[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]