Ordinance 99-3216 ORDINANCE NO. 99-3216
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH,FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING DISTRICT MAP,
REFERENCED IN SECTION 142-72 OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, BY CHANGING THE
ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION 5937 COLLINS
AVENUE (A/K/A THE BATH CLUB) FROM THE CURRENT
ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION RM-1 RESIDENTIAL
MULTI-FAMILY LOW INTENSITY, TO THE PROPOSED
ZONING DISTRICT CATEGORY RM-2 RESIDENTIAL
MULTI-FAMILY MEDIUM INTENSITY; AMENDING THE
AFFECTED PORTION OF THE CITY'S OFFICIAL ZONING
DISTRICT MAP TO CORRESPOND WITH THIS CHANGE
AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION; PROVIDING
FOR REPEALER, SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the applicant, 5937 Collins, Inc., has made application to the City of Miami
Beach to rezone the property located at 5937 Collins Avenue(A/K/A the Bath Club); and
WHEREAS, amending the zoning of the property listed below as provided herein is
necessary to insure that development of that property will be compatible with development in
adjacent and surrounding areas, and will contribute to the health and general welfare of the City;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1. AMENDMENTS OF ZONING DISTRICTS AND MAP OF
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE.
That the Mayor and City Commission hereby amend the Zoning Districts and Zoning District
Map of City of Miami Beach referenced in Section 142-72 of the Code of the City of Miami Beach,
Florida, by changing the zoning district classifications of the property at 5937 Collins Avenue
(A/K/A the Bath Club) from the existing zoning district classification RM-1 Residential Multi-
Family Low Intensity,to the proposed zoning district classification RM-2 Residential Multi-Family
Medium Intensity.
SECTION 2. REPEALER.
That all Ordinances or parts of Ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby
repealed.
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY.
If any section,subsection,clause or provision of this Ordinance is held invalid,the remainder
shall not be affected by such invalidity.
SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect on the 27th day of November , 199 9 .
PASSED and ADOPTED this 17th day of November , 199 9 .
ATTEST:
MAYOR
CITY CLERK
F:\PLAN\$PLB\MAY\BATH 1393\1393.ORD
1st readomg 9/22/99
2nd reading 11117/99 APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
ed/
'TM$orr tJ
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH,FLORIDA 33139
http:llci.m iami-beach.fl.us
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM NO. 83-7-99
TO: Mayor Neisen O.Kasdin and DATE: November 17, 1999
Members of the City Comm'..ion
FROM: Sergio Rodriguez4 4
City Manager
SUBJECT: Bath Club -R oning
Second Reading - An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the
City of Miami Beach, Florida, Amending the Official Zoning District Map,
Referenced in Section 142-72 of the Code of the City of Miami Beach,Florida,
by Changing the Zoning District Classification 5937 Collins Avenue (A/K/A
the Bath Club) from the Current Zoning District Classification RM-1
Residential Multi-Family Low Intensity, to the Proposed Zoning District
Category RM-2 Residential Multi-Family Medium Intensity; Amending the
Affected Portion of the City's Official Zoning District Map to Correspond with
this Change as Adopted by the City Commission; Providing for Repealer,
Severability and an Effective Date.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission,upon second reading public hearing,
adopt the proposed amending Ordinance.
ANALYSIS
The applicant, 5937 Collins,Inc.,has made application to the City of Miami Beach to rezone the
property located at 5937 Collins Avenue, also known as the Bath Club property. The property is
currently zoned RM-1 Residential Multi-Family Low Intensity,and the applicant has requested that
the property be rezoned to the RM-2 Residential Multi-Family Medium Intensity zoning district
classification. In addition to the rezoning request, the applicant has also applied for a change to
the Land Development Regulations regarding the height limits for oceanfront properties in the RM-
2 zoning district; this related application is discussed under separate cover.
The Bath Club was constructed in 1927 and has served as a private beach club since that time. The
site contains approximately 5.28 acres, and currently consists primarily of low-rise buildings. In
1993,Bath Club,Inc.requested a change in zoning from the then existing RM-3 Residential Multi-
Family High Intensity zoning district classification to the RM-1 Residential Multi Family Low
Intensity zoning district classification. The change was requested in order to bring the zoning into
conformity with the existing low intensity use of the property, and to reduce the property tax
burden on the land owners. In early 1994,the City Commission approved the rezoning request.
• AGENDA ITEM 5 V
DATE )I - ' 7 _ 11
1
Commission Memorandum
November 17, 1999
Bath Club -Rezoning
Page 2
ANALYSIS (Continued)
At the present time,the applicant is proposing to undertake the redevelopment of the Bath Club
property into a luxury resort hotel. While the ultimate site plan and design scheme has not been
finalized for the proposed project, the applicant anticipates that the development would have a
maximum floor area ratio of 2.0 with some individual buildings of approximately 140 feet in
height. The applicant has filed a companion application to amend the height restrictions for the
RM-2 zoning district classification which would effectively allow a 140 foot height limit for the
property.
The Administration has expressed concerns regarding the retention of the historic Bath Club
structures currently existing on the site. The potential that the proposed development may have in
limiting public access to the beach is also a concern. On June 22, 1999,the Planning Board voted
5-2 to recommend that the Commission approve the proposed rezoning of the site, with the
stipulation that the applicant first apply for and receive Historic Preservation designation of the
subject site, and that the applicant should improve and dedicate a 15 foot wide landscaped
pedestrian access easement running along the north edge of the property, for use as public beach
access for the surrounding neighborhood.
The applicant has subsequently applied for Historic Designation for the Bath Club site, and is
scheduled to go before the Historic Preservation Board on September 9, 1999. If the Historic
Preservation Board recommends favorably, the ordinance designating of the historic site would
then go to the Planning Board for review and recommendation at its September 28, 1999 meeting.
The ordinance would then be presented to the City Commission at its October 20, 1999 meeting,
concurrently with the anticipated second reading of this rezoning ordinance. This scheduling is
designed to ensure that any proposed rezoning of the subject site is undertaken in conjunction with
the designation of the property as a historic site.
At its September 22, 1999 meeting, the City Commission voted 5-1 to approve the proposed
rezoning on first reading.
In reviewing this request for an amendment to the land development regulations, the Planning
Board considered the following:
1. Whether the proposed change is consistent and compatible with the comprehensive plan
and any applicable neighborhood or redevelopment plans.
Consistent- The amendment does not require an amendment to the Future Land Use
Map of the Comprehensive Plan, as the property is designated RM-3
Residential Multi Family High Intensity on the adopted Future Land Use
Map. Accordingly, the proposed change from RM-1 to RM-2 on the
2
Commission Memorandum
November 17, 1999
Bath Club -Rezoning
Page 3
ANALYSIS (Continued)
Zoning Map creates a less intensive use than that which is contemplated in
the Comprehensive Plan. The amendment is not contrary to any
neighborhood or redevelopment plan.
Regarding the 1997 charter amendment in regards to waterfront properties,
requiring a referendum for the increase of zoned floor area ratio (FAR)
above that which existed at the date of the charter amendment (June 4,
1997),the FAR for the RM-1 district as of that date was 2.0. Subsequently,
the City reduced FAR for many zoning districts, including the RM-1 and
RM-2 districts. Currently,the FAR for the RM-2 district is 2.0; therefore,
this proposed rezoning does not increase the FAR over that which existed
as of the date of the charter amendment,and consequently, does not require
a referendum.
2. Whether the proposed change would create an isolated district unrelated to adjacent or
nearby districts.
Consistent - The property is currently an isolated district unrelated to adjacent or nearby
districts. The subject property is zoned RM-1; as such, it stands alone as
the only parcel zoned RM-1 in the area. The property is surrounded by
areas which are zoned RM-2 (north and west of the property, including
north of 63rd Street), RM-3 (south of the property) and CD-3 (directly to
the north). The proposed amendment would reduce the isolated nature of
the zoning.
3. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
city.
Consistent- The RM-2 zoning designation is compatible with neighboring properties.
The land development regulations for the RM-2 district, even as proposed
to be amended by the applicant, would be compatible with neighboring
buildings in terms of height and would allow less intense development than
the neighboring and adjacent properties. The maximum proposed FAR
would be 2.0 versus the much larger existing FAR of the Maison Grande
next door or the Maison Paco Rabanne across the street.
3
Commission Memorandum
November 17, 1999
Bath Club -Rezoning
Page 4
ANALYSIS (Continued)
4. Whether the proposed change would tax the existing load on public facilities and
infrastructure.
Partially Inconsistent- The proposed change will impact upon the circulation of
vehicular traffic on the City's roadway network. According
to the traffic study that has been submitted by the applicant,
the redevelopment of this site,as proposed,will generate a
total of 1,207 daily and 99 PM peak hour additional trips
over and above that which would be allowed by developing
the property to the maximum permitted by the RM-1 zoning
district regulations.
It should also be noted that any actual development on the
site must first meet concurrency, or put forward plans for
traffic mitigation that will allow the project to meet
concurrency; this takes place at the Design Review Board
stage.
5. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions
on the property proposed for change.
Consistent- The existing designation of RM-1 is somewhat inconsistent with the RM-2
and RM-3 designations surrounding the subject property. The RM-2
designation of the subject property would be consistent with the designation
of properties to its immediate west.
6. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed change
necessary.
Consistent- The subject property was downzoned from RM-3 to RM-1 when the site
was used as a private club for property assessment and tax reasons. The
property is now being proposed as a site for a luxury hotel. Accordingly,
the change in use necessitates the proposed change in zoning and fits into
the character of Miami Beach as an upscale tourist destination complete
with luxury accommodations. Retention of the RM-1 designation would
not provide sufficient density for a hotel development.
4
Commission Memorandum
November 17, 1999
Bath Club-Rezoning
Page 5
ANALYSIS (Continued)
7. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
Partially Consistent- The proposed amendment should not adversely influence living
conditions in the neighborhood. However,the development of the
subject property as proposed may limit public access to the beach.
The Administration notes that the applicant has voluntarily offered
to dedicate a 15 foot wide pedestrian access easement running along
the north edge of the property, for use as public beach access.
8. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion beyond
the levels of service as set forth in the comprehensive plan or otherwise affect public safety.
Partially Inconsistent- The proposed change may have impacts upon traffic
circulation, which may exceed allowable levels of service
(LOS). As stated above, the redevelopment of this site as
proposed will generate a total of 1,207 daily and 99 PM
peak hour additional trips over and above that which would
be allowed by developing the property to the maximum
permitted by the RM-1 zoning district regulations.
It should be noted,again,that any actual development on the
site must first meet concurrency, or put forward plans for
traffic mitigation that will allow the project to meet
concurrency; this takes place at the Design Review Board
stage.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
Partially Consistent- The proposed change will not seriously reduce access to light and
air. The development regulations for the RM-2 district will result
in less intensive development than the surrounding RM-3 district
permit.
5
Commission Memorandum
November 17, 1999
Bath Club -Rezoning
Page 6
ANALYSIS (Continued)
10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area.
Consistent- The Administration is of the opinion that property values in the adjacent
areas would not be negatively affected by the proposed amendment; if
developed as a luxury property,it could further enhance surrounding values.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
Consistent- The proposed amendment will not deter development on adjacent sites. The
proposed rezoning should not affect the ability for an adjacent property to
be developed in accordance with said regulations.
12. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with
existing zoning.
Consistent - Development of the property into a residential multi family facility within
the RM-1 zoning district regulations is unlikely.
13. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the city for the proposed use in a
district already permitting such use.
Consistent - The subject site is unique in being one of the last relatively undeveloped
parcels in the Mid-Beach area; no other nearby site, either vacant or
underdeveloped,would prove as desirable for the development of a luxury
hotel.
The Administration is concerned about the retention of the historic Bath Club structures, and that
public access to the beach be preserved. Therefore,any approval of the proposed rezoning should
be with an awareness of the following:
1) The applicant, as part of the development project associated with the proposed rezoning,
has offered to improve and dedicate a 15 foot wide landscaped pedestrian access easement
running along the north edge of the property, for use as public beach access for the
surrounding neighborhood.
2) The applicant has provided a draft covenant which will ensure the retention and continued
maintenance of the historic Bath Club structures until the final designation of the subject
6
Commission Memorandum
November 17, 1999
Bath Club -Rezoning
Page 7
ANALYSIS (Continued)
property structures as a historic site.
Based on the foregoing analysis,the Administration recommends that the Commission adopt,upon
second reading public hearing, the proposed zoning map change, contingent upon the above
stipulations, as it would permit the development of an appropriately scaled hotel development on
the site, and bring the zoning of the site more into conformity with the RM-2 and RM-3 areas
which surround the subject site.
SR\ G\ G\RGL\rgl
F:\PLAN\$ALL\CC MEMOS\1393CMM2 WPD
7
3053776222 BERCOJ & RADELL PA. 128 P01/03 DEC 22 '99 17:27
•
BERCOW & RADELL , P . A .
•
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET
TO: FROM:
Robert Parcher Jeffrey Bercow i ( 012-0
COMPANY: DATE:
City of Miami Beach December 22,1999 lc)—3 WL
PAX NUMBER: TOTAL NO.OF PACES INCLUDING COVPK,
305-673-7254 3
PHONE NUMBER; SENDER'S REFERENCE NUMBER:
121 -'1
RE: YOUR REFERENCE NUMBER;
❑ URGENT ❑FOR REVIEW ❑ PLEASE COMMENT ❑PLEASE REPLY ❑PLEASE RECYCLE
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS FACSIMILE MESSAGE IS PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL AND IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL NAMED
ABOVE AND OTHERS WHO HAVE BEEN SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED TO RECEIVE SUCH.
IF THE RECIPIENT IS NOT 7NE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT
ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR DUPLICATION OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS
STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR,OR IF
ANY PROBLEMS OCCUR WITH TRANSMISSION, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US DY
TELEPHONE(305)374-5300.
NOT)S/COMMENTS: •
Please see the attached. t
'// /14,; \
vrr-
i 069y- c:c.{
•
200 S. BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, SUITE 850
MIAMI, FL 33131
FAX (305) 377-6222
TELEPHONE (305) 374-5300
•
•
3053776222 BERCOW & RADELL PA. 128 P02/83 DEC 22 '99 17:27
LAW OFFICES
BERCOW & RADELL
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
FIRST UNION FINANCIAL CENTER,SUITE$5O
JEFFREY BERCOW 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
BEN.J.FERNANDEZ MIAMI,FLORIDA 33131
THCOPHILVs I.HARRIS
DEBORAH L.MARTOHUE TELEPHONE(305)374-5300
MICHAEL E.RADELL FAX(S05)377-6222
JANA K.MCDONALD
OF COUNSEL
VIA TELECOPIER AND U.S. MAIL
December 22, 1999
Gary Held, Esq.
City Attorney's Office
City of Miami Beach
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
Re: Bath Club—5937 Collins Avenue
Declaration of Restrictions
Dear Gary:
This law firm represents 5937 Collins Avenue, Inc., the contract
purchaser of the Bath Club property located at 5937 Collins Avenue, Miami Beach,
Florida. This letter responds to your December 8, 1999 correspondence in which you
forwarded a revised covenant reflecting proposed changes to the Declaration of
Restrictions proffered at the November 17, 1999 City of Miami Beach Commission
meeting.
As to the proposed changes to paragraphs 1. 4, and 10, we have no
objections to your proposed language. However, the proposed revision to paragraph 3,
which addresses the dedication of the public easement for beach access, is not
acceptable. The proposed language is inconsistent with representations we made to the
City Commission at the November 17 hearing. The size of the public access easement
and location of easement cannot be determined prior to site plan approval by the Joint
Design Review/Historic Preservation Board. Additionally, we proposed to record the
actual easement document after all appeal periods have expired, and prior to the
issuance of a building permit. Furthermore, the easement agreement will need to
provide, inter atia, that it does not become effective until redevelopment and construction
has been completed.
The language that you have proposed does not provide adequate
protection to the property owner, Bath Club Inc., or 5937 Collins, Inc. Accordingly, we
believe the following language should be reinserted into the Declaration of Restrictions
paragraph 3:
Owner will dedicate a pedestrian access easement along
the North boundary of the Property, not to exceed 15 feet
in width, for use as public beach access. The easement
3053776222 BERCOLI & RADELL PR. 128 P03/03 DEC 22 '99 17:28
Gary Held, Esq.
December 22, 1999
Page 2
instrument will be recorded prior to the issuance of a
building permit for redevelopment of the Property, will
provide that it does not become effective until construction
has been completed, and may provide for prohibition of
access during construction. Such easement shall be
limited in a manner that is necessary and appropriate to
insure the security and safety of the future occupants of
the Property as well as the security of the easement users,
subject to reasonable review and approval by City staff.
We believe that the above-cited language still protects the City's
interest in assuring that public access to the beach is provided through the site.
This language assures that the Joint Board will not approve a redevelopment
plan for the Bath Club property without also reviewing and approving the required
easement instrument;this language would also prohibit the issuance of a building
permit until the easement instrument is recorded.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at
305-377-6220,
e
JB/cg
Cc: Mr. R. Donahue Peebles
Ms. Veronica Caminos
Mr. Richard Matlof
Ty Harris, Esq.
Mr. Robert Percher
Bob Smith, Esq.
Laurie Ann Thompson, Esq.
BERCow & RADELL
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
cM- FtIe zRiti '7, /999
LAW OFFICES O'Y/ 9!'32/ 6
BERCOW & RADELL
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
FIRST UNION FINANCIAL CENTER,SUITE 850
JEFFREY BERCOW 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
BEN J.FERNANDEZ MIAMI,FLORIDA 33131
THEOPHILUS I. HARRIS
DEBORAH L.MARTOHUE TELEPHONE(305) 374-5300
MICHAEL E.RADELL FAX(305) 377-6222
JANA K.McDONALD
OF COUNSEL
VIA TELECOPIER AND U.S. MAIL
December 22, 1999
Gary Held, Esq. r'
City Attorney's Office
City of Miami Beach --
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
Re: Bath Club— 5937 Collins Avenue U.! '
CD 161
Declaration of Restrictions
c) w
Dear Gary:
This law firm represents 5937 Collins Avenue, Inc., the contract
purchaser of the Bath Club property located at 5937 Collins Avenue, Miami Beach,
Florida. This letter responds to your December 8, 1999 correspondence in which you
forwarded a revised covenant reflecting proposed changes to the Declaration of
Restrictions proffered at the November 17, 1999 City of Miami Beach Commission
meeting.
As to the proposed changes to paragraphs 1, 4, and 10, we have no
objections to your proposed language. However, the proposed revision to paragraph 3,
which addresses the dedication of the public easement for beach access, is not
acceptable. The proposed language is inconsistent with representations we made to the
City Commission at the November 17 hearing. The size of the public access easement
and location of easement cannot be determined prior to site plan approval by the Joint
Design Review/Historic Preservation Board. Additionally, we proposed to record the
actual easement document after all appeal periods have expired, and prior to the
issuance of a building permit. Furthermore, the easement agreement will need to
provide, inter alia, that it does not become effective until redevelopment and construction
has been completed.
The language that you have proposed does not provide adequate
protection to the property owner, Bath Club Inc., or 5937 Collins, Inc. Accordingly, we
believe the following language should be reinserted into the Declaration of Restrictions
paragraph 3:
Owner will dedicate a pedestrian access easement along
the North boundary of the Property, not to exceed 15 feet
in width, for use as public beach access. The easement
Gary Held, Esq.
December 22, 1999
Page 2
instrument will be recorded prior to the issuance of a
building permit for redevelopment of the Property, will
provide that it does not become effective until construction
has been completed, and may provide for prohibition of
access during construction. Such easement shall be
limited in a manner that is necessary and appropriate to
insure the security and safety of the future occupants of
the Property as well as the security of the easement users,
subject to reasonable review and approval by City staff.
We believe that the above-cited language still protects the City's
interest in assuring that public access to the beach is provided through the site.
This language assures that the Joint Board will not approve a redevelopment
plan for the Bath Club property without also reviewing and approving the required
easement instrument; this language would also prohibit the issuance of a building
permit until the easement instrument is recorded.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at
305-377-6220. del/
iir�: :: cow
II
JB/cg
Cc: Mr. R. Donahue Peebles
Ms. Veronica Caminos
Mr. Richard Matlof
Ty Harris, Esq.
Mr. Robert Parcher
Bob Smith, Esq.
Laurie Ann Thompson, Esq.
BERCOW & RADELL
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
f
C M —Nouom61.70, 170 = 1k"
)4 Q 94-3z/
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
Office of the City Attorney
Y
Interoffice Memorandum
To: Lawrence A. Levy Date: Decemb '2399
City Manager• ?
From: Gary M. Held m
First Asst. City A 40 y
Subject: Bath Club - 5937 Collins Ave.; Declaration of Restrictions
Following the Commission hearings on the Bath Club, and a review by this office of
the applicant's proposed Declaration of Restrictions,this office submitted a revised covenant
to Mr. Jeffrey Bercow for his consideration. Mr. Bercow responded by letter dated
December 22, 1999 (copy attached)proposing the Declaration provide for an easement"not
to exceed 15 feet," in a separate document to be recorded prior to building permit, effective
upon completion of construction, and subject to limitation"in a manner that is necessary and
appropriate to insure the security and safety of the future occupants of the Property as well
as the security of the easement users, subject to reasonable review and approval by City
staff."
We would appreciate the Administration's assistance in:
(1)confirming our belief that the easement proffered at the Commission hearing was
for at least 15 feet, not less; and
(2) ascertaining what security and safety limitation measures might be appropriate,
and what language in the Declaration of Restrictions the Administration might accept to
provide for such security and safety limitations without unduly restricting public.ar,'cess?
Thank you.
cc: Murray H. Dubbin
Jorge Gomez
Lobert Parcher
3053776222 BERCOW & RRDELL PA. 128 P02/93 DEC 22 '99 17:27
LAW OFFICES
BERCOW & RADELL
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
FIRST UNION FINANCIAL CENTER,SUITE$SO
JEFFREY BERCOW 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
BEN J.FERNANDEZ MIAMI,FLORIDA 33131
THEOPHILVE I.HARRIS
DEBORAH L MARTOHUE TELEPHONE(305)374-5300
MICHAEL E.RADELL FAX(305)377-6222
JANA K McDONALD
OF COUNSEL
VIA TELECOPIER AND U.S. MAIL
December 22. 1999
Crary Held, Esq.
City Attorney's Office
City of Miami Beach
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
Re: Bath Club—5937 Collins Avenue
Declaration of Restrictions
Dear Gary:
This law firm represents 5937 Collins Avenue, Inc., the contract
purchaser of the Bath Club property located at 5937 Collins Avenue, Miami Beach,
Florida. This letter responds to your December 8, 1999 correspondence in which you
forwarded a revised covenant reflecting proposed changes to the Declaration of
Restrictions proffered at the November 17, 1999 City of Miami Beach Commission
meeting.
As to the proposed changes to paragraphs 1, 4, and 10, we have no
objections to your proposed language. However, the proposed revision to paragraph 3,
which addresses the dedication of the public easement for beach access, is not
acceptable. The proposed language is inconsistent with representations we made to the
City Commission at the November 17 hearing. The size of the public access easement
and location of easement cannot be determined prior to site plan approval by the Joint
Design Review/Historic Preservation Board. Additionally, we proposed to record the
actual easement document after all appeal periods have expired, and prior to the
issuance of a building permit. Furthermore, the easement agreement will need fo
provide, inter alfa, that does not become effective until redevelopment and construction
has been completed.
The language that you have proposed does not provide adequate
protection to the property owner, Bath Club Inc., or 5937 Collins, Inc. Accordingly, we
believe the following language should be reinserted into the Declaration of Restrictions
paragraph 3:
Owner will dedicate a pedestrian access easement along
the North boundary of the Property, not to exceed 15 feet
in width, for use as public beach access. The easement
3053776222 BERCIIJ & RADELL PA. 128 P03/03 DEC 22 '99 17:28
Gary Held, Esq.
December 22, 1999
Page 2
instrument will be recorded prior to the issuance of a
building permit for redevelopment of the Property, will
provide that it does not become effective until construction
has been completed, and may provide for prohibition of
access during construction. Such easement shall be
limited in a manner that Is necessary and appropriate to
insure the security and safety of the future occupants of
the Property as well as the security of the easement users,
subject to reasonable review and approval by City staff.
We believe that the above-cited language still protects the City's
inlefest in assuring that public access to the beach is provided through the site.
This language assures that the Joint Board will not approve a redevelopment
plan for the Bath Club property without also reviewing and approving the required
easement instrument;this language would also prohibit the issuance of a building
permit until the easement instrument is recorded.
If you have any questions, 'lease do not hesitate to contact me at
305-377-6220.
//1
co
JB/cg
Cc: Mr. R. Donahue Peebles
Ms,Veronica Caminos
Mr. Richard Matlof
Ty Harris, Esq.
Mr. Robert Percher
Bob Smith, Esq.
Laurie Ann Thompson, Esq.
4
•
BERCOW & RADELL
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
1
M 'V • ct° c g y
cr e, U
'• c • 0 au
• W . U •�
w
CA
(TS
o .CD ' VU
C.) w