##VIDEO ID:a-ldhsPLY1w## e we are broadcasting Live on YouTube and Via Zoom but uh not on channel 77 for tonight's uh agenda item it will be available on channel 77 as a replay item but if you want to watch it live please go over to YouTube channel or Zoom I'd like to call this meeting to order I'd like to ask everybody please silence all phones and beepers if you still have one good evening this board is comprised of seven members four members of the board shall constitute a quorum and the affirmative vote of four members shall be necessary for the adoption of any motion if only four board members are present and applicant May request to be entitled to a continuance to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the board if a matter is continued due to a lack of Quorum the chairperson or Secretary of the board May set a special meeting to consider such matter in the event that four votes are not obtained an applicant except in the case of a comprehensive plan Amendment May request a continuance or allow the application to proceed to the city commission without a recommendation pursuant to resolution number 202-1184 Gables has returned to traditional inperson meetings ever the Planning and Zoning Board has established the ability for the public to provide comments virtually for those members of the public who are appearing on Zoom uh actually it's not a quazi Judicial so you don't have to be visible to the court reporter or you don't have to be uh sworn in lobbyist registration and disclosure any person who acts as a lobbyist must register with the city clerk as required pursuant to the city code as chair and I officially call the City of Coral Gables planning and zoning board meeting of August 14 2024 to order the time is 6:02 Jill if you please call the role here here CH ABS here uh tonight we'll have no swearing in on the two items because as I said before they're not qua judicial everyone who wishes to speak this evening must complete the roster on the podium please we ask that you print your name clearly so the official records of your name and address will be correct Zoom platform participants I will ask any person wishing to speak on tonight's agenda item to please open their chat and send a direct message to Jill Menendez stating you would like to speak before the board and include your full name Jill will call you when it's your turn I ask you to be concise for the interested time phone platform participants after Zoom platform participants are done I will ask phone uh participants to comment on tonight's agenda item I also ask you to be concise for the interest of time first we have the approval of the minutes of July 10th 2024 has everybody had a chance to read those I move we have a motion we have a second any comments no call the RO please Julio Gabriel Here balinski here yes fix Paro yes Hario Salman yes CH Withers yes Robert Bear yes abs and stad uh yes uh one question if I may Craig I was not here and Robert was not here at the last meeting we're allowed to vote Yes on those minutes though we didn't participate I read the minutes correct you are allowed to I just want to clarify that for the record and I read that my friend here chip wit wanted me to be present thank youing that strategy now thank you um the procedure we'll use for tonight first we'll have the identification of the agenda item by Mr caller then we'll has presentation by applicant or agent which in this case will be staff uh then I'll go ahead and open it for public comment first in chamber then I'll do Zoom platform and the phone line platform afterwards we'll go ahead and close public comment board discussion a motion discussion and second of a motion if needed and the board's final comments and a vote as I said before at the beginning just to let everybody know that we're broadcasting Live on YouTube and on Zoom but not on channel 77 there's some technical difficulties going on with that but it will be replayed there uh afterwards Mr parer item E1 and ordinance of the City Commissioner Carl Gable Florida providing for text amendments of the city of Carl Gable's official zoning code Article 5 architecture section 5-200 Mediterranean standards article 3 uses section 3-42 reg restrictions related to location and article 16 definitions to enhance the quality of Carl Gable's Mediterranean Design By requiring a conceptual design review removing duplicative criteria relocating meting and applicable standards supplementing existing criteria including additional Mediterranean building examples providing for severability repealer codification for an effective date item E1 public hearing thank you Jennifer good evening Jennifer Garcia planning afficial I apologize I'm a little under the weather so my voice can be a little cracky and and low um have a PowerPoint please thank you okay so just as a little refresher um as you know um Mediterranean architecture that we refer to as now um has been part of the vision of George Merrick for Coral Gables for um almost one century so far um so it dates back to the original warrant TD which is the little uh image on the left side um which dat which stated basically that um all buildings except for those that are in the Thematic Villages of Coral Gables um shall have Spanish style Venetian moish Italian or similarly harmonious looking at you Craig harmonious types of architecture um and that was later um implemented into the zoning code the first zoning code of Coral Gables in 1930 and then um in the post-war period um the original vision of George Merck kind of um was um pushed aside I guess in favor of more um um you know um in the favor of trends of the time with the mid-century um until the 1980s uh when the city decided to implement the Mediterranean bonus um in 1986 actually with the intent to to um encourage right encourage matran architecture in our city and that first was limited to just the CBD and the North Pond area so more of our Orban core um a year later in 1987 they expanded that to include uh the builtmore way area as well as the area south of the CBD uh down to I think uh University Drive so that more or less that downtown area that we have um in a few years later in the early 1990s expanded to be Citywide that you could use and utilize the med bonus so now we have actually areas in our city that are mandating mediterian architecture and that's in the old industrial area which is now uh being reband rebranded sorry as the design Innovation District um hiala Plaza the one block of the 100 block of hia um as well as the r the residential info regulations um and uh mf4 and mf3 Zoning districts so in those areas in those zoning District you have to build Anan architecture um so I should go back so what we're looking at today let me go back really quick we're looking at today is not just or Med bonus to get actual bonus from the board of Architects but it's to have uh better criteria and better standards for these parts of the city that actually mandate this style of architecture so Med bonus has been amended many times since the 1980s and most recently uh it was amended a couple years ago um thanks to the Blue Ribbon committee to require that the style has be Mediterranean they they took out the other styles so it has to be Mediterranean and also um provided a conceptual design review it's optional um this um initiative to revise the standards for met Trin design um is kind of picky backing off of that blue ribbon committee um and their ideas um we reviewed it with the board of Architects literally line by line Criterion by Criterion um for many months um I think back in back last fall uh 2023 um then we've been you know meeting with you guys at the city commission obviously to update them and to have a presentation um so they understand what we're what we've been working on um so now we're at the beginning phases of the adoption process looking for recommendation from this board to move forward to the commission so the goal is stated already in the ordinance itself is to provide incentives and to encourage a Mediterranean architecture so right now the standards are a little subjective um they're a little repetitive because a lot of them are about Windows and Doors facing the street which is part of the underlying zoning right now anyway um so the intent of this is to make something that's a little more rigid a little more clear um more about architecture and about met training architecture style um specifically um so you'll recognize a building um on University and ponds the first rendition of that building on the left side um was uh fought hard by the residents they not not like it um and it changed a lot in architecture same requests of change of L land use and Zoning same uh zoning changes seeing alley vacation um replat all that the the obvious difference the biggest difference here is architecture changed and that's when the residents came out to City commission meetings and requesting that the city commission approved the project so architecture is very important right in our city so development review this is a very uh heavy slide I hope we can understand it the first um the first um flowchart um is kind of the byright what Coral gaes has is byright um DRC Review Committee uh Board of Architects preliminary review and then to buing permit but as you know this is very rarely ever used most site plans do require uh City commission approval and that of course starts at DRC um and it involves the board of Architects however most of the buildings that you see as a board um are companied with a change of land user zoning and so the board of Architects is not um approving that change of land Zone they're not part of that process they're part of the site plan approval process they're approving the architecture they're approving the Aesthetics they're not part of the um change of land use and the change of zoning they're just there reviewing the site plan because they're part of it but because um our city encourages change of Ls and Zoning to be accompanied with a site plan it usually travels together so travels from DRC the board of Architects to this board plan Zing board and first second first second reading with theate commission so again the height difference is between who approves it right Board of Architects can only approve level one level two bonus they can approve a toer billing that the land use in zone doesn't allow they only approve those two bonuses right but a city commission they approve the land use and Zoning changes and that's usually what the residents are mostly concerned about is that additional height as jumps from low rise to highrise that change is not from the med bonus it's not from Board of Architects it's from the land ENT zoning changes that's approved by the city commission so to clarify that so the summary of proposed changes are pretty much the same we've already discussed um it's about strengthening the purpose and the review process of the med bonus um it's also to remove the Redundant criteria that we have already in our code is to move some uh certain criteria that's more appropriate other areas such as um uh drive-thru on certain streets are prohibited um same thing with um for koshares moving that to a more appropriate part of our code um it's also incorporating Provisions from the Mediterranean Village pad architectural standards that's in arenic Sea um expanding the list of example buildings um and then also including a character defining feature list uh to help Architects um to incorporate features of architecture features of materan architecture so right now we have eight example buildings in our zoning code um probably the most one that's used most often is the billmore so there's a need to have um better examples there are for larger sites because that's really what we're our zoning code unfortunately encourages so what's proposed today is to remove the San Sebastian Apartments it's not seen as a exemplary building um and the same with the grand shop since there's not really good U elevations and plans of that building uh the board of Architects kind of felt that wasn't a important precedent to keep and replacing those two and adding on to the list um many buildings that you can recognize by our founding Architects founding Architects being The Architects that we recognize um Martin Hampton uh Schon Weaver the ones that really created the character of of our city uh back in the 1920s and then also some local examples and then I think we've talked about this already um Vaya I think was added um as well as some other examples that are outside of South Florida um and Spain and Palm Beach and then since we've discussed this in May I believe we've added a few more examples um in Spain France and and the United Kingdom as well um and the list the long list of character defining features I don't want to go through that but it's really just um you know stucco uh Towers um you know use of two-piece barrel roof tille um those types of features that you see on met tranan architecture it's not really spelled out right now in our criteria so we list of those uh character defined features in our code for The Architects to use incorporate into their designs so since we last met in May um we've addressed some of the comments that we received um we moved context analysis to be the very first Criterion um in the prerequisites table uh we felt that was really important as we discussed at the last meeting um that context is very very um important also when you're designing a a building for a site usually look at the context first it's kind of the first step um so it makes sense it should be first first and then we kind of um addressed some comments about the scale so like I said we expanded the conscious analysis of language um to talk about site planning and how important that is as far as massing and Building height and how any kind of conflict should be addressed and reviewed um by the board of Architects just kind of clarifying that language and for the building scale um adding in some uh language about um large scale buildings um having more formal design more refine Design Elements and a smaller scale buildings having um a little bit more asymmetrical forms and you can see that very clearly with the uh the builtmore the builtmore is more of a classical um formal building it has very um defined uh design details versus the the smaller um think building is a little more asymmetrical it's a little more uh rustic on the spectrum of architecture so again the Precedence is not granting any bonus at that time it's really just um meeting the criteria and meeting the being eligible I guess to apply for the level one level two Med bonus so we've uh updated some land language for the facade composition um just kind of clarifying the language as far as uh base middle and top and importance of the of of those three areas of the composition of facade um kind of just using language I was there and and and adding on to it and that would be soorry let me go back so all of these 12 if you're multif family you have to complete six of the 12 of those requirements or eight of the 12 if you're mixed use and that would Grant you the bo of Architects feels like you've met that right that would Grant you the level one bonus and then level two bonus there are four I don't think we talked about that very much last time um so wasn't much add update to that but if they may all four that for of archex feels like it's in meeting criteria of that of that list um then they could make a motion to to grant that Med bonus for that building I think that's that's it yes thank you do we have uh any speakers signed up President we do have two speakers okay could you call please sure um Maria chis Longo good evening my name is my name is Maria Christina Longo and I live at 16 finishia Avenue and I'm going to speak in favor of the med bonus revisions the Mediterranean bonus was creative as an incentive for developers to continue with a traditional Mediterranean theme that George Merck started in the 1920s preserving this theme helps preserve our history and our character George Merck the Visionary and genius that he was understood the importance for a city to have a dis a distinctive and specific Identity or branding having a cohesive theme creates value and a sense of place take a look at the history of Paris hosman buildings Paris harmonious architecture is Iconic the problem is not the B bonus the problem is that the developers and their lawyers request unreasonable change of zoning that impact people's lives in negative ways the band bonus only grants a total of two additional stories and just 18% additional far to a specific site when developers meet all the prerequisites and criterias for bonus one and two eliminating the Met bonus is not the solution to increase density and height moreover with the revised criteria Architects with this revised criteria Architects and developers will have to really perform to meet them why make the Met bonus standards more rigorous because this incentive has not produce consistently Timeless and beautiful buildings that add value to our Mediterranean theme and our identity about two and a half years ago the city created the Blue Ribbon committee to improve the Met code due to understandable increased frustration by residents including myself with the outcome with the product that the bonus was producing the Blue Ribbon committee was chaired by architect Felix Paro who now sits on this board the Blue Ribbon committee initiative was a great start however more needs to be done to make the code stricter by adding language that will produce Timeless buildings like the new P's residence by Alan Morris that Jennifer show you today I was one of the individuals who fought the Alan Morris Pawn's residence project initial design wholeheartedly wholeheartedly and with great Passion because the original design and style were was were not Mediterranean after the boa rejected the second version for the Pawn's residents the Alan Morris team reached out to me to help them with the design concept two residents and I influen significantly the final approved new design for the pwn residen that so many people love now it was through this experience with the Alan Morris project that I realized that our met bonus needed further enhancements about a year and a half ago the cor GES planning department retook a 2018 initiative to revise a met bonus zoning code line by line This comprehensive initiative to revised met bonus code has been managed by the planning department with the participation of the boa and the city architect their goal simply has been to create more rigorous design parameters and guidelines for projects to qualify for the incentive the ultimate goal has been to elevate the quality of design that's the genuine and trustful goal to increase the quality of design I'm just going to give you a few examples of the new revisions which are incredible now the prerequisites are much more rigorous and one and in the prerequisites the first criteria which I'm super happy about it because it's always been my issue they have developers Architects have to do a context analysis that's number one another requirement is that IT addresses the scale of the building another one is that requires a proportional analysis of buildings one excellent um requirement which was brought up by initially by the blue committee but now it's proposed to be mandatory is a conceptual review um review the conceptual review and the list of images for president buildings used for inspiration have increased significantly so there is more to draw inspiration from from for Architects these comprehensive revisions are a win-win for everyone the boa wins because they will have legal grounds to reject poorly designed projects and they will have higher standards to expect more the mandatory conceptual review process will help residents like myself win because bra bad projects that are not in context will be stopped in the initial stages freeing citizens from the burden of having to organize to fight on resonable projects also developers win with a mandatory review process because they will get feedback early on before spending thousands of dollars on the developmental review process the planning and the zoning board you win because there will be people will be happier and there will be less frustration with the outcome less people fighting to protect their quality of life the city wins because beautiful Timeless architecture creates value there's no doubt doubt about that now more than ever more than ever now this is critically important that we keep on we improve it because of the leave local act the leave local Act is an incentive that does not have design parameters we need our incentive with higher design quality design parameters please please vote Yes to approve the revisions that will increase our standards in architecture thank you thank you Vinnie Tori hello Vin toor 208 and theia welcome back Vinnie thanks um My Hope here is to kind of create a dialogue I have a few things to say they're not necessarily critiques they're just things that I think I see and some of these things we still I think need to chew on I've been reviewing this for a little while there's a few questions in the process because we understand how things go here and some of the implications that would come from this so I've been sort of studying that kind of thing um I'm in favor of the improvements I think we can always gain by having better architecture it's just what are the implications and how do we get there so one of the things that I was kind of thinking about and I think I discussed this with Jennifer she put on this on the board there on the screen a building that is quite higher than what the code allows by by three or four stories five stories maybe the the zoning is for four or five and they came in with with nine so the the board is supposed to judge it on the level one level two which is giving it two extra floors but the board is going to have a review of a building that's Nine Stories or nine sto or higher Let's Pretend so that first review by Board of Architects could be that they say this building looks fantastic and it passes the mustard and it's a beautiful weding cake and it contextually fits in their view a location but it still has to go through your board the commission I wonder if that approval can be given on something that is completely above and beyond the level one level two and and this is sort of a question I guess for us to think through because I think some of the stuff that happens that that we're asking the board to take a harder view of context and compatibility I think that's really the main focus that we're all trying to get to obviously better Aesthetics but I think the gripes if I should call it gripes or the concerns that I've always heard deal more with context and with size and things like that so I think what I think what folks are trying to do is is create more of a a way to control that and that I think is being sort of slid towards the board of Architects I may be wrong here but that first review is is critical now the first review is meant to be does it me meet the criteria of this Mediterranean style we're going to look at it very harshly through these new requirements and academics a lot of these are academic requirements but beyond that you know there's a there's a there's a review there that they may say the building looks fantastic it's still five stories higher than the code allows I don't know what that means and how that process will happen but I can see that their role may be look it looks fantastic and architecturally it's beautiful that's that's one question the second thing is I think one of the important features of what this is trying to do and I read it several times is to incentivize several things right this is more about incentivizing I would think that's what this is about um because that's really what you need to do here is give people more reasons to do certain things but it's besides getting to the fact that we want to incentivize the Mediterranean the second and third purpose and applicability lines B and C are promoting something different they're promoting an assortment of tree level public Realms and pedestrian amenities exchange for increases in Building height residential density and floor area so that bonus is also tied to public realm so that in in a sense deviates a little bit from the from the Mediterranean it's just asking for certain things it could be any style it's not necessarily a Mediterranean request is a design request right that's also in here so the other item uh again provid additional bonuses to incentivize C G's mediterian architecture designed to continue support with the best Plastics of thematic established historic fabric as reference in best practice so that's specifically hey we're going to try to get this to be Mediterranean from nor point forward but I but I think that the issue of us struggling with big buildings gets us back to the first three floors and this is where we're fighting the architecture but we're also fighting Mass so the requirements of the ground floor the second floor the third floor to me whether they're Mediterranean or any other style is really the key for us to be able to judge our our streets level and that's one of the things that I want to discuss amongst us because again we're pushing pushing Mediterranean but we really should be pushing maybe other things as well to the to the large degree the third thing to bring up is the the list of buildings that are being shown here which are all perfectly good and so forth majority of them I think are lower scale buildings the majority of them are lower scale buildings three four five story buildings which is good they're great there's only four or five maybe three four or five that are tall mostly The Breakers the builtmore a couple others there's only a few that come off Europe basically we're trying to bring it back to what's been built by these Architects or locally there isn't a lot to go with so I think the struggle goes back to tall buildings are hard doing him with Mediterranean style are really hard and then there's not a lot to go with you you got a few hotels that have gone and made it to be 14 15 stories but that's I think that's part of our struggle is whether this will work with the big buildings and how do we do it how do we make it so I'm here to make this work I'm here to help get it to the right place I think we're all under we're all trying to get this to be right and this question is debating this to the point where we feel we've done a good job in and getting it to where we all want great architecture um compatibility massing and that's just my thoughts and I come back maybe later on when you guys have discuss some more thank thank you Vinnie do we have any other speakers that are in the chamber signed up no what about in Zoom um no one's indicated they want to speak I sent a message to them if they wish to speak to please raise your hand and no one has and on the phone platform out there no okay so at this time I'm going to go ahead and close it for public comment um chip I like would you mind going first no I don't mind um I'm certainly not as um educated as some of our board members here as to the skills that they have but I I guess what it what it boils down in in Vinnie kind of hit on a second there's the criteria that we established for the different bonuses did we assign values to them based on are they are they the the common area benefits is it does it make the building look better you know those different points there's different bonus there's I think there's 12 or 13 of them was there um yeah so if I got my PowerPoint slide I can show you yeah so there's basically those four three different tables yeah just trying to figure out if if we could look at those a second each of the criteria that's can't from here unfortunately um but but which one speak specifically to the first three floors so obviously precedence you would look at precedence at how those example buildings treat the first three floors um let's see the ground floor design obviously is limited just the ground floor um not the first three um but a lot of the characteristics are the same um see okay let me back I'm sorry so if if we're really looking to improve The Pedestrian feel and walk walkability or whatever we call it car Gables I would think that the encouragement of those lower areas are the ones that are probably the ones that we should receive the most attention and developers should get the most benefit is is that practical thinking or is that is that are all are they all weighted the same no I I I think you you both are very correct I think you really need to focus again on the base of the building because that's where you're going to be seeing the base can range between pedestrian amenities yeah the base can range depending on how tall the building is how you want to divide it up it's part of the composition of the building um so the base of the building you want to have more uh fine details a little more pedestrian scale versus the upper floors and okay get are they valued more than other parts of the bonuses no so what this is is set up the same way to set up right now it's a checklist right I don't want to say checklist CU that makes it little not as important um but it's not like if you meet criteria three you get 05 F right I what I'm just want the The Waiting of each of the we i g h t i n g of each of the bonuses are all 8% or whatever whatever 7% whatever it adds up to I I don't know 13 divided by 100 what is that are they so the the one on the first floor that gives you a great arcade to walk under is is giv the same amount of bonus as window trim or something like that uh sure but I think the ground floor in your in your um your base and that composition and I think there's some requirements not in level one but or I think that's Al I think it's level one so level one is the one that you meet six of of 12 um you're also required to have a certain percentage of needs to be applic sorry not applicable um it needs to be haveit little space facing the street and that's really I think what we're trying to get at it's not just a very beautiful designed parking garage but actual uses that are facing the street that's really what you're going to start to create a nice pedestrian feel you have people who are outside their balconies or in their windows and you feel like you have the security of people watching eyes on the street right so I I think having that is probably a little bit stronger than having a really beautiful parking garage those first first few floors so are you are you asking if there's a weighted scale to system yeah I don't think there is though there it doesn't sound like there is right no what I'm trying to say is that the ground floor is addressed in multiple requirements I get it I get it and there and there were some things that were previously bonuses that are now you have to do it right so so why was the um university of Mi why was the um San Sebastian Apartments Exile what was the I'm just C I'm just curious to know I mean I they felt like it wasn't um an exemplary building it was a little what it's it's a designed in a very common way a little it's not very ornate I guess pedestrian it's very pedestrian that's how you would say it okay very pedestrian I think what they're trying to say is that it's it's not a very ornate building it's very simple and they felt like it wasn't a good example for uh a building to be getting um Mediteranean bonus for if they're using that as our example I think that was kind of the concern it's not exemplary of the style what it's not exemplary of the style or of the classic of AR you're using as s right and then and then um the last question I had had to do with just basically you know what's what's the endgame on all this I mean what is a where where are we headed in five years with this what what's the vision in five years with these changes I think we're want to see um better quality buildings in our areas better looking buildings better better flow quity buildings yeah yeah not as much um cheap looking buildings that barely meet the requirement but some that you say that was really beautiful building I'm glad they got so there really wasn't a thought about building up the downtown or congestion or density as far as this as far as as far as this concept as far as no this is really just a strengthening the the criteria so as long as the buildings are good-looking they're they're feeling about how dense it is or how busy it is downtown that really doesn't matter not part of this review this really is a this is really just giving um a toolbox to the board of Architects do a their job that they want to do better of I want to put words in their mouth I have dudy here I understand but but it it gives them the opportunity to add more mass and add more F and add more height which they're already doing right now just now which is a concern of a lot of people right let's face it and so so this really doesn't deal with any of the the density or the massing or the Heights or anything like that it's just simply design and what it looks like no so there's there's some language in here about massing and how you need to be in context and how the bo Architects could use that language to really strengthen their review and be able to control the architecture the form of the buildings right this isn't this isn't addressing point5 F it's not addressing additional two stories it's add it's it's addressing how to get that and giving them teeth in a toolbox to be able to form it in a way that they feel is appropriate thank you so it's so it's giving a tool is what you're saying right okay I see okay Felix so unfortunately when the Blue Ribbon committee stopped you here so um when the uh medit when the Blue Ribbon committee was disemboweled uh quickly by one of the Commissioners that's no longer on this uh uh representing the city um you know it it just stopped at a screeching Hal and I see that uh many of the comments that were already that had already been address by the committee have now found themselves somewhat into this particular uh new um new standard I have an issue a very large issue with the way that the boa does their job and I know that Judy is sitting right there and I think the world of the problem I think is that that most people don't understand that there are two components to the design review standards that the board of Architects must apply it's written in black and white in our in our zoning code section 5-12 is design review standards it has nothing to do with bonuses but it has everything to do with first that is the part that must be reviewed by the board of architect first why and if you would indulge me Mr chairman and board members for example A3 whether adjacent existing historic features natural features and street level pedestrian view cords are are a appropriately integrated or otherwise protected four whether the amount and arrangement of open Green Space including Urban open space EG plazas or unimproved areas EG open Lawns are appropriate to the design function and location in relation to the function of the structures of adjacent and surrounding properties five where sufficient buffering including hard and soft scape is provided when non-compatible uses abut or adjoin one another six whether the proposed lighting provided for safe movement of persons and vehicles provided security and minimized glare and reflection on adjacent properties seven whether access to the property and circulation is safe and convenient for pedestrians cyclists and vehicles and is designed to interfere as little as possible with the traffic flow on the roads and to permit permit Vehicles a prompt and safe Ingress egress to the site I'll skip the nine whether the application provides improvements public open space pedestrian amenities which benefit the public why is this important because then you go to B B1 is Aesthetics but nobody talks about B2 architectural compatibility with neighboring properties and uses I have heard over and over and over by the board of Architects that there is a representative from the city attorney's office where they tell them you can't look at these things it's in the code if the City attorney thinks that the board of Architects cannot look at these things then I think that the City attorney should somehow Drive the ability to change what is written in BL and white under Section 5102 design review standards for the board of AR because the first sentence says the board of Architects shall determine if an application satisfies the following design review standard I think that's important when you go to the second page because there are only two pages to this you go to the second page under h building scale and mass and then I building facade step backs so if the board of architect text have their hands tied because it's not written in the code I get it but it's written in the code and I'm sure that that the chair can probably say yeah we've been told we can't look at this or we can't look at that I think that before the board of Architects can review and assess where the bonuses can be issued to the applicant I think this should be instead of a one-step process it should be a two-step process the first step is making sure that they get the massing and they get all of these components in right where everybody feels comfortable and compatibility that was um laughed at by some people in the city is not a laughable matter it's it's a matter that has to be addressed and you cannot offer bonuses if you can't get the first component right so when we first discuss going in for a preliminary review which now is being proposed as mandatory so people don't waste time and they get it right then if you simply do the first part right it would even save a lot more effort for the second part which would be the med bonuses but that's the first thing I want to address just a question though from the from what Jennifer put up there it's not the board of Architects that gives the bonuses like you're saying I I am I incorrect the board of Architects approv whether it's Mediterranean and whether they're entitled to level one or level two as far as but it's up to the commission no no so I'm incorrect it's a change Mr chairman it's a change of zoning correct is the commiss correct correct correct okay and it goes with a recommendation from this board most of the time okay but the only ones that granted is not the city commission that's how powerful the board of Architects should and is and has been in the past but what I am saying is that the massing the compatibility the urban planning that is all part of it granted there are certain rights that the property owner has there's no doubt about that but he's got to make it work to make sure that you have all of these things and that's just part one without any bonuses now when you get to part two which which are the bonuses then the board of Architects right now they simply have a point system and this point system as as chip correctly said there is it's not a weighted system you know nowadays kids go to high school they're taking honors whatever they get a weighted system for them because of the degree of difficulty what chip is has said correctly is that if you look at The Pedestrian component how we blend into the rest of the fabric of the neighborhood that should be weighted and right now there is no weight so if you put in a a 4in reveal on a window it carries the same weight as if you put a fountain on the on the ground floor where people can enjoy that that's absurd and that's because the simp ification of this system has gotten to the point of where we are today then the only thing you can depend on is the ability of the architect and the uh the agreeing of the developer to do what should be done to provide then great architecture so I think that this is a very good step of having the mandatory meeting with the boa first but I think I see it over and over that they are handcuffed and I I don't think I am guessing at this you could ask the chair of the board of Architects whether that's a correct statement or not the second thing I'd like to bring up which I think is extremely important is that there's 78 pages in appendix a of site specific Parcels throughout the city they are identified there most of these Parcels either went through public hearings or they went through different mechanisms where there were certain guarantees that were offered through the public hearing process to the neighbors to the surrounding area it is absolutely incredible that in our code today there is a small paragraph that says that the water no I got it got Julio should I go get my mask sorry should I go get my mask so I'm next to hold your breath Robert so one of the things I think is very important is that most individuals in the city don't understand that very inocula there was a sentence that was added that said that basically these site specific regulations Trump everything with one exception that if you qualify for a Mediterranean bonus that trumps the site specific I say that that should be stricken immediately you can remove site specifics but then that would require that you go to the city commission to do it why are the sites specifics important sometimes based on the site you have a limitation of height a limitation of use limitation of different things but it was done to be able to protect and guarantee something and again with the compatibility of the neighborhood I think it has that sentence should be stricken it's in at least three different places in the zoning code it has never been mentioned by staff to be removed and I want to make sure that this is on this board's radar the third thing the compensation of the bonuses the bonuses go through compensation through the use of height or square footage through the increase of the floor area ratio there are certain corridors in the city that are made specifically for height the City of Coral Gables was designed in a north south axis it was not designed as an East West axis the principal axis was constantly on bouard and now it's starting to be developed especially on the North side I don't have an issue with height when you're right away is is of a significant amount the problem that we have is that when there are changes of zoning and then you throw in the compensation of the level one and level two bonuses and you put it on a very small RightWay you you create a losing proposition because it becomes it becomes less human to scale and it becomes less livable for the people that are in that area I believe that there should be height but I think that we should provide that bonus on the larger rways we have have larger rways such as alhamra where Alan Morris did his iconic building years ago and many other buildings that are very large are on Alhambra there are other rways that are also wide you have to be careful when you're a buding single family residential so you do not dwarf or or basically uh destroy uh those areas so I think that where we put the height is important and I also think that you should not be able to piggy back other things for additional height such as Parks so it's amazing we take away the setbacks when it comes to zoning then there's no green space and then we tell the developer if you give us a 50t by 100 foot Park then we'll give you more height we should put all the cards on the table and say this is the way we should change it and this is the way it should be there are there are many other things and I spent a tremendous amount of time to be fair to staff and the board of Architects and and also to this board because I had said that I thought that these bonuses had run their course I I will tell you right now that 3 years ago in 2021 we started looking with the blue ribbon committee we started looking at a lot of issues and one of the issues were you know it was uh almost an epiphany that um J you should get Med bonuses if you do med architecture I got that everybody got that but we never went to the next level I think it's important that people understand that since then there have been other buildings that are being built that have nothing to do with Med bonuses but they were granted Med bonuses and whether it's slight of hand or someone falling at you know asleep at the wheel it doesn't matter what the words say if the intent isn't really there and it has to be brought to light I think to the board of Architects to the planning board and to the commission to make sure that it's successful and I just think that we have a very serious issue when it comes to our planning and we're not we're not meshing the planning component with the architectural component with the the I'm not going to call it style I'm going to call it good architecture component I'm for great architecture and I think that we have to be able to make sure that we give all the tools to the professionals and we Safeguard the residents through the board of Architects that's all I have to say thank you um yes if I may one second uh Craig the what was stated by Felix that the City attorney stands by the board of architect and says you can't say this or say that can you can you comment on that you know I um texted the um City attorney and she advised me that it's not accurate that the count the city attorney's office position is that where it says the board of Architects shall determine if an application satisfies the following design review standards section 5-12 it is not their position that the board of Architects cannot consider this criteria which the code requires them to consider that criteria but I haven't had an at at length conversation I just hearing this from the first time I'm not disputing what you're saying I'm just saying that I tried to summarize as quickly as I could what your position is and apparently there's a miscommunication or misunder understanding Mr chairman I I would like to ask the chair of the board of Architects to address specifically what was what was responded to by the by the City attorney because I guarantee you there's one thing I never do which is lie okay well the reason wait wait wait I don't think that's what he's saying I understand and there's a simple reason that I don't lie that way I don't have to remember what I said so I would like if you don't mind Mr chairman for the chair of the board of Architects to Simply say whether whether they have ever been informed by the by the city attorney's office through one of the assistant City attorneys whether they can or cannot look at certain elements that are specifically in 5-12 well if if that's what you'd like to do I mean you're welcome to call up the individual I just I just would rather not get into that type of a scenario at this meeting but but if it's something that you feel strongly about then of course but but by the same token I think that's something that I think has been brought up and because of the fact that it's been brought up and on the record we've asked the City attorney to look into it I think it's something that will be looked at I mean I certainly would like would be happy to get back to this board at the next meeting if there's any as actually what I indicated to the City attorney is that I thought it was important to read the transcript of this discussion so that she had an opportunity to review what you said I'm only right now you know limited to a minimum a certain number of words to explain the situation I in no way am suggesting that you're not lying I think there may be a misunderstanding that's would you feel Felix would you feel comfortable if the City attorney if it's something we ask I would actually feel more comfortable if if the person that is in the trenches that chairs the board yeah States whatever she wants to State and I second that then if you so so what I would say is oh sorry Judy CTI 920 Medina Avenue Coral Gables um so what I would say to that is that there has been quite a long history um on what we've been told we have purview over and what we've been told we don't have purview over um actually Gus was in our last meeting and did clarify again um what we can and cannot review and it is a nuanced um response that he gave us right one thing I would like to do is can you bring that slide up because there are things that we do not have perview over right we can't we only have two stories that we can say that it can be increased by the rest we don't have perview it has to go to commission right so that is an accurate statement right that we are not allowed to say if something is acceptable at that height because it's not our purview okay so I I think that's part of it um and I think the other part of it is that I I would probably agree with you that we have been told because of that that the granting of additional height and additional f is really not our purview we're looking at the architecture and that is what we are there to do that's what your task to do yes okay so you know these things come in different waves right I think now the push is more that we would look at um the context and certainly you know what I would respond um to you sir is that there is a series of precedents right and all of those precedents have to be met so they they're not weighted in any way because they're all important and the first one of those is actually which is why I would strongly support these changes um is because the first one says that we now have to review context and that is very specifically written and it wasn't specifically written previously even though I understand what you're saying it is in the zoning code so and I don't know if you do you have the document sorry the first one if you look I don't know if you all have copies of this here but the first prerequisite is um context analysis and it's proposed building massing scale and height shall be compatible with the urban context and adjacent buildings and one thing I'd like to add to that which is a discussion that we had um last week is that in the conceptual review there is no requirement to bring in any context and scale and mass and I really think that um to what you were saying that as a first blush does this fit is really important so uh and it's emphasized in this new new um revision right and which is why I think this document helps us in terms of the board of Architects what they're expanding on now exactly but I have a question since you bring exctly that one of the requirements is that you have to consider the contextual context analysis but if the property is Zone let's say mf2 but the surrounding buildings are one or two stories and the mf2 you allowed to do much taller because by by how do you do contextually there then then you're going to say well the existing buildings are one and two story but even though your property is zone mf2 right or something readed I totally agree with you it's the biggest dilemma that we have right and and you know we see single family house and then you know well not single family house but that has come in and that exists right currently in the city right where we have a single family house looking at a loading dock of a you know 10 building uh you know and I have to say we've I've had this discussion with multiple of you that I don't know that the board of Architects and my colleagues because there's a lot of money at play in the approval or lack of approval of these things right to a developer I don't know how comfortable we are saying yay or nay I feel it needs to be honestly you all at the Planning and Zoning level and for years we've said hey why isn't somebody else saying yes this is good to come to us and then we'll review the architecture Mr chairman to answer can you speak into the microphone please I'm sorry Mr chairman to respond to what Robert was saying which is a very good point one of the things that you do if you go through this this review this two-part review is that many times many times not always but many times the applicant is going to be applying for an up zoning they never apply for a down zoning they're applying for an up zoning so maybe this is away from a massing standpoint intensity standpoint a use standpoint to be able to say wait a minute over on this side this isn't good but if you put it on that side it can work and if you have the board of Architects also giving you that type of information in the in the physical world that would help to understand It Felix you're right if somebody's coming from an up zoning but if they're not your job to to to to look at the contextual of that proposed building may not be easy to do because you're allowed to do something but contextually what you have next to it is is not compatible so what do you do then I I I don't I don't disagree with what you're saying but what Judy specifically said is for example the loading dock that particular function of that particular project you know where to put the Lo the zoning dock but some people just well you know I could get two more units if I stick the the the the the loading dock directly in front of that single family house but isn't that up to the board of Architects to look at that but that has been the problem Mr chairman the problem has been what I said before what Judy said now which is that now they are they have the ability and what they're proposing to do with certain parts of this change has been to provide even more clarity to be able to make those suggestions at that design R you're correct should they isn't that what they do but but I would think but I would think that that's part of the task that that the board of Architects have is to look at the Quality of the design of a project and when they look at the quality of the design of the project the the if first thing I would do is look at where the loading dock is next to a single family residential then that means they've I have to assume that you've looked at it or the board of Architects has looked at it and has approved it you would you would be surprised how many times those projects come already as we say before so cooked that they can't they can't do anything at that point but that that project goes now before the entire Board of Architects not just by a pocket of three oh no no no the big projects or entire board right so the entire I mean there's how many set of eyes are looking at it at that point now we're catching it I mean I think there were a peri there was a period of time where it yeah it came you know more but it's not just I mean Robert knows this it's not it's a lot of items right that are back of house it's FPL Vault it's loading dock it's you know it's the electric room it's the I mean there's it's not always easy and it does functions that need to be and they're big blank ugly walls or Worse again you know fpo is one of them you may say I want to put the vault in the back and FP is going to tell you it's have to be right on the street and you can't do anything about it because they're not going to give you that service but but you know let let me talk about what vennie Tori was talking about and you were also talking about it it's like you you before you comes a plan that is either Mediterranean or not and it's 190 ft when it comes to you okay and you know Daren well it has to come to the Planning and Zoning to get that and eventually commissioned to get approved so you're approving a Mediterranean Design that may not be 190 ft when you right come down to it and it never goes back to the board of Architects so you may be looking at a wedding cake mhm and it's going to be at the end a flat sheet cake with a cherry on the top that's different architecture than what you approved absolutely and that is a separate problem okay but it's a it's a problem it never goes back to you exactly with sign with any kind of significant change absolutely and we see a lot of changes even that the commission makes that never come back to us so I would I would take some of the blame I'm I'm please Judy please I'm not I'm not blaming the board of I age with you some of those things happen outside of our purview and it does not come back well it seems like the process is flawed right that's a solvable process in my opinion because it could easily be brought back some of these items are more complicated because robertt Robert is absolutely right if the zoning allows you know a particular zoning next to a twostory that's something that is already ratified by the city right exactly but you're talking about loading Ducks I've been to DRC many DRC meetings isn't that the staff to say hey look wait a minute it's facing a residential you at that point at the DRC meeting isn't that up to the staff to say architect you can't do that before it even goes to any boards I I think the bigger problem that we are facing is not the loading dock it's it's contextually how do you going to be able to to integrate one and the other and and and I think that's how do you solve that and and there's many more that we're going to go through here that are going to make it more difficult for the board of Architects to be able to do it correctly you know and and let's go back to the example of the original Alan Morris building because at least three of us chip a and I were here when that project first came to to the okay that I will never forget because it was during the pandemic and their attorney who represented them went on to like almost 9:00 at night and then he wanted 10 minutes for us to to evaluate and approve the project which you know I was the one and and Mr Morris got mad at me because I met a imately to to defer because you know was not right that project we denied it it went back multiple times to the board of Architects right it did and then until this last time that it came back finally bringing it down from 190 ft to I forget the final you know height that it did but it6 huh 146 146 which originally we told him and I think Vinnie Vinnie was on the board with us at the time okay so that project went back but you know I think there's a mechanism for the board of archtics to go back and review and make sure that the project is acceptable compatible whatever you want to call it I think the mechanism is there I think the biggest problem that they're going to be looking at is how do you make a determination what's appropriate what's not appropriate for the project it's if the project is going through a rezoning and they cannot how how do you going to how are you going to do that but in that in the case of the Alan Morris project they were upzoning and but they were not approved in the case of the Allen I remember clearly the case of the Allen Morris project was the massing was so big right and the board the commission everybody said no and that's why they came back with the design that they did in the size of the building I mean on there was it was Vinnie chip was on there I was on there Julio I don't think you were were you and Robert I wasn't on there but I I spoke against it and and the reason is that if they would have gone maybe to the board of Architects if they would have used this two-tier system and the board of Architects would have told them at that time your massing is just too out of proportion they could have saved themselves maybe a lot of time and money but but it was the com but it was the Commissioners who told them we're not going to approve this when I think they came twice and that it came before us three times to us it came but then it's up to the commission we can say no but it's up to the commission to go ahead and say yes or no I don't I don't necessarily agree with you that it's up to the board of Architects to state that the massing is just too big for for the size that's just I think it's more for the board of I think it's more for the of Architects to look at a project if it fits within the design and the scope and possibly the scale but if it passes the design from the board of architect I I understand what you pH I I know clearly I know but but but that should be treated at the beginning then when it goes to the board of Architects and it shouldn't go to the commission and then the commission says you know we're not approving it for the third time I think what happened is the commission said for the third time we're not approving yet they went back to the drawing board and when they went back to the drawing board it had to go back through the entire process and and again I think that having the board of Architects early on in there speaking about the massing which is specific in the code I think is the best idea to be able to have that sounding board because the training of the architect is helpful the developer is doing numbers the developer is crunching the numbers to see if he could get or she can get X to make it work and the architect does their best in trying to make it fly but at the same time the land use attorney can we put up a slide would you mind J has a perfect slide yeah yeah could I have the PowerPoint slide please can you check the microphone over there because I don't think you're talking into it it's not picking you up mine or Jennifer's okay it's picking up okay um but to me this is this is the key slide right right that middle piece that's not us that's what the City attorney is saying you don't have purview over that right and that's true I mean there's more that's being said as well but lately that's that's the but you're there to correct me I'm going back to what I had said before you're there to determine whether it qualifies for the level one or for the level two within the design but you're not there when it goes to the change of land use and Zoning which is so we get that we get the big one right right but then but you you can't can you deny a project because it's too big right now well that's the thing Ence of this discussion you know you know no we cannot so so let me ask you this because it seems like the cart is before the horse it sounds like the developer should have the ability to know how this planning board feels on the asks for the additional Heights and if it's appropriate for the land use we should be the ones looking at that before it goes to the board of Architects before they cook the project right before they cook the project and then you give it the blessing one way or another and it comes back to us for well it can be preliminary basis right they don't have to decide on the architecture right ex exactly but if they say we want 190 ft and and we know what the land use is we have that perview so we're recommending board the commission is the one that going to make the final decision well that's that's up to them but I mean I'm just talking about the process right now what they do is out of our control but what is in our control is the ability to say to the developer that's going to work the mass is going to work or it's not going to work and the architecture is secondary to that it's not even the massing to me that you all need to say works it's like can this location within the city with its infrastructure with its you know roads Etc can it support a building of this size and the compatibility we keep you know fix has been preaching compatibility forever it's in the code but I want to remind everybody we're here to look at the Mediterranean bonuses as oppos that's that's what's before us I I'm not disagreeing with you sue okay but I mean this is a great discussion because I think it's backwards I think we've been doing things backward very good discussion I'm not disagreeing with you but what I want to do is I want to try to move it forward based upon what's before us which is the Mediterranean now Vinnie you had made some comments would you mind come in second I'd like to ask you on that please I wanted to come back to where Felix was going I want to remind you something I think this goes am Miss by everybody the way the first of all just we're all trying to get to the same place process is the key here and no other city has this process as intricate and as good as we have it so this is a good thing we're just trying to perfect it try we're going to get better buildings the code the way it's written has a site plan approval by the commission it's it's basically the commission has to have review of anything over 20,000 ft what happens it's meant to be horse traded everything is a horse trade everything is a negotiations and that's the way it's written if it doesn't like it it's the way it is so when you get parks in the corner and you get setbacks that are changed is because somebody's saying if you give me this can do this and those decisions somewhat are discussed and sometimes negotiated early on they are and when it comes to the board of Architects hopefully they say well if you can get through and make it look good that's even better right get the get the neighbors to it some of these things they're in concept approved then they have to get through the board they have to look right and they have to get through the neighbors so it's a process that begins with the negotiations it ends with commission approval and it's difficult because sometimes what they're trying to do isn't anywhere near what the code requires they're going to move the thing right over they're going to say but I'm going to give you a park over there and all of a sudden this changes just dramatically so what they're trying to do I think with what's given to them is what's the best possible building we can make here contextually and architecturally but sometimes what they're being given these negotiations either have begun or going to happen at the end and they're in the middle of this negotiations it's the way it is so the task for them you're you're talking about a pad no I'm talking about a lot of the projects no but I mean you're talking specifically about a pad where you could avoid no I give you an example you have plenty of examples but the building that's going on right now in the mer Park Village I think it's a condo used to be a hotel a condo has a park on one side they slid the building over I think they added a floor I'm not sure I don't remember but basically that was one example where the building was changed maybe for the better I'm not suggesting it's not every project or not every project a lot of projects are done that way can I have an extra floor can I have this if I that's just normal that's the way the code is written but I think that ultimate goal with that being said I'm not sure we can change that is how do we get the better architecture and I'm not sure again this is a process that I don't know the final answer to but I know that maybe you should go first or maybe the board should go first I can't see you going first because you can't see what's being proposed it has to be conceived it has to be this is going to be beautiful at the end and you guys can say you want two extra floors but it looks horrible or it doesn't work or those exra two floors aren't so bad it's got to start with the Border I think no you're right you cannot Grant a zoning change without seeing something I mean that to me is not the the way to do it we're just saying that have to come here first what I understood you can't do that I didn't say that no no no no I said I I I mean can't you have a conceptual drawing with height that's that that's what they're forcing them to do now no I understand understand that but you're you're also baking in the med the Mediterranean features yeah and again they're going to get more square footage and they're going to get an extra two floors so they may have to make that work better they have to make it work now they're saying this this new riddens you got to make it work that extra two floors that we're giving you have to be earned and I think that's where the problem partial the problem is that the the the lacks of the the strictness of the of the way that we're interpreting it we we're allowing things that we I think we all heard they don't deserve the two extra floors that's not Mediterranean that kind of thing so but I I think that the first review whether they're going to get more floors less floors big mass less mass is basically hey architecturally this works contextually this works now it may be that yeah it's in the middle of an area that it's completely you know first time around good example and we all maybe have heard is Alan Morris is let me see here is north of a property that is even more intensity that hasn't been built yet right we know which one that is right it's the it's a courthouse so if you had been that building first Alan Morris would have gotten an easier slide through their process but since it's not they had to go through a harder harder process but if you had had a building built there again it's it's a different I still think that board architect should go first regardless of the thing and say this building works this building doesn't work and and obviously increase the the way I agree with you I think the board the process whether it's 100% or not they have to go first because they're not going to come to us they they going to go commission says I want to do a zoning change and then let me start over with the board of architect okay what happens when you get the flat cake because we reject it and with flat cake with the cherry on the top is that the architecture that they approved it's up it's the commission you have elected officials that come in that do a vote I know they I know they have the final say but but at that point why have a board of architect I think it has to go back I think they agreed that it has to go back well well yeah but I mean is that the process right now or is it maybe kind of sort to sometime Jennifer would you answer that we we can only have one person speak at a time and they have to be at the podium Vinnie thank you sorry thank you oh thanks so yes a site plan requires board roet approval now if they've get approval before it goes up to this Planning and Zoning Board it goes to commission the commission changes something at that point it does go back to the city architect he determines if substantial enough to take it back to the whole board or if he's okay with it moving forward with the commission who determines that City ar City architect the city architect right one person yes and there have been times that the city uh City commission sent something back to the board of Architects the board of Architects I think deferred with a lot of comments and the commission basically vetoed it and brought it back to um the commission about a passage away on a certain property we went through that not that long ago well maybe a couple years now where uh the the development director tried to defend um one of the projects on US1 and they changed the doors to sliding doors they did this they did that all through shop drawings nobody reviewed it the pering process and it was like mea mea and that was it and and now I understand the same thing happening with some large projects where the railings are going from what looked like rot iron railings that were very nice to now glass railings again not even going to the to the city architect because it's it's being treated as a shop drawing they they don't even know what they what they have under their own noses and and it changes the look of you know some of the architecture but that's up to how do I say this you've got to have the right staff in place because one person or one board is not going to be able to look at everything and that's why you have a city architect or you have or there's a process and I understand and I understand what you're talking about the glass the glass balconies it doesn't make sense to me you know I didn't know about it but what you're saying now it doesn't make sense when you're looking well we're looking at it every day the Poo De La Riviera that's what we're talking about they got the bonus they fought for it we fought against it the neighbors fought against it they got the bonus it got built they're sliding glass windows throughout the whole building no one wants to take responsibility how that happened but it happened and that's why I'm saying when one person says and it's the city architect or just one person alone and they say yeah go ahead with it do this that's how sliding glass gets in a building that should not have been Mediterranean because it didn't meet the code and we're stuck with it now what are we going to do are we finding the developer for going against but I think we need I think we should move forward I think the Mediterranean bonus is being brought before us to take a look it's being brought before the commission and that's what we're tasked with and I think going back and looking this should have been done or this should not have been done isn't going to get us really anywhere right now well you have to look at the past so you don't make the same mistake well it's good to bring it up but let's let's try to move forward with what we have here if it's something that there's a recommendation down the road that should be put in there or one of the board members feels it should go in we can but but it it goes back to the original the contextual analysis and to be able to to to move with this that that was you know my first comment is how do we resolve that because you know if if it if it's not within the character the rest doesn't mean anything you know to me and how do you give you know the board of Architects the necessary tools to be able to do that and and and I and when it's my turn I will express my concerns because I have a few of them okay you know and what what I'd like to do is Julio would you mind continuing on that way we get it a little bit from so were you done I apologize I didn't start I was just commenting on on a a no but are you done with your comments right now so I can continue no I'm not I didn't start just with with the comments you have for now I'll call you to the comments on on this proposal right the comments that you had made as to how to go ahead and Define it and there was I'd like to get your full comments right now no I'd like to get Julio's first I thought we were going this way i' like to skip okay because I wanted to a piggy back off of him but I'll wait okay go ahead okay I don't want you to wait because I do want to talk about abuses and this is a perfect opportunity to talk about abuses we have had an abuse of our Mediterranean code I think we can all agree people up here say oh yeah how did that happen you know we've had abuses because I think the process is flawed so I think we have to seriously look at that process okay so it doesn't happen again and that falls into what are we trying to approve today we're trying to approve stricter language more criteria stricter criteria more pictures you know what it all comes down to it all comes down to subjective interpretation subjective interpretation that's what it comes down to because we've seen it with a current code it's subjective so anytime you have a subjective code there are going to be abuses we saw it with zubie we saw it with poo de Riviera there are probably many more that I don't even know about so we're talking about no matter what kind of language you write and how many criteria you come up with there will always be abuses and particularly now that I'm hearing about all the the holes in our process about how things get slipped by and what should be and what shouldn't be I think we should be addressing the process rather than voting on a code that's going to be abused again uh the compatibility issue that Felix brings up I think is very important I think we need to have the City attorney fully explain what the board of Architects are able to do and what they should do by the code because I think it's about compatibility okay I can tell you that in my neighborhood I live in a nondescript architectural neighborhood in Coral Gables if somebody came in with an architect with a Mediterranean Design for my neighborhood no matter how beautiful it is it doesn't fit it's a nondescript neighborhood nondescript architectural neighborhood so the compatibility I think is the number one issue that we're looking at here and that should be in the purview of of the board of Architects and I think until we solve that I don't think any of this is going to matter nothing is going to matter there's going to be too many abuses so you can tell where I'm going with my vote we need a lot of fiction before we come up with more stuff thank you Julio cities don't grow overnight they're slow process I think what we're seeing right now is that slow process you give and you take and you measure and you cut but it is takes a while for everybody to be in one concert um Board of Architects I don't see any reason why even though it's not the preview of the board of Architects to make a decision on the height of a building they can still make a comment on the quality of architecture even though it's not a zoning change that they're looking at so I think to tell them this is not your preview you cannot make a decision or you cannot make a comment on that I think they should have the flexibility if they see something that is out of scale to say it and you can send it through with notes saying okay it's the architecture is good but we don't like this the height change or whatever so I I think they should have that flexibility because they're the first eyes that the city has on any project that's coming through so I think they should be given the flexibility and nobody should be telling them no you cannot talk about that because that's not in your preview so either we have to change the preview of the board of Architects or we have to allow them to have that because I feel a lot more comfortable when I sleep better at night knowing that the board of architect is there and that is looking at the projects early on before he gets a full set of working drawings out on the street so that's that's one the other one is it's going to take time it's going to take time for us you know we all have different ways of looking at projects we all have different ways of looking at a city but but we're all looking at trying to improve the quality of the environment and it could be a Mediterranean building or it could be a contemporary building a lot of the things that we talk about the quality at street level the first three floors the top of the buildings could work either with a Mediterranean architecture or contemporary architecture and I think that's what's more important I think that we came to depend on the board on the Mediterranean architecture as the Cure All and it always bothers me that there's no comments anywhere in the city about the quality of the architecture of those buildings which are not Mediterranean but we have to be looking at it we know that there's been a very bad examples of Mediterranean architecture that has passed through all of our hands you know and that we they shouldn't have they shouldn't have gone through the Board of Architects you shouldn't have gone through planning and zoning and it shouldn't have gone through the city commission and just because you put three arches on the ground floor um an arcade on a top of the floor that does not make it a Mediterranean architecture so I think the direction that this is going we should try to quantify and qualify two things projects so that we preserve and improve the quality of of the architecture and the environment of the city City it's the right way of doing it thank you um jaier first of all thanks thank you everybody for your your public comments I think they were all very good and we're all sort of looking at the same problem um from many different ways and for the changes that are being proposed uh for the med bonus that's a very specific thing that we were going to be deciding today but what I'm hearing is also that we have a problem with process we are addressing it partially through the conceptual review which will involve some massing but the underlying problem is that we have a multiplier effect with regards to zoning changes and comprehensive land use changes and unfortunately the board of Architects is presented with a proposed project which includes those with without ever having been necessarily approved by the commission so their task with reviewing a design which is co codependent on uh a change in zoning without ever really looking at what the massing and implication is now the conceptual review which is part of the changes that were being addressed here today would would go a long way to towards that and and under uh uh Miss card's uh stewardship of the board of architect I can tell you that it's really well-run very collegial the commentary is all fairly uh uh non-abrasive between the presenters and the reviewers and it's always very constructive so such that we are already getting a better quality of architecture uh in this city um and this is one of the tools that we're needed but there's an overlying issue which is which is that conflation of the design with the the uh the change in zoning which is really what creates the massing and objections that we have of uh of these buildings that that happen to threw everybody's put everybody's hair on fire for obvious reasons because they are non-contextual if we were to take the built War which I think we all agree is a beautiful building and we put it slap up to US1 I guarantee you nobody's going to like it because it's not quite contextual is it but yet it would be perfectly acceptable from a Board of Architecture point of view with regards to its design so the massing its location and its approval of the zoning change is really one issue that is parallel to but outside of the purview of the board of Architects but it needs to be addressed I think as a separate issue and this a discussion for another time perhaps there is a separate review for zoning change uh at as part of the conceptual review Once that's approved maybe that has to get approved and then it goes back to the board of Architects as okay here's your envelope now design a building and then you review it and that might solve the problem okay and that's just my one person's one lay person's uh uh uh idea of a possible solution to help get us around the the the the big problem the biggest problem the elephant in the room where we get these projects that are like surprise and we don't like the surprises because they usually do not end well now with regards to uh context I think that the consentual review that we're we're we're offering uh and now probably making mandatory for projects over 20,000 sare ft uh is uh is uh is very positive it needs to be mandatory if you're going to go for zoning change absolutely I think that that's one issue I think I would like to see included in the uh the changes to the med bonus that if you go over 20,000 and you're going for a med bonus you better get a conceptual review prior to submitt for design review and not being an optional they do ready is that is that the way it's written yes okay because I wasn't sure the way I read it it didn't look like it was maybe I was reading an older version where it was still uh uh yes as propos to as proposed today the um conceptual review is mandatory for any Med bonus whether it's small scale or large scale but also is it required for uh for any zoning change it is not I say You're Building right right but you just want you don't care about the med bonus so you just want to go uh get a zoning change and increase your your density are you required you're not required draw together anyway the board and the commission okay again a discussion for another day there is there is something to be done with regards to its conceptual review and separating the zoning approval or the increases from going through the board of Architects before it gets approved before the implication of that are approved so that's my particular point I don't have an issue uh with the recommendations is presented today so but I just want to underline the fact that we are dealing with only a very limited part of what is the problem with regards to developmental review in the city uh I offer an example in which a project and I'll say which one it is it was the Public's project came to us for a for a uh review for a uh a variance to into the board of adjustments and I just happened to be sitting as the chair at that board at that time and my understanding is that that all the fish had been cut all the bait had been divided up amongst the fishermen and everybody was happy and that the project was done it was frozen that was it and at that point it seemed to be okay it it seems to meet all the requirements for for the for the variance it was positively recommended by by staff and we voted to approve it and then by happen stance I ended up being on this B we get to review the project again and everything was thrown up in the air and that was part of not having had a conceptual review for a project over 20,000 Square ft where those decisions should have been made and should have been locked into an agreement to then be submitted to the Board of Architecture for review so you're not getting these redesigns halfway between one review board and another review board and then expecting it to be finally resolved by the commission and if that's the case then that's neither transparent nor should it be allowed so we need to look at how the process works in general this is just the specific of the med bonus and as I said I don't have a problem with the recommendations in fact I'm very positive supporting uh the changes is proposed we can always add more but we got to start somewhere and I think this is a very good start so that's it that's my comments thank you Robert before you do Mr chairman I if you can hear from my cold I am not feeling well so if I may be excuse of course before I vote on that yes you're next to me too late Robert I'll be holding my breath Julio thank you for coming let the record note that uh Julio is excused and is leaving the CH hope you feel better feel better thank you um I'm I'm not going to go back to the process I'm just going to concentrate on of giving my uh comment based on what was presented to us today uh and I I think some of us I know uh Felix and I know Javier um have mentioned in the past that we're is becoming very prescriptive of the way that this is being put together um and and what I would like to uh Jennifer if you could put up the the example the exhibit of the Alan Morris building the is because and I'm just going to use a couple example um when it when it says you know may require classical massing I I see this building by the way I like this building a lot okay I I think the the new building not the old building and I'm I'm trying to look at how do I Define classical mass in that structure and I I personally don't know how to define that but but again I I do like that building and where this is coming very prescriptive if I look at that elevation that that facade I see that that building is probably I would say 70% 75% glass too solid okay right but when I look at what's been as of windows and door that the proportion of one to five and you know and not not um of the you know wind the ratio of windows and door to solid wall should be measured for each floor to have a 1:5 ratio and and at a minimum of one to three I'm not sure how to correlate this with that which again I really think they did a great job okay and how do you how do you do that that's that's one the other which I think Judy started to to to mention is when you have to incorporate uh The fpnl Vault and all the other back of house areas that unfortunately are needed and under the under the uh provision or the prerequisites that a minimum of 80% of the linear Frontage of each story of any building fac in a primary Street should be habital space well unfortunately some of the properties in the city of corg the death is 100 fet okay and and and and the same paragraph If All Storage of vehicles or off street parking that is above grade should not occur within 20 ft of the front setback line so you have a 10ft setback and then you have to put 20 feet that gives you 70 feet assuming that you're not going to do zero set back on the back so how do you make a Podium War work having to put a habit of space and having those dep and unfortunately the reality and that you know the depth of the property in The Gables the majority are 100 ft so I have a problem with some of this number and and and maybe it's 20 ft from the front setback I mean from the property line but not from the setback because otherwise it's impossible to to make you know more than one story building am I am I looking at it you know am I not misreading this I think a lot of the other sections are acceptable even though I'm not a fan to says ordinate windows but you know it's it's okay we could that's is sub subjective to the interpretation um but I think this is it going in the right direction I I agree with some of the comments have here we need to start somewhere but I think this is becoming very prescriptive and and and Felix you and I were on that blue ribbon committee and I remember you mentioned on many occasion that the Region Bank building on ponon was a great building okay and I agree with you and I think a lot of The Architects will agree with that with this that building is impossible to do okay that building and that building we will not be able to get with this I w't be they won't be able to get that right am I am I no no I listen I I I wrote phix can you talk can you talk into the microphone please I wrote so you so you know where I'm coming from right on this section I had written ah the formula and then test the formula because one of the problems is that when you write these formulas design with it see if it Works see if you can do what you're saying and that's the problem when you have prescriptive codes after the time it doesn't work right and by the way the Symmetry if the picture would have been taken straight on from University looks completely different the classical component is there not from the angle that was shown to you there but it is definitely on the other side but the point is that when you get into the formulas you start getting into trouble real quick and I I agree with you 100% And then this makes it more difficult for the boa to follow because at least that's my opinion you know I I I um I I think that a a lot of this has been very good and I I read it and you know I even went back and even look at the best practice manual that we had in the city that I don't know how much of this really is is really applicable okay you know I think the the new examples that you're putting in in in there um are probably more appropriate um because you got taller building I forget who I don't know if was Vinnie or somebody says the problem that you have is when you have taller buildings um it's it's a big difference between the think building and a building like this so um I I like where we're going I think there's a lot of things that needs to be worked out I'm I don't know what what's going to happen today with this I mean I I agree that we're not there yet I mean that's that's what I'm hearing um it's very valuable the comments that we got from the architects who are on the board Judy herself who came and told us was there um one of one of the questions that I have is in your staff recommendation on if you can pull up on uh there with me let me get to where it is it was on page two at the top you start talking about the Plaza on page two of the recommendation you say the architectural elements from proportions of the recently built Plaza formerly known as a Mediterranean Village have received significant recognition architecturally yes correct can you go into that you're saying that what they've provided in the Mediterranean style has received a lot of recognition no I think just the built environment sorry the built um project the plaza has received um you know praise as far as architectural quality that it has right mostly on the buildings that are facing fonds to be honest um but at the time the reason it's bringing up is because they have their own pad it includes a architectural standards right and N of those standards the proportions between the bay the the widths of the windows and the the width of the bay the window Bay um and other things have come from those standards that are in the the Mediterranean what's it called Mediterranean Village pad um standards but but at the same time that's one of the most contested projects by sitting on the board that's one of the project projects that people have come and complained the most about right but from my understanding it's not about the architecture it's about the SC massing massing right but but the point that I'm getting to is by being able to do that architecture they were able to get that massing no no theyed pushed over lot of Street the pad came with a excuse me the pad came with a an overall design of the the project on a mask and that's how it was originally approved and they came back to this board three times four times we voted where we got increase and increase and increase correct but it had nothing to do with the architecture it had to do with the F and the entitlement that was being granted to that property and the bonuses it didn't have the bonuses came on top but I don't think it had any bonuses it was all part of a p anyway true but you can't get that height they got bonuses they got bonuses for height well that's what that's what I'm saying is they got the bonuses that came off of that style I know but that's what I was saying saying is this that's a multiplying effect it's a conflating multiplying effect that I think the city and its residents are naturally objecting to agreed no I agree but but here it's being mentioned it it stuck to me reading this that that project is being mentioned as such a great project I'm not saying it's a it's an ugly project I agree um I think what's captivating a lot is what's on the ground floor and that's what Vinnie spoke about is that you're able to look at it on the ground level or the ground floor and see a lot of the Mediterranean style as opposed to just putting everything on the top with a steeple with a roof or whatever is being done but at the same time I'm not sure that myself as one individual or one member would want to have all the buildings look the same no or have the way it's being described here is sort of like here's a buil Mark or here's these buildings you want to design you got to design as these buildings right which is the issue now is now we have eight buildings and that's it and most of them are two stories but to me there there should be there should be more of a diversity within the design and I think some of the design you have good Architects and you have bad Architects and it's really up to the board of Architects and now as a whole to look at the design and say this is good or this is really just a bad job they're just trying to get f with a straightforward concrete facade um but as a resident it just concerns me that the buildings will start to look the same that are being designed the way I'm reading this with the requirements because I think by by Nature most of the developers are want to are going to want to get as much f as they can whether they're going to get approved or not I don't know but because of dollars and cents and square footage they want more F and by wanting more F they're going to say okay this is what you have to design uh architect X they're a good architect but I want to go with the person that designed specifically this only style in this type of building and I just I don't know if I agree with that throughout the City or throughout these areas that those buildings be that way what bothers me the most is what I think the word that was used that Rob brought up which is prescriptive you know it's I think there has to be something more there I think we're in the right direction and I understand to me probably this all started because of f um and it was being granted to people that designed or put a little steeple or just something at at some point in the building and said this is Mediterranean give me my f and I think the purpose is to curtail that and and I could be wrong but that's that's what I'm hearing from everybody in the way they're talking and at the same time there's there's a good side and a bad side to that because you can start to curtail it but then everything may just start to look with the same type of designs that are going on in there and to me I I wouldn't want to see all that it's a different point of view I think that most of you have spoken about um but to me not being an architect that would bother me and and I I I really thought hard about Vinnie's point that he said you know the first three levels is really what you see in a pedestrian area or or in these areas and I think really need to concentrate on those levels even though you got to do some kind of uh a frame or so forth to build on top of it but that's really what the pedestrians to me that's what you see when you're walking downtown or you're walking through a certain area you're you're visualizing you're looking at those areas those windows and if you have to go ahead and take every window and and put some kind of a I don't know what the right word is that that use at the bottom that makes a Mediterranean a s if you if you go ahead and have to put a specific sill on that windows so it qualifies is that really the right thing for those buildings to have I don't know but to me I just don't know if I would want that in all those buildings for it to qualify can I ask a question yeah um if if a developer comes in and they've checked all 12 boxes the board of Architects could say we're not going to Grant you the bonus right it probably a little more difficult to back that no up with but yes I think they have the right to say no because a lot of that language they kind of finesse to make sure that um you're not just sticking elements onto we love it all but we're not going to give you your additional F we're not going to give you your additional height they could say that correct they can so the board of Architects they give specific reasons why I'm not sure I'm not sure you could say that's why I ask our attorney Robert Robert is 100% right there's only one part of your code that does allow the discretion of lowering the amount of the bonus that is when it's an addition or renovation that's the only where the only place that says in fact I recommended where I marked up to have the ability to do that so when you see it listen you did a good job we're going to give you everything that you strive for it gives you that incentive to do a better job which I think that's what you were talking about but the point is that it does a clearly in the code and it says it clearly under where you have the renovations component of it and I marked it up and in there it says specifically that they have the ability of only giving you part of it here it is under your page three section e as an echo additions rest restoration and Renovations of existing buildings the board shall have final determination to the amount of bonus granted right there black and white so so does that apply throughout the whole I would apply it to the whole thing okay I would because that gives you a tool for the board of Architects to say more right if it the code goes on sorry really quick the code goes on for each of those tables those level one level to it goes on to say that additional bonus up 2.3 and up to2 so they're not required to say you get the whole 12 you have. 3 they may feel that the intensity is too much and they only want to give a I guess my point is the discussion about the board of Architects not having control over height they massing they they don't know that chip that's that's the problem they don't you're going to get the Judy can you come up sorry what I'm what I'm saying is that could you just repeat I apologize sure it's really important that we get the full transcript not only because the commission wants the benefit of this so could you just mention what you just said before sure absolutely what I said what I asked really is to Felix's earlier point of what we can and cannot uh speak on it would be great if we could get a written interpretation by the City attorney so that it is very clear and we're not basing it on sort of so so varing um so that was my my my thought is if you you know the when you get the building in front of you initially you know the height right and you know how that building is going to look at 15 stories or you know how that building is going to look at 13 stories hypothetically I mean you would decide hey we're all probably thinking something different yeah what I'm saying is I mean you can look at a building and say I can't look at a building and look at that picture and say that building will look good at eight stories or that building would look good at 12 stories or that building would good at 15 stories I I don't have that ability but I'm ass sure that your trained eye you probably could or Robert's trained eye could say that building would look better if it was a little taller a little shorter a little fatter a little skinnier I mean is that am I way off based on that that's accurate okay so if you have an architectural if you if you have bonuses coming to you and you like the style of a building but you just don't think the bonuses would make that building look better at 15 stories why not just deny the bonuses remember we are told that those are not part I know that's what you're being told that's what I'm saying the practicality of the issue would be to me to Felix's point we're that's what we have being instructed we're looking at the architecture because the purview is not ours to tell them that well not not only that chip but she might say it would look better shorter so no but the the rest of the board of Architects might say no we love it that's where the subjectivity comes inbody to what we Embrace there's nine opinions on the board I mean yeah that's the diversity that we get right right but but remember one thing I want to say though the Alan Morris building it was was not only the size of it it was the architecture right yeah I mean I don't want to not be clear on that that's why we at the board denied it multiple times also Robert is again 100% correct in saying because it doesn't tell you specifically I I I heard where she go oh I I heard you say that it's implied it's it's implied saying up to but this says it Crystal Clear when it says the board shall have final determination to the amount of the bonus granted in my opinion that should be added in the other part because therefore maybe at that particular point you could even start goofing around with certain elements on the pedest pan level let's say for the plazas or The Pedestrian experience Etc and weigh it even more if you think that it deserves that additional bonus there it gives you that flexibility but right now it's not written that way but phelix what happens if the board of AR says no we're not going to Grant you the additional floors right and then they go to commission the commission says well I mean I guess it's appeal to of the you know and then take it a commission and says yes we're going to Grant you the additional floors right so how do you I have a real serious problem with one project that's going up in the city that I'm not going to mention and the problem that I have it's a substantial project they were granted Mediterranean bonuses and I'm more Martian than it is Mediterranean I have a problem with that and it just happened recently it was just approved recently you're going to have issues there's no doubt about it but I think that the first thing is you have to give the board of Architects the tools for them to develop or redevelop the reputation that they've had here in the past of guarding us I I think also that the plaza which I have spoken over and over again as a Critic is that I think that they had many opportunities to do something and still come up with the square footages that they had where it could have been done in a different in a different way it was driven not with present staff excluded it was driven a lot by staff and part of the cooks that were in the kitchen were stopped and it really is unfortunate because that building they put a lot of money into the detailing of that building there's no doubt and you can't bash them for that and they did what they were allowed to do in this city so they can't be blamed for that but what I'm saying is you have to look at each project individually its compatibility and all these different things I think we've discussed a lot of these items and and we know what should and should not happen we could dissect this thing forever but I'm just saying is that we all know what good architecture is and the massing and the scale and the experience are all part of it and we're just falling short and it's very difficult to do it in the basis of a formula look I I uh I agree and I'm going to tell you the the plaza that that project I will venture to say whoever was on the board of Architects back then did not approve that project we on this board did not approve that project there was a city manager that has been long gone okay that has a street name after him in Sunrise that stood at that door and and looked at us like intimidating us to approve the project and I I say absolutely not okay and that project got approved back then before that project was somebody say it was cooked before that project was completely done before he got here before he go to Wi the commission before the board of our ects so and I agree with you and I have been a Critic of that project they have spent a lot of money and have some beautiful material but I don't think that project the massiveness of that project is is what has caused a lot of residents to come out and speak against that project speak against the the um P the Rivier and the one across the street from my office whatever Gable station The Big Box okay so those have been the three that has lit the fls okay tip the bucket as a so so my question Mr City attorney does the board of Architects have the right to deny bonuses if someone has met all the criteria so the board cannot act in an arbitrary and capricious manner that's a general stand standard of all administrative bodies that they cannot act arbitrarily and cous I don't like you so I'm going to deny your application that would be inappropriate I want to point out one section so the answer is they do have the they have to Ability but it you get challenged legally if they do it capriciously right if they're completely arbitrary and capricious they cannot attach a reason to their decision I just wanted to point out under six B about preliminary Board of Architects review it does indicate that the May Grant May approve approve with Mod modifications defer or deny the application they have the authority to do that the only thing is what you ask is if they met every criteria and there's no basis for denying them their um uh right their bonus can they say well you know you met everything but we're sorry we're not going to give it to you if they're acting arbitrary and capricious then there is a review as I recall or an appeal of a b Board of Architects review is there not so obviously they'll go to I believe it's a special master that they go to and they're going to bring up hey we met everything there's no substantial competent evidence to support just like you are required when you make a decision you supposed to have substantial competent evidence well you make a recommendation supposed to have substantial competent evidence to support your recommendation they're required to do the same so my question is if Allan Morris had met every criteria for the Mediteranean bonus but his building was denied why well you know the thing is when you look at this criteria there's a lot of discretion okay and judgment that goes into the criteria so when something becomes a matter of judgment that's in there because this is you don't just check the boxes there's judgment as to whether you met them so in the Judgment of the board if they felt that he he did not meet all the criteria then they have the ability to deny it and of course Alan moris if he thinks they were acting arbitrary and capricious he has the ability to appeal it but but he was also upzoning the property so it wasn't just the Mediterranean bonus which is discretionary sure and and they could and one of the issues you look at in an up zoning is compatibility it doesn't meet compatibility and that's a decision that this board is supposed to and we did that on the first go round right wasn't compatible at 190 ft and we me I remember clearly we denied it three times and and and the board of Architects also says compatibility with neighboring properties and uses right there so what direction from what we're hearing right now I I think my opinion Mr chairman what I would like to do is is pass a motion basically telling staff that they're going in the right direction and that they have to uh refine it more and take our our comments and and try to incorporate as many as as they can where Whitt it down as so you're saying is that a deferral or how do we if that's a motion that you want it would be a continuance what would it be a continu well let me I I'd like to ask Steph where are we as the board expecting this at the next uh Commission meeting is there an urgency because we've had we've had this once we deferred it then we didn't then we had a small board so we deferred it to a full board and now we're here where are we as far as what the board is expecting the commission you mean I sorry the commission um mean the commission with a board of County Commissioners my apology um the commission is anxious like they always are but I mean if the board wishes to haveif comments to implement into this draft of the revisions to the med design we could do that are we clear on what is is the board feel they've made clear to staff what additional changes they want to make because I've heard things like well there uh there was some suggestion that this board uh that the this board should hear it before the board of Architects so that's not before the board no that's okay so what what what are the things that staff has to go back and do that that's Felix why don't you give us a list I'll give you I'll give you a stab at it um that could be dangerous doesn't mean we have to accept them no no okay so so the motion motion is to approve the the uh staff with these recommendations no to to continue until they they rewrite it it's a continuance until they rewrite it they have to get as many of these things I mean there are a lot of things here that we discussed tonight that were much more specific than any other time correct and I think it would be unfair to staff for them to you know kind of Polish it off for example if [Music] and and and maybe you could you could take a straw vote on different items if you wanted to do that Mr chairman what what I would suggest is just it's your recommendation so put in there the items that that you feel we have discussed and if any other board member would like to add anything to it that you haven't added at that point I think they can okay as a friendly Amendment if there's a second but this would be for continuance anyway if that's your that is what you're my recommendations for continuance I don't I wouldn't feel comfortable uh so you're making a motion to continue and you're going to list what you believe the criteria that staff need to address yes sir okay continue perfect we have a motion do we get a well I'd like I'd like to hear okay actually let's we do have a second so let's he thank you he seconded I'm Sor second yes Kinski uh no no no no no we don't we don't have the complete motion we don't have the complete motion is for discussion right got it okay thank you joh but wait so I remembered everything you said you want me to repeat it back no I could say it backwards I can say it backwards there's no doubt in my mind the the way that it's written I'm trying to follow you know the your requirements here but I would say that the best thing is actually to look at your synopsis and follow the synopsis but it's also in the transcribe in the uh minutes that we have that the court reporter has taking correct from the discussion I would say one one of the things um that I that I specifically had mentioned was the two-part boa review approach for the section 5102 which incorporates the design review standards and then section 200 which are the med standards why is it important because you can't get to the med standards until you get the first component done that would have been one of the uh much more different uh ways of approaching this so that that would have been one do you want to have a discussion about that first because that's a big one well no no I like that you like that okay I mean I'd rather you continue okay with what you have and then I think staff's also going to go ahead and look at the minutes from the court report order okay because there was a lot of discussion that took price the second one was the striking out of the sight specific uh upserting the sight specific zoning regulations that are uh mentioned at least three times in in the uh Med bonus component 52 you say striking the site specific the no striking the portion that absur the site specifics by simply qualifying as Med bonus in other words Trump said right leaving it the way was always intended which site specifics cannot be trumped and the only way that they can be changed if they go back to the public hearing process that they were approved to begin with you Ser yes yes yes yeah I agree misspoke you said upsurt no okay okay continue you're correct you're on a roll yeah exactly yeah um does that include the blanket 150 ft that's throughout North ponds in the CBD it it it it would be that by the granting of Med bonuses it it still is seconded to the site specific properties and their conditions which are in appendix a which consists of so you can't do a med bonus on top of the the site specific no no no no on top of a zoning no no okay the way that the code is written now if you're granted Med bonuses you can Trump site specific that's the way it's written now I could read it to if you would like I thought it was on top of what's no Allowed by the specific no what do you mean by Trump you mean I I mean box or o overrule something that normally went through a public hearing to get it approved yeah but is that just height I'm assuming it's just height that's not no there are all sorts of things in if you read the site specifics right they have all sorts of restrictions from uses to height to F very very specific things and and those S specifics are have been part of the code forever since the 1970s yes I'm sorry in the 70s yes no way before s specifics existed way before the 70s okay okay and there appendix a site specific zoning regulations right and and they're in there by section and and component and then each one has its own Merit I'm just trying to um make sure that something that we don't do that should have nothing to do with this that one does not overrule the other one in fact the other way around we also have to be careful not to give a suggestion that rewrites the code no no this this is not rewriting the code it's actually taking out a component that should have never been put in the med in the med bonus component of it what you're saying is nothing here will affect those S specific properties only those site specific properties you know those are Exempted from anything whatever is written there applies and nothing else has been affected I'm going to going to here right I'm going to use an I'm going to use a fictitious example the youth center maybe in 1930 they went to a public hearing and they approved it as a site specific for the Youth Center only someone that's a city-owned property just imagine if it wasn't then all of a sudden you don't want to relinquish that there is a mechanism you'd have to go back to the commission to erase that agreement so people rely on that agreement like a covenant exactly that's why it's so important that we make sure that we protect that but if you take that example if you take the example of a covenant right now the commission can undo covenants that's correct so and I don't think you can write that commission doesn't have the authority to oh no no I didn't say that I'm saying if you wanted to overrule one of these site specifics you have to go through a public hearing process so you're saying in order to take advantage of the med bonus you have to rezone your property to whatever the and basically abandon your site specific benefits is that what you're saying let me let me read this to you which is very specific trying to see where it is and the changes and I'm getting helped with st under page two of the staff report it's item number three uh no uh page two item number three yes site specific zoning regulations and Mediterranean bonuses right Coral Gables Mediterranean style design design standard bonuses slash incentives as provided for in this section may be awarded as supplemental additional intensity SL density or reduction of existing limitations as assigned in appendix a site specific zoning regulations that is crazy that should have never have been put in there because you can eliminate it but you have to go through a hearing process because there were agreements probably made with neighbors and under a public process under a public process how dare anyone say just because it qualifies as Mediterranean bonus that now you could wave a wand and say it it's not important anymore you still have the process I I was thinking more of instead of going through such a such specific change is I was thinking more of just all the comments that we made with suggestions to come back with the language as opposed to well stating the way you're stating it the the the reason Mr chairman that I bring it up is because this is very specific to the Mediterranean bonus okay and that has nothing to do with the price of tea in China as far as the protection of 70 some on pages of listed properties and under appendix a that has been there forever I think it's a protection that exists but if there's enough of a will for someone to say we want to eliminate this because it was maybe archaic or it's run its course we could go through the proper channels of going through a public hearing it's almost the same as changing a plot there's process to change a plat there's a there's a very specific process just imagine if that PL plat process now can be changed simply because now a particular property qualifies for Mediterranean bonus which on top of everything else is discretionary so the way you would have it read would be that Mediterranean bonuses shall not apply to sight specific zoning and that if you want sight specific if you want Mediterranean onus you need to rezone your site specific to the underlying zone no no what I what I would I would simply strike out you can have Mediterranean bonus on something has sight specific what you can't do is take the site specific restriction out of that property that doesn't mean you can't apply for Mediterranean bonus what what they have what they have done is that what you're saying if there's a site specific that says you can't have more than 50 feet you you can't sell liquor you can't sell liquor it was sight specific you can't sell liquor on this property but I I don't I don't know if I agree with that well I mean I'm just no I just I was want to make sure specific you can't be more than three stories and Mediterranean makes it four stories so you can't have that because your site specifics are three stories so you can't exceed the site specifics would that be an example that that that could be that could be an example I don't know what they've what what has been done is just a blanket erasing simply for qualifying for something that is I but those weren't those weren't all I I don't know if that falls within the comments that we that everybody made and we made here as to how to guide them I think I think what's I think what I'm hearing from you is you want to be very spe specific and what to strike out from the code or from from wherever it is because it should or should not be there the the reason Mr chairman the reason I'm um I think this is so important is Because unless staff has gone through all 77 pages of every one of those properties to see what the Restriction that exist there is I I just find it incredible that this was added there where it simply just erases all of these all all of these site specific standards which are zoning standards these are part of the zoning standards under appendix a and and how can you do that because we are discussing specifically let's let's let's just go back to B why are why are we here what why is this brought before us this is to me this is brought before us because the board of Architects or whatever the powers are saying buildings are being designed and given the Mediterranean bonuses when these buildings are not really Mediterranean in style am I wrong you're 100% the scope that's before us but but you're 100% right the thing is that because it is a Mediterranean bonus that does this as far as as negating the site specific standards that normally went through public hearings I I I just think that they're hand inand they're not one or the other but I think that that language should be brought back to us in words separately different yeah I just don't and I don't by the way I don't disagree with you but I know this is I just don't know if that's within the scope of what we're here right now we can make a recommendation that that language should be brought back or something but I just don't see that as to what the way it was brought before us tonight this you know the way that this was surgically in inserted for me it is very suspicious and I think it's a mistake that this doesn't get taken care of now that we're looking at the Mediterranean bonuses because it's specifically triggered once it's a Mediterranean bonus so I'll let it go Mr chairman I'll let it go but I'm going to bring it up privately to to whomever it is that is willing to listen because I think this is a very dangerous p and in fact you know there's always a big bug of that we hear from the city attorney to make sure that we don't get sued Etc if I live next door to something that had a a site specific and the city granted a Mediterranean bonus and changed something there I would sue the city in a New York minute and is that in the code and I'd probably win and that's in the code right now we're not changing The Code by year no we're we're going to leave this independently that's fine but that's part of a recommendation yeah well we're give to them but not necessarily write it or dictate what should or should not be removed to me it should be more look this is the board feels that this is wrong the way it's written so I just want to ask staff this language wasn't actually changed it was just updating how you change the tables and things this yeah right so I think this might be beyond the scope of the title but I think you could as a recommendation say the board should look at Med bonus as it applies to site specifics correct and and and you can include that when you ultimately decide on this item you can say separate and apart the board should look at at how uh Med bonus applies to site specific chairman would it be possible for me to render an opinion because I think I think this is really important right so we as the board staff put this together we the board of Architects reviewed it right but I would have to say myself included I mean all of the zoning nuances are not something I think that we as a board of Architects really understand so it may be that this needs to be workshopped as we did at the board on an architectural level it should be workshopped from a Planning and Zoning level and the implications because I can tell you that I had no understanding of whatsoever so I mean I think it's a great point and maybe it's a workshop because I don't know how long this take tonight to go word by word no no and and and that's what I'm that's what I'm saying is just make a recommendation for example you know for me a Maria replat height of tow houses shall be limited to 45 ft there was this for it to be sight specific and not in the zoning code there was an agreement with people that went before the commission that got this into the code where's my who is protecting me if I'm the neighbor and now someone comes in with a pad that says I'm going 60 ft wait a minute oh I got Mediterranean bonus so therefore I can abuse that no you can yes no you can't because the set specific doesn't allow you to do that no Robert the thing is that the way that it's written in the bonus if you're granted the bonus you could do whatever you want with that no as long as the land use and Zoning supports it yes I'm pretty sure Al Maria Row is not zoned to be highrise shirs that's the underlying Factor low density residential I don't understand there's land use and there zoning and they cap height the both of them cap the height you can't have height beyond what you're allowed to have for the underlying zoning and land use but the land use we're talking about the site specifics yes but the land use if land doesn't support it if land use only is capped at with the amount with the amount of with the amount of changes of zoning that there have been over the last few years last couple decades i''s say I am sure that there have been changes of of of zoning that have occurred on properties where the underlying uh site specific was never looked at and typically they remove the site specifics they remove their property from the site specifics of lcit in appendix a I I'm telling you right now there's absolutely no business for that being there I'm going to defer to the chairman I'll continue if you'd like well I mean for me I like to H my thought was to have more at this stage an understanding of what the comments were and the feel of what the board was looking at as opposed to being more specific in rewriting with the language or the actual because because if we're going to do that Judy is right we're going to go past 9:00 this is going to take a I mean this is more of a workshop type thing if that's what we want to look at I'm not saying fix I'm not saying you're wrong I'm really not I what I'm saying is I don't think it's part of what's before us at this point we can make a recommendation and we can make a recommendation for a workshop and we can make a recommendation to look at it I and and to me I think that the the staff has is going to have the transcript of what we did today and they should go back for us to give them repeat everything that we did that we said tonight yeah I agree okay I think I don't know if if you have enough to say you know I'm going go back take that information and try to come back to you guys with a revised document that incorporates our comments I think that may be a lot more productive and and possibly instead of a strikeout or so forth with those comments maybe putting it in Red so it stands out and you say this is these are the changes that came back from this meeting yeah yeah I can remember what we did today right Mr chairman um uh jumping forward uh the formulas that were brought up by Robert I I agree that the formulas and the best practices should be reviewed completely starting on page eight right I think I thought we were going to just allow the transcript stand as is but I he's making a big statement this is not specific but you're right that's part of the comments that we made those should be looked when they come back I just picked up I I I moved on I was trying to make no no no I I I just I just Mo I moved on to to the next set of comments which were the formulas the formulas don't work they haven't been tested either test them or strike out the formulas so that's on page 8 that's also on page 10 formulas of the golden section and the other proportion system on page 10 for multif family buildings the following about the porches 8 ft the stoop 3T the finished floor 18 in the porches Stoops 5T you know it's it's it's a formula based and I think Robert had also mentioned on the eight on the on the the best practices that he was having a difficult time and so was I on on um a formula based thing where it's very very strict and and there isn't a lot of um uh discretion on being able to move those numbers correct Robert okay not from without the benefit of doing the exercise correct without which is which is test the formula right so then the next item and by the way also on page 14 on the testing on the center line of the open on the open Bays Etc that's also on page 14 and there were more formulas on page 13 on the bottom and if I can interject on page 14 I think there's a typo um under MX3 10,000 you have 14 stories that would equal 83.5 ft I think that's a typo isn't that that should be 163.5 ft right 14 stories oh and you got it down as 83.5 ft yeah okay so that's a typo there second to the last there yeah well those would be short dos and and by the way the other thing is if if I may the other thing is that chip made the point about whether it's a weighted system or not correct okay for one of the examples that chip was talking about is sustainability if you have sustainability you're going to get the same point for Felix would you be okay just saying that for staff to read the transcript as opposed to going because oh no no I I was just doing a general to to help everyone as far you know very very general I'm almost done if You' [Music] like and and and by the way we did not discuss this uh Mr chairman on page 18 uh the developer shall contribute 1% of the aggregate project in case they can't can't make a park or land acquisition or whatever to contribute 1% um I think that should really be studied you know where where our art in public places has been used very differently than the original intention where it's been turned over to developers and and um sometimes that doesn't work well okay and now it's being it was it was just brought into for Parks that's on the top of page 18 I I thought that that is something that is uh is a red flag so so I guess you stand the reason if you if you're trading a park you're no longer donating to art in public places is that no no no I'm sorry it's that it's very similar if as you recall when the county passed it that we we had the 1% so we would the city would get we the city would get the money and then they would deem we're going to put this in a public right away we're going to do this now you you you have you have the developer saying oh I'm going to bring in this piece of art from you know from this artist somewhere or actually uh we're going to rip it out of the ground and bring it over here and then try to fix it up some and then put it in here and and now they don't have to donate the 1% of the aggregate cost so this is almost like the same template the same blueprint for the same thing for now Parks so now you give 1% and and I don't know what the value is it's like yeah but phix up to I mean you got to start looking at 1% for public you know art 1% for open space there is a limitation where no no no I'm I'm I'm not you're going to be extracting from no I'm what what I'm saying is I I'd rather have the open space provided by the developer I don't want the 1% I don't know what I can get with 1% of the the aggregate value of a normal development it probably is nothing you know is this open space fund A New Concept that is of course it is a New Concept flagged in the yeah we discussed it it's it's part of the if you meet six 12 or came out of left field or how many there are it's not required yeah it's not required right no it's part of the this this came out of left field and this is one of the things where you get the check off to to be able to get the bonus it's oh it's one of the it's optional but we weren't fine-tuning anything you know so so now but oh but it's it's not something they're required to do it's one of the options that you can one of the check which didn't exist which we didn't even discuss here tonight because we didn't get there oh I'm sorry I brought it up but I brought it up it was important look I I I think that's about it then well there's a lot I'm sure it's going to be more once we go through it that we're going to encounter that needs to further get refined uh this is not you know and I think Julio this is you know you don't do this in one okay so we're going to have to go back and if the commission is in a hurry to pass this well they're going to bypass us and and take you know this but I think for me to support this we have to do a lot more work oh yeah so we have a motion no that's that's it uh uh there was the we have the second right is there any other comment yes just a question to housekeeping um generally um actions by the board are defined by the majority of the members of the board yes just needs to be made clear just says the board the board the board right before need to be an affirmative vote okay we're going to take a vote on any other comments no so hopefully we're clear call the RO please I'm sorry could you read the motion first I want to make sure we're deferring it to the next meeting corre it doesn't or whenever or whenever whenever they're ready just says and well we what the motion there was a motion but we know I was suggesting that they go back to the transcripts and look at that and come back to us based on on the comments that taking two hours or more they may not be ready at the next meeting well I didn't know if we wanted we needed a date certain or you're Ren noticing I think it's best reoti this oh yeah that's okay call the RO please Kinski yes fixo yes Salon yes chip Withers yes Robert Bear yes AB inste yes thank you um through the chair may I uh suggest that we take a break for five minutes and end our time to 9:15 no no no or do you think we can finish okay then that's fine we got one item left which is the canal well I'm going to go use the canal beer right all right let's let's take a five minute break okay let's let's the last e [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] e [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] oh [Music] get some huh all right let's uh should the last item Mr chairman I'm look well before we read the last item we have to have a motion to either extend our time or if not it's going to get deferred to the next meeting I'm I have a motion to extend the time 15 minutes so we have a motion to extend is there question is St can we finish this presentation in less than 10 minutes it's one PowerPoint it's one slide sorry if you don't know where Mahi Canal is or just one slide it shows you where it is I think this can be done in five minutes I think so to minutes all right do we have do we have a motion to extend by 10 minutes the meeting what did I did I say it's 15 I already put a motion on for 15 you did I'm sorry I didn't hear it so 15 I'll so five more minutes 15 we have a second everybody in favor say I let's do it let me read this first I know also but I'm a okay but it passes I item F1 all right item F1 an ordinance of the city Commission of Carl Gables Florida providing for text amendments of the city Carl Gable's official zoning code Article 15 notices section 15-12 notice to require notice to all properties along the Mahi Canal regardless of distance for any new mixed use and multifamily developments on the Mahi Canal providing for repeal revision severability Clause clarification providing for an effective date item F1 public hearing thank you so J Garcia ping U official so was adding in one sentence um a long sentence at the end of our noce requirement so I have one slide to show where the Mahi Canal is um so it's in between US1 and the coral gaes Canal Way um there are it's the only Canal Way that has um mixed use and multifam certificate multif family uh uses on it um this request came from the waterways advisory board to request that the entire Canal have mail notice like everybody else within 1,00 or, 1500 ft depending on the on the request um that they would receive the mail notice and be involved in the process that's it okay do we have any speakers for this item no we don't in any of the platforms no let's go ahead and close it uh the speakers does anybody I have a question what is the today what is the distances from the property again that you have it's 1,000 ft for a site plan approval but it's 1,500 ft if you're changing the land use and zoning and what is the distance between the to the end to the end it's a little over 6,000 ft 6,000 yes linear feet yes so just explain one thing to me what if something happens in any of those projects no only for mixed use and multif family projects so something Happ on US1 MH the person that lives 6,000 ft away has to get notified correct the way present prepared today yes everything that's in the red right and what's the purpose of it I'm just curious can I ask a question it would have to be US1 or if it's a Jas to the Mahi Canal except for the US one there's one and the only way you can do the project oh Ando and South alhamra where on South H Hambra and cabayo south on us one South H Hambra and cabayo that's mixed use f seeds yeah where the pink is right where it's Z right now so it's not just us one well it's only that right a buing in cabero essentially is where P de Riviera is all you know right and it it extends twice as far on South El H all the way to I still don't I ask a question it requires to be the devel are the pink areas adjacent to the Mahi Canal yes yes they are they are they're buddy oh okay only the only those two pink areas not any other pink only if it falls within the canal oh correct right I just want to clarify right properties adjacent to the canal correct right Budd yes and I just need to ask and maybe what's what's the purpose to notify the person on The Canal at the other end I understand it's residential and if there's a project and they want to come before the board everything posted and advertise but what's the purpose to notify the the person on the very end of the canal that is on Granada so again I'm taking this request from the commission who heard it from the um waterways Advisory Board I think the concern is that it's a limited amount of canal it's the only Canal that really has commercial uses on it and they feel that during construction or during commercial uses that they could potentially impact the canal and everyone on the canal wants to be notified of any changes that might trigger any impacts plus plus I believe uh you know there's that's people's backyards right now there's a lot of boat traffic as it is there okay and I think the neighbors are concerned that there's going to be a Marina at the end which will increase the boat traffic in in their backyards right but the marina is there now right that's currently there right they're not incre nobody's going to be allowed to increase they they feel they feel with the commercialis we don't know oh absolutely because you don't get in in in South Florida you don't get you know more you know usage I but is a marina even legally there now right it's not even legal it's what it's not a legal Marina no they have they have you're saying a public marina word there's not a marina you could dock okay both along the seaw wall and you're allowed to do that today with like 30 something boats legally but who are those public slips no they're private slips back by those by the property adjacent property can bring it back up I could tell you because I looked at this property 12 14 years ago myself okay actually I had another contract and you and they they that property have the right to 33 slips along the seaw wall only for them not for public use so those are there today it's not like they're going to bring a marina you're never going to I could tell you what I was told by the guy from um up in Tallahasse one day you know in your lifetime you're not going to get any more slips what I was looking at before here is the same case you're never going to get any more slips allowed there so whatever is there now they cannot increase it but but if the but if the usage increases because there are not 30 boats parked there right now there's in fact I haven't seen any boats parked back there but if but but if a development comes in and they all of a sudden start selling those slips to the unit owners there's 30 boats that currently aren't there right now that will be passing in back of everybody's backyard isn't that their right but but you're yeah I'm not saying it's their right or it's not their right I'm saying the this motion is for people to be notified of what's happening in what might be happening in their backyard so that they can come for public comment but 6,000 ft away four times what is the typical protocol in the city because this is not a circle this is this is a line that's where the 6,000 ft comes it's not a circle like we normally have if you do right if you do a Google map without the curve what's the distance from the furthest house to the point on US1 oh you measured it 000 ft 6,000 linear feet from including the curve and all the way down to the other Canal that's not that's it's not 6 that's what gor said I live there there were some I should point out 6,000 ft from US1 to the the Granada to the the curada where Granada intersects the Waterway right there that's where Granada comes at that's the that's where Granada into that Canal right yes that's a mile over a mile little over a mile yes I don't know about that yeah it it actually could be but either way those those 30 spaces that are there now if those 30 spaces that are there now if a project goes there would they not be allowed to have those 30 if they don't before us would they not automatically be allowed those 30 spaces Mr attorney I don't know are they allow those spaces a matter I think this one they have permits with the county for those slips but again this is really just for noticing no I understand I'm just trying to understand I think I I can I live in that I live there I live there so the neighbors are very very concerned about what might be going and they want to be sure they know the what's going to going to be going in so they want to be noticed so they can attend public meetings have input but you would think the neighbors that aren't on the Waterway would want to know also well the most affected are going to be on the Waterway that's why the Waterway board said we would like it noticed I mean we have one board already that's saying and has listened to the residents and they said let's move forward with this where does the regular notice so I have a motion to approve as uh this item if there's no other discuss before before we have a motion would anybody like to just say anything from the board without me asking individual people to comment yes I'm trying to just I'm trying to justify my in my mind what makes this so unique I mean you said 1,000 or500 ft depending on the type of change correct correct uh uh that takes us about a quarter about halfway between US1 and uh well midway between Granada and US1 uh yeah that's a long way it's not a circle no no but it's it's a half circle let's say it's a u-shape but either it's not either way don't don't look at this look at what a circle is500 time if if that's well most of that c is going to be um and um's housing so that's not wor about um's not not part of the Waterway I know I'm just talking about normal notification you would have to provide yeah in a circle in a circle in a circle from the from us one from one of those two sites on us one takes you, 1500 ft takes you about a quarter of the way from that distance Miss we're looking at like like 10 or 12 Lots plus most of the uh about a quarter of the houses in that section I I'm just trying to it's not it's not like a remote situation where they're not going to notice is are we setting a precedence and I'm afraid that's what we're going to be doing I can't see why it's a special condition that requires extra notice that's what I can't get my head around well I think it's because there's water in back of these properties well there's water behind a lot of properties can we just ask a question I'd like to just ask a question to council I I reviewed an ordinance that was drafted by staff where I was concerned we need to explain why this notice is different from all other notices and while we have canals that run through our city this is the only Canal that has mixed use or significant multif family uses on it that zone that right most other canals all have single family some have duplex but just one more thing Mr chairman we have endangered species in that Canal okay and and and this these these people that live there that have their the boats on the back of their Canal are impact you know they they they have a relationship and they they they have to guard you know those resources in other words the the the manatees that live there and there are very similar U situations in the canals in Marco Island where the people that own property have a respon a responsibility I I'm having the same issue as jaier what is this I I understand all that they have the right for those slips today they're not increasing just because they don't have whatever 103 bows there now what is the difference why is this so special that requires all the way to the end that is not anywhere else I I just don't see what the harm is in the notification right not not only that it's not it's not the other way around and it's not only 30 boat slips it's boat traffic increased in general boat CRA traffic is going to increase in general not just slipped boats but boat traffic in general if the it's one person at a time only for the court reporter I have I have a boat am I not allowed to navigate those Waters today yes as long as you fit underneath those bridges okay I'm allowed to navigate those Waters right so I the argument of the increase in in in in traffic and there to me is not a volid but this is about noticing so if there is a project that will increase the boat traffic those residents have a right to know how and why the boat traffic is going to be increased and have an opportunity to in put on anything that is going in there so Robert if they put a use such as a a restaurant at the end and now you know you've got a big boat you could go in there that's one boat but now you have personal watercraft personal watercraft 20 people they could go up there they take very little space they've impacted this completely it's very unusual because it's a Waterway and it's the waterway that leads to commercial and the commercial will attract they live off that will attract uses that are going to increase the intensity Jenifer at that project right now can a restaurant open at that very end oh yeah yes today yes do they have to come before us open a restaurant size of it I mean there's existing building right there let's say they want to open a Monty's not that big 30 right there's restaurants there right now or the belli that's there right now right and but there's a sandwich shop there yes I've been there but if good if personal watercrafts want to go there now they can go there now to that sandwich shop let's think of it a different way this is one of the most unusual places that there is here in the city let's say now because of the commercial use chip over here wants to put up a a sightseeing business with shelling and now now he has shelling with with pontoon boats yeah you can make a lot of money I could rent paddle boats I can rent guys we got 5 minutes completely different it it this is a very unique site and it's going to impact everyone up to that turn where the Waterway the the the Mah Waterway gets bigger look there that logic then we'd have to go all the way down to we hit the ocean because they're going to impact all the people on on the Coral Gables water no I said to the intersection where the Waterway is no no no but under your logic how the boats going to get there they not going to be dropped by Parachute they're going to go to up up the G gaes Waterway underneath the Lun Bridge all the way from the bay so it's it's about where do we end this gentlemen we do have a motion by Sue I'll second it we have a second is there any comment my comment is that I would be more willing to go up to minata oh listen we have a motion second have a motion and we have a second any other comment call the rooll please chip Withers yep 5 years no Felix Paro yes Z kowalinski yes Robert bear no AB as inste no okay so you have the opportunity for reverse motion otherwise it goes without a recommendation it's a 33 vote if anybody desires to make a reverse motion to me I feel all the neighbors are going to show up for the project whether you're on the canal or you're not on the canal with what's going on that that's why I just want you to know that's why I voted that way I don't think they notice I'm afraid of setting a precedence we've got 3 minutes before we Sunset does anybody want to go ahead and make a motion to extend I don't but I just want to say we have to be for the residents and this is one of those that we should be for the residents and notify them as much as possible it doesn't affect anything at all except it does Goodwill for the residents who are going to have to live with increased book traffic I'm sure it'll pass a commission anybody want to extend there's no other no other motion so three is a tie and it goes as no recommendation do you want to accept something that is less than you know like have your suggested I would take it to my not no okay I mean I I wouldn't I mean and then the people on the other side are going to say why didn't we get goes to Commission with no recommendation um since nothing else Mr Sherman I make a motion to adjourn thank thank you so adjourned all in favor say I I I correct