1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 -1- CITY OF MIAMI HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD TRANSCRIPT OF JANUARY 5, 2010 HEARING AGENDA ITEM # 2 MIAMI SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 2450 SW 1 STREET ST APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NOT TO ISSUE A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR EIGHT BISHOPWOOD TREES LOCATED ON SW 3 STREET RD BETWEEN SW 24 AND SW 25 AVENUES TH TH 3:00 PM CITY HALL 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE DINNER KEY, MIAMI, FLORIDA
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-1-
CITY OF MIAMI
HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD
TRANSCRIPT OF
JANUARY 5, 2010 HEARING
AGENDA ITEM # 2
MIAMI SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
2450 SW 1 STREETST
APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF
THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
NOT TO ISSUE A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR
EIGHT BISHOPWOOD TREES LOCATED ON SW 3 STREETRD
BETWEEN SW 24 AND SW 25 AVENUESTH TH
3:00 PM CITY HALL
3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE
DINNER KEY, MIAMI, FLORIDA
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-2-
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU, AND YOU MAY BE SEATED. ANYONE WHO IS
GOING TO GIVE TESTIMONY TODAY, WOULD YOU PLEASE STAND AND BE
SWORN IN BY THE PRESERVATION OFFICER? NOW, IN THE ABSENCE OF
OUR ATTORNEY, I'M GOING TO MAKE AN ATTEMPT AT THE LOBBY
ANNOUNCEMENT, AND THAT IS IF YOU ARE HERE ON -- IF YOU ARE BEING
PAID BY SOMEONE TO BE HERE, ON THEIR BEHALF, YOU ARE CONSIDERED
A LOBBYIST, AND YOU MUST REGISTER WITH THE CITY CLERK. AND HERE
IS OUR ATTORNEY NOW. AND HE WILL DO A BETTER JOB OF MAKING THAT
ANNOUNCEMENT. BUT WHILE HE'S GETTING HERE, I'LL GIVE YOU MY
ANNOUNCEMENT, AND THAT IS, IF YOU HAVE A CELL PHONE OR A BEEPER,
PLEASE TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO TURN THAT TO VIBRATE OR OFF.
THANK YOU. YOUR TURN.
>> City Attorney: I IMAGINE THE LOBBYING -- THE LOBBYING, AS I'M SURE
YOU HEARD FROM OUR CHAIR, IF YOU'RE BEING PAID FOR YOUR
APPEARANCE TODAY AS A THIRD PARTY, YOU NEED TO REGISTER AS A
LOBBYIST WITH THE CITY CLERK BEFORE YOU ADDRESS THE HEP BOARD.
BUT IF YOU'RE APPEARING, LET'S SAY, ON YOUR OWN BEHALF, FOR YOUR
OWN PROPERTY, OR A PAID VOLUNTEER ON BEHALF OF A CIVIC GROUP
OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU WOULD NOT QUALIFY AS A LOBBYIST. IF
YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE SEE US. THANK YOU.
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AT THIS TIME WE'LL HAVE THE
ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
* * *
THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS MIAMI SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL. 2450
SOUTHWEST FIRST STREET. JUST THIS IS AN APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-3-
THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NOT TO ISSUE A TREE-REMOVAL PERMIT
FOR SIX BISHOPWOOD TREES LOCATED ON SOUTHWEST 3rd STREET
BETWEEN SOUTHWEST 24th AND SOUTHWEST 25th AVENUES. IS THE
APPLICANT PRESENT?
>>Board Member Grafton: AND MR. CHAIR, I HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM
THIS CASE, BECAUSE IT'S A PROJECT I'M WORKING ON AND MY COMPANY
IS WORKING ON, THANK YOU.
>> Chairperson: OKAY. PLEASE GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE
RECORD.
>> Mr. Garcia: GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN, AND MEMBERS OF THE
BOARD. I'M LUIS GARCIA, HERE ON BEHALF OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF
MIAMI-DADE, FLORIDA.
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE HAVE A STAFF REPORT?
>> Preservation Officer: YES, SIR. AT – [ INAUDIBLE ] YES, AT OUR LAST
MEETING, THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT THE PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIREMENTS, AND AT THAT TIME, THE FILE WAS UNAVAILABLE TO US
AND WE SENT IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER A MEMO TO YOU WITH THE
DOCUMENTS SHOWING THAT IT WAS PROPERLY NOTICED. SO THIS WAS
CONTINUED BEFORE SO THAT WE COULD, IN FACT, MAKE SURE THAT WE
HAD DONE EVERYTHING CORRECTLY, WHICH WE DID. THIS TIME WE
NOTICED, AGAIN – AND HEARING SOME CONCERNS FROM THE NEIGHBORS
ABOUT THE NUMBER OF POSTINGS AND SO FORTH -- WE MADE AN EVEN
GREATER EFFORT. THREE TREES WERE POSTED BEHIND MIAMI SENIOR
HIGH, AND WE NOTIFIED ALL OF THE ADJACENT PERSONS OF THIS
HEARING. THE STAFF ALSO WANTED TO KIND OF EMBELLISH WHAT WE'D
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-4-
WRITTEN BEFORE SO THAT WE WERE CLEAR ON WHAT IS BEFORE THE
BOARD. WHAT IS BEFORE THE BOARD IS WHETHER OR NOT THE EIGHT
BISHOPWOOD TREES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE MIAMI HIGH SCHOOL
PROPERTY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE REMOVED. WE HAD SAID IN OUR
ORIGINAL REPORT THAT THE BISHOPWOOD TREE IS CLASSIFIED AS AN
INVASIVE. AND THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE USE, CITY CODES AND
CHAPTER 23, OUR CODE, AND CHAPTER 17 OF THE CITY CODE, WHICH
DEALS WITH ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION, ALL SPEAK TO THE
BISHOPWOOD TREE AS AN INVASIVE SPECIES. BECAUSE WE THOUGHT WE
SHOULD MAKE THAT EVEN CLEARER, WE ADDED AN ADDENDUM TO THE
STAFF REPORT AND INCLUDED SEVERAL EXCERPTS FROM MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY DOES NOT SUPERSEDE THE CITY OF
MIAMI'S ORDINANCES. IT SUPPLEMENTS THEM, REINFORCES THE
POSITION. SO WE ADDED EXCERPTS FROM CHAPTER 24, WHICH SPEAKS
TO THE BISHOPWOOD TREE AS A PROHIBITED SPECIES IN THE
LANDSCAPE MANUAL, SPEAKS TO IT AS A PROHIBITED SPECIES. AND THEN
SECTIONS 8.1 OF OUR TREE-PROTECTION ORDINANCES, AND THERE ARE
NO FEES. AND THE REMOVAL OF INVASIVES ARE ENCOURAGED. AND
LASTLY, WE INCLUDED AN EXCERPT FROM JULIA MORTON WHO WAS
CONTEMPORARY OF MARJORIE STONEMAN DOUGLAS AND SHE SPEAKS
TO IT IN THE FLORIDA HORTICULTURE PROCEDURES -- PROCEEDINGS,
RATHER, ABOUT THE BISHOPWOOD TREE, AND IT WAS INTERESTING FOR
ME, BECAUSE I AM NOT A BOTANIST OR A PLANT PERSON, OTHER THAN AT
HOME, SHE SPEAKS TO THE FACT THAT THE TREES WERE IMPORTED
FROM CHINA, AND THAT THEY WERE CONSIDERED GREAT TREES AT THE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-5-
BEGINNING AND LATER, CERTAIN THINGS WERE DISCOVERED, THAT THEY
WERE FAST-GROWING, WHICH WAS A GOOD THING, BUT THAT THEY ALSO
HAD A TENDENCY TO DEVELOP DIFFERENT DISEASES, ET CETERA. AND I'M
NOT TRYING TO BE THE BISHOPWOOD TREE EXPERT, BUT I WANTED YOU
TO SEE THERE HAS BEEN A LOT WRITTEN ABOUT IT AND IT HAS BEEN
IDENTIFIED IN MIAMI-DADE COUNTY AS AN INVASIVE SPECIES, AND IT IS
RECOMMENDED THAT IT BE REMOVED, AND SPECIFICALLY IN ONE OF THE
EXCERPTS WE GAVE YOU, IT SAYS WHEN DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY
OCCURS, WHICH IS WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED HERE, THAT THE TREES
SHOULD BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH A NATIVE SPECIES. AND WE
STILL CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN OUR RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS THAT
THE INVASIVE SHOULD BE REMOVED AND THAT IT IS NOT CONTRARY TO
OUR MANDATE OF PROTECTING THE TREES IN MIAMI. THANK YOU.
>> City Attorney: MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY, I DON'T WANT TO SOUND LIKE A
BROKEN RECORD, BECAUSE I SAID THIS THE LAST HEARING. BUT I WANT
TO EMPHASIZE WHAT WE'RE HERE TODAY ON, ON THIS PARTICULAR
PROCEEDING OF A PERMIT APPEAL, IS THE CRITERIA AND CONDITIONS
FOR TREE REMOVAL AND TREE RELOCATION UNDER 8.1, TREE
PROTECTION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. AND I'D LIKE US TO PLEASE
ADHERE TO THAT CRITERIA, BECAUSE IF WE GET WAYLAID, WE'RE NOT
HERE ON SCHOOL SIDING, OR TRAFFIC PATTERNS, TREATMENT AND SO
ON AND SO FORTH, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WITHIN OUR PROVINCE. THANK
YOU.
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE
TO ADD --
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-6-
>> Mr. Garcia: NOTHING REALLY, BASICALLY WE'RE HERE ON THE APPEAL
GIVEN BY THE DEPARTMENT, AND WE'RE VERY PLEASED WITH THE
DEPARTMENT'S RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVAL, FAST
RECOMMENDATION THAT WE APPROVE THE REMOVAL OF THE EIGHT
BISHOPWOOD TREES. ONE THING, I DON'T KNOW, IT WAS POINTED OUT
LAST TIME, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT HAS AGREED TO REPLACE THE TREES
WITH 12 OAK TREES THAT ARE NATIVE TO THE COMMUNITY. AND THAT'S
BASICALLY IT. IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR SPECIFIC
QUESTION, WE'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. WE ALSO
HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM OUR ARCHITECT IF THAT IS NECESSARY TO
ANSWER ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS. IF NOT, THEN WE WILL NOT TAKE ANY
OF YOUR TIME WITH THAT.
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> Board Member: I HAVE A QUESTION.
>> Chairperson: YES?
>>Board Member: THE OAK TREES ARE GOING RIGHT IN THE
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) --
>> Mr. Garcia: RIGHT, THE SAME AREA.
>> Board Member: IN THE SAME SPOT?
>> Mr. Garcia: NOT IN THE EXACT SAME SPOT, NO.
>> Chairperson: EXCUSE ME. NOT EXACTLY THE SAME SPOT, BUT CLOSE
PROXIMITY? ?
>>Mr. Garcia: IN CLOSE PROXIMITY.
>> Chairperson: ON THE INSIDE OF THE FENCE OR THE OUTSIDE --
>> Mr. Garcia: INSIDE OF THE FENCE.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-7-
>> Board Member: SO YOU'RE –
>> Mr. Garcia: WE HAVE NOTHING FURTHER TO ADD. BASICALLY AS WE
STATED BEFORE, THIS IS IN ORDER -- WE NEED THE TREE REMOVAL IN
ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE NEW RENOVATION AT THE HIGH SCHOOL,
MIAMI SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL. AND WE ARE REPLACING THE EXISTING
EIGHT TREES THAT ARE NOT PROTECTED AND THEY'RE DESTROYING THE
AREA IN AND OF ITSELF. WITH 12 TREES THAT ARE NATIVE TO THE
COMMUNITY.
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU. ARE THERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO
WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR
NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. ALSO PLEASE LIMIT YOUR
REMARKS TO TWO MINUTES APIECE.
>> City Attorney: WHATEVER ANY PARTY PUTS INTO THE RECORD HAS TO
BE GIVEN TO THE OTHER PARTY. OKAY?
>> Board Member: MR. CHAIR?
>> Chairperson: YES?
>> Board Member: WHILE WE WAIT FOR THE PERSON, CAN I ASK STAFF OR
ANY OUR EXPERT, THE ARCHITECT A QUESTION, LAYMAN'S TERMS THAT'S
ON THE BOARD?
>> Chairperson: I'M SORRY --
>> Board Member: CAN I ASK A QUESTION OF STAFF --
>> City Attorney: WHATEVER IS GIVEN TO THE BOARD, I REPEAT, MUST BE
GIVEN TO THE OTHER PARTY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AS LONG AS SOMEONE
DOES IT.
>> Board Member: JUST A QUESTION, IN THE STAFF REPORT, COULD YOU
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-8-
EXPLAIN TO ME AND PROBABLY MAYBE PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC THAT MAY
WANT TO KNOW, THE TERM "AN INVASIVE SPECIES," COULD WE GET SOME
CLARIFICATION ON THAT, PLEASE, IN TERMS OF THE TREES?
>>Board Member: IT'S NOT A NATIVE SPECIES. AND IT IS -- IT WILL MULTIPLY
AND SPREAD AND AT TIMES BE DANGEROUS, THE BOCIFEOUS WILL
WEAK-WOODED AND WILL LOSE THEIR HEADS IN HIGH WINDS.
>> Board Member: UH-HUH, OKAY. THANK YOU.
>> Board Member: I GUESS I'M CURIOUS IF WE HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE
NET OFFICE WHO ORIGINALLY DENIED -- OR DENIED THE REMOVAL?
>> Chairperson: OKAY, SIR, MR. MITCHELL IS WITH US, AND IT WAS A PUBLIC
WORKS DENIAL, BECAUSE THE TREES ARE IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.
THIS IS OUR ASSISTANT PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR.
>> Asst. Public Works Director: GOOD EVENING. FRANCIS MITCHELL
REPRESENTING THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. THE DEFINITION OF
INVASIVE SPECIES IS A SPECIES NONNATIVE TO THE AREA AND THAT
TENDS TO PROVIDE IT, BECAUSE THERE'S NO NATURAL CONTROL THAT
WOULD PREVENT THAT TREE TO ACTUALLY RUN WILD, TO
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) WITHOUT CONTROL.
>> Board Member: AND JUST THE STAFF, WOULD THAT BE THE REASON
WHY OUR PRESERVATION STAFF HAS APPROVED THE -- WHAT DID YOU
DO, GRANTED THE APPEAL? THE RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU GAVE, IS
IT BECAUSE OF THE INVASIVENESS OF THE SPECIES?
>> Preservation Officer: THAT'S CORRECT.
>> Board Member: SO MY REAL QUESTION, THEN, IS TO PUBLIC WORKS,
OKAY, THE TREE IS GROWING IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. WHY DOES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-9-
PUBLIC WORKS OBJECT TO IT BEING REMOVED IF IT IS AN INVASIVE
EXOTIC?
>>Asst. Public Works Director: WHEN WE GRANTED TREE REMOVAL PERMIT,
WE WENT FIRST BY POSTING THE TREE. ANYTIME WE RECEIVE ANY -- ANY
OBJECTION FROM THE PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, WE TAKE THIS INTO
CONSIDERATION, AND WE RECEIVE, WHAT, SIX, I BELIEVE – FIVE. FIVE
OBJECTIONS. SO THAT WAS THE REASON FOR DENIAL.
>> Board Member: THANK YOU.
>> Chairperson: THAT WAS IT?
>> Board Member: YEAH.
>> Chairperson: GO AHEAD, SIR.
>> Mr. Kolner: THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS NEIL KOLNER.
I LIVE AT 2420 SOUTHWEST 3 STREET. I PRACTICE LAW IN DOWNTOWNrd
MIAMI. I LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM THESE EIGHT BISHOPWOOD
TREES. WE'RE HERE ON APPEAL FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR,
WHO'S MADE A DETERMINATION THAT THESE TREES IN THE PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY SHOULD NOT BE CUT DOWN. YOUR FUNCTION IN THIS
APPEAL SETTING IS TO FOLLOW THE INTENT AND PURPOSE ESTABLISHED
BY THE ORDINANCE CALLED TREE PROTECTION. AS YOU'LL SEE, THE
INTENT OF THE ARTICLE IS TO PROTECT, PRESERVE, AND RESTORE THE
TREE CANOPY WITHIN THE CITY. THE PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE IS TO
ASSURE THAT THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF ALL DEVELOPMENT
ACTIVITY IS EXECUTED IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE
PRESERVATION OF EXISTING TREES TO THE GREATEST EXTENT
POSSIBLE. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS. IT DOES NOT SAY, EXCEPT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-10-
INVASIVES. IT DOESN'T SAY, EXCEPT WHEN THE SCHOOL BOARD OF DADE
COUNTY WANTS TO CUT DOWN THE TREES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.
MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE ROLE OF THIS BOARD ON AN APPEAL FROM
THIS IS THAT YOU MUST CONSIDER THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR'S
DECISION. IF YOU WERE TO OVERTURN THE DECISION OF THE PUBLIC
WORKS DIRECTOR, IT WOULD BE UNPRECEDENTED, IN MY RESEARCH. I
REVIEWED THE MINUTES OF THIS BOARD FOR 76 MEETINGS DATING BACK
TO JANUARY 2003, WHICH ARE THE ONES AVAILABLE ON THE INTERNET.
ONLY ONCE DID THIS BOARD ADDRESS AN APPEAL OF A PUBLIC WORKS
DIRECTOR DECISION, DENYING A TREE-REMOVAL PERMIT. THAT APPEAL
WAS DENIED BY THIS BOARD. WE WOULD ASK YOU TO DO THE SAME
TODAY. I HAVE PROVIDED YOU COPIES, FIRST OF ALL, OF 58 LETTERS OF
NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE SIGNED A PETITION TO THIS BOARD. 58 PEOPLE
WITHIN THE COMMUNITY WHO ARE OPPOSED TO CUTTING THESE TREES.
MANY OF THEM WOULD BE HERE BUT FOR THE NOTICE INADEQUACY AT
THE LAST MEETING, AND WHEN WE ADJOURNED, WHEN YOU ALL
ADJOURNED THE LAST MEETING, IT WAS PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED WE WERE
GOING TO RESUME THIS MEETING TOMORROW, JANUARY 6 . AND I HAVEth
THE TRANSCRIPT OF THAT MEETING IF ANYONE'S INTERESTED IN SEEING
IT. BUT HERE WE ARE ON THE 5th, AND PERHAPS SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE
MIGHT HAVE BEEN HERE TODAY TO VOICE THEIR OPPOSITION IF IT HAD
BEEN PROPERLY ANNOUNCED.
>> Board Member: MR. CHAIR? A QUESTION, I DO APOLOGIZE.
>> Chairperson: YES.
>> Board Member: POINT OF CLARIFICATION. STAFF, WAS THIS ITEM
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-11-
ADVERTISED?
>> Preservation Officer: YES, SIR, IT IS. IT WAS NOTICED TO THE PEOPLE BY
-- I'M SORRY, ADJACENT TO THE SCHOOL. THERE'S A NOTICE THAT IS
PUBLISHED IN THE NEWSPAPER. IT IS ON OUR WEBSITE.
>> Board Member: SO THAT WOULD SUPERCEDE OUR DATE
ANNOUNCEMENT AT THE NEXT MEETING?
>> Preservation Officer: YES, I MISSPOKE.
>> Board Member: OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> Chairperson: GO AHEAD.
>> Mr. Kolner: I WROTE A LETTER TO THE PRESERVATION OFFICER AFTER
THE LAST MEETING ASKING HER TO CLARIFY HER DECEMBER 1ST STAFF
REPORT RECOMMENDING THAT YOU OVERTURN THE PUBLIC WORKS
DIRECTOR'S DENIAL OF TREE-REMOVAL PERMIT. AND I ANALYZED HER
STAFF REPORT, AND THE SUM AND SUBSTANCE OF HER STAFF REPORT
WAS WHAT STAFF DID WAS TO READ THE ORDINANCE AND SEEK
COUNSEL FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AS TO HOW TO HELP THE
ARCHITECTS ACHIEVE THEIR GOAL OF APPEALING THE DECISION. STAFF'S
JOB, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE PRESERVATION OFFICER'S DUTY, IS TO
CARRY OUT THE DUTIES DESIGNED BY THIS CHAPTER. HISTORIC
PRESERVATION, AND THE OTHER APPLICABLE LAWS, LIKE THE
TREE-PROTECTION ORDINANCE. I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S THE TREE
PRESERVATION OFFICE -- OR THE PRESERVATION OFFICER'S DUTY TO
ASSIST SOMEBODY TRYING TO OVERTURN A DECISION OF THE PUBLIC
WORKS DIRECTOR. INSTEAD OF CLARIFYING HER DECISION, SHE SIMPLY
ADDED MORE ABOUT THE INVASIVE TREES. I ALSO HAVE PRESENTED TO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-12-
YOU A LETTER FROM COUNTY COMMISSIONER OF DISTRICT 5, BRUNO
BARREIRO, WHO HAS SAID AS COUNTY COMMISSIONER THAT
REPRESENTS THE CITY OF MIAMI, I SUPPORT THE DECISION OF THE
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NOT TO ISSUE A TREE-REMOVAL PERMIT FOR
EIGHT BISHOPWOOD TREES BETWEEN SOUTHWEST 24 AND SOUTHWESTth
25th AVENUES. THE RESIDENTS OF THE VICINITY OF THE MIAMI SENIOR
HIGH SCHOOL DO NOT WANT THE TREES REMOVED AS THEY HAVE BEEN
THERE FOR MANY YEARS. MANY RESIDENTS HAVE INFORMED ME THEY
WERE NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FUTURE CHANGES PLANNED IN THIS AREA
AND WERE NOT INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS. I GREATLY APPRECIATE
YOUR CONSIDERATION IN THIS MATTER AND URGE YOU TO DENY THE
APPEAL. SINCERELY BRUNO BARREIRO, COMMISSIONER, DISTRICT 5. I'VE
ALSO ATTACHED AND PROVIDED FOR YOU SOME OF THE ARCHITECT'S
MASTER PLANS FOR THE RENOVATION IN WHICH THEY DISCUSSED THE
LANDSCAPING OF THE AREA AND THEIR PLAN. AND TUCKED IN THE
CONCLUSION ON PAGE -- WELL, THEY'RE NOT NUMBERED, BUT THE LAST
PAGE OF THE PACKET, THE LAST PARAGRAPH, IMPROVED GREEN SPACE
ON THE GROUNDS OF THE CAMPUS, AND AT THE PERIMETER WILL
GREATLY IMPROVE THE AESTHETIC QUALITY OF THE SITE. LANDSCAPING
IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAYS AND CAREFUL ATTENTION TO STREET
IMPROVEMENTS WILL COMPLETE THE RETURN OF THE SCHOOL TO THE
POSITION OF PROMINENCE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT IT ONCE HELD. FOR
THE LIFE OF ME, HOW CAN THIS MASTER PLAN, TALKING ABOUT
LANDSCAPING IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAYS BE CONSISTENT WITH CUTTING
THE ONLY TREES IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ON SOUTHWEST 3rd STREET?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-13-
FOR ALL THOSE REASONS, AND FOR THE REASONS THAT 58 OF MY
NEIGHBORS HAVE SIGNED A PETITION TO THIS BOARD, AND THE COUNTY
COMMISSIONER FOR OUR DISTRICT, WE URGE YOU TO UPHOLD THE
DECISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR AND DENY THIS APPEAL.
THANK YOU.
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE SOMEONE ELSE FROM
THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK?
>>Preservation Officer: MAY I ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT MR.
KOLNER ASSIGNED TO ME?
>> Chairperson: YES. JUST GIVE US ONE MINUTE.
>> Preservation Officer: I BELIEVE MR. KOLNER SAID I WAS STATING THAT I
WAS ADVANCING THE ARCHITECT'S POSITION ON THIS, AND I WANT TO
ASSURE YOU THAT ON MY REPORTS, THEY SPEAK ONLY TO THE TREES
AND DO NOT DEAL WITH THE MASTER PLANNING FOR THE MIAMI SENIOR
HIGH SCHOOL. ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID DO, ALSO, TO MAKE CLEAR
WHAT THE PROCESS IS, IS TO FIND OUT WHETHER OR NOT THE
NEIGHBORS HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED OF ANY PREVIOUS HEARINGS. AND WE
HAVE WITH US THE HEARING BOARD'S OFFICIAL LIST OF A NOTICE OF THE
REPLATTING FOR MIAMI HIGH AND THIS PLAN. AND AT THAT TIME, THEY
NOTICED 500 FEET AROUND THE SCHOOL, WHICH IS A HUGE BLOCK AREA.
WE DID WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT THAT HAPPENED, SO THERE WAS AT
LEAST ONE NOTICE SENT THAT THERE WERE THINGS HAPPENING IN MIAMI
SENIOR HIGH. I DO THINK THAT TAKING OUT OF CONTEXT THE FIRST
PARAGRAPH OF CHAPTER 17, OUR 8.1, INDEED IT IS OUR JOB TO
PRESERVE THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE NATURAL FEATURES IN MIAMI,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-14-
BUT THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS, AND CHAPTER 17, ENVIRONMENTAL
PRESERVATION, IT NOTES THAT THE BISHOPWOOD IS AN UNDESIRABLE
EXOTIC SPECIES. IN 8.1, IT ALSO SAYS, IN 8.1.1.5-C ENCOURAGES THE
REMOVAL OF EXOTICS AND REPLACEMENT WITH NATIVE TREES. IN 8.1.6.3,
IT EXPLAINS THE REMOVAL OF A PROHIBITED SPECIES, WITH TWO
EXCEPTIONS – A FICUS VARIEFICUS VARIETY --WE INCLUDED IN PARTS OF
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY'S ORDINANCES, AGAIN NOT SO THAT YOU WOULD
THINK THAT MIAMI-DADE RULES. BUT RATHER THAT THERE IS NOT ONLY
A COUNTY COMMENT AND CONCERN ABOUT INVASIVE TREES, BUT ALSO
THE STATE HAS WEIGHED IN ON THE TREES. SO MY JOB WAS TO FOCUS
PERHAPS VERY NARROWLY AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE TREES WERE
-- SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE LEFT OR WHETHER THEY SHOULD BE
REMOVED. THANK YOU.
>> Chairperson: OKAY, THANK YOU. YOU MAY COMMENT.
>> City Attorney: AND ANY HANDOUTS IN A QUASI -- ANY HANDOUTS IN THE
RECORD MUST BE GIVEN TO THE OTHER SIDE. THE BOARD CANNOT
ACCEPT SOMETHING THAT IS NOT GIVEN TO THE OTHER SIDE.
>>Preservation Officer: THE OTHER THING IS DO WE HAVE THE 80 LETTERS
MR. KOLNER PUT INTO THE RECORD? DO YOU HAVE --
>> Clerk: YES, WE DO. HE GAVE ME THE ORIGINALS HERE.
>>Preservation Officer: OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> City Attorney: PROCEED.
>> Mr. Mazzaroppi: RON MAZZAROPPI, 2534 SOUTHWEST 3 STREET. THErd
AREA WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS ONE THAT HAS A -- HAS THE TREES ON IT
FOR THAT SIDE OF THE STREET. NOW, IF YOU GO AROUND -- AND I HAVE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-15-
SOME PICTURES HERE TO SHOW YOU -- ALL OF THE VARIOUS STREETS IN
THAT AREA ARE ALL CONSISTENT. THEY'RE ALL LINED WITH TREES.
NATURALLY IN THE AREAS WHERE THERE'S DRIVEWAYS, THERE CAN'T BE.
THE CURBING IS BASICALLY THE SAME, OR LACK THEREOF. AND IT FORMS
THE BASIC NEIGHBORHOOD. THE RENOVATION THEY WANT TO DO AND
WHAT THEY WANT TO DO REMOVES THE TREES, REMOVES THE
SIDEWALK, PUSHES IT BACK, AND MAKES A PARKING LANE IN THERE,
WHICH WOULD TAKE THIS OUT. THEY SAY THEY WANT TO REPLACE THE
TREES, BUT THAT'S NOT A REPLACEMENT. THE REPLACEMENT IS TO TAKE
UP AND PUT BACK IN THE SAME PLACE. THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY WANT TO
DO. THEY WANT TO MOVE THE TREES OVER ON THEIR PROPERTY. YOU
KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO PLANT SOME TREES AND WE'RE GOING TO LET
THEM GROW, AND I'LL PROBABLY BE DEAD BEFORE THEY GET TO BE
ANYTHING LIKE THIS. AND THEN WHAT'S TO SAY IN FIVE YEARS THEY
DECIDE THEY JUST WANT TO TEAR THOSE TREES OUT, THEY WANT TO DO
SOMETHING, THEY DON'T MAINTAIN THEM PROPERLY? THE NEIGHBORS
HAVE NO STAND IN THIS. [ BELL SOUNDS ] AT ALL. THIS IS WHY WE WANT
TO MAINTAIN THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY AND MAINTAIN THE TREES IN THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY, SO IT'S UNDER YOUR CONTROL, BECAUSE THAT'S THE
ONLY PROTECTION THE NEIGHBORS HAVE. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THESE
PICTURES, THESE TREES AND THIS CURBING AND THE WAY THIS IS DONE
IS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD. YOU TAKE
THAT OUT, YOU DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO ON THEIR DRAWINGS, IT'S
GREAT FOR COMMERCIAL AREA. BEAUTIFUL FOR A COMMERCIAL AREA.
BUT IT'S NOT PART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. [ BELL SOUNDS ]
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-16-
>> Chairperson: THAT'S THE SIGNAL THAT YOUR TWO MINUTES HAVE
EXPIRED. IF YOU COULD PLEASE WRAP IT UP.
>> > Mr. Mazzaroppi: OH, OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU.
>> > Mr. Mazzaroppi: SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS WE WANT TO
PRESERVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE WANT TO PRESERVE THE LOOK OF
THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS A TWO -- A TWO-PLUS BLOCK RENOVATION
PROCESS. WHATEVER THEY WANT TO DO THERE, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE
TO DO ON PART OF THAT OTHER PROPERTY, ON THEIR OTHER PROPERTY.
YOU HAVE ALL THESE NEIGHBORS. THIS BIG PROJECT, NOBODY IS SAYING
ANYTHING. [ BELL SOUNDS ] WE WANT A FEW LITTLE CRUMBS HERE TO
GIVE US TO PRESERVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE HAVE, THAT WE'VE
ALL SPENT MONEY FOR, AND WE TAKE CARE OF. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU. I'LL LET YOU GO AT THE END, IF YOU DON'T
MIND.
>> NO PROBLEM.
>> Chairperson: BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
>> Mr. Ray: MICHAEL RAY, CLASS OF '69, ALSO TAUGHT THERE, AND
INVOLVED IN THE INTERNSHIP THERE. AND I HOPE BEFORE MY TWO
MINUTES START --
>> Chairperson: ADDRESS, PLEASE.
>>Mr. Ray: IS 124 SOUTH MIAMI AVENUE, MIAMI. I RAISED THE DUE
PROCESS ISSUE BEFORE. AND I CITED VERY SPECIFICALLY, AS WELL AS
THE FACT OF NOTICES BEING MAILED TO HOMEOWNERS, THE CITY CODE
62-1292A AND B WHICH WOULD REQUIRE SIGNS POSTED ON BOTH SIDES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-17-
OF THE STREET, WHICH WERE NOT, AND I POINTED THIS OUT
SPECIFICALLY AT THE LAST MEETING, SO I TAKE ISSUE, I SORT OF FEEL
LIKE MY INTEGRITY HAS BEEN IMPUGNED HERE, THE STATEMENT MADE
THAT NOTICE WAS PROPER WHEN IT WASN'T. AND, ALSO, THAT SAME
SECTION "B" WOULD HAVE REQUIRED NOTICES ON EVERY TREE, SINCE
THAT'S WHERE THE ORIGINAL NOTICES WERE PLACED. AND I WOULD
URGE THIS BOARD TO BECOME MORE FAMILIAR WITH THEIR OWN NOTICE
REQUIREMENTS SO THAT THESE PROBLEMS --
>> Preservation Officer: MAY I --
>> Mr. Ray: -- EXCUSE ME, PLEASE. SO THESE PROBLEMS DO NOT ARISE
AGAIN IN THE FUTURE. NOW, AGAIN, THE CARDINAL RULE –- PRESERVE
THE TREES TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE. YES, THERE WAS
NOTICE ON A PLAT, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT TEARING
DOWN TREES IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND MAKING A BUS STATION.
THEY'RE NOT REPLACING THESE TREES. THEY'RE TAKING THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM THE PUBLIC AND USING IT FOR SCHOOL BOARD
PROPERTY. THAT'S NOT REPLACEMENT. THEREFORE, YES, IF YOU LOOK
AT 8.1-3 -- 8.1.5, CRITERIA FOR REMOVAL OF TREES, THERE'S FOUR THERE.
THE ONLY ONE THAT COULD POSSIBLY APPLY IS "D," THE GENERAL
WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC THAT THE TREE BE REMOVED FOR A REASON
OTHER THAN SET FORTH ABOVE. THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY REASON
SHOWING WHY THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE PLAT
DEDICATION SAYS THOSE TREES EXIST IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE
PUBLIC'S FUTURE USE. EXCUSE ME. CITY RESOLUTION, 09-0113. BY THE
MIAMI CITY COMMISSION. SO WHAT -- THE SCHOOL BOARD HAS THE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-18-
BURDEN OF PROOF HERE. THEY LOST THE RIGHT TO TEAR DOWN THESE
TREES. MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW IS THEY LOST. THEY DIDN-- HAD
THE BURDEN OF PROOF. WHAT OTHER PROOF HAVE THEY SHOWN
THERE'S NO OTHER PLACE FOR PARKING? IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT TREES.
LET'S FACE IT. IT'S ABOUT A BUS STATION. YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT, HAVE
THEY DONE WHAT THEY NEED TO TO SHOW WHY THESE TREES HAVE TO
GO, AND THIS IS THE ONLY PLACE? PEOPLE CAME HERE THE LAST TIME,
COMPLAINED, YOU DIDN'T TELL US WHAT YOUR PLAN WAS, NOT IN THE
PLAT, WE DIDN'T GET NOTICE. WE AGREED TO HAVE A MEETING, MET AT
MIAMI HIGH, COOKIES, FOOD, DRINKS, AND OH, WE WANT TO WORK WITH
YOU, TRY TO DO WHAT WE CAN. MAYBE WE CAN PARK ON 25 AVENUE,th
THE BUSES THERE, MAYBE WE CAN PARK ON 24th AVENUE, SOMETHING
THERE. WE'LL WORK WITH YOU. THIS PICTURE I TOOK ON 25 AVENUE.th
THE DAY AFTER THAT MEETING, THEY GOT BACK WITH OUR CONTACT,
TILLIE FOX, AND IT SAYS FROM RUDOLPH HERNANDEZ, THE ARCHITECT,
AS TO OUR PROPOSAL THAT YOU ALLOW THE 10 BUSES TO PARK ON 25th
AVENUE, WHERE THEY PARK NOW. THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER -- QUOTE, THE
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION DID NOT FIND A PROPOSED
RECOMMENDATION ACCEPTABLE DUE TO FLORIDA STATUTE 316.1945.
WELL, HELLO! THAT'S SUBSECTION "A" OF THE STATUTE. IF YOU LOOK AT
SUBSECTION "B," YOU CAN SEE THAT EXACTLY WHAT'S DONE NOW IS
AUTHORIZED. HERE IS THE INTERSECTION, AND THIS SIGN IS 20 FEET
FROM THE INTERSECTION. SUBSECTION "B" OF THAT STATUTE SAYS THAT
YOU CAN STOP AND PARK IF IT'S MOMENTARILY TO PICK UP AND DROP
OFF PEOPLE. NOW, THEY DON'T EVEN MENTION THAT. THEY IGNORE THAT.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-19-
AND THE NEXT DAY THEY TELL US THAT IT CAN'T BE DONE. BUT THAT'S
THE WAY IT'S DONE RIGHT NOW. THIS SIGN IS 20 FEET FROM THE
INTERSECTION --
>> Chairperson: EXCUSE ME, COULD YOU MOVE TO THE MICROPHONE,
PLEASE? AND WRAP IT UP.
>>Mr. Ray: SORRY, AND COPIES TO EVERYONE.
>> Chairperson: AND WRAP IT UP, PLEASE.
>> Mr. Ray: AND, THEREFORE, IT CAN BE DONE. BUT THEY CHOSE NOT TO.
AND THEY SAID THEY'RE WORKING -- WE WILL CONTINUE TO EXPLORE
OTHER OPTIONS AND KEEP YOU UP TO DATE. WHAT OTHER OPTIONS?
THEY NEVER EXPLORED ANYTHING. WHY ARE THEY EVEN HERE TODAY IF
THEY'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH THE PUBLIC TO WORK SOMETHING ELSE
OUT? [ BELL SOUNDS ] IT'S RIDICULOUS. THIS IS ABOUT THE SCHOOL
BOARD THINKING THAT THEY'RE THE ALMIGHTY THAT CAN JUST COME
HERE AND GET YOU ALL TO DO WHATEVER YOU WANT -- WHATEVER THEY
WANT AND NOT HAVE TO BE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND TO THE
COMMUNITY AND TO THE TREES, AND THEN THEY HAVE THE NERVE TO
SAY US TO, WELL, YOU DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT THE TREES. IT'S JUST
ABOUT THE BUS STOP, ISN'T IT? WELL, THAT'S RIDICULOUS AND IT'S
INSULTING. I KNOW MR. FRIEDMAN WENT TO MIAMI HIGH, AND YOU KNOW
THEY CAN BLOCK THE STREET IN THE MORNING. [ BELL SOUNDS ] THEY
CAN BLOCK FOR AN HOUR IN THE MORNING AND AFTERNOON AND LET
THE BUSES SIT THERE. WHY DO THIS? THEY HAVE $5 MILLION
CONTINGENCY MONEY SET ASIDE TO WORK OUT OTHER ISSUES THAT
EVOLVE. WHY SHOULD THIS BOARD GO ALONG WITH THIS INSANITY?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-20-
THANK YOU.
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU. MADAM --
>> City Attorney: MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY, JUST WE DO BELIEVE THAT THIS
MATTER WAS PROPERLY NOTICED, AND I HAVE JUST SOME BRIEF
FACTUAL STATEMENTS THAT STAFF WOULD LIKE TO PUT IN THE RECORD
JUST CONFIRMING THAT TO YOU.
>> Chairperson: OKAY.
>> City Attorney: WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE THE SECTIONS IN 62 AND
WHAT WE DID?
>> Clerk: OKAY, LET'S SEE. CHAPTER 62, WHICH WAS CITED, OKAY, WHICH
WE HAVE PRINTED HERE, STATES THAT THE SIGN SHALL BE -- THE SIGN
SHALL BE ERECTED IN FULL VIEW OF THE PUBLIC ON EACH STREET SIDE.
WHERE LARGE PARCELS OF PROPERTY ARE INVOLVED, EXTENDING OVER
CONSIDERABLE DISTANCES, IT MAY BE ON STREETS, AS ADEQUATE TO BE
APPROPRIATE. WE HAD THREE SIGNS. GOING ON, WE DID NOTIFY THE
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS, AND WE DID ADVERTISE IN THE PAPER,
IN TWO, AS A MATTER OF FACT, "THE MIAMI DAILY REVIEW" AND "MIAMI
TODAY," AND ON THE WEBSITE, SO WE DO BELIEVE IT WAS MORE THAN
ADEQUATELY NOTICED.
>>City Attorney: HOW MANY SIGNS WERE POSTED?
>> Clerk: AT LEAST THREE.
>> City Attorney: HOW MANY SIGNS DID THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER
SAY THEY POSTED FOR TREES?
>> Clerk: THEY SAID THEY POSTED ONE PER PROPERTY.
>> Preservation Officer: MR. CHAIR, IF I COULD COMMENT ON THE CRITERIA
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-21-
AND CONDITIONS FOR TREE REMOVAL AND LOCATION, WHICH WAS ALSO
CITED. SUBPARAGRAPH C.
>> City Attorney: I'D LIKE PUBLIC WORKS TO RESPOND TO THE NOTICE. WAS
THE NOTICE --
>> Asst Public Works Director: THE NOTICE TO REMOVE FOR THE TREES
WERE POSTED ON EACH TREES. A TOTAL OF EIGHT TREES.
>> City Attorney: WAS THAT DONE IN THIS INSTANCE?
>> Asst Public Works Director: YES.
>> City Attorney: THANK YOU.
>> Preservation Officer: YES, AND THE CRITERIA FOR REMOVAL, THE
GENTLEMAN MENTIONED IF IT'S IN THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE
PUBLIC, THAT'S SUBPARAGRAPH "C," AND PRECEDING IS, IF THE TREE IS
AN EXOTIC TREE SPECIES AND WILL BE REPLACED BY NATIVE TREE
SPECIES TO PROMOTE GOOD FORESTRY PRACTICES, AND THAT IS IN THE
SECTION.
>> Chairperson: OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> Board Member: MR. CHAIR?
>> Chairperson: YES, MR. HOPPER.
>> Board Member: THIS IS AN ITEM WE LOOKED AT LAST YEAR AND IT WAS
CONTINUED. AND SINCE THEN, I'VE BEEN ABLE TO PERSONALLY, BECAUSE
OF MY APPOINTMENT TO THIS BOARD, DO MY OWN HOMEWORK IN TERMS
OF VISITING THIS ISSUE.
>> Chairperson: MR. BARBER?
>> Board Member: YES, SIR.
>> Chairperson: WE HAVEN'T CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING YET.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-22-
DO YOU WANT TO WAIT?
>> Board Member: NO, IF I CAN RESPOND TO -- BRIEFLY TO WHAT WAS SAID
INITIALLY. I THINK --
>> Chairperson: TO --
>> Board Member: FALLS IN PLACE TO THE LAST PERSON SPEAKING.
>> Chairperson: OKAY, GO AHEAD.
>> Board Member: BECAUSE THE COMMENTS WERE DIRECTLY -- THEY
WERE DIRECT COMMENTS AT THE STAFF, AT THE SCHOOL BOARD.
>> Chairperson: YES, SIR.
>> Board Member: THINGS OF THAT NATURE. IN NO WAY DO I WANT, AND I
KNOW PEOPLE OF THIS BOARD, WANT TO SEE ANY GREEN SPACE OR
CANOPIES BE LOST IN MIAMI. I DO THINK THE KEY ISSUE HERE IS THE
FUNCTIONALITY OF THIS ISSUE WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD. IT IS NOT
ABOUT AN ISSUE OF REMOVING TREES. I THINK IT'S FUNCTIONALITY. I
DON'T WANT IN NO WAY TO SAY THAT THE SCHOOL BOARD HAS NOT DONE
THEIR DUE DILIGENCE. BECAUSE I'VE NOTICED AROUND MIAMI, DADE
COUNTY, THAT SCHOOLS HAVE BEEN CHANGING IN TERMS OF THEIR
ABILITY TO HANDLE THE AMOUNT OF STUDENTS THAT EXIST. THERE'S A
SCHOOL IN MY AREA THAT HAS BEEN TOTALLY REBUILT. THEY DIDN'T
WAKE UP A YEAR AGO AND TELL US ABOUT THIS. THIS WAS SOMETHING
ESTABLISHED YEARS BEFORE THEY BEGAN TO BUILD THE BUILDING AND
REBUILD THE SCHOOLS. SO I CAN'T SAY -- AND SAY THE SCHOOL BOARD
ALL OF A SUDDEN DISREGARDED AND THESE PLANS WERE TOP-SECRET
PLANS, THEY WERE NOT AWARE THAT THIS WAS GOING ON. I KNOW LAST
MONTH MY THOUGHT WAS THAT THERE COULD BE A CHANGE, OR THE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-23-
SITE COULD BE MOVED. BUT THEN WHEN I LOOK AT THE PLANS, I LOOK AT
THE ISSUE OF FUNCTIONALITY, HOW WE COINCIDE WITH THE SAFETY OF
THE STUDENTS, WHERE IS THE BEST PLACE TO PUT THE ROUTE FOR THE
STUDENTS TO ACCESS IS, AS TO WHERE THE BUILDINGS ARE. AND I THINK
THE DUE DILIGENCE HAS BEEN DONE AND THE RESEARCH HAS BEEN
DONE AS TO WHERE THEY'RE LOCATING THIS PARTICULAR SPACE. I'M
SORRY THE TREES ARE THERE. LIKE THE ATTORNEY SAID, OUR ISSUE IS
TO LOOK AT THE LAW AND HOW IT STATES IN TERMS OF THE TREE. THE
TREE REMOVAL. AND BASED ON WHAT THE STAFF HAS GIVEN US, IT'S
WRITTEN AS TO HOW WE'RE SUPPOSED TO ACT AND HOW WE'RE
SUPPOSED TO MOVE ON THIS OPTION IN TERMS OF THE TREES, WHETHER
IT'S INVASIVE SPECIES OR IT'S NOT. IT'S AN INVASIVE SPECIES, WE HAVE
CODES WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY IN TERMS OF HOW WE DELIBERATE ON
THIS ISSUE. AND I THINK THAT WE'RE GOING ON AND PUSHING, WE NEED
TO LOOK AT THE FACTS. THE ARTICLE 8.1, AND THEN WE HAVE SEVERAL
CODES AND ARTICLES GOING WITH 8.1, POINT FIVE, AND HOW WE LOOK
AT THIS OPTION. WE'LL GO AROUND AND AROUND, AND THE ACTUAL
FUNCTIONALITY AND WHAT THE CODE SAYS. THAT'S WHAT I BELIEVE WE
NEED TO LOOK AT TODAY.
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU. ARE THERE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
THAT WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? PLEASE COME FORWARD, GIVE
YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
>>Ms. Dove: HI. -- GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS GISELLE DOVE. I WANT
TO TALK ABOUT WHAT I SEE THE ROAD TO BE, AND IT IS ABOUT
PRESERVING NEIGHBORHOODS AND WE CANNOT LOOK AT THE SCHOOL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-24-
OUTSIDE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE LIVE THERE EVERY DAY. AND THE
REMOVAL OF THE TREES, WHEN THEY ARE THE ONLY TREES ON OUR
STREET, WILL HAVE A DEVASTATING IMPACT ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND IF WE WANT TO PRESERVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, I THINK WE
SHOULD DO EVERYTHING WE CAN. I JUST HEARD THE PUBLIC WORKS
GENTLEMAN SAY, YES, THESE ARE INVASIVE TREES, BUT THEY POSE
ABSOLUTELY NO THREAT TO PERSONS, ENVIRONMENT, OR ANY OTHER
SPECIES. YES, WHEN THINGS ARE DESCRIBED AS EVASIVE OR EXOTIC,
MEANING NONNATIVE. HOWEVER, I THINK THIS BOARD LOOKS AT WHAT
WE CAN DO TO MAKE MIAMI STAY MIAMI WHENEVER POSSIBLE. THESE
TREES POSE NO THREAT. ARE THEY CLASSIFIED AS EXOTIC AND
INVASIVE? YES. BUT ARE THEY POSING A THREAT? NO. WILL THEY
MAINTAIN SOME SEMBLANCE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD? YES. WHICH IS WHAT
I THINK THIS BOARD IS CHARGED WITH. WE ARE THE RESIDENTS. WE LIVE
THERE. WE WANT TO LOOK OUT AND SEE TREES, NOT BUSES. DO
REMEMBER THAT WHO OWNS THE OTHER PROPERTIES ADD JAS END TO
THE OTHER STREETS. WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IS PUSHED THINGS THEY
DO NOT WANT ON THEIR BEAUTIFUL, BEAUTIFUL CAMPUS OUT INTO THE
ONE STREET THAT BORDERS THE NEIGHBORHOOD. YES, THE TREES ARE
INVASIVE, BUT DO GO TO THE HIGHER CALLING OF THE BOARD, WHICH IS
TO PRESERVE NEIGHBORHOODS. LEAVE OUR TREES ALONE. WE WANT
THEM THERE. THEY POSE NO THREAT TO THE CITIZENS. THEY POSE NO
THREAT TO THE NATIVE GREENERY. THEY POSE NO THREAT. SO WE URGE
YOU TO PRESERVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU.
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-25-
SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? PLEASE COME FORWARD. GIVE YOUR NAME AND
ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.
>> Ms. Fox: HE'S PASSING OUT SOME MATERIALS. MY NAME IS TILLIE FOX,
AND I HAVE LIVED AT 302 BEACON BOULEVARD FOR HALF A CENTURY. MY
PARENTS BOUGHT THE HOME IN 1960, AND I'M ALSO FOUNDING FACULTY
AT FIU. THERE'S SOME MATERIAL BEING PASSED OUT. WOULD YOU LIKE
ME TO WAIT?
>> Chairperson: NO, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> Ms. Fox: OKAY. AND I WILL BE REFERRING TO THE AERIAL MAP BEING
PASSED OUT. THOSE TREES WERE PLANTED OVER THREE DECADES AGO
BY THE CITY OF MIAMI TO BEAUTIFY THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO
SEPARATE THE BACK OF THE SCHOOL FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY
CREATE A BORDER IF YOU SEE ON THE MAP THAT IS BEING PASSED OUT
BETWEEN THE ATHLETIC FIELD. THE ATHLETIC FIELD WAS NOT THAT SIZE,
ON 24th AVENUE, THERE WERE HOMES ALL ALONG 24 AVENUE AND THEth
CORNER OF 3 STREET. BUT MIAMI HIGH PURCHASED THOSE HOMES INrd
THE 1960s AND ENLARGED THE ATHLETIC FIELD SO TO SHIELD THE
NEIGHBORHOOD, TREES WERE PLANTED ALL ALONG THE PERIMETER OF
3rd STREET AND 24th AVENUE, ON THE "L" SHAPE. BUT NOW, OUR
PROBLEM IS THAT WITHOUT ASKING, WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING WHAT THE
PLAN IS – [ BELL SOUNDS ] -- THEY WANT TO TAKE OUR TREES. THEY
WANT TO TAKE OUR SIDEWALK. THEY WANT TO TAKE OUR RIGHT-OF-WAY
AND PLANT INSTEAD 12 BUSES IN FRONT OF OUR HOMES. THAT'S THE
REAL ISSUE. THEY'RE TAKING THE TREES AND REPLACING THEM WITH 12
BUSES IN FRONT OF THE HOMES. AND WHO WOULD WANT THAT IN FRONT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-26-
OF THEIR HOMES? THIS IS DETRIMENTAL TO OUR HEALTH – [ BELL
SOUNDS ] -- AND WELFARE. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE EXHAUST FUMES,
NOISE, 700 KIDS RUNNING AROUND, SCREAMING, LOOKING FOR THEIR
BUS. AND WHERE ARE TREES? WE NO LONGER ARE IN NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS IS GOING TO BE DETRIMENTAL TO OUR SAFETY BY WIDENING THAT
ROAD. YOU'RE GOING TO CREATE MORE TRAFFIC. RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE
TRAFFIC GOING BOTH WAYS. THE WIDER, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE
DANGER TO THE STUDENTS, MORE DANGER TO US, BECAUSE PEOPLE
WANT THE ROAD THAT'S LARGER, ARE GOING TO SEE THEY WON'T OBEY
THE SPEED LIMIT AND BY HAVING A NARROW ROAD, YOU WILL SLOW
DOWN TRAFFIC.
>> Chairperson: COULD YOU WRAP UP, PLEASE? COULD YOU WRAP UP,
PLEASE?
>> Ms. Fox: YES, SIR.
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU.
>> Ms. Fox: REMOVING THE TREES IS ALSO DETRIMENTAL TO OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO OUR ENVIRONMENT BY PUTTING A BUS LANE. IT'S
MAKING US COMMERCIAL. IT'S MAKING THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
AND DESTROYING PROPERTY VALUES BECAUSE NO ONE IS GOING TO
WANT TO LIVE IN A BUS DEPOT AND ACROSS THAT RACKET 10 TIMES A
WEEK. THEY SAID IT'S ONLY TWICE A DAY, BUT IT'S REALLY NOISE,
POLLUTION, AND WE'RE NO LONGER IN NEIGHBORHOODS. YOU'RE GOING
TO HAVE THAT DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF OUR HOMES, AND WE'RE WILLING
TO WORK WITH THE ARCHITECT, TO MAKE THE OFFER, BUT WE HAVE NOT
HAD TIME TO MEET. AND AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PICTURES, I'VE ALSO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-27-
DRAWN SOME ALTERNATE PLANS WHERE ON 25 AVENUE, WHICH ISth
OWNED ON BOTH SIDES BY MIAMI HIGH, MIAMI HIGH OWNS THE PROPERTY
ON BOTH SIDES OF 25th AVENUE, THEY CAN PUT A BUS LANE THERE,
WHICH WILL BE SAFER WITH MEDIAN TRIPS. WE HAVE SEVEN PLANS
DRAWN IN THAT HANDOUT THAT I HAVE. SO I AM AN ALUMNI OF MIAMI
HIGH, AND I WANT MIAMI HIGH PRESERVED, BUT I ALSO DO NOT WANT THE
NEIGHBORHOOD DESTROYED BY CREATING THIS BUS DEPOT IN FRONT OF
OUR HOMES AND TAKING AWAY THE ONLY TREES THAT WE HAD, AND
THOSE TREES WERE DEEMED SAFE BY THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THEY'RE
RIGHT ALL OVER COCONUT GROVE. YOU CAN FIND THEM ALL OVER THE
PLACE. AND I NEVER SEE ONE SEEDLING IN 50 YEARS THAT I'VE LIVED
THERE SPROUT FROM THAT TREE, THE MALE AND THE FEMALE. [ BELL
SOUNDS ]
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU.
>> Ms. Fox: OKAY, THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS?
>> Board Member: I HAVE A QUESTION, MR. CHAIR.
>> Chairperson: YES, SIR?
>> Board Member: I'M HEARING PEOPLE MAKE REFERENCE TO A BUS
DEPOT. A DEPOT IS PARKED VEHICLES THAT WILL BE THERE FOR
STORAGE, RIGHT? IS THIS A BUS DEPOT? CAN SOMEBODY ANSWER THAT?
>> City Attorney: I WANT TO --
>> Board Member: LOADING AND UNLOADING.
>> City Attorney: PLEASE EXCUSE ME, BUT AGAIN, I JUST WANT THE
HEARING TO ADHERE TO THE TREES, BECAUSE WE REALLY -- THIS BOARD
QUITE SIMPLY DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THE SCHOOL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-28-
OPERATIONS.
>> Board Member: THAT'S WHY I ASKED MY QUESTION, MAKING REFERENCE
TO THE BUS DEPOT. AND I WANTED TO CLARIFY. IS IT A BUS DEPOT?
>> Chairperson: THE POINT IS THE BUS DEPOT, IT DOESN'T MATTER. IT'S
ONLY ABOUT THE TREES. WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A BUS DEPOT, IT
DOESN'T MATTER TO US. ONLY WHETHER WE CAN REVERSE THE -- THAT
WE SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT REVERSE THE FINDING FROM THE PUBLIC
WORKS.
>> Board Member: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> Chairperson: PERIOD.
>> Ms. Fox: THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE IS OUR TREES ARE BEING
REPLACED BY BUSES, AND THEY'RE NOT BEING PLANTED IN THE SAME
LOCATION.
>> Chairperson: THE TREES ARE BEING CUT DOWN. IT DOESN'T MATTER
WHAT'S COMING BACK. THE TREES ARE BEING REMOVED. IS THERE
ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC WISHING –
>> Board Member: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THIS LADY, IF I MAY.
>> Chairperson: GO AHEAD.
>> Board Member: MS. FOX? I'M LOOKING AT THE AERIAL?
>> Ms. Fox: YES, SIR.
>> Board Member: AND I'M LOOKING AT 25th AVENUE WHERE THERE ARE
INITIALS ON MSH ON SEVERAL --
>> Ms. Fox: MIAMI SENIOR HIGH.
>> Board Member: CAN YOU TELL ME TO WHAT USE ARE THOSE
PROPERTIES CURRENTLY BEING PUT?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-29-
>> Ms. Fox: CURRENTLY, THE ONE BY 3 STREET USED TO BE Ard
BASKETBALL COURT. ALL OF THOSE WERE ATHLETIC COURTS, AND NOW
THEY'RE GETTING TURNED UP AND TURNED INTO A PARKING DECK. AND
THE NEXT ONE ARE PORTABLES. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY USE FOR
STORAGE, OR WHAT. BUT WE USED TO CLOSE OFF 25 AVENUE WHEN Ith
WAS A STUDENT THERE, AND STILL RECENTLY 25 AVENUE WAS CLOSEDth
OFF. BUT THAT LAND ON BOTH SIDES BELONGS TO MIAMI HIGH. AND ON
27th AVENUE, ALL THAT IS COMMERCIAL.
>> Board Member: THANK YOU.
>> Chairperson: ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON
THIS ITEM? PLEASE COME FORWARD. GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
FOR THE RECORD.
>> Ms. Young: HI, LISA YOUNG, 2534 SOUTHWEST 3rd STREET. I WOULD
JUST LIKE TO SAY I DO NOT WANT TO SEE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD
DISTURBED FROM THE TREES. AS WE'VE POINTED OUT, THE TREES ARE
NOT HURTING ANYBODY. I UNDERSTAND THEY NEED TO PUT THEIR BUSES
SOMEWHERE, AND THAT'S WHY THEY WANT TO TAKE THE TREES DOWN.
THEY HAVE THREE OTHER STREETS, 25th, 2nd, AND 24 . I WOULD THINKth
THEY COULD FIND A WAY TO PUT THE BUSES SOMEWHERE, OR EVEN
WITHOUT TAKING THE TREES DOWN, PUT THE BUSES ON THEIR OWN
PROPERTY AND MAKE A BUS LANE INSIDE. THE INTEGRITY OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD IS WHAT'S AT STAKE HERE, AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE –
WHY WE ARE ALL UPSET. WE BOUGHT HOMES. WE'VE PAID VERY GOOD
PRICES FOR THEM IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. WE DO NOT WANT
TO BE SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. THANK YOU.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-30-
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC
WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE
PUBLIC HEARING. BUT I WILL ALLOW REBUTTAL FROM THE SCHOOL
BOARD.
>> Mr. Garcia: THANK YOU.
>> Chairperson: LET ME JUST ASK A QUESTION FIRST. NOW, CORRECT ME
IF I'M WRONG, YOU ARE TAKING OUT EIGHT BISHOPWOODS, PUTTING
BACK 12 LIVE OAKS?
>> Mr. Garcia: THAT'S CORRECT.
>> Chairperson: AND HOW LARGE ARE THESE LIVE OAKS?
>>Mr. Garcia: 22 TO 26 FEET HIGH.
>> Chairperson: OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> Board Member: IF WE WANT TO DO THE REST OF THE CLARIFICATION
THERE. IF THESE TREES WERE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THEY WERE
TO BE REMOVED AND MITIGATED, WOULD THE TREES THAT YOU ARE
PROPOSING DUE TO THE MITIGATION FOR THESE TREES AT THE SIZE
THAT THEY ARE -- THE SIZE THAT THEY ARE TODAY BY THE CODE?
>> Mr. Garcia: I BELIEVE SO. BUT WE ARE ACTUALLY NOT REQUIRED TO
MITIGATION, WE'RE DOING IT VOLUNTARILY.
>> Board Member: I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO. ALL I'M
ASKING IS, WOULD THESE TREES, OKAY, IF YOU TOOK THE CALLIPER OF
THE BISHOPWOODS, ALL RIGHT, AND IF YOU APPLIED THE CITY OF MIAMI
TREE CODE FOR REMOVAL AND MITIGATION, WOULD THE TREES THAT
YOU ARE PROPOSING MEET THOSE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS?
>> Mr. Garcia: WE BELIEVE THEY WOULD.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-31-
>> Ms. Curtis: NO. THE ANSWER IS NO.
>> City Attorney: OKAY, I'M SORRY, YOU NEED TO -- ANYONE THAT
ADDRESSES THE BOARD, YOU NEED TO PLEASE GIVE YOUR NAME,
ADDRESS, SO FORTH. THANK YOU.
>> Ms. Curtis: MY NAME IS AIDA CURTIS, AND WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD.
THE DIFFERENCE IS BY DERM STANDARDS THEY WOULD, AND THEY
WOULD, IN FACT, MEET AND EXCEED THE STANDARDS. THE CITY OF MIAMI
REQUIRES THE REPLACEMENT ON A CALLIPER BASIS. CALLIPER BY
CALLIPER. THERE IS NO POSSIBLE WAY THAT ONE COULD ACQUIRE, A
NURSERY-GROWN TREATMENTS, THE SIZE OF WHAT'S EXISTING. SO
WE'RE PLANTING WHAT IS REASONABLE TO BE PLANTED, WHICH ARE
NATIVE TREES IN THE LARGEST THAT YOU COULD POSSIBLY GET THEM IN
A DECEMBER ENLT SIZE TRANSPLANTED AND SURVIVE EASILY, AND WE
ARE PLANTING 12 OF THEM. SO WE ARE DOING THE BEST WE CAN. BUT
AGAIN, WE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO MITIGATE ANY OF THE BISHOPWOOD,
SO WE DON'T NEED TO PUT ANY TREES.
>> Board Member: ARE THE TREES BEING REPLACED BEING REPLACED IN
THE SPOT WHERE THE TREES BEING REMOVED?
>> Mr. Garcia: THE TREES ARE BEING REMOVED FROM ONE SIDE OF THE
SIDEWALK AND PLACED ON THE OTHER SIDEST SIDEWALK. THEY WILL
STILL BE ON SCHOOL BOARD PROPERTY. THEY'RE PRESENTLY ON
SCHOOL BOARD PROPERTY AND ARE PRESENTLY --
[ SHOUTS ]
>> Chairperson: EXCUSE ME. EXCUSE ME.
>> Mr. Garcia: CITY PROPERTY. THEY'RE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-32-
>> Board Member: SO ARE THE TREES BEING REMOVED FROM THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE REPLACEMENTS IN THE SAME SPOT?
>> Mr. Garcia: THE REPLACEMENT IS, THEY'RE GOING ON THE OTHER SIDE--
>> Board Member: YES OR NO IN
>> Mr. Garcia: NOT THE EXACT SAME SPOT. GOING ON THE OTHER SIDE.
>> Board Member: THE ANSWER IS NO.
>> Chairperson: EXCUSE ME.
>> Asst. Public Works Director: IF I MAY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YEAH,
THE TREES, THEY WILL BE REPLACED -- THE TREES ARE CURRENTLY ON
THE SWALE, AND WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING WOULD BE ON THE SCHOOL
BOARD PROPERTY. THEY WON'T BE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE BOARD
MITIGATION REQUIREMENT, WHEN A TREE IS AN INVASIVE SPECIES, WE
DON'T DO THE MITIGATION BASED ON CALLIPER. WE DO IT ON ONE TO
ONE. IF THE 12 THEY ARE PROPOSING IN NO WAY WILL MATCH THE
CALLIPER REQUIREMENT OF THE –
>> Board Member: MR. CHAIR?
>> Mr. Garcia: IF I MAY RESPOND TO ALL THE SPEAKERS, ALL THE
DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS RAISED BY SOME OF THE SPEAKERS. FIRST OF
ALL, THE FIRST ARGUMENT RAISED WAS THIS WAS A REVERSAL OF THE
DENIAL FROM PUBLIC WORKS, AND THAT'S AN UNUSUAL THING FOR THIS
BOARD TO ACTUALLY BE DOING. BUT THE ONLY ARGUMENT THAT WAS
GIVEN BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FOR ACTUALLY DENYING THE
TREE PERMIT IS HE RECEIVED OBJECTION. AND BECAUSE HE RECEIVED
OBJECTION TO THE TREE REMOVAL, THEN IT'S A MATTER OF COURSE,
THEY DENY THAT PERMIT. THAT IS ARBITRARY CAPRICIOUS. THERE IS NO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-33-
CONSIDERATION WHATSOEVER AS TO THE REASONS WHY WE'RE
REQUESTING THE TREE REMOVAL, SO THERE'S SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR
THIS BOARD TO ACTUALLY GRANT THE PERMIT AND REVERSE THE PUBLIC
WORKS DEPARTMENT'S DENIAL OF OUR PERMIT. THERE WAS NO REASON
OR BASIS IN FACT OR IN LAW GIVEN BELOW FOR THAT -- FOR THAT DENIAL
OF THE TREE PERMIT. THE SECOND ISSUE THAT WAS RAISED WAS YOU
HAVE 58 PETITIONS FROM THE PUBLIC, THE SURROUNDING
NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT WHY ARE THEY REMOVING THESE TREES? BUT
LOOK AT THE PETITIONS THEY'VE PROVIDED TO YOU AND THEY PROVIDED
TO THE NEIGHBORS TO SIGN. THE PETITION SAID, HOW IS IT POSSIBLE
THAT THEY THINK TO REMOVE THE EIGHT TREES WHICH ARE MORE THAN
30 YEARS OLD AND THEY DO NOT THINK TO REPLACE THEM, A
RESIDENTIAL STREET WITHOUT TREES? BUT WE ARE REPLACING THEM.
SO THE PEOPLE THAT WERE GIVING – [ SHOUTS ]
>> Chairperson: EXCUSE ME.
>> City Attorney: LISTEN. LISTEN TO ME. WE'RE GOING TO KEEP ORDER
HERE, AND THERE WILL BE NO OUTBURSTS, AND ANY COMMENTS WILL BE
MADE THROUGH THE CHAIR IF THEY RECOGNIZE IT. WE FOLLOW
DECORUM HERE IN ROBERT'S RULES. THAT GOES FOR EVERYONE. THANK
YOU.
>> Chairperson: GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
>> Mr. Garcia: IF I MAY? AS STATED IN THEIR PETITION, THEY'RE TELLING
THEIR NEIGHBORS THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE REPLACED. MAYBE
THEY'RE BEING REPLACED ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SIDEWALK. BUT
THEY ARE BEING REPLACED BY 12 TREES. NOT EIGHT THAT ARE THERE.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-34-
IF YOU LOOK AT ONE OF THE OTHER ISSUES RAISED, AND THAT'S THE
TREES PROVIDE A SHIELD FROM THE SCHOOL AND THE SURROUNDING
NEIGHBORHOOD, THERE'S NO SHIELD THERE. THE TREES ARE 20 FEET
APART. YOU SEE THE SCHOOL IN BETWEEN. THERE IS NO BY
BIFURCATION. THE SCHOOL IS NOT LEAVING. THE STUDENTS ARE NOT
GOING AWAY. THEY WILL ALWAYS BE THERE. THERE WILL BE A BUS
DROP-OFF FOR THESE STUDENTS NEAR THAT SCHOOL AT SOME POINT.
THE ONLY PROBLEM IS THAT OUR SAFETY CODE SAYS YOU CANNOT HAVE
THAT BUS DROP-OFF IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SCHOOL. AND THAT IS ONE
OF THE OPTIONS THAT WAS PROPOSED BY THE NEIGHBORS OF THE
SCHOOL. AND THAT IS ONE OF THE OPTIONS THAT WAS REJECTED BY
BOTH THE CITY AND THE CODE. THE OTHER ISSUE THAT'S BEEN RAISED
IS NO DUE PROCESS HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE PUBLIC OR THE
NEIGHBORS. I THINK THAT'S SUBSTANTIALLY BEEN CLARIFIED BY THE
TESTIMONY YOU HAVE FROM YOUR OWN BOARD AND STAFF THAT SHOW
THAT WE DID PROVIDE NOTICE THE FIRST TIME, WE DID PROVIDE NOTICE
THE SECOND TIME. I PERSONALLY WENT OUT THERE AND SAW THE
NOTICES ATTACHED TO THE TREES THAT HAVE BEEN PLACED NEAR THE
SCHOOL PROPERTY. BASICALLY, WE'RE NOT REPLACING THE TREES WITH
A BUS STATION. THIS IS A BUS DROP-OFF. WHETHER WE HAVE THE TREES
THERE OR NOT, YOU WON'T HAVE A BUS DROP-OFF. IT'S VERY CLEAR. WE
ARE ACTUALLY ENHANCING THIS NEIGHBORHOOD BY PROVIDING 12
TREES THAT ARE NATIVE SPECIES, THAT WILL ENHANCE THE LOOK AND
FEEL OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. IT WILL ACTUALLY IMPROVE THE
NEIGHBORHOOD AND WILL ACTUALLY PROVIDE A BETTER BARRIER THAN
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-35-
WHAT IS THERE BETWEEN THE SCHOOL AND THE NEIGHBORING
COMMUNITY, BECAUSE YOU WILL HAVE A LOT MORE TREES THAT HAVE
THE ABILITY TO HAVE A HIGHER CANOPY THAN THE 12 BISHOP TREES
FOREVER THERE LINGERING AND CAN FALL IN A STORM AND THEY'RE
BREAKING AND UPROOTING THE SURROUNDING SIDEWALKS. SO WE'RE
IMPROVING THAT WHOLE AREA FOR THE SCHOOL. AND BASICALLY, WE
HAVE TAKEN THE COMMUNITY'S CONCERNS, WE HAVE ADDRESSED THEM.
BUT THIS IS THE BEST OPTION THAT WE HAVE. AND AS YOUR OWN
ATTORNEY HAS TOLD YOU AND YOUR OWN STAFF HAS TOLD YOU, WE'RE
HERE ONLY ON THE TREE REMOVAL AND WE HAVE BASICALLY COMPLIED
WITH THE CODE AND ORDINANCE THAT SAYS WHY WE CAN DO THIS TREE
REMOVAL, AND THERE'S NO REAL REALLY -- REAL LEGITIMATE OR ACTUAL
REASON. THE BUSES ARE THERE FOR 30 MINUTES IN THE MORNING AND
30 MINUTES IN THE AFTERNOON. AND THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. IF YOU HAVE
ANY QUESTIONS, I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM OR OUR
CONSULTING ARCHITECT CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS WITH REGARD TO
THAT ISSUE.
>> Chairperson: AND NOW WE GO TO THE BOARD FOR QUESTION,
COMMENTS. MR. BARBER, I BELIEVE YOU --
>> Board Member: YEAH, JUST ONE QUESTION, AND I KNOW RAFAEL WILL
SHUT ME UP IF IT'S NOT IN ORDER. HAS THERE BEEN ANY CONSIDERATION
TO PROVIDING A BUFFER BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE
NEIGHBORHOOD IN TERMS OF – MAYBE SOMETIMES I SEE STRIPS OF
TREES IN THE DRIVEWAY GOING INTO THE SCHOOL. ON THAT STREET?
HAS THERE BEEN ANY THOUGHT OF A BUFFER, TREE BUFFER OR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-36-
SOMETHING, SMALL MEDIAN IN-CUT? TO ADDRESS THE --
>> Mr. Murguido: JOSE MURGUIDO, ARCHITECT. THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DOES
NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT WIDTH TO PROVIDE A MEDIAN IN THE MIDDLE. SO
IT WAS EXPLORED, AND UNFORTUNATELY, IN ORDER TO DO THAT, THE
SOUTHBOUND LANE WOULD HAVE TO BE CLOSER TO THE RESIDENTS,
WOULD ONLY EXACERBATE THE PROBLEM AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO
EXCHANGE THE SWELL FOR A MEDIAN AREA. SO THAT -- THERE'S JUST A
NARROW ROAD, AND UNFORTUNATELY, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH SPACE
FOR A MEDIAN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD.
>> Board Member: IT WAS A THOUGHT BUT --
>> Mr. Murguido: IT WAS EXPLORED, YES, SIR.
>> Chairperson: YES?
>> Board Member: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. MITCHELL. WHEN THE
SPEAKER FOR THE SCHOOL BOARD SAID THAT THE DECISION OF PUBLIC
WORKS WAS ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS AND MADE ONLY BECAUSE
PEOPLE COMPLAINED, YOU STOOD UP AND I THOUGHT YOU WANTED TO
SAY SOMETHING. BUT PLEASE DO SO IF THAT WAS YOUR DESIRE.
>> Asst. Public Works Director: YEAH, REMOVAL OF TREES IS MOST, I WOULD
SAY, CONTROVERSIAL SUBJECT IN THE CITY OF MIAMI. AND IT'S NOT
SOMETHING THAT WE DO LIGHTLY. SO BEFORE WE ISSUE ANY TREE
REMOVAL PERMIT, WE WANT TO BE ABSOLUTELY SURE THAT THE IMPACT
OF THE REMOVAL WILL BE OKAY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WITH THE
RESIDENTS. AT TIMES I'VE DENIED A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT. LATER, MY
DECISION HAS BEEN REVERSED. SO IN ALL CASES, I JUST DON'T WANT
THESE TO BECOME -- TO BECOME BIGGER ISSUE THAN WHAT IT IS.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-37-
>> Board Member: CURIOUS WHETHER THIS HANDOUT WE GOT WAS A
COPY GIVEN TO THE SCHOOL BOARD TO REVIEW? DO YOU HAVE ANY --
THIS WAS GIVEN TO US --
>>Mr. Garcia: WE JUST RECEIVED THE COPY TODAY.
>> Board Member: JUST CURIOUS. DO YOU HAVE ANY COULD COMMENTS
THEIR QUOTE/UNQUOTE ALTERNATIVE PLANS, POSSIBILITIES?
>> Mr. Garcia: WE DID HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING. WE WENT OVER THE
DIFFERENT TYPES OF PLANS. WE MET WITH THE CITY SUBSEQUENTLY TO
GO OVER THE POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES. THE ONLY ALTERNATIVES, THE
CITY BELIEVES IS THE BEST ALTERNATIVE, IS THE ONE PROPOSED.
>> Board Member: THE CITY OR SCHOOL BOARD?
>> Mr. Garcia: THE COUNTY, I'M SORRY. THE COUNTY.
>> Chairperson: YES?
>> Board Member: I THINK THIS IS A QUESTION OF NOT WHETHER CAN
TREES BE REMOVED. TECHNICALLY, ACCORDING TO CODE, ACCORDING
TO SPECIES, ACCORDING TO CLASSIFICATION, BUT WHETHER THEY
SHOULD BE REMOVED IN THE PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCE? WE'VE
HEARD SEVERAL TIMES ABOUT THE CODE PROVISION THAT EXOTICS OR
INVASIVES THAT CAN BE REMOVED AND REPLACED. WE ALL KNOW WHAT
REPLACEMENT IS IN THIS CASE. IT'S NOT REPLACEMENT IN THE SENSE OF
PUTTING ANOTHER TYPE OF TREE WHERE THE TREES CURRENTLY EXIST.
THESE TREES, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, HAVE STOOD UP THROUGH ANY
NUMBER OF HURRICANES OVER THE PAST 30 YEARS AND DON'T SEEM TO
BE A THREAT TO FALLING OVER. SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WHAT WE
HAVE IS A DECISION FROM PUBLIC WORKS, AND DUE TO ITS BEING
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-38-
APPEALED, WE HAVE TO GO TO THE CODE AND SEE WHAT JUSTIFIES
REMOVAL OF THESE TREES. AND THE ONLY PROVISION IN CODE THAT
SEEMS TO APPLY, IF AT ALL, IS WHETHER REMOVAL OF THE TREES IS
NECESSARY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF SOME ISSUE OF PUBLIC HEALTH,
SAFETY, AND WELFARE. NOW, I SUPPOSE IF THESE TREES WERE VERY
UNIQUE TREES -- THEY HAD GOLDEN BERRIES, THEY WERE HISTORIC
MONUMENTS -- ONLY 10 OF THEM IN THE WORLD, THEY WERE SO RARE
THAT THEY COULDN'T BE REMOVED, I'M SURE THE SCHOOL BOARD
WOULD FIND SOME OTHER PLACE TO PUT THEIR BUSES. THE PROPERTY
ON 25th AVENUE THAT THEY OWN. I MEAN, THEY'RE WILLING TO GO INTO
THE ATHLETIC FIELD AND PUT TREES THERE, BUT APPARENTLY NOT
BUSES, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF THEY NEED A VARIANCE TO USE THEIR
OWN PROPERTY FOR THEIR OWN BUSES, THEY SHOULD DO THAT FIRST.
SO I UNDERSTAND THEIR DESIRES TO MOVE THE PROJECT ALONG, AND
I HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH NOTICE AT THIS POINT. I DON'T BELIEVE
THERE'S BEEN A SHOWING BY THE SCHOOL BOARD THAT THERE IS SOME
OVERRIDING NEED OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE THAT
REQUIRES THE REMOVAL OF THESE TREES SUCH AS WOULD WARRANT
REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.
>> Board Member: I WENT TO MIAMI HIGH, TOO, AND I COULDN'T HAVE SAID
IT BETTER.
>> Board Member: I GUESS IT'S TIME FOR THE ARCHITECT – [ INAUDIBLE ] --
I REALLY DON'T. I KNOW HOW DANGEROUS THEY CAN BE. I'VE SEEN THEM
IN HURRICANES, AT LEAST IN THE FT. LAUDERDALE AREA, COME APART,
ON TOP OF CARS, BECAUSE THEY'RE AS WEAK-WOODED AS THEY ARE IN
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-39-
HIGH WINDS. I HAVE NO IDEA AND NOBODY HAS PRESENTED ANY
INFORMATION HERE THAT SAYS THAT THESE TREES HAVE NOT BEEN
TORN APART BY WIND IN THE PAST. THEY'RE SO FAST GROWING THAT IF
YOU'RE TWO YEARS DOWN THE PIKE FROM A HURRICANE, YOU'D NEVER
KNOW IF A BRANCH HAD BLOWN OUT OF ONE OF THESE TREES. THEY'RE
JUST THAT NATURED. I'M LOOKING AT THE PLANTING PLANS THAT HAVE
BEEN PRESENTED. AND I GUESS I COULD ASK THE SCHOOL BOARD -- I
KNOW THERE IS NO MITIGATION REQUIREMENT FOR REMOVAL OF THE
INVASIVE EXOTIC. NOTHING. NO REQUIREMENT. HOWEVER, I BET IF ONE
LOOKED AT THE PLANTING THAT ONE IS PROPOSING FOR THE
RENOVATION OF THIS SCHOOL, THAT THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF PLANTING
THAT SOMEHOW IS BEING DONE THERE WOULD MORE THAN MITIGATE
FOR THE REMOVAL OF THESE TREES. I JUST -- I'M ALSO -- I MEAN, I'M
STRUCK BY SOME OTHER KINDS OF THINGS. I'M LOOKING AT THE GOOGLE
AIR -- OR THE AIR PHOTO FROM GOOGLE. AND I'M LOOKING AT THE EIGHT
TREES THERE, AND I'M LOOKING ACROSS THE STREET, AND I GUESS
THESE ARE THE NEIGHBORS WHO ARE -- WHO ARE REALLY OBJECTING TO
THE FACT THAT WE'LL REMOVE THESE TREES. I DON'T SEE ANYBODY
THERE. I DON'T SEE ANYBODY THERE TRYING TO PROVIDE TREE CANOPY.
SO TO SOME DEGREE, IT'S KIND OF AN EMPTY ARGUMENT. IF THE PEOPLE
ON THAT SIDE OF THE STREET DON'T CARE, YOU KNOW, THEY WANT
SOMEONE ELSE'S TREES TO TAKE CARE OF THEM. I ALSO WANT TO TALK
ABOUT ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS, IS THAT ALTHOUGH THE TREE
PROTECTION INTENT AND PURPOSES IS TO SOME DEGREE TAKEN OUT OF
CONTEXT, THAT OUR JOB IS TO PRESERVE AND RESTORE THE TREE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-40-
CANOPY WITHIN THE CITY, OKAY? BUT IT'S PRESERVE AND RESTORE. AND
THE ISSUE WITH INVASIVE EXOTICS IS THAT THEY CROWD OUT OTHER
TREES. AND, IN FACT, THEY TAKE OVER THE CANOPY IN MANY, MANY OF
OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. I KNOW ALL OF YOU -- WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF
MANY OF YOU OR ALL OF YOU KNOW ABOUT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE A
CYPRESS TREE GROWING ANYWHERE YOU CAN TAKE A FICUS TREE
DOWN, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT A PERMIT. THE REASON THAT IS IS BECAUSE
THE LITTLE BERRIES GET EATEN BY THE BIRDS AND THE BIRDS RUN OVER
TO THE HIGHWAY, AND THEY ELIMINATE THEIR LITTLE BERRY OVER THERE
ON THE HIGHWAY AND THE SEED ROLLS IN THE GUTTER, THE SEED IN THE
GUTTER TURNS INTO A LITTLE TREE AND BLOWS THE ROAD APART.
THAT'S WHAT INVASIVES DO. NOW, WHETHER OR NOT ONE CAN GO OUT
AND FIND A BUNCH OF BISCHOVIAS AROUND THAT HAVE SEEDED IN, I
DON'T KNOW. KNOW FICUS DO THAT. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THE
NOTION OF TAKING EIGHT TREES DOWN AND PLANTING OAK TREES OF
THE SIZE THAT THE SCHOOL BOARD IS PROPOSING TO PLANT IS MORE
THAN ADEQUATE TO GAIN MY SUPPORT. I GUESS IF I HAD ONE OTHER
ISSUE, I THINK IT'S THE NOTION THAT -- I KNOW OUR PUBLIC WORKS ARE
KIND OF STRETCHED ALL OVER THE PLACE. I GUESS I WISH IN A CASE LIKE
THIS WHEN THERE IS A CODE THAT TALKS ABOUT EXOTIC INVASIVES THAT
THERE WERE SOME REAL – SOME REAL -- SOME HORTICULTURE
KNOWLEDGE THAT IS, IN FACT, A PART OF THAT. AND I ALSO NEED TO
ADDRESS ONE ISSUE THAT ONE OF OUR SPEAKERS -- ONE OF THE
SPEAKERS FROM THE PUBLIC TALKED ABOUT, THAT THESE TREES POSE
NO THREAT. THEY ARE THREATENING, OKAY? THEY ARE TREEING THAT,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-41-
IN FACT, DO COME DOWN QUITE OFTEN IN HIGH WINDS AND CAN, IN FACT,
INJURE PEOPLE AND PROPERTY, OKAY? AND THEY DO POSE A THREAT
BECAUSE OF THEIR WEAK-WOODED NATURE. THANK YOU.
>> Chairperson: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? MOTION? [
INAUDIBLE ] NO, YOU MAY NOT. NO. NO. YOU MAY NOT. PUBLIC HEARING
IS OVER. MOTION?
>> Board Member: I HAVE A MOTION.
>> Chairperson: GO AHEAD.
>> Board Member: IF I MAY? I MOVE THAT THE APPEAL BE DENIED AND THAT
THE DECISION OF PUBLIC WORKS BE AFFIRMED.
>> Board Member: SECOND.
>> Chairperson: IT'S BEEN MOVED TO AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE PUBLIC
WORKS DIRECTOR, SO IF YOU VOTE "YES" ON THIS MOTION, YOU'RE
VOTING TO RETAIN THE TREES.
>> City Attorney: AND WE'VE HEARD A LONG HEARING ON THIS. PERHAPS
LONGER THAN OUR OTHER CASES. SO I'M JUST -- I'M JUST MAKING --
INQUIRYING. IS IT IMPLIED, OR IS IT INTENDED BY THE MOVANT, WHEN
THERE IS A DENIAL, IT'S BECAUSE THE CRITERIA FOR TREE REMOVAL AND
RELOCATION HAS NOT BEEN SATISFACTORILY MET.
>> Board Member: MY THOUGHT IS THE APPEALING PARTY HAS NOT MET
THE BURDEN TO REVERSE THE DECISION FROM PUBLIC WORKS.
>> City Attorney: OKAY, VERY WELL. VERY WELL.
>> Chairperson: ANY QUESTIONS ON THE MOTION?
>> Board Member: SECOND.
>> Chairperson: I'M ASKING IF FROM ARE ANY QUESTIONS. ROLL CALL,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-42-
PLEASE.
[ ROLL CALL ]
>> Clerk: THE MOTION CARRIES, A VOTE OF 6-3.
>> Chairperson: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
NEXT ITEM.
[ APPLAUSE ]
>> City Attorney: THIS DECISION IS FINAL UNLESS APPEALS OF THE CITY
COMMISSION IN THE MANNER PRESCRIBED BY THE CODE.
>> Chairperson: NEXT ITEM ON
THE AGENDA
* * *
Related Documents
