HomeMy WebLinkAboutO-081812
3
l
"114-
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1.4
15
.16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
ORDINANCE NO. 8181
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871,
THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR
THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION FOR LOTS 1 THRU 5, BLOCK 1,
GRAND VIEW PAPE (5-58), LOCATED AT 1524
THRU 1532 N. W. 14TH AVENUE, FROM R-3
(LOW DENSITY MULTIPLE) DISTRICT TO R-C
(RESIDENCE -OFFICE) DISTRICT.
WHEREAS, the Planning and Loid.ng Board of the
City of Miami, at its meeting held on June 11, 1973,
passed and adopted by an 8 to 0 vote its Resolution No.
73-130,recommending granting a change in zoning classification,
as hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, it is deemed advisable in the best
inttrest . the general welfare of the City of Miami and
i Yr ,bi.t nts to grant a change in zoning classification,
as heLeinafter t et forth:
NW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION
OF Ti CST's! CF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. That Ordinance No. 6871, the Comprehensive
Zoning C;rdinaace for the City of Miami, he and the same
is hereby amended by changing the zoning classification for
Lots i thr:a 5, :lock 1, GRAND VIEW PARK (5-58) , located at
1524 thru 1532 N. W. 14th Avenue, from R-3 (Low Density
MultipJ.e) District to R-c (Residence -Office) District;
and by making the necessary changes in the zoning district
neap made a part of said Ordinance No. 6871, by reference
and description in Article III, Section 2, thereof.
Section 2. That all laws, or parts of laws,
in conflict herewith, be and the same are hereby repealed
insofar as the above described land is involved.
-1-
36
Section 3. It is declared to be the legislative
intent of this body that if any section, subsection,
s
sentence, phrase, or provision of this Ordinance is
held invalid, the remainder of the Ordinance shall not
be affected.
PASSED ON FIRST READING BY TITLE only this 26th day
of July, 1973.
PASSED AND ADOPTED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING BY
TITLE ONLY THIS 13::h day of September, 1973.
H.D. SOU'2T1=
CITY CLE12T
DAVI D T.. KENNEDY
MAYO R
MIAMI REVIEW
AND DAILY RECORD
Published Daily except Saturday, Sunday and
Legal holidays
Miami. Dade County, Florida.
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF DADE:
Before the undersigned authority personally Sp -
peered Martha Drobnie. who on oath says that she
is the V.P., Legal Ads of the Miami Review and
Daily Record, a daily (except Saturday, Sunday and
Legal Holidays) newspaper. published at Miami in
Dade County, Flor.da; that the attached copy of adver-
lisement, being a Legal Advertisement or Notice in
the matter of
Adoption of Ordinance No. 8181
Re: Change of Zoning Classification,
etc.
City of Miami, Florida
in the XXX Court,
was published in said newspaper in the Issu.a ui
September 18, 197.3
Affiant further says that the said hliaml Peview
and Daily Record is a newspaper pukli;ir .t Mismi,
in said Dace County. Honda, and that the said news•
paper has heretofore been continuously punished ;n
said Dade County, r"farieia, e-rch day nexcc•::t Saturd. y,
Sunday and Legal Holidays; and has b , •n • ,.tared
second class: mail ringer at the post slice in Minn,;,
in said Dade County, Floric'a, for a period of Orr_ ye:lr
next preceding the first publication et !ha a'ta-had
copy of advertisement; and afirar,t fortis sa• s that
she has neither paid nor promised an' person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, cernirission or
refund for the purpo'.e ct r:ecurmg this e.dvc•tisement
for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this
18th day of. September , A. D. 19 73
.Muth Chatter,
Notary Fubitt. State et ,Flor(An at Large
'SEAL)
My Commission expires flay 16, 1577.
c1TtOF M1AMtq
bAIU, riot?- 'Y, VVIIHDA
LECAi.. iloliC
MI interested '0111 :take notice
that on the 13th day of Septem-
ber, 1973 the Commission of the
City of :klami, Florida adopted
an ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE AMEND-
ING ING ORDINANCE NO. 5871,
THE COMPREHENSIVE
ZONING ORDINANCE FOR
THE CITY OF •M:IAMI, BY
CHANGING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION F 0 R
LOTS 1 THRU 5, BLOCK
1. GRAND VIEW PARK
t5-5F) LOCATED AT 1524
TIIRU 1532 NW I4TH
AVENUE, FROM R-3 (LOW
DENSITY .MULTIPLE) DIS-
TRICT TO R-C (RES-
•IDENCE-O F F I C E) DIS-
TRICT
which Is designated Ordinance
.No. F:F1,
H D SOUTHERN
CITY CLERK
CITY OF 11IAMI,
FLORIDA
Pia:llrntt ..n rf this notice nn
the 1Fth day of Sel,tprhb' , 1973.
Ad No. 9C ?9
2
3
'i
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1
i9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
.10
31
32
33
34
35
36
RHT/cc
7/2/73
ri
'JUL
ORDINANCE NO. 4-50/41Pd,
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871,
THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR
THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION FOR LOTS 1. THRU 5, BLOCK 1,
GRAND VIEW PARK (5-58), LOCATED AT 1524
THRU 1532 N. W. 14TH AVENUE, FROM R-3
(LOW DENSITY MULTIPLE) DISTRICT TO R-C
(RESIDENCE -OFFICE) DISTRICT.
GI iu : iq
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zonings Board of the
City of Miami, at its meeting held on June 11, 1973,
passed and adopted by an 8 to 0 vote its Resolution No.
73-130,recomanending granting a change in zoning classification,
as hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, it is deemed advisable in the best
interest of the general welfare of the City of Miami and
its inhabitants to grant a change in zoning classification,
as hereinafter set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. That Ordinance No. 6871, the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance for the City of Miami, be and the same
is hereby amended by changing the zoning classification for
Lots 1 thru 5, Block 1, GRAND VIEW PARK (5-58), located at
1524 thru 1532 N. W. 14th Avenue, from R-3 (Low Density
Multiple) District to R-c (Residence -Office) 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.
Section 2. That all laws, or parts of laws,
in conflict herewith, be and the same are hereby repealed
insofar as the above described land is involved.
vErzi 19 ?
JUL 26iO7
oRnr;;,hr7.,: t,L).
3.
2
3
4
5
6
7
111 8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
020
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
4/30
31
32
33
34
35
36
•
•
Section 3. It is declared to be the legislative
intent of this body that if any section, subsection, sentence,
phrase, or provision of this Ordinance is held invalid,
the remainder of the Ordinance saall not be affected.
i1/
5i5S D on first reading by title only this etday
of 1973.
PASSED AND ADOPTED on second and final reading by title
only this /'8 day of JW/OP70004c1973.
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
MAYOR
Attest:
City Clerk
. ' a ris urner
Assistant City Attorney
REVIEWED BY:
S. oy
Assistant Director of raw
APPRdVED TO ORRECTNESS:
A an . Rot stein
City Attorney
-2-
COURTESY
N O T I C.E
NOTICE TO OWNERS OF REAL ESTATE IN
THE VICINITY OF 1524 THRU 1532 N.W.
14TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA
The Miami City Commission, at its meeting of THURSDAY,
July 26, 1973, at 10:00 A. M., in CITY HALL, 3500 Pan
American Drive, Dinner Key, Miami, Florida, will consider
the following:
1524 thru 1532 N.W. 14th Avenue
Lots 1 thru 5, Block 1,
GRAND VIEW PARK (5-58)
Resolution recommending Change of Zoning Classification on
the above property, from R-3 (Low Density Multiple) to R-C
(Residence Office).
At its meeting of June 11, 1973, the Miami Planning Board
adopted Resolution No. 73-130 by an 8 to 0 vote (one member
absent) recommending the Change of Zoning.
IMPORTANT
The City Commission requests that PETITIONER be present or
represented at this meeting, and all interested real estate
owners are invited to express their views.
The petition and supporting papers concerning this item are
available for review at the Planning Board Office, 3318 Pan
American Drive, Dinner Key.
MIAMI PLANNING BOARD
7-20-73
cm
e„ifg fAtiamii, Itirt a
'73 JUN. G2 Y'; 8 : 29
June 12, 1973
Honorable City Commission
Attention: Mr. M. L. Reese
City of Miami, Florida
Re: CHANGE OF ZONING - RECOMMENDED
1524 thru 1532 N. W. 14th Avenue
Lots 1 thru 5, Block 1,
GRAND VIEW PARK (5-58)
Applicant: Max R. Silver
Gentlemen:
The Miami Planning Board, at its meeting of June 11, 1973, Item
#5, following an advertised Hearing, adopted Resolution No. 73-130
by an 8 to 0 vote (one member absent), recommending Change of
Zoning Classification for Lots 1 thru 5, Block 1, GRAND VIEW PARK
(5-58), located at 1524 thru 1532 N. W. 14th Avenue, from R-3
(Low Density Multiple) to R-C (Residence -Office).
One objection was received in the mail.
An ORDINANCE to provide for this Change of Zoning has been pre-
pared by the City Attorney's office and submitted for considera-
tion of the City Commission.
mm
Z. M. 24
Attached: Minutes
cc: Law Department
Sincerely,
( j
'>t
David Simpson, Jr.1/
Executive Secretary
Miami Planning and Zoning Board
NOTE: Planning Department recommendation: "APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE
APPLICANT WORKING WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN THE DEVELOP-
MENT OF PLANS FOR THE PROPERTY.
• •
•
•
to
It 1
5. 1524 THROUGH 1532 Ni W. 14TH AVENUE
Lots t through 5, Block i,
GRAND VIEW PARK (5-58) . '13 t
J j E
Change of Zoning Classification on the above described s e,
from R-3 (Low Density Multiple) to R-C (Residence -Office).
44 8:
Secretary filed proof of publication of Legal Notice of Hearing,
and administered oath to all persons testifying at this hearing.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: "APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE
APPLICANT WORKING WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN THE DEVELOP-
MENT OF PLANS FOR THE PROPERTY"
The general characteristics of land use is the immediate area
of the subject petition is that of mixed, single family, two
family, and multiple family residential use. There have been
an increasing number of medically oriented office uses located
in the adjacent R-C (Residential -Office) zoned portions of the
area, and since the structures in the area are in generally poor
considition, either multiple family or medical office use offer
redevelopment potential. A covenant should be required to tie
development of the subject property with specific plans. This
will insure that the land use objectives of the Medical Center
Master Plan for orderly and integrated growth of medical center
facilities are met.
Mr. Martinez: Mr. Aronovitz, will you state your name and
address for the Record, please.
Mr. Aronovitz: Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, and Members of the
Board, my name is Sidney Aronovitz, Attorney, of Aronovitz, Silver
and Booth, 908 Ainsley Building, Miami, Florida. Representing the
applicants in this Item #5.
The applicants are, as to Lots 1"through 3, Max R. Silver,
as Trustee, his parties in interest are two physicians, Dr. Jacob
Kolski, and his partner, Dr. Arthur Franzino.
As to Lots 4 and 5, Mr. Cesar Iglesias, and wife.
We are essentially seeking a change from R-3 to R-C. We
direct your attention to the fact that the character of the area
is predominantly R-C.
Now, unfortunately, that's a rather large-scale map you have
there, becuase if the entire C-24 of the Zoning Plat Book were put
up there, you would readily observe that the entire area, east of
the subject property, all of the way over to 12th Avenue, is R-C.
All of the way over to 12th Avenue, due east, northeast, and every-
thing east of 14th Avenue.
You would also, readily observe, that to the southeast, the
same thing is true all of the way over to the Cedars of Lebanon Tract.
You will recall that the Children's Retardation Clinic is there, and
the -Public Health Center is in that big vacant block.
And then, due south, all of the way to the Miami River, is R-C.
Now, what we have here, essentially, is a block divided, because
right through the middle of the block, on the southwest side, you have
R-C. And, on the northeast area, you have R-3.
Our clients would like an opportunity to be able to develop the
property, and in so doing, they would propose to orient it in the
direction of offices, likely medical, possibly some legal offices,
on the other hand, there may be apartments. Now, that presents a
problem, and I raise the problem, only because the Board has, in the
past, this evening, from time to time, referred to the recommendations
of the Planning Department, and I would like to make a comment on that,
if I may.
I have seen a copy of it, which was available here, a little
earlier. First, I am very happy with the recommendation for approval,
and I don't have a fault to find with that.
-31- June 11, 1973 Item #5
I do want to call your attention to this, :hough. If, by
the subject to certain items of approval, you mean, subject to your
approval, through the Planning Department, of landscaping, we have
no objection.
If you mean that we will conform to the setbacks, to the lot
area, to the square footage, we have no objection to that.
Mr. Martinez: If you would excuse me. The more I read this
the less sense it makes to me, because, we cannot sit here and put
these conditions on - on somebody - either we rezone the property,
or we don't. But to ask them that they have to submit plans for
the development of the property, is to me against the Ordinance,
itself, I mean, it's not legal.
Mr. Aronovitz: Well, that's exactly this practical problem
that we're facing, we're just aren't - we might as well not have
the rezoning, as to have it in this - . . .
Mr. Martinez : I wish the Department would, before we continue
with this, will clarify their position on this, because this is the
first time that I have seen them take a position like that. And when
we have, in fact, people from the audience request this, or some of
the Board Members looking to this avenue of controlling the - what
was going to be put on the property, we have been told that it was
illegal. And, now, they are making a recommendation like this.
Well, it sort of has me puzzled. And I don't know what to do.
Mr. Whipple? Or, someone?
•
Mr. McLean: Mr. Acton dictated this, the lead to this recom-
mendation, or, this recommendation.
Mr. Silverman: We cannot hear you.
Mr. McLean: Pardon me. Mr. Acton, himself, dictated this
recommendation to me. It was not his intention, I am sure, to
condition a change of zoning. But, further in the recommendation,
it does, I think, clarify what Mr. Acton was seeking, "A covenant
should be required to the development of the subject property with
specific plans." This approach has been taken before, and it's my
understanding that some background on the area, is that it is in the
Medical Jackson Memorial University of Miami. Medical Center Area.
The Department has consistently and initially recommended deferment
on all items and zoning changes in the area.
Because, the Jackson Memorial Hos?ital Master Plan needs to
be updated. To perhaps consider applying interim zoning to the area.
We need a master plan for the area, a number of requirements and needs
in this area.
Therefore, I think Mr. Acton's thinking was, although we are
somewhat in approval, and he feels, and the Department feels, in
evaluation, that the change to R-C is consistent with the area plan,
because this very important Medical Center Complex must have specific
studies and requirements, re-evaluation, all of the way around, that
we feel that maybe on a one to one basis, if this project, or this -
if a Covenant could be turned in on this development, somehow, so that
the City could carefully evaluate this, in terms of the established
criteria in the Master Plan. Evaluate it in terms of all of the needs
that this area has, that have been unavailable to study, comprehensively,
we've only been able to study it piecemeal.
I think this is what Mr. Acton's intention was. The zoning
change itself, is consistent, as far as we know, with the Area Master
Plan, and this area is inside the Master Plan Area, for Jackson
Memorial University of Miami Complex.
Mr. Aronovitz: Mr. Chairman, with all due respect to the
recommendations, anti the remarks made, I can't help but facetiously
but nevertheless, seriously, remark that from the nature of the baby
that we have here, the lady is either pregnant, and she's not slightly
pregnant.
-32- June 11, 1973 Item #5
Now you say that it's compatible, and it •ays subject to
the proper use of the whole area Master Plan, and more importantly,
the entire area east of us, across the street there, is all R-C,
and it doesn't haVe-tnese restrictions on it.
The entire area east, south, north, northeast, doesn't have
these restrictions on it. We're being singled out. And the reason
is, that because the last year and a half, there's been a necessary
plan being developed for this whole area, we're being told, 'no,
we've got to wait further', and frankly, I will tell you the truth,
if we had plans that we could bring in and show you, we might not
have a problem, but we don't have those plans; and we might as well
have nothing, than to get it subject to plans that we don't at the
moment we don't know what we can develop.
As I understand it, what they're saying is, between the first
and second meeting of the City Commission,bring your plans in. Well,
it isn't that simple. We can't do it that way. And either you zone,
or you don't zone. And I would respectfully submit that if we're
entitled to the zoning, and he concedes that the Master Plan permits
it, really, the highest and best use dictates that we have the R-C.
Mr. Martinez: Mr. City Attorney? Mr. Harris?
Mr. Turner: Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Martinez: Have you been listening to the explanation of
the Department, on this? I mean, this is, really - I don't understand
this type of approach, that we're taking here, I mean.
Mr. Turner: Mr. Chairman, if I can try and explain it a little
bit, what's been done in the past in other areas.
You should consider this strictly as a change of zoning, and
any - the City Attorney has accepted Covenants between first and
second reading, on change of zoning in certain areas, in certain
instances, such as this, where you have a transitional area, to
insure that the developer complies with his presentation, for the
change of zoning.
We have done this in several cases.
But on the Board level, this is just to be considered as a
change of zoning. And if the Commission wish to require this, then,
this would be another step.
Mr. Martinez: All right, that would be - that's another horse
of a different color, altogether. Okay.
Mr. Turner: Right.
Mr. Martinez: Okay, do you have anything else you want to
add, Mr. Aronovitz?
Mr. Aronovitz: No, sir.
Mr. Martinez: Is anyone here, in opposition to this item?
Mrs. Caminetti: My name is Mrs. Caminetti. I am Executive
Vice -President of the LeJune Southwest Homeowners' Association.
With all due respect to Mr. Aronovitz, whom I have admired
over the years, I feel that because most of the area is R-C, there
is no criteria to change, from one zoning to another.
Even with the approval of this Department, subject to approval
of landscaping, setbacks, et cetera.
If he is going to build apartments, he already has the required
zoning, unless I am mistaken.
To me, zoning is like a play, it has a way of running off and
injuring other people in other areas. The opening wedge is there for
others to take hold and run off with, continuously, and based on past
-33- June 11, 1973 Item #5
•
mistakes, or rezoning mistakes of previous Plann ig and Zoning
Departments' and other City Commissions' which downgraded zoning for
certain areas, causing blights on the various communities, thus causing
our present ghettos. And I don't mean to say that this would cause
a ghetto, since the office structures that are in the area, although
high, are not unreasonable to look at, but instead of driving a wedge
into the zoning, as it exists now, I would say that the property best
be served by the present zoning, as it exists, until such time, that
the Master Plan, or Comprehensive Plan is approved by the City.
Mr. Martinez: Thank you, Mrs. Caminetti. Anyone else, in
opposition? None. We will come back to you for rebuttal,
Mr. Aronovitz, if you have anything else you want to add.
Mr. Aronovitz: Mr. Chairman, I would merely point out, of
course, that the owners of this property sat by and had nothing to
do with the zoning around them, and obviously, their living there
with the R-C across the street, in all of the other areas. And,
now, because of that, they should certainly receive the considera-
tion that is otherwise there. And, consequently, this is not a down-
grading of an area, this is a building up of an area, and should sub-
stantially contribute to the improvement of the entire facility there.
Mr. Martinez: A11 right, thank you, the Public Hearing is
closed. We will have discussion, or any questions from the Board
Members. If, not, Mrs. Fernandez, this is in your district.
Mr. Silverman?
Mr. Silverman: Mr. Chairman. The Staff has recommended approval.
The condition of a Covenant is clearly illegal, in my opinion. You
cannot have contract or conditional zoning. You either rezone, or
you don't rezone.
Now, there have been areas, in the past, where, at the City
Commission level, a developer has come in with a big set of plans,
and made elaborate promises, and the City, in order to consider that,
they requested the developer to submit a Covenant, that was voluntarily
• submitted, in order to get the zoning.
•
Now, that's not what we have here. Here, we have a question,
whether we should have apartments or whether we should have a medical
office building, and there's no big plans, there's no big drawings,
there's no big statements about all of the wonderful things we're
going to do. It is strictly a question of what is the proper zoning.
Now, the whole area is zoned R-C.
I agree with Mrs. Caminetti's principles, the application is -
this is not the area for that application. There has been mistakes
of zoning boards, we make them all of the time. However, this is not
an area - this is not a mistake - the change of zoning should be made,
the entire area is R-C, the applicant is a doctor who's going to use it
for that purpose, I'd much rather have an office building than have
more apartments. I think we should approve this, in accordance with
the recommendation, which is for approval.
Mr. Martinez: Okay, Mr. Silverman. Anyone else wants to make
a comment? If not, Mrs. Fernandez, it's in your district.
Mrs. Fernandez: I want to say that I went by the area a few
days ago, and I agree with the Department, that the structures in the
area are in generally poor condition.
And also, taking into consideration the very strange way that
the R-C has been applied to this area, and knowing from the Department
also, that the R-C is convenient, and in accordance with the Master
Plan Medical Center, I definitely believe that the building of the
new residential office building in this area will enhance the area,
and so, I move to approve for the changing of zoning from R-3
Low Density Multiple, to R-C Residence Office.
Mr. Gort: Second.
Mr, Martinez: I have a moiton for approval on Item #5, and
-34- June 11, 1973 Item #5
a second by Mr. Gort. Discussion on the motion? Mr. Dean?
Mr. Dean: I want to ask a question.
Mr. Martinez: Mr. Dean, you haven a question?
Mr. Dean: Mr. Aronovitz, does your client presently own this
property?
Mr. Aronovitz: Yes, sir.
Mr. Dean: Lock, stock and barrel?
Mr. Aronovitz: Yes, sir. I've put an affidavit in, to that
effect, yes, sir.
Mr. Dean: The reason I asked you this question is, because
a lot of people come up, and they want a change of zoning, if, and.
That is the reason I asked this question.
Mr. Aronovitz: Not - not on - you are absolutely correct,
sir, and I understand your reason for asking. Max R. Silver, as
Trustee, has owned this property for approximately two years.
He holds the title for Dr. Kolsky and Dr. Franzino, who are the
beneficial owners, and then, the other two lots are owned by the
occupants of the property, the Iglesias.
Mr. Dean: But they don't know what they're going to build.
Mr. Aronovitz: No. At the moment, it would be likely in
the nature of office building, that's what it will be, offices,
medical offices, would be the direction in which -
Mr. Dean: It would be medical office.
Mr. Aronovitz: In the direction it would apparently be
medical offices, most likely, yes. It fits in with the whole plan
there, in that area, for that reason.
Mr. Dean: This has been studied for a decade, and they have
not come up with something.
Mr. Martinez: Discussion on the motion? None. Okay, call
the roll, Mr. Simpson.
Mr. Simpson: The motion on #5 is to recommend.
One objection was received in the mail.
Mrs. Fernandez offered the following resolution, and moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 73-130
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING CHANGE OF ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF LOTS 1 THROUGH 5, BLOCK 1,
GRAND VIEW PARK (5-58), AT 1524 THROUGH 1532
N. W. 14TH AVENUE; FROM R-3 (LOW DENSITY
MULTIPLE) TO R-C (RESIDENCE -OFFICE).
Upon being seconded by Mr. Gort, this resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Alfonso, Dean, Gort, Silverman, Martinez.
Mmes. Callahan, Fernandez, McGraner.
NAYES: None.
ABSENT: Reverend Johnson.
Mr. Simpson: Eight - zero.
Mr. Martinez: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Aronovitz.
Mr. Aronovitz: Thank you, thank you very kindly.
-35- June 11, 1973 Item #5