The nightclub’s representatives argued that the violation was an anomaly, pointing out that the nightclub had undergone 88 inspections without issue since Memorial Day. They claimed that the Halloween violation coincided with a private investigation funded by a rival, raising suspicions of a setup. The representative stated, “the night that a competitor hires an investigator to take a video of the venue” was when the violation occurred. The nightclub’s attorney emphasized the establishment’s compliance history, noting proactive crowd management measures and previous compliance with city regulations.

The board members grappled with the decision, weighing the need for enforcing city rules against potentially punishing a business based on questionable circumstances. They discussed the severity of the proposed 180-day suspension of the CUP, recognizing its potential to close the business. The representatives for Vendome expressed a willingness to collaborate with the city to improve their queuing management plan and maintain compliance.

The dialogue expanded to include the nightclub’s responsibility in managing underage patrons, with the representative asserting that they had rigorous ID checks in place. However, they acknowledged the challenges posed by high-quality forgeries, which have affected other venues as well. The board members questioned the criteria for determining violations and emphasized the importance of fair and consistent enforcement.

In addition to Vendome, the board discussed various hotel development proposals, including a notable application for the site of the former Deauville Hotel. The proposal aims to transform the vacant lot into a modern development with reduced density. Public comments revealed strong community support for the project, recognizing its potential to revitalize the neighborhood and generate significant tax revenue for local improvements.

The Miami Beach Planning Board meeting also addressed planning initiatives for Washington Avenue, with discussions on increasing Floor Area Ratios (FAR) to promote residential use and introducing a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. The board considered the implications of these changes, including the balance between new development and preserving the character of the historic district.

Another topic was the proposed ordinance to alter the approval process for hotel developments, mandating city commission review for hotel use applications. This change aims to mitigate the impact of new hotels on existing housing but raised concerns about complicating the approval process and potentially disincentivizing smaller hotel projects.

The board’s discussions were comprehensive, extending to micromobility and parking regulations, noise management for new hotel projects, and the establishment of gender-neutral bathrooms.