Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-26406 Reso RESOLUTION NO. 2006-26406 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AMENDING ITS PRIOR RESOLUTION NO. 2006-26233, DATED JUNE 7, 2006, PURSUANT TO A REMAND BY THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE APPEAL FROM SUCH RESOLUTION AND PURSUANT TO THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN AL TON SOBE LLC AND CERT AIN OBJECTORS TO THE PROJECT APPROVED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ON FEBRUARY 7, 2006, TO ALLOW THAT ORIGINAL DRB ORDER TO BE REINSTATED AND TO ALLOW THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD TO CONSIDER REVISIONS TO THE PROJECT AS PROPOSED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER AND OBJECTORS. WHEREAS, the subject application for Design Review Board approval of a project at 929 Alton Road consists of a mixed-use project with commercial space fronting Alton Road at the ground level and vehicular access to the parking garage at the northwest corner of the site; a residential lobby is located at the southwest corner; parking is located in one fully subterranean basement level, as well as on the second floor; residential units are located on floors 3-5, and an active roof deck is proposed with a pool; and WHEREAS, the project was first considered by the Design Review Board on November 15, 2005, and was continued to a date certain of February 7, 2006, in order to address the concerns expressed by the Board and staff; and WHEREAS, on February 7,2006, the Board approved the project; and WHEREAS, pursuant to City Code Section 118-262, the Miami Design Preservation League and affected persons timely filed an appeal of the Design Review Board decision rendered on March 3, 2006; and WHEREAS, such Code section allows the applicant, or the city manager on behalf of the city administration, or an affected person, Miami Design Preservation League or Dade Heritage Trust to seek a review of any Design Review Board Order by the City Commission. For purposes of that section, "affected person" means either (i) a person owning property within 375 feet of the applicant's project reviewed by the board, or (ii) a person that appeared before the Design Review Board (directly or represented by counsel), and whose appearance is confirmed in the record of the Design Review Board's public hearing(s) for such project; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 118-262, the review by the City Commission is not a "de novo" hearing; it must be based upon the record of the hearing before the Design Review Board. Furthermore, Section 118-262 (b) provides: In order to reverse, or remand for amendment, modification or rehearing any decision of the Design Review Board, the City Commission shall find that the Design Review Board did not do one of the following: 1) provide procedural due process; 2) observe essential requirements of law, or 3) base its decision upon substantial, competent evidence; and WHEREAS, in order to reverse or remand a decision of the DRB, a 5nth vote of the City Commission is required; and WHEREAS, Section 118-262(a) requires the appellants to file with the City Clerk a written transcript of the hearing before the Design Review Board two weeks before the scheduled public hearing on the appeal; the transcript and associated material were transmitted to the Mayor and City Commission via LTC; and WHEREAS, on April 11, 2006, the City Commission set the hearing for this appeal to be held on June 7, 2006, and the City Clerk was directed and did notice such hearing; and WHEREAS, on June 7, 2006 the City Commission heard the parties, and pursuant to the argument given, the written materials submitted, and having been duly advised in the premises determined that: 1. The appellants objected to the applicant's late submittal of plans to the Design Review Board reflecting changes to the plans; and 2. The appellants objected to certain members of the Design Review Board disagreeing with the opinion of the Assistant City Attorney advising the Board that the Board had authority under the City Code to require a reduction in floor area if the Board were to find that the project was not compatible as provided for in the design review criteria; and WHEREAS, these objections resulted in, respectively, 1) a denial of due process, and 2) a departure from the essential requirements of law, such that the appeal should be granted and remanded to the Design Review Board for further proceedings; and WHEREAS, the motion to grant the appeal was made and seconded, and approved by a vote of 7 -0; WHEREAS, following the adoption by the City Commission of Resolution 2006-26233 on June 7, 2006 the owner of the subject property, Alton Sobe LLC, filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the Appellate Division of the Circuit Court, in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida, case no. 06-350 AP; and WHEREAS, prior to the matter being fully briefed by the parties and decided by the Court the owner and the objecting neighbors entered into a settlement agreement that would allow the property to either be purchased for some public residential use, or be developed with certain design modifications; and WHEREAS, in order to implement the settlement the parties have requested, and the Appellate Court granted, a remand to allow the owner and the objectors to present the City with an option to purchase, or failing that to present the Design Review Board with the revised plans for consideration; and 2 WHEREAS, the parties, in order to implement the settlement are asking the City Commission to allow the prior DRB order to be reinstated, and allow the design changes to be presented to that Board as modifications to that original order; and WHEREAS, the City Commission finds that it is in the best interests of the City and in the public health, safety and welfare to allow the original DRB order to be reinstated and for the owner and objectors to present the design changes to the DRB, and to allow such other discussions concerning the property to proceed as appropriate. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Mayor and City Commission hereby amends its prior Resolution No. 2006-26233, dated June 7, 2006, pursuant to the remand by the Appellate Division Of The Circuit Court of the appeal from such Resolution and pursuant to the Settlement Agreement between Alton Sobe LLC and certain objectors to the project approved by the Design Review Board on February 7,2006, to reinstate the original DRB Order in DRB file number 18871 and to allow the Design ReviFw Board to consider revisions to the project as proposed by the property owner and objectors. 1 /1 , ; ,,- I I . PASSED AND ADOPTED, this 6th dayof rec;,efnb~r ,2006. I ../ t! I Wl&t~- "-"""" MA Y OR David Dermer A~t p~ CITY CLERK Robert Parcher APPROVED AS TO FORM & LANGUA & FOR EXECUTION 'J4f /1/zt Jo, ~ F:\atto\HELG\LITIGA TI\Alton Sobe\Resolution after remand for settlement reso.doc 3 COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY Condensed Title: Request for the City Commission to reinstate the original order of the Design Review Board (DR B), wherein it approved DRB File No. 18871 pertaining to the development project at 929-939 Alton Road. Key Intended Outcome Supported: I Not Applicable Issue: Should the City Commission reinstate the original order of the Design Review Board (DRB), which was previously vacated pursuant to the granting of an appeal filed by the Miami Design Preservation League and Affected Persons~ Item Summarv/Recommendation: The City Commission granted the appeal filed by the Miami Design Preservation League and Affected Persons pertaining to the development project at 929-939 Alton Road (DRB File No. 18871). The Administration recommends that City Commission to reinstate the original order of the Design Review Board. Advisory Board Recommendation: The Design Review Board approved the subject application on February 7,2006. Financial Information: Source of Amount Account Approved Funds: 1 D 2 3 4 OBPI Total Financial Impact Summary: The proposed Resolution is not expected to have any fiscal impact. Ci Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin Jorge Gomez or Tom Mooney Assistant City Manager City Manager m ..... MIAMI BEACH AGENDA ITEM DATE C7l-/ 1~-tr.aG ~ MIAMI BEACH City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov COMMISSION MEMORANDUM FROM: Mayor David Dermer and Members of the City Commission City Manager Jorge M. Gonzalez J - ~ December 6, 2006 TO: DATE: SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AMENDING ITS PRIOR RESOLUTION NO. 2006-26233, DATED JUNE 7, 2006, PURSUANT TO A REMAND BY THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE APPEAL FROM SUCH RESOLUTION AND PURSUANT TO THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN ALTON SOBE LLC AND CERTAIN OBJECTORS TO THE PROJECT APPROVED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ON FEBRUARY 7, 2006, TO ALLOW THAT ORIGINAL DRB ORDER TO BE REINSTATED AND TO ALLOW THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD TO CONSIDER REVISIONS TO THE PROJECT AS PROPOSED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER AND OBJECTORS. ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION Adopt the resolution reinstating the original order of the Design Review Board and allowing the property owner to present an application to the DRB to consider revisions to the project as proposed by the property owner and objectors. BACKGROUND Pursuant to Section 118-262 of the City Code, the Miami Design Preservation League and affected persons appealed a decision of the Design Review Board (DRB) rendered on March 3, 2006, pertaining to DRB File No. 18871, for a mixed-use development project at 929-939 Alton Road. On June 7, 2006 the City Commission granted the appeal, thus vacating the Final Order and remanding the matter back to the DRB for further evaluation. ANAL YSIS Since the granting of the appeal, the applicant for the subject project has been engaged in dialogue with the surrounding property owners, as well as the Miami Design Preservation League. The purpose of these discussions was to explore potential modifications to the plans approved by the DRB that would address the concerns of the surrounding property owners with regard to the overall scale, massing and rear setbacks associated with the project. The applicant and the appellants have reached consensus on a revised design for the project. Specifically, the applicant will now be proposing a substantial increase in the rear setback of the parking base, as well as residential portions of the project. In order to accommodate the originally approved units, a front setback variance will be required. December 6, 2006 Commission Memorandum Reinstatement of Order in ORB File No. 18871 Page 2 of 2 Planning Department staff has evaluated the proposed changes and is supportive of the project, as revised. However, in addition to obtaining variances for the front setback, the applicant will also be required to go back before the DRB for approval of the modified plan. The subject application will still remain as a mixed-use project, with commercial space fronting Alton Road at the ground level and vehicular access to the parking garage at the northwest corner of the site. Parking is located in one fully sub-terranean basement level, as well as on the second floor, with the residential units located on floors 3-5, albeit substantially more setback from the rear property line. The applicant is requesting a reinstatement of the original order, pursuant to the settlement agreement between it, MDPL and the affected property owners, due to the fact that the subject project became legal non-conforming with regard to the number of parking spaces being provided. The original project was approved at 1.5 spaces per residential unit, and the current regulations have a parking requirement of 2 spaces per unit. CONCLUSION The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission reinstate the original order of the Design Review Board (DRB), wherein it approved DRB File No. 18871 pertaining to the development project at 929-939 Alton Road, and allow for the owner and affected parties to present to the DRB an amended plan for approval. JMG/TH/J~M ~ T:\AGENDA\2006\deC0606\Reg~~NSTATEMENT - DRB File 18871- MEM DEC.doc SHUTTS & BOWEN LLP ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW MARIA A. ORALIA Member Florida Bar (305) 347-7328 Direct Telephone (305) 347-7701 Direct Facsimile E-MAIL ADDRESS: mgra I ia@shutls-law.cOIll November 10, 2006 Via E-mail and U.S. Mail Jose Smith, Esq. City Attorney City of Miami Beach 1700 Convention Center Drive Miami Beach, Florida 33139-1819 Re: Request to Schedule Resolution Reinstating the March 3, 2005 Design Review Board Final Order for the Project located at 929-939 Alton Road, Miami Beach, Florida Dear Mr. Smith: This firm represents Alton Sobe, LLC ("Alton Sobe"), the owner of the property located at 929-939 Alton Road, Miami Beach, Florida ("Property"). Please accept this letter as AIton Sobe's request to schedule a resolution reinstating the March 3, 2006 Design Review Board Final Order ("DRB Final Order") approving a 5-story mixed-use project on the property adjacent to the Flamingo Park Historic District ("Flamingo Park") on the December 6, 2006 City Commission Agenda. By way of background, on February 7, 2006, the Design Review Board ("DRB") approved a new five (5) story mixed-use project consisting of 24 residential units and a restaurant on the ground level ("Project"). The DRB Final Order approving the Project was issued on March 3, 2006 ("DRB Final Order"). On March 23, 2006, The Miami Design Preservation League ("MDPL") along with seven residents of Flamingo Park (hereinafter referred to as "Respondents") appealed the DRB Final Order to the City Commission pursuant to Section 118-262(a) of the Miami Beach Code. On Jlme 27, the City Commission reversed the DRB Final Order approving the Project and remanded the matter to DRB for further proceedings. Immediately thereafter, Alton Sobe filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari in the Circuit Court of the 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida challenging the Commission's reversal ofthe DRB Final Order. 1500 MIAMI CENTER. 201 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD' MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 . TELEPHONE 1305) 358-6300 . FACSIMILE (305) 381-9982 . WEBSITE; www.shutts-law.com MIAMI FORT LAUDERDALE WEST PALM BEAC>1 ORLANDO TAMPA TALLAHASSEE AMSTERDAM I..ONDON Jose Smith, Esq. November 10, 2006 Page 2 Alton Sobe and Respondents have reached a settlement that addresses Respondents' concems over the compatibility of the Project with Flamingo Park ("Settlement"). Pursuant to the Settlement, Alton Sobe redesigned the Project to address Respondents' concerns by eliminating the front yard setbacks for the residential portion of the building, stepping back the residential tower on the 4th and 5th floors on the east side of the building, eliminating the balconies facing east on the 3rd floor and increasing the rear yard setbacks to a maximum of 61'2" at the 5th floor, among other things (Redesigned Project). Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement, Respondents have agreed not to contest the Redesigned Project. Additionally, Respondents have agreed to the reinstatement of the DRB Final Order, which would allow the Redesigned Project to be approved pursuant to regulations in place at the time of the February 7, 2006 DRB hearing approving the Project. Based on the foregoing, we respectfully request that a resolution reinstating the March 3, 2006 Design Review Board Final Order pursuant to the terms of the Settlement and remanding Design Review File No. 18871 to the Design Review Board for further proceedings pursuant to Resolution No. 2006-26233. Thank YOll for your consideration in this matter and please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions or comments regarding this request. Very tmly yours, SHUTTS & BOWEN LLP cr(~~~ cc: Gary Held, Esq. Jorge Gomez Thomas Mooney Yves Uzan Dominique N ameche Bill Farkas Mark Needle Andrew Delaplaine Charles Recher Carol Jacque Allison Cotter MIADOCS 1576669 1 SHUlTS & BOWEN LLP MIAMI FORT LAUDERDAlE WEST PALM BEACH ORLANDO TALLAHASSEE AMSTERDAM LONDON