Loading...
File Ref. #024 /7 0 ~;r- J 4N ~, 'i~ CITY OF MIAMI BEACH PLANNING, DeSIGN & HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION To: RECE\VEO 98 JMl -1 AM \0: 51 ~ Date: ROBERT PARCHER, CITY CLERK 1/ f DEAN J. GRANDIN, Jr.. HI~ PRESERVATION AND 'if ti' URBAN DESIGN DIRECTO~ .J' j/Lvvt January 5, 1998 {J\ I ~ I {;ll vo: ~. (IJ -t~' ~ . fy bU. From: Subject: Appeal of ORB File No. 9483J Miami City Ballet Attached, please find correspondence from Mr. Ron Bloomberg, pertaining to the above noted matter. As you may be aware, an affected person may appeal a decision of the Joint Design Review/Historic Preservation Board to the Special Master appointed by the City Commission, in accordance with Subsection 19 of the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, the Zoning Ordinance stipulates the appeal shall be in writing and submitted to the Historic Preservation and Urban Design Director within twenty (20) days of the date on which the Board reached a decision on an application. The Ordinance further prescribes that within thirty (30) days of receipt of this appeal, which was December 18, 1997, the Historic Preservation and Urban Design Director shall submit the appeal to the Special Master who shall set a date and time for hearing the appeal. The notice requirements for the hearing shall be identical to the notice requirements for the original decision upon which the appeal is based, which consist of the following advertising provisions: 1 . Not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing date, a description of the request, and the time and place of such hearing shall be posted on the property on a sign of no less than 11 " x 17". 2. Not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing date, a description of the request, and the time and place of such hearing shall be advertised in a paper of general paid circulation in the municipality. 3. Not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing date, a description of the request, and the time and place of such hearing shall be given by mail to the owners of record of land lying within 375 feet of property. As this is a matter which is administered by the Clerk's office, the Legal Department will continue to handle the notice requirements. In this regard, the appellant V\(ill<be I .! \.l. January 5, 1998 Page Two required to provide one (1) set of mailing labels for the owners of record of land lying within 375 feet of property, in order to satisfy the mail notice requirements. In reference to the posting requirement, please forward one (1) copy of the notice for this hearing, when it is ready, to Tom Mooney of my staff so that it may be properly posted. The verbatim transcript of the Joint Board hearing for this application are also the responsibility of the appellant, who should be in the process of ordering them from a Court Reporting or Transcribing Service. Please advise when a hearing date has been set, so Division staff and the Administration may mark their calendars accordingly. If you have any further questions with regard to this matter please contact me. DJG:TRM F:\PLAN\$ALL\GEN CORR\INTEROFF\DG-9483. WPD Enclosure cc: S. Rodriguez H. Mavrogenes J. Gavarette W. Cary T. Mooney M. Dumas D. Grub Frieser D. Turner L. Martinez R. Bloomberg DRB File #9483J AMERICAN RIVIERA REAL ESTATE COMPANY 420 LINCOLN ROAD, SUITE 448, MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139 Phone: 305-538-9090 Fax: 305-532-9909 December 18, 1997 Certified MaW Retmn Receipt Requested .Aland Delivery Mr. Dean Grandin Urban Design and Histroic Preservation Director City of Miami Beach 1700 Convention Center Drive, Second Floor Miami Beach, FL 33139 RE: Appeal of DRB case # 94831 aJk/a Miami City Ballet Project located on 22nd Street between Park Avenue and Liberty Avenue (the "Project") Dear Mr. Grandin: Pursuant to section 19 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami Beach, I wish to exercise my rights as an aggrieved party to appeal the Design ReviewlHistoric Preservation Board's Order dated December 2, 1997 for file lllUllber 94831 (the "Ordcr"). I am president and principal shareholder of American Riviera Real Estate Company and Palm Court Inc. (hercinafter the "Aggrieved Parties"). Bolli entities hold equitable interest in the following properties: 340 23rd Street, 211 22nd Street and 309 23rd Street. Such ownership interests are recorded and on record in Dade COlUlty, FL . All of these properties are located within 375 feet of the above referenced Project. As principal of the Aggrieved Parties it is believed there are several grOlmds which materially justifY an appeal of the Order. I. Dcnial of Due Process and Opportunity to be Heard Under Florida statute, 111e Aggrieved Parties are entitled to procedural due process. By virtue of the fact that the Aggrieved Parties were never properly notified of any Design Review Board hearing dates fc.lr the Project, the Aggrieved Parties could not adequately prepare to object to the Project submission. In addition, the sites to have been encwnbered by the Project never had any signage posted on them announcing the DRB hearings. It is my understanding that posting notice on a DRB applicants proposed site is City policy. 2. Project Applicants Improper Submittal ofall DRB Application Material The Aggrieved Parties strongly question the actual validity of the original DRB/HPB application initially filed on September 20, 1997. Material evidence suggests the Project applicant did not adequately file the application in compliance with the requirements set forth lUlder the City's Zoning Ordinance. Accordingly, the application and DRB hearing should never have been approved until such time as the application was complete. The following are all questionable items concerning the Project DRB/HPB application: a. General incomplete DRB/HP application submission by virtue of the checklist of items required by the City for an application to be deemed complete. b. Lack of all Owner's affidavits for all properties affected by the Project c. Lack of Applicants "notarized" signanrre e. Lack of proper disclosure of interests f()f applicant's shareholders, nwnber of shares each hold, and proper addresses of each shareholder. C Lack of submission of a levcllhree lrallic impact study by licensed engineer. g. Lack of payment of the appropriate application fee. h. Lack of 375 foot area survey and proper mailing labels to notilY neighboring proper owners currently on record in the Dade County Public Records. Mr. Grandin December 18, 1997 page 2 of2 3. Lack of Recommendation for a Variance According to the submitted plans for the Pn~iect, there is no five f(lot rear set hack. In f:lct, there is no set back at all. According to the City's zoning ordinance, all CD-3 zoned property must have a five foot setback from the rear property line. The Project's rear property line nms east/west. Notwithstanding the fact that the Project fails to show any type of rear set back, the Order entered into on December 2, 1997 does not mention that the applicant must secure a variance in order to proceed with its plans. The proposed design f(lr the project, if approved, would "inordinately burden" both 340 23rd Street and 309 23rd Street in that the northern facade of the Prqject is designed to be a concrete wall nmning 300 feet east to west, and over 55 feet high. This wall has no penetration for windows or other architectural distinction to alter would could ostensibly be a 50,000 square foot monolithic structure. Swnmary Based on the oveIWhelming evidence referenced hereinabove, it is abundantly clear that grounds for an appeal of the Order for file 9483J have been met. Upon your further findings of fact, and confirmation of the items referenced herein, I would appreciate receiving proper notification of the actual appeal proceedings before the Special Master. As I have been informed by administration in the Planning and Zoning department that this matter is to initially go before the Special Master, enclosed is an administrative filing fee check in the amount of $ I 50.00. All notices and information should be sent to: American Riviera Real Estate Company c/o Ronald Bloomberg 420 Lincoln Road, Suite 448 Miami Beach, FL 33139 Your attention to this matter is appreciated. Sincerely, Ame' cc: Marc Towbin, Esq. Marc Boulris, Esq. Mr. Jose Garcia-Pedrosa Mr. Harry Mavrogenes Mayor and City Commission RSB/rg frorn9 _97/app<a1l 2