[Music] [Music] [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Music] [Music] please take your proceeds the meeting is about to begin please stand by we are going on air in 5 4 3 2 1 good afternoon and welcome to the May first meeting of the Miami Beach land use and sustainability committee meeting uh Mr attorney let's do a roll call thank you Mr chairman and and good afternoon I will call the role uh commissioner hello commissioner Dominguez present commissioner Suarez is absent and chairman Fernandez present and uh I believe I believe uh commissioner Suarez will be arriving uh a little bit later in in our meeting so with a quorum established um I'm going to recognize the planning director for any uh changes to our agenda any additions withdrawals any changes okay uh good afternoon folks uh on the agenda um um there are a number of regular items that are going to be deferred to a future date and so I'm going to announce these and so if anybody is here for these items there is no need to stay because these will be deferred to a future date item number nine uh discuss current incentives for average uni size requirements in residential Apartments item number 10 explore zoning incentives and identify appropriate zoning districts to encourage the development of schools and other educational facilities item number 11 discuss consider during the creation of a new capital project to install floating walkways Andor the acquisition of the outlaw at 201811 Indian Creek Drive to complete the Indian Creek pedestrian pathway item number 12 discuss potential incentives to convert co-living and transient units to apartments in the north beach TCC District item number 13 review the future land use map classification for Pride Park item number 14 discuss setting parameters for property owners to present creative development proposals to the city Administration and City commission as an alternative to invoking the preemptions in the live local act to encourage longterm non-transient residential developments including Workforce housing that is more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood item number 16 review the city's current maximum development capacity for water sewer electrical and other utilities and public facilities and how to better use updated modeling and data for projected future demand to inform Ci's planning legislative efforts related relating to development item number 17 review amendments to the Land Development regulations to amend the hotel approval process and finally number 18 discuss the new short-term rental law passed to New York City known as local law 18 Again the items I just read uh are being deferred to a future date and will not be heard today thank you Mr director uh colleagues my intent is to call the agenda uh with in the order in which I have provided in the memo that I circulated earlier today I'm going to call uh out of order item number 19 then I'm going to go into the P the priority agenda and then we're going to take one item from the regular agenda item number 15 uh which was the item relating to the Clevelander with that is there a motion to set the agenda I'll move it the the agenda has been moved second second uh with that by acclamation we set the agenda for the record today's meeting at the land use and sustainability committee will be conducted in a hybrid format with members of the committee physically present in the building department conference room located on the second floor of City Hall and staff and members of the public appearing either in person or virtually via Zoom to participate virtually members of the public may dial 888- 47544 N9 and enter the webinar ID which is 8505 9923 03 pound or log into to the Zoom app and enter the webinar ID which again is 85599 92337 anyone wishing to speak on an item must click the raise hand icon in the Zoom app or dire dial star9 if participating by phone with that Mr director Let's uh introduce item number 19 okay item number 19 is discuss fpnl storm secure underground program and opportunities to identify the city of Miami Beach neighborhoods that may be eligible for undergrounding of power lines through the program at no cost or expense to City residents or businesses thank you is there a motion to bring the item before the body move it and second by the chair with that the item is before the body I this is an item that's been uh sponsored by mayor Miner commissioner Dominguez and myself so I'm going to recognize uh my colleague commissioner Dominguez to introduce this item and I also know we have representatives from fpnl present to speak on the item okay let me pull up this item for some reason I didn't get your memo so my apologies no worries okay I'm just going to borrow this for a second yes all right so I uh would like to call up uh Alex hi from FPL who's gonna give us an update on this item absolutely we have a PowerPoint ready to go and how much time do you need for your presentation and we could keep it as concise as possible the presentation should take about seven minutes seven minutes okay okay do five all right oh good afternoon Commissioners my name is Alex bis I am Florida Power and lights external Affairs manager for Miami Beach I'm joined by members of our undergrounding team who will be here to answer any technical questions you may have after this presentation concludes we're here in support of item 19 today which would facilitate the hardening or undergrounding of distribution laterals in the city through fpl's distribution lateral hardening program which has also been referred to in this committee as the storm secure underground program which is part of our larger storm protection plan or SP this presentation will provide an overview of the SP and cover details of lateral hardening including project selection criteria procedural steps and updated projections for Miami Beach since the 2004 storm season Florida Power and Light has made significant investments in our energy grid to improve reliability for customers systemwide we've hardened 100% of our transmission structures hardened or underground over 77% of our main power lines which are also referred to as feeder lines and we've undergrounded about 48% of our distribution laterals and are continuing to do so through this program these Investments are all funded through FPL storm protection plan which in addition to lateral hardening and undergrounding includes a number of other programs such as distribution and transmission pole inspections transmission hardening vegetation management as well as substation storm surge and flood mitigation more information on each of these programs can be found in the administration's memo that is attached to this item in some all of these programs work to better protect our power grid against extreme weather events and create a number of benefits for FPL customers including better reliability reduced outage time and mitigated restoration cost this slide provides you with a visual representation of how power is ultimately delivered to customers through the SP we've hardened our transmission structures which carry power at high voltages from our power plants to our substations we're also making investments in our substations to better protect them against storm surge and flooding and and we continue to harden and underground our feeders and laterals through this program as well and here's a you know a few pictures of the lines we're talking about on the left you'll see the transmission lines in the middle you'll see the main lines or the feeder lines and on the right you will see the laterals and these laterals are what we target through our lateral hardening program now Miami Beach like all cities has the option to underground its laterals in one of two ways the city May either elect to do so through the SP or through a municipally Le process undergrounding the laterals through a municipally Le process requires that the city pays all fees upfront which is generally funded through the creation of one or more special assessment districts conversely through the SP there are no upfront costs to Miami Beach residence as all projects in the SP are funded through the storm Protection Plan cost recovery charge this is something that's paid by all FPL customers systemwide you pay it I pay it it's included in your monthly bill so there's no upfront cost moreover when you Underground through the SP FPL is responsible for project implementation the city would not need to worry about hiring contractors facilitating pro project Logistics and things of that nature and finally once customers begin receiving Underground Service they'll enjoy faster restoration times fewer vegetation related outages and reliability that is 12 times better than the reliability they have with overhead laterals and Alex if we can start wrapping up because you have a minute 30 left okay sure um so quickly here the way and this is important the way we select which laterals get undergrounded is through a data driven process that's been approved by the Florida Public Service Commission it uh it takes in information regarding power line performance during name storms outages due to vegetation issues and performance during day-to-day operations again FPL does not arbitrarily select which uh laterals to underground and when it is all data driven um and so quickly since I've got to wrap up here this is a before and after you'll see we can take the overhead Transformer down we replace it with a pad mounted Transformer we install a manhole and a junction box as well uh one of the benefits of this item is that it would create a process through which FPL would provide advanced notice to the city so that you all could work with the utility providers like AT&T to have them underground their infrastructure as well here is a picture of that equipment and here are the updated projections for my Beach um we've got three projects that are now going to be filed with the Florida Public Service Commission uh this would cover about I think five or six lateral miles on the beach and then the balance of them would be completed uh by 2031 um and I believe that just about wraps it up of course we'll start with conceptual designs then we move to customer Outreach which uh spans the entire length of the project and then once final designs are submitted we will then code to the city and request a permit um one last benefit of this plan here is that the administration could condense this timeline by actually developing a expedited PR process thank you very much thank you Alex and and I want to thank you because we've collaborated on a resolution that I've placed on the agenda for the committee's consideration I want to thank our chief Deputy City attorney for for for drafting this uh this resolution as well which directs our staff to work with FPL with Expediting the processes internally uh for the utility relocation uh making sure that the permitting process is streamlined uh and ensuring that we are providing the public with all the necessary information that they need uh regarding this because this also deals with rways that might be near uh homes in in our city and I think one of the key things about this is that currently only 50% of our city of our the customers in our city are underground but there's another 50 % who are not and we've seen when this has been our taxpayers paying for this some residents have had to pay up to $27,000 out of their pocket in order to have their homes and their communities undergrounded this by participating in this program we're allowing this cost savings to our taxpayers uh through this partnership with FPL and something that I'm very excited about and Madame vice mayor uh that we're joining in this effort uh to deliver this undergrounding project uh for the residents and the taxpayers of the city of Miami Beach I moved the item so the item is moved uh I'll second the item uh Vice chair bot I just had a a quick question if I might yes um on one of the sides it said um there were three projects highlighted in yellow Venetian 41st and Miami Beach what encompasses the Miami Beach stripe of yellow so if we can actually pull the presentation back up uh we do have some maps here here um is this your question we also have well I I believe um I believe that the question was you you highlighted three in yellow what area are those yellows well the two two of them said Venetian and 40th Street so that seems clear but there was there was a grid a table that had right so that table right here we had 248 938 and 437 so here's 248 so it's that pink all the the pink that you see there would be what is included in each of these projects that's forthcoming in 2025 and then we've got two additional projects you'll see this in green this time on 40th Street and you'll also see the green here um that's fed from the Venetian subst and let me ask you something because I was I had inquired about North Beach and one and and you and you all had looked at performance in North Beach what's what's uh what's the information what does the data tell us about performance we got with our reliability team and what we found is that in proportion to the rest of the city the miles of laterals that have been undergrounded in North Beach is actually in keeping with the rest of the city's numbers as well um and again this is all uh driven by data so it seems as though the you know North Beach generally from what we can tell has pretty strong Rel reliability at this point reliability okay and that and that that's what this is based on this is based on reliability that's correct M um just looking at Parkview Island because I've walked that a million times it's is it purely reliability or is it also withstanding storms because we've got you know wooden light poles that are or power poles that are at all kinds of precarious I think this is where I have to kind of start um you know going a little bit quicker but there are three pieces of information that the Public Service Commission uses to evaluate which laterals get undergrounded and when and and and let me just interject there because it's the Public Service Commission of the State of Florida that sets the criteria for this program and to determine which areas are are what the data needs to be in order to qualify under the program right so the three pieces of of information that they use are performance during named storms like hurricanes um outages related to vegetation so it's often the case that you know a feeder or lateral is is you know built right next to a bunch of trees and if a tree falls on it that would then accelerate where it's at in the process and then also just day-to-day performance on Blue Sky days so those taking those three data points um where we develop you know a two-year work schedule so it's really about performance not about Aesthetics at all like even so even if it looks like it's about to fall over um as long as it's working fine it's it gets pushed back below well if a pole is about to fall over I mean I I exaggerate for for dramatic no we we consider you know reliability um you know the Aesthetics of it are not you know currently incorporated into that process thank you Alex thank you so much uh with that the item's been moved and second I'm going to is there any members of the public attending that wish to speak on this item seeing none in person wishing to speak on this item anyone via Zoom wishing to speak on this item please uh raise your hand I see Wayne Roberts uh Wayne Uh welcome uh you have two minutes hey doing uh Al good afternoon um I'm very concerned that um I've heard in the past that we had about 68% coverage in Miami uh in Miami beach but I'm not sure if that conversation was around South Beach or Miami Beach in general and now I hear 50% which is about the state average and I'm shocked that density you how many people will be impacted by a loss of power um Miami Beach being more dense than the average in the state um I'm shocked that density did not play a role in the decision making of data um because you know polls are 11 times less reliable than um underground uh if it impacts you know a thousand residents rather than a 100 I'm shocked that um that that did not play a role in in in choices and when he talks about uh the projects through 2030 1 I I have to ask what percentage of the city will be underground at that point uh that's that's uh slated to be uh converted to underground like at the end of that cycle what what percentage of Miami Beach will be underground uh the only other point I have to make is you know uh the city needs to plan for the future and the future incorporates uh um electric cars and uh as far as I understand it I'm not an expert that direct current is required to uh to power up um these um these fast charging stations for cars and now we're going to come out with robot talk taxis by Tesla I think uh half of the population will be U uh driving electric cars very shortly at least and um you know we're we're we live in we live in multif family dwelling units that thank you Mr Robert thank you Wayne thank you so much and your concern is and we are working with uh with uh with entities like like FPL and others and expanding our uh public charging facilities in our city Lots uh and I misspoke because it's not 50% more than 50% of FPL customers on the city are already receiving their power via underground infrastructure it's not 50% it's more than 50% which is more accurate with what uh was mentioning uh Jack fingas you you have your hand raised I'm not sure if you're here to speak on this item but if you do uh if you are please uh introduce yourself you have two minutes Jack with that I'm going to close a public hearing on this item the it has been moved it's been second all those in favor I with that the item passes Mr director uh just for clarification purposes the item's been uh concluded and this would be in accordance with the conclusion in the land use committee memo correct this is this is to uh send a recommendation to the city commission to adopt uh the resolution that we have uh placed on the agenda uh with with the item okay and that's at page 212 yes with that Mr director let's introduce uh item number one okay item number one is to discuss the programming for the new Byron Carlile geobond project for a multi-purpose cultural art space and possibly Workforce housing and or other uses that are compatible with a cultural art center and the surrounding neighborhood and to consider the various options for financial and funding models for the project is there a motion to bring the item before the body mov it's been moved has been seconded commissioner bond this is your item you're recognized so this is an item that is near and dear to my heart um the Byron carile has been sitting vacant and um unusable for far too many years um it is a space that was built in 1968 as a double movie theater um over the years it showed lots of movies to lots of people who had lots of good times there watching movies and doing who knows what else in there um um most recently it was the O Cinema the home of the O Cinema um but only part of the movie theater could be used um it had fallen into pretty sad State um and so it couldn't be used to its fullest extent and O Cinema had to be relocated to The Old City Hall here down here in Miami in in South Beach and the space has been vacant for since then and um we have been working we I was part of this as an activist and a resident um before I became a commissioner and there's been a whole group of people working for years to try to figure out how to best maximize the the potential the Buon car out at one point before the Geo Bond uh for the Arts was funded there the thought was maybe we could try to restore it and and bring it back um that didn't happen quickly enough so the costs went from you know several hundred, to several million um and it was recognized that perhaps the best use of that funding would not be to recreate what was there when the way the people consume entertainment has changed so significantly so a two screen movie theater may not be the ideal use there so then the conversation came around to what would be the ideal use there and what could be great and how would we get there fast forward to the Geo Bond where um we have $30 million to be put towards restoring renovating or um or uh rebuilding something new in that space um and a lot of people have gotten involved from the community Community Arts organizations neighborhood um Advocates residents businesses who've put together some pretty comprehensive plans um with the help of of uh Roberto espo who is an architect who helped bring the AR Center to life and is very committed to this and so the question before us today colleagues is how to um spend the $30 million that we have earmarked um to the highest and best use which may not NE necessarily be the pure Financial highest and best use is it a cultural arts center with a lot of adaptive um and flexible programming um for a a myriad of very diverse cultural organizations as well as Community uses um is it that plus um the possibility of some Arts Force housing um not to exceed the F in the neighborhood not to ask for variances but to fit into the envelope of what exists and how do we do that um whatever we decide how do we do it in the fastest and most efficient way possible um so that we can use the $30 million that we have earmarked before it turns into 25 or 20 with inflation and rising Rising construction costs so that is the conversation we have before us and I know this is a long intro but I want to make it abundantly clear to anybody who is listening from the neighborhood um there have been very very strong and passionate advocates for for this project in lots of different iterations I can tell you from my perspective at least um there is no way we are going back to any of the prior um proposals that were put forth by developers in previous administrations where it was basically a tower of ostensibly affordable housing or micro units with a tiny gray box for us to be finished the goal here is first foremost a multifaceted communitybased cultural complex and if we're able to deliver that with some housing on top of it then that is great but we are not putting things the other way around it is not going to be a tower with a nice theater in it it's I I just want to make that abundantly clear so that anybody who's reading through the documents does not get um concerned about the thoroughness of the presentation that you guys have put together with all of the the backup history and all the iterations of conversations that have gone through so again abundantly clear full on community complex for the Arts first if we can figure out a way to do um Arts Force housing on top of that in a way that makes Financial sense then that's that's gravy thank you Madame Vice chair and just for the record I forgot to say when I when I called the item this item will will be discussed until 5:50 at 5:50 I'm going to conclude this item whichever point we're at and we're going to move on with our agenda with that uh commissioner Dominguez you're recognized thank you uh I remember uh when commissioner Mark saman uh was on the commission he fought hard for the Byron Carlile so did many residents that were out there and um many passionate residents included having uh petitions on what they wanted so the vision I have for it is to keep the structure use the Geo Bond I think we've I've heard from many developers that are first housing Workforce housing the numbers really don't work North Beach has about half a dozen highrises that are coming and the density in that area is going to be insane and that's in a an island where fdot already told us that we're at capacity there's no more room so I would like to hear from the administration um not necessarily now but in the future what can they do to make this a beautiful cultural center for the community using the geom money that geob Bond money that's already been allocated thank you Mr chair thank you commissioner uh I see we have the city Administration uh before us uh Liz uh you're welcome to present on the item absolutely I'm going to te this up good afternoon um committee members Elizabeth Meo interim director for facilities and Fleet Management and we have taken into consideration all the items that are going to be discussed before you uh programming a standalone model and one that includes Workforce housing and we provid you with some information I'm going to this up and danieli will provide you with the rest uh good afternoon Mr chair Commissioners Daniel facilities and Fleet let me get myself organized here a little bit words I'm gonna ask it if we could work on the microphone for the presenters so that we could hear them better OB because it's a little bit harder to hear here in the front so I'll try to project better sorry um so the administration was tasked with exploring options for delivery of a multi- uh purpose multidisciplinary Cultural Center at the location of the Byron Carlile in uh working this out the following was considered the first was uh a report from AMS research and planning uh that looked at the cultural landscape of Miami Beach and the surrounding areas and I'm glad to say that there's an abundance of great art around us that can keep this place busy year round uh they identified five to8 anchor tenants that could be uh that could be operators frankly if uh if we wanted them to and then beyond that another 10 uh organizations that could be frequent users and another 10 uh that can be occasional but regular users so there's plenty of product to present at this Cultural Center uh and it is uh a proof of concept that something like this will thrive in North Beach um the the report also touches on self-operating but leaves the door open to other government structures depending on which way the project goes and what would best serve the the final Cultural Center uh the operating plan I'm sorry the report did not uh include an operating plan or proforma which will then uh inform a lot of the finances on this so that was one the the report from AMS the next thing we looked at were the concept drawings the first from Schulman Associates uh which was solicited by the city uh I believe in 2021 uh and the second the unsolicited Friends of the byon Carlile design that was submitted was created by Roberto as uh the uh Schulman Associates had the cultural center at about 10,000 square ft and we know that that's not acceptable uh the Roberto ESO design has the the cultural center at a generous 49,000 ft square feet um the as we start preparing Financial models on this we are confident that we can get it up to and Beyond 35,000 square ft of cultural space uh we're trying to get it as f as high up as into the 40s but that will come as we start developing this project as we bring on a developer as we start looking at designs we can really start honing in the numbers a lot of the numbers in the cash flows that you have that were submitted as exhibit I believe D um are very very general it is a starting place so I I ask that everybody look at it with a truckload of salt uh more than anything for us it was a uh a proof of concept that we can Within These boundaries create what we're talking about um so both of these uh make us confident that one we can create a substantial uh Cultural Center in that space with or without the workforce housing um the money comes into play when we start talking about uh one versus the other uh the 49,000 SQ foot uh Cultural Center uh upon back of envelope uh pricing uh is probably twice as much if not more than what we have in the Geo Bond uh the the tough part with that size of cultural center without the workforce housing is that the burden of cost of operation lies squarely on the art organization and they'll have to be a commitment from the city uh for subsidy for ongoing subsidy so that's the standalone loan we'd likely uh deliver that through a design build RFQ um with the if we were to design to budget we would probably be looking at a cultural center that was a little bit less than 30,000 square F feet maybe between 25 and 30,000 square fet if we designed to the $3.5 million budget so it's it's a little bit smaller than than what was proposed by friends of the Byron um I have a question yes please so you said design build why that way instead of design bid build which would uh usually get us better pricing okay so but so I'm we're going to take this question the future questions just through the chair and you know and then we're going to keep all of our the rest of our questions to the end of the presentation okay um that is something that I'd have to confer with CIP and see what gets us the most value uh there there are certain uh requirements that we need to hit from from a state level I I believe that they uh they require us to follow certain paths if we as the city are going to put out the RFQ um there is design design uh bid build there's design uh build finance and operate which is what we're going to get into now in the in the P3 but we would depending on which way we wanted to go we would explore all options and really try to find which one brings the best value to what we're trying to do um so apart from the Standalone now we have the the cultural center with Workforce housing this opens some Finance some financing doors for us uh the way that we would likely deliver this is through a P3 uh in which we would create or contract a 501c3 to deliver finance and operate ultimately operate the cultural center um that needs to be explored a little bit more they would also carry the the the bond uh needed to cover the construction Gap at no point will the city ever lose ownership of the land they would retain ownership of the land and they can we can recall the building at any point by satisfying the bond so the whatever agreement we enter into the 501c3 whether it's one that we create or one that we find in arts organization that we find the contract is very much one-sided we we set the the rules of the road um we I think that based on a second round of calculations of numbers that we can get this upwards of 35,000 square feet for the cultural space my goal is to get it upwards of 40,000 but again we're so early in the process that it's really hard to start minimizing the margins the the little bits here and there that we're we're looking at contingency the cost we're trying to project cost and all of this uh is being done pro bono by these developers by the developer and by uh the architect so they're they're willing to help us but really to seal their name on it and get we need to proceed a little bit down the line with this project um and ultimately uh the the workforce housing would bring residual cash flows that over time as the bond is paid down will completely uh cover the operating costs of the cultural center maybe not in the first five years the first five years what we're trying to do with this is really thread a needle we want to get the most cultural center we can for the money we have and which really in year two through six is going to be a very tight Financial uh situation for the cultural center but what we'd like to do is figure out a way to get them through the first six years and then the backend uh the the net revenue explodes thank you mam Vice chair um so my understanding is that um this Falls within the boundaries of the CRA and part of the CRA commitment that we have is that we have to build Workforce housing um one of the biggest challenges we have for Workforce housing is finding land upon which to build um my primary goal when I started off helping to advocate for the for the Byron car with the friends I don't know Daniel I don't even know how many years ago that was but quite a few Nancy lean was involved and a lot of us were involved um and and commissioner samin was a huge huge huge I remember watching him get bullied by his colleagues with literally if you don't support us in what we want we're going to tank that I was horrified and here I am you know all these years later anyhow um we have to build Workforce housing in north beach within the bounds of the CRA building Workforce housing to some degree on this facility um within the envelope of what's ex permitted um by the f um without asking for any variances is possible and it helps generate Revenue to cover the costs of a cultural center which means it can do more community outreach Community programming and give it more room to breathe and maneuver um there's no criteria stipulating how much Workforce housing we have to build so it's really a question of sliding scale to maximize the amount of space for cultural programming and the the most kinds of um um facilities we can offer the community with some Workforce housing so I I am inclined to do that because I I believe that it gives the cultural center most room to operate uh and and more the most possible flexibility without sweating about making uh covering their nut every year um um the other thing is that a lot of you know I'm I I live there so I know exactly how disastrous those roads are um and how tenuous the the um infrastructure is and how we do not want to necessarily have a ton of new building we buildings we already have a too many going up that were promised to the neighborhood as housing for the missing middle or Workforce housing and now we're either micro units or you know affordable housing starting at 800 $1,000 so this would give the folks who work at the cultural arts organizations a way to live and work and hopefully play in in one area as opposed to having to drive across the bridge every day which um makes our our roads much less um you know it's not thousands of people who would be employed there but every little bit helps so I would like to um you know that's where I I land on this I want to make sure that we maximize and get as close to the the goal of 39,000 square feet or you know whatever it was that Roberto had said um maximize the cultural art space and give them the best opportunity for financial success and fulfill Our obligation for the C and we will be getting money from the galat tower that's going you know that's nearing completion and all the other the other 12 buildings that are coming up in the next couple of years so to me there's a lot of ways to to help Finance this we don't have to write a check tomorrow because this is a longer Pro process but um so colleagues that's where I fall on this thank you uh Madame Vice chair uh what I'd like to do is it's give the opportunity to some of our other colleagues who are present U commissioner Suarez welcome uh commissioner magazine welcome I don't know if you want to chime in on this before we open it up to the public uh to to individuals from the public that may want to speak on this item um commissioner uh mag commissioner Suarez sure thank you especially as I'm not on the committee but just so we all know where all of us stand cars are on the table we are in a housing crisis we have all sat here on the planning board on commission and said oh well of course we need housing affordability we have the chance to do something we need to put our money where our mouth is how many times are we going to look at our constituents move out of Miami Beach and say oh my gosh we're losing residents and then not vote for housing on our land Workforce housing full stop I I cannot support anything on our land that we are not providing Workforce housing when we are losing thousands of residents the only city in all of Florida the only city we're in a housing affordability crisis and we're not delivering any housing for normal workingclass people that is my foremost priority during my time here that in public safety so I look for this as an opportunity to do so thank you commissioner thank you chair commissioner Suarez recognized thank you chair uh so you said you needed more time on figuring out the specifics on how you can do Workforce housing or can you explain what that timeline would look like sure through the chair um really what we need is more expertise so we need to engage uh a developer we need to engage we need to start down the line of um defining the project defining the parameters of the project uh there's only so much that we can do in you know Pro Bona world where I'm having conversations with people saying can you tweak this can you tweak that we've gotten it to a place where we feel confident that this is executable uh we have probably 80 to 90% of the information we need to really start down the line of of an RFP for this uh but we need to decide on the governance potential governance structure if we're going into a P3 we do need to see how we're going to treat that 501c3 if we're going to go seek one like we did in colins park or if we're going to empower one to to execute this for us and then operate the building on the back end and I'm sorry just to clarify because you and I had a conversation about this but for my colleagues and anybody else listening when you talk about um operate the the building you're talking about operating the housing component the cultural arts center would be a different conversation it can be either or we could hire a 501c3 like in Collins Park to manage the housing portion we can also Empower a 501c3 cultural institution to manage the cultural and then and then hire out the management of the residential because I think that's that's not um uh specific to this conversation it gets talked about down the road and it's a much more nuanced conversation so the decision on how we proceed is not predicated on who's going to be managing which piece of this correct and part uh through the chair through part of what the uh next steps would be is if we decide we do want to go with Workforce housing is starting to Define some of that criteria starting to Define what the nonprofit intermediary would look like the role they would play the agreement between the city and that intermediary and then start with um that information and part of it is a um an operational plan and a proforma so as we start developing a proforma we understand the finances of the culture Control Center and how they would contribute to the overall project thank you so much I'm just going to put my my my comments on on the record first and foremost you know I understand the need for housing in our community but I also see a tremendous amount of development occurring in North Beach uh I also uh we all live with the increasing demands uh with the with with the increasing stress on our traffic infrastructure and our limited roadways um just uh just last week I was meeting with a cultural institution I would say a cultural anchor of North Beach uh and them expressing to to to me uh the great concerns that they have about the very limited availability of parking uh up in up in North Beach uh and I just get concerned how the city now also you know developing uh on his own property uh such such amount of density could further aggravate the challenges with parking which we already know is bad enough even when we're looking to create parking zones up in North Beach the challenges that we have with a very limited and congested uh roadway uh network uh up up in North Beach uh so so I I I I feel you know that I need more information uh about this uh but but if I were to say today if I had to make a decision today uh I'd be more inclined to see us uh work on a standalone uh Cultural Arts Center that can be delivered with the funds that the that the electorate that the voters have already approved uh through through through the go referendums uh that's that's what I feel uh will will will deliver better and we can always work on our policies and other opportunities that we have on other lands to deliver on Workforce housing especially on our policies to help advance that but there's a parking crisis up in North Beach there is a traffic crisis up in North Beach and the last thing that the taxpayers uh government needs to be doing is contributing to that that's my perspective of it uh but I respect the opinions and the initiatives of all of my colleagues I'm going to open up uh for public comment members of the public attending the meeting in person wishing to speak on this item please line up on the podium uh I'm going to limit comments to one minute so we can stay on schedule and I'm going to recognize uh David seon uh David David welcome you have one minute I I am so glad that we're actually starting to work on the Byron um we the friends of the Byron presented this concept and I feel like first and foremost it's a Performing Arts Center and that has to happen but to your point the same Arts organization that you're speaking about uh the Band Shell has 50 employees none of them can live on Miami Beach because they're forced to live off Beach and they're forced to commute every day to to reach their workpace so I think that housing above it creates a situation where you're diminishing traffic you're diminishing the need for parking if you're allowing the people that are living in the building to work in the building that is the future of of of housing in in our area and Workforce housing is important but I wouldn't want to see this project derailed over that it what we really need is a is a Performing Arts Center in North spe thank you David thank you for your participation uh Daniel welcome you have one minute thank you so much hi Commissioners Daniel Calo with Miami Design preservation League I remember yes that was back in 2020 when we were just starting with the the covid craziness and we did the zoom about saving the Byron carile and also the essence of the arts and culture status of the Byron so it is exciting to see now that this is moving forward forward um I'm not sure if there I hope there will be some study about if there are elements that could be preserved from the structure you know even if it's adapted or or rebuilt but there are some like funky myo uh aspects that still remain so hopefully that will be considered also I did want to mention that the North Beach master plan led to an increase in F and the city owns this lot so if you don't use it for something good like with a public benefit like Workforce then it may be a loss opportunity so uh looking forward to more discussion thank you thank you Daniel uh Jack finglass uh you're welcome to comment you have one minute welcome Jack Jack you have to unmute yourself I I fully support commissioner bot and commissioner Fernandez and I was most interested in uh commissioner Magazine's comments I think Workforce housing is extremely important and I look forward to having a successful marriage of the two in this most most important project thank you thank you uh Jack uh Wayne Roberts uh you're welcome to comment on this item you have one minute hey um I appreciate all your comments um we certainly need Workforce housing my concern is around the density in North Beach it's gotten way out of hand uh with um developers of approving or or we lobbying for you know higher and higher density and now we're going to add more density so that that concerns me we shot this down when matis PR presented it I don't know when like 2018 or something um a P1 or P3 uh project um David seon showed me a design I didn't like the design that that was presented it it it was just way too dense and it killed the look of of of that area so uh it's a conflicting thing if we just leave it empty and and and and and in in poor shape it's the worst outcome so we need to move forward but we need to move forward in a in a in an educated way um that balances everything that that that concerns the city and I don't want to go one way or the other thank you Wayne thank you all right so I'd like to uh okay Elizabeth uh welcome you have one minute to speak and with that I'm going to be closing the public hearing hadn't hi good good afternoon good evening hadn't had any intention on speaking on this but uh I do live in North Beach um we do experience horrible traffic we also experience a housing shortage real housing that needs more than 200 squ ft to live in um and I would support the cultur Center I also want to see housing and it can be done with CRA funds it can be done with a lot of different ways it does also need to be it that design build doesn't work because you can just stop in the middle of that and that's the end um we need to do a real RFP and get going on it thank you thank you Elizabeth with that uh commissioner bod uh your this is your item uh how would you like to proceed with your item I just I'm not going to make I'm not going to make a motion yet I'm going to just say something then okay yes so commissioner bod and then commissioner Suarez so I just want to remind my colleagues that the project as it is um proposed is not covered by the $30 million that was um earmarked by the the Geo Bond so additional funding would have to be found and um Workforce housing could help generate that money um I live walking distance a few blocks from that inter intersection at 71st and eally viable men um you know and I know how absolutely terrible it can be but I don't want the um unfortunate decisions over the last decade to keep us from making an excellent decision for the next decades we granted short-term rentals we are we you know short-term rentals are allowed out there we've granted 500 plus micro units we've got another development that's claiming to be Workforce housing at 200 square ft a little further west in North Beach we need to PE put people who actually work here and live here and and will take their cars off their roads into the mix and we need to find the full amount of funding to get to the cultural center that we want that has been proposed what is what is Illustrated here is not a final design of what it's going to look like from the outside it's showing how the pieces can come together to provide the best possible use of the interior space the outside the external bits the repurposing the cheese holes and Waggles the if you look back to the original design of the theater from 1968 looks very different wrapping up so I just want to make sure that as we move this forward to the commission we're not losing sight of the whole opportunity and if you go back to the north beach master plan having this kind of a a facility with the ground floors activated and some um Workforce hous been going up to seven stories in its entirety not seven stories above the the cultural arts centers is exactly what was proposed not a 22 Story Tower sticking up like a giant middle finger in the middle of North Beach so that would you like to make a motion I yeah I I would like to move this to the commission with a a favorable recommendation to proceed with um the project and and investigate how to provide the most full complete as um presented cultural complex with some level of Workforce housing above it okay is is there a second on the motion I'll second it okay okay so the items been properly moved and second commissioner s you wanted to just yeah just real quick not to take too much time you know there's a lot of discussions about traffic and there's valid concerns that if we build something is it going to add more traffic and if we have Workforce housing for the cultural art center can we require that they that they work there to live there uh I don't know the answer to that I'd have to look therefore we eliminate the need for them to travel obviously or get into a car or even have a car yeah thank you thank you commissioner Suarez and and I just want to put for the record if there were Workforce housing in this building working at this building I wouldn't want to be living in this building I want to have some separation between work life and and and personal life but with that uh the items been properly moved and second uh Mr attorney let's call the role on this item sure commissioner B yes commissioner jingz I don't think it's ready yet to go to the commission so um the city told us that they needed more time so I'm a no okay commissioner Suarez yes and chairman Fernandez I'm gonna vote no um even though I believe that's a tie vote what it does is the item still moves forward but I believe that makes it an unfavorable recommendation that's right okay all right I have a question yes if it moves forward to the commission as an unfavorable recommendation what does that mean for the future of this project I mean have we just effectively killed it I mean that is that is a wildly unintended consequence that I will not be okay with the i the the committee is only advisory to the city commission and the city commission gets the guidance of the committee but does not have to accept the uh the decision of the committee and can make its own uh determination um it doesn't have to take accept the same recommendation of the commission Mr that's correct so through the chair uh if the commission hears what we heard and is still feels like this is interesting we just don't have enough information they could just kick it back to a committee or or or um open and continue to two months down the road or something like that so A no here or an unfavorable whatever it is a neutral recommendation up to the commission doesn't end this project it just um and it also could give staff more time to do some of the work uh get some information and maybe by that time you know you know maybe by that time you know people people can feel more more comfortable I think I I personally think there should be perhaps more public input uh from from from North Beach um but um you know I I I think we need to move forward with with the item and and the commission can make its own uh determination all right and and um just for the record this was a dual all to the land use committee and the finance committee so the finance committee will have a its own recommendation okay great all right thank you so much colleagues with that uh colleagues let's um let's introduce item number two okay U Mr chair uh item number two is to amend the Land Development regulations to create an application fee for administrative review of development applications submitted under the live local act this was a dual referral to both the land use and sustainability committee and the planning board thank you uh is there a motion to bring the item before the table okay it's been moved and second um this is uh commissioner Rosen Gonzalez's item commissioner Rosen Gonzalez is attending via Zoom uh you're welcome to speak on the item commissioner welcome hi everyone hello good afternoon welcome okay so let me give you my thinking this item is not fully baked and when I saw what staff wrote um so my idea was especially in um the North Beach area every like a lot of the developers that are building these large buildings that are going to become short-term rentals um given live local they might come back and want to make changes you know to their building permit and before we start to get Towers there as tall as what's the tallest building in the area Tom would that be the aqua um in the North in the overall North Beach area aoo is about 460 feet so that's the tallest building yeah imagine okay so before it turns into tall towers like that what I my idea and this is something that we actually have to probably do fairly quickly I don't even like talking about it but I would like to change some of the fees that we have and look at some of the Inc incentives um I think I when I mentioned this item it wasn't just fees it was fees and incentives um is that not right Tom or were they two separate items because I'm all confused now but anyway I wanted to look at the fees and and see what we could do to possibly um discourage anyone from changing the plans that we have because I think that if we get preempted on this and I think we have to act act quickly which is why I referred it to the planning board I don't know exactly if it was heard at the planning board or not but I'm interested in hearing um from Nick what do you think that we could do Nick without you know to create a situation where you might not want to um change your building permit um I think first of all this item focus is focused on fees for the administrative review of live local act applications and and so right now we don't have a uh a fee in our code um for that review so um the the the if the if the land use committee transmits this item with a favorable recommendation at that point it would go to the planning board as an ordinance um creating a fee um the amount of that fee has to be limited to cover uh the city's costs in connection with reviewing live local act applications so um so the highest we could go Nick what's the highest we could charge it would it would have to be it would have to be based on uh the planning Department's um actual costs in in reviewing U these applications so so it you know the recommendation in the memo is uh is a base site plan review fee of of $3,125 and then a per square foot fee um and and then we would also be able to charge charge for the cost of of uh of the bananers um but commissioner Ros Gonzalez also asked about what incentives might be available and and I I think and and and and if I may I just like to interject there because the item that we be that that we have before us what the city commission referred to the committee and what we're discussing today are regulations on creating an application fee I don't want to mix into into into incentives because that's going to be a larger policy disc discussion that we don't have on the agenda today we have a pretty packed agenda with well I'm going to get through this pretty quickly um I have a separate item on incentives because when you guys go and you look at the incentives in North Beach um they're ridiculous like uh they make no sense and they're really supposed to encourage this large scale growth of short-term rentals which I don't think a lot of people want you know somebody building but the train is left the station and the building permits have mostly been issued and so it's going to be built so i g I guess if the administrative fee is 3,000 that's fine plus mailing fees I'd like to see it higher Nick can't we make it 50,000 you know I think anytime we we adopt a fee um by ordinance some study is is involved as far as what are the city's actual costs right so I think um we we would be happy to sit down with with uh with planning and look at those numbers I I'm interested in hearing what my colleagues uh have to say I think that what they're recommending is too low I think that given the parameters of the live local act it shouldn't be it should be exp it should be uh you know pricey because they're circumventing our zoning laws uh you know and and and there's really nothing we can do about it so I think that administratively we should do as much as possible I don't know what you guys have in mind um in terms of fees uh but uh i' I'm interested in hearing what you have to say about this and if you support this thank you thank you commissioner um I want to recognize commissioner Dominguez and then I'll make some comments thank you Mr chair um and this question is actually for Nick it says here that it's uh this could conflict with a section of our ldr code um so would we be able to put in the ldr live local subject to additional fees in order to keep other Workforce housing not to have fees I think that as far as the workforce portions of the project I would recommend treating those the same as a uh non-li local act Workforce project right because ultimately those particular units are are the same are going to be subject to the same requirements in our code and and thank you uh commissioner Dominguez uh perhaps uh something that could be considered is you know I I don't know if we can just say it can be a $50,000 fee because again it is based on the review the review of Staff costs it actually has to be substantiated and something so that if it does get challenged the city can go in and demonstrate okay this is how we determined this fee and not lose in a in a court setting however uh what I do feel that we could look at is the acception of applying these fees to non-aff and non uh Workforce housing I think that those who wish to utilize um the live local act uh to develop in our city they are already getting a big incentive they are receiving a big development incentive this waiver of these fees in our ldrs in section 2.3.5 um was intended to be okay as a catalyst how do we get the industry the market to develop the workforce housing that we need in our city and what fees can we wave for them they don't need that incentive if they're getting all of this extra development incentive that uh the state legisl has given them through uh through the Land Development regulations and so perhaps what we could do is for for live local act projects we don't apply section 2.2.3 point5 which currently exempts uh Workforce and affordable housing from these fees and I don't know if that' be possible Mr attorney and I think that's your question Mr chairman is similar to to commissioner dominguez's question um I I would ask Tom I think the the the existing waiver for affordable or Workforce units is a waiver of land use board fees right so that's correct okay so in that case um since live local projects are are um are going to be reviewed entirely at the administrative level um perhaps we could draw a distinction there to say you know if you if you do go through our land use boards um then then the then the fee incentive would apply but if you do not um then then the per square foot uh rate that would apply to the market uh rate part portion of the project would apply to Workforce units as well if it's a live local project so we could we could look at that okay great uh colleagues are there any other comments from theas on this item no I I I think uh the points being made are good and I'd like to see us um try to exert whatever leverage we have left to us to have people work with us not against us is there a motion before the body I'm I want to make a motion I can't can I can I give an idea for a motion yes through the chair uh and and well I can't I'm raising my hand but I'm not I'm not in the room I just want to get your attention Alex okay Alex commission recognized okay here's what I propose I propose that if it's live local none of section whatever whatever applies they have they have to comply with parking requirements that are that that that because now there are no parking requirements so they should have to pay the administrative fee um they should have the same parking requirements that right now do not apply to regular Workforce or affordable housing acts and then also they would have to pay all land use boards and go through the regular process do you guys would you guys agree if I write this up to to send it on in and let's um you know I want to agree with you I just want to Def uh give recognize our chief Deputy City attorney on this I I sense and I feel and I think recall hearing in Tallahassee a certain level of preemption as it related to parking and so I'm not sure what can we legislatively do at this juncture as it relates to parking regulations that that's correct the version uh the the amendments to the live local act that were approved by the legislature this year would have an automatic uh parking reduction for for qualifying projects if they're within a certain distance of let's say a bus stop or a Transportation Hub so and it's I I believe it's a 20% uh reduction for qualifying projects um so I think I think you you can you're you're absolutely entitled to uh to to adopt and a fee for the administrative review process and that that you can definitely do um and and and that should cover you know staff's review time which is going to be more uh intensive depending on the size of the project so per square foot is an appropriate measure and then the city's hard cost costs of uh you know of any required notices or mailers um that you can absolutely include as well all right commissioner R is that good well it is but I mean Nick right now if you're building a portable or Workforce housing in the city of Mii Beach you don't have any parking requirements in certain areas correct is that correct Tom no if I could through the chair uh answer that commissioner uh Workforce and affordable housing has a reduced parking requirement but it did not eliminate the parking requirement so there's a reduced parking requirement for Workforce and affordable housing units so I would like them to have the parking requirement minus the 20% as mandated with the state of Florida I would like to include that too because I think that's really important there's a real lack of parking any everybody knows that especially in the North Beach area so I would if somebody would make a motion to it possibly I don't know how you feel about that but the administrative fee and also um restoring the parking requirements for local parking requirement minus the 20% 20% Mr attorney can would that be would that be in proper posture if it is moved I think the the the increased parking requirement would probably need to apply to um to all affordable or Workforce housing units in that particular district and then um and then live local as commissioner Rosen Gonzalez stated with you know if the 2024 bill is signed by the governor then the live local projects would get a 20% reduction if they're eligible um but I think if you're going to increase the parking requirement as a zoning matter um for certain types of residential units I think that would need to apply to um to all Workforce and affordable units in that District so um commissioner Rosen Gonzalez I think I I think you know given the nature of this item this and this is an item I believe was D duly referred uh to our board and to the planning board I think we need to bifurcate the items here then I think we you have good policy that you brought forward that protects the city uh and and it relates to the review fees um but I think and I think there's a motion on the table on that on that uh item and I think it was uh seconded uh by commissioner Suarez so the review fees was moved and second and seconded let's open up the floor is if there's any member of the public wishing to speak on the item that we have before us as it relates to uh to the fees review fees administrative fees for for live local any members of the public present wishing to to speak on that via Zoom any members of the public on Zoom wishing to to to speak on that seeing none uh I'm going to close the public hearing uh the review fees was moved and seconded all those in favor indicate by saying I I all right so the item uh that that proceeds uh commissioner I think you are on to something as it relates to parking and I would encourage you perhaps um to um with with the committee's uh backing to to bring forward a separate item and perhaps with the same level of urgency uh duly referred to uh planning and to this committee as to uh to address the issue of the ldr amend Amendment relating to parking throughout the zoning districts and commissioner Rosen Gonzalez Tom and I would be happy to work with you on that referral would everybody just want to co-sponsor it with me are you guys okay with that or you want me to just go It Alone whatever you want no I'm I'm happy to co-sponsor you have the vice chair you have commissioner Dominguez uh commissioner okay so there you have it could you guys prepare something for May 15th possibly so that we can get it through the pipeline yes okay thank you commissioner thank you thank thank you commissioner Fernandez your participation is always welcome and i' appreciate it with that we are closing this item uh Mr director let's introduce item number three okay Mr chair item number three is to disc discussed an initiative to Pilot a decel system for noise enforcement including the installation of noise meters in the Entertainment District thank you Mr Mr director this is uh is there a motion on the table uh to uh bring the item before us second it's been moved and second the item is properly before the body this is an item that was presented to us in the supplement of our of our agenda um uh in our supplemental material page 88 um I I brought this this item forward um first and foremost because throughout our city frankly a number of individuals uh have come come and approached me about entertainment you know they want entertainment in their business they feel that they can't survive without entertainment um and uh and my response to them is well our residents can't survive in our city without proper enforcement of noise and you can't have more entertainment and we can't add fuel to the problem unless we provide an objective mechanism through which to enforce to enforce uh to enforce this last year uh we we we had engaged in a in a process uh to study the uh the the conversion of our enforcement to a decibel system and possibly uh regulate the use use of noise meters in our enforcement process and um and I'd like to recognize the planning director to speak about uh the study that was done last year having to do with this the findings and the recommendations uh for us to consider sure um Mr chair members of the committee um a similar item was referred to the luse committee in 2022 and it was discussed by by the land use committee at a couple of meetings in 2023 um at the April 2023 meeting of the luse committee an updated proposal from the city's sound consultant who did agree to participate in this um meeting via Zoom if there are any any questions um was submitted that would um basically create a pilot program um for a decibel based noise standard program um and the the the last submitt that was discussed by the land use committee was attached to the addendum it was from March 1st of 2023 and the noise pilot program that was proposed at the time would cover the properties fronting Washington Avenue and Collins Avenue between 8th Street and 10th Street and the scope and and we've provided a summary um in the land use committee memo would include mapping existing noise that could be used as a baseline for the purpose of creating a future deciel noise ordinance um the scope also included identifying potential locations for the deployment of stationary sound level me meters performing an on-site noise survey within the geographic limits of the study area to establish typical sound levels using sound level data collected on site to develop noise heat maps of the area utilizing the commercial sound plan program the preparation of a report summarizing the findings and a business op business owner uh opt-in option was also included in case there were private properties that wanted to participate um in this um this scope um did have um Financial costs which were um included in the proposed study and if something similar was to move forward funding would have to be identified for either this fiscal year or next fiscal year thank you uh Mr direct thank you Mr director um Mr attorney the current basis for enforcement of noise uh what is it when when the city received receives a a noise complaint and code enforcement response uh to a location uh that is the subject of a of a uh of a noise complaint what is the the mechanism the basis used to determine uh whether whether is valid or not in the city's enforcements the the um the standard in the noise ordinance is whether and this is consistent with the m County noise ordinance but whether noise is unreasonably loud excessive unnecessary or or unusual um the code sets forth a number of of instances where noise is presumed to be um uh you know unnecessarily loud or excessive and um and after 11:00 at night uh noise is presumed to be a violation of the noise ordinance if it is plainly audible at a distance of 100 ft or more uh from the source and so it who who determines is something is if if if noise coming from an establishment in any given time of of of the day let's say let's say you know you work in a hospital you've just got you know done with a 14-hour night shift you're getting home at 7 o'clock in in in the morning and and you need to rest to start your next shift and so so who determines if you know the person who is causing noise uh at 10:00 at 11:00 midday whether that's un reasonable or excessive uh in any way it's it's up to the responding code compliance officer to determine whether uh whether the noise is in violation of of our of our code but is it based on because it's being heard at a distance uh before 11 o' that that presumption does not app let's say let's say it's it's midday it's lunchtime let's say and and you know you know I'm taking a nap and I can't take a nap or um or you know someone that just worked a night shift is is is trying to rest or you're trying to work at home or you're trying to study you know uh you know how is it is it based because it's being heard at a certain distance like like how is unreasonable determined I can be a very reasonable person but but someone else might be unreasonable so so what's the standard of reasonableness uh good afternoon committee members Robert rosenell from the city attorney's office I can just help out with this a little bit uh the but reasonable in legal terms is by definition objective it is not a subjective standard if you say reasonable that as a matter of law means objective would a reasonable person find it to be uh uh unreasonably loud I can tell you as a matter of practice in the uh example that you gave where somebody is in their residential unit and they complain that music is too loud I can tell you that what code does is goes to the unit uh and with all doors and windows shut they listen to hear if they can to if they can hear the the offending music or noise or whatever is coming from the neighbor or the restaurant or whatever's next door if they can hear it in that unit they issue a code violation um if they can't hear it they don't uh and so in that particular example that's how that works out um and even and even let's say because if if a knight it's is 100t of distance let's say during the day is not 100 ft distance um you know and you can still hear it in in in the unit still unreasonable that is my understanding of currently how code enforcement and have we encountered ever any situation in which a you know a violation has been tossed by the special Master because it can't be upheld as reasonable at the special Master as unreasonable I mean I I couldn't tell you a specific example but I'm Absol absolutely sure that that has happened because that would be the defense I mean the defense was my my noise wasn't unreasonable and and if you put on evidence to show that your music wasn't unreasonable the special magistrate may very well find in your favor and if we had a deciel system uh that can show you know a raing a raing in addition to so not only did a code enforcement officer show up at at the property and determined the noise to be you know unreasonable which which I think could be you know subjective um you know if they show up at the property and they have a reading can that could couldn't that potentially be used also in a special Master uh hearing decibal based system is a policy call that you all can make if you want there are uh there's challenges to both methods the the benefit of the current system of unreasonably loud is that it has been upheld by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals so the exact wording of our ordinance the way it is now we know uh is at least in the 11th circuit uh legal uh I can tell you that a small portion of our current ordinance was recently uh declared vague by a Miami D State Court which is current we currently have appealed that to the third DCA and we we think we have a very good chance of winning that but there is just so in full disclosure there's a full there's a small portion of our current ordinance that has been declared vague unconstitutionally vague by a lower state court and which portion of our of that of the code is that uh the portion that uh I don't have actually let me read it to you it is uh time or at any time with louder volume than is necessary for the convenient hearing for the person or persons who are in the room vehicle or chamber in which such machine or device is operated and who are voluntar voluntary listeners there to uh that's there's there's a bunch of standards in the uh so unreasonably loud unnecessary that one particular provision and that's and that's a concern to when there isn't an objective measure by which to to to measure this that a resident that's calling in a complaint feel that it's objectively being measured uh you know you could have an enforcement officer show up at someone's home and not hear something that a resident is hearing and then at that point the resident's complain the resident can be hearing it the officer is not and then at that point is it unreasonable at that point or not where whereas if you have a decibel meter a decible reading system well now you have an an an additional level of of enforcement I'd like to recognize the vice chair on this item um in addition to everything you said um the system as it stands now doesn't work the way we want it to the way we need it to um we rely on residents to call in noise complaints and code officers get to the location as soon as they can by which time the noise may or may not still be going on the code officer does or does not hear something there is confusion about whether or not the resident is supposed to be able to be allowed to enjoy their balcony without excessive noise a lot of people don't understand what that legal uh perspective is that legal legal guidance um the code officer then goes to what they believe is the violating the offending perpetrator of the noise and then they get a phone call from the facility um owner or uh attorney saying we have permission we have a cup that allows us to do this or no but we're allowed to have our speakers out on the sidewalk or whatever and so a code officer may or may not be able to withstand that kind of onslaught and if if a if a um violation does get written up it goes to the special magistrate because the people getting the violation will uh appeal it to the special magistrate and there is confusion the special magistrate may or may not have the cup in front of him or her may or may not understand the nuances of it it is so subjective at every inflection point of this process and we are getting more and more as a city getting more and more um requests to allow open air maybe not technically entertainment but effectively entertainment roof deex whether it's a a live DJ which means it's open air entertainment versus um you know a Spotify play list just blasted out we there is an onslaught of of um venues where live music is being played to the detriment of everybody else or or um including this room no I'm kidding um not live music but music I mean if you try to have dinner outside on Lincoln Road you and you're sitting in between three restaurants You've Got You Know the music of the world coming at you and you can't hear anything I my kid is a musician I love live music I love music of all stripes at at many different volumes but what we have now isn't working the way we in intended it to and I understand that years ago Des uh meters weren't good enough the technology didn't exist but every year they're getting better I mean Paris is doing it um effective a few years ago and I know that is um for vehicles but they have they have technology that that um is for mics that that takes reading um every one tenth of a second to triangulate the origin point MH sounds pretty good to me um New York City right now um through a partnership with um uh NYU is doing a program I think the acronym is supposed to be pronounced Sonic sounds of NYC um I don't think it's so nice but I I think it's supposed to be Sonic but basically they're they're having people register and identify sounds um from a from a a community input you know um level way of training the techn ology to recognize what sounds are sort of the cost of doing business in New York and what it sounds like versus something that's excessive so for us to say um this is what stands and this is why we're doing what we've been doing doesn't sound like that's good enough anymore because that's not it's not addressing the the issues that we have thank you thank you Madame Vice chair and I and I think what your your points resonate so well because it might be what is being upheld in court court but is it what is delivering to the quality of life of the residents and the taxpayers of the city of Miami Beach well that might not be the same thing it might be delivering in court but it's not protecting the quality of life of our residents and that's the core that I'm concerned about about that our residents be able to enjoy their homes that they be able to rest that they be able to study that they be able to to to work uh without the interference of noise uh in their in day-to-day quality of life commissioner Schwarz thank you Mr chair um I fully support this program I'm I'm a little curious why why is it taken it this long to figure this out why don't we have a decimal if if if if if I may just for uh purposes of History I I initiated this item um a while back um you know perhaps uh Mr planning director was it in 2021 or 2022 I think it was U mid 2022 that you did the first referral did a first referral on this there was a study done that's attached to this item with the assistance of a consultant we did uh a procurement uh for a noise consultant for the city the city's official noise consultant and we changed that procurement to specifically uh be able to use that noise consultant to help us create policy that addresses desable unfortunately the last land use committee um you know voted this down but we have now the opportunity to put this forward we are dealing with a tight time schedule and I'm not sure we're going to send anything today to the full City commission what I would like us to do is that if it is the will of the body request that uh the planning director actually look into some of the models that the vice chair has mentioned what Paris is doing what New York uh University is doing with Sonic and what other cities are Philadelphia I'm sorry what no and Philadelphia and and and and Philadelphia what they're doing in terms of using uh decel uh measurements for the enforcement of noise incorporated into into the report will dedicate some time in order to have the consultant that we hired uh present on this uh and I'm going to recognize commissioner SARS one last time and I see a member of the public wishing to uh speak on the item as well um as far as a legal concern are there any legal challenges that we might face with this yeah uh yes that's the downside of decimal based system they are notoriously hard to defend in court and if you don't win in court you don't protect anybody uh the system that we have has been upheld by the federal court and so to that extent we did we don't this is the first time we've ever had a serious challenge in the last 20 years uh based on that but putting that aside maybe with advances in deciel technology something could be done and that's totally a policy call on your behalf if you want to switch you can switch and we'll defend it I'm not saying it's undefendable it's just notoriously hard I would I would advise that if you're going to do that to complete the study that uh you originally had hired but they never got done with the instructions that uh commissioner bot brought up about the examples of new technology and new areas that the consultant could uh look at but as as the director of planning said there's you need some funding for that because it was never paid for thank you so what I would like us to do is for the next meeting because we're dealing with a with a limited time frame today and we still have several several items on the agenda we're going to set aside some time for the next meeting to allow for the noise consultant to present their their proposal because it is a very interesting proposal that I've had the benefit of seeing um but I think this body should be seeing and um we're going to get the the information about Paris Philadelphia and NYU with that I'm going to open the floor to members of the public wishing to speak David uh please come to the m to the microphone you have two minutes uh to speak uh first I'd like to ask just a question the question is it's sort of like the tree that fell in the forest what about when the resident doesn't hear anything in their home is that okay if it's totally quiet in a resident home isn't that what we seek I know that for me it's always been sacred that nobody should be disturbing their neighbors certainly not a business but what happens when there's a business operating that the residents don't hear whatsoever I raise that as a question for you to think about on a historical note Tom uh I don't know whether you're here I know you're here a long time and we know each other a real long time but uh we went to a decel system in the city it had to be in the 90s uh uh or early 2000s and quite frankly the city bought $26,000 sound meters noise meters we uh all went to uh up a sound on his phone I don't know what happened to my noise meter here don't allow and I'm on the wrong thing boom that's the wrong thing too here it is here's a noise meter and I have all my in mangoes all of my managers operate off of noise meter in fact I have microphones in the sidewalk cafe and our entire sound system is based on decibel meters when the city went to decibel meters and bought 20 $6,000 decel meters I came to the microphone because they were passing a an ordinance to go to decel reading and they passed it at 88 DB is what it should be and I went downstairs in front of City Hall and I did a decibel reading and it was 91 Deb in the street with no music playing thank you thank you David this this m this sound in level in Deb in this room is 91 average of 91 DB so you get an idea thank you so much David we're going to move on to Mitch novic on Zoom Mitch uh you have two minutes you're recognized good good evening everyone Mitch novic I live behind mangoes I want to say noise attracts noise and and and an objective mechanism mechanism should require entertainment noise to be contained with within the confines of the property from which noise is emanating thank you thank you Mitch uh Wayne Uh you have two minutes welcome you're recognized um I think Laur is the one who stated it that we're opening up more um outdoor entertainment and it and a lot of it is appearing in residential neighborhoods I'm less concerned with the commercial districts because the commercial districts and there's very little housing but in in residential neighborhoods um the noise needs to be um mitigated um and uh we should only uh permit um outdoor entertainment btrs with the S the similar goal as um the Goodtime hotel which is I can't hear it at the residential places um at the street level um so you know BTR that's where you need to limit the uh the the noises on on approval of btrs in residential neighborhoods that's that's the most Paramount decision you can make um so that their noise doesn't penetrate residential homes um commercialization is great you know mixed use is great as long as it doesn't disturb life thank you thank you with that we're closing the public hearing so we're going to continue this item to next month Mr planning director let's ask the consultant to be ready to do a presentation and let's get the information on the three uh uh locations mentioned by the Vice chair with that let's introduce item number four okay item number four is to discuss creating economic and Zoning incentives to encourage the conversion of existing Office Buildings to residential which ideally explore new incentives e economic or other being used in other states rather than relying on existing options which we might not want to encourage such as floor area ratio and parking incentives reductions to the mobility fee in order to increase the supply of available housing in Miami Beach is there a motion to bring the item before the committee moved and seconded the items before the committee this item is being sponsored by commissioner bod and commissioner magazine uh commissioner bod you're uh welcome to introduce your item followed by commissioner magazine um I'll I'll make it short and sweet but you know when we talk about in incentivizing new development it's with um far or height or reduction of parking or waving this or waving that and we don't we're not getting what we want as a city and I say you guys are all sick of me saying this but you have to plan for the city you want not the city you are so how do we look differently at what we can offer the city how do we look different uh at developers how do we encourage adaptive reuse of development Redevelopment of existing buildings rather than tearing things down and building something in its place um and I I uh will turn it over to my colleague commissioner magazine to add his two cents and then I I you know we really have to go far a field and think Super creatively about what we can do to get the results we want especially now I mean this is more so the case now than ever before um given what's going on Comm in Northern parts of our state Mr magazine welcome you're recognized thank you and I'll keep it quick out of respect for you letting me chime in here not on the committee uh Echo what commissioner bot said and if people are looking at this and saying well why would we want new office space in the city when we're sitting here trying to incen existing office space we can walk in chum at the same time there's a clear bifurcation there's a clear demand for uh Class A or class A+ office space in our city we've actually seen some of the highest lease rates in the entire country uh come in right here in Miami Beach for new yet to be built uh or yet to be completed Class A office space uh but when you get down into class B and Class C office space uh there is a waning demand and those are really the properties that we could Target for um uh looking to create some type of incentives you know across the board the tried and true methods but also with more of a creative thinking hat on um because like I echoed earlier I think the single biggest um key to our city is providing the ability for more residents uh over commercial usages um I'm going to recognize uh commissioner Dominguez to speak on the item thank you um I'm supportive of this item I have done some digging on this in the past and I was always told by the city Administration and even um Builders themselves that it's very difficult to convert offices uh to residential but there's no harm in exploring it and I'd like to take the city Administration 's recommendation uh to so I move to continue the item to the July 20 24th meeting okay let me recognize uh commission uh uh the planning director to present on this item sure uh Mr chair members of the committee um since the um the sponsors had wanted um us to look at incentives that go outside of our normal wheelhouse the the the the standard zoning incentives we had suggested that um we continue this to July so that we can reach out to our Grants Department and our finance department to see what might be out there in terms of tax incentives and in ter terms of grants that could provide those additional kind of out of the box incentives that might move that needle other than your standard zoning types of of incentives for residential conversions you recognizes commissioner um yeah I'm happy to give you the time all the time that you need to get to some really good creative ideas and I know it is hard um however I also know that this is happening across the country and people are doing successfully and coming up with really creative and interesting ideas I mean people are able to take ugly defunct shopping centers and make them into really appealing cool um you know condos I guess or uh not that I'm encouraging building shopping centers to convert them but um but there's a way to do it and we just need to figure out what that is and you know especially as we're uh choosing or claiming to be leaders in econom um environmental resilience as well the more buildings we demolish the worse it is for our environment the more we adaptively reuse the better it is so um go at it let's see what you got kid okay so there's a motion on the table to continue this item to the July 2024 meeting is second and by acclamation show that item adopted Mr director let's introduce item number five okay item number five is to discuss potentially requiring commercial Charter vessel operators to provide sanitation pumpout logs evidencing compliance with applicable sanitation laws all right this item uh is there a motion to bring this item before the table I'll move it it's been moved and second this item is being sponsored uh by commissioner bot and commissioner Rosen Gonzalez commissioner Bond you recognized to present your item uh this just seems like hanging fruit one of those things that we don't have um already incorporated into our laws just because it didn't seem to be a thing that we would need to do but as um commercial Charter vessels are more and more part of the fabric of our business environment this seems like a reasonable thing to um to ask for thank you uh thank you commissioner uh who is uh I believe the police department is present our deputy chief paasa is present to present on this item yes sir acting Chief today that's that's correct Lord help welome Chief uh if and let's try to keep it concise but please welcome yes good evening Mr chair members of the commission director Mooney deputy chief Paul aosta on behalf of the police department um we did an analysis of Florida Statutes that that govern our ability to conduct enforcement out on the waters on certain um items specifically to this kind of uh topic and we discovered that um Florida State Statute 32 327 um 60 subsection 4 the Delta uh governs a municipality in that they may enact and enforce a sewage pump out requirements for liveboard vessels floating structures and Commercial vessels with the exclusion of uh commercial fishing vessels within any area of the jurisdiction additionally any specific uh additionally and specifically to house boats on the Florida statute 3 2753 subsection 8 the owner and operator of a libard vessel or hospital that is equipped with Marine sanitation device must maintain a record and date of each pump out for the Marine sanitation device and the location of that pump out station for a period of one year each record must be maintained for a period of one year after the date of pump out the subsection does not apply to specific Marine compost toilets that are manage uh that manage human waste um and that are in compliance with Marine compost uh toilet technologies that comply with the United States Coast Guard requirements um further Florida statute 32764 um subsection 4 Alpha um local governments May adopt additional requirements for owners or operators of vessels or floating structures that are subject to the requirements of Florida statute 32753 to provide proof of proper sewage the disposal if the vessel of floating structure is anchored in a moing field or in a no discharge zone for longer than 10 days ordinances adopted under that particular section must be reviewed and approved by FWC we as the administration um are prepared to further explore the possibility of requiring that an eligible vessel applying for a BTR as an example um maintain a sanitation or pump out log that can be readily shown to both you Coast Guard authorities um our C- compliance officers upon request uh during spot checks uh for both commercial and private vehicle private vessels within the city of Miami Beach as it stands now uh our Marine Patrol cannot do these kinds of inspections but we are open for that discussion if there's a legal uh path forward that we can be included in this type of enforcement um and create such enforcement that uh provide some teeth um so that we can hold folks accountable whenever they commit these types of violations um my colleague to the left which is Major Robinson may have additional information as it pertains to um this type of uh process or we can call up legal they want to got you thank you thank you so much uh Chief uh commissioner bot I just have a couple of questions um um if if Charter vessels or any vessels operate these um uh Marine comp poose toilets or they claim to how do we check to make sure that what they claim they have they're they actually have like if they say oh I don't have logs because I have a marine compost toilet they they have to show that they do right like you'd have to get on the vessel to check that well that's my understanding you have to actually check and and inspect the vessel major Robinson you're recognized uh yes good afternoon uh Ian Robinson major in charge of the Operations Division um I haven't really looked into the the composting part of this um I know we're talking about Charter vessels uh and compelling them to come up with some sort of log um armed Marine Patrol officers can stop somebody for a violation of say a wake zone um and do any inspections so life preservers horns if it's a requirement that they have this pump out log uh can look at those but that's that pump out log in federal law we'd have to find out information from the city attorney's office because we're in a dangerous area there and if in fact the city can um enact ordinances that says that we can create it uh then obviously we would code violation and or a boting citation be attached that if we're compelling people to show that and a second um tangential well second question um if a charter goes out in the morning and then comes back and picks up a new crew of customers or in the afternoon and in the evening are they required to pump out between Charters or can they do it at the end of the day like they could do three charters in in a 12-h hour period not pump out until the end of the day I don't know um that's probably governed by federal law somewhere as to the times I don't the City attorney might be able to look in federal law and see whether that's required I don't know where they come back from each one they're required a pump it or on the hour or whatever the case might be I don't know times I think that that's something we should look into we can look into that yeah thank you uh commissioner SAR you recognize Mo most thank you chair uh most of these charter boats um you know they're making thousands of dollarss an hour the usually I would say all of them do not have Marine compost toilets they flush the engines they have holding tanks um and if we're going to go down the B I'm fully supportive of this item by the way if we go down the BTR uh route where we require through your BTR that you provide pump out logs we can say that you need to Pro you need to have on board a a holding tank not a compost tank and I think I think that's totally acceptable okay thank that thank you uh commissioner I'm going to open up um for for the rest of the committee members you have any comments uh commissioner magazine any comments okay uh is there a motion before the table do we want and what is the motion on on the item what is your motion commissioner Suarez I'll move exactly how it is requiring commercial Charter vessel operators to provide sanitation pump out logs okay that's part of of a process yeah BTR but we need to give these guys more time to come back with what that would look like okay so then the motion would be uh asking staff to prepare an actual item to bring back to committee and how much time does staff need to prepare an item with the item sponsors to bring back for the committee's consideration commissioner I I think by by the next date will be fine for us I think we can we can get together with legal and do some research on it I think that'll be enough time for this so by the June meeting uh we'll have an item what's the date on the June meeting I'm sorry I'm not I'm not sure what what date is our June 10th June 10th so June 10th we'll have an item before us um and we'll we'll take public comments since we're not voting on the item today um we're not sending anything to the city commission today I'll open up public comment at the June meeting um Mr chair really quick we we did not include our partners in code for any particular comment because if it involved btrs I know that they should have a say so in in that development sure and they can speak uh at the okay at at the next meeting uh and they can work with uh with our colleagues in drafting that item good enough sir all right so this will come back at the June 10th meeting of the Landes committee yes sir thank you thank you uh with that Mr director let's introduce item number six okay item number six is um the discussion to expedite the opening of the Baywalk and move the development of the Baywalk up on the go bond prioritization list and present the Baywalk plan to the lusc committee thank you uh is there a motion to bring the item to the committee it's been second by the chair uh commissioner Dominguez you've been leading on this item and you've been keeping track of the Baywalk and making sure that uh we uh get movement on this uh thank you for being so diligent on this and for your incredible leadership I want to recognize you to introduce your item uh thank you so uh this item was actually a a commissioner Mark samin item and he used to walk the portions of the Baywalk that were open every single day so I am working to do what I can with the city Administration to ensure that this project is completed and the last time we spoke about it um behind the mandre uh there were developer permits that were getting done and the pedestrian bridge is dragging do you have any updates I do uh Mr chair Madame vice mayor uh Commissioners good evening my name is David Gomez I'm the interim director for CIP and I'm pleased to be here tonight to bring you this update um the portion behind the mandream which we refer to is 10th to 12 Street um is undergoing uh the commencement process they do have their permits the developer is here to address your comments if you recall at the last meeting they did set a start of construction of May 1st um that did change to May 7th and I think there's another update tonight that they'll give you a little more information on uh and before I step away and let them speak they're they're also going to give you an update on the pedestrian bridge and their permitting process and where they are with that schedule Mr chair are you okay hearing from the developer um so yes that's how much will you allocate um I'm just going to for a brief presentation brief Pres presentation on on on where we're at with the uh with with the Baywalk portion and with the bridge okay yes so who is going to be speaking on behalf of the development team Commissioners how are you um regarding regarding the Baywalk name name first and last name and I'm with teror group thank you welcome well thank you um so in regards to the Baywalk project um right now we're we're we have all of our city permits in place we had a Derm issue which we reported last time we were here at land use um we met all of the items that Derm requested at that point and then uh a week ago they requested uh a uh a submerged land lease which we are in the process of getting um it's more of an extension with the one that was the one that was in place expired um so Cresent Heights is is working to get that uh reestablished so we're expecting that to come through in the next in the next couple weeks and we should be able to get things started okay and when do you anticipate having uh mobilization uh for the project so we we we on on what we reported last time was May 1 May 13th we'd be we'd be mobilizing that would be a test pile and then four weeks after that we'd be doing production piles and then after that would take uh five months to complete the work okay and um when do you expect so five months you said to to deliver the work correct okay and where are we uh with the pedestrian bridge so with the pedestrian bridge and I'll bring Alice up because she's been working directly with with with fdot um Alice Bravo which we we introduced her last time as well uh on the pedestrian bridge we are uh we we submitted 100% documents uh to fdot we've got their comments we responded and uploaded the responses to in the FD system drawings are going to be submitted uh by the 10th I believe is the DAT May 10th May 13th um and we should be able to get a response or permit out of them by the end of the month um and then we we have a couple uh drainage Wells that we have to put in place and we have to go we we're applying for those we expect those to be out early June so we'll be able to mobilize by the by by mid to end of June and we should be able to start uh start work at that point with the Waterman extensions Alice welcome thank you Alice Bravo uh glad to be here and to provide you with this update and and we've been working very closely with fdot and the various groups within uh the materials office the Construction office the permitting office Etc um this this final submittal should go fairly quickly since um at the 100% level we we we had a smaller number of comments so it's just basically a final submittal for everybody to check off that the issues have been addressed and one yes yes uh once you start in June end of June how long will the pedestrian bridge take pedestrian bridge is going to go to the end of of of 2025 so it's it's an 18-month schedule um unfortunately the the water made extensions that that were added in the drainage Wells added approximately 5 to six months of Time ahead of of getting into structure um and then the structure will take us all the way to the end of of December 25 okay uh I've requested from from the developer a um a schedule uh a schedule of benchmarks uh for the progress of these of of these of these projects uh and you've and you've provided me uh with a schedule that uh shows utility work uh taking uh Place uh for example the South the water main on the south part starting in in July correct uh the north part it starts in September uh working with AT&T and relocation starting uh in September uh in October you're going to be working on injection uh else associated with this you're doing foundation work uh starting in November uh super structural work uh starting uh in April of 2025 glazing installations starting in September 2025 and you go into other things like more of the finished prod uh product as a stco paint railings sidewalk Landscaping starting in August 2025 with final inspections for August of 2025 starting in August and going to theend of year final inspections September through the end of uh 2025 um that's that's for the uh pedestrian bridge um I just you know I I just wanted to be clear on on the record uh the developer uh you know it's a partner with the city on other projects uh and it's going to be working I think in more projects in the city of of of Miami Beach um I I will will be recommending uh that uh that our uh City commission take into account the the developers diligence the developers adherence to the benchmarks uh in completing uh when in in meeting these benchmarks before we you know Grant any any any Grant awards that that that might be discussed at the moment or before we you know move forward on any potential other developments with a developer I need to see advancement and adherence to this schedule in the interest of the uh stakeholders of of these neighborhoods and the same uh with the portion of the Baywalk be behind the mandre you've given me uh a a schedule uh for uh for for completion and I don't know if if you could just put that into the record as well uh the benchmarks that you've said for and if you look the the last page actually summarizes it in kind of a graphic month to month with the same those same bench marks okay so for the Baywalk uh durm approval in May uh we're we're where's the city's permitting where where are we with the city permitting test on all right uh the test piling is starting uh in May correct May 13th is when we're trying to get the test Pile in we'll be able to two to three weeks after that we should be get be receiving uh production piles and we can start putting those in place and that starts in June correct and then you move forward with beans and and cap in July the walkway and deck in August and with inspections and approvals from from October to December and so and so again as with the with the benchmarks established uh for the pedian bridge I'm going to I would like for us to entertain a motion uh that we recommend to the city commission that we hold uh these benchmarks and the developers adherence with this diligence in the consideration of any any grants or in the consideration of any development applications that come uh to to the city to make sure that we're advancing with these promises to the uh taxpayers of the city of Miami Beach Madam I don't have a cop that oh I requested this is something I had requested will you share yes of course of course it was not on the agenda it was part of my brief talking I have copies it was part of my briefing that I request yes yes but um G give me a question yes without all my scribbles um Mr Mr attorney uh is that I don't know if what I stated uh is proper and if you need to restate in any other way no no that was that was um that was fine the only clarification I would make is in in the is for the city commission to take that in account in as to Future public or public private developments yes if someone would if I don't know there's a a will in the body to uh to to make that motion because I can't make the motion um um I'm not sure I'm clear like I'd like to hear this again June 10th to make sure that May 7th and May 13th and some of the other items happened and we can continue this this item to May to um to our uh future meetings but I would like to send this recommendation and Nick if you could restate what my motion is for the per for for for the committee's purpose I will I will do my best and feel free to step in I I understood the motion was to transmit a recommendation to the city Commission that the city take into account uh the the developers diligence and adherence to these schedules um when when uh a awarding or negotiating uh or reviewing any future public or public private um development by this by this applicant is that right right development applications or grants okay yes so I can't make the motion but if I'll make the motion okay is is moved uh by commissioner Suarez is second by the Vice chair uh I don't know there's any other discussion comments uh on this uh commissioner magazine not on your motion Mr chair uh and I I want to be concise here so this is more for City staff and perhaps a followup in email out of respect for time you know the one glaring hole I think that we're going to have is going to be behind 800 West Avenue uh because within two years we're going to have the pedestrian bridge completed then 500 uh call West Avenue that's Bentley Bay then we're going to have uh the Floridian already completed and then to the north of that we're going to have uh Southgate there's is already built uh behind 1, 11100 and 1200 so we're going to have contiguous except for under 800 I as I understand it that actually falls on the city there's funding in place but for the city to acquire some of those permits and actually do the construction I just don't want us to have an egg on our face where all of our private sector Partners have essentially done their part and then the part where the city has to do we're just set uh sitting there holding the back so David maybe if you can follow up uh not now I I want to respect the chair's time but maybe if you could follow up via email where we stand on that and how we're moving forward absolutely thank you so much and and and if you could confirm we we have been in conversations uh with with 800 uh wests 800 West is the one that's changing the management company we're trying to schedule that meeting okay um so they're they've asked us to wait until they finish that Pro process we have met with 1228 and 1250 and that was just in the last couple of weeks so that that process is moving thank you thank you uh any other comments uh from from the days members of the public wishing to speak on this item any members of the public wishing to speak on this item seeing none um with that we can show the motion adopted by by acclamation and this item continues because it is on our monthly agenda and again thank you commissioner domingus for your leadership on advancing uh the Baywalk um with that Mr director let's introduce item number seven okay item number seven is to review zoning districts where entertainment which includes nightclubs is a permitted or conditional use and consider amending the Land Development regulations to list nightclubs entertainment as a conditional or prohibited use in specified zoning districts um before we we proceed with this item just to make sure that we're in proper form uh is there a motion to end our meeting let's say by 30 minutes I'll make the motion it's been seconded by the chair uh is there is is there any opposition to that well let's I was going to out I feel sick 30 minutes 30 minutes yes 30 minutes so that we can get through uh through this um so with with that commissioner Suarez this is your item uh you're welcome to introduce it thank you thank you Mr chair I think you know given what has happened over the many years uh in Miami Beach where we've had issues with particular nightclubs I think Miami Beach has reached a point of maturity where we um we we we as a community don't have to tolerate um a relic of the past of these nightclubs moving forward U where they have they bring in um bigname DJs and the events pop up during spring break Memorial Day and that's how they survive and so the intent of this item is to kind of graduate from that business model and move and incentivize toward a more Mila or queen Supper Club model for the city and I wanted to check the temperature of my colleagues on this and see how you guys feel um but certainly I think Miami Beach has matured enough where we're beyond that now and um the the type of night life and entertainment that we'd like to have in the city gears more towards supper clubs so and I'd like to have Nick sort of explain more in DET detail of what the the the the details of this are and commissioner given that these are um technical options that the that the planning department has developed in consultation with us I would I would ask Tom if you could go through um some of the some of the options um sure you want me to go through that now okay I'll through the chair I'll go ahead through the chair and I will um summarize what we um put in the memo in the memo as you'll note we provided a summ of all the areas of the city where entertainment including dance halls and nightclubs is currently permitted and this would include the cd2 district except for Sunset Harbor CD3 Districts The mxc District rm2 and rm3 districts accessory use only um very sit specific in rm1 there's only two sites as a matter of fact as well as a tc1 tc2 and TCC areas that are specific to North Beach additionally there's two areas of the city that have a 2 a.m. close time for alcohol sales which is Alton Road from fth Street date Boulevard as well as 41st Street some of the things that we looked at in terms of trying to better incentivize the um Supper Club model or the the performance that is associated with the restaurant model um included presenting some options under the analysis that could potentially achieve that objective this was a dual referral to the planning boards so any recommendations of the land use committee we can take directly to the planning board as an ordinance Amendment but some of the options that we came up with include the following within the rm2 and rm3 districts prohibiting outdoor entertainment outright right now uh outdoor entertainment requires conditional use approval regardless of of where you're located within the City indoor entertainment Within These districts would only be permitted as an accessory use to a hotel it would no longer be permitted as an accessory use to an apartment building or an apartment hotel and would only be permitted as part of a restaurant in accordance with the revised criteria that we suggested for a supper club which is in item a indoor entertainment regardless of Occupational content would require conditional use approval and the occupational content for a venue with entertainment would not be able to exceed 300 persons so again within the rm2 and rm3 districts the the these would be much smaller types of entities within commercial districts and mxe districts outdoor entertainment would be prohibited within a venue that is less than 1500 feet from a residential zoning District so if your Venue is more than 1500 feet from a residential zoning District you could continue to request cup approval but if you're less than 1500 feet you would no longer be able to ask for that and you wouldn't be able to have outdoor entertainment indoor entertainment um would also be limited to part of a restaurant in accordance with the revised criteria for a supper club and indoor entertainment um would also require conditional use approval regardless of the O load however there would no be no outload cap like what is proposed for the rm2 and and rm3 districts um if there's consensus on these or any other uh potential recommendations we could include those in a draft ordinance and bring it to the planning board commissioner Bond so um is there any place where you could have entertainment as a right without getting a cup under what we've come up with no okay but if you fit their criteria and you applied for a cup and you were granted it then you'd have a path forward so it's not a it's not a Prohibition it's just giving some more structure to to people trying to do this correct okay but there will be certain areas where outdoor entertainment would be prohibited that's correct where where right now I think there's certain for example there's certain residential RM zoning districts where currently outdoor entertainment is permitted and under the proposed language it would be prohibited uh is there any other prohibition that this would be creating on on allowed uses at the moment yes it it would be the proposal that we've come up with right now in rm2 and rm3 districts you could potentially request a conditional use approval for outdoor entertainment um the other thing that this does is it would limit indoor entertainment uses uh to those associated with a restaurant so it you would no longer be able to do a standalone bar or nightclub or dance hall with entertainment it would have to be more along the Supper Club model model and this is only so this this in essence in if if if I if I read this right and if I interpret this right existing operators then would be continue to operate in a legal non-conforming manner uh and then new operators you know would would would you know they would have to apply for a cup uh in certain areas they wouldn't be able to uh do it if they fall within a certain distance of residential as well that's correct this is prospective prospective um so it's not meant to uh affect existing legally established businesses but you are correct anybody who is now legally established could potentially become legal nonconforming legal non-conforming now let me ask you this because we've gotten we've we've it's something that I want to study further um because we've I've sponsored legisl myself on this to get certain uses um and make them pretty much prohibited prospectively which in turn makes the remaining uses let's say like certain convenience stores or certain packaged liquor stores let's say package liquor stores where we've prohibit them in certain areas um but then those that are existing become legal non-conforming and the unintended consequence of that I feel has been almost like well now that they're legal non-conforming it they never want to go away they permanently want to stay there because it's almost like um like a taxi Medallion like the taxi Medallion you know you have it it's something that's coveted it's something that you'll never be able to get again so you don't you know you don't want to give it up um you don't want to transfer from one location to another because you can't um and you know where uh where where a nice restaurant could go in or where a beauty PA could go in or where some other use could go in now you're stuck with the use that you don't want because someone just doesn't want to give it up and that's my only you know unintended consequence that I would say that I would just caution us on and figure out how do we address that if the intent is to transform um I like the idea of incentivizing incentivizing uh you know supper clubs and and higher-end uh entertainment uses um I also think we we we need to realize not everyone can afford to go to AA not everyone can afford to go to a queen that is the reality of the diversity of our community you know not not everyone is privileged not everyone has a black American Express but they still want to go out they still want to have a good time and might not be able to afford to you know go to a higher uh priced place like that so you know I I I think it's this is good conversation that we're having it certainly is positive policy for the safety of our community and the quality of life of our residents I just want us to be aware of potential unintended consequences uh as we as we discuss this commissioner uh Dominguez you recognized thank you so much um I too want to study this fur and U make sure that we're not having any unintended consequences uh Miami Beach became iconic because of our beautiful beaches and The Nightlife that we had and I have enjoyed going to Mila and to Queen but there's also something to be said about going to whether it's don't sit on the furniture or Mr Jones or some of the other establishments that we have to have an entire city with nothing but supper clubs that's not everybody's taste in entertainment and um so I I definitely want to study it further because uh I think we have some good operators out there and I don't want to have unintended consequences I have a question um you know and I'm going to do what the attorneys have always told us not to do especially as it relates to alcohol legislation um because I think we've only this have consider probably like 30 of them over the past couple of years um but let's say like an establishment like Nathan's If This Were to pass would would an establishment like Nathan's be able to open and I'm asking I'm doing something I shouldn't do I'm asking a question I don't know the answer to so like I'm I probably couldn't answer that uh because I don't know enough about Nathan the detail of Nathan's operation if they're a restaurant um and um they meet the criteria for um for kitchens and food sales or or whatever criteria is developed to ensure that these are truly restaurants uh and they meet that then they would if they have an entertainment component they would then require conditional use approval let me let me ask you this a situation like the Gathering um the Gathering is you know at the at at the Western end of of Lincoln Road um I don't think that they have a restaurant component uh to it what if this were to pass would they be able to to open but this but they would be able to because they're a hotel yeah think so yeah under this proposal the Gathering is zoned rm2 and while hotels are not permitted within the West Avenue rm2 they are permitted in other rm2 districts the Gathering though they have a very unique status and so if they wanted to uh do modifications to their interior um that are consistent with allowable accessory us to a hotel they would be permitted under this to add a restaurant um but I would want to double check those West Avenue regulations to make sure that there was no entertainment prohibition okay assuming there's no entertainment prohibition they might be able to add it okay all right commissioner Suarez is your item yeah uh look um um the there is there are no unintended consequences the the intention is to to move forward and and mature as a city beyond beyond nightlife I think we've hit an escape velocity on on what drives our city I don't think that we need nightclubs and night entertainment that has severely impacted our quality of life to to be to be known for Miami Beach that's that's not our branding anymore our brand as I Envision it is residential resident focused it's the beaches it's the water it's not it's not the night life and um and I think you know I think we're having a great we're having a great discussion on that and you know that's that's that's my that's my vision of the city uh obviously you know I I respect everyone's opinions on here um but I I I just over the years over the decades I've seen these nightclubs you know pop up they they they really decimate the quality of life in the neighborhood and then they leave and then they open up somewhere else and I think this is going to set up a better criteria for the the entertainment that we want and you know we sure we can have a lot more discussion I'm H perhaps at the planning board perhaps even at at our commission um you know through through multiple readings I I think I think we all need to chime in on that I just wanted to see where you guys felt with with this idea and if I may I I think I'm I'm hearing you I think one of the things that we have to keep in mind is that supper clubs like for example uh Mila to what time does does Mila operate Mila had to get planning board approval I think their hours are either till 3 or 4 I don't or yeah I don't think they go to five I think the planning board puts some some limit so so so if the intent is to you know follow something like the Mila model Mila Mila you know goes up to four um Queen I think Queen is operates till to what time I it's five I think Queen has a five I don't know operationally how late they typically they got a cup yeah they got a cup as but I just I just I just want us to to realize you know I want us to be careful I want us to be careful because I get I get the intent of of what you're trying to to do and I and I think so many of us here are probably aligned with with improving the safety the quality of life maturing as as as a city I don't want that to be confused as you know we only want to have establishments that you know night nighttime establishments deater to a wealthy crowd you know because not everyone in Miami Beach is wealthy um and and and unfortunately you know I don't I don't want our policies to create that what I would encourage you is I think get some of this feedback start drafting an ordinance with with the city attorney that then we can review here before we send anything to back to the to the city Commission so that we can more you know formally you know review an actual piece of legislation You' you presented a general idea you've received some feedback from your from from from your colleagues and I think we can continue this item to the next month where we can review an actual ordinance um for for consideration before we send it to the full commission so Tom what what did through the chair what what was prepared it was it was an a set of options and the chair is proposing an actual option to pick from which is an ordinance that that's correct what we did was we put together some different options based upon the referral memo that are included in the land use memo and I think and Mr chair correct me if I'm wrong what you're suggesting is that those options be developed into an actual ordinance that I don't I don't feel comfortable today uh without seeing an ordinance to send something to the city commission I think we we've all given feedback um about this that need that that should be incorporated into into an ordinance let's let's bring that back over to to the committee so that we can vet it and then have a proper public hearing here from from from the community uh on this item which I think it's a very impactful item and we just can't uh pass without seeing uh an actual ordinance drafted all right so let continue this item how much time uh does the administration and the city attorney's office feel that they need for you know the basics of of the ordinance are ready so I can draft something pretty quickly show it to Nick and then we can meet with the sponsor and then iron out any details so I think we could bring an ordinance back to you on June 10th okay and and and the one thing that I think we should be mindful of is that we do have a mixed Entertainment District um the mixed Entertainment District is a part of our economy we do want to diversify there uh but but but but for me I think I think it's it's important we want to protect the quality of life of our residential neighborhoods and perhaps some of our other commercial corridors that means we also need to you know have a certain area for fun for for entertainment uh for tourism that helps sustain our our our economy we want we may want a better Define and tailor that but I do think that that Entertainment District is an important C character part of the character of of our city but we just need to fix it we need to improve it uh so that so that we can all coinist uh commissioner Dominguez uh and just one last comment because you did nail it the tourism aspect of it while the quality of life for the residents and residential neighborhoods absolutely need to be protected we also have areas that have hotels we have 22,000 hotel rooms that are part of our economy and it's also important thank you with that let's continue this side to next month and let's include in that uh maps please uh and uh and you know if we're talking about distances let's you know show you know a map with radiuses as well not just zoning districts but radiuses as well thank you um Mr director let's introduce item number eight okay item number eight which is a companion to item number seven is um to adopt minimum requirements for restaurants seeking to provide entertainment in order to incentivize supper clubs and restaurants offering indoor performances within districts that permit entertainment this is also a dual referral to the planning board I'll defer my item to the same June meeting okay you want to prepare yeah it's a companion item yeah yeah I mean I as it relates to incentives I think that that you know I personally feel much more comfortable with with incentives uh but uh but if you want to draft an item uh I don't know if my colleagues want to offer any input uh so that our our colleague can take our input into consideration as he's drafting uh this item because I I I want you to be you know successful when you come back could I Mr chair just because we don't get a chance to talk outside the sunshine I agree with the carrot over stick and uh if there's places where they are problematic uh we had a nightclub on Washington Avenue that had shootings called Cameo right and they they're shut down look at that building if not a nightclub what it is going to be so perhaps we look at some of these Story Nightclub you know commissioner Dominguez was fantastic you know kind of getting them out but now now if it's like if it's not a nightclub then what is it going to be so we could look at some you know land use incentives to say if we don't want 500 a.m. nightlife entertainment there what do we want it to be and provide a carrot thank you commissioner uh any other feedback uh for our colleague on this item comment yes um on the story and this will be good news uh for Joe uh commissioner magazine they're thinking about doing a residential project there uh more to come I haven't seen anything concrete though I do stay out later than some my colleagues so sure no I look I commissioner Suarez I really um I like where you're going and trying to reimagine what we are going forward and I am supportive of that train of thought I just I I don't want us to be um become so homogeneous in what we are allowing to happen because we're not you know what do somebody that came up with a great concept that doesn't quite fit into our existing framework um and and we do need to have things for people at all different stages of life and income levels and interests so um I definitely support the idea of um cleaning it up and making it putting tighter guard rails on it um but I I don't know if um and I agree with commissioner magazine that incentives are always better than than you know carrots are always better than sticks so I don't have concrete ideas of how to make things different or better I just want to keep that balance in mind of um not legislating us into Naples and uh Tom before we defer this because I I I think just just for the benefit of of the public what are some of the initial recommendations that that the Administration has presented uh for for potential incentives so one of the things that we wanted to try to do was clean up the definition of what currently constitutes a restaurant because what we found currently is that um there are certain benefits to having a restaurant component is part of your entertainment establishment in terms of things like distance separation and so right now under the definition of restaurant basically these nightclubs can have a minimal kitchen and serve bar bites and then meet the definition of restaurant so one of the things that we're suggesting is that the definition of restaurant and the requirements for restaurants and the full kitchen facilities be substantially upgraded so that these really truly are restaurants serving meals and that the restaurant is the primary component of the operation as opposed to kind of an afterthought or something tangential and then um if they meet this established criteria um these establishments would be able to go to the planning board and obtain uh entertainment for larger o loads for these types of of supper clubs great okay um so we're going to defer this item to the next uh meeting um Mr attorney um aligned with with the intent of kind of cleaning up our our our image I do think one of the things we do need to address is our side streets I think you know that really is a lot of the ailments that we encounter uh in our city especially as it relates to the Entertainment District uh if you'd work for me on a referral to this committee uh to discuss the the minimum size for restaurants facing side streets uh in the Entertainment District we have a lot of uh you know for a lack of better word fast food establishments that attract you know it's no secret we've seen it you know during spring breaks and other periods you know it attracts criminal activity um outside of some of these uh establishments on the side streets of certain areas of of our city especially in the mxc I think we need to look at what is the minimum size for some of these uh restaurants on side streets in the in in the mxc and possible requirements that they um if you're going to have a side entrance that it also also have a front entrance to the main corridor or um or what what what other uh criterias we can put in place to address the issue of these small uh fast food establishments on side streets so if you could if the two of you could work on that referral for me and if anyone wants to join you're welcome to um with that we have one last item on the agenda which is item number 15 Mr director we could introduce item number 15 sure uh item number 15 is to discuss a proposal to convert The Clevelander to a residential project with no outdoor entertainment okay is there a motion to bring this item before the body I'll move it it's been moved is there a second I'll second it okay the item is properly before us uh who this is the this item is being sponsored by the city attorney's office uh Nick I'm going to recognize you to introduce yes well no actually we can't see all right um and Mr Mr chairman this members of the committee this item was originally placed um on the on the January City commission agenda at the request of the property owner um the the update I can give you since uh the land use committee meeting of March 19th um at which the committee directed us and the planning department to meet with the property owner um is that we did meet with the property owner on March 27th and and discussed uh the the the developers proposal in detail um staff at that meeting recommended that the height of any new project on this site not exceed 75 ft due to um the the established de the developed context of Ocean Drive and the and the surrounding um uh the surrounding District particularly taking into account the the uh the importance of the historic scale of of Ocean Drive and and the ardco Collins Avenue historic district um the the developer responded that a height of 150 ft would be the minimum that would make uh their Project work um and so given the significant disparity between staff's recommendation and where the developer is uh we would need additional policy direction from this committee now since the March 2017 meeting the developer has submitted uh as recently as this week a revised presentation that I think they uh they'd like to make to the committee today and uh and that the the the the uh the revised project would be one Tower at a height of 139 ft on the uh on the Clevelander property okay thank you before I open this up to uh to to the interested party uh is there any comments from the body or do we want to uh move forward to the presentation I think we just move forward oh you have to leave soon okay um actually we need to make a motion to extend the meeting uh so how much time uh would we like to extend the meeting by let's say 15 minutes yeah it's fine 15 minutes you can say all right so uh is there a motion to extend mooved second by acclamation 15 minutes okay Mr tachas you're recognized for a brief Pres presentation I also after your presentation I'm going to open it up to members of the public how much time Mr chairman uh let's say uh 5 minutes okay Mr chairman and uh members of the committee I'm Alex tatas for the record of the law firm of suon Bowen Mr chairman I'm going to bring up and introduce uh Kobe karp who will give a presentation uh for the latest massing which is now at 139 ft um I just want to reiterate or or actually State the position of our client that that we have been working with this City since about January of this year and trying to arrive at a settlement in a compromis position to resolve all the issues that are pending a settlement I'm sorry I'm sorry let's pause the clock for a moment settlement settlement on Mr chairman this this began as my discussion with Rafael P to try and settle all the matters that are be between us and and the city which includes litigation and includes the LI local act and so this was intended to be a global settlement of those issues and that's how it was referred to to this committee at the end of January okay so I just want to indicate that this is this is the the client's additional attempt now to try and see if we can make this work um we are far apart from staff staff was at 75 ft in height we are now down to 139 ft which unfortunately is about is as low as we can go so um we were seeking the vote of this committee to conceptually approve the project for 139 ft and send it back to then design a project with sta at that height so now I'll turn it over to Kobe who can make the presentation thank you so much my name is Kobe carp and I'll be quick I have 350 to go let's just go through the images if you can um pull them up for a second next image please so kindly uh next image please so kindly what we next image please I'm trying to move it quick as I I oh I got a control thank you very much let's see is this the one on the right Right Bingo that's where we started that's so we submitted on the um original submission it's about 200 uh ft with 180 with 18 floors we met with uh certain individuals in the community they thought it would be nice to break it up into two um buildings which we did one on the north side of the um a basically we have two we have one on the south side of the Cleveland a and then we have another one on the other side on Collins Avenue and the north side of the annex what we did is we studied those two bu buildings together and when we came along some people said you know Kobe would be nicer or Kobe and team to go back to the single building we don't like the height um but and we also do not like you coming back and putting two buildings so we said okay we'll go back and study the single building we saw the single building floating up in the air and More in line and curve with the6 this is just a massing it's not a design but what it did do it allowed us to bring the height down by projec ing it over the alley at 139 ft and at the same time as you can see in these images preserve and restore not only the Clevelander but also um the asex on Collins Avenue and that allowed us to have preservation restoration of the two buildings and not touch the annex so we went back and forth and looked at the massing and this is a context study um neighboring buildings that we have um this is important to look at because when you look at the real context of the neighborhood um historically contextually and right now you can see that the buildings that have been built the tides and other buildings historically we put the heights there um have been built to a similar height and that's why we are here in front of you that hopefully you will be gracious enough and allow us to go back to work with staff who is who is at 75 ft um I have been able to bring it down we do have an opportunity to bring back and restore The Clevelander and and and and bring it back to its original Glory but if you are able to give us the time and opportunity to work with Tom and Debbie and staff that would be greatly appreciated by us um if you can't then that's fine too I guess but I love you guys and I hope you're kind enough and do seriously give us the opportunity to talk to each other and continue the communication because I think that at least we have been going in a positive direction I think that staff historically for the short time that I've been able to live in been work here in Miami Beach since 1988 has been very um educated education educated educating me providing me with context and my clients so I think that it would be nice to continue the dialogue if you so allows thank you for your time I have 55 seconds left thank you thank you Mr chair can I get 60 more seconds please you have 50 seconds thank you I just want to reinforce that this is a unique transformative project so this would Fe feature the closure of the largest outdoor entertainment bar in Ocean dries history and it would change Ocean Drive forever we would abandon our cup and that's something that that has been discussed by City officials for at least 10 years or more that's what we're talking about and it's a unique opportunity and as I said it'll be transformative for Ocean Drive the other issue I will tell you is you know we have a live local act pending in front of you it would be much smarter for the commission to work on a project collaboratively with us where you can control what is built there because the live local act will not provide for public hearings you can get commission input hbb input Etc if we can work collaboratively towards this project thank you I'm GNA open up the floor to public comments um uh Daniel uh you're welcome to speak anyone wishing to speak on this item if you could please line up by by the podium I'm Gonna Keep The Brave to one minute please okay sure all right thank you commissioner Daniel Calo with Miami Design preservation league so first of all I did want to thank the owners from The Clevelander and their team because I know they have been working hard and reaching out to different stakeholders um and looking at different options I think the concern that Still Remains is whether this is compatible with our very precious Art Deco uh historic district and it seems like in looking at the imagery that there's still a real lack of compatibility and I want to point to a couple things that the new building would basically cover the Clevelander or like smother it 2third of it looks like it would be enveloped by it and also uh just the fact that this is probably Ultra Luxury housing not the housing that commissioner magazine and others are really pushing for Workforce housing so I think at this this point probably it's they said best in final maybe time to say no and move on to other ideas thank you thank you Daniel uh I'm gonna go on Zoom Valerie nevered you have one minute to speak welcome Valerie nevered uh you have to unmute yourself all right you have one minute to speak welcome Val so sorry I'm losing connection thank you very very much I just would like to say one thing ocean Dr it's a very um our our postcard just like the eel Tower is a FR postcard and the Coliseum and oh my God I don't remember the other one is the Italy postcard so please just keep we're losing you um we we've lost you um welcome you have you have a minute to speak welcome Ocean Drive not a derelict Spa on Washington it's Ocean Drive the Center of Ocean Drive I've lived here for 26 years I've seen the town go up and down and up again I am telling you you will kill the South Beach economy if you privatize the most famous public Street in all of the United States you can't force us to become Suburban boka Ron all of my friends from the ballet they don't have money to go to supper clubs and this and that they all go to please don't sit on the furniture they do go to Monty they go to the Clevelander there's nothing wrong with these establishments please don't be seduced by a see-through rendering with no parking it has no sensibilities of art Depot it's just a big giant Cube and I please don't be seduced by dinner and drinks with the developers from out of town please don't turn Ocean Drive our prized possession into a condo alley for maybe like a hundred outof Town people when we could be millionaires by the way we could be revitalizing our retail for every and your name for the record Andrea speos thank you so much uh Mitch novic uh you have one minute welcome hi good evening again Mitch sovic my concern is parking concurrency and most importantly the impact on infrastructure if something like this should pass it should not open the door for other others along our prize STP thank you thank you Mitch uh are there any members of the public wishing to speak on this item David and anyone else wishing to speak on this item after David if not David you are the last speaker just briefly uh briefly it's all in the math if you want residential then you have to give the square footage interior-wise for a developer to make money they're not going to make and I was advised this by one of miam Miami Beach's greatest developer if someone can't make a 15% profit they're not going to do the job the cost of the land the cost of everything the cost of the profit if you don't do the math and you don't give the height you're not going to have any development and that's as simple as it is thank you with that we're closing the public comment comment uh colleagues uh uh feedback from from the body on this on this issue commissioner Suarez you recognized I you know there there's a lot of everyone's saying we don't want to turn into Naples we don't want to turn into bokeh but up until this year bokeh didn't have a shooting problem every year or a sex trafficking problem in our city you know I I I think it's I think it's disingenuous to to to to to to claim that I mean you know people you know people get shot on Miami Beach and and I'm I want to move away from that element and I'm always going to be in favor of Resident Centric values and you know I don't know where I I stand on on The Clevelander project but I think a a big certainly a big carrot in front of us is you know we're going to remove an element that has notoriously been an issue for Miami Beach for decades and it's outdated and it's a relic of our past and we need to move forward um you know I I I certainly love Ocean Drive I I walk down it almost every night on my nightly walks and but but some nights I can walk down it because I I don't I don't want to I I I'm in fear of my life so um I I welcome here what everyone else this say I thank you any other members of the committee wishing to speak on this item you know um when when this came before us a month ago um at land use I remember specifically saying if you want to go big you've got to give us something that looks like it's been there contextually forever um and certainly not this big I mean the two thinner 12-story Towers seem to be a little bit better than than this I know this is a massing study I know this isn't a design I understand that but this also is not even close to contextually appropriate for Ocean Drive um sure if you go across the island all the way to the Bay you'll find towers that are this high but if you look north and south on the postcard the front door of not just our City but of South Florida's tourism um it it's wildly out of scale and I'm not you know I'm I'm happy to consider options um but I don't feel like we're getting anything that we can seriously consider I mean if you'd come back to us with a hundred maybe that would be a conversation we could we could have but 139 is it it's absurd and I understand the math doesn't work I get that I'm I'm you know my background is business I've got that that but at the end of the day it is not real estate is a Gamble and if you overpay or somebody overpays for a piece of land betting on the come that they can develop what they want with it um and maybe they can't then then that that's you know the thrill of real estate sometimes you win and sometimes you don't but I I feel like this is not a step forward in the conversation and I'm really sorry to say that because I love the idea of working together to be collaborative to be um trying to find a best solution to my colleague's point of trying to limit some of the behavior that we don't want to encourage and to have a seat at the table to help bring about a better offer a better vision for what comes next I'm frankly I was disappointed when I saw this resp can I respond the the committee is still speaking thank you no I mean that that's it I and I I'm disappointed that I'm disappointed um because I I do think this is a great example a great opportunity to lead by example we you know we saw it at Ocean Terrace for most of that development project when you know the developer came to the community with something that the community said thanks but no thanks not over in a million years they came back to the table with a lot more nuance and thought and you know kind of working together with a community to try to put something together that worked for everyone it wasn't perfect and there were some bumps along the road but I think when that comes to life that will be something that gets generally embraced and I was hoping to see that here and I I have it here so I know it was um you know positioned to us as our last best offer and I'm like well or what we sleep with the fishes like it it it seems like a little a little threatening in the nicest possible way um but I'm not there yet I I don't I don't see anything to even negotiate with and and that's um I think a real shame thank thank you um you know I Mr planning director um under under live local what are they um entitled to under live local well there's there's two live locals there's the existing live local that is in effect now and I'll let Nick correct anything I might mate but they have submitted a an application under the current live local which allows a project that has at least 40% of the units being used as Workforce on affordable housing to utilize the U maximum height that is zoned within a mile of the property however it does not contain an F preemption and so when they have submitted their live local project I believe it was late last September or early October we had set a follow-up correspondence with them identifying a number of deficiencies um one of them being that um historic preservation board approval would be required for any demolition that is proposed um as was mentioned previously the Florida legislature this session did adopt amendments to the live local that could potentially preempt us on F however that legislation to the best of my knowledge has not yet been signed by the governor and technically is not law okay so what what are the heights so under the um under within a mile of this particular property the maximum height currently zoned uh would be 150 ft 150 ft correct and so and so and so we're being asked to move forward with something that's just 11 feet below what they would be entitled to under under live local in in terms of height yes and under live local they still have to go is is is there any laot aggregation that that they proposed in their live local so under the under their live local application they had proposed combining two sites the Essex site which fronts Collins Avenue and The Clevelander site which fronts on Ocean Drive um under that proposal they would require an alley vacation to an Al vacation and who can approve of an an Aly vacation the city commission the city commission it doesn't that require a referendum if they're proposing to move F between the properties that would require voter approval and uh did it did it did it involve any changes to the historic structure yes they had proposed the demolition of an Annex structure on The Clevelander site which was approved in 2001 and they had proposed the partial demolition of the Essex Annex fronting Collins Avenue and the partial demolition of the historic Cleveland or fronting ocean Dru so they're they're they're coming to us with a proposal they're selling to us a proposal that's for a building that's 139 uh feet high uh as opposed as the as the benefit to the public as opposed to doing um doing the live local which would be 150 feet in in height uh but that would that would still require an alocation that requires voter referendum uh and um and impacts to Historic assets that require HPB approval that's correct and affordable hous right that's correct and Nick if I uh anything that was inconsistent please let me know no that's correct and let me ask you this at the last hearing I had I had said I'm I'm okay for us to engage in conversations if we do away if they they agree to do away with short-term rentals uh that was that please if you're not speaking I want to ask everyone please be seated the last time that we discussed this and we engaged in we we said let's move forward in in conversations I asked you know I'm going to do that if they agree to no short-term rentals on the property was that agreed to as part of the negotiations I I don't believe the developer has agreed to uh profer a Prohibition on shorter rental so then are we really then changing the demographics of Ocean Drive then then we're just creating the opportunity to have hotel rooms on Ocean Drive instead of residential yes Perhaps Perhaps they're willing to I mean I'm sorry I'm I'm I'm asking questions so that then I can recognize you I um but I I I'm asking I'm asking the questions that I need answers to yeah so I you're you're welcome to come and be and be recognized but I let all my colleagues speak and I think you would agree that as a chair of the committee I should have an opportunity to ask questions correct wait well you're recognized but just before through the chair I I was under the impression that it's always going to be residential and you know that's going to be a little different for me if if if it's not residential so um I I I'd like to hear what you have to say Mr chairman and committee members I just want to make two comments one commissioner about the instruction of the committee at the last meeting was for us to have a working session with planning staff to try and get to a project we can both live with that didn't happen so we met with staff and they said under the galber administration we've already determined the maximum height we can support is 75 ft we didn't have a chance to talk about Mass sighting moving things around that was not the case so what you're seeing today is a massing study only it's not a design it's not massing it's not sighting but it's not productive for us to go back to staff unless they have direction that we can go to 139 ft because at 75 ft it simply is a project that will not work but we did not have the chance to have something in the nature of what you describe which is a great deal of collaboration on the sensitivity of Designing something and then commiss Suarez the the the project is designed would have hotel where Cleveland dur essics is and then residential there will be no short-term rental in the new tower okay was that explain to our staff when these negotiations were taking place because I just asked our staff and my and our staff is indicating that that was not indicated to when when we had our um in response to your question Mr chair when we had our discussion we did not discuss any terms such as a profer for no short-term rentals right so yeah for me that for me having no short-term rentals is is essential I don't think that 100 dropping from 150 ft to 139 ft I I don't think what's what's the benefit I mean what is the benefit to to to to the taxpayers um ultimately it and and they proceed with the live local proposal that they that they had ultimately our electorate will have a say would have a say in in in approving this ultimately then at that point because there will be the alif vacation and it and it'll be it'll be our residents who will say you know whether whether whether it can happen or not I do want to see a transformation I want to see an an improvement I don't see that Improvement happening at 139 ft I'm willing to ask our staff to look Beyond uh the 75 ft given now that Mr tashes has set on on the record which I didn't have that in in the past that they're agreeing to not having short-term rentals on on the property that is a that is a difference right now there is transient use on that property is that correct Mr planning director yes it's a hotel use now it's a hotel use so so it's not only night nightlife use but it's nightlife use mixed with hotel with with with Hotel use um so you know just going in and already saying off off the bat it's going to be completely residential um with with no short-term rentals that's different I'm not going to say sit here and say that I'm okay with with 139 feet because I don't think that that is fair I think it's disingenuous we're giving up 11 feet you're giving up 11t that's that that to me is not a real you know that's not coming to a middle ground but but but I I am okay saying let's have a conversation about going beyond the 75 ft and what I would say also is that you know we trust our historic preservation board as as the experts on historic preservation in our city and if we do recommend that that that we engage in a conversation of going beyond the 75 ft that it go to before the historic preservation board whatever would come back to this committee for their input before we make any recommendation to the city Commission because ultimately it's something that they're going to have to weigh in on and what I don't want to do is send Mr tashas Mr O'Brien and the other people involved Mr carb running around circles and US discussing something that later that that later the board with uh with jurisdiction over the matter doesn't agree with so we need to get their input in this in this process as well colleagues commissioner magazine could I just clarify something because this is completely new to me and maybe I was asleep of the wheel but it changes my calculation entirely so for them to file a live local application they would the voter would have to approve to vacate the alley the the the live local application that the developer filed back in October contemplated uh connecting the joining the two properties the Essex property and The Clevelander and it contemplated an alley vacation and the alley vacation under the provisions of our Charter would require for it to go before the city selectorate right but is that like what they're tied to no they could file a they could file a different live local application from what they originally filed but they preserve their their rights with a certain application they can file a new live local application okay so I I I agree with uh the chair that giving up 11 feet it bangs you know uh juice isn't worth the squeeze um I I'm conflating a few things right uh two comments I will say Mr soro's comments really uh struck about compatibility and maybe there's a question and one thing we keep in mind uh about compatibility if they would go forward under a live local does that completely remove us from the table of any input in design does it have to go to the drb or things like that uh through the chair any demolition of any portion of of either the Cleveland or the Essex would have to get the approval of the historic preservation board that's something that's not preempted under Lial yeah but the actual construction when we're talking about compatibility if they did a live local they could just build a glass box that looks like Dubai but if we actually would strike some sort of bilateral da then we would presumably have input so right well just being in the historic district it would have to go to the hbb yeah that's correct whether they go under live local or they go under some path like a revised ordinance or a settlement um any demolition would require historic reservation board approval right Tom get that but for the construction right if they do live local can they just then build whatever they want without any drb input I'm talking about compatibility so Mr Caldo says it has no Art Deco themes which I agreed with the glass box looks terrible there but if they went the live local route they could just do whatever they want where if we did a bilateral agreement we would have input on the design so under under Liv local um in historic district it's it's a little bit more nuanced because in historic districts unless you're dealing with a vacant lot if it was a vacant lot with no building or improvements on it they would not have to go to the historic reservation board they could get site plan approval administratively however if there are existing structures on the site they clearly need historic preservation board approval for the Demolition and May require historic preservation board approval if they're doing something over an historic building or new construction that contemplates partial demolition it starts to become a little tricky because as part of the certificate of appropriateness for demolition review the historic preservation board can ask to review what will take the place of the demolished structure and then just one question I'll over colleagues on the board um if they did a live local uh would they have to give up their cup because presumably you could do a live local 40% Workforce housing hotels on the rest and then keep your cup I don't think they would be required to give up their cup if they did a live local how so so I guess that is the other we have may require it may require modifications to the cup if the live local project um uh involve changes to the site yeah I mean I think it very likely would require a c is tied to a s plan that filed uh that is that is a legal document that's registered with with the courts right that if you're going to change the S plan that you need to reopen the cup in which case uh then at that point you it's it's it's open up and it's open up Mr chair yes thank you Mr CH but also um if there's if they're proposing 60% of the new development be high-end residential they're not going to want to have a you know an all you can drink wet t-shirt contest kind of place in their Courtyard I mean I don't know some people might pay a premium for that may maybe maybe you can charge double I don't know um and I know that's not what you guys are doing now with the Clevelander I get that but but you know there have been moments um and my point being that it would not likely be this rockus kind of place if you're trying to get top dollar but and you know I'm I'm all for giving you guys us all one more shot at doing this and I know you said the numbers don't work at anything less than 139 fet but 75 to 139 you're you're asking for double what we what we are telling you that we want and so that's not compromise and so I'm I'm begging you to fix figure out a way to make this work at something that we can rally behind let us hold you up as a great example of what can be done here because it just it's I don't know maybe you don't need goldplated finishes in the guest bathroom but you know find a way to make make the numbers work this isn't Trump um Mr Mr tashes I see you want to approach Mr chairman thank you um commissioner but I don't have the authority tonight to go to say we'll do anything below 139 ft but what I will tell you though is that I'm going to interrupt you there if we cannot have a discussion about anything below 139 ft I don't know if it's worth wasting your time Mr O'Brien's time and your team's time I just I'm just gonna be very sincere and Frank with you I I I just you know if you're if you're telling us if you're telling this body um in this public setting that you're stuck at 139 you know I I it what's it doesn't that's not a negotiation what do we what do I tell my my my representatives in Tallahassee when we've been going over there and fighting to preserve that postcard from from from from preemption on the protection that make it that that is that is trying to destroy it to be overdeveloped and we're there fighting them and telling them no give us the authority on local rule making to decide on the protections to protect this iconic uh postcard how do I tell them and tell them yeah thank you for for for for giving us that authority to to to decide on our historic districts guess what did exactly what you were going to do we allowed for historic asset to be demolished and to be replaced with a glass tower I'm sorry if if we're going to move forward in any sort of negotiation we need to we need to be with the understanding that we're going below the 139 uh because if not it's not worth wasting your time and I certainly don't want to waste my staff's time because that's a taxpayer's money that we're spending when we're using their time and so and so uh I need I need I need affirmation here that we really are coming to the table to go the 139 because it's not going to move forward otherwise Mr chairman I'll tell I'll say one thing to clarify our proposal we are not demolishing any part of the historic structure that is a contri that is contributing so the annex on The Clevelander is not contributing and will be demolished we've been saying from the beginning we're preserving the historic structures on Clevelander and Essex any comment to the contrary is not accurate as far as the the height of the project the only thing I'll tell you is that this is a complicated project okay I I worked with Kobe on the fourseason Surf Club that took us five years to do these are complicated projects it's impossible to really make a lot of progress when planning staff is not willing to collaborate rolling up your sleeves on what the project could be our planning staff is following the the directive of of the body that that they represent which is the body that is elected by the residents of this city they're following that dire and the directive was to negotiate within a certain criteria and so and so and so I what you're hearing is that there may be an inclination to continue to allow our staff to continue in these conversations if it is an understanding that we're going below the 139 and but but but but if we if we if if we can't get that then then I'm not going to waste their time Mr chairman we've come back with many many massing studies starting with last year being I think it was 30 that then it went down to 18 then it went down to 150 then it went down to 139 75 ft is just too far apart from where we need to be in order to close but with all due respect I'm sorry to interrup Mr chair we're running out of time but there's a there are a lot of numbers between 75 and 139 and through the chair um perhaps we defer this to the next meeting and you you certainly have a direction from us I mean short-term rentals is one thing that certainly needs to be you know presented for me to even be on board and you know maybe you know look it's going to have you mean no short-term rentals yeah that's what I meant um D all for I think there's there's there's willingness here to make something work but you're not hearing a no from us need to us somewhere by the way that's Sayang a lot and I I think it would it would behoove you to take that advice and um and say all right we're willing to negotiate the problem is our staff cannot sit down with you unless we're we're here saying that we're okay with them sitting down with you and you haven't brought us to a position where we can say we're okay with them sitting down with you to look at anything over the 75 uhet and and so and and so so so we want to be able to negotiate and to talk but you're not giving us anything Mr chairman I can it's at 8 o'clock at night um I'm happy to call our client first thing in the morning tomorrow as I said I don't have authority tonight to agree to anything below 139 but I can call them in the morning tomorrow um Mr Mr attorney uh guide us here so that so that so that we're we're in proper posture well this is the this is the committee's meeting right so if if your consensus is uh that that in order for staff in my office to continue engaging uh with the developer on this proposal that that that number needs to come down then the ball is in the developers Court to come back with uh with a revised proposal well I I'll I'll tell you you know only do it and don't come back to me and tell me it's 138 um you know or 135 for that matter and uh and if we do move forward with anything I don't want anything coming back to this committee unless it first goes by the historic preservation board because I need them to understand that we're being serious that you know yes we want to be partners but we want to make sure that whatever moves forward is something that number one it's going to make sense but also encourage them to really negotiate knowing this is first going to go to the historic preservation board for an advisory input before it comes back to this body and just to be clear what what would go to the historic preservation board is you you would you would like the developer to present um uh I guess the a concept plan for you know for for for the height of a project for the massing whatever you guys negotiate as representatives of of the city before it comes to us here for it to stop by the historic preservation board is that through the chair is that typical usually well this this committee has asked for um our land use boards and for other committees to provide noning feedback so if your recommendation is that the developer um meet with staff again and then bring something to the HP board for their input we could probably come back to you in July with the hpb's advisory it would be nonbinding it wouldn't be an application but they could probably give you some advisory um comments yeah if if the if the interested party uh agrees you know to go beyond below the 139 to Covenant uh and to Covenant the um the the no STS and just for the sake of clarity no Str strs I'm assuming below 139 means doesn't mean 138 right I'm I'm assuming you're going to want to see a meaningful uh reduction yes and commissioner Dominguez and also uh to factor in parking because who's going to buy a multi-million dollar condo and then not have a parking space so all right any further questions no Mr chair the only thing again I I'll speak to our client I know our goal was to do this collaboratively we're the ones who started the discussion just to be clear and if we didn't want that we wouldn't have initiated that of course so I just want to be clear that we're the ones who started it and we said hey we want to do this collaboratively yes the other thing I would say is but just realize collaboratively without being collaborative you could have done 150 but to be collaborative to say 139 is something that's collaborative is really not very collab aborative well but but but the closure of The Clevelander Bar is a massively important carrot so we can't be treated like a generic developer just looking to put up a project in mxe it won't work and that's the unique nature of the of what we're proposing does that mean that the Cleveland dra is going to abandon its it's 5:00 a.m. yes and that's and that's something that the HP well the issue would be the main issue is to abandon the outdoor entertainment cup so no live music no music above background levels we'd have an upscale restaurant with perhaps background music outside that's it maybe we would do a late night 2: a.m establishment I don't know but that's a massive issue so to approach this as if we're any generic developer on a piece of vacant land to build something it's it's not and it's and and we're not approaching it that way we understand the importance of this AET and that's why we're giving it the seriousness and the attention that that I mean the one thing I would say m chairman if you do say to go back some direction needs to be given to staff so they're not stuck on 75 ft because if that's the case there's nothing well I think it's been pretty clear from this body we've we've given the direction if if the interested party says that they're willing to go below one 139 uh for our staff to be willing to go beyond the the 75 we've we've made that clear we've said as a condition of us having any con any conversation beyond the 75 ft be a contingent on a certain number of stuff that we've discussed here that I think we've already discussed in the past by the way this is none of these things that that the body just to be fair to this body and to be fair to our public resources that we're investing in this conversation this is nothing new this is not breaking news we have enumerated all of this already in the past thank you Mr chairman thank you so we'll put this on the agenda for July we can plan on coming back here please try to be at HPB for June the latest thank you guys uh with that we and U Mr attorney anything else for the good of the order no sir with that we're we send a JS I'm sorry