06-24-1952 Regular Meeting 103
REGULAR MEETING
MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL
June 24, 1952
(Postponed from June 17th)
A regular meeting of the Village Council of Miami Shores Village,
Florida, was held at 7:30 orclock P.M. , June 24, 1952, at the Village Hall*
with the following Councilmen present:
Mayor M. E. Reynolds
George A. Frix
Michael J. Franco
William E. Carpenter
Absent: S. D. Phillips, Jr.
Mr. Thomas H. Anderson, Village Attorney, was also present.
Union motion made by Mr. Frix, seconded by Mr. Franco and
unanimously passed, minutes of the last regular meeting were approved as
written.
A certificate of appreciation was received from the Brockway Post
of the American Legion. The Council instructed the Village Manager to
write a letter acknowledging and thanking them for this certificate.
The Village Manager reported that the Miami Shores Woman's Club
hadgone to considerable expense and time in re-decorating the Community
.House. Mr. Carpenter moved that the Village Manager prepare a letter for the
Mayor's signature thanking the. Woman's Club for the fine work they have done
at the Community House. Motion was seconded by Mr. Frix and passed
unanimously.
The next item of business of the evening was in regard to the
t04
1
105
6/24/52
petition for a change in zone on Biscayne Blvd. which was returned to the
Council for a decision after being dismissed in Court. Mayor Reynolds read
a statement outlining the procedure the Council proposed to follow, barring any
objections from the interested parties. In line with this procedure the Mayor
named the following as a committee of three to hear testimony before the
petition is voted on by the entire Council:
George A. Frix, Chairman
Michael J. Franco
William E. Carpenter
The Village Attorney pointed out that this procedure is at variance
with the ordinance and thought the attorneys for the other side should be heard
as to their opinions.
Mr. T. J. Ellis stated that he was sorry he had filed the suit but
had done so only because he thought he could not get a fair hearing. He con-
tinued .that all his people wanted was fair use of their property and reasonable
consideration by this. Council for fair use of the property. His clients are not
interested in putting beer gardens and undesirable business on .the Boulevard
as has been claimed, and he added he had no objection to this procedure except
that he wished to reserve all legal objections to the validity of the two ordinances
passed after the petition was filed with the Planning Board, Nos. 223 and 227.
Mr. Ellis stated that obviously his clients think that the property is not suited
to single family residences and he made the offer, that the Village employ
a national planning expert at our expense, with no instructions, none from you
-and none from us, to go over there and see this property that the property
owners claim is not suited to single family residences, let him say what can
106
1
1
107
6/Z4/5Z
-3-
be done with it that won't hurt the neighbors and come in as an advisory
recommendation to all of us. Mr. Ellis added that he personally thought it was
a kind.of business and planning i n matter and not a kind of legal matter.
The Village Attorney stated that the Council cannot abdicate its
position to make any commitment or comment at all.
Mr. Ellis repeated that his clients only want to develop the property
in a legal, proper and fair manner and not hurt the Village and the neighbors.
He stated they have all agreed not to put in business, they want to build
modern air-conditioned high-class apartments and.limit them to year round
apartments.
Mr. L. J. Cushman, attorney for the Miami Shores Citizens Protective
Association, voiced his objections to this procedure. He stated he did not
like the procedure of referring the matter to a sub.-committee and did not
agree that it is in compliance with the ordinance. He contended that it puts
the Council in the position of making.a new law for 'a special case, whereas it
should be handled like any other zoning matter. He continued that he thought
this would require an amendment to the zoning ordinance and therefore the
propriety of the Council undertaking to informally delegate the Council's author-
ity or 'obligation to dispose of this matter itself. /According to his 'understanding
the suit that was pending in the Circuit Court of Dade County was dismissed with
the understanding that the applicants were going to resort to .administrative
remedies and since the ordinance is here, why should the Council make a new
procedure for this case. "I see no reason why the administrative procedure
ios
1
1
1-09,
-4- 6/24/52
should not be followed. TheCouncil has no lawful authority to delegate this
matter to:-someone else, " he stated.
The Village Attorney then mentioned the fact that we couldn't give
them a prompt hearing, because of the lack of a full Council.
Mr. Morrow, attorney, speaking for the petitioners, stated he
could see no reason for making such a judicial procedure out of this. He said
the Council can meet and give notice toanybody who wants to be heard, resolve
this thing;and dispose of it without a lot of technicality, emphasizing the
importance of expediency.
After further discussion the Council decided to proceed_along the lines
of the statement read by the Mayor and Mr. Frix:and the attorneys were
instructed to work out limitation of time for taking testimony and other details.
Mr. Hagearty of the Citizens Protective AssociationY pointed out that
at least 200 people will not be here until the middle of October. He stated he
didn't care when hearings start but they must continue until the people return.
Mir. Ellis again stated he has offered informally and in writing to
employ a national expert and wanted to know whether or not the Council will
accept his offer.
The Mayor stated that the Council could not accept his offer.
The next item-on the agenda was a letter from Mrs. Walsh regarding
,a nursery school. This was deemed an administrative matter to be handled
by the Village Manager.
In regard to the ordinance .concerning,intoxicating beverage licenses,
110
114
6/24/52
it was suggested by the Village Attorney that regulation be made by number
of people, that is, about one license for 3500 people. The Mayor stated he
would go over this with the Village Manager and make recommendations at the
next meeting.
A plat was presented combining ,Lots 7 and 8 of Tract 184A, the
Shores
west 25 ft. of Tract 190 and Lot 3, Block 5 of Earletbn less the west 400 ft.
The plat was approved by motion made by Mr. Frix, seconded by Mr. Franca
and passed unanimously. This plat is to be known as "Gordon Tracts. "
After a review of the June bills they were .approved by motion made
by Mr. Frix, seconded by Mr. Carpenter and passed unanimously.
Mr. Marion.Arnold, insurance adjuster, recommended settlement
of a sidewalk accident case which occurred on.December 10, 1951, in front
of 9523 N. E. 2nd Avenue, the injured person being,Mrs. Elizabeth:0. Blanchett.
Mr. Carpenter moved that we authorize Mr. Arnold to effect settlement in
this case up to a limit of $400. 00 as the Village's share, without prejudice to
the Village's position. Motion was seconded by Mr. Franco and passed
unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 9:00 PM.
Deputy C1 ,
C
Approved: f
Village Manager/and Clerk
may
112