[1:34] any person was allowed pursuant

[1:35] to chapter two, article six of

[1:36] the city code must register

[1:38] with the city clerk and comply

[1:39] with related city requirements

[1:41] for lobbyists before appearing

[1:42] before the planning, zoning and

[1:44] appeals board. A person MAY not

[1:45] lobby a city official, board

[1:46] member or staff member to

[1:47] registering a copy of the code

[1:48] section by lobbyists available

[1:50] in the city clerk's office and

[1:52] online on municode.Com. The

[1:53] agenda for this meeting and

[1:54] materials for the items on the

[1:55] agenda were published and made

[1:56] available to the board in

[1:57] advance of the meeting. The

[1:59] materials are also available

[2:00] online@miamigov.Com. Please

[2:01] silence your cell phones and

[2:03] other noise making devices. Any

[2:04] person with disability

[2:05] requiring assistance, auxiliary

[2:06] aides or services for this

[2:08] meeting MAY notify the board's

[2:09] liaison. Any person MAY be

[2:11] heard by the board through the

[2:11] CHAIRMAN Pursuant to the public

[2:13] notice for not more than two

[2:14] minutes on any proposition

[2:15] before the board unless

[2:16] modified by the chair. When

[2:17] addressing the board a member

[2:19] of the first state his or her

[2:20] name, address and what item

[2:22] will be spoken about when the

[2:23] board takes action or votes on

[2:25] any proposition, it shall do so

[2:26] by a roll call vote to be

[2:28] recorded and included in the

[2:28] record. Please note that board

[2:30] members MAY have generally been

[2:31] briefed by city staff on items

[2:32] on today's agenda. The meeting

[2:34] can be viewed live on miami tv

[2:36] and on channel 77. In addition

[2:37] to the comments provided here

[2:38] at city hall, the public may

[2:40] submit comments via the city's

[2:41] online comment form. The

[2:42] comments submitted through the

[2:43] comment form, if any, were

[2:44] distributed to board members

[2:45] and city administration

[2:46] throughout the day so that the

[2:48] board can consider prior to

[2:49] taking any action. Additional

[2:50] online comment form remain open

[2:52] during the meeting to accept

[2:53] comments and distribute to the

[2:54] board members up until the

[2:55] chairperson closes public

[2:57] comment. All comments received

[2:58] will be included in a public

[2:59] record of the meeting. These

[3:00] public comment these public

[3:02] comment options established and

[3:03] provided for this meeting

[3:05] comply with section 286.0114

[3:07] florida statutes. Members, are

[3:08] you comfortable with all the

[3:10] provisions set forth in these

[3:11] uniform rules of procedure we

[3:12] have established for this

[3:17] meeting? Yes. Thank you. Okay.

[3:20] We're going to rise for a

[3:20] moment of silence and the

[3:24] pledge of allegiance.

[3:26] [Laughter] [Laughter] Pledge

[3:27] allegiance to the [Laughter]

[3:30] Flag of united states and to

[3:32] the republic for which it

[3:35] stands one nation under GOD.

[3:36] Indivisible with liberty and

[3:45] justice.

[3:53] For all those who will be

[3:54] testifying. Please rise and

[3:57] raise your right hand. Do you.

[3:58] >> solemnly.

[3:59] >> affirm the testimony you

[4:00] will give? Is the truth the

[4:00] whole.

[4:02] >> truth and nothing but the

[4:02] truth? Thank you.

[4:05] >> please be seated. Sorry real

[4:07] quick. Is anybody else that

[4:07] didn't.

[4:09] >> stand up plan on speaking

[4:11] today? Okay.

[4:18] >> okay, thanks. Thank you.

[4:23] Roll call, MISS Lynette. Kudos.

[4:24] MR. Ellen.

[4:28] >> meteor. MR. Paul main here.

[4:32] MR. Manuel vadillo. MR. Eduardo

[4:35] j. Fernandez here, MISS Paula

[4:39] de carlos. MR..

[4:40] >> mario j.

[4:42] >> bailey present MR. Joshua.

[4:46] Pitkin, MR.. Andres.

[4:49] >> lopez present. MR.. Adam.

[4:53] >> gersten present. MR. Chris.

[4:55] Collins present. MR..

[5:00] >> arthur persoff. We have

[5:01] chrome and chair. We are

[5:04] requesting do you approve.

[5:04] >> for.

[5:05] >> full voting rights for our.

[5:07] Alternate board member. Arturo

[5:08] fernandez yes.

[5:11] >> thank you. And were there

[5:12] any requests for absence

[5:14] waivers? Yes, chair we have a

[5:15] request for absent waiver for

[5:17] board member manuel vadillo.

[5:17] And board.

[5:20] >> member paula um paula de.

[5:23] >> carolis motion to approve.

[5:27] Second all in favor? Aye. Any

[5:29] opposed I please uh just note

[5:31] um if any board members.

[5:33] >> did not. Request I just want

[5:34] .

[5:35] >> to mark that down. Thank

[5:39] you. Um are there any

[5:42] deferrals. Yes they're item one

[5:46] which is a um revocation of a

[5:48] certificate of use. I believe

[5:48] the applicant is.

[5:50] >> in the final stages of

[5:51] correcting everything and so

[5:52] they asked for an indefinite

[5:54] deferral.

[5:58] >> okay. Uh anybody have

[5:58] anything to say.

[6:04] >> about that? 1401 southwest

[6:04] 17th avenue.

[6:08] >> hi.

[6:11] >> I don't know where he is. Um

[6:13] hi my name is tamara and zoning

[6:15] administrator. Um oh, there he

[6:18] is. Um, he will speak on why

[6:19] we're requesting an indefinite

[6:21] deferral. Um he's really close

[6:21] to.

[6:22] >> the finish line.

[6:23] >> trying to work with unsafe

[6:24] structure to. Finalize his

[6:27] permits. I know how it goes.

[6:28] Good afternoon. Just for the

[6:29] record, nicholas rodriguez on

[6:31] behalf of the property owner as

[6:32] staff stated, we're really

[6:33] hoping to wrap up the

[6:34] permitting and close out the

[6:35] unsafe structure. Violation

[6:37] which would make the.

[6:39] Revocation appeal moot and we

[6:40] would just take our see you.

[6:42] The reason it's important this

[6:43] property is grandfathered

[6:44] legal. Nonconforming use. So if

[6:45] we lose the see you.

[6:47] >> it's gone forever and the.

[6:49] Structure then has no use going

[6:50] forward. Understood? Okay. And

[6:51] how far off just so.

[6:53] >> the board knows uh how long

[6:54] do you think it will take for

[6:56] you guys to wrap up? I'm hoping

[6:56] really.

[6:57] >> hoping that before the end

[6:58] of the.

[6:59] >> year the permit is issued

[7:00] and everything inspected and

[7:00] closed.

[7:01] >> okay. But like 3 to 6

[7:03] months. Yeah, 3 to 6 months.

[7:05] Okay. Um. All right. Does the

[7:06] board have any questions or.

[7:07] >> we want to go.

[7:08] >> ahead and make a.

[7:09] >> motion. Make a motion to

[7:10] approve.

[7:12] >> second uh let's.

[7:17] >> do a roll call just. And

[7:17] that was.

[7:19] >> to approve the indefinite

[7:21] indefinite deferral. Yeah.

[7:23] board member ellen meziere yes.

[7:26] Board member mario bailey yes.

[7:26] Board.

[7:27] >> member.

[7:29] >> lynette um cardoza board

[7:32] member paul main yes. Board.

[7:35] Member MR. Eduardo j. Fernandez

[7:37] yes. Board member MR. Joshua.

[7:40] Peskin yes. Vice chair MR..

[7:43] >> andres. Lopez yes. Chair MR.

[7:43] .

[7:45] >> adam gerstein yes. Board

[7:47] member. Chris collins. Yes.

[7:49] Motion passes 9 to 0 for an

[7:51] indefinite deferral. Um and.

[7:52] >> the meeting next meeting

[7:54] will be in. MARCH 2027.

[7:56] >> thanks. Thank you all very

[7:57] much. Have a good night. Thank

[8:00] you, thank you. Uh, MR..

[8:01] >> chair, I think.

[8:02] >> there's a minute. I think

[8:03] there are some minutes to

[8:05] approve I forgot.

[8:06] >> yeah, 17. I'll.

[8:08] >> move to approve the JULY the

[8:11] uh. The.

[8:13] >> JULY 17th minutes. Oh well

[8:14] JULY 15th minutes over there.

[8:15] Okay.

[8:16] >> so there's a motion.

[8:17] >> is there a second to.

[8:18] >> approve the minutes? Sorry I

[8:19] forgot second. Okay.

[8:22] >> all in favor? Aye.

[8:24] >> any opposed? Okay.

[8:26] >> I'm I'm sorry chair, but

[8:26] there's no minutes on the

[8:27] agenda.

[8:30] >> to be approved. Okay. I

[8:31] don't know where. MR.. Just a

[8:33] question if if they're.

[8:36] Published uh I don't think they

[8:38] were published before it

[8:39] doesn't matter.

[8:40] >> but I'm just I saw that they

[8:41] were published.

[8:42] >> so and I don't remember

[8:43] approving them before but

[8:44] they're not on this agenda,

[8:47] sir. Okay. All right. Well

[8:51] moving on um do we want to work

[8:52] on this calendar or do we do we

[8:53] want to.

[8:55] >> put that off [Laughter] Or

[8:56] can we get through it quickly

[9:00] the the that that is up to the

[9:02] board. Um the calendar this is

[9:04] the calendar for the upcoming

[9:06] calendar year if you would like

[9:07] to study it and make.

[9:09] Suggestions next meeting you

[9:10] can or study it during the

[9:11] course of the meeting. Yeah

[9:12] that's up to you. Yeah I'm

[9:15] going to just say we wait a uh,

[9:17] a meeting, um, just so that we

[9:19] can all review and make sure

[9:20] that we're eliminating any.

[9:22] Conflicts because we had a

[9:23] problem this year. So we want

[9:25] to make sure we avoid that.

[9:28] Okay, so do we need to. Uh we

[9:31] just if we defer do you have.

[9:32] >> to if.

[9:33] >> you can defer.

[9:34] >> it to next meeting, that

[9:35] would be fantastic. And you

[9:36] just do a voice vote. Voice to

[9:38] MR. Chair before you defer two

[9:40] quick things you want to check

[9:41] the presidents day. Um date and

[9:42] the.

[9:43] >> spelling of juneteenth.

[9:45] That's all. Presidents day and

[9:46] what was the other one actual

[9:48] date in juneteenth. Spelling.

[9:50] >> juneteenth should be on

[9:50] there because.

[9:51] >> it's a it's a spelling

[9:54] right. Okay. Got it. Move to

[9:56] defer to the next meeting. Is

[9:58] there a second? Second. All in

[10:02] favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay.

[10:06] Number three oh you know what

[10:13] actually. Let's do number.

[10:24] Four. Or is four part no.

[10:28] Number three. Did you want to

[10:30] take the rezoning for little

[10:32] havana first? Yeah I think how

[10:34] many of you are here for the

[10:37] little havana rezoning? Yeah I

[10:38] definitely would like.

[10:39] >> to actually do that. I

[10:40] believe that's eight.

[10:41] >> and nine. Sorry. Okay.

[10:44] Right. Chair you would like for

[10:46] me to read both titles into.

[10:47] >> the record? I think that'd

[10:57] be great. Yeah. Thanks.

[11:06] Just one second chair.

[11:08] >> because the titles are very

[11:10] lengthy so excuse me in

[11:20] advance.

[11:25] Item number eight file id

[11:28] 19682. A resolution of the

[11:29] miami planning and zoning and

[11:30] appeal board with attachments

[11:32] recommending approval of an

[11:34] ordinance of the city of miami

[11:35] commission amending ordinance

[11:38] number. 10544 as amended the

[11:40] future land use map of. Miami

[11:42] comprehensive. Neighborhood

[11:44] plan pursuant to the. Expedited

[11:47] state review process subject to

[11:50] the. Section 163.3184. Florida

[11:52] statutes by changing the future

[11:55] land use. Designation from

[11:57] medium. Density restricted

[11:59] commercial to restricted.

[12:02] Commercial of the average.

[12:04] Described herein of real.

[12:06] Properties at. 909 northwest

[12:09] fifth street. 936 northwest

[12:15] sixth street. 434424 9508. 99

[12:18] northwest south river drive by

[12:20] changing the future land use.

[12:21] Designation from medium

[12:23] density. Restricted commercial

[12:25] to restricted. Commercial of

[12:28] their. Acreage described herein

[12:31] of the real properties at. 437

[12:33] and. 445 southwest second

[12:37] street and. 118 southwest south

[12:39] river drive by changing the

[12:40] future land use designation

[12:42] from the medium density.

[12:44] Multifamily residential. To

[12:46] restricted. Commercial of the

[12:48] acreage described herein of the

[12:53] real properties at. 404 2428,

[12:56] 458453. And 459. Southwest

[13:05] second street.

[13:07] 4264343744444545451 and. 479th

[13:12] southwest third street. 224 236

[13:21] 242 300 318 408 427 435 443,

[13:27] 490, 501 525 530. And 541

[13:38] southwest. Fourth avenue.

[13:46] 384014064084114214284314414444455450451458459

[13:48] and. 467 southwest fourth

[13:58] street.

[14:03] 111129137209219303311315329337421427435,

[14:06] 519, 527, 543.

[14:08] >> and. 621 southwest fifth

[14:19] avenue. 360 (940) 040-1405

[14:21] 41542543544545459, 469, 469.

[14:24] And 470. Southwest fifth street

[14:38] and. 401404421427428433434,

[14:40] 444445451452458461471. And 498.

[14:41] Southwest sixth.

[14:42] >> street by changing the

[14:45] future land use. Designation

[14:47] medium density stricted.

[14:48] Commercial.

[14:50] >> to restricted commercial.

[14:55] >> of the acreage. This is long

[14:57] described hearing of the real

[14:59] realty property. 1057 southwest

[15:02] second street. 626 and. 644

[15:07] southwest fourth avenue.

[15:09] 625658711718 and. 719 southwest

[15:15] fifth avenue. 63675, 680. And

[15:18] 701. Southwest seventh avenue.

[15:21] 635 and. 642 southwest seventh

[15:31] court.

[15:35] 41342142442743944444645346046146

[15:38] (747) 047-5500 510 511 52521,

[15:52] 526, 531, 536542.

[16:00] 545567595996016116296496616716767558118348358485858

[16:05] 900 915, 918, 921922, 923, 939,

[16:15] 37, 938, 945, 95951, 96961,

[16:19] 97989911002 1019. 1020 1027

[16:24] 1030 1036 1037, 1040 1047,

[16:30] 1050, 1052, 1121, 1131,

[16:32] 11371145. And 1153. Southwest.

[16:36] >> seventh street. 601 63636.

[16:38] And 640 southwest eighth

[16:42] avenue. 601 and. 1177 southwest

[16:46] eighth street. 628677 and. 777

[16:55] southwest ninth avenue.

[16:56] 626629634637642711721747.

[17:01] >> 46 southwest 10th avenue.

[17:04] 6276286336346 4700 717.

[17:06] >> and. 718 southwest 11th

[17:09] avenue by changing the future

[17:11] land use. Designation from the

[17:12] low density multifamily

[17:14] residence to the medium density

[17:16] multifamily residence to the

[17:18] acreage. Described herein of

[17:21] real. Property at. 828, 834.

[17:23] And 844. Southwest eighth

[17:29] avenue 829838. 338 40 and. 844

[17:34] southwest eighth court.

[17:36] 814829835836 and 840 southwest.

[17:37] >> ninth.

[17:38] >> avenue. 831 and. 834

[17:48] southwest. Ninth court.

[17:52] 8498918921929935937, 939, 951,

[17:56] 961, 975, 977, 985, ten, 11,

[18:01] ten, 17. 1027, 1037, 1041.

[18:06] 1119, 1127, 1131, 1141. And

[18:08] 1153. Southwest ninth street.

[18:12] 826, 827. 834, eight, 35 and.

[18:15] 845 southwest 10th avenue. 827.

[18:17] >> eight, 38, 36, eight, 44

[18:20] and. 847 southwest. 11th avenue

[18:22] by changing the future land

[18:24] use. Designation from the low

[18:26] density. Restricted commercial.

[18:27] To the medium density

[18:29] restricted commercial of the

[18:32] acreage. Designation described

[18:34] inherent of the real. Property

[18:36] at. 824.

[18:37] >> southwest ninth court by

[18:45] changing the future land use.

[18:46] Designation from the medium

[18:47] density.

[18:48] >> multifamily.

[18:49] >> residence to restricted

[18:50] commercial of the acreage

[18:53] described herein of real

[18:57] property at. 172717371751,

[19:02] 1761, 1771, 1779, 1780 1784,

[19:08] 1787, 1788, 1818 131821, 1825,

[19:13] 1837, 1845, 1850, 1853, 1871,

[19:19] 1873, 1875, 1877, 1901, 1916

[19:24] 1920 1913, 1936, 1942, 1945,

[19:29] 1954, 1957, 1962, 1965, 1972,

[19:35] 2000 2025, 2036, 2041, 2043,

[19:41] 2043, 2045, 2051 2059

[19:44] 2105210721, 1121. 31, 21. 36.

[19:47] >> 21, 37, 21. 4021.

[19:48] >> 45, 21. 46.

[19:53] >> 21, 47, 21. 52 and. 2157

[19:55] southwest seventh street. 1747

[19:58] and. 1895 southwest eighth

[20:01] street. 624625 and. 636

[20:04] southwest 18th avenue. 635

[20:08] southwest 19th avenue and.

[20:11] 627638707 and. 1711 southwest.

[20:12] 21 avenue by changing the

[20:14] future land use designation

[20:17] from the low density restricted

[20:18] commercial to restrict

[20:19] commercial of the acreage

[20:21] described in the real property.

[20:22] >> at. 767 and.

[20:27] >> 797 southwest second street.

[20:29] 769 southwest third street.

[20:33] 7677 70. 7075 and. 7076

[20:36] southwest fifth street. 801

[20:38] and. 822 southwest sixth street

[20:46] and. 127142 202 1824409427 505

[20:51] 06515, 52531, 543 606. 20

[20:53] southwest eighth avenue miami,

[20:55] florida as more particularly

[20:57] described in the attached and

[20:58] incorporated exhibit a making

[20:59] findings.

[21:01] >> containing a severability

[21:02] clause and [Applause] Providing

[21:04] for an effective date.

[21:10] [Applause] [Applause] We have

[21:10] one [Laughter].

[21:13] >> more we're only halfway

[21:16] there. So that was the future

[21:16] land use map amendment. We

[21:18] would like to go ahead and read

[21:19] the rezoning in as well.

[21:21] >> so [Laughter] That we can

[21:22] [Laughter] Hear both at the.

[21:23] >> same time [Laughter] As

[21:23] they.

[21:26] >> are connected. Okay.

[21:28] >> and for the record board

[21:39] member arthur is present.

[22:04] They should.

[23:09] item number nine file id. 19683

[23:10] a resolution of the miami

[23:12] planning zoning and appeals

[23:13] board with attachments for.

[23:15] Recommending approval of an

[23:16] ordinance of the miami city

[23:18] commission amending the zoning

[23:20] atlas of the ordinance number.

[23:22] 1311 for the zoning ordinance

[23:23] of the city of miami, florida

[23:26] as amended miami 21 code by

[23:28] changing the zoning.

[23:31] Clarification from. T5l urban

[23:33] center transect zone. Limited

[23:37] to the. T68-0 urban core

[23:39] transect zone open for the

[23:40] properties generally located

[23:43] at. 626644 southwest fourth

[23:49] avenue and. 6256586711718719

[23:56] southwest fifth avenue and.

[24:04] 413423424427439444 half.

[24:10] 4464534646146747477 505

[24:11] 1051152521. 526.

[24:12] >> 531.

[24:13] >> 536.

[24:28] >> 542, 553567595, 996016. Ten

[24:30] 6116296416616716787558118348358528558

[24:32] 6900 915.

[24:33] >> 918. 921922.

[24:39] >> 923, 939, 37, 938. 945,

[24:44] 95951, 957, 9697989, 9199. Six

[24:49] 1013. 1019 1020. 1027 1030 1036

[24:53] 1039. 1040 1047. 1050 1052,

[24:59] 1057, 1121, 1129, 113711451153

[25:05] .Southwest seventh street and.

[25:07] 6367568701 1010 southwest

[25:10] seventh avenue and. 635643

[25:12] southwest seventh court and.

[25:14] 1167 southwest eighth street

[25:17] and. 6016326386 40 southwest

[25:20] eighth avenue and. 627677

[25:27] southwest ninth avenue and.

[25:28] 62662963463772174746 southwest

[25:33] 10th avenue and.

[25:35] 627628633636642 700. 721

[25:37] southwest 11th avenue and by

[25:38] changing the zoning

[25:39] clarification from the t4l

[25:41] general urban transit zone

[25:44] limited to seven five l urban

[25:48] center transect zone. Limited

[25:50] for the properties generally

[25:56] located at. 6767797 southwest

[25:58] second street and. 769

[26:05] southwest third street.

[26:06] 767770775776816 southwest fifth

[26:09] street and. 817822 southwest

[26:18] sixth street and. 127142 202

[26:21] 1823640942750652521, 533543

[26:23] 606. 20 southwest eighth avenue

[26:25] and by changing the zoning

[26:27] clarification from the. T4r

[26:29] generally urban transit zone.

[26:33] Restricted to t five zero urban

[26:34] center transit zone.

[26:36] >> open for the properties.

[26:48] >> generally located at.

[26:49] 40242428552452453459498

[26:57] southwest second street and.

[26:57] 42643643744444545451468479

[27:09] southwest third street and.

[27:13] 438403406408415425428433441,

[27:14] 44444545451458459467. Half

[27:19] southwest fourth street and.

[27:27] 224236242 303 18418427335443495

[27:31] 505 2152553541. Southwest

[27:42] fourth avenue and

[27:43] 111129137219311315329337421427435519

[27:46] half 527541605621 southwest

[27:55] fifth avenue and

[27:56] 37140140541542143544545455, 459

[27:59] ,4694 70 southwest fifth

[28:05] street and

[28:12] 40142421427428434435,

[28:13] 444446451454458461471 southwest

[28:15] sixth street and by changing

[28:17] the zoning clarification from

[28:20] t5o urban center transit zone

[28:24] open to the t68o urban core

[28:26] transit zone open for the

[28:28] properties generally located at

[28:30] 438 southwest first street and

[28:33] 445 southwest second street and

[28:35] 124 southwest south river

[28:36] drive. And by changing the

[28:39] zoning clarification from t4o

[28:41] general urban transit zone open

[28:45] to t5o urban center transit

[28:47] zone open for the properties

[28:50] generally located at 832

[28:52] southwest 12th avenue and by

[28:54] changing the zoning

[28:56] clarification from t4l

[28:58] generally urban transit zone

[29:01] limited to t5o urban center

[29:03] transit zone open for the

[29:05] properties generally located at

[29:08] 824 southwest ninth court and

[29:09] by changing the zoning

[29:11] clarification from t four are

[29:14] generally urban transit zone

[29:19] restricted to. T five are urban

[29:20] sector transit zone restricted

[29:22] for the properties generally

[29:26] located at 828834 half 844

[29:30] southwest eighth avenue and

[29:33] 82983833. 84844 southwest

[29:35] eighth court and 14 southwest

[29:39] eighth street and 814829836837.

[29:43] 840 southwest ninth street and

[29:44] 829831834 southwest ninth court

[29:53] and 849893921929933937, 939,

[29:58] 951963, 975, 977985 half 1019

[30:02] 1027 1039 1043, 111, 191125,

[30:08] 1133, 1141, 1153, 116511851501

[30:15] ,151515211525, 1535, 1621,

[30:20] 1627, 1631, 1627, 1631, 1637,

[30:27] 1645, 1653, 16161667,

[30:29] 167516831697 southwest ninth

[30:34] street and 8268278348. 35. 842.

[30:39] 845 southwest 10th avenue and

[30:41] 829838388. 44845 southwest 11th

[30:46] avenue and 837844. 910

[30:51] southwest 12th avenue and

[30:53] 824825834835. 84585855

[31:01] southwest 12th court and

[31:02] 822825834835843844853854

[31:10] southwest 13th avenue and

[31:11] 81782783483584285903 southwest

[31:17] 13 court and 827833. 842.

[31:19] 84385851 southwest 14th avenue

[31:25] and 1901909 southwest 15th

[31:27] avenue and 820 southwest 16th

[31:29] avenue and by changing the

[31:32] zoning clarification from t5l

[31:34] urban center transit zone

[31:37] limited to t 680 urban core

[31:39] transit zone open for the

[31:43] properties generally located at

[31:45] 12281238123412 southwest second

[31:49] street 1227 and 1235 southwest

[31:52] third street 626 and 644

[31:56] southwest fourth avenue

[31:59] 115812171228, 1229, 12 and 1238

[32:05] southwest fourth street. 627 no

[32:08] 625658711718 and 719 southwest

[32:12] fifth avenue 1160 1220 1234 and

[32:17] 1239 southwest fifth street

[32:21] 115611621225, 1232, 1235, 1658

[32:25] and 1724 southwest sixth street

[32:28] 6367568701 and 1010 southwest

[32:31] seventh avenue 635 and 643

[32:42] southwest seventh court

[32:45] 41342342442743944444645346461,

[32:48] 4746747477 505 ten 51152521,

[32:54] 526, 531, 536, 542, 553567,

[33:07] 595, 596016 ten

[33:11] 61162964166167167877581183483458528558

[33:17] 6900 915, 918, 921922, 923,

[33:24] 939, 37, 938, 945, 955, 951957,

[33:28] 9697989, 91996 1013 1019 1020

[33:33] 1027 1030 1036 1039, 1040 1047,

[33:39] 1050 1052, 1057, 1121, 1129,

[33:44] 11371145, 1153, 121212 2520

[33:57] 2712351236 1240 1241 1250

[34:22] ,1446, 1447, 1450 1453 1460

[34:27] 14611469 1470 1475150115 1015

[34:33] 2015 211529 1530 1535 1540 1545

[34:39] 1550 1552, 1553, 1556, 1561,

[34:45] 1568, 1621, 1628, 1631, 1632,

[34:50] 1641, 1642, 1645, 1646, 1648,

[34:55] 1699, 1723, 1730 and 1760.

[34:59] Southwest seventh street

[35:01] 601632638 and 640 southwest

[35:04] eighth avenue 1167 southwest

[35:07] eighth avenue 628 and 677

[35:11] southwest ninth avenue

[35:17] 6266296346376216 40 and 746

[35:23] southwest 10th avenue

[35:26] 627628633636642 707 21

[35:29] southwest 11th avenue 201212

[35:37] 303 113333540340742425, 426,

[35:43] 434, 435, 502521, 527, 536, 542

[35:49] ,615, 616, 619629641 and 710

[35:53] southwest 12th avenue

[35:55] 626327017057 ten and 718

[36:01] southwest 13th avenue

[36:02] 624629636644717 and 726

[36:08] southwest 14th avenue

[36:09] 626627631711717 southwest 15th

[36:14] avenue 6286356436 50 and 711

[36:19] southwest 16th avenue

[36:23] 6026146186 3779 southwest 17th

[36:25] avenue and by changing the

[36:27] zoning classification t4 are

[36:33] generally urban transit zone.

[36:36] Restricted to t5 urban center

[36:38] transit zone open for the

[36:40] properties generally located at

[36:47] 1727 1720 17371751, 1761, 1771,

[36:54] 1779, 17871813 half 1821, 1835,

[36:59] 1837, 1847, 1853, 1871, 1873,

[37:05] 1875, 1881, 1933, 1945, 1957,

[37:10] 1963, 2035, 2041, 2043, 2049,

[37:17] 2051 2055 21052107211121, 31,

[37:22] 21, 37, 21, 45, 21, 47 and 2157

[37:27] southwest seventh street and

[37:29] 624625636 southwest 18th avenue

[37:32] and 632635 southwest 19th

[37:35] avenue and 627638 southwest 21

[37:37] avenue and by changing the

[37:39] zoning clarification from t for

[37:41] l general urban transit zone

[37:44] limited to t5 urban center

[37:46] transit zone open for the

[37:47] properties generally located at

[37:53] 1780 17841788, 1810 1850, 1960

[37:57] 1920 1936, 1942, 1954, 1962,

[38:03] 1972, 2000 2036, 2046, 2088,

[38:06] 2138, 2144, 2146, 2154

[38:11] southwest seventh street and

[38:12] 17531897 southwest eighth

[38:15] street and 715 southwest 21

[38:17] avenue and by changing the

[38:20] zoning classification t five

[38:23] urban center transit zone open

[38:27] to t68o urban core transit zone

[38:28] open for the properties

[38:33] generally located at

[38:34] 212421262132 southwest seventh

[38:37] street and 122101 southwest

[38:39] eighth street by changing the

[38:40] zoning classification from t

[38:43] five urban center transit zone

[38:46] limited to t6al urban core

[38:48] transit zone limited to the

[38:49] property generally located at

[38:53] 404 2442 490 north west south

[38:55] river drive and 899 southwest

[38:57] fourth street and by changing

[38:59] the zoning clarification from t

[39:01] five zero urban sector transit

[39:04] zone open to t6ao urban core

[39:05] transit zone open for the

[39:07] properties generally located at

[39:09] 500 north west southwest drive

[39:12] and by changing the zoning

[39:15] classification from t5l urban

[39:17] sector center transit zone

[39:19] limited to t6al urban core

[39:22] transit zone limited for the

[39:24] properties generally located at

[39:27] 909 northwest fifth street and

[39:29] 936 north west sixth street

[39:31] miami, florida. Collectively

[39:33] the property as more

[39:36] particularly described in the

[39:37] attached and incorporated

[39:39] exhibit a making findings

[39:40] containing a severability

[39:42] clause and providing for an

[39:45] effective date. Thank you.

[39:55] [Applause] Okay.

[39:59] >> thank you. Good evening.

[40:01] Amber forte with the city of

[40:02] miami planning department here

[40:03] to present the future land use

[40:05] map amendment and rezoning

[40:12] application p 2620890 and

[40:14] pz2620891 for the properties

[40:15] located at 644 southwest fourth

[40:17] avenue which are linked to all

[40:23] the properties listed. So I do

[40:25] want to talk about the what

[40:28] ryan passed out to you which is

[40:30] a substitution we did post with

[40:33] the agenda a proposed amendment

[40:34] stating that we would update

[40:36] all of the documents at this

[40:37] meeting. And so what you have

[40:42] is updated exhibits and um

[40:43] legislation and that is all

[40:45] based on a community meeting

[40:48] that was held on AUGUST 25th.

[40:51] Um we did we had an outreach

[40:52] meeting at jose marti park.

[40:54] About 75 people were in

[40:56] attendance for that meeting.

[40:58] Our main takeaways from that

[41:01] meeting, um, during a comment

[41:03] and question period was that we

[41:06] were encroaching too close to

[41:08] the single family areas to the

[41:13] south of um of kyoko and on

[41:14] ninth street. So we have

[41:16] significantly and what you'll

[41:18] see in in your maps that were

[41:19] given handed out as well as in

[41:21] the maps that amber will

[41:22] present that we have

[41:23] significantly reduced the

[41:25] rezoning in that area. Um in

[41:26] fact we've almost removed all

[41:28] the properties that are there

[41:29] are still a few that remain but

[41:31] um that is where we're able the

[41:32] only portion that remains is

[41:33] where we're able to complete

[41:37] the transect. So you'll see a

[41:38] t6t5t4t3 and you'll see that

[41:39] complete transect. Now the

[41:41] other takeaway that we had is

[41:43] that we really needed to

[41:44] explore an overlay or some type

[41:47] of overlay uh district we have

[41:50] engaged a consultant to begin

[41:51] preparing enabling a

[41:52] neighborhood revitalization

[41:54] district, um, which is an

[41:56] overlay tool that does things

[41:57] like incorporate public

[42:00] benefits. And as part of that

[42:01] we'll also have design

[42:03] guidelines as well for for the

[42:05] area. So those things are

[42:07] getting incorporated. Um and

[42:08] then the commissioner has

[42:10] continued to do some public

[42:11] outreach after this meeting, um

[42:14] and has expressed support for

[42:16] conservation districts in the

[42:17] single family neighborhoods to

[42:19] the south such as shenandoah

[42:21] and the roads. And of course

[42:22] the planning department is

[42:23] happy to support those efforts

[42:25] as well. Um, the other thing

[42:26] that we did hear is about the

[42:28] pace of the project and as well

[42:30] as um doing continued outreach

[42:32] as I said, the commissioner has

[42:32] already continued doing

[42:34] outreach. I believe he he met

[42:37] with the roads um neighborhood

[42:39] association uh, and outreach

[42:41] will continue. So this is a

[42:43] lengthy process that will occur

[42:46] ,uh, over the next several

[42:48] months. And this is just one

[42:49] piece as we begin to put

[42:50] together the pieces of the

[42:51] neighborhood revitalization

[42:53] district's design guidelines

[42:55] and any other overlay tools

[42:57] that will that will come out of

[42:59] of those efforts, um, there

[43:01] will be continued out outreach.

[43:03] Um, we also can we also hope to

[43:05] do outreach, um, before this

[43:07] goes to city commission in

[43:09] OCTOBER and then again in

[43:11] NOVEMBER as well. So there is

[43:14] sorry it goes to it would go to

[43:15] second reading in DECEMBER.

[43:17] There is a lengthy state review

[43:20] process to this because of the

[43:22] amount um the amount of acreage

[43:24] that we're changing to the

[43:26] future land use [Laughter] Plan

[43:28] and so we need approximately at

[43:31] we really need at least 60 days

[43:33] to have that to have that

[43:34] reviewed by the state. They

[43:36] only get 30 but by the time we

[43:38] submit to them they review they

[43:40] submit back to us if they ask

[43:41] any questions or anything like

[43:43] that it can it can easily be

[43:45] 660 days or even further. And

[43:48] so um kind of that's why we

[43:50] would like to continue moving

[43:52] this forward. But there will be

[43:53] continued outreach as we build

[43:54] the neighborhood revitalization

[43:58] district and as all of the

[43:59] items kind of come together at

[44:01] the end and culminate at city

[44:03] commission. So I'm going to let

[44:06] amber take it away sorry and

[44:07] explain the substitutions in

[44:09] the in the in the applications.

[44:10] Yes. Okay.

[44:13] >> um you know before that

[44:16] really quick um to a point you

[44:19] made the ncd the idea of there

[44:21] being ncds would those be

[44:24] addressed prior to I mean is

[44:25] that going to be at all

[44:27] discussed and brought out prior

[44:29] to commission like in other

[44:31] words will we're rushing to

[44:32] this this just appeared and

[44:35] we're doing this but now we're

[44:37] hearing oh well, you know, the

[44:38] commissioner is open to ncds

[44:39] and things like that, which I

[44:41] think are going to be really

[44:42] significantly important to the

[44:46] people that are here today. So

[44:49] you know, I think speeding this

[44:52] through without having it, you

[44:54] know, and it just being a

[44:57] promise to discuss, um I'm sure

[44:58] everyone would want to know

[45:00] what how you see it kind of

[45:02] playing out because you just

[45:04] kind of set that up and I

[45:05] before we have everyone start

[45:07] coming up and talking about it

[45:08] because if anyone else heard

[45:10] you say that they MAY want to

[45:10] know.

[45:13] >> sure. So um, I mean shannon

[45:15] shenandoah and the roads it's

[45:17] my understanding have expressed

[45:18] um neighborhood conservation

[45:20] wanting to have some type of

[45:20] neighborhood conservation

[45:24] district for years and so there

[45:26] um, once the community comes

[45:28] together in support of that,

[45:30] we're happy to help move that

[45:31] forward that that that process

[45:34] forward. Um, but until we have

[45:36] a true community support for

[45:38] that that's beyond just

[45:40] expressed interest, it's hard.

[45:42] I can't move a conservation

[45:43] district forward. So we're

[45:45] really um, while we are

[45:47] supportive and we're happy,

[45:48] we're happy to come out and

[45:50] make presentations and to help

[45:51] guide the process, I really

[45:53] need the community to come

[45:54] together in that conservation

[45:56] district effort um conservation

[45:58] districts as well as historic

[46:00] districts uh, really truly only

[46:02] are successful if they are

[46:04] driven by the community and the

[46:05] property owners. Sure.

[46:08] >> thanks for that. And on one

[46:10] other housekeeping, um, there

[46:11] are a lot of properties on here

[46:12] and I just want to make sure

[46:15] that nobody on the board has

[46:16] any disclosures to make about

[46:19] any ownership stake in anything

[46:22] being discussed today. Any of

[46:24] these addresses belong to any

[46:34] projects anybody's working on.

[46:39] MR. Passoff none. Okay. Okay,

[46:44] great. So I'll first go into

[46:46] the flume requesting multiple

[46:47] changes to the future land use

[46:49] map designation designation for

[46:50] those properties generally

[46:53] located at 644 southwest fourth

[46:55] avenue as well as the rezone

[46:56] requesting multiple changes to

[47:00] the miami 21 codes atlas for

[47:01] 466 properties generally

[47:04] located at 644 southwest fourth

[47:07] avenue. Uh and. What was that

[47:07] number? Pardon?

[47:09] >> how many properties are

[47:12] being changed. 466 in the

[47:23] rezone and 301 in the flume.

[47:25] And those do reflect the

[47:27] updated substituted numbers not

[47:28] the original proposal. Yes.

[47:32] >> so first I'll go into the

[47:34] proposed future land use

[47:35] changes for this new project

[47:36] the little havana transit

[47:38] corridor. Uh the applicant is

[47:39] the city being represented on

[47:41] behalf of the city manager and

[47:43] that flume consists of five

[47:44] separate corridor areas. Our

[47:47] subject areas um within those

[47:48] subject areas are approximately

[47:54] 67 acres and 301 properties.

[47:56] Here is a future land use map

[47:58] overview of our existing and

[48:01] proposed future land use map um

[48:02] within the five little havana

[48:04] transit corridor areas up for

[48:07] flu resident redesignation to

[48:09] restricted commercial 24 those

[48:10] parcels are existing as low

[48:12] density restricted commercial

[48:14] 154 as medium density

[48:15] multifamily residential and

[48:18] another 123 as medium density

[48:21] restricted commercial for a

[48:27] total of 301 properties. So by

[48:28] changing the designations to

[48:31] restricted commercial density

[48:33] increases up to 150 dwelling

[48:35] units per acre nonresidential

[48:37] flr goes up to 11 and a variety

[48:43] of uses become allowed. So when

[48:45] we were analyzing this this

[48:46] flume amendment there were some

[48:48] key considerations and

[48:49] conditions that staff made of

[48:51] those subject properties in

[48:52] areas one of them being the

[48:55] wide range of designations. Uh

[48:59] sorry within the subject within

[49:01] the subject area as a wide

[49:03] range of parks to medium

[49:04] density housing to commercial

[49:06] and institutional uses. We

[49:08] wanted to keep that in mind

[49:12] when making changes to the flu.

[49:14] We also looked at the at the

[49:16] coastal conditions as some of

[49:17] the properties primarily along

[49:19] southwest south river drive are

[49:20] located within the coastal high

[49:22] hazard area and MAY be exposed

[49:27] to storm surges. Goodness sorry

[49:31] .Additionally we looked at

[49:32] transit access. That was

[49:33] another very important

[49:34] consideration as the study

[49:35] areas include southwest seventh

[49:38] and southwest eighth street. Uh

[49:39] they are major transit

[49:40] corridors where fdot conducted

[49:42] a study for planned

[49:43] improvements to improve access

[49:46] safety development and and

[49:48] inform land use decisions.

[49:50] Lastly we looked at community

[49:52] resources more specifically the

[49:54] ten schools and 11 parks within

[49:56] the subject area. Overall, the

[49:58] subject properties are within a

[49:59] mixed use neighborhood transit

[50:01] a mixed use transit accessible

[50:03] neighborhood near schools,

[50:05] parks and parks that

[50:06] incorporate flood mitigation

[50:08] and resilience to the localized

[50:16] effects of climate change. So

[50:18] here we have the concurrency

[50:19] management for the area. The

[50:20] proposed amendment was tested

[50:21] across five areas of

[50:23] concurrency and we found that

[50:25] there were adequate levels of

[50:27] service were met for all five.

[50:28] The previous levels of service

[50:30] standards were based on a

[50:31] potential population increase

[50:34] of 19,253 residents in the

[50:36] subject areas that we that we

[50:38] thought were going to result in

[50:40] a new maximum population of

[50:43] 36,215. So that was the

[50:45] previous one. This one here is

[50:46] representative of the areas

[50:48] being taken out specifically in

[50:51] that area. Five um the levels

[50:52] of service standards are now

[50:55] based on that. 16,028 potential

[50:57] population increase and a new

[51:07] maximum of 27,646. Okay so we

[51:09] also also went to the

[51:10] comprehensive plan analysis. We

[51:12] did find that the proposed

[51:13] amendment. Proposed amendment

[51:15] complies with the with the

[51:16] following miami neighborhood

[51:18] comprehensive plans policy by

[51:20] meeting all five levels of

[51:21] service standards providing for

[51:23] more safe and affordable homes,

[51:25] improving the existing housing

[51:27] and strengthening the

[51:28] neighborhoods for current and

[51:29] future residents and provides

[51:31] reliable transportation options

[51:39] while easing car dependance.

[51:41] Now going to the rezone, the

[51:42] rezone area is a little bit

[51:45] larger than the flume at 140

[51:48] 100 acre, 146 acres and

[51:51] contains 466 parcels across ten

[51:53] corridor areas. And because

[51:54] that rezone is inconsistent

[51:56] with the future land use

[51:58] designation as I presented we

[52:01] are concurrently submitted the

[52:06] flume amendment. So picture

[52:08] here are the original rezone

[52:09] areas. We originally had a

[52:11] large proposed rezone area with

[52:12] 11 corridors. However after

[52:14] community outreach and input we

[52:15] shrank that area significantly

[52:17] more particularly the proposed

[52:19] t five just south of southwest

[52:21] eighth street which we'll see

[52:28] pictured on the next slide. So

[52:30] area five as you can see circle

[52:32] as you can see in the red box

[52:41] went from 699,948ft2 to

[52:42] 262,088ft2. So a significant

[52:45] decrease in the size of that

[52:50] area. And just for a little bit

[52:53] more context, um I we have here

[52:55] listed all of the areas that

[52:57] are being proposed. Um

[52:59] collectively they show the

[53:01] existing zoning and the

[53:03] proposed zoning as well as

[53:04] existing and proposed flume and

[53:07] how um, how much of that square

[53:08] footage is actually in each

[53:12] area. So in addition to that

[53:15] decrease of area five, um there

[53:17] was also an area of five b that

[53:18] had been removed which was

[53:24] about 7000ft2. Here are little

[53:26] photo here are some photos from

[53:27] our site visit uh staff

[53:29] conducted a site visit on

[53:33] AUGUST 6th, 2006 2026 excuse me

[53:35] um where we went to every uh

[53:37] corridor area and took photos

[53:39] walk the area to get a feel for

[53:40] the character of the nature and

[53:42] the conditions of the

[53:49] neighborhood. Um yeah. So here

[53:51] we have the use table which

[53:52] details the uses unlocked as

[53:54] the proposed transit zones for

[53:56] the at the proposed transit

[53:59] zones for the rezone at the t5

[54:01] and t6 we see an increase in

[54:02] allowable dwelling units per

[54:04] acre and uses like hotels,

[54:06] office space, recreational uses

[54:08] and educational uses unlocked

[54:10] and or allow for administrative

[54:14] approval. In addition to the

[54:18] unlocking of the densities uh

[54:20] public benefits has also been

[54:23] um allowed which would allow

[54:24] for higher densities and

[54:30] stories within the t5 and t6.

[54:31] So those public benefits

[54:33] benefit the community via cash

[54:34] contributions, which can be

[54:35] used for capital improvements

[54:36] within the neighborhood or

[54:38] allowed in exchange for public

[54:40] parks and open space, uh,

[54:42] affordable or workforce housing

[54:44] and or green building

[54:50] certification. So some some key

[54:52] considerations for the rezone

[54:54] is that ultimately little

[54:57] havana and the city as a whole

[54:59] is evolving. Um, we wanted to

[55:00] provide sensitive alternatives

[55:03] to pressures that we are seeing

[55:04] from local projects, which tend

[55:07] to be denser than what is being

[55:10] proposed. Um, on this map here

[55:12] the blue dots show the existing

[55:14] live local permits within the

[55:17] within the corridor areas and

[55:19] the pink dots show the new live

[55:21] local permits. So we see some

[55:23] of them clustered along

[55:25] southwest southwest south river

[55:26] drive to the north and we are

[55:28] seeing them also along uh

[55:30] eighth avenue eighth street

[55:33] pardon me. Additionally we are

[55:35] looking to maintain the

[55:35] neighborhood's character

[55:37] through through miami's 21

[55:39] different design review

[55:40] criteria and reinforce the

[55:42] transect as a guiding guiding

[55:43] principle and easing the

[55:45] transitions of density and

[55:46] height between less less

[55:49] intense uses and densities. Um,

[55:50] in addition to that, we also

[55:51] want to secure the financial

[55:53] future of the neighborhood via

[55:54] the public benefit system

[55:56] rather than public benefit

[55:57] program payments rather than

[55:59] state tax breaks and

[56:05] incentives. So next I'll go

[56:06] into the criteria. The first

[56:08] criteria the proposed change

[56:09] will further the goals,

[56:10] objectives and policies

[56:11] policies of the comprehensive

[56:13] plan, the miami 21 code and

[56:15] other city regulations. Um the

[56:17] rezone is inconsistent with the

[56:19] existing future land use. So we

[56:21] did do that companion flew

[56:22] amendment to ensure that the

[56:24] future land use is compatible

[56:25] with the proposed rezoning

[56:27] classifications. Um the rezone

[56:29] does encourage development of a

[56:32] balanced mix of uses of uses

[56:34] for area use areas for

[56:35] employment, shopping,

[56:37] entertainment, housing and

[56:39] recreation near each other and

[56:41] then proximate access to the

[56:43] transit corridor encourages

[56:45] compact pedestrian oriented and

[56:46] mixed use development within

[56:47] the neighborhood. So we found

[56:52] that that complied. Criteria to

[56:53] the need and justification for

[56:54] the proposed change, including

[56:55] changed or changing conditions

[56:57] that make the passage of the

[56:59] proposed change necessary. So

[57:00] we are seeing a history of

[57:02] changing conditions within this

[57:04] neighborhood and area in 2027,

[57:07] five properties located along

[57:08] southwest south southwest

[57:10] seventh avenue and southwest

[57:12] seventh street were rezoned

[57:16] from t5o to t 680 and in 2016

[57:18] two out of those properties

[57:22] were rezoned from t5l to t5o to

[57:24] allow for an expansion of an

[57:25] existing auto related

[57:27] commercial establishment. There

[57:29] have also been increases in

[57:31] zoning within the past decade

[57:35] of zoning from t5t from t5 to t

[57:37] six primarily north of

[57:38] southwest eighth street and

[57:40] more recently in 2025 the city

[57:42] commission adopted ordinance

[57:44] 14411 rezoning the nearby

[57:45] property located at 601

[57:48] southwest ninth street and 840

[57:50] southwest sixth avenue from t5l

[57:53] to t six oh. These changing

[57:54] conditions highlight the

[57:56] evolving the evolving

[57:58] conditions of the diverse urban

[57:59] corridor and the significant

[58:01] efforts made to increase the

[58:03] density of new developments in

[58:04] the intensity within the

[58:06] surrounding areas by unlocking

[58:08] allowable uses via that rezone

[58:12] process. And then the final

[58:14] criteria a successful transit

[58:15] change in manner which

[58:17] maintains the goal to preserve

[58:18] neighborhoods and to provide

[58:20] transitions and intensity and

[58:23] building height. So it we are

[58:24] looking to change the

[58:26] successfully increasing so

[58:28] increasing it successfully um

[58:30] maintains the easing of density

[58:31] and intensity of uses adjacent

[58:33] to the t three urban transit

[58:35] zones and the t four urban

[58:36] transit zones of the

[58:39] surrounding areas. Uh also the

[58:40] little havana neighborhood

[58:42] though largely low density is

[58:43] seeing more dense infill

[58:44] properties and live local

[58:45] projects being developed within

[58:48] the low and medium multifamily

[58:50] residential areas. So that

[58:52] increased development so the

[58:53] increased development capacity

[58:54] through the rezone will enable

[58:56] the national registries to

[58:58] enable national registry

[58:59] historically designated

[59:01] properties to take advantage of

[59:03] selling those rights to further

[59:04] promote the preservation of

[59:05] those properties through

[59:07] transferring development rights

[59:10] um to other residential

[59:14] projects. So we found that that

[59:20] also complies. To end we

[59:21] recommend the flu as

[59:22] substituted pursuant to

[59:26] ordinance number 1054 for the

[59:28] future land use map of the

[59:28] miami comprehensive

[59:29] neighborhood plan as amendment

[59:31] and the findings, the planning

[59:32] department recommends approval

[59:34] for the requested changes to

[59:35] the future land use map

[59:36] designation from low density

[59:38] restricted commercial medium

[59:40] density multifamily residential

[59:41] and medium density restricted

[59:42] to commercial restricted

[59:44] commercial to restricted

[59:49] commercial. Thank you. So I

[59:52] have one more uh and then the

[59:53] recommendation for the rezone

[59:54] as substituted pursuant to

[59:57] miami 21 article seven section

[1:00:00] 7.1.2.8 of ordinance 13313114

[1:00:03] as amendment as amended and the

[1:00:04] findings the planning

[1:00:05] department recommends approval

[1:00:06] of the requested change of

[1:00:08] zoning from t4l general urban

[1:00:10] transit zone limited to t5l

[1:00:13] urban urban center transit zone

[1:00:15] limited from t4r general urban

[1:00:17] transit zone restricted t4l

[1:00:19] general urban transit zone

[1:00:21] limited and t four general

[1:00:22] urban transit zone open to t

[1:00:24] five urban transit zone open

[1:00:27] and from t5l urban center

[1:00:29] transit zone limited and t five

[1:00:31] urban transit zone limited open

[1:00:34] excuse me to t six eight urban

[1:00:37] transit zone open that

[1:00:39] concludes my presentation.

[1:00:40] Thank you and thank you

[1:00:42] welcome. Any questions? Thank

[1:00:47] you. Okay so um does anybody

[1:00:48] here not spoken at a meeting

[1:00:54] before? Okay so we line up on

[1:00:56] either is am I missing is

[1:00:57] anybody else doing anything?

[1:00:59] You guys are good right? Okay.

[1:01:01] So you can use either side. You

[1:01:03] have to state your name and

[1:01:05] your address for the transcript

[1:01:08] and then you have two minutes

[1:01:12] and um please just uh you know,

[1:01:13] somebody makes a great point or

[1:01:16] something you disagree with

[1:01:18] best you just keep it to

[1:01:19] yourself and if you want to

[1:01:20] address it, you could use your

[1:01:21] two minutes to address

[1:01:22] something somebody else said if

[1:01:24] you love what someone says and

[1:01:25] you start clapping, it takes

[1:01:26] forever to get through

[1:01:27] everybody that wants to speak.

[1:01:30] So we're going to start now.

[1:01:36] Thanks. Hello.

[1:01:39] >> good evening, denise galvez.

[1:01:41] I am live at 2130 southwest

[1:01:43] 20th street. I own a business

[1:01:46] in little havana. I run vienna

[1:01:48] cultural fridays and little

[1:01:49] havana main street. We're

[1:01:51] currently working to designate

[1:01:52] that eighth street corridor

[1:01:54] from 12 to 17th avenue. I'm

[1:01:56] asking you tonight to please

[1:01:58] defer this item. The applicant

[1:02:00] is the city of miami. The

[1:02:02] latest amendment to the map was

[1:02:03] provided yesterday afternoon.

[1:02:05] Not even the commissioner had

[1:02:06] seen it. There is no reason why

[1:02:08] we should move forward. Gersten

[1:02:09] brought up great points. They

[1:02:12] keep mentioning ncds and ncr

[1:02:13] all these things that people

[1:02:15] have not seen and haven't even

[1:02:16] been discussed further. I think

[1:02:18] that should come before we move

[1:02:20] forward on such far reaching

[1:02:21] legislation that affects so

[1:02:23] many properties. I happen to

[1:02:24] live south of ninth street so

[1:02:26] oh great they removed my home

[1:02:27] but guess what? I walked that

[1:02:28] neighborhood and my office is

[1:02:30] on eighth street that a lot of

[1:02:32] those businesses live off of

[1:02:33] tourism. This will affect the

[1:02:34] tourism. Nobody comes to little

[1:02:36] havana to look at big concrete

[1:02:37] buildings built out to the

[1:02:38] sidewalk. How is this going to

[1:02:39] affect traffic? How is this

[1:02:41] going to affect the quality of

[1:02:42] life for all the people who do

[1:02:44] live north of little havana,

[1:02:45] the congestion is already

[1:02:46] horrible. The streets are in

[1:02:47] horrible conditions, the

[1:02:48] sidewalks in horrible

[1:02:49] conditions. There's so much

[1:02:50] that needs to come. This is

[1:02:52] called putting the cart before

[1:02:53] the horse. Bottom line please

[1:02:55] defer. Ask the city manager who

[1:02:57] lives in broward to defer. He's

[1:02:58] probably not he's never come to

[1:02:59] a little havana walking tour.

[1:03:01] We give it free with doctor

[1:03:02] porridge doctor paul george. I

[1:03:04] invite him to come before he

[1:03:05] proposes this kind of

[1:03:07] legislation that affects not

[1:03:09] only 440 homes but it will

[1:03:10] affect the roads, it will

[1:03:12] affect the historic riverside

[1:03:13] district and it's definitely

[1:03:14] going to affect shenandoah and

[1:03:15] the historic neighborhood

[1:03:16] behind. Thank you.

[1:03:18] >> thank you very much. Thank

[1:03:22] you. Next speaker. Thank you,

[1:03:24] mauricio villasuso uh, my

[1:03:26] address 999 southwest first

[1:03:28] avenue. Um, I'm a property

[1:03:30] owner investor and real estate

[1:03:31] consultant for a lot of the

[1:03:32] owners in little havana, in

[1:03:35] fact many of whom are one of my

[1:03:36] first columns going to be they

[1:03:38] could not attend the AUGUST

[1:03:39] 25th because they didn't

[1:03:41] receive proper notice. Um if I

[1:03:42] can get a show of hands of all

[1:03:44] my property owners who came

[1:03:46] here tonight and thank you so

[1:03:47] much. These are actual property

[1:03:50] owners who could not attend the

[1:03:51] AUGUST 25th. They either

[1:03:53] received it that same day and

[1:03:55] they did not receive notice and

[1:03:57] raise a hand. Uh raise your

[1:03:58] hand again if this directly

[1:03:59] impacts your property and you

[1:04:03] you support it. Thank you of my

[1:04:06] owners. So so anyways, a lot of

[1:04:08] the owners um didn't receive

[1:04:10] notice couldn't come. But the

[1:04:12] other comment I want to make is

[1:04:14] 11 years ago we had this

[1:04:16] opportunity francisco garcia

[1:04:18] then zoning director tried to

[1:04:21] propose a large massive plan to

[1:04:23] similarly do this. Back then we

[1:04:25] heard a lot of comments and

[1:04:26] pushback and what we ended up

[1:04:28] getting from that commentary

[1:04:30] was two blocks designated

[1:04:31] historic. It was supposed to go

[1:04:32] in parallel with the zoning but

[1:04:34] that didn't happen. And back

[1:04:37] then there was a 2015 economic

[1:04:38] development report that the

[1:04:40] city of miami, the department

[1:04:41] of zoning, university of miami

[1:04:43] all did together and they saw

[1:04:46] the rental issues, the rents

[1:04:49] rising, the housing crisis over

[1:04:51] 30% of the property stock from

[1:04:53] the 1920s and how we were

[1:04:54] losing them. And to address

[1:04:55] that they needed to encourage

[1:04:57] more development because from

[1:04:59] the 90s to the 2000 there was

[1:05:02] only 5% and here we are and I I

[1:05:03] commend the zoning department

[1:05:04] and planning department folks

[1:05:07] for taking a bold step and

[1:05:08] they're taking the lead on this

[1:05:10] to suggest that we redevelop it

[1:05:14] little havana it's its turn.

[1:05:16] We've seen all this luxury high

[1:05:17] end rise and everywhere else

[1:05:18] but little havana there's

[1:05:20] multi-generational owners,

[1:05:22] people who've wanted to see

[1:05:24] this deregulation of the zoning

[1:05:26] rules so they could exercise

[1:05:28] their property rights. So I

[1:05:30] please encourage you to move

[1:05:32] forward. Thank you. MR. Cruz.

[1:05:34] Thank you. Elvis cruz 631 north

[1:05:37] east 57th street maximum

[1:05:39] density potential board members

[1:05:41] you MAY recall that I recently

[1:05:42] handed you a document titled

[1:05:45] maximum density potential.

[1:05:47] Here's the documents. This was

[1:05:49] a study by the city of miami

[1:05:51] planning department in 2016 to

[1:05:52] determine how many housing

[1:05:54] units could be built in the

[1:05:56] city under the existing zoning.

[1:05:58] That study showed that the city

[1:06:01] was zoned to allow eight times

[1:06:04] more housing units than we had

[1:06:07] in 2010 and therefore eight

[1:06:09] times the population. That's

[1:06:12] staggering number is before any

[1:06:14] additional zonings like special

[1:06:18] area plans or ztsnd and many

[1:06:20] more including this one. Miami

[1:06:23] is already hugely over zoned.

[1:06:25] It is an inconvenient truth

[1:06:28] that the city does not want to

[1:06:30] admit miami should not be

[1:06:32] upzoning it should be down

[1:06:34] zoning if you think traffic is

[1:06:36] bad now just wait until we have

[1:06:38] twice the population or three

[1:06:41] times or four times or double

[1:06:43] that to eight times but that's

[1:06:45] just traffic. What about

[1:06:46] potable water supply, sewage

[1:06:48] treatment capacity, garbage

[1:06:50] disposal capacity or hurricane

[1:06:52] evacuation time? This is also

[1:06:54] this is a huge violation of

[1:06:56] miami 21 successional

[1:06:58] transition principle. So here's

[1:07:00] what's on the proposed map

[1:07:01] today. Here's the before you

[1:07:04] have t five oh next to t4l

[1:07:06] which we were told is supposed

[1:07:09] to be the way it's done after

[1:07:11] you're going to get t six next

[1:07:13] to t4 that's a violation of

[1:07:15] your principles on the south

[1:07:18] side before we have t four next

[1:07:23] to t3 after t five next to t

[1:07:25] three. Oh and that's a

[1:07:28] commercial t5 how much is

[1:07:30] enough? How much is too much is

[1:07:33] the unspoken goal to cram as

[1:07:35] many housing units into miami

[1:07:38] as possible? Shouldn't miami be

[1:07:39] more concerned with preserving

[1:07:42] our long term quality of life

[1:07:43] than in enabling developer

[1:07:47] profits? Please vote no on this

[1:07:49] horrible proposal. Thank you.

[1:07:56] Thank you. Good evening. Thomas

[1:07:58] rodriguez 1652 southwest ninth

[1:08:00] street. I live directly across

[1:08:01] from the affected areas by this

[1:08:02] proposal and at least until

[1:08:03] they just changed the

[1:08:05] boundaries in the last seven

[1:08:06] days I timed the readings of

[1:08:08] these last two agenda items

[1:08:09] just because it just kept on

[1:08:10] going on and on. It was about

[1:08:11] 25 minutes just to read these.

[1:08:13] Just think that speaks really

[1:08:15] to just how widespread this is

[1:08:16] as a blanket attempt to upzone

[1:08:19] the city and it's just kind of

[1:08:21] a little too much all way too

[1:08:22] quickly. That's I think that's

[1:08:23] why so many people are here

[1:08:24] speaking about this. We're

[1:08:25] looking at one of the largest

[1:08:26] zoning changes in miami 20

[1:08:28] since miami 21 um, it's

[1:08:30] unprecedented really it's more

[1:08:32] than 136 acres more than 661

[1:08:33] parcels at least that's the

[1:08:34] number that was presented to us

[1:08:36] last tuesday. Um I just heard

[1:08:38] 707 tonight again this is like

[1:08:39] just rapidly shifting. There's

[1:08:41] just way too much for anybody

[1:08:42] to be able to process all at

[1:08:43] one go. The fact that you guys

[1:08:45] had to ask if any of your

[1:08:46] members had conflicted

[1:08:48] properties here speaks to just

[1:08:49] the widespread impact here. We

[1:08:50] were just informed about this

[1:08:53] about nine days ago. We

[1:08:54] received a flier in the mail on

[1:08:56] monday for a meeting last

[1:08:57] tuesday and then we're here

[1:08:59] eight days later speaking about

[1:09:01] it at pcab. So really again

[1:09:03] just inadequate notice it's a

[1:09:04] wonder that 75 people showed up

[1:09:06] on tuesday night because that's

[1:09:08] just speaks to how rapidly this

[1:09:10] all came together. The takeaway

[1:09:12] is not that density is bad,

[1:09:13] it's that residents deserve

[1:09:15] clear information and

[1:09:16] meaningful outreach and a real

[1:09:17] opportunity to understand the

[1:09:18] impacts. I've asked that you

[1:09:20] please refer these items. Thank

[1:09:23] you. Thank you. Good evening.

[1:09:26] My name is martha and I live at

[1:09:29] 1026 southwest 19th avenue and

[1:09:32] I am the co-founder of the

[1:09:34] historic shenandoah group, a

[1:09:36] group which was formed 11 years

[1:09:37] ago and is made up of residents

[1:09:39] in the part of shenandoah with

[1:09:41] the densest concentration of

[1:09:44] historic properties um and

[1:09:46] whose borders are ninth street

[1:09:49] to the north, 13th street to

[1:09:51] the south, 14th avenue to the

[1:09:53] east and 22nd avenue to the

[1:09:54] west. I'm here on behalf of

[1:09:56] many of the residents in our

[1:09:58] group to respectfully request

[1:09:59] that your consideration of this

[1:10:01] proposal be deferred for two

[1:10:03] main reasons. Number one, the

[1:10:05] amount of acreage is extremely

[1:10:07] large and our community has not

[1:10:10] had the opportunity. We've not

[1:10:12] been given ample time to

[1:10:14] consider the potential impact

[1:10:16] of a rezoning of this

[1:10:18] magnitude. Um we believe it's

[1:10:21] premature to move forward uh to

[1:10:22] move this forward as proposed

[1:10:23] given that the significant

[1:10:25] given the significant impact to

[1:10:27] not just the current residents

[1:10:29] but to future generations, we

[1:10:31] gained access to the updated

[1:10:34] maps only 48 hours ago. That's

[1:10:36] the maps that were updated from

[1:10:38] the maps that were provided

[1:10:40] last week. Um and the second

[1:10:43] reason is that when we were

[1:10:46] comparing the the pdfs, the

[1:10:48] maps that were provided to us,

[1:10:52] um, against the the ones that

[1:10:53] delineate the current zoning

[1:10:56] and when we compare these to

[1:10:58] the maps online on the city of

[1:11:00] miami website which is map dot

[1:11:06] grid ics.Com some of the um

[1:11:08] some of the ways that the maps

[1:11:10] were delineated, they did not

[1:11:12] match um as drafted by the

[1:11:14] planning and zoning department.

[1:11:16] So there were there were at

[1:11:17] there was at least one

[1:11:19] discrepancy there and it will

[1:11:21] take us more time to to

[1:11:22] understand some of not the not

[1:11:23] only the changes being proposed

[1:11:26] but to understand which uh what

[1:11:28] is the current zoning actually

[1:11:29] because there are discrepancies

[1:11:31] between the online maps and the

[1:11:33] maps that were provided. Um and

[1:11:34] lastly I'll say that the

[1:11:37] residents pardon me. Oh sorry.

[1:11:38] The residents of historic

[1:11:40] shenandoah have engaged both

[1:11:42] dade heritage trust and the

[1:11:44] villagers to pursue not a

[1:11:45] neighborhood conservation

[1:11:47] district but rather a historic

[1:11:49] designation. Back in 2015 we

[1:11:51] had this effort with the

[1:11:52] greater shenandoah

[1:11:54] neighborhood, which is a much

[1:11:55] larger area from 12th avenue

[1:11:57] all the way to 27th avenue and

[1:11:59] then from eighth street to 24th

[1:12:01] avenue. Our group, which is a

[1:12:03] much smaller area, is now ready

[1:12:05] to move forward with pursuing

[1:12:06] this designation. So we ask

[1:12:08] that we please that you give us

[1:12:10] more time to consider this and

[1:12:11] that you take time yourself to

[1:12:12] consider it. Thank you so much.

[1:12:14] Thank you for your time. Thank

[1:12:15] you.

[1:12:17] >> albert camus 1119 southwest

[1:12:20] sixth street 2042 southwest

[1:12:22] fourth street 1128 southwest

[1:12:25] sixth street 530 southwest 11th

[1:12:28] avenue owner investor just like

[1:12:30] some clarity what's going on

[1:12:33] with the parking situation? And

[1:12:37] then two if your property abuts

[1:12:38] one of the properties on

[1:12:39] seventh street, is there going

[1:12:41] to be any adjustments in the

[1:12:42] future for those properties

[1:12:45] that abut t5 properties? Just

[1:12:47] some clarity on that please.

[1:12:48] Thank you.

[1:12:51] >> we'll address that. We'll

[1:12:54] have a discussion later. Good

[1:12:55] evening ladies and gentlemen.

[1:12:57] my name is frank halpern. I was

[1:12:59] born and raised in miami,

[1:13:00] florida and I went to the

[1:13:01] university of florida. Now I'm

[1:13:02] an attorney here in miami,

[1:13:04] florida. I'm a property owner

[1:13:06] in east little havana

[1:13:08] specifically at 236 southwest

[1:13:10] fourth avenue that's directly

[1:13:12] across the street from jose

[1:13:14] marti park. Right now I can

[1:13:17] only build a four plex with no

[1:13:19] commercial units. It's two

[1:13:21] blocks away from 60 and 70

[1:13:23] story buildings that are going

[1:13:27] up a stark contrast if there's

[1:13:29] anywhere in little havana that

[1:13:30] needs increased density and

[1:13:33] height that makes sense it's

[1:13:36] here. It's next to jose marti

[1:13:38] park. We are immediately

[1:13:39] adjacent to downtown and

[1:13:41] brickell directly on the miami

[1:13:44] river. The planning board has

[1:13:46] suggested 200 units per acre in

[1:13:49] little havana and 400 next to

[1:13:51] the miami river. Right now on

[1:13:54] my lot I can only build four

[1:13:56] units and no commercial

[1:13:59] property. I an attorney am

[1:14:01] getting priced out of miami. I

[1:14:02] an attorney am getting priced

[1:14:05] out of office space. I am

[1:14:08] running out of options. I

[1:14:09] believe the city is also

[1:14:11] running out of options as well.

[1:14:13] The demand to live near

[1:14:15] brickell in downtown in the

[1:14:17] miami river does not disappear.

[1:14:19] I've heard this being a

[1:14:20] giveaway to developers because

[1:14:22] property owners MAY benefit

[1:14:23] from additional development

[1:14:26] rights, but I think we need to

[1:14:28] ask the opposite question who

[1:14:30] benefits when we don't allow

[1:14:34] more to be built right now all

[1:14:35] of that increased demand gets

[1:14:37] funneled into one place and

[1:14:40] that's east of I-95. I have to

[1:14:42] go work in that courthouse east

[1:14:45] of I-95 and I want more options

[1:14:47] for my own property because we

[1:14:49] are running out of options. My

[1:14:51] property is also directly next

[1:14:54] to the river. The river is

[1:14:59] bound to crest over that that

[1:15:02] park and if I have a one story

[1:15:04] building on fourth avenue I'm

[1:15:06] going to need options and

[1:15:08] there's only one option I'm

[1:15:10] going to need to build up

[1:15:11] because when the storm surge

[1:15:13] comes and I'm not saying it's

[1:15:14] always coming but one day it

[1:15:16] will I'm going to need

[1:15:17] something and that's going to

[1:15:18] be more height and more

[1:15:21] density. I urge this committee

[1:15:25] to approve what is a narrow and

[1:15:28] well tailored up zoning that

[1:15:30] the planning board has sought

[1:15:32] to remove portions of to make

[1:15:34] even more well tailored. I

[1:15:36] applaud their efforts. This is

[1:15:39] 12 years too late. I'm now a 40

[1:15:41] year old man and I am running

[1:15:43] out of options. Thank you thank

[1:15:48] you. Carlos miranda 1761 west

[1:15:50] flagler street very simple

[1:15:52] concept for you guys today. I

[1:15:56] have been a resident, a

[1:15:59] property owner, a builder, a

[1:16:01] developer, a business owner, a

[1:16:03] job giver in little havana for

[1:16:07] over 20 years for the last 15

[1:16:10] years little havana has

[1:16:13] stagnated under the carollo

[1:16:16] corruption and I come here

[1:16:18] today with an incredible amount

[1:16:20] of enthusiasm for the future

[1:16:24] because finally finally finally

[1:16:27] finally we have someone bold

[1:16:30] enough in the city in the

[1:16:32] administration to stand up for

[1:16:34] this neighborhood that we so

[1:16:36] truly deeply care for and say

[1:16:39] we will push, we will create

[1:16:41] momentum. We will push in a

[1:16:42] direction to generate true

[1:16:45] change in this community.

[1:16:46] Ladies and gentlemen, you guys

[1:16:48] have a choice today you can

[1:16:53] either stop that budding

[1:16:55] momentum, stop those first

[1:16:57] steps toward progress or you

[1:16:59] can encourage it. This clearly

[1:17:02] is a multi-phase process. This

[1:17:04] today is not the end of the

[1:17:05] process. There's zoning

[1:17:07] changes, there's zoning

[1:17:08] overlay, there's parking

[1:17:09] changes. There's all these

[1:17:11] sorts of things are

[1:17:14] architectural uh facade

[1:17:15] requirements, multiple phases

[1:17:19] to it. But it all begins with

[1:17:20] whether you guys decide today

[1:17:24] to encourage building momentum

[1:17:26] towards a better community in

[1:17:28] miami and little havana or

[1:17:30] whether you decide to squash

[1:17:34] that progress and squash a city

[1:17:37] and a commissioner finally

[1:17:39] trying to do something to undo

[1:17:41] the last 15 years of

[1:17:42] stagnation. [Applause] Thank

[1:17:46] you. Thank you. Thank you. Go

[1:17:47] ahead. Hi.

[1:17:48] >> my name. Is roberto santos.

[1:17:51] >> uh, my family owns four one

[1:17:52] southwest fourth street. I'd

[1:17:53] like to donate my time to billy

[1:17:57] corben. Thank you. Good

[1:17:59] evening, billy corbin. 403004

[1:18:02] miami beach 33139. I think we

[1:18:05] all know at this point we might

[1:18:06] not accept it, but we realize

[1:18:07] that most of us if not all of

[1:18:09] us in this room are going to

[1:18:11] live to see a time when no

[1:18:12] haitians live in little haiti,

[1:18:14] when no dominicans live in

[1:18:16] little santo domingo of

[1:18:18] allapattah, when no bahamians

[1:18:20] live in the little bahamas of

[1:18:21] the west grove and when no

[1:18:25] cubans live in little havana. I

[1:18:27] think that it's important to

[1:18:29] establish that not all

[1:18:30] landowners and not all

[1:18:31] developers are bad or evil or

[1:18:32] want to destroy neighborhoods.

[1:18:33] Some of them are just small

[1:18:35] business owners who are looking

[1:18:37] to maximize the value from

[1:18:38] their private property and they

[1:18:40] should have that opportunity

[1:18:42] and that should be done in a

[1:18:43] reasonable and and planned way.

[1:18:46] I'm not certain that this is

[1:18:48] reasonable or fully planned and

[1:18:50] but I realize that the train

[1:18:52] has the bright line has left

[1:18:53] the station and we either get

[1:18:54] on board or we're going to get

[1:18:55] run over by it and it's the

[1:18:56] bright line. So we're probably

[1:18:58] going to get run over by it.

[1:19:01] But they had a very set number

[1:19:03] of dates you'll recall at that

[1:19:04] meeting for those of you who

[1:19:05] are there that were there last

[1:19:06] week, they know everything they

[1:19:07] need to hit every date they

[1:19:09] need to hit and this is going

[1:19:10] to happen. So I would just ask

[1:19:11] this board to seriously

[1:19:13] consider some of the things

[1:19:14] that you saw in their

[1:19:15] presentation level of service

[1:19:17] standards. The city cannot keep

[1:19:19] up with the level of service in

[1:19:21] any I don't know by a show of

[1:19:22] hands if you live in the city

[1:19:23] or you're a business owner in

[1:19:24] the city, are you satisfied

[1:19:25] with the level of service

[1:19:26] you're receiving from a city

[1:19:28] with a $3 billion a year

[1:19:30] budget? I mean honestly, so can

[1:19:31] they really maintain the level

[1:19:32] of services when they're

[1:19:34] talking about adding 20,000 new

[1:19:35] residents in this neighborhood

[1:19:37] over a series of decades after

[1:19:40] this plan? Also, how many times

[1:19:41] are we going to hear the public

[1:19:43] benefit song before we realize

[1:19:45] that they're lying to us, that

[1:19:46] there is no public benefit,

[1:19:48] that there is no way that we

[1:19:50] can develop our way out of an

[1:19:51] affordability crisis, that

[1:19:52] they're going to add workforce

[1:19:53] and affordable housing, that

[1:19:55] they're going to add parks that

[1:19:57] they're going to add or improve

[1:19:59] our infrastructure which is

[1:20:01] failing. Also, I've been to

[1:20:02] enough of these meetings to

[1:20:03] know we should start a segment

[1:20:06] called seven things and seven

[1:20:08] said tonight that in order to

[1:20:09] have a neighborhood

[1:20:11] conservation district we need

[1:20:12] grassroots support. We need

[1:20:13] [Laughter] Community consensus

[1:20:16] .What about the upzoning like

[1:20:19] so an ncd requires everybody to

[1:20:20] get together in the

[1:20:21] neighborhoods and come hat in

[1:20:22] hand begging to the city. But

[1:20:24] the upzoning can happen from

[1:20:26] where? By whom? And that's the

[1:20:28] last thing I want to ask you

[1:20:30] about savannah. The people

[1:20:31] representing the administration

[1:20:32] were very generous with their

[1:20:33] time after the community

[1:20:34] meeting last week very

[1:20:36] professional, very polite but

[1:20:38] also very cagey when everybody

[1:20:40] in the room wanted to know one

[1:20:41] thing for the purpose of

[1:20:43] accountability and transparency

[1:20:45] whose idea was this? Where did

[1:20:47] this come from? I understand

[1:20:49] 1215 years ago these ideas are

[1:20:50] always milling about. They're

[1:20:52] coming up. There's different

[1:20:52] neighborhoods. You started

[1:20:54] telling me about the history of

[1:20:55] upzoning in west grove and here

[1:20:57] and there, but you also told me

[1:20:59] that 7 to 8 months ago there

[1:21:00] was a resurgence in interest in

[1:21:02] city hall for this. Where did

[1:21:04] it come from? We just want to

[1:21:05] know whose idea it was. It

[1:21:06] might be better to know that it

[1:21:07] was the district commissioner

[1:21:08] because at least we know it was

[1:21:09] an idea that came from within

[1:21:11] the community, rather one that

[1:21:12] came from outside of it and was

[1:21:14] forced onto it. Was it the

[1:21:15] mayor? Was it the city manager,

[1:21:17] the coward from broward who is

[1:21:18] sponsoring this item but

[1:21:19] doesn't bother to show up to

[1:21:21] defend it himself? I just think

[1:21:22] we need some more clarity and

[1:21:24] answers to those questions. I

[1:21:25] don't know if that necessitates

[1:21:27] a deferral or not, but I think

[1:21:28] those are some important issues

[1:21:30] that I would hope the board

[1:21:31] would [Applause] Address

[1:21:32] tonight and get answers to.

[1:21:33] Thank you. Thank you.

[1:21:38] >> uh, please don't clap.

[1:21:40] Thanks. Go ahead. Hi.

[1:21:42] >> good evening. My name is

[1:21:44] raisa fernandez. My address is

[1:21:46] 992 northwest fifth street,

[1:21:48] miami, florida. I live um,

[1:21:51] maybe a block away from one of

[1:21:55] the proposed properties and I

[1:21:57] have a t four. And so when

[1:22:00] people mention about zoning and

[1:22:02] you know, making the most

[1:22:04] profit of their properties I

[1:22:05] live in a single family home

[1:22:08] but my my property is

[1:22:10] designated t four but yet I

[1:22:13] have not received any notice

[1:22:14] about these property changes

[1:22:17] happening a block away on the

[1:22:20] river because I'm 350ft away

[1:22:24] and not 300. And so I think

[1:22:27] that this is very

[1:22:28] unprofessional to not send

[1:22:31] enough notice to homeowners,

[1:22:33] not just investors or

[1:22:35] developers that live in the

[1:22:37] neighborhood or have own

[1:22:38] homestead property owners

[1:22:39] should have been notified

[1:22:42] within at least 500ft of the

[1:22:43] properties, especially with

[1:22:46] this type of change in zoning,

[1:22:49] the property that is in play is

[1:22:51] at the end the folio number and

[1:22:53] your last package it goes from

[1:22:55] miami zoning is t five and it

[1:22:58] goes up to t six through eight.

[1:23:00] But at the moment that property

[1:23:02] is not a building it's just a

[1:23:03] very there's one vacant land

[1:23:05] and one small marine commercial

[1:23:07] space that's there. And so I

[1:23:10] think that is in peril to the

[1:23:12] people that live here in this

[1:23:14] neighborhood. Um to be notified

[1:23:17] to be spoken to the planning

[1:23:18] department never reached out.

[1:23:20] Little havana has a master plan

[1:23:22] that was done ten years ago and

[1:23:24] none of that has been

[1:23:26] incorporated where the

[1:23:28] community really took part in

[1:23:29] shaping this. I don't see

[1:23:31] anything about um park space

[1:23:34] green space infrastructure for

[1:23:37] transit. Um none of this has

[1:23:40] been shown in this planning um

[1:23:42] application. It's been uh feels

[1:23:44] like it's been a doodle. Two

[1:23:46] minutes properties that have

[1:23:48] been circled in because there's

[1:23:51] been um requests by developers

[1:23:53] and property owners that will

[1:23:55] make a lot of money, um but not

[1:23:59] been requested by homeowners

[1:24:02] and neighborhood associations.

[1:24:05] Um, so there's little havana

[1:24:07] shenandoah there's a lot of

[1:24:09] property master plans and

[1:24:10] reports on historic

[1:24:12] preservation and I think that

[1:24:14] this should be deferred or

[1:24:16] asked some serious questions.

[1:24:17] Thank you.

[1:24:20] >> good evening board I'm

[1:24:22] richard casada a property owner

[1:24:25] of 1877 southwest seventh

[1:24:28] street and a I just wanted to

[1:24:31] say that the demand to live in

[1:24:32] this area is huge. The working

[1:24:34] class that lives in that area

[1:24:37] more than more times than one

[1:24:38] would like. They're forced into

[1:24:40] small poorly conditioned

[1:24:42] apartments because that's all

[1:24:44] they can rent that's available

[1:24:46] near their work which is in

[1:24:48] this little havana area in

[1:24:49] neighborhood. And so our city

[1:24:51] that is growing so much I

[1:24:54] believe this proposal very well

[1:24:56] thought out is the next step a

[1:24:58] in helping our city grow

[1:25:00] especially this area which is a

[1:25:03] very big working class area.

[1:25:05] And so I would urge the board

[1:25:06] to approve this well thought

[1:25:08] out proposal which I think will

[1:25:10] help the development that our

[1:25:11] city really needs. Thank you.

[1:25:17] [Applause] Thank you. Hello my

[1:25:19] name is susie battle and I own

[1:25:21] a business in this area. It's

[1:25:23] called azucar ice cream at 1503

[1:25:25] southwest eighth street. Um I

[1:25:28] need to just at least put in

[1:25:29] that. What's wrong with little

[1:25:32] havana now what's wrong with

[1:25:35] our area? Who wants big

[1:25:36] buildings there? The whole

[1:25:38] point is that it's quaint. The

[1:25:40] whole point is that it's

[1:25:42] charming. The whole point is

[1:25:43] that people want to go

[1:25:45] backwards and that's the

[1:25:46] nostalgic part of our

[1:25:48] neighborhood. By the way, I

[1:25:50] went to preschool where the

[1:25:52] marlins stadium is at

[1:25:53] candyland. I've been in this

[1:25:57] neighborhood for 57 years so

[1:25:59] please defer, defer, defer.

[1:26:01] There's no I don't understand

[1:26:03] the rush. I don't understand

[1:26:05] why this is so quick. I don't

[1:26:06] understand why nobody gets

[1:26:08] notices. I don't understand any

[1:26:11] of this. So in my eyes what are

[1:26:13] we doing here? Why are why are

[1:26:14] you doing that? How do you

[1:26:16] sleep at night like that? I

[1:26:18] just I just it's sort of sad to

[1:26:20] me to see that this is

[1:26:22] happening here. So please let's

[1:26:24] take a look at it and actually

[1:26:26] educate ourselves as to how

[1:26:28] this is going to work. Not so

[1:26:30] quick. Not so let's get it in

[1:26:34] right now defer defer defer.

[1:26:38] Thank you guys hold off on the

[1:26:41] clapping. Thanks. Hi my name is

[1:26:42] michelle stanchina. I live at

[1:26:45] 1325 southwest 22nd terrace. I

[1:26:47] think a lot of really important

[1:26:49] valid points on both sides have

[1:26:51] been brought up. I think that

[1:26:53] the city is obviously growing

[1:26:54] and has room for growth.

[1:26:56] Business owners want to grow.

[1:26:58] Um people want to live in

[1:27:00] apartments they need to live in

[1:27:01] apartments. But the people that

[1:27:02] are here and currently live

[1:27:05] here have valid concerns as was

[1:27:07] just mentioned. There is no

[1:27:09] reason to rush this through.

[1:27:12] This affects as you heard we

[1:27:14] they called out for 30 minutes

[1:27:16] the addresses that are

[1:27:18] affected. This will not only

[1:27:19] affect the people living in

[1:27:22] those addresses but multiple

[1:27:24] houses as was mentioned that

[1:27:26] are 50ft away that were not on

[1:27:27] that 30 minute list. This

[1:27:30] requires time. This requires

[1:27:33] energy. This requires due

[1:27:34] diligence. Okay. It's not just

[1:27:35] about housing. It's not just

[1:27:37] about buildings going up.

[1:27:38] There's a lack of services.

[1:27:40] There's a lack of fire stations

[1:27:43] .There's a lack of public

[1:27:44] transportation. There's already

[1:27:45] congestion as was mentioned

[1:27:48] last week there's a hurricane

[1:27:49] evacuation route. What happens

[1:27:51] to that route when you add 2000

[1:27:53] people to that community?

[1:27:54] People complain about

[1:27:56] congestion every day in group

[1:27:58] chats. The schools are

[1:28:00] affected. This is not something

[1:28:03] that you can do in one month

[1:28:06] and evaluate properly. This

[1:28:10] requires proper studying and

[1:28:12] planning. There's city planners

[1:28:13] and it's almost insulting to

[1:28:15] the city planners how fast this

[1:28:18] is going through. So I urge you

[1:28:20] to defer until more information

[1:28:23] is actually available so that

[1:28:26] you can plan the city and grow

[1:28:28] the city but grow it in a

[1:28:31] proper and effective way. Thank

[1:28:34] you. Is there anyone else who

[1:28:38] would like to speak? Okay. Um

[1:28:42] we will now engage in

[1:28:46] discussion on this item. Go

[1:28:50] ahead. Member van. Well can we.

[1:28:52] Hear the city responses first?

[1:28:54] Can we hear the city responses

[1:28:56] first? If you want to do that

[1:29:00] we can do that. Okay. Did you

[1:29:02] have any specifics you wanted

[1:29:04] to respond to from public

[1:29:07] comment? Um I believe there was

[1:29:10] a comment about parking. So um

[1:29:13] miami 21 does require one and a

[1:29:14] half spaces per unit and then

[1:29:16] has parking requirements for

[1:29:17] everything that that still

[1:29:20] applies. Um we did the city

[1:29:22] commission did adopt a little

[1:29:24] havana parking trust fund um,

[1:29:27] uh, earlier this year and so,

[1:29:30] um, the actual only way to get

[1:29:31] a parking reduction anywhere in

[1:29:33] that area is if you pay into

[1:29:35] that fund so you're no longer

[1:29:38] allowed to get the um

[1:29:40] reductions by right that are

[1:29:41] allowed within miami 21 the

[1:29:42] only way to get reductions are

[1:29:45] to pay into that fund. Um, we

[1:29:46] additionally are working on

[1:29:48] another parking trust fund that

[1:29:51] will come forward. Um, next

[1:29:53] piece of meeting SEPTEMBER

[1:29:56] 16th. And so we are we are

[1:29:57] addressing the parking

[1:29:59] concerns, um, through those

[1:30:01] parking trust funds. Uh, I

[1:30:03] believe there was um I'm not

[1:30:05] sure what the other comment was

[1:30:07] about the other question. Did

[1:30:08] you did you have one in mind?

[1:30:11] Was there. Okay, okay. Well if

[1:30:13] anybody thinks of anything else

[1:30:13] they heard they want

[1:30:15] clarification. Bring it up. Go

[1:30:20] ahead. Uh yeah, I've been on

[1:30:22] this board a long time and

[1:30:23] every now and then you see

[1:30:26] something rushed to us like

[1:30:30] this in a big, big hurry and

[1:30:32] typically you don't know where

[1:30:36] it's coming from. Um MR. Corbyn

[1:30:38] had a very good point. Who on

[1:30:41] earth is pushing this? All of

[1:30:43] the principals are brand new to

[1:30:44] their positions. They have not

[1:30:47] been here long enough to have

[1:30:49] any idea about the genesis of

[1:30:52] this problem, of this of this

[1:30:53] project and its development.

[1:30:55] Not the mayor, not the city

[1:30:58] manager. Not the commissioner.

[1:31:00] Nobody involved with this

[1:31:03] project from the

[1:31:05] administration's point has been

[1:31:06] here long enough to have a hand

[1:31:09] in it at all. So MR. Corbyn's

[1:31:11] point is well taken. Where is

[1:31:14] this coming from and who's

[1:31:17] pushing it and why is it being

[1:31:20] pushed down our throats so

[1:31:22] quickly? It's a little odd.

[1:31:26] It's a massive project. It's

[1:31:29] upzoning on steroids and if we

[1:31:32] think that the city yes the

[1:31:36] city needs truly affordable

[1:31:40] housing but for a project this

[1:31:42] size I want to be assured

[1:31:45] before I can vote anything I

[1:31:47] want to be assured that it is

[1:31:51] in fact necessary. Is it just a

[1:31:53] bunch of of developers who have

[1:31:55] every right to make money but

[1:31:57] they do not have the right to

[1:31:59] rush something this massive

[1:32:02] into our faces and say quick

[1:32:04] quick sign here, let us get

[1:32:05] going because a lot of people

[1:32:07] are going to make money. MR.

[1:32:10] Cruz was absolutely right most

[1:32:12] of our services are f certainly

[1:32:14] all the major roads in miami

[1:32:16] are f and b steiner is

[1:32:19] absolutely right one and a half

[1:32:21] per dwelling unit. But you can

[1:32:24] pay into a fund and you can get

[1:32:26] virtually nothing no parking

[1:32:28] whatsoever if you pay enough

[1:32:29] money to the fund. And I

[1:32:31] suspect that tied to that

[1:32:33] program you can also get

[1:32:36] additional bonus height. So

[1:32:38] with something this massive

[1:32:42] it's insulting to me and I

[1:32:43] would hope to some other

[1:32:45] members on this board to be

[1:32:48] asked to vote on it with no

[1:32:50] information whatsoever except

[1:32:53] that staff has drawn some nice

[1:32:55] pictures. So I'm pretty sure

[1:32:57] that the staff if they were

[1:32:59] pushing this they would have

[1:33:01] made sure that this board knew

[1:33:04] all they could about it. So I

[1:33:06] don't believe staff is pushing

[1:33:08] it. There's somebody behind a

[1:33:10] curtain here and I there's no

[1:33:12] way that I could do anything

[1:33:14] but defer this until I

[1:33:17] understand who and why a lot of

[1:33:19] the zonings in this city must

[1:33:23] have necessity if this is

[1:33:26] necessary to break transitional

[1:33:30] form and put t5 up against t3

[1:33:33] and t4 up against t6, I want to

[1:33:35] know why before I vote on it.

[1:33:37] I'm not against growth in this

[1:33:39] city. I think the city survives

[1:33:41] on growth. It dies without it.

[1:33:44] But there's intelligent growth

[1:33:46] and there is irresponsible

[1:33:48] growth. And to rush this into

[1:33:52] our faces is irresponsible. I

[1:33:53] can't tell you one thing about

[1:33:55] this project. It's new to us.

[1:33:57] We don't know anything about it

[1:33:59] and now they want us to

[1:34:00] [Laughter] Vote and say oh it's

[1:34:02] okay. It'll all be okay. We're

[1:34:04] not going to have the parking

[1:34:05] so we're not going to have any

[1:34:07] more cars. Okay so where's the

[1:34:10] busses? Where's the trains?

[1:34:12] Where's the streets? Uh it's

[1:34:16] just it's almost ludicrous and

[1:34:18] to have to listen to 30 minutes

[1:34:22] of properties when we don't

[1:34:24] have a clue who's behind this

[1:34:26] and why they're behind it and

[1:34:28] what the true impacts are going

[1:34:31] to be is a little ridiculous.

[1:34:33] And unfortunately it's not the

[1:34:34] first time that this board has

[1:34:37] been asked to act this way with

[1:34:39] nowhere near enough information

[1:34:40] in a rush because somebody's in

[1:34:43] a rush here and I would love to

[1:34:45] know who it is because as I

[1:34:46] say, nobody on the

[1:34:48] administration here has been

[1:34:49] here long enough to have a hand

[1:34:51] in this. They MAY have looked

[1:34:52] at it and said, oh this is

[1:34:54] nice. Yes, it's going to bring

[1:34:55] a lot of revenue to the city.

[1:34:57] Well that's terrific. So

[1:35:00] explain it to us. Explain it to

[1:35:03] this board why it is truly

[1:35:05] necessary. Now some of the

[1:35:07] people that spoke just now

[1:35:09] reasonably eloquently about why

[1:35:10] they would like to have this

[1:35:12] well geez why owned properties

[1:35:13] up in those neighborhoods that

[1:35:14] would like this to because it's

[1:35:16] a money maker your the value of

[1:35:17] your properties are going to go

[1:35:18] up and there's nothing wrong

[1:35:22] with that. But don't ask me to

[1:35:25] vote blind because I will not

[1:35:29] do it. I vote to my vote would

[1:35:31] be to defer this and let's hear

[1:35:33] some more about it. The last

[1:35:37] thing I want to say is ncds are

[1:35:42] not ironclad. This very board

[1:35:46] denied ncd three their rights.

[1:35:47] I don't think they realized

[1:35:49] what they were doing. I don't

[1:35:50] think that some of the members

[1:35:52] on this board really understood

[1:35:54] what the ncd was supposed to

[1:35:56] afford the people that applied

[1:35:58] for it it's supposed to give

[1:36:00] them more protections. So the

[1:36:01] biggest thing that I would like

[1:36:05] to see is yes, all the t3

[1:36:07] properties surrounding any kind

[1:36:09] of developments of this size

[1:36:11] should have their ncd

[1:36:12] applications rushed forward

[1:36:15] even faster than this project

[1:36:17] is being rushed forward. So I

[1:36:19] would vote for deferral. Thank

[1:36:21] you. Um actually member

[1:36:28] borshoff go ahead and. So as

[1:36:31] far as this is uh this this

[1:36:32] project, I'm sure there's a lot

[1:36:33] of people out here that sound

[1:36:34] like they're they're confused

[1:36:38] or you know, but I, uh I'm

[1:36:39] gonna get a little personal on

[1:36:41] this, but I, I live in

[1:36:43] shenandoah and the roads have

[1:36:46] businesses on coyote so I'm

[1:36:48] affected by a lot of crime and

[1:36:51] uh, vagrancy and a lot of

[1:36:53] inefficiencies in the current

[1:36:55] code and especially on h street

[1:36:59] uh, being t68a butting up to

[1:37:01] seven street and having an

[1:37:02] inferior zoning. The biggest

[1:37:04] challenge and I and I think

[1:37:05] what I'd like everybody to kind

[1:37:07] of understand here is it's not

[1:37:10] it's really just an

[1:37:12] inefficiency in the current

[1:37:13] zone. I wouldn't see this as an

[1:37:16] up zone. This is more of making

[1:37:17] the current zoning efficient so

[1:37:19] that you can have proper

[1:37:21] development and that you can

[1:37:23] have proper buildings that

[1:37:26] actually make sense. Um, if you

[1:37:27] kind of get into the weeds a

[1:37:28] little bit and you understand

[1:37:29] the lot dimensions on eighth

[1:37:33] street it's about 100 110ft it

[1:37:35] anybody that builds on those

[1:37:36] corridors ends up having to

[1:37:37] build very inefficient

[1:37:39] buildings that don't even allow

[1:37:42] for proper parking. You can't

[1:37:44] even build a parking structure

[1:37:46] on on eighth street properties

[1:37:48] that abut the t four on ninth

[1:37:50] street I mean I think ninth

[1:37:51] street should be all up zoned

[1:37:53] so that you can build proper

[1:37:54] developments on eighth street.

[1:37:56] Eighth street is a major

[1:37:57] corridor and one of the things

[1:37:58] that a lot of people don't

[1:37:59] understand about this corridor

[1:38:01] is that it is a one way

[1:38:03] corridor. It is a highway. This

[1:38:05] is a federal this is a state

[1:38:06] highway. This is it's not a two

[1:38:08] way road. It's you know, and in

[1:38:09] order to build proper

[1:38:11] development on these corridors

[1:38:13] with with adequate parking, you

[1:38:15] need to have these abutting

[1:38:18] zonings um be implemented. This

[1:38:20] is this is not ken griffin

[1:38:22] coming to miami to buy all

[1:38:24] these properties on calle ocho.

[1:38:27] Sorry to sorry to not you know,

[1:38:30] for the buzzkill. I mean this

[1:38:32] is just efficiencies. This is

[1:38:34] design. This is architecture.

[1:38:37] This is just implementing the

[1:38:39] proper zoning so that you can

[1:38:40] build efficient buildings and

[1:38:42] we can improve the neighborhood

[1:38:43] and you can get a different

[1:38:44] quality of independence. This

[1:38:45] is not about the business owner

[1:38:47] and taking away the character

[1:38:50] of little havana. This is about

[1:38:53] making it efficient. I'm not

[1:38:55] getting into the time. This is

[1:38:57] not my position. My position is

[1:38:59] only to illustrate to you the

[1:39:00] inefficiencies in the market

[1:39:02] and the overall benefits to the

[1:39:04] community because I think a lot

[1:39:06] of people just are just you

[1:39:07] just don't know what you don't

[1:39:08] understand the benefits. I

[1:39:09] think if you understood the

[1:39:11] benefits you would be very

[1:39:13] happy. So I'm just I'm not

[1:39:14] getting into I'm not I'm not

[1:39:16] into the process. I'm not into

[1:39:18] the process. I am only here to

[1:39:20] illustrate the benefits. The

[1:39:23] board will decide the timing.

[1:39:24] That's [Laughter] Up to the

[1:39:26] board. I'm only here to explain

[1:39:27] the positive things that will

[1:39:30] be [Laughter] Impacted by the

[1:39:36] upzone so thank you. Um.

[1:39:43] >> member can you speak into

[1:39:46] the mic? Can you speak into the

[1:39:48] mic member can you speak into

[1:39:53] the mic? I'm not going to get

[1:39:55] into a long dissertation of

[1:39:57] every single benefit I don't

[1:39:59] I'm just basically illustrating

[1:40:01] the the positive impact that it

[1:40:04] will make and that is what I'm

[1:40:07] here for is to make decisions

[1:40:09] on behalf of the community that

[1:40:11] are in the best interest. I'm

[1:40:13] not you know the board this is

[1:40:14] a big issue with the board. I

[1:40:15] think these meetings end up

[1:40:17] wasting a. I think it's a big

[1:40:18] waste of time to be honest with

[1:40:19] you. I think everybody should

[1:40:20] have been educated. I think

[1:40:21] there's times for people to

[1:40:24] call in and you know I think

[1:40:25] our issues here on the board

[1:40:27] are to make decisions that are

[1:40:29] on the on the you know, to to

[1:40:31] understand the zoning and to

[1:40:33] make decisions that are in the

[1:40:34] best interest of the community.

[1:40:36] So I am here just to say, hey,

[1:40:37] I think it's in the best

[1:40:38] interest of the community. I

[1:40:40] don't have to get into the

[1:40:41] semantics of all the reasons

[1:40:43] why because it's just it's too

[1:40:44] long. I'm not going to get into

[1:40:46] it. I'm here to make a decision

[1:40:47] and to move on. Otherwise these

[1:40:48] meetings could end up till two

[1:40:50] in the morning. I think these

[1:40:51] these meetings are very

[1:40:52] inefficient and I think people

[1:40:54] need to take positions as board

[1:40:57] members and move on whether we

[1:41:00] dedicate more time to either

[1:41:01] doing other things, whether

[1:41:04] it's a deferral that's not my

[1:41:05] position. My position is to

[1:41:07] make a position on what I

[1:41:09] believe the positive impacts

[1:41:11] are going to be the community.

[1:41:12] I'm not into process. I'm not

[1:41:14] here [Laughter] Into anything

[1:41:15] other than hey, I think it's a

[1:41:16] good decision and I think

[1:41:18] that's what every board member

[1:41:20] here should do is study and

[1:41:21] figure out do I like this or do

[1:41:24] I not like this and move on?

[1:41:30] >> that's thank you. Please I

[1:41:31] just have a few comments. I was

[1:41:33] looking at the analysis for the

[1:41:36] comp plan change specifically

[1:41:38] the level of service. So a

[1:41:41] couple pieces of information

[1:41:43] regarding schools. Six of the

[1:41:44] nine schools do not have

[1:41:46] capacity for the projected

[1:41:48] number of students with the

[1:41:50] application. Uh the water

[1:41:52] service states that it meets

[1:41:53] the level of standards but does

[1:41:55] not contemplate any

[1:41:58] nonresidential uses which is

[1:42:01] surprising. Sewer was not

[1:42:03] evaluated. It states that will

[1:42:05] be reviewed by the county and

[1:42:09] in addition traffic estimates

[1:42:11] an additional 24,000 cars in

[1:42:14] the morning. I'm sorry 24,000

[1:42:17] cars in the evening and 21,000

[1:42:20] cars in the morning. So can you

[1:42:24] walk us through that review and

[1:42:26] how you feel that that. Sure.

[1:42:28] >> so I'm going to ask ryan

[1:42:29] who's our chief of

[1:42:30] comprehensive planning to help

[1:42:33] me out here. So we submit based

[1:42:35] on the land use and the

[1:42:36] increased density we submit um

[1:42:39] for concurrency review with

[1:42:41] with miami-dade school board um

[1:42:44] they look at it so it they they

[1:42:46] changed their policy how many

[1:42:50] years ago they to allowing so

[1:42:52] it's not just the schools

[1:42:53] within it's also neighboring

[1:42:56] the neighboring schools. So

[1:42:58] they they also so not only do

[1:42:59] they look at the immediate

[1:43:00] schools, they also look at.

[1:43:01] There's capacity for those

[1:43:04] students to be absorbed in the

[1:43:06] like the essentially the next

[1:43:07] level or the next ring of

[1:43:10] schools. And so they they have

[1:43:11] said that there are enough

[1:43:13] seats. So those MAY not be

[1:43:14] directly within that area, but

[1:43:16] the neighboring areas could

[1:43:18] absorb any additional seats. So

[1:43:20] therefore based on their review

[1:43:22] that they are saying that there

[1:43:25] are enough seats um we submit

[1:43:29] for sewer as well as um uh

[1:43:31] hurricane evacuation goes to

[1:43:33] the county we submitted

[1:43:34] hurricane evacuation evacuation

[1:43:38] uh levels to the county

[1:43:40] probably two months ago three

[1:43:42] months ago. Um so those were

[1:43:44] those were issued to the

[1:43:46] county. Um they did not

[1:43:49] respond. Um so there is another

[1:43:51] uh and then of course when we

[1:43:53] do transportation we only look

[1:43:55] at at this level at this point

[1:43:57] we only look at how many peak

[1:44:01] uh am and pm um are trips are

[1:44:03] um generated and that is what

[1:44:07] is generated by what is

[1:44:09] considered in traffic

[1:44:11] engineering to be the highest

[1:44:15] use it it's not what actually

[1:44:18] would MAY get built. So imagine

[1:44:22] if um dadeland mall got built

[1:44:24] here that's what it's

[1:44:25] essentially contemplating in

[1:44:28] some cases. So it's not

[1:44:30] necessarily the peaks are not

[1:44:32] necessarily the best um or

[1:44:34] they're actually they're

[1:44:35] contemplating that every square

[1:44:37] inch gets built out to the

[1:44:39] maximum land use and that would

[1:44:42] create the most amount of uh of

[1:44:45] trips. What happens at a later

[1:44:47] date as projects come in as

[1:44:49] projects come in, they're

[1:44:50] required to do a study, a

[1:44:52] traffic study and based on

[1:44:54] those actual uses that are

[1:44:56] being proposed and built at

[1:44:58] that time they have to mitigate

[1:44:59] any traffic impacts. So that's

[1:45:01] how our traffic concurrency

[1:45:04] works. We do have in this case

[1:45:07] another level of review for our

[1:45:09] level of service. So we take

[1:45:10] all the information that is

[1:45:11] included in your staff report

[1:45:13] and we submit that to the state

[1:45:15] and the state reviews that um

[1:45:17] if they have any questions or

[1:45:20] require additional information

[1:45:22] um disagree with our analysis.

[1:45:25] They have essentially 30 days

[1:45:28] to respond. Um in this case we

[1:45:30] are and in this case we are

[1:45:32] next to two state roads and

[1:45:35] I-95. Um so there is a good

[1:45:36] chance that they will have or

[1:45:37] require additional information

[1:45:41] from us um at that time so I

[1:45:44] but we don't know that until we

[1:45:46] actually submit. Um so that's

[1:45:48] kind of how the level of

[1:45:49] service works and how we

[1:45:50] contemplate level of service. I

[1:45:52] will say that one of the

[1:45:53] differences that you should

[1:45:56] note is that there are

[1:45:58] significantly less properties

[1:46:00] in the future land use map

[1:46:02] amendment than there are in the

[1:46:04] rezoning because our future

[1:46:07] land use map that has not been

[1:46:09] holistically looked at in the

[1:46:11] city since we believe

[1:46:13] [Laughter] Maybe the 80s I I

[1:46:15] would say at least at at the

[1:46:18] earliest the late 90s um

[1:46:20] already contemplates additional

[1:46:22] growth and additional density

[1:46:24] and um zoning in the in a large

[1:46:26] portion of these areas. So

[1:46:28] that's why you see a

[1:46:30] discrepancy in the number of

[1:46:31] properties in the future land

[1:46:33] use map amendment and the

[1:46:35] rezoning because a lot um a lot

[1:46:37] of that growth has already been

[1:46:42] planned for. Thank you. Thanks.

[1:46:50] >> good okay good. Okay there

[1:46:52] we go. I mean first and

[1:46:54] foremost double cheers again

[1:46:56] for all the reading that was

[1:46:57] very impressive and and then of

[1:46:59] course thank you staff for the

[1:47:00] analysis and everything else in

[1:47:03] between. Um I have a couple

[1:47:04] questions and I think the

[1:47:06] easiest one is to ensure that

[1:47:08] the amendment and the item

[1:47:10] that's before us with the

[1:47:11] amendments removes most of the

[1:47:13] single family homes. There were

[1:47:15] never any single family homes

[1:47:17] that were included. There was

[1:47:20] an area to the south. Um and we

[1:47:22] can we can show the maps again.

[1:47:23] There was an area. In front of

[1:47:25] me. I think there was an area

[1:47:26] to the south where originally

[1:47:29] proposed was t five abutting um

[1:47:32] t three and it is currently t

[1:47:34] four abutting t three. What we

[1:47:35] heard from our neighbor at the

[1:47:36] neighborhood meeting is that

[1:47:38] that really encouraged too

[1:47:40] close and too far into the

[1:47:41] single family neighborhood or

[1:47:42] into our neighborhoods to the

[1:47:44] south. So we significantly

[1:47:47] reduced that um so that the t

[1:47:49] four remains in where there is

[1:47:53] depth. Um uh that where there

[1:47:55] is some depth there we did do

[1:47:59] complete the transect to t6t5t4

[1:48:02] and so um that's what that is

[1:48:03] why we changed that. So there

[1:48:05] were no single family homes

[1:48:06] that were included originally.

[1:48:08] >> and I think that leads me to

[1:48:09] to my main point here, I think

[1:48:10] it's imperative that we make

[1:48:13] sure that the transect zoning

[1:48:15] itself is laid out. I

[1:48:18] understand that in the actual

[1:48:20] transect zones is where we're

[1:48:22] up zoning to allow for for

[1:48:23] greater density where it's

[1:48:24] needed and where it's allowed

[1:48:25] based on the stats

[1:48:26] recommendation based on what

[1:48:28] was before us. So within that

[1:48:30] those are my two points the

[1:48:32] fact that making sure that the

[1:48:34] amendment and the focus is

[1:48:36] imperative on making sure that

[1:48:38] the zoning is proper and I

[1:48:40] think it's also imperative that

[1:48:43] we look at this as stages and

[1:48:44] steps. I think there's a lot of

[1:48:45] issues with this. There's a lot

[1:48:47] of great things with this and

[1:48:49] at this point in time I'm

[1:48:51] supportive of it mostly because

[1:48:53] it is a very long process and

[1:48:55] while yes, this has brought

[1:48:57] upon and placed on our laps

[1:48:58] within the last couple of

[1:48:59] months I mean it has been a

[1:49:00] couple of months that we've

[1:49:03] been back and forth. We still

[1:49:06] have to go before the full

[1:49:07] board. We still have to go

[1:49:10] before the state. We still have

[1:49:11] first reading and second

[1:49:13] reading that we come back and

[1:49:15] reread these items and take it

[1:49:16] upon. So at this point I just

[1:49:17] think it's imperative that we

[1:49:19] make sure that we protect those

[1:49:21] transit zones and transit

[1:49:23] corridors to make sure that the

[1:49:24] major and the majority of that

[1:49:26] density is there and not within

[1:49:27] I know it's not within the

[1:49:28] single family homes, but we

[1:49:31] like to I guess hot button that

[1:49:32] topic of single family homes.

[1:49:34] And so therefore I'm supportive

[1:49:35] of it just imperative of that

[1:49:37] fact that make sure that the

[1:49:38] transit corridors are the ones

[1:49:39] that are being fully impacted.

[1:49:43] So thank you. Thanks.

[1:49:48] >> um I would like to mirror my

[1:49:50] fellow board member that he

[1:49:52] just his comment said that I am

[1:49:53] supportive of it because of the

[1:49:55] process is very lengthy. I

[1:49:57] understand and there will be

[1:49:59] multiple phases in this that

[1:50:01] requires a lot of input. Uh but

[1:50:03] I do want to speak up for the

[1:50:05] people that are in this room

[1:50:07] that they're they feel like

[1:50:08] they need to be more engaged

[1:50:10] with with city staff. Um, what

[1:50:12] I heard here from multiple

[1:50:15] people was that a meeting was a

[1:50:17] a meeting was done the day

[1:50:19] before or announced the day

[1:50:20] before and most of them didn't

[1:50:22] have any notice. This is why we

[1:50:23] have a lot of these residents

[1:50:26] here today. Um an amendment was

[1:50:30] provided I heard five five

[1:50:32] hours before or day before. The

[1:50:34] the proposed amendment was

[1:50:36] published with the agenda on

[1:50:38] friday. On friday. I just think

[1:50:41] we need to do a little more

[1:50:42] with the community engage with

[1:50:46] them. Um and a little bit of it

[1:50:48] would be nice for this board to

[1:50:51] also hear how many meetings

[1:50:52] we've actually conducted. Has

[1:50:55] it been one has it been it's

[1:50:57] only been one. It's only been

[1:50:57] one meeting. Okay.

[1:51:01] >> um well that would be my

[1:51:03] comment. Um as far as involving

[1:51:05] this community more and um

[1:51:10] that's where I stand on that.

[1:51:12] Thank you. Got a question for

[1:51:14] you. So reached out to staff

[1:51:16] and I got information that

[1:51:17] there was three community

[1:51:20] meetings. One um 825 uh, rezone

[1:51:25] community meeting. Uh 826 um

[1:51:27] roads hoa and then historic

[1:51:29] shenandoah. 828 so so the

[1:51:30] planning department only

[1:51:32] conducted one public outreach

[1:51:34] meeting and that was on 825 I

[1:51:36] do believe that is my

[1:51:37] understanding that the

[1:51:39] commissioner um, did additional

[1:51:40] meetings after that and those

[1:51:41] are the ones that you're

[1:51:44] speaking to. Thank you. Um next

[1:51:46] question for you is related to

[1:51:48] the uh loss of services. You

[1:51:50] pretty much answered it, but I

[1:51:51] just want to make sure that I'm

[1:51:54] clear on the answer and so you

[1:51:55] submit it and it's related

[1:51:56] solely to transportation. So

[1:51:58] you submit it to the county,

[1:52:00] you wait 30 days to I guess to

[1:52:02] hear back from them. And so how

[1:52:04] do you know if you met the

[1:52:05] criteria if you haven't heard

[1:52:08] back from them? So so we um so

[1:52:10] I mean we we submit to the

[1:52:12] state so we we submit and then

[1:52:15] um, the florida department of

[1:52:16] transportation actually looks

[1:52:18] at the information that we gave

[1:52:19] us and then do we also at the

[1:52:21] time at that time we also

[1:52:22] submit to the county at the

[1:52:24] same time. So the county gets

[1:52:26] another copy of what we haven't

[1:52:27] already submitted to them

[1:52:29] because we've already submitted

[1:52:30] some information to them.

[1:52:32] They'll get another um full

[1:52:34] packet of the entire analysis

[1:52:36] along with the resolution and

[1:52:38] everything. Um and then but it

[1:52:40] goes to every single department

[1:52:42] at the state of florida and so

[1:52:43] there are multiple departments

[1:52:46] within the state that um that

[1:52:47] do the that review

[1:52:49] transportation is only one of

[1:52:51] them. Uh, sometimes they say

[1:52:54] nothing. Um and we never hear

[1:52:56] anything from them. Sometimes

[1:52:58] they submit a formal letter

[1:53:00] back to us um, that says we

[1:53:02] have these questions we would

[1:53:04] like you to respond. Um

[1:53:06] sometimes we get a letter from

[1:53:08] florida department of commerce

[1:53:10] that says there are no

[1:53:11] objections your review is

[1:53:13] complete. Sometimes we get one

[1:53:14] that says this is in violation

[1:53:16] of state law. Everything is not

[1:53:19] valid anymore. Um so it just it

[1:53:21] just depends that also all of

[1:53:23] that communication then gets

[1:53:26] attached into the public record

[1:53:27] for the second reading, um at

[1:53:29] city commission of course if

[1:53:31] the state does require

[1:53:33] additional analysis that

[1:53:36] typically defers our second

[1:53:38] reading until we are able to

[1:53:39] provide or to answer those

[1:53:41] questions to the state. Um and

[1:53:45] so then again once once once we

[1:53:47] get through that review with

[1:53:49] the state um and then second

[1:53:51] reading happens we still have

[1:53:53] to submit to the state again

[1:53:55] and they have to accept it and

[1:53:57] then um and then approve it

[1:53:59] again. So there's even another

[1:54:00] 30 days after that before it

[1:54:03] becomes effective. With staff

[1:54:05] meeting to adding a condition

[1:54:07] of a traffic study to this

[1:54:09] item. So we cannot condition

[1:54:10] rezonings or future land use

[1:54:13] maps. Okay thank you. And then

[1:54:14] the next question for you is

[1:54:16] related to the coastal high

[1:54:17] hazard. You said that was also

[1:54:20] submitted to the county and so

[1:54:21] you feel comfortable that all

[1:54:23] conditions were met because you

[1:54:24] did not hear back..

[1:54:26] >> oh for the hurricane

[1:54:29] evacuation. Yes we we try very

[1:54:32] hard um to maintain a good

[1:54:33] relationship with the county

[1:54:35] and to get answers from them.

[1:54:37] Um we submit every future land

[1:54:39] use map for this review for

[1:54:42] them because they ultimately um

[1:54:44] are the keepers of our

[1:54:45] hurricane evacuation routes and

[1:54:47] of our shelters. So we also do

[1:54:48] shelter review with them. Um we

[1:54:52] rarely hear comment back. Is it

[1:54:54] safe to say so could you

[1:54:55] conclude that that criteria was

[1:54:57] met like all the things that's.

[1:54:59] That's typically if we do I

[1:55:00] mean typically in level of

[1:55:02] service review if there's no

[1:55:04] comment back then we're okay to

[1:55:05] proceed. Got it.

[1:55:07] >> so just want to clarify. So

[1:55:09] it's not an assumption that is

[1:55:11] standard process that like if

[1:55:13] you don't hear back with

[1:55:14] another question when was it

[1:55:15] submitted to the county? I just

[1:55:17] want to verify. Brian we'll

[1:55:19] have to double check. Um we

[1:55:21] typically try to submit all of

[1:55:24] our um we try to do a minimum

[1:55:26] of 60 days for all of our level

[1:55:28] of services. Um sometimes we

[1:55:29] submit to the school board we

[1:55:31] need a full 60 days. So

[1:55:33] typically we're working on a 60

[1:55:35] day cycle for our concurrency.

[1:55:36] Sometimes that gets pushed to

[1:55:37] 30 days but typically it's

[1:55:40] about a about a 60 day notice.

[1:55:42] Next question for you this item

[1:55:44] does not require affordable

[1:55:46] housing correct? No okay. And

[1:55:49] so in the the presentation

[1:55:51] there was a thing that says

[1:55:52] like affordable housing like it

[1:55:54] was a check mark that it was

[1:55:56] like, uh, it was a factor of

[1:55:58] proof. So if it doesn't require

[1:55:59] any affordable housing, how can

[1:56:02] you say like that was met? So I

[1:56:07] think that I think that as we

[1:56:10] as we add more housing units in

[1:56:11] general that begins to

[1:56:13] stabilize our market. Um,

[1:56:16] whether it's for if whether

[1:56:18] it's a for rent product or a

[1:56:20] for sale product, any units,

[1:56:22] um, as we add them begin to

[1:56:25] stabilize that throughout our

[1:56:26] country's history when we've

[1:56:28] had affordability, housing

[1:56:30] affordability crisis in the

[1:56:32] 1920s and 1940s, we did it

[1:56:34] often by building more homes

[1:56:37] and we did it by um, increasing

[1:56:39] density where we already had

[1:56:42] existing houses. So in a lot of

[1:56:44] streetcar um neighborhoods

[1:56:45] throughout the country, you'll

[1:56:47] see single family homes cut up

[1:56:48] into duplexes at that time and

[1:56:50] you can go through the maps in

[1:56:51] almost any city in america and

[1:56:54] see that. So that is often how

[1:56:55] we have solved affordability

[1:56:57] crisises and we know that that

[1:56:59] works is that if we don't have

[1:57:01] enough units it drives up the

[1:57:03] price. So some of this is will

[1:57:05] be some of the affordability

[1:57:06] will naturally occur because

[1:57:07] we're able to stabilize the

[1:57:11] market anytime. Um I think

[1:57:13] there's also these are smaller

[1:57:15] lots and there's already a lot

[1:57:17] of density there. And so a lot

[1:57:19] of these uh a lot of these

[1:57:22] places cannot rebuild at the

[1:57:23] density they're already

[1:57:25] functioning at because of the

[1:57:26] zoning that they that they're

[1:57:29] at. So um, that that's also

[1:57:31] part of why we're we're moving

[1:57:33] this forward and trying to

[1:57:36] maintain um and maintain that

[1:57:37] as well and those naturally

[1:57:39] occurring, uh, what we call

[1:57:40] missing middle housing, right?

[1:57:42] So it's those housing units

[1:57:45] that don't include amenities

[1:57:48] like gyms and pools. Um, and so

[1:57:50] as a result they're just more

[1:57:52] affordable. Uh, we often see

[1:57:55] two that the size, um, will

[1:57:58] drive the price of a unit or

[1:58:00] whether it's for rent or for

[1:58:03] sale. So if it's a 1000 square

[1:58:06] foot unit and it's um $100 a

[1:58:08] square foot, it's you know,

[1:58:11] $100,000 if it's um 1000ft2 and

[1:58:15] it's $300 or it's sorry if it's

[1:58:18] um 900ft2 and it's $100 a unit,

[1:58:21] it's only you know, $90,000. So

[1:58:23] sometimes what happens is when

[1:58:24] we have additional density, it

[1:58:26] allows people to build smaller

[1:58:28] houses or smaller units and

[1:58:29] that becomes affordable as

[1:58:31] well. I think through the other

[1:58:32] things that we are exploring

[1:58:34] such as the neighborhood

[1:58:35] revitalization district there

[1:58:38] can be um public housing or not

[1:58:39] sorry not public housing but

[1:58:41] affordable housing um component

[1:58:43] put into that and that's where

[1:58:45] it can be incentivized. Okay.

[1:58:48] >> and my final question is um

[1:58:51] in the packet like identified

[1:58:52] like a portion of affordable

[1:58:54] housing, I don't know if that

[1:58:56] was excluded like with the new

[1:58:58] the changes, um, it was a

[1:59:00] natural um portion or some

[1:59:02] units about I forgot how many

[1:59:05] units but also like you said

[1:59:07] there would be no displacement.

[1:59:09] Um I just wanted to understand

[1:59:10] how you came to that there

[1:59:11] would be no displacement once

[1:59:15] this is completed. [Laughter]

[1:59:18] Displacement or not or is this

[1:59:20] maybe maybe for a different

[1:59:22] project that we're talking

[1:59:23] about tonight. Same project

[1:59:26] this we're still on 89 correct?

[1:59:26] Yes.

[1:59:35] >> no. Is that the staff.

[1:59:37] Report in the photos there were

[1:59:38] no like the photos that you

[1:59:39] identified. There was no

[1:59:41] affordable housing units like

[1:59:47] in that entire map. Oh maybe.

[1:59:47] The map that.

[1:59:50] >> you showed. It was the

[1:59:51] initial map. It was before this

[1:59:54] one the initial packet that was

[1:59:57] submitted. Oh.

[2:00:04] >> and the only reason I asked

[2:00:05] that because it said there

[2:00:06] would be no displacement and

[2:00:07] just based off of those

[2:00:07] photographs, I just [Laughter]

[2:00:09] Want to make sure that like how

[2:00:10] do we come to the conclusion?

[2:00:12] Okay. So I I think there is

[2:00:14] another item on the agenda and

[2:00:16] that comment applies directly

[2:00:17] to that item. But okay, that's

[2:00:19] why I'm a little confused

[2:00:20] because. Maybe maybe and that

[2:00:22] one does directly have that

[2:00:24] does directly impact a county

[2:00:26] um, housing project that is on

[2:00:28] that is in the city limits and

[2:00:29] so there will be no

[2:00:30] displacement with that one but

[2:00:32] that is not in this area. Okay.

[2:00:32] >> thank you.

[2:00:35] >> so I mean. Maybe I can thank

[2:00:39] .You I'm not aware of any um

[2:00:41] housing projects that are in

[2:00:43] this area that would be

[2:00:46] displaced by any zoning. So I

[2:00:49] can't say that but. Go ahead.

[2:00:52] So there was mention of a

[2:00:54] master plan. What what

[2:00:55] background can you give us on

[2:00:58] that and where is that in the

[2:01:00] process of being either

[2:01:02] implemented or not? So that was

[2:01:05] done in ryan. Do you want to

[2:01:09] speak to the the 20 was it 26

[2:01:12] 2019? Yeah.

[2:01:14] >> ryan I'll speak to it. Good

[2:01:15] evening. Ryan shared with the

[2:01:17] city of miami chief of

[2:01:18] comprehensive planning. Um, we

[2:01:20] actually have some of the great

[2:01:21] minds that worked with the

[2:01:23] community here to put together

[2:01:24] little havana porta. A lot of

[2:01:26] people were at miami senior

[2:01:30] high in 2019. We said 2019 was

[2:01:31] it before that? I can't

[2:01:33] remember the date it was before

[2:01:37] covid it was 2017 2018 um and

[2:01:40] um through many hours put

[2:01:41] together lots of work to come

[2:01:44] up with um a lot of

[2:01:45] recommendations for uh,

[2:01:46] everything across the

[2:01:47] neighborhood including

[2:01:49] transportation, green space

[2:01:51] zoning, housing, historic

[2:01:53] preservation. So all of that is

[2:01:55] in the little havana plan that

[2:01:57] was put together with um, a

[2:01:59] number of organizations across

[2:02:00] little havana including dade

[2:02:02] [Laughter] Heritage trust and

[2:02:06] others. So how does the what's

[2:02:08] the process to either implement

[2:02:09] or not implement that plan?

[2:02:11] Where does that what is the

[2:02:14] status of that? I apologize

[2:02:16] what can you repeat your

[2:02:18] question. For the master plan?

[2:02:20] What is the intent of that of

[2:02:22] that master plan for

[2:02:23] implementation or not? I mean

[2:02:25] has it just been shelved? I

[2:02:27] think it was shelved for many

[2:02:28] years and I think the hope is

[2:02:29] that we are able to build upon

[2:02:31] that master planning effort

[2:02:32] through the efforts that we're

[2:02:37] endeavoring now. Thank you. All

[2:02:40] right. I just want to say one

[2:02:42] final thing. Um like I

[2:02:43] understand like a lot of people

[2:02:45] they didn't get the the notices

[2:02:46] the most recent notices I

[2:02:47] believe that the commissioner

[2:02:48] has been trying to work and do

[2:02:51] a lot of community meetings and

[2:02:53] this is like one step in the

[2:02:55] long process. Um there is some

[2:02:56] items that issues that give me

[2:02:58] slight heartburn but I, I

[2:03:00] believe in the process and so

[2:03:02] um, I will be supporting the

[2:03:06] item. Um.

[2:03:10] >> the first thought you know,

[2:03:17] for me is the amount of um sort

[2:03:23] of not replaceable. Buildings

[2:03:25] of character that kind of make

[2:03:29] the neighborhood um, you know,

[2:03:34] I firsthand saw the development

[2:03:39] of um legislation and watched

[2:03:43] it evolve around wynwood and I

[2:03:44] always tell people that, you

[2:03:47] know, it was built to uh,

[2:03:49] encourage a lot of adaptive

[2:03:50] reuse and that never happened,

[2:03:52] right? Like what you know,

[2:03:54] whatever's left in wynwood is

[2:03:58] won't won't be um, certainly

[2:04:00] not really as charming of a

[2:04:03] neighborhood to begin with as

[2:04:06] little havana is now. So you

[2:04:09] know, by doing the rezone I

[2:04:11] understand that there's a

[2:04:12] transfer of development rights

[2:04:15] sort of component um what that

[2:04:17] looks like and you know the

[2:04:20] details I'm not sure um I'm

[2:04:22] comfortable saying that I know

[2:04:24] what that would be how that

[2:04:25] would function. But you know,

[2:04:27] the idea is that if you can do

[2:04:29] that you're putting money into

[2:04:30] old school buildings that keep

[2:04:32] the neighborhood looking a

[2:04:34] certain way and there's

[2:04:35] incentive to repair them and

[2:04:36] then you know, someone can do

[2:04:38] something somewhere else, um,

[2:04:42] maybe even close by. Um, but I

[2:04:45] don't I think it's a I that

[2:04:47] kind of thing taking one of the

[2:04:51] few remaining places that you

[2:04:52] could walk down the street in

[2:04:55] our city and understand what

[2:04:57] you're looking at as being

[2:05:01] unique to that area. Um, I

[2:05:04] would definitely be at least

[2:05:07] way more in favor of not taking

[2:05:09] a vote on this for that reason

[2:05:11] alone because it's it's just

[2:05:13] why would you kill the golden

[2:05:14] goose really? It's it's you

[2:05:16] know, one of the top tourist

[2:05:19] destinations in the city. Um, I

[2:05:22] do understand how frustrating

[2:05:26] it is. Um, I don't own any

[2:05:28] commercial property and I did

[2:05:30] one thing and I had to sell it.

[2:05:32] But you know, I do understand

[2:05:34] how frustrating it is to have

[2:05:36] highly efficient, inefficient

[2:05:39] zoning, right? Like if I could,

[2:05:42] you know, flush t4 down the

[2:05:44] toilet, I would because I think

[2:05:45] t5 and especially in today's

[2:05:47] market, it's like the only way

[2:05:49] you could get anything done on

[2:05:50] smaller sites because it would

[2:05:51] allow you to do the things you

[2:05:52] need to do and that's you know,

[2:05:55] I know MR.. MR. Cruz heard him

[2:05:56] speak a lot and I understand

[2:05:58] his skepticism well, you know,

[2:05:59] or anyone who makes the

[2:06:01] argument that someone buys a

[2:06:03] property and you know, it's not

[2:06:05] really our problem what you can

[2:06:07] do with it if you bought it,

[2:06:08] you knew what you were doing

[2:06:09] and assumed the risk. But I

[2:06:11] think you know, times have

[2:06:14] changed so much that um that I

[2:06:16] do understand that we need to

[2:06:18] do uh, some rezoning and then

[2:06:19] the length of time that it

[2:06:21] takes to get the city to come

[2:06:23] on board to pick a site and and

[2:06:26] do it can take forever or you

[2:06:27] know, you could talk to a few

[2:06:28] people and they're like, oh,

[2:06:29] that's a great idea. And

[2:06:30] someone else said, oh that's a

[2:06:31] great idea and somewhere it

[2:06:33] stops. So then I also asked the

[2:06:36] question yes, why this so large

[2:06:39] of a change so quickly? Um I

[2:06:43] could totally support a pilot

[2:06:45] program or a phase one where we

[2:06:47] said look we are going to take

[2:06:50] the the place even if there's a

[2:06:52] few great buildings that get

[2:06:54] brought into it. But let's say

[2:06:56] we pick the spot where we have

[2:06:58] the biggest need to put the

[2:07:01] most intense rezone and

[2:07:03] underlying land use change and

[2:07:04] said we're taking this chunk

[2:07:05] and we're going to try it and

[2:07:06] we're going to see what

[2:07:08] happens. Do people start doing

[2:07:10] things in the next 2 to 5

[2:07:12] years? Okay great. Let's roll

[2:07:14] it out somewhere else. Did the

[2:07:17] adaptive reuse incentives work?

[2:07:18] Did we preserve buildings

[2:07:20] because there was a transfer of

[2:07:21] development rights and people

[2:07:24] utilize them? Um but to do it

[2:07:26] and really change the character

[2:07:27] of the entire neighborhood

[2:07:29] potentially so fast and then

[2:07:31] you could argue, um, well it's

[2:07:33] going to take forever. It

[2:07:34] doesn't and that's the thing

[2:07:36] that's the other crazy thing

[2:07:38] everything takes forever until

[2:07:40] suddenly you know, you unlock

[2:07:41] and I understand they're

[2:07:43] building cycles and clearly a

[2:07:44] lot of people aren't sure

[2:07:46] what's happening right now. But

[2:07:49] in general if you unlock all of

[2:07:50] this height and density

[2:07:51] quickly, people will take

[2:07:53] advantage. They will demolish

[2:07:56] as soon as they can to at least

[2:07:58] make sure nothing changes and

[2:07:59] then they can say, well now we

[2:08:00] have nothing and we can now

[2:08:01] build this, you know, whatever

[2:08:04] we want to build counterpoint

[2:08:05] to a counterpoint to a

[2:08:07] counterpoint um live local

[2:08:09] could affect some of these

[2:08:10] anyway. And so I understand

[2:08:12] that the city is in a rush to

[2:08:16] try to give people some sense

[2:08:19] of uniformity, right? Because

[2:08:21] then the other problem is here

[2:08:24] if the city has chosen to do

[2:08:26] this and I also am concerned

[2:08:28] that, you know, I don't get the

[2:08:30] sense that the commissioner for

[2:08:32] this district is 100% behind

[2:08:35] this. Um I don't know that

[2:08:37] because we don't know right.

[2:08:40] Uh, sponsored by city manager

[2:08:42] usually means well it could

[2:08:44] mean a few different things but

[2:08:49] um get into that later. Um but

[2:08:51] certainly if something is

[2:08:52] sponsored by the commission

[2:08:54] commissioner of that district,

[2:08:56] it does send a strong signal

[2:08:58] that it has been well

[2:08:59] considered and we're not seeing

[2:09:01] that here. I think another

[2:09:03] thing is that if it came out of

[2:09:04] the gate and everyone was ready

[2:09:06] to go and then suddenly

[2:09:07] everyone freaked out and they

[2:09:08] made a lot of changes and came

[2:09:09] back to us and said okay, now

[2:09:11] it's ready to go. What's to say

[2:09:12] they can't come back a third

[2:09:13] time and say okay, no no no no

[2:09:15] but but now it's really ready

[2:09:17] to go and it's pared down even

[2:09:19] more so you know, clearly the

[2:09:21] necessity that would have been

[2:09:24] delivered at that first um

[2:09:27] briefing or conversation, uh,

[2:09:30] wasn't 100% really correct

[2:09:32] because it's smaller now than

[2:09:37] it was when before we saw it.

[2:09:44] Um. Yeah.

[2:09:52] >> so.

[2:09:59] >> yeah, that's all I'd like to

[2:10:02] make a motion go ahead. Make a

[2:10:05] motion to approve. Is there a

[2:10:09] second? I'll second based on

[2:10:11] staff recommendation. I didn't

[2:10:13] hear the motion motion was to

[2:10:17] approve. Yeah and just to be

[2:10:19] clear it's as amended with the

[2:10:21] updated with the. Yes yeah

[2:10:24] okay. And also just a reminder

[2:10:25] that this does require a

[2:10:27] supermajority vote and since

[2:10:30] there are ten that require

[2:10:34] seven. Okay.

[2:10:37] >> there's a motion and a

[2:10:39] second. Well this is for the

[2:10:40] first item for the future land.

[2:10:42] >> use underlying. Yeah and

[2:10:46] then we'll do the miami yes.

[2:10:47] Okay.

[2:10:52] >> let's uh. Roll call. Board

[2:10:56] member arthur yes. Board member

[2:10:59] I mean vice chair andres lopez.

[2:10:59] Yes.

[2:11:02] >> board member linette. Kudos.

[2:11:02] Yes.

[2:11:06] >> board member. Ellen meteor

[2:11:11] board member paul main. No

[2:11:13] board member eduardo j.

[2:11:16] Fernandez yes. Board member

[2:11:18] mario j. Bailey. Yes.

[2:11:22] >> board member joshua

[2:11:28] pettijohn yes. Board member

[2:11:33] chris collins. Yes. Chair adam

[2:11:40] gerstein. No motion passes 7 to

[2:11:42] 3 and this decision is final

[2:11:44] unless the division of hearing

[2:11:46] boards receives an appeal

[2:11:48] within 15 days. It's not final.

[2:11:49] It's going to city commission.

[2:11:51] It's going to city commission.

[2:11:53] Okay uh next one. So zoning

[2:11:58] please. Is there a uh just any

[2:11:59] further discussion on the

[2:12:09] change the zoning changes?

[2:12:12] Okay. Is there a motion on the

[2:12:16] zoning changes? Motion to

[2:12:17] approve the zoning changes

[2:12:22] second. And just to clarify

[2:12:25] that also is with the updated

[2:12:27] map. Yes thank. You staff

[2:12:33] recommendation and thank you.

[2:12:36] Board member arthur.

[2:12:38] >> yes. Vice chair andres

[2:12:42] lopez. Yes board member lynette

[2:12:45] kudos board member. Ellen

[2:12:49] meteor board member board

[2:12:52] member paul main. No board

[2:12:54] member eduardo j. Fernandez

[2:12:58] yes. Board member mario bailey.

[2:13:00] Yes. Board member. Joshua

[2:13:05] pentagon. Board member chris

[2:13:06] collins. Yes.

[2:13:09] >> chair.

[2:13:14] >> adam gersten yes. Uh, no.

[2:13:17] Sorry. Motion passes 7 to 3

[2:13:26] approve as amended. [Laughter]

[2:13:28] MR. Chair, can we take a small

[2:13:29] break? Break?

[2:13:39] >>

[2:19:07] back at it. We're going to go

[2:19:11] back to the top of the agenda.

[2:19:17] Take it from the top. Okay.

[2:19:20] We're starting. [Laughter]

[2:19:22] Trying to run a meeting, MR.

[2:19:25] Borisoff. So he's trying to be

[2:19:27] a man. I'm trying to be

[2:19:30] efficient. Members men and

[2:19:33] porous of just trying to run a

[2:19:34] meeting if you don't mind.

[2:19:37] Thanks. [Laughter] Thank you.

[2:19:41] All right. Um, so calendar, can

[2:19:43] we we're not doing calendar so,

[2:19:55] uh, number three please.

[2:20:00] File id 19600 a resolution of

[2:20:01] the miami planning zoning and

[2:20:03] appeals board with attachments

[2:20:04] approving with conditions and

[2:20:06] exception pursuant to article

[2:20:09] three section 3.19.3 of

[2:20:11] ordinance number 13114 the

[2:20:13] zoning ordinance of the city of

[2:20:15] miami, florida as amended miami

[2:20:17] 21 code to approve the master

[2:20:19] plan for the little river

[2:20:21] enhance transit station

[2:20:22] neighborhood district for the

[2:20:24] real property generally located

[2:20:28] at 90 north west 71st street

[2:20:30] 7050-7150 northeast second

[2:20:33] avenue 7101 northeast miami

[2:20:36] court 395 40 northwest 75th

[2:20:39] street 7275 northwest seventh

[2:20:41] avenue 7301 northwest seventh

[2:20:44] avenue 7305 northwest seventh

[2:20:46] avenue 7311 northwest seventh

[2:20:48] avenue 77 northwest seventh

[2:20:51] avenue 735 northwest seventh

[2:20:54] avenue 7345 northwest seventh

[2:20:59] avenue 7100 northwest north

[2:21:02] miami avenue 7220 north miami

[2:21:06] avenue 7329 north west miami

[2:21:09] court 7357 northwest miami

[2:21:11] court 7401 northwest miami

[2:21:14] court 7409 northwest miami

[2:21:18] court 14 northwest 75th street

[2:21:21] 7421 northwest miami place 7401

[2:21:24] northwest miami place 7406

[2:21:27] northwest miami court 7400

[2:21:29] northwest miami court 7395

[2:21:33] northwest miami place 7338

[2:21:35] northwest miami court 7328

[2:21:38] northwest miami court 7301

[2:21:42] northwest miami place 7324

[2:21:44] northwest miami court 7320

[2:21:46] northwest miami court 7140

[2:21:48] northwest miami court 51

[2:21:51] northwest 71st street 70

[2:21:54] northwest 76th street 7200

[2:21:57] northwest first avenue 7225

[2:21:59] northwest first court 7161

[2:22:02] northwest first court 7153

[2:22:07] northwest first court 7145

[2:22:09] northwest fourth court first

[2:22:12] court 71st 37 northwest first

[2:22:16] court 141 northwest 73rd 71st

[2:22:19] street 173 northwest 71st

[2:22:22] street 7127 northwest second

[2:22:25] avenue 7137 northwest second

[2:22:27] avenue 7134 northwest first

[2:22:30] court 7140 northwest first

[2:22:34] court 180 northwest 72nd street

[2:22:37] 195 northwest 72nd street 165

[2:22:40] northwest 72nd street 7204

[2:22:42] northwest first court 7212

[2:22:45] northwest first court 7221

[2:22:48] northwest second avenue 7211

[2:22:50] northwest second avenue 7000

[2:22:52] northwest second avenue 220

[2:22:55] northwest 72nd terrace 7125

[2:22:58] northwest second court 7160

[2:23:00] northwest second avenue 7150

[2:23:03] northwest second avenue 7133

[2:23:06] northwest second court 7122

[2:23:08] northwest second avenue 7100

[2:23:11] northwest second avenue 255

[2:23:15] northwest 71st street 757155

[2:23:19] northwest court 7122 northwest

[2:23:22] second court 285 northwest 71st

[2:23:25] street 7145 northwest third

[2:23:30] avenue. 7147 northwest third

[2:23:33] avenue 7160 northwest third

[2:23:36] avenue 7128. Northwest third

[2:23:38] avenue 301 northwest 71st

[2:23:41] street 321 northwest 71st

[2:23:43] street 214 northwest 73rd

[2:23:45] street 300 northwest 73rd

[2:23:48] street 238 northwest 75th

[2:23:51] street 7400 northwest second

[2:23:54] avenue two five northwest 74th

[2:23:56] street 231 northwest 74th

[2:23:59] street 7410 northwest second

[2:24:01] court 7333 northwest second

[2:24:05] court 214 northwest 74th street

[2:24:09] 7350 northwest seventh avenue.

[2:24:11] 73332 northwest second avenue

[2:24:15] 7325 northwest third avenue 267

[2:24:17] northwest 73rd street 257

[2:24:20] northwest 73rd street 253

[2:24:25] northwest 73rd street 7320

[2:24:27] northwest second avenue 241

[2:24:30] northwest 73rd street 7289

[2:24:33] northwest second avenue 156

[2:24:36] northwest 73rd street 7288

[2:24:38] northwest first court 7275

[2:24:40] northwest first court 150

[2:24:43] northwest 73rd street 70

[2:24:46] northwest 73rd street 60

[2:24:48] northwest 73rd street 7330

[2:24:50] northwest miami place 91

[2:24:53] northwest 73rd street 125

[2:24:55] northwest 73rd street 110

[2:24:58] northwest 74th street 7410

[2:25:00] northwest miami place 101

[2:25:03] northwest 74th street 127

[2:25:06] northwest 74th street 126

[2:25:08] northwest 75th street 100

[2:25:11] northwest 75th street 115

[2:25:14] northwest 75th street 7510

[2:25:16] northwest first avenue 7522

[2:25:19] northwest first avenue 7521

[2:25:21] northwest first avenue 89

[2:25:23] northwest 75th street 65

[2:25:26] northwest 75th street 53

[2:25:28] northwest 75th street 35

[2:25:32] northwest 75th street 7506

[2:25:34] north miami avenue 88 northwest

[2:25:37] 71st street and 7450 north

[2:25:40] miami avenue miami, florida

[2:25:41] more particularly described in

[2:25:43] the attached and incorporated

[2:25:46] exhibit a property to allow the

[2:25:49] property to be developed to up

[2:25:54] to t624bo pursuant to article

[2:25:59] three section 3.19.3 of miami

[2:26:02] 21 code and the little river

[2:26:05] transit neighborhood district

[2:26:07] master plan attached and

[2:26:09] incorporated as exhibit a

[2:26:11] further reciting resolution

[2:26:18] number pzab-r-26-045 adopted by

[2:26:22] pcsb on JULY 15th, 2026 related

[2:26:24] to the recommending approval of

[2:26:26] an exception with conditions

[2:26:27] regarding to the master plan

[2:26:29] for the little river enhance

[2:26:32] tsnd and replacing such

[2:26:34] delaware.Gov with the

[2:26:36] resolution of the miami

[2:26:37] findings containing a

[2:26:38] severability clause and

[2:26:40] providing for an effective

[2:26:42] date. Thank you. So you might

[2:26:43] be asking [Laughter] Yourself

[2:26:46] why are we hearing this again?

[2:26:50] Um um so in the original if you

[2:26:51] remember during our original

[2:26:53] discussion there was some

[2:26:54] confusion over whether you were

[2:26:55] making a recommendation to city

[2:26:57] commission or whether or not

[2:26:59] you were the final acting body

[2:27:01] in that confusion was because

[2:27:04] um staff in the title said that

[2:27:06] the planning zoning and appeals

[2:27:10] board was recommending um a

[2:27:12] exception. Um we did not say

[2:27:13] recommending to city commission

[2:27:15] we just said recommending an

[2:27:17] exception. And so that is where

[2:27:19] the confusion kind of came in

[2:27:21] um out of an abundance of

[2:27:24] caution. Um we felt that the

[2:27:26] correct thing was to do is to

[2:27:28] resend the previous um

[2:27:30] resolution and have you issue a

[2:27:32] new resolution with the correct

[2:27:34] title. Um and so that's why

[2:27:37] it's back here before you what

[2:27:40] uh is in the file is that we

[2:27:43] have a transcript of those

[2:27:44] proceedings that have been

[2:27:46] entered into the record along

[2:27:48] with all of the staff material

[2:27:50] from before as well as the

[2:27:51] applicant's presentation and

[2:27:53] the staff's presentation as

[2:27:55] part of the public record. And

[2:27:57] so what we are asking you to do

[2:27:59] tonight is to rescind the

[2:28:01] previous previous resolution

[2:28:03] except into the record the um

[2:28:06] the the previous meeting and

[2:28:07] the findings from the previous

[2:28:09] meeting which of course are

[2:28:10] based on upon the staff report,

[2:28:12] the staff report which is part

[2:28:14] of this record as well and then

[2:28:17] just reaffirm the exception in

[2:28:20] a new resolution. We did also

[2:28:22] modify one of the conditions

[2:28:24] and that is because adams got

[2:28:27] big eyes. Um and that is and

[2:28:29] that is uh that is because um

[2:28:30] there was a little bit of

[2:28:32] confusion um in the condition

[2:28:33] the condition says that

[2:28:35] properties can be added by

[2:28:37] warrant and so there's a little

[2:28:41] bit um the property there is a

[2:28:44] way for as per the code, there

[2:28:46] is a way for properties to take

[2:28:48] a different path with a warrant

[2:28:50] but new any new properties

[2:28:53] would have to be would have to

[2:28:54] actually apply through the

[2:28:56] exception process. And so we

[2:28:57] just want to clarify that. And

[2:29:00] so we're amending that as well

[2:29:02] as the associated page 88 just

[2:29:04] to say that um properties that

[2:29:06] can be added will be can be

[2:29:09] added as per miami 21. So it's

[2:29:10] all encompassing right? Okay.

[2:29:11] Yes. Got it.

[2:29:13] >> so that's the only change

[2:29:14] just we want to make sure that

[2:29:15] that's very clear and there's

[2:29:16] no confusion there.

[2:29:18] >> all right so real quick two

[2:29:20] things. One you want us to do

[2:29:22] two motions then one to rescind

[2:29:24] or. You can do it all in one

[2:29:26] motion. Motion rescind and

[2:29:29] adopt and. Yes so it's it would

[2:29:33] be a motion to um rescind the

[2:29:35] previous exception or the

[2:29:37] previous resolution and then to

[2:29:39] approve the exception for the

[2:29:40] transit neighborhood station

[2:29:43] district. Okay.

[2:29:46] >> um anybody from the public

[2:29:48] like to speak on this hearing

[2:29:52] and seeing none um somebody

[2:29:54] make a motion. MAY I make a

[2:29:57] motion to approve and rescind

[2:29:59] rescind and approve? Right.

[2:30:01] >> and then just to be clear so

[2:30:03] we did modify that with

[2:30:06] condition. Yes. Um what we do

[2:30:08] need to modify is is the um she

[2:30:11] 88 of their master plan just to

[2:30:12] make it consistent with the

[2:30:14] condition that we changed.

[2:30:16] Again is referring it back to

[2:30:17] miami 21 that's all that we're

[2:30:25] doing. Okay so do you want him

[2:30:28] yeah just with that add that in

[2:30:32] there. Motion to rescind and

[2:30:35] approve with the amendment on

[2:30:40] page 88. Yes that's correct.

[2:30:40] Okay.

[2:30:44] >> so is there a second. Second

[2:30:47] okay roll call please. Board

[2:30:50] member eduardo j. Fernandez

[2:30:53] yes. Board member ellen meziere

[2:30:55] .Yes board member lynette

[2:30:58] kadosh board member paul main.

[2:30:58] Yes.

[2:31:02] >> board member mario bailey.

[2:31:02] Yes.

[2:31:05] >> board member joshua patinkin

[2:31:06] yes. Vice chair andre

[2:31:08] s lopez.

[2:31:11] Yes board member um chris

[2:31:14] collins. Yes. Chair adam

[2:31:16] gerstein. Yes.

[2:31:19] >> motion passes 9 to 0 and

[2:31:21] this decision is final. Thank

[2:31:21] you.

[2:31:24] >> and it is appealable to the

[2:31:25] division of hearing boards

[2:31:27] within 15 days. We forgot you

[2:31:29] forgot. Arthur I'm sorry board

[2:31:31] member arthur how can I forget

[2:31:35] you? Board member arthur paris.

[2:31:36] Thank you. I'm sorry. Motion

[2:31:39] passes 9 to 0 and this decision

[2:31:41] is final unless the division of

[2:31:42] hearing boards receives ten

[2:31:44] days. Appealable. Unless the

[2:31:45] division of hearing boards

[2:31:47] receives an appeal. Thank you.

[2:31:47] Thanks.

[2:31:48] >> thank you all very much. Uh,

[2:31:51] the decision there is ten zero

[2:31:53] [Laughter] Staff. How many.

[2:31:57] >> other ten zero. 1010 zero.

[2:32:05] >> this is final. [Laughter]

[2:32:05] Yes.

[2:32:15] >> longer to read it.

[2:32:32] >> all right. Five. No, I've

[2:32:35] got the next item. I'll speak

[2:32:37] to you soon. Item number four

[2:32:40] file id 19690. A resolution of

[2:32:42] the miami planning and zoning

[2:32:44] and appeals board with

[2:32:45] attachments approving with

[2:32:46] conditions and exception

[2:32:48] pursuant to article five

[2:32:51] section 5.6.1 point j of

[2:32:54] ordinance number 13114 the

[2:32:57] zoning ordinance of the city of

[2:32:59] miami, florida as amended miami

[2:33:01] 21 code to allow an increase in

[2:33:04] a maximum lot of 40ft2 for uses

[2:33:06] that serve the neighborhood and

[2:33:09] two waivers pursuant to article

[2:33:11] four. Table four of miami 21

[2:33:15] code a 30% parking reduction

[2:33:17] for residential uses for a

[2:33:19] property located within the

[2:33:21] urban central business district

[2:33:25] and an opportunity zone and two

[2:33:29] a 30% parking reduction for

[2:33:31] residential visitors use uses

[2:33:33] for a property located within

[2:33:36] the urban central business

[2:33:38] district and an opportunity to

[2:33:42] zone a zoning designation of

[2:33:44] t6-8-l urban core transect zone

[2:33:48] limited generally located at

[2:33:49] 413421431 and 453 northwest

[2:33:52] third avenue third street

[2:33:53] miami, florida more

[2:33:55] particularly described with an

[2:33:56] attached and incorporated

[2:33:57] exhibit a property making

[2:33:59] findings containing a

[2:34:00] severability clause and

[2:34:01] providing for an effective

[2:34:05] date. Thank you. My name is

[2:34:07] mousie watson. I'm the chief of

[2:34:08] land development. Tonight I'm

[2:34:10] presenting an exception that's

[2:34:11] going to exceed the maximum lot

[2:34:16] size of 40,000. Um the location

[2:34:19] of this the subject properties

[2:34:25] are at 413421431 and 453

[2:34:29] northwest third street and as

[2:34:31] florence did a great job of

[2:34:33] explaining the first is an

[2:34:35] exception. First part of the

[2:34:37] approval is to approve an

[2:34:39] exception for the increase of

[2:34:41] the lot size and there's two

[2:34:43] associated waivers one is for a

[2:34:44] 30% reduction of residential

[2:34:47] uses and the second waiver is

[2:34:49] for a 30% reduction of

[2:34:55] residential visitor uses. This

[2:34:59] site is um it consists of four

[2:35:02] lots. It's approximate the

[2:35:03] proposed development will be

[2:35:09] four 45,513ft2 and it's close

[2:35:14] to the river downtown. The

[2:35:16] current flume for the project

[2:35:18] is restricted commercial and

[2:35:22] the zoning is t68l now for this

[2:35:25] neighborhood serving use you

[2:35:27] have to I mean excuse me for

[2:35:28] the exception you have to have

[2:35:29] a neighborhood serving use and

[2:35:31] this is a unique project this

[2:35:33] neighborhood serving use is

[2:35:35] preserving the old frank lot

[2:35:38] house. Um, some of you MAY have

[2:35:39] remembered but there was an

[2:35:40] effort I apologize, but there

[2:35:42] was another building right next

[2:35:43] to this that burned down maybe

[2:35:46] about two years ago. And so

[2:35:48] this will be an adaptive reuse

[2:35:49] project. But for the

[2:35:50] neighborhood serving use for

[2:35:52] this project the applicant has

[2:35:55] um committed to preserving this

[2:36:03] house. In addition to that as I

[2:36:04] expressed before there's two

[2:36:07] waivers. One is for 30%

[2:36:08] reduction of the parking for

[2:36:10] the residential use. So they

[2:36:12] were required to have 213.

[2:36:15] They're proposing 143 spaces.

[2:36:17] The second is for 30% reduction

[2:36:19] of residential visitor uses

[2:36:22] they're proposing 14 was there

[2:36:25] required 14.2 spaces and

[2:36:28] they're providing ten. And next

[2:36:30] I'm just going to provide some

[2:36:31] renderings of what the the

[2:36:32] development is going to look

[2:36:36] like if it's realized. As you

[2:36:40] can see to the far left is the

[2:36:42] house and the rest in the front

[2:36:43] there's townhouses in the back

[2:36:45] is the multifamily the

[2:36:49] multifamily building. This is

[2:36:51] from a more like looking east

[2:36:53] view so you can see how it fits

[2:36:55] more into the context of the

[2:36:58] neighborhood. Um, when staff

[2:37:00] did their analysis when I did

[2:37:02] my analysis, I found that this

[2:37:04] exception complied with all of

[2:37:07] the requirements for miami 21

[2:37:10] and as well as article four

[2:37:12] table 12 which is our design

[2:37:15] standards and the waivers also

[2:37:18] are in um comply with our

[2:37:22] standards. I mean we have um

[2:37:25] mostly standard conditions but

[2:37:26] one of them that I would like

[2:37:29] to call out to you is that um

[2:37:31] we've really made sure that we

[2:37:33] codified that they protect the

[2:37:35] historic home since that is the

[2:37:36] neighborhood serving use. You

[2:37:38] know, we don't want them to you

[2:37:40] know, get the approval here and

[2:37:41] then go on and do something

[2:37:43] else. So we codified that

[2:37:46] condition within the within the

[2:37:48] analysis. I also would like to

[2:37:50] say that you MAY be questioning

[2:37:52] like why are they allowed to do

[2:37:55] a 30% parking reduction by

[2:37:57] waiver instead of exception?

[2:37:59] That's because it's in the

[2:38:01] urban central business district

[2:38:03] as well as the opportunity zone

[2:38:04] which is allowed which allows

[2:38:09] them to go by waiver. So with

[2:38:10] that that's going to conclude

[2:38:12] my report and we are asking

[2:38:14] that you approve this project

[2:38:16] with conditions. Thank you.

[2:38:17] Thank you.

[2:38:19] >> good evening. Board members

[2:38:21] carly koschel with bercow

[2:38:22] offices at 200 south biscayne

[2:38:25] boulevard. MISS Watson did an

[2:38:26] excellent job of explaining the

[2:38:27] project and why we're here

[2:38:29] before you tonight we are

[2:38:32] requesting and my screen. Oh

[2:38:34] yeah. I'm sorry. Um, I'll speak

[2:38:36] while she's disconnecting and

[2:38:37] disconnect is reconnecting. Um,

[2:38:39] we are requesting an exception

[2:38:42] to exceed the maximum lot size.

[2:38:44] As MISS Watson mentioned, we

[2:38:49] are proposing a lot size of

[2:38:51] 45,513ft2 which is about 5000

[2:38:55] over and I still don't have

[2:38:59] this. And what is particularly

[2:39:01] interesting about that and the

[2:39:03] fact that we are preserving the

[2:39:05] frank gallant house is that

[2:39:07] that house is and the area

[2:39:10] immediately around it is around

[2:39:13] 5000ft2. So yes, we are

[2:39:14] requesting an exception to

[2:39:16] exceed the maximum lot size,

[2:39:19] but it is also because we are

[2:39:21] preserving and providing space

[2:39:23] around the the historic

[2:39:26] structure. If I could add to

[2:39:27] that and that's one of the

[2:39:29] reasons why we were approving

[2:39:31] it is because the amount that

[2:39:32] the lot was exceeding is about

[2:39:34] the same amount as the historic

[2:39:35] house. So it was like really

[2:39:46] like a swap.

[2:39:54] Maybe I will. Maybe I'll yeah

[2:40:04] maybe I'll walk over to you.

[2:40:18] She has a hmm I do you have.

[2:40:33] Yeah let's try that. Do you um

[2:40:35] can you go ahead and just get

[2:40:37] started talking or do we. Yeah

[2:40:41] um. Well yeah let's try that

[2:40:52] one.

[2:40:58] All.

[2:41:05] >> um.

[2:41:08] >> thank you guys for your

[2:41:11] patience. We are up and running

[2:41:13] um so with me this evening are

[2:41:16] the applicant team which is um

[2:41:18] which is with us tonight it's

[2:41:19] italo balbi, ashley bosch and

[2:41:23] jesse otley um on behalf of cb

[2:41:24] development the applicant in

[2:41:25] this case and the owner of the

[2:41:27] properties as mentioned by

[2:41:29] staff um our architect which is

[2:41:31] jennifer mccartney and ivan

[2:41:34] bennett um with mc g uh

[2:41:36] architecture and um our

[2:41:41] landscape architect team, um as

[2:41:43] staff mentioned the property is

[2:41:45] just west of downtown. It is

[2:41:47] north of the loomis park. Um

[2:41:49] not the miami beach loomis

[2:41:51] park. This is the loomis park

[2:41:53] that is just south of northwest

[2:41:57] third street and it is included

[2:42:00] within the loomis park historic

[2:42:02] district. It's zoning as staff

[2:42:04] mentioned is t six eight which

[2:42:06] specifically contemplates

[2:42:07] buildings um residential

[2:42:10] buildings within that are

[2:42:12] between 8 and 12 stories in

[2:42:14] height and this property is

[2:42:18] squarely within that um within

[2:42:19] that those parameters as well

[2:42:21] as within the loomis park

[2:42:22] historic district as you're

[2:42:23] driving down the street, the

[2:42:25] thing that is most iconic about

[2:42:28] this area is the scottish rite

[2:42:29] temple, which is a historically

[2:42:31] designated structure and this

[2:42:34] would be um immediately to its

[2:42:36] east. Um we've worked with

[2:42:38] staff as to the design to

[2:42:40] really make sure that we pay

[2:42:42] tribute to the historic

[2:42:44] context, specifically the

[2:42:46] scottish rite and provide a lot

[2:42:48] of design considerations for

[2:42:51] the the roadway that abuts the

[2:42:53] property. Um staff mentioned

[2:42:55] the structures that used to

[2:42:57] exist on the property. Um and

[2:42:59] they have all been demolished

[2:43:02] by various forms of neglect and

[2:43:06] or arson um the requests that

[2:43:08] are to exceed the maximum lot

[2:43:10] size and the 30% parking

[2:43:12] reductions and as staff

[2:43:14] mentioned, the the reason that

[2:43:17] we get to request to exceed the

[2:43:19] maximum lot size is where we

[2:43:21] demonstrate that we are

[2:43:22] providing a neighborhood

[2:43:25] serving use. And here as staff

[2:43:26] mentioned, the neighborhood

[2:43:27] serving use is really the

[2:43:29] preservation of and restoration

[2:43:31] of the historic structure on

[2:43:33] the property which when you

[2:43:35] look at the property and the

[2:43:36] space that's around it is

[2:43:39] around 5000ft2. Um and then the

[2:43:41] creation of the historically

[2:43:44] compatible design, um that is

[2:43:46] going to be implemented on the

[2:43:48] site as well as an activated

[2:43:49] streetscape that is really

[2:43:52] thoughtfully implemented. Um

[2:43:54] and put in especially what

[2:43:55] you'll notice and what jennifer

[2:43:57] will walk you through is just

[2:43:59] how much thought jennifer's

[2:44:01] design team and the ownership

[2:44:03] team put into the relationship

[2:44:05] of this structure with the

[2:44:09] street, how the tower um is is

[2:44:11] significantly set back from the

[2:44:13] street and also set back from

[2:44:15] the properties to the north. Um

[2:44:17] that's really important to

[2:44:18] consider as well as the

[2:44:21] interaction of that lower um

[2:44:24] like podium area which is

[2:44:26] specifically lower than what

[2:44:29] miami 21 typically permits the

[2:44:31] these townhouses that staff

[2:44:33] mentioned are approximately

[2:44:36] three stories in height and

[2:44:37] that's really important to

[2:44:40] consider when miami 21 standard

[2:44:43] legislation permits a podium of

[2:44:45] 125ft in height. And with that

[2:44:47] we're happy to walk you through

[2:44:48] the design. Jennifer is happy

[2:44:50] to do that and we're or we're

[2:44:51] happy to jump into any

[2:44:53] questions that you MAY have.

[2:44:58] Thank you. Chair I'm sorry, do

[2:45:00] we have permission to go ahead

[2:45:01] and close public comment?

[2:45:02] >> yes please close public

[2:45:05] comment. Okay.

[2:45:07] >> good evening. Jennifer

[2:45:09] mahoney with studio m

[2:45:11] architecture in miami, florida.

[2:45:13] Um our approach while designing

[2:45:15] rio vista was to respect the

[2:45:16] historic character of the site

[2:45:18] while creating a project that's

[2:45:20] compatible with the surrounding

[2:45:21] neighborhood and contributes

[2:45:23] positively to the loomis park

[2:45:24] historic district. We're

[2:45:25] preserving and restoring the

[2:45:27] historic frank lloyd house and

[2:45:28] integrating it into the overall

[2:45:30] design of the project. We will

[2:45:33] see um the preservation of this

[2:45:34] historic structure as an

[2:45:35] important opportunity to

[2:45:37] maintain a piece of the site's

[2:45:39] history while giving it a

[2:45:41] meaningful role within the

[2:45:42] development. The project also

[2:45:44] provides 142 residential units

[2:45:46] within a transit oriented

[2:45:47] development area, adding

[2:45:48] housing in a location that's

[2:45:50] well served by public

[2:45:52] transportation. At the same

[2:45:53] time, we've designed the

[2:45:55] project to respect the existing

[2:45:56] scale and massing of the

[2:45:57] surrounding neighborhood. So

[2:45:59] while we're requesting the

[2:46:00] exception for an increase in

[2:46:02] permitted lot size, we believe

[2:46:04] the project provides meaningful

[2:46:05] neighborhood benefits in return

[2:46:07] through historic preservation,

[2:46:09] additional housing,

[2:46:10] landscaping, tree preservation

[2:46:12] and a strong pedestrian

[2:46:18] experience along loomis park.

[2:46:20] Facing third street along the

[2:46:21] park frontage we have a variety

[2:46:23] of uses and building elements

[2:46:25] including the residential lobby

[2:46:27] ,the six townhomes and the

[2:46:29] historic frank lot house. At

[2:46:31] the top of the page you can see

[2:46:32] the proposed ground floor

[2:46:35] street facade in plan while you

[2:46:36] compare it to the historic

[2:46:38] street facade below you can see

[2:46:40] how the proposed design is

[2:46:41] intentionally broken down into

[2:46:43] a similar rhythm and scale. So

[2:46:44] while the project is

[2:46:46] contemporary, the design of the

[2:46:47] pedestal is very much informed

[2:46:49] by the historic character that

[2:46:51] is traditionally defined this

[2:47:01] portion of loomis park.

[2:47:04] [Laughter] And it doesn't want

[2:47:14] to change pages. Here.

[2:47:23] >> there we go. Okay. There's

[2:47:26] also vehicular entrances along

[2:47:27] third street because this is

[2:47:28] our only frontage, but there

[2:47:31] are purposely set back about

[2:47:33] 40ft from the property line. So

[2:47:34] to minimize their presence

[2:47:37] along the street and to

[2:47:38] maintain a stronger pedestrian

[2:47:43] character. Here you can see how

[2:47:44] the townhomes are positioned

[2:47:46] directly along the street

[2:47:47] frontage rather than having a

[2:47:49] larger building mass directly

[2:47:50] define the park frontage, the

[2:47:52] townhomes and lobby create a

[2:47:53] more intimate residential scale

[2:48:00] along the sidewalk. One element

[2:48:02] that we've created in the

[2:48:03] design is this courtyard, which

[2:48:05] is similarly located to the

[2:48:06] courtyard that was at the

[2:48:09] temple court apartments. Um the

[2:48:11] step back in the building

[2:48:12] frontage creates an opportunity

[2:48:14] for additional landscaping and

[2:48:15] allows us to retain these

[2:48:17] mature trees. More importantly

[2:48:19] it creates a variation along

[2:48:20] the sidewalk and more

[2:48:22] interesting pedestrian

[2:48:23] experience. Instead of one

[2:48:24] continuous building wall, you

[2:48:27] have a series of spaces,

[2:48:28] landscaping and building forms

[2:48:29] that create a stronger

[2:48:30] connection between the project

[2:48:35] and the street. Because this

[2:48:37] site historically did not have

[2:48:39] parking on it, it was a very it

[2:48:40] was very important to us that

[2:48:42] the parking were providing not

[2:48:43] become a dominant element of

[2:48:45] the project. We intentionally

[2:48:46] placed the parking behind

[2:48:48] active uses so that's largely

[2:48:50] hidden from the street. As you

[2:48:51] can see from this image the

[2:48:53] parking is screened from third

[2:48:54] street by the townhomes and the

[2:48:56] historic house. This allows the

[2:48:58] park frontage to maintain a

[2:48:59] residential and pedestrian

[2:49:00] oriented character rather than

[2:49:02] being defined by a parking

[2:49:04] structure or garage. We also

[2:49:05] paid close attention to the

[2:49:06] scale of the building at the

[2:49:08] rear of the site. On that side,

[2:49:10] the parking structure is only

[2:49:11] approximately two and a half

[2:49:13] stories in height. We

[2:49:15] intentionally kept this portion

[2:49:16] of the structure smaller so

[2:49:18] that it relates more closely to

[2:49:20] the existing three and four

[2:49:21] story buildings at the rear of

[2:49:22] the property. The parking

[2:49:24] waivers that we're requesting

[2:49:25] are allowing us to keep the

[2:49:27] scale of the pedestal in

[2:49:28] harmony with the scale of the

[2:49:33] neighboring buildings. In this

[2:49:34] image you can see how the

[2:49:35] project relates to the

[2:49:36] surrounding neighborhood. We've

[2:49:38] stepped the facade similar to

[2:49:39] the scottish rite temple next

[2:49:41] door and our tower relates in

[2:49:43] height to other towers located

[2:49:44] close by. Although the code

[2:49:46] allows us to build up to 12

[2:49:47] stories, we've intentionally

[2:49:49] limited the project to ten.

[2:49:50] We've also chosen not to

[2:49:52] develop to the maximum number

[2:49:53] of residential units that the

[2:49:55] code would allow. Ultimately we

[2:49:57] believe the project will be a

[2:49:58] welcome addition to the

[2:49:59] neighborhood one that provides

[2:50:00] new housing while respecting

[2:50:01] the history, scale, landscape

[2:50:03] and pedestrian character of

[2:50:07] loomis park. Thank you. Okay

[2:50:11] you guys [Laughter] Good more?

[2:50:14] Nope. Great. Okay. The board oh

[2:50:15] I'm sorry. Anybody from the

[2:50:16] public want to speak on this?

[2:50:19] Okay. Board. Bravo.

[2:50:22] >> excellent. This is. Exactly

[2:50:26] perfect. Uh, just curious the

[2:50:29] the necessity for reducing the

[2:50:35] 30% parking. So so the image

[2:50:37] this image is really the best

[2:50:40] one that to look at for that as

[2:50:42] I mentioned a podium under

[2:50:45] miami 21 is permitted to be

[2:50:47] 125ft or about 898 stories in

[2:50:49] height. By requesting the

[2:50:51] parking reduction, we're able

[2:50:52] to reduce the number of parking

[2:50:54] spaces that need to be provided

[2:50:56] on site and use that reduction

[2:50:59] of in parking to create a

[2:51:01] smaller podium. So the parking

[2:51:03] reduction helps us create this

[2:51:05] very manageably sized podium,

[2:51:07] which is a benefit to the

[2:51:08] overall structure and the

[2:51:09] neighborhood, the surrounding

[2:51:14] neighborhood. Thank you. For

[2:51:21] collins. Anything anyone anyone

[2:51:24] anyone. Okay. Anybody want to

[2:51:25] make a. Motion to approve?

[2:51:25] Great.

[2:51:27] >> second anybody. Second.

[2:51:31] >> I'm sorry who first and

[2:51:31] second.

[2:51:37] >> bailey and man. Board member

[2:51:39] mario bailey yes. Board member

[2:51:41] paul main.

[2:51:44] >> yes. Board member lynette

[2:51:46] kudos board member ellen

[2:51:47] meziere. Yes.

[2:51:50] >> board member MR. Eduardo j.

[2:51:52] Fernandez yes. Board member.

[2:51:54] Joshua. Pentagon board member

[2:51:57] chris collins. Yes board member

[2:52:00] arthur parasol vice chair.

[2:52:00] Andre

[2:52:01] s lopez. Yes.

[2:52:02] >> chair.

[2:52:04] >> adam gerstein. Yes.

[2:52:07] >> motion passes ten to 10 to 0

[2:52:08] and this decision is final

[2:52:10] unless the division of hearing

[2:52:11] boards receives an appeal

[2:52:13] within ten days. Thank you all

[2:52:13] very much. Thank you.

[2:52:26] >> 15 days. Next up.

[2:52:30] Item number five file id 19687

[2:52:32] a resolution of the miami

[2:52:33] planning zoning and appeals

[2:52:34] board with attachments

[2:52:36] recommending approval with

[2:52:37] conditions to the city

[2:52:39] commission pursuant to chapter

[2:52:43] 55 section 55-15 of the code of

[2:52:44] miami city of miami, florida as

[2:52:47] amended to vacate the close a

[2:52:49] 25 foot wide public alley that

[2:52:51] runs north between two existing

[2:52:55] private properties at 4001

[2:52:58] southwest sixth street and 3965

[2:53:00] southwest sixth street and

[2:53:02] terminating at 4000 southwest

[2:53:04] fifth terrace, miami, florida

[2:53:06] as more particularly described

[2:53:08] in the attached and

[2:53:09] incorporated exhibit a alley

[2:53:11] making findings containing a

[2:53:12] severability clause and

[2:53:13] providing for an effective

[2:53:18] date. Good evening. Good

[2:53:21] evening again watson. I'm here

[2:53:23] to present a vacation closure

[2:53:27] of a 25 foot alley um per

[2:53:31] pursuant to chapter 55 section

[2:53:37] 55-15c. Currently the area that

[2:53:39] we're requesting to be vacated

[2:53:45] is 2620 6646 um thousand square

[2:53:51] feet. It is bounded by. 3965

[2:53:53] southwest sixth street to the

[2:53:57] east 44,000 southwest fifth

[2:54:00] terrace to the north 4001

[2:54:02] southwest sixth street to the

[2:54:04] west and to the south is

[2:54:07] southwest sixth street. You'll

[2:54:09] be able to see it better in the

[2:54:12] next image. The future land use

[2:54:16] for this. Oh goodness. I'm

[2:54:20] sorry. Is restricted

[2:54:23] commercial. Oh hold on one

[2:54:23] second I can't.

[2:54:26] >> see. No no no it's I'm sorry

[2:54:28] it's single family residential

[2:54:33] and the zoning is t3r so the

[2:54:34] thing the reason why the

[2:54:37] applicant is requesting this

[2:54:39] vacation closure is really for

[2:54:41] safety issues. It's a dead end

[2:54:42] alley and currently they're

[2:54:44] experiencing like unwanted

[2:54:45] parking and things of that

[2:54:47] nature in their neighborhood.

[2:54:48] And so they're requesting that

[2:54:50] the street be vacated, the

[2:54:52] street will be remitted back to

[2:54:54] both of the adjacent property

[2:54:57] owners on the side. Um the plot

[2:54:59] was approved in SEPTEMBER 5th

[2:55:02] of 2024 and the letters to

[2:55:05] confirm that was given on

[2:55:06] SEPTEMBER 4th 2025. Here's some

[2:55:08] pictures to give you some

[2:55:10] context of what it looks like.

[2:55:12] What the the vacation with the

[2:55:14] alley excuse me looks like

[2:55:18] unimproved. So in this analysis

[2:55:20] we found that the vacation

[2:55:23] closure um complies with all of

[2:55:25] the requirements needed to

[2:55:28] recommend this this board and

[2:55:30] these are also standard

[2:55:32] conditions. So again we're

[2:55:33] recommending that this be

[2:55:35] approved with conditions. Thank

[2:55:38] you. Thank you. Anyone from the

[2:55:43] public like to speak on this.

[2:55:45] You just have to speak into the

[2:55:47] mic give your name and address.

[2:55:49] Hi I am the applicant I'm part

[2:55:51] of I'm the wife of david conrad

[2:55:54] who's a the applicant. Um I

[2:55:56] don't really have anything to

[2:55:59] add. Um ma'am your name. Anna

[2:56:03] perez. Thank you. Um yeah, I

[2:56:04] don't have anything to add. I'm

[2:56:06] sorry I'm not very familiar

[2:56:07] with this process but, um.

[2:56:09] Yeah, I don't have [Laughter]

[2:56:10] Anything to add but if you have

[2:56:12] any questions, I'm. Thank you.

[2:56:14] >> okay. Thanks.

[2:56:17] >> anyone else? No. Okay. Board

[2:56:19] motion to approve. One quick

[2:56:21] thing. We have a question. Yes.

[2:56:23] A question is a statement. I

[2:56:24] just want to I like the way it

[2:56:26] came together like by

[2:56:28] increasing safety. Um and that

[2:56:29] was really cool that you guys

[2:56:31] worked together and you won't

[2:56:32] need as many police officers

[2:56:34] and things of that nature and

[2:56:37] so I love the um yeah. And we

[2:56:39] do as planners try to

[2:56:40] incorporate you know, we had

[2:56:41] septet which is you know,

[2:56:44] safety through design. So great

[2:56:45] job. Thank you.

[2:56:48] >> okay. Is there a motion?

[2:56:50] Well yeah I made a motion but

[2:56:52] just before I do that I'm just

[2:56:53] curious it took a year for this

[2:56:56] to come before us. Yes.

[2:56:56] >> two.

[2:57:03] >> second then second. Yeah.

[2:57:04] >> let's pass this as quickly

[2:57:05] as possible. Okay.

[2:57:09] >> roll call. Board member paul

[2:57:10] main.

[2:57:13] >> yes. Board member eduardo

[2:57:14] fernandez.

[2:57:16] >> yes. Board member. Lynette

[2:57:19] kudos board member ellen here.

[2:57:19] Yes.

[2:57:22] >> board member mario bailey

[2:57:24] yes. Board member chris

[2:57:26] collins. Yes board member

[2:57:28] joshua patterson board member

[2:57:32] arthur parasol vice chair andre

[2:57:33] lopez. Yes.

[2:57:35] >> chair.

[2:57:36] >> adam gersten. Yes.

[2:57:39] >> motion passes 10 to 0 and

[2:57:42] this decision is final unless

[2:57:51] not. Motion passes 10 to 0. All

[2:58:04] right I think. You guys are

[2:58:07] gonna love these applications.

[2:58:11] Yes please a companion item. I

[2:58:16] mean. Who doesn't love a park?

[2:58:20] Item number six file id 19685 a

[2:58:21] resolution of miami planning

[2:58:23] and zoning and appeals board

[2:58:25] with attachments recommending

[2:58:27] approval of an ordinance of the

[2:58:29] miami city commission amending

[2:58:32] ordinance number ten 544 as

[2:58:35] amended the future land use map

[2:58:36] of miami comprehension

[2:58:38] neighborhood plan pursuant to

[2:58:40] small scale amendment

[2:58:44] procedures subject to 163.3187

[2:58:46] florida statute by changing the

[2:58:48] future land use designated from

[2:58:50] single family residential to

[2:58:52] public parks and recreation of

[2:58:55] the acreage described inherent

[2:58:58] of rural properties at 2293

[2:59:01] southwest 17th terrace, miami,

[2:59:02] florida as particularly

[2:59:04] described in exhibit a with

[2:59:06] making findings containing a

[2:59:07] severability clause and

[2:59:08] providing for an effective

[2:59:10] date. Item number seven

[2:59:14] companion item file id 19684 a

[2:59:16] resolution of the miami

[2:59:17] planning zoning and appeals

[2:59:19] board with attachments

[2:59:20] recommending approval and

[2:59:23] ordinance of the miami city

[2:59:25] commission amending the zoning

[2:59:29] at last. Of ordinance number

[2:59:31] 13114 the zoning ordinance of

[2:59:33] the city of miami, florida as

[2:59:35] amended. Miami 21 code by

[2:59:37] changing the zoning

[2:59:40] clarification from t3r suburban

[2:59:44] transit zone restricted to c. S

[2:59:47] civic space transit zone for

[2:59:48] the property generally located

[2:59:52] at 2293 southwest 17 terrace,

[2:59:54] miami, florida as more

[2:59:55] particularly described in the

[2:59:57] attached and incorporated

[2:59:58] exhibit a making findings

[3:00:00] containing a severability

[3:00:01] clause and providing for an

[3:00:05] effective date. Thank you. Um

[3:00:07] my name is luis lamb. I'm the

[3:00:08] park planner for the city of

[3:00:10] miami. Good evening everyone. I

[3:00:13] will be presenting a rezone and

[3:00:15] a flume amendment to provide a

[3:00:16] new park for the city. These

[3:00:18] are items number six and number

[3:00:22] seven. So the purpose is to

[3:00:25] rezone the property from t3r to

[3:00:27] c s civic space and to change

[3:00:31] the future land use map uh from

[3:00:32] single family residential to

[3:00:34] public parks and recreation

[3:00:36] staff recommends approval. This

[3:00:39] is a city project uh located in

[3:00:41] district four. The address is

[3:00:46] 2293 southwest 17th terrace.

[3:00:49] The site is approximately 0.23

[3:00:52] acres or 10,000ft2. It's in the

[3:00:55] shenandoah neighborhood. Uh, as

[3:00:56] mentioned in commission

[3:00:57] district four, the surrounding

[3:00:58] area consists mostly of single

[3:01:00] family and duplex residential

[3:01:02] use and as mentioned before,

[3:01:04] the aim is to provide a new

[3:01:07] park. Here's the existing

[3:01:10] zoning on the left t3r and the

[3:01:13] proposed zoning on the right of

[3:01:16] civic space and the existing

[3:01:19] future land use of single

[3:01:22] family and the proposed uh

[3:01:27] public park. Uh the rezone is

[3:01:29] in compliance with the

[3:01:31] criteria, uh with the three

[3:01:36] criteria from miami 21 and the

[3:01:38] future land use amendment

[3:01:40] criteria is also in compliance,

[3:01:42] uh, with miami comprehensive

[3:01:46] neighborhood plan. As I

[3:01:47] mentioned before, staff

[3:01:49] recommends approval of the

[3:01:51] rezone and the future land use

[3:01:56] amendment. Uh, I can go into

[3:01:57] detail if you'd like, but this

[3:01:59] is basically just showing the

[3:02:01] the allowed uses in the civic

[3:02:05] space as opposed to t3r notably

[3:02:07] recreational facility and

[3:02:08] community facility will be

[3:02:10] allowed by right as civic

[3:02:15] space. Uh parks do not have any

[3:02:17] dwelling units so it will go

[3:02:20] down to zero um as opposed to

[3:02:22] nine dwelling units per acre

[3:02:27] and the existing zoning. And

[3:02:28] similarly in the single family

[3:02:30] residential under the flume it

[3:02:32] goes from nine dwelling units

[3:02:35] to zero and it will allow park

[3:02:37] uses with a maximum lot

[3:02:41] coverage of 25%. Thank you.

[3:02:45] Thank you. There's no one in

[3:02:48] the public so oh we have

[3:02:52] anybody. Just curious uh 25%

[3:02:54] lot coverage is that for any

[3:02:55] building that you might want to

[3:02:58] put on it? And that's the civic

[3:03:03] space uh, maximum lot coverage.

[3:03:06] It's going to be 100% park

[3:03:08] except for up to 25% building

[3:03:09] use some kind of facility.

[3:03:10] Yeah.

[3:03:11] >> if you were to put a

[3:03:15] building maximum would. Be 25.

[3:03:17] Move to approve. Okay.

[3:03:19] >> is there a second? Okay,

[3:03:23] there's a second. Did that.

[3:03:26] >> oh, that was you okay.

[3:03:30] Bailey board member paul main

[3:03:32] yes. Board member mario bailey.

[3:03:32] Yes.

[3:03:35] >> board member lynette. Kudos.

[3:03:38] Board member ellen meteor. Yes.

[3:03:40] >> board member eduardo

[3:03:41] fernandez. Yes.

[3:03:43] >> board member joshua pitkin

[3:03:45] yes. Board member chris

[3:03:47] collins. Yes board member.

[3:03:50] Arthur passoff vice chair.

[3:03:53] Andres r lopez yes. Chair. Adam

[3:03:54] gersten. Yes.

[3:03:57] >> motion passes 10 to 0. Thank

[3:04:01] you. If I can just make one

[3:04:04] comment more um items like

[3:04:06] these please. I think I think

[3:04:08] luis has a whole bunch coming.

[3:04:11] Yeah we do. Right and I think I

[3:04:12] think there's even more coming

[3:04:13] in district three and district

[3:04:15] four. Awesome.

[3:04:16] >> correct. All right. Thank

[3:04:18] you. Have a good night. Thank

[3:04:22] you. Uh did we uh skip or did I

[3:04:24] MISS The calendar? We deferred

[3:04:27] it. Uh, or we deferred it.

[3:04:28] Okay. All right, motion to

[3:04:29] adjourn. Second.

[3:04:32] >> thank you. If everybody can

[3:04:33] please check their calendars

[3:04:34] over the next two weeks and

[3:04:36] make sure there's no issues and

[3:04:39] we'll update the spellings.

[3:04:49] [Music]

Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board

Agenda

Transcript