File Ref. #073 C
de;: ~73 -Au~i/flH1l- (!.
Pr.;f"r=IVED
- \ ~.io> \~.l i__
001'/("18
.;u /1" \) PH /2: 28
en! CLE.I?WS OFFICE
KENT HARRISON ROBBINS
ATTORNEY AT LAW
1224 WASHINGTON AVENUE
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
(305) 532-0500
August 18, 1998
Diana Grub Frieser
First Assistant City Attorney
City of Miami Beach
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
Re: DRB File 9817
775 Dade Boulevard
Warren Harding Hotel
Dear Mrs. Frieser:
1. Your August 12, 1998 letter did not respond to the ultimate issue raised in my
August 3, 1998 letter and my August 10, 1998 letter: that the staff report could not
lawfully recommend approval ofthe project because the zoning-in-progress ordinance
prohibits approval of a project that does not conform with a pending Planning Board
approved zoning ordinance that had reduced height limits in the RM-2 zoning district:
The City of Miami Beach zoning-in-progress ordinance at the time of the
original submission of the Harding Hotel Design Review Board application
on December 16, 1997 required that, in order for an application to be exempt
from zoning-in-progress, a "completed application meeting all submission of
the requirements submitted for Design Review approval" must be timely
submitted. (14-7) (Moreover, since December 16, 1997, even stricter
regulations have been in effect which require Design Review approval for
exemption from zoning-in-progress.) At all times applicable, the City of
Miami Beach Planning and Zoning Department has required Design Review
applicants to file completed Disclosure ofInterest forms as part of the Design
Review Board application. The Harding Hotel Design Review Board
application dated December 16, 1997 was incomplete because the property
owners and other persons required to be named under the Disclosure of
Interest application forms were not disclosed.
Diana Grub Frieser
August 18, 1998
Page 2
The Harding Hotel DRB application is subject to zoning-in-progress because,
on July 20, 1998, the Planning Board approved a new zoning ordinance which
reduced height limits from 100 feet (11 stories) to 60 feet (6 stories) in the
RM-2 zoning district which is the zoning district for the Harding Hotel site.
Therefore, the zoning in progress moratorium ordinance prohibits approval of
the project which is 100 feet plus 25 feet of architectural projections. On July
20, 1998, not only was the application incomplete, but also the application,
because it did not qualifY for the "complete application"exemption before
December 17, 1997, was also not exempt from the "design review approval"
requirement in effect from December 17, 1997. Furthermore, it is the duty of
the City Manager under the zoning-in-progress ordinance to administratively
order the staff and the DRB board not to approve applications that do not
comply with zoning-in-progress.
2. Your letter did not respond to the fundamental issue raised in my August 3,
1998 letter, that evidence introduced at the hearings has disappeared:
The failure to disclose property owners was documented on the record at the
March 25, 1998 Design Review Board hearing. A certified title search
showing that Le Boulevard Condominium, Inc. was one of the record owners
of the property was introduced into evidence on March 25, 1998. Indeed, Le
Boulevard Condominium, Inc. was the sole owner oflots 3, 4,5,6, 7, 8,9, 10,
11,12, and 13, Block 1 of the Mid Golf Subdivision at Platbook 30 Page 19
which encompassed all but five lots included in the original site plan. I have
the videotape record documenting that the title search was introduced into
evidence at the March 25, 1998 Design Review Board hearing. This evidence
was not in the City's official files when I inspected them both on July 28,
1998 and on August 6, 1998 at the Planning Department. It is a criminal
offense to remove evidence introduced during official proceedings. What
steps have been taken by the City of Miami Beach to address this most
egregious issue? Moreover, during the March hearing, the attorney for the
applicant admitted that the site plan that were originally submitted were
revised but the record at the March 25, 1998 hearing established that the
original plans were no longer in the DRB file. What steps have been taken by
the City to assure that the record is reconstructed correctly prior to the next
2
Diana Grub Prieser
August 18, 1998
Page 3
hearing to assure that the DRB decision rests on the record and not on
fabrications and misrepresentations? The integrity of the entire DRB process
is on the line.
3. I accept the offer in your August 12 letter to have a meeting with Dean
Grandin concerning the Harding Hotel DRB application to discuss the issues raised in
my letters so that they may be considered when Dean Grandin prepares his staff
report for the August 26, 1998 hearing. City Manager Sergio Rodriguez should also
be present to discuss what action he is taking action under the zoning-in-progress
ordinance to stop the further processing of an incomplete application for a project
which is not exempt from zoning-in-progress. Please also have any other City official
present who is engaged in investigating the disappearance of the exhibits.
4. Finally, the City has not produced the public records requested on August
10, 1998. The production of these records are necessary for my preparation for my
presentation before the staff as well as at the DRB hearing. Why is the City not timely
producing these records?
Please address the forgoing as soon as possible so that my clients will not be further
prejudiced by the City's actions and omissions.
~lL{i
KENT HARRISON ROBBINS
cc: Dean Grandin, Zoning Director
Tom Mooney, Planner
Murray Dubbin, City Attorney
Robert Parcher, City Clerk
Sergio Rodriguez, City Manager
Lucia Dougherty, Esq.
3