were rather badly split.
005 JUN • 11973
One of these main areas was this process of selection and we thought
the best thing to do was present some alternatives and leave this knotty
problem to the Commission to resolve.
In other words, we did get almost unanimous agreement of the structure in
the draft before you.
We used a series of flow charts. We made up 7 of these with alternatives
which made about a dozen. We have copies of these available. Probably
in about 10 or 15 minutes, if you wish to take the time, we could run
over the advantages and disadvantages of each and why we discarded the
ones we discarded and Lester Pancoast in 5 minutes could give arguments
on both sides of the alternatives that we didn't settle on selection of
members. I don't know if you want to take that kind of time.
We have copies to distribute to everyone.
I would need about 10=15 minutes to run thru these structures.
Mayor Ferre: While you are setting up Dr. Mantel, I would like to
recognize the presence of Mr. Mike Martinez, Chairman of our present
Planning Board, Mr. Nathaniel Dean, Mr. Cecil Alfonso, Mrs. Mildred
Callahan and Mrs. Emeline McGraner. Also Miss Marie Anderson who has been
very interested in many things in this community and is now at FIU as
dean of University relations.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, if you don't mind, I think it would be appropriate
if we ask those persons who served so dilligently on the committee to stand
so that we may take note of who they are. There are quite a number of
them here today and I know you recognize most of those people.
They have given us so much and I applaud them and appreciate them and all
of us here applaud you for taking an interest in what's happening in the
City of Miami. Thank you for being here.
1)r. Murray Mantel: The first chart is the existing procedure as we
saw it, the advantage of this procedure is there is a lower cost than
having 2 separate boards and one of the considerations or alternatives
was to eliminate the public hearing in some cases as now for all cases, 2
public hearings arc held: 1 with the Board and 1 with the Commission and
in some framework it might be possible to leave out one of the hearings
and in this case however, some people felt that the 2 hearings provide
longer notice so if they don't hear about the first one, they can hear
about the 2nd and this is a plus. On the negative side, the most serious
problem felt is that with a city the size of Miami and with all the
problems that come in with rezoning, them just isn't time to do the
planning that is necessary. This is the major impetus for the split.
It was also felt the existing procedure throws too much detail to the
Commission. Everything that goes through the Board eventually has to
come to the Commission and the third thing, it was felt that the Board is
given a lot of responsibility and it really has little authority to go
with it under this framework.
The procedure that we ended up with is the last one, Procedure 6
and in between there, we had 5 which we might run through and see why
hese were disc rded.
Procedure is a simple split of the 1 board into 2 boards but
keeping sort of the same framework that you have now. The advantage of
course of the simple split would provide time for Planning by dividing
up responsibilities and this would be its major advantage.
The disadvantage of that was its higher cost when you have 2 boards and
a second disadvantage of this is that it does not relieve the Commission
of any detail. Everything still comes into the Commission and there is
still no authority. The Boards again have lots of responsibilities but
no authority to make any real decision. There was essentially no support
• cussion.
Pr cedure 2 actually is one that was incorporated in Procedure 6,
and so I'll save that discussion for later but lets talk about the alter-
native in procedure 6 and this deals with a variance only. There was
quite a bit of discussion about not going through the Commission with
variances and let the Board decide and if there was an appeal, it would
go directly to the Court. We felt the advantage here was that it would
relieve the Commission of this kind of decision making. On the negative
side, we felt that this is not responsive to the public in the sense that
the Zoning Board is not elected and we felt that procedures can be quite
important. Many of these variances have considerable impact on the
community and should be responsive to the people.
006
11971 A
The other thing is that it was felt important, a disadvantage is that
the appeal procedure for the small person who doesn't have a lot of
money ha:; a small problem, lets say they have a 1" variance request to
put a swimming pool beyond the setback line. That kind of a thing for
someone has to go to the expenses and rather slow process of appeal to
the Court, we felt was not desirable, that the Commission could provide
an inexpensive and rapid decision for appeal and that ought to be first
before the courts available. That alternative after discussion, had no
support.
Procedure #3.I This was the one on the Hearings Examiner to
replace the hearing examiner for rezoning requests. Keeping the Area
Rezoning and Variances etc. through the Board. The advantages here are
that it may speed the process and that it uses a highly skilled person
to make the recommendation and various reports to the Commission.
The disadvantages again briefly are that it would he a rather narrow
viewpoint. Any one person, no matter how skilled, no matter how educated,
knowledgable he may be, it represents a narrow viewpoint and where the
Board can give 5 or 7 opinions and outlook on the problem. It is also
felt that one person again no matter how knowledgable would be much easier
to pressure than would a group of people in terms of the pressures even
where the intention is proper. It is also felt that if rezoning was
done by a Hearing Examiner, that this would remove really the major
responsibilities of the Board. This is one of the functions, at least
the Zoning Board would have very little else to do of significance and
this was a concern and after discussion, surprisingly, this had no
support, though there is a lot of support in other communities.
$ Procedu e #4. 1This was another variation of the Hearing Examiner.
Some people felt, lets put one in between the Board and the Commission
and then if he approves it and there is no appeal, that it would be the
end of it. Also provide an appeal to the Commission so of course if it
went through all the routes of appeal, we would have 3 hearings and this
was felt to be very unwcildingand if the appeal to the Commission was
not provided, it would not be responsive to the people. Again the Board
and the Hearing Examiner are not responsive to the people and it has the
same disadvantages we felt as in Procedure 3 so this could get very
unweiltlink n its thing and again, no support after discussion.
Procedure ff5. (This is a different way of splitting up. If you will
notice the other procedures split the requests coming in, certain requests
going one path and requests from official sources going down the other path.
This one splits it up on the basis of rezoning in accordance with the master
plan and rezoning which is not in accord with the master plan. In other
words it would be not the source of the request but the nature of the
request that would determine which way it went. Advantages here is that
it can possibly speed the process. It also provides a 3rd path. It also
can possibly isolate spot zoning if this work and point out those things
that are really bad for the community. On the negative side however, it
involves a very difficult value judgment to determine the real nature of
the request before the hearing. This is a value judgment that would have
to be made by the Hearing Office and a very difficult one, and we have
some experience with a modificationcof this in the City of Coral Gables.
They tried to have this kind of a thing and we have seen whats happened
there because of the difficulty of the request, it tends to be getting
the benefit of the doubt to the petitioner and most things are ruled to
be, well its probably in accord with the plan. What happens is that one
of the Boards just get overloaded, in their case, the Planning Board and
they end up with no time for planning. Another serious problem is that
you don't have a comprehensive plan that's up to date right now and so
this would have to wait until you did get it updated and that is a serious
nrublggm and so nni again was discarded with no support.
P ocedure #6: Is the one that is represented in your document.
eprovide the official source for requests, What that does is o q , the ones
that would be significanttto the community, going to the Planning Board.
and this should give them time with all the other matters going to the
Zoning Board to really get some long range planning done, to re -work the
ordinance as its needed and to update the master plan of the City. These
are very urgent problems and they really need a lot of time.
The citizens request would all go into the Zoning Board and they would
fall in 2 categories. One which is a judicial type of function which is
the center group of things, the variances, the administrative interpretations
conditional use. The recommendation here was that they make the final
decision if there is no controversy. This will relieve the Commission
of a great many things. For instance a 1" setback variance for a swimming
pool came in, if the neighbors didn't object or if nobody objected to
007 JUN -11973
that request, the decision of the Board would be final and it would not
have to come to the Commission however, either side wanted to appeal it,
it would then come to the Commission. This should relieve the Commission
of many many non -controversial minor problems.
The rezoning is one of course that cannot be delegated. Its a
legislative one. That would go,through the Zoning Board pretty much as
it does now with recommendations from the Board and final decision by
the Commission with Appeal to the Court.
Surprisingly we -didn't start out, we had very heated discussions but
when we came down to the final thing, I think we had all but one person
in the committee that was in the last meeting, that agreed on this
Procedure #6 as being the one we would like to recommend. We hope you
will find it and consider it favorably.
If there is any questions, I will try to answer them briefly.
If not, Pancoast can go over the alternatives on selection as the
committee viewed them.
Mayor Perre: I think its better we hold all questions, you aren't leaving
now are you?
Mr. Pancoast-
'Mr. Lester Pancoast: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, it was my privelege
to be Chairman of Group "B" which was in charge of qualifications and
selections. My Co -Chairman was Gerald Silverman from your own Planning
Board. Through our many Saturday morning meetings through March and April,
we had a great deal' of interesting material to hammer out but the thing
the we hammered most hard on and perhaps this will be true of you as well
was the question of not how to get a new procedure, but how to get the
best people for the position of making important decisions on these two
bodies that we are setting up to separately handle planning and zoning.
The two options that we came up with, we did not choose between but
we have very strong arguments both for and against a nominating
committee. The alternate being direct selection by the Commission and
I waivered hack and forth on them myself so 1 don't have too much trouble not
weighting one side of the argument over the other.
Having a nomination committee or a selection committee has its drawbacks
and is clumsy. It also has definite advantages, and if I were in the
Commission seat, I would, i believe want a nomination committee to help
me in the difficult process of researching and finding people and recording
thdr abilities and then to offer me a selection. I am speaking now as if
I were a Commissioner, among choices which had been pre -researched in a
sense. We were fond of saying during these discussions that we were trying
to avoid political decisions, actually we really didn't mean that because
political is not a bad word depending on how you use it or intend it.
I think what we were trying to avoid in our deliberations was the less
considered appointments that sometimes in our past have occured in the City
and sometimes they have occured with very good reason or under the pressure
of time etc. The hope for proposing a nomination committee was to set up
a process which would slow down that phenomenon and make it a more care-
fully considered thing. Make it a thing whereby more people in the
community focus on the hope and need to get the right people in that role.
Its not an easy thing to do, especially with rising standards of conflict
of interest; that is conflict of interest standards which are being set
even before a conflict occurs. The man is not even able to be in a
position of possible conflict o:- interest and we were aware of the County
deliberations on these matters and the transferring of these things to
the City and it distracted us but didn't prevent us from going ahead and
deliberating these things. I notice also that I)r. Bartley's draft
mentions conflict of interest and relates to the County without fully
analyzing the problem and we feel in good company with him on that.
Obviously a legal department area which will have to be dealt with very
carefully in the final draft. But professionals roles in dealing with
these two bodies is a difficult one. I am a professional so obviously
I look at it from a professionals point of view.
Aside from the problems of conflict of interest, you do want some
kind of professional participation in the final makeup of the Board but
you are probably able to get more directly related professionals in the
nomination committee who would help to choose the people who would
actually be on the board and who would have to avoid conflict of interest.
008 JUN -11973
I hope I haven't gone into this in too a convulated a way but its very
hard to speak of in simple direct terms.
The difficulties of a nomination committee come about when you
picture yourself as a member of such a committee. You would have to
solicit from a great many directions, nominations. These nominations
could come from professional groups and should be solicited from certain
of them, and most of them I think would cooperate but, the nomination
committee will have to come up with a great many people with a great many
qualifications if this alternative is followed. Consider the initial
problem where you are looking for 2 committees, each of 7 people, and
you have to make to a Commission, 3 proposals for each position so I
believe we are talking alvut 42 people with marvelous qualifications in
this area. You can see it is not a simple matter.
Dr. Bartley I notice in his recommended draft, suggests that if such
a Commission, if it doesn't function rapidly enough or on time, the
Commission would have the alternative of selecting directly. I think then
without bearing too heavily on which way, I would suggest you go, I have
given you an idea of the size of this problem which was the largest of my
subcommittee. Thank you.
Mrs. Gordon: Would you touch on the educational seminar facet of the
recommendation as being the requirement to remain on the Board?
Mr. Pancoast: Yes indeed. In fact there are several criteria which are
listed as Dr. Bartley said with either method whether you have a nomin-
ation committee or not. In addition to that there are requirements which
are built in so that nominations, monimees or directly selected people who
actually are in the position of the 2 final boards, would be required
to go through certain processes which will help them learn in addition
to what they might already know and be more capable as Board Members.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you Mr. Pancoast. Dr. Mantel was going to make a
presentation.
Dr. Bartley: I would of course solicit from the Commission any remarks
or questions.
Mayor Ferre: We'll get to the questions in a moment. I just want to
see if all the presentations have been made.
All right now at this time the chair will recognize questions from the
floor. Come up to the microphone and state your name and address for
the record sir.
Mr. Aaron: My name is Ralph Aaron, 3275 Alamanda Street, Coconut Grove
in the City of Miami. I would like to pass a few comments by way of a
minority report of one person, myself, and I hope in doing this, I
reflect two qualities. #1 Some degree of knowledge ability with humility
and #2 the average person in this City, and not perhaps a person who either
has a special interest or a person who is tied in politically or a person
who is influential or a person who happens to be a recognized professional.
I would like to pass these comments. #1 The Committee that existed for
this study could have been much much larger because there are many
qualified dedicated and interested who were never informed about the
procedures and the activities that subsequently took place in this study
group. There were many many empty seats and they could have just as
easily been filled with these people especially from rate -payers associations
who didn't know about these studies and this particular group.
#2 The deliberations and final conculsions of this particular study group
of which I was a member, if it had consisted of a like number of persons
but not those same people could have come up with an entirely different
reflection or posture, so this is just one group and I would like you to
consider this fact that if it had been another group or a third group,
there may have been a completel,r different set of proposals and alternatives.
#3 I would like to mention is that as a minority report and proposal,
never criticize anything unless you have perhaps something better to offer
and I would like you to give consideration to what I would like to offer
because I am positively convinced that this would be the solution for
the City of Miami.
C 1 9
J U N -11973
By way of preface and preamble and perhaps you may reflect a
degree of emotionalism because I am very concerned whether its this
community I live in or any other. I believe that this has got to be
the best physical reality that we find our aspirations in, our hopes
and our happiness and its very very important that we all throw in this
input and thats why I am here and this is my proposal:
#1. That instead of splitting this into a Planning Board and
a Zoning Board, that we have a Planning and Zoning Board
just as we have now and we have a committee or board of
adjustment. This Committee or Board of Adjustment would
take care of the trivia and the kinds of things that have
bogged down the machinery of Planning and Zoning for the
almost 6 years I have had the privei.ege of being a resident
and 'a voting citizen in this community.
This Board of Adjustment would take care of special exceptions
of Variances and Conditional Uses. The Appeal would be
directly to the Court as an option or alternatively to the
Planning Board for that poor individual who can't afford to
go through the Courts. At least he has a trial with no
expense or very little expense such as applications to the
Planning and Zoning Board.
#2. The second part of the restructure would be the Planning and
Zoning Board itself. It would exist with the same name it
has now. It would conduct itself and concern itself with
planning matters and zoning matters and the zoning matters
could be a.request of an individual citizen or they could be
the request of the Commission, the Planning Board or the
Planning Staff themselves.
I am very concerned about creating monolithic and enlarged
governments and I feel that if we do it that way, we will
save this expense.
#3. I would like to point up the question of an office or department
of }fearing Administrator.
In effect we do have this in terms of staff of the Planning
and Zoning Board and to create another department of govern-
ment, I feel would be a mistake. I have had talks with the
Dade County Officials and there T have noticed that tradit-
ionally they have a structure that the Public Hearings Section
of the Building and Zoning Department provides the service
that the Planning and Zoning Board Staff are providing right
here and now and it could either be tied in with the Building
Department or it could be tied in over to the Planning Department
and traditionally as an alternative to being in the Building
Department, its in the Planning Department in terms of a combined
function of the actual processing of zoning requests and the
planning itself.
#4. I would like to bring up the question of a nominating committee
that Mr. Pancoast talked about.
I am very concerned that the nominating committee would propose
persons who may be professionals and businessmen of some
recognition but I L.m concerned about the little guy because this
community is made up mostly of the little guy and this is the
guy who can't afford even to come to a City Commission Meeting
because he loses a .days pay and T am concerned about that man
and I would like to see him get on this combined Planning .and
Zoning Board. For him to take a course in Planning and Zoning
and in Community Development, which would allow him to qualify
so that the nominating committee won't come along and appoint
this architect and that lawyer and this businessman., what about
the guy who is a welder? Or he is a bricklayer? Or he is a
small shopkeeper? I want to see that man have a right to be on
the Planning and Zoning Board.
It think this is very important to our democratic process and
I think what is proposed here in terms of the nominating
committee selecting these individuals may by-pass the little
guy getting involved in the process of government and of
community development.
ono JUN -11973
#5. I would like to make one more comment and that is the question
of the Planning Board that is proposed.
You know for the 5 years I have been attending the planning and
zoning Board meetings I have seen almost no agenda items
requested by the planning staff to consider or deliberate,
planning matters. • They almost never come up and all of a sudden
we are going to be deluged with them because we are going to have
this Planning Board.
I recall a couple of years at the annual meeting of the Planning and Zoning
Board that is required by City Charter, and I said we don't have any
planning matters coming up before this Planning and Zoning Board, you never
hear of them. All of a sudden we are going to he deluged with them. Well
lets remind ourselves of one thing. This community is 95% built up and
we got studies and overlay studies all over the place especially downtown
and I would like to emphasize again that there aren't going to be that
many planning matters before the Planning and Zoning Board that it couldn't
have the capacity within its agenda to deal with planning and to deal with
the rezoning requests that come up. I don't see the need to have these two
separate boards, two separate administrations and the additional costs to
the little guy because let me tell you something. Notwithstanding the
city raises that have come accross the hoard recently, and not withstanding
the raises that other people are getting, a lot of people are on fixed
income with small private pensions on social security and they can't
afford a bigger government. They have to tow theline and let us try to
do the same thing too on behalf of these people and there are a lot of
poor people out there who can't afford big government.
These are the things I would like you to deliberate and consider when
you finally get to the point of public hearings and you are going to decide
on the structure, the form of reorganization and the procedures of
planning and zoning in this community.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Aaron before you leave, perhaps there might be some
questions from members of the Commission if you would be so kind.
Mrs. Gordon: Dr. Bartley would you like to speak to that please.
Mayor Ferre: Before we do that Doctor -
Mrs. Gordon-, we will hear from Dr. Bartley in a moment if we can first
see if there are any questions of Mr. Aaron from the Commission.
I have one.
Mr. Aaron, I recognize your point about the dangers of getting involved
in eliteism or over professionalism and I sympathize with your point
about getting the so-called little guy involved but how do you propose
exactly to do that?
Mr. Aaron: Sir, again don't offer anything unless you have something to
really offer.
Mayor Ferre: How do you get the little guy without getting involved
in what has been criticized as political cronyism or patronage?
Mr. Aaron: Well what I would do , what I would really do, is I would
set up a course and I would have educators offer to anybody who is a
resident of this community, that they can come to this course and
these courses should be announced, not way way back in some rear section
of the newspaper but somewhere where its quite evident and anybody who
meets the qualifications as a resident of this community should be able
to take this course and if he passes that examination, I feel then his
name should be put into a pool and when a position comes up, rather
than the selection to come from a nominating committee or from the
City Commission, I think it should be just a question of drawing it out
of those people are eligible and who have met the criteria.
Mayor Ferre: All right, thank you Sir.
Dr. Bartley let me ask you this question because I think this is a matter
that we should concern ourselves with.
We have for example people. like Mrs. Bettner and Mrs. Calhoi.n and many
others who have been very interested in the process of zoning and in the
zoning itself. Now how could you get people like that to participate in
these boards without, in other words how can we not ostracize from
participation in this by pre -requirements?
011 JUN-11973
Dr. Bartley: I think Mayor Ferre that the suggestion was made in terms
of planning seminars, is a good one. I forget the date, Commissioner
Gordon, but the City of Miami for example, two years ago, had such a
seminar and in addition to several members of the Miami City Planning
Board attending, there were a considerable number of private citizens
that attended. Perhaps Mr. Aaron's suggestion translated into some kind
of evening sessions might meet his criticism that people cannot take time
off during the day. I have been in the business 20 years and there is
just no doubt that it is extremely difficult to get a lot of the average
citizen interested in planning until somebody wants to put a gasoline
station in next door to them. Members of this Commission may be political
figures and I do not use the word political in any invidious context,
far from it. Being political figures, you know how difficult it is
to get a lot of citizens interested even in very broad aspects of the
issues facing the community. I don't think the problems Mr. Aaron presents
here in the immediate context of planning is any different than the problem
that democracy faces generally in getting citizens interested generally.
Could I make one further comment, Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Ferre: It wasn't a question of getting their interest because I
think times are changing and just to show people as you have here shows
interest of concerned citizens. My question speaks more to the point not
of their interest but of their official participation.
Are you proposing in here a method in which we can select for the zoning
and planning board that perhaps do not have professional qualifications?
In other words, a professional committee, if there should be such a
committee that would select, could select people that are non-professionals.
Dr. Bartley: Absolutely Mr. Mayor, as a -utter of fact. One of the
criticism that may be made by others of the present draft is that there are
no requirements in the draft you have before you, that there must for
example, be an architect on the board. No, there is none of that in here.
When you speak of qualifications in this draft, we are talking rather about
an interest in planning and zoning and a variety of other factors.
Oh no, as I say, there will be some professionals who might criticize the
draft because we have failed to specify an architect, a real estate man,
I do think there is one other item though that we should get into per-
spective here this afternoon.
Let us understand that the slings and arrows on this draft should be
directed to me. That the errors of omission and in this draft are mine.
That this is in effect, the consultants draft into which a variety of
input including the input of the citizens committee has been inserted but
the responsibility for the draft as it appears before you is solely and
completely my responsibility and is not the report of the citizens comm-
ittee, not the report of George Acton's office or Mr. Simpson's Office,
it is under the terms of my contract with the City, it is my responsibility.
Mayor Ferre: Any other questions? The chair will recognize Mr. Rolle.
Mr. Rolle: For the record, I am Wellington Rolle, 1471 N. W. 43 Street,
Miami. I have listened to all of the comments of Dr. Bartley and Mr.
Mantel, its difficult to sit here and not express an opinion and make an
observation. It was refreshing to hear the comments of Mr. Aaron and as
I listen and read the information that is in the document, I would like
to address the issue To Dr. Bartley that you have not included in the
proposal, adequate provisions for the participation of the rank and file
citizen in the City of Miami. would like to suggest to Mr. Pancoast,
that there is no need for a nominating committee to make the selection
of names to present to this Commission for the final selection of those
7 individuals who are going to participate on various Planning and Zoning
Boards. The one thing that I do like on the cover sheet of the document
that was presented by Mr. Bartley, is the fact that in one quote you
talked about comprehensive planning. I think that there are a lot of
citizens, a lot of rank and file citizens, a lot of citizens without the
satchel of credentials that others will bring forth before this Committee
who are rhle to make decisions on what should happen in their city and
how they c n make this a better place to live.
I have personally been here many years and personally I am discouraged
at the kind of progress that we are making and here again, if those.
individuals who have appeared before these microphones say to us, that
this is going to resolve this kind of a problem, based on the information
presented thus far, that position would be unfounded.
I would take issue with you Mr. Mayor, in your expression of concern about
012 JUN-1.1973
the criticism that has been voiced about cronyism. What are you talking
about? Who is questioning the integrity of the individual rank and file
citizen in the City of Miami? Who is questioning the collective intell-
igence of the voter in the City of Miami? Why must you assume that the
voter does not have the opportunity or the ability inate or otherwise to
make decisions as to what happens in this City?
I think if in the City of Miami, we would lend our efforts and resources
and talent toward developing an adequate comprehensive plan, I think that
all of us who come before this Board and this body would be able to give
the kind of input that you could make a decision upon based on the
comprehensive plan and what the citizens feel that they want to see
developed in the City of Miami. No Mr. Mayor, I don't think and Mr. Pancoast
and Mr. Bartley and Mr. Mantel and others who share that point of view, you
have not included into your plan the opportunity or the provisions whereby
the rank and file citizen will have an opportunity to participate and as a
matter of fact, in my opinion, I think you have precluded the opportunity
for that very kind ofparticipation that I refer to, thank you sir.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you Mr. Rolle. Mr. Fannatto-
Mr. Fannatto: First I want to commend you for hiring an outstanding
consultant like Dr. Bartley.
I am president of the Taxpayers League of Dade County. As I said, Dr.
Bartley is one of the nations outstanding authority on planning and zoning.
I think that Mr. Mantel has a good reputation. I would like to say that
the city of Miami has been growing. The case load has been very numerous
that comes before the Planning Department. The time has arrived and I
have to agree with what some of these gentlemen have said, Dr. Bartley
the time is ripe, we need a separate Planning Board and a ZOning Board
and the question is, who should select these individuals?
Its very important to our community to have an up to date, intelligent
Planning Board and Zoning Board. I say here that I am not in favor of
the nominating committee because some of the people you might select for
a nominating committee may want to be a candidate on the Planning and
Zoning Board and you would be losing wasted talent, however, I do think
when these people are selected, they must have experience and it doesn't
have to be a course in experience, it has to be practical experience.
either people who have served on the board or people who have sat in the
audience and who have heard hundreds of cases. These are the people with
common sense and that's the kind of people in my estimation that can make
a good planning and zoning department. Who should be the judge, it should
be people with outstanding ability to impart their knowledge and I am
going to recommend who these people are. Who these people should be in
my estimation. We have a very outstanding Planning Department in this
City of Miami. I had the pleasure of working with him for 3 years.
We have a very outstanding Planning and Zoning Department. You have an
outstanding Secretary. We have what is known, regardless of what the
newspapers, or what people tell you, these people are dedicated, respon-
sible and experienced people. I think that all the Africans go before
the Zoning and the Planning Department and let these people with outstanding
ability to impart their knowledge select these people and they know the
guidelines and I think that they can recommend to you, the Mayor and
Commissioners people who will give us a good up to date Planning and
Zoning System in Miami, thank you.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you Mr. Fannatto. Is there anybody else who would
like to make accomment? or ask a question?
Mr. McDonald: My name is San McDonald. I live at 2789 S. W. 30 Court.
I have lived in Miami .
(Unable to understand from tape)
Indications would be that Mr. McDonald was complaining about too much
density and pollution in the air and urged common sense in future zoning.
Mayor Ferre: Anybody else who wants to ask a question?
ves Mam-
Lorraine Printz: I am Lorraine Printz, I am a realtor in Coconut Grove
2488 Inagua Avenue. I do feel that we have an outstanding Planning and
Zoning Department. They are most capable. We have no complaints from
the taxpayers about paying their salaries and I think its wonderful that
we have such talented people. I feel you need some outside assistance,
013 JUN - t 1973
The Planning and Zoning Board could set up, ask for, a backup committee
of the residents in the City and draw upon their knowledge any time they
feel they need assistance but let us leave the Planning and Zoning
Department continue as it is. Thank you.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you Mrs. Printz. Anybody else?
Mr. Pancoast?
Mr. Pancoast: I would like to make a couple of brief comments inspired
by two earlier speakers. The Committee also stumbled on the seemingly
very good idea of having professional planners to choose the people who
would be members of these boards but we get into a terrible confusion
there where people hired by governmental people an* hiring other people
and it does not cause a separation of powers which is necessary.
As to the very legitimate concern as to whether rank and file people are
prohibited from participating in this process, in these processes because
there are several kinds of them, I would say that merely being a
professional does not give you the total right to be in a position of
this kind. Either does being a member of the rank and file give you a
right to be on any of these positions. Hopefully, either professional or
non-professional has the capabilities of doing a good job and providing
leadership which these positions require.
People who are required and w;io have residual abilities or people who
for some reason or other don't have to work, should in my opinion be
involved in some kind of process so they are sitting in the audience as
somebody said, or whether its attending educational processes as a
preliminary indication that they are with the problem. We have in the
past, I am not focusing on the immediate Board, faced people who
literally did not know anything about the rather complicated processes
we are talking about. That's what we are hoping to avoid.
We think that the more careful selection should go on in terms of getting
people who are really interested and capable of doing the difficult job
which is necessary.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you Mr. Pancoast. Now, I am going to open the
meeting for questions from the Commission. Before doing that, I would
like to recommend for discussion, the following procedure on this very
important matter that we have before us.
#1 That we request the City Manager and the City Attorney to study the
latest recommendations dated the 28th of May and by the way Dr. Eartley,
we have one before us one dated May 25 which is the one we have teen
reading from but the one I got and I read is dated May 28th.
Is there some -
Dr. Bartley: No Sir, those are the two documents that are referred to
in the Dover letter.
The first document is dated 25 May, the second smaller document 28 May
and the cover letter refers to the 2 documents.
Mayor Ferre: I would like to recommend this procedure:
First that we request a careful and thorough study by the city manager
and the city attorney about the implementation of such plans, with their
specific recommendations and from the city attorney as to whether the
editing procedure which affects references to the Planning Board are
covered under the charter amendment or whether there would be any other
charter changes that would be needed to be put on the baidot in November
for changing.
Secondly: After you have done that and hopefully you can do that quickly,
I would like to Mr. Reese, provide that at the next 2 Commission Meetings
that we set 1 hour aside in the afternoon after we've finished with our
regular meeting, for this Commission to go into specific deliberations,
section by section on our own without a public hearing to discuss these
different proposals and get the consensous of the Commission as to the
direction it wants to take.
I really don't think we would really need more than 2 such occasions
after we've received Mr. Rothstein and your recommendations.
After we've done that, I would like to, and I think we can set the date
right now, to call for first a public hearing so that we would have an
open forum and an official public hearing, which this is not by the way
to discuss this in more depth and then I would after that first public
hearing, I think we should in session discuss whatever changes we wish
to and at the subsequent. Commission Meeting„ vote on a procedure or
procedures that we wish b adopt and then call a final public hearing
014 JUN-11973
once we have taken a position on it. I knew that sounds complicated
but what that will do is this. It gives the administration an opportunity
to comment on this officially. Secondly, it gives us the opportunity in
work session, to go section by section, to discuss it. Thirdly, it gives
the opportunity for the public as a whole to come in and discuss it with
us and then after we have had that first public hearing, for us to take
an official decision as a Commission, that we would then call a final
public hearing at which time hopefully we would pass the final resolution.
I don't see why that couldn't be done before we, before the end of
August. Is there any reason why that couldn't be done Mr. Reese?
Mr. Reese: What you are going to have is advertising periods of time to
notify the public.
You are also going to have a barrier that has to be considered in this
time schedule, is the necessary time needed to do an editorial job on
your revision because in discussing it with the Commission, you are going
to make changes and adjustments to rework your document in order to work
it in. -
Mayor Ferre: Lets select those times now Mr. Reese and see if we can
get down to the selection of dates so that we have targets on this.
Mr. Rothstein, City Attorney: Mr.Ferre, insofar as your public hearing.
The first public hearing will he the advertised one but thereafter, it
can then be continued at each agenda session so you don't have to worry
about special advertising.
Mayor Ferre: Oh I see, in other words you are saying that we can have
Mr. Rothstein: I am talking about your workshop procedures to your final
point where you are ready to adopt -
Mayor Ferre: It simplifies it then. What you are saying is we can do it
in a simpler vein.
What I would like to do then is select the days for a public hearing
giving us enough time Mr. Reese for you and Mr. Rothstein to come back
with your specific recommendation and again enough time for us to deliberate
and discuss in our work sessions here before we get into a full public
hearing.
How much time do you think in your -
Mr. Reese: Well if I understood you correctly, you said you wanted to set
aside 1 hour on June 14th and 1 hour on June 28th to discuss it among the
Commissioners.
Mayor Ferre: Yes Sir.
Mr. Reese: Then after that you wanted a finished document to go out on
July 12th for advertising purposes.
Mayor Ferre: I am saying we would have a 1 hour deliberation on June 14th
and on June 28th and that after that we would have the first public
hearing. It could be the 12th of July, thats fine with me, at which
point, we would then again meet, after we've had the public reaction, and
I think we should take a position in this Commission before we have a final
public hearing so that the people will know how we stand on it and they can
come here and protest it or discuss it or try to change it or what have you.
I would hope that we could do it by the 26th of July or certainly by, if
not -
Mr. Reese: Mr. Mayor, I understand the emergency and I understand the
urgency of this but I wonder if you are doing the service by expediting
this that you intend to do?
The month of August the City Commission will undoubtedly be out of session.
Mayor Ferre: We don't know that yet Mr. Reese.
This is a working Commission, we don't know whether we are going to break
in August. It all depends on a lot of different things.
015 JUN -11973
Mr. Reese: Assuming that the Commission will be here in the month of
August, assuming, there is a large number of people in this community
that are greatly concerned about zoning and aren't here in the summer-
time and I am just wondering if you are performing the service that you
anticipate by endeavoring to hold this meeting prior to a suitable date
right after school opening?
Mayor Ferre: I understand your question and I think its a valid question
but I personally think that this community has been talking about this
for many many months and actually years and certainly we have deliberated
and talked and had hearings and I think we ought to give ample time but
it seems to me that 2 months or 21 months is ample time.
Mr. Reese: Mr. Mayor, all I am saying is that you are holding an official
public hearing to adopt an ordinance.
Mayor Ferre: During a time when a lot of people are out of town, I
recognize that.
Mr. Reese: At a time when the people ought to be present, that's all
I am saying.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, maybe we can blend the best of both worlds.
Mr. Rothstein, for an ordinance to become effective, its a 30 day wait
correct?
Mr. Rothstein: Yes Sir.
Mr. Plummer: Could it be this way, that we hold the 1 hour work sessions
on June 14 and 28 and have a public hearing on the 12th, have a second
public hearing on the 26th for adoption, and a final hearing on the 1st
meeting in September for the adoption?
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer I am always amazed at your ability to come
back with very good solutions and recommendations and I think that's a
good one. I would agree with that.
We would then have a first hearing on July 26th and a final hearing in
September.
Mr. Plummer: The first meeting in September.
Mayor Ferre: That sounds reasonable to me. I think that's plenty of
opportunity for everybody who wants to talk or protest, to come in here
and say whatever they want to.
Is this acceptable then to everyone on the Commission?
Mrs. Gordon: I have no major objections, I would just like to call
attention to the fact that and Mr. Rothstein would have to tell mo if
this is so, if the appointees who are sitting on the Board now, I
believe 3 of them, their terms expire in July and whether'or not we would
need to extend for a 30 or 60 day period, their terms until something
concrete was developed by this Commission?
Mr. Rothstein: You could extend their terms and you still haven't
decided if you want to take one Board and continue it on or eliminate it
completely. You have the power under the new charter change to handle
it whatever way you want.
Mrs. Gordon: I know that no matter what steps are taken, that those steps
could also be adjusted at any future time that it was necessary so that
Mr. Reese's concern being that perhaps this would be a final thing that
not perhaps be adjustable wouldn't hold true because you could.
May I Mr. Mayor bring out a couple of minor points that I would like to
point out at this time and I was concerned with the things that Mr. Aaron
mentioned but I did want to call to the attention of him and other people
here that in effect what you were asking us to do is what we are doing
really even though you are calling it by another name. Its the same thing.
The reason is this. You are developing as you said, you would like,
a Planning and Zoning Board. We are calling it a Planning Board but we
are calling St a Planning Board which will have the power to analyze all
applications for zoning changes in relation to a master plan, a compre-
hensive plan which will be developed. True, we don't have a comprehensive
plan now but one of the most important and vital functions of the Planning
Board will be to develop this plan.
016 JUN-11973
Now the Board of Adjustment which you referred to. We are calling it
a Zoning Board that will be the responsibility of the Zoning Board to
do the' adjustments you have outlined and if you recall in Dr. Mantel's
analysis of considerations that have been taken, one of the considerations
was that the so called Board of Adjustment or Planning Board should be the
final authority on minor matters as you said it should be and it would be
in this concept as outlined here. I am going into just a little detail
for clarification sake•.
Inaudible remark -
Mrs. Gordon: All right then just let me finish my sentence if you don't
mind. I just wanted to tell Mr. Aaron that basically if he would like
afterwards, I will explain to him the similarity and that the matters of
education are certainly available to people today at the University of
Miami in an annual seminar. The public can attend them. They are invited
to attend them and they are attending them because there was over 300
people attending the last seminar which was given in October and has
been given for each of the past 2 years and it is a wonderful program
and its a program that I highly encourage all citizens to participate in
and with that I will defer to you Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: Commissioner Gordon with my apologies to you and everyone
present here, I have got to go and catch an airplane in a little while
so I will have to leave and will turn the chair over to Vice Mayor Gibson
and you can continue the meeting. Everyone is welcome to stay here and
ask any questions they want.
I have got one comment before :.eaving that I want to make and I want to
ask Mr. Acton a question about a master plan.
The County is in the midst of finalizing a master plan which will cover
somewhat the City of Miami even though it will not do so specifically.
Now, there are 2 things. I think that the procedure and the work that
Dr. Bartley has done are very commendable and I think its a great move
forward.
I do want to remind and caution everyone that plans and structures of
government are no better than the people that are involved to serve in
them and we of course have rampant instances of great constitutions in
South AMerica for example where the people who govern those countries
don't pay attention to them so they are very meaningless so as structure
and Dr. Bartley and I have discussed this, structure is great but just as
important perhaps more important are the people involved in serving the
government.
Secondly, I think that the procedures of Planning and Zoning are great
but I think one of our great needs in this community is a. master plan
that we can all try to live and hopefully live by and I think one of the
important things that we should immediately, without any delay, charge
the administration is proceeding with such a master plan to fit in con-
junction with the county master plan and in that vein, Mr. Acton, I am
going to ask you.
How many professional people do you have in your staff?
Mr. Acton: I have 9 authorized planners and I presently have 7 on board.
Mayor Ferre: These are 7 that are professional people?
Mr. Acton: They are• professional.
Mayor Ferre: Do you feel that you have on your staff sufficient
capacity to undertake such a task?
Mr. Acton: Well I think that answer will have to come at a later date.
Mayor Ferre: Let then me officially request that that answer be forth-
coming and with this recommendation and I have and I don't want anybody
to misconstrue my feelings because I am not for the abolition of the
City of Miami or for consolidation of the City of Miami with Metro but
the fact remains that Metro does have a larger staff than we do and they
have been involved in the procedures of planning and a master plan and
I would like to, in your answer, for you:to take into consideration,
the usage of the, in part, of the Metro Staff in helping us in our
deliberations to come forward with a master plan that would fit into
the overall Metro master plan. I asked you, you said you thought it
would take a year. In my humble opinion,` -`I think we could do it in a
lot less time than that and I would like to request that this be done
017 JUN • 11973
•
hopefully before the end of this year.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, may I make a comment that is pertinent to what
you just said?
Mayor Ferre: Yes Mam.
Mrs. Gordon: At the time that the charter change was first being con=
sidered. One of the supporters to a change in the charter was
_ Mr. Reginal Walters and he so stated the reason being, that he felt that
the City of Miami $ Planning Board working in conjunction with him and
his staff would facilitate the master plan for the county being developed
more rapidly. This is why a planning board in the City of Miami is such
a vital factor not only for the City of Miami but for the entire county.
I just wanted to make this clear.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you now, Mr. Acton I have to leave -
Rev. Gibson: Before you turn over so I don't get into confusion. Are we
agreed now on this timetable?
Mayor Ferre:
Rev. Gibson:
Mr. Plummer:
Rev. Gibson:
Mayor Ferre:
Nobody disagreed on it but we have to do it officially.
All right, lets do it officially.
Do you want me to give you the outline?
Yes sir.
Just make a motion.
Mr. Plummer: Well I will make the motion that on June 14, we have a
1 hour workshop and on June 28, we have a second 1 hour workshop.
July 12, we have the first public hearing and on July 26th we have a
second public hearing and the first reading and on September 13, we
have a public hearing, second and final reading and adoption.
Mayor Ferre:
Rev. Gibson:
Mayor Ferre:
Is there a second to the motion?
Second.
Any further discussion? Call the question please.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Reese advised me the first meeting in September is
September 13th.
Mr. Southern: , Mr. Plummer?
Mr. Plummer: Yes.
Mr. Southern: Mr. Reboso?
Mr. Reboso: Yes.
Mr. Southern: Reverend Gibson?
Rev. Gibson:
Mr. Southern:
Mrs. Gordon:
Mr. Southern:
Yes.
Mrs. Gordon?
Yes.
Mayor Ferre?
Mayor Ferre: I vote yes.
Now, before I leave. I was called by Mrs. Grace Rockefellar and asked
to read this statement in the record for her and she said she has polled
the members of the Northeast Improvement Association and the other
associations which she represents and is involved with.
•
of R JUN -11973
They very strongly feel that any member of any board, Planning or Zoning
within the city structure, should be residents of the City of Miami and
shejust wanted me to make that comment for the record in her name.
At this point I will turn over the chair to Father Gibson.
Mr. Plummer: Father Gibson, are we now ready for questions from the
Commission?
Rev. Gibson: Yes Sir.
Mr. Plummer: Dr. Bartley, would you -
Mr. Martinez: I am sorry to interrupt, I would like some clarification.
My name is Mike Martinez of 4713 N. W. 7th Street, presently serving as
chairman of the Planning anc. Zoning Board of the City of Miami.
Members of the Board have asked me one question that I haven't been able
to answer and I want an answer from the Commission.
We have participated on the citizens committee. We have certain views
and certain recommendations. The question is, during these hearings, can
they can they come up and express their feelings and recommendations ?
The reason I am asking this, is nobody has asked for us to come up,
they asked us to participate but nobody has asked us to come up and this is
why they asked me this and I think all of that are sitting on the Planning
and Zoning Board were put there by the reason that we represented, we
were civic people, civic leaders in our different sections of the community
here in the City of Mlami and we are sort of representative of the people
and the citizens of Miami, so we do have certain ideas and certain recom-
mendations and certain feelings that we would like to express to the
Commission at some time.
Rev. Gibson: Let me respond by saying and if I am not correct, the
other Commissioners can say your wrong Gibson and then we can make a
decision. I would hope Sir, my thinking is that all of the members of
the Planning and Zoning Board ought to be there to express themselves,
tell whats good about what has been proposed and tell what is bad.
Thats the only we are going to know. You have worked with it and the
fact that you have worked with it, you know some pitfalls and dangers.
It's very easy for the fellow on the outside to tell us what ought to be
so we would want you to be present and be heard vocally.
Is everybody on the Commission share that?
Mr. Plummer; I think it would be appropriate Mike that you would show
up here first on July 12 to express yourself. You are welcome on the
other days but as far as the input by the members of the Board, I think
that July 12 would be the appropriate date for that input.
Mr. Martinez: All right, thank you.
Rev. Gibson: Any other questions?
Mr. Plummer: I have some of Dr. Bartley.
Dr. this is really some things I feel'I should bring to your attention,
as well as other things. Has anyone supplied to you a copy of the
recently passed conflict of interest law by Metropolitan Dade County
which does encompass all municipalities?
Dr. Bartley: No Sir and I have been unable to secure a copy of it,
however you will notice in article 2 and in article 3, of the attached
draft, that, I have written it in.
Mr. Plummer: Well doctor, I don't want to get into it. The point I was
trying to make is that I feel even though I am in favor 'of the conflict
of interest law, there have been a lot of good people lost to certain
boards in the county as well as in the city, on this new conflict of
interest law so I would like for you to make yourself available, a copy
of that to see how it blends in to your document.
Dr. Bartley: Yes Sir, if you will notice if you just want to make a little
note Mr. Plummer, on page 29, you might. I am sure your concerns are
very proper concerns because the type of things you are suggesting here
of course are being run into in many parts of Dade.
019 JUN -11973
•
•
Fr Mr. Plummer: My next question is knowing the proposed or the proposal as
you have set forth. Approximately from the day that a man would file an
application to the time he was , lets say to be approved by this
Commission. My question really is this. We have heard so many times
that before Metro, that it would takb 6 to 9 months to process an appli-
cation for final determination. The City has prided itself that most
times you are heard within 30 days and get a determination within 60.
Under your proposal, approximately how long, how much longer, would this
take?
Dr. Bartley: As the document is presently written Mr. Plummer, the
time periods very closely very closely approximate the time periods right
at the moment.
Mr. Plummer: Another thing I notice that you address yourself to is
cost and fees. One of the bone of contentions I have had since I have sat
on the Board as well as the Commission, is that people are afforded the
opportunity to make application and pay a fee that doesn't anywhere near
come close to adequately pay for what that hearing costs the rest of the
taxpayers. Have you given consideration to the fact of that in your
determining of fees?
Dr. Bartley: No Sir, I have nct examined your fee structure but I would
be very much surprised if your present fee structure does indeed cover
the overhead cost. This has not been a part of my charge. Now let me
add one point. I intimated in a note in terms of notice and hearing
requirements where I point out that if the notice of hearing requirements
are increased, or wven if they are kept substantially as suggested in my
draft, that Mr. Simpson's postage bill for example will have to be increased
in that sense indirectly but on the fees as such, no sir, but I will be
very much surprised if your fee really covers it.
Mr. Plummer: I think you should look into that matter.
I recall when I looked into it once before when I looked into the fees
taken in by the Zoning Board, not that they should be a profit making
but I do feel they should be a break even board.
Dr. Bartley: You see the difficulty of figuring the fees as I am sure
Mr. Reese would be the first to tell you is that there is so much overhead
in other city departments other than your present Planning and Zoning Board
itself. Mr. Acton, Mr. Reese, Public Works, Mr. Rothstein, Law Department
and that kind of thing.
Mr. Plummer: Dr. Bartley you will find under the old structure, the fees
that were collected for public hearings did not even adequately cover
the postage to mail out the notices and this is something that I think
you should address yourself to in compounding the new fees.
I would like to ask you, under your proposal, do I understand that the
Urban Review Board would be abolished?
Dr. Bartley: No Sir, your Urban Review Board, I believe Mr. Rothstein will
coaborate this, its my understanding that the Urban Review Board is
presently constituted by resolution other than by ordinance and it was my
recommendation and remains my very firm recommendation at this point,
that the Urban Review Board not be written in by ordinance. Let the
Urban Review Board continue to be handled by resolution. It creates
greater flexibility. There are a variety of reasons for my thinking that
the Urban Review Board should be by resolution rather than by ordinance.
Mr. Plummer: My final question. You did not address yourself, Mr.
Pancoast did, to the point of a Hearings Examiner. Now we here within
the City have heard a great deal of discussion from Metropolitan Dade
County of a proposal of a single hearing examiner. I am not going to
ask today that you address yourself to that fact but I would either by
mail or the first workshop or the first public hearing, I would like to
hear your thoughts on that matter.
Dr. Bartley: I will be glad to. As a matter of fact, I was prepared to
do that today Mr. Plummer but in the interest of time, I will go along
with your other suggestion.
Mr. Plummer: I personally as one would like to thank you for all your
input.
020 JUN -11973
Rev. Gibson: Any other questions on this matter?
All right, if there are no further matters. Dr., we want to thank you
for the service rendered.
Mrs. Gordon: And thanks again to Dr. Murry Mantel and to each and
everyone of the committee members for what you have been giving to us,
your valuable time and your knowledge. Thank you and we will be seeing
each other in the very near future however at this time, I would like
to say goodbye.
Reverend Gibson: We stand adjourned.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the
City Commission. this special meeting was adjourned
ate 3:40 P.M. this date.
ATTEST: H. D. SOUTHERN
CITY CLERK
RALPH G. ONGIE
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
Maukice Fume
e
MAYOR