##VIDEO ID:5Trg5fi3QtU## h [Music] me take [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] e [Music] [Music] n [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] please take your seats the meeting is about to begin remember to speak into the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record please stand by we are going on air in 5 4 3 2 1 good afternoon and welcome to today's meeting of the land use and sustainability committee uh today's meeting of the committee will be conducted in a hybrid format with members of the committee fiscally prent in the commission Chambers at Miami Beach City Hall and staff and members of the public appearing either in person or virtually via Zoom to participate virtually members of the public may dial 888 47544 N9 and enter the webinar ID which is 8505 59923 037 or log into the Zoom app and enter the webinar ID which again is 855 9923 037 anyone wishing to speak on an item must click the raise hand icon on the Zoom app or dial star9 if participating by phone with that I'm going to recognize our City attorney to establish Quorum uh thank you Mr chairman I I'll do a roll call commissioner Dominguez present commissioner Suarez here Vice chair B hi and chairman Fernandez present AUM is present thank you and I want to uh thank our colleague commissioner Joseph magazine for joining us as well even though he's not a member of the committee and I also want to welcome our interim assistant City Manager David Martinez who together with uh our planning director Tom Mooney will be serving as leaon to to this committee welcome Mr assistant city manager and uh Mr planning director do we have any changes for today's agenda uh yes Mr Mr chair um item number one a discussion regarding the I 395 MacArthur Causeway has been deferred to a future meeting and will not be discussed today and item number 19 um regarding potential amendments to the ldrs and the comprehensive plan for allowable uses and development regulations within the 40th Street single family overlay has been deferred to the October 10th meeting additionally um item number 11 regarding retaining wall setbacks and requirements in single family districts has been withdrawn by the item sponsor item number 11 11 and 15 and item number 15 which is a review and if necessary amend parking requirements applicable to districts where live local projects are permitted has also been withdrawn by the sponsor will not be heard today with that with the changes on the agenda set on the record by the planning director with a deferral item number one and 19 and the withdrawal of items number 11 and 15 is there a motion to set the agenda motion it's been seconded by The Chair by acclamation the item uh is uh the the the agenda is said I'm going to follow the agenda as printed we're going to take items three and four together because they both relate to um Lincoln Road and we'll start with item number two you can introduce the the item Mr director and then I'll recognize commissioner Dominguez to present on her item sure um this is an item pertaining to residential use incentives for ldr and comprehensive plan amendments thank you uh commissioner Dominguez this is your item uh thank you um this item was heard at the last commission meeting I'll actually let Tom uh tea up the details okay um thank you commissioner Dominguez um as commissioner Dominguez mention this particular item which has already been transmitted by the planning board with a favorable recommendation um was approved at first reading on July 24th 2024 and the proposal includes both amendments to the Land Development regulations as well as amendments to the comprehensive plan and it creates incentive areas for non-transient residential uses and these three areas include the mid Beach rm2 rm3 areas which is roughly from around 40th Street to approximately 63rd Street along Collins Avenue as well as the uh West Avenue Bayfront overlay area and then the South Beach rps4 District and the rps4 district are the oceanfront properties that go from southp drive to fist Street within these areas there are very modest increases in both height and F proposed in the incentive areas for the rm2 district the maximum F would be increased from 2 to 2.3 um and within the rm3 areas depending on lot size it would go from 2.25 to 2.6 and from 2.75 to 3.2 and from 3.0 to 3.5 um and then lastly within the rps4 district um the maximum F would be increased from 2.0 to 2.25 within the Bayfront overlay which is applicable to properties in the rm1 and rm2 districts in the rm2 distri districts the maximum increase would go from 2.0 to 2.5 and in the rm1 districts it would go from 1.25 to 1.6 within the West Avenue Bayfront overl area area however the eligible properties are limited to those existing properties that consist of U non-conforming uh or legal conforming transient use and if they agree to voluntarily convert that to a non-transient use they could Avail themselves of that higher f um when this particular ordinance was approved at first reading uh because second reading was set for October 30th um in line with our zoning cycles that have been adopted for 2024 um the city commission re-referred the item to the land use committee for additional discussion prior to Second reading on October 30th the administration is supportive of this ordinance and we would recommend that the land use committee uh provide a favorable recommendation to the city commission for second reading on October 30th commiss M Dominguez thank you uh so the intent of this item is to incentivize uh short-term rentals hotels um to convert from transient use to more residential housing and I spent a lot of time with uh the planning department on this and it has gone to the planning board they were supportive of it I'm very grateful that two of my colleagues David Suarez and commissioner Joseph magazine were also co-sponsors to this item and uh I'd like to see it move forward and allow my colleagues to say anything that they would like to on this is that a motion on the item yes and I'll second it commissioner Suarez you recognized I think it's a great idea and I'm I'm in favor and I'll just put on on on the record that over over the past two decades we've seen a loss of I think 7600 residents in our city which has been a trend that we've progressively been seeing and with this very good policy that you've put in place commissioner domingus um hopefully it makes its ways uh to to the city commission we could see Mr planning director correct me if I'm wrong up to potentially maybe up to 180 units approximately coming out of this that otherwise would be transient units but we now are providing inventory to restore that full-time population that we've been losing in our community that's correct very good job commissioner Dominguez it's been moved by commissioner Dominguez second by the the chair any further questions commissioner Bond um I'm going to be supportive of this also but I do have a couple of questions so um Mr planning director if you could um is there any way you know there's one project that's in the works um and I was having conversation with the developer and they were saying well you know we got this bonus F but to um Avail ourselves of it we have to go up higher so how do we manage that in with this in uh revision the proposed ordinance in addition to the F increase includes a corresponding height increase to accommodate that additional F so if somebody would like to Avail themselves of this with a height increase we don't see any issues with somebody being able to Avail themselves so the old um thing that we've heard as residents so often of yeah yeah yeah we're going to do it and then halfway through the development process like oops sorry we did the math wrong we need more from the city this should head that off to the pass we believe so yes okay and then um the other thing is that um affordable U new non-transient housing is always welcome for sure but is this I didn't see anything in here about um making it housing for the missing middle versus making it housing for the top 1% or whatever this particular leg islation because the increases are so modest does not include a provision for um mandating a um certain sector of housing so somebody could do potentially attainable housing but it would also enable people to do luxury housing if if that's what they desired okay and I have an item commissioner Bond on on the agenda for the September 11th City commission meeting which is a referral to this committee to discuss uh more over overarching policies that we could adopt to address specifically that Middle Market that missing middle that might not qualify for for example Workforce housing uh programs and can't afford luxury inventory that we have so much of and how do we incentivize uh that that um that housing for the Middle Market that's forgotten enough thank you for your comments are there members of the public wishing to speak on Des item if you're on Zoom feel free to to raise your hand in Zoom if you're in person please feel free to come to the podium welcome thank you hi commissioner Daniel Ser with Miami Design preservation League um I haven't really looked in depth at the ordinance because like just it hasn't really crossed our our table yet but just in looking at some of the heights it looks like possibly going up to 15 50 ft instead of 50 is that correct and if that's the case are we going to have any massing studies before we approve this kind of large uh increase in Heights on Lincoln Road um because I thought that was part of the planning this is uh this is item number three I'm sorry item number two item number two it says three on the yes no I think on on on the screen they have placed the wrong item there we go item number two for that yes yes so this item re relates to uh in mid Beach to the arm3 zoning District on the West Avenue overlay mid Beach arm2 and the rps4 area south of fifth I see Mitch novic has his hand raised on Zoom welcome Mitch you have two minutes to speak hey welcome back everybody Mitch nov uh I I would argue and I've always argued that The Exodus from our city has to do with three things uh diminish Public Safety diminish quality of life but moreover our billion doll plus budget has made Miami Beach unaffordable to the middle and those uh uh that that includes our service industry um perur by F increases decided by the commission I've always stated I believe believe uh these increases like vacations of the alley could be decided by the electorate but I am in favor of incentivizing residential housing uh especially along Washington Avenue where we've approved hotels Hotel use and uh the two hotels have become problematic to Residents within the community thank you thank you Mitch any other members of the public wishing to speak on this item seeing none I I will close the public uh opportunity to be heard seeing no further comments from the deas can we show this item adopted by acclamation thank you colleagues this item is is is adopted let's go ahead and uh call upon items number three and four and I'm going to take them together just because they both relate to Lincoln Road they're very similar items with similar purposes so with that uh Mr planning director we could introduce the items sure I'll go ahead and read both in to the record Mr chair item number three is ldr amendment to incentivize residential uses along Lincoln Road and item number four is to discuss a proposal to revitalize the two to 300 200 to 300 blocks of Lincoln Road between Washington Avenue and Collins Avenue including pedestrianization of the corridor other streets improvements and amendments to the Land Development regulations thank you Mr planning director and um and I want to commend commissioner Suarez uh for for for working on this and I'm proud to have my own item on this um commissioner Suarez is tackling the west side of Lincoln Road I'm tackling uh long been tackling the east side of of Lincoln Road and grateful to um Commissioners uh uh magazine as well for uh for for working on this you know we have economy to sustain on Lincoln Road and we also have the economy of our residents who are being pushed out of our city due to the lack of uh of inventory uh that can serve them and uh and that's the goal here the goal here is to is to create housing opportunities for those who are being pushed out to Bickle to downtown to other parts of Miami day County because they can no longer find that attainable housing that once existed in in Miami Beach and they're at a loss um and our businesses s suffer by consequence because there's not that full-time residency to support the the the ecosystem of our economy uh especially when uh like in the summer when when we don't have high uh amounts of tourist in our city I'll recognize my colleague commissioner Suarez to present this item thank you thank you Mr chair thank you um yeah look you know not to belabor what you mentioned we we we do have a affordable housing issue in Miami Beach and a lot of our residents are getting priced out of uh of the market and what a better location to have a pedestrian ecosystem of residential use than Lincoln Road um you have Trader Joe's on the West Side you have the beach on on the other it's the perfect ecosystem for a revitalization of Lincoln Road and you have mixed used uh um businesses on the bottom and so the intent here is to really give in the next couple decades life to Lincoln Road that's not just transitory or or cyclical in nature U it should be booming all all the time um and then let me uh let me pass it over to Tom to give out some of the finer d details of uh of what we of what we worked out and uh before I start Mr chair do you want me to go ahead and briefly explain uh both uh the ordinances for item three and item four because they're separate yeah sure sure it all relates to Lincoln Road uh item number four on the East End of Lincoln Road it's is a little bit more encompassing because it it also involves a pedestrianization and that Future Vision for for the East End of Lincoln Road but let's take them together please okay um as um you may note uh what we did was we created two separate ordinances one that's specific to what we would call the east side of Lincoln Road which is the area between um Drexel Avenue and Collins Avenue and the reason that we use Drexel Avenue as a demarcation point was because that's part of a previously designated City Center area that already had a slightly higher F and slightly higher height uh also it includes the Washington Avenue Corridor which is part of a separate residential use incentive ordinance that is currently pending before the planning board um as noted in the ordinance um and we provided a summary of this in the memo um for the area between Drex and Collins um we created um two separate areas um and this is specific to item number four I'm I'm I'm going east to west but but within the area that is um located um in the area what we would call Lincoln Road and I'm getting to the yeah the first area would be um the Lincoln Lincoln Road North between Drexel Avenue and Collins Avenue so that would be for properties that are located north of Lincoln Road the the properties with with a property boundary on the north side of Lincoln Road all the way up to 17th Street um there would be certain development incentives that a property could Avail themselves of if they are willing to have uh non-transient residential uses and that could either be converting existing transient residential uses to non-transient or new construction of of non-transient residential additionally any non-conforming ener tainment establishment would need to be abandoned if it exists um within that property um if someone is willing to agree by Covenant to proceed with that um north of Lincoln Road the uh maximum F would be increased from the current 2.75 to 3.5 um additionally there would be minimum setback requirements of 50 ft from Lincoln Road for all portions of a building above 50 ft in height as well as a minimum set back of 20 ft from any adjacent um or 25 ft from any adjacent side street um there would be a removal of minimum parking requirements but a parking is is provided and I'm sorry Tom let me let me just back up it's 50 ft setback from the frontage on Lincoln Road and it's 20 feet setback from uh from a side street correct 25 ft from the side street 25 additionally there would be um um a removal of the minimum parking requirements but if parking is require is provided it would not be able to to exceed 20% of the number of off street parking required under parking tier number one um a maximum Building height of up to 120 feet would be permitted within this area um provided that the project includes at least one of four identified public benefits um and this could either be a covered Transit shelter um providing a micr Mobility station contributing to the South Beach Public benefits fund or an expedited building permit obtaining a full building permit within 24 months of adoption of the ordinance Additionally the mobility fee for the project could be wave up until September of 2030 and the um f and height additions and incentives would only be applicable to projects that obtained a full building permit by September 1 of 2030 um for the area that is um we've characterized as uh Lincoln Road South uh and that would be for properties with the lot line on the south side of Lincoln Road um the maximum F could also go up to uh a maximum of 3.5 and um from from which uh Baseline right now of 2.75 from 2.75 to 3.5 you would uh it would be subject to the same provisions as are required for Lincoln Lane North and if additional Building height is sought um one of the public benefits that's required for Lincoln uh Road North would also be required here but since this is this is on the south side of Lincoln Road um and within that larger context of buildings uh to the south of Lincoln Road we're suggesting that the maximum height could go up to 150 ft but again with the minimum setback requirements that would be required on the north side of Lincoln road which would be uh For Those portions of a building above 50 ft in height a minimum set back of 50 ft from Lincoln Road and a minimum set back of 25 ft from any side street and then the same Provisions regarding the mobility fees and the time frame to obtain a a building permit would also be required under the current code what is uh the current height limit uh in these areas um within the city center area uh which is the area between Drexel Avenue and um um Collins Avenue on the north side of Lincoln Road the maximum height is 75 feet but on the south side of Lincoln Road it's 100 feet thank you and then uh as it pertains to item number three regarding the area of Lincoln Road um east or west of Drexel Avenue between Drexel Avenue um and Alton Road um we've created three separate areas um the first um we've called area one um which is located between 17th Street and Lincoln lane north um in this particular area the same uh requirements for non-transient residential uses or the conversion from transient to non-transient Res residential uses would be applicable and if um a property owner is willing to um develop non-r residential uses and perpetuity and to abandon any non-conforming uh entertainment uses the maximum F within this area could be increased from 2.25 to 3.0 if the lot is less than 45,000 square fet and from 2.75 to 3.5 if the lot is greater than 45,000 Square ft Additionally the maximum Building height could be increased up to 150 ft for all Lots within this area currently um Lots fronting 17th Street have a maximum Building height of 80 ft and lots having um and all the other Lots in this area have a maximum Building height of 75 ft um this increase in height within this area would be subject to no off street parking being provided uh minimum requirements for uh a micro Mobility station um as well as exceeding the minimum micr Mobility requirements and participating in a public micro Ability Network uh area two would be the uh properties with a lot line on Lincoln Road on the North side um between Lincoln Road and Lincoln Lane North and in this particular area the maximum F could be increased from the current 2.5 to 3.0 and the maximum height could be increased from the current 50 ft maximum to 100 ft if these um requirements and in incentives pertaining to parking and micro Mobility are met additionally within this area of Lincoln Road North there would be a minimum setback of 50 feet uh for all portions of a building above 50 feet in height from Lincoln Road as well as 25 ft from any adjacent side street um and then finally a multi-story rooftop addition would be permitted above a contributing building currently if you have a contributing building the code only permits a one-story rooftop addition and what we've seen happen in the past is people will demolish rear portions of a contributing building so that they could build a separate detached addition that could go higher this would allow them to actually keep the contributing building but go higher if it meets the minimum setback requirements I'm sorry Tom on on the other side on 17th Street to Lincoln Lane North what was uh the existing height limit uh if you have a lot fronting on 17th Street the maximum height is 880 ft and within the rest of the area the maximum height is 75 ft okay and the proposed would be um up to 150 ft50 okay all right then the last area which is area three Tom you mentioned that there already are buildings around that same height maybe you can explain a little bit more yeah there's uh the reason that we had suggested going up to a higher height within this area is that this area is not part part of an historic district it contains a lot of surface parking lots as well as a lot of existing Office Buildings on both Michigan Avenue and Meridian Avenue um and this particular area given the size of the parcels within the area and the fact that it's not in an historic district um we believe that with an F of up to 3.5 a maximum Building height of 150 ft would be more commensurate for that F and would be consider consistent with that EST established scale character and context that exists currently and that's in area one that's the area between 17th Street and Lincoln Lane North that's correct and then finally uh area three which is Lincoln Road South um these would be properties with the lot line on the south side of Lincoln Road and the maximum F proposed to be increased would be to go from 2.5 to 2.75 and an increase in the maximum Building height from 50 ft to 7 75 ft under the same Provisions the reason we had suggested a lower number on the south side of Lincoln Road is because of its proximity to the more low-scale Flamingo Park historic district to the immediate South which is zoned rm1 and so we believe that uh it would be more appropriate to have a slightly lesser F and height increase however um there still would be an incentive for people to do non-transient Residential um within that area um as it pertains to item number four which is the area to the between Drexel Avenue and Alton row that was a dual referral to both the land use committee and the planning board and then item three which is basically the two to 300 blocks um if the land use committee recommends in favor of this that would need to go back to the commission for a separate referral to the planning board um Tom let me let me just ask you because um one of the important things that my colleagues and and I and I and I think this entire committee has been very focused on is you know as we were mentioning earlier that forgotten middle of uh Market individual that person that can't nowhere near afford luxury and that person that doesn't qualify for for the workforce uh programs that government so often talks about and focuses on and and there is a big segment of population there probably most of our the grand majority majority of our population that's that's out there that depend on that tell me um how how these items ensure affordability uh ensure ensure that um that these don't become luxury units um in in a market where where where perhaps we have an over supply of uh luxury units that are helping uh the hardworking residents of the city uh We've included some Provisions in these draft ordinances that we believe will speak to that the first being the removal of the parking requirement and in some cases the actual prohibition of providing off street parking spaces typically the higher-end luxury units or model want to have um off street parking or multiple off- street parking spaces within their building the other thing that we did was we put a cap on the size of the units they can not exceed 1,200 Square fet again luxury units are typically much larger um third there's requirements for um micromobility elements that would help facilitate the ability to utilize Alternative forms of Transit um than a vehicle um and then lastly which is a little bit more difficult to quantify uh with an or an ordinance um but areas like this are tighter urban areas that we believe would be more appealing to Urban dwellers um and those who are within what we call the missing middle um and these are the types of areas that are more likely we believe to attract uh people seeking attainable housing um because of the fact that it um promotes um living with more of a walkability emphasis um it's these are not units with Waterfront views um or luxury amenities but it is um living that is more urban and lifestyle and more set up for people that like to walk and use micro Mobility um and and one of the things that uh stands out to me especially in item number three uh that my colleague has has sponsored is is a fact that in the draft language it specifically uh spells out that no unit shall exceed that 12200 uh square feet uh unit size uh which specifically you know helps maintain that size that form of of unit that um that is still you affordable I don't want to use affordable because that's overused but attainable attainable to people that can't qualif that can't afford luxury and don't qualify for other types of assistance commissioner Suarez you recognized thank you Mr chair thank you for for touching up on that on that issue and um and clarifying that yeah my intention is not to build super luxury housing on Lincoln Road you know when when I first when I first got to the beach um the first condo well I first when I got to the beach I actually rented a lot and I rented it everywhere from like West Avenue to Deco Plage to you can name it um but the first place that I bought was uh new construction it was on Fifth in Meridian um and it was a Garden Hotel a garden uh unit no parking uh 550 square feet and it it was cheap it was like at the time it was like 180,000 it was something that you can actually purchase a a a new starter home and that's and that's that's non-existent today unfortunately and I want to in the next 10 20 years I want to give more opportunities to individuals who do want to have that starting home where it's not super luxurious but it's it's it's luxurious in the sense to them that they get to go downstairs on Lincoln Road they can go shopping they can go to Trader Joe's they can walk over to the beach and they can all do that on a pedestrian way I mean how cool would it be to actually live on Lincoln Road and and and just live your lifestyle there and you go to the beach um on the weekends you know and if the best part is if we're incentivizing micr Mobility so inside these these new developments the way I Envision it would be having like Deco bike stations or scooter stations inside the building that they can that they ride share and that can get you anywhere on the beach and to a much greater extent this is for people that don't live in Miami beach but already work in Miami Beach because if you pull all the people on 41st Street or the MacArthur and they're going west at 5:00 and you ask hey why are you leaving we can't afford to live here this is the development for those people that want to live here but already work here and I think this is a great start this is something that you know our children are going to take full advantage of um because you know let's let's let's be honest I mean at at you know we're going to put a cap on I believe 5 years for this but even then through permitting and construction it's probably a decade before we see some you know a full impact scale of this and so that that's you know we're thinking ahead we're thinking for the next generation of of Miami Beach residents and um I'm hopeful that my colleagues are supportive of a vision that's that's primarily residential for Miami Beach and let me ask you this um and I want to direct this question to our City attorney um when we create items like this that are incentive based and that have a sunset provision this F doesn't become a matter of right in essence we if if they don't take ad advantage of this to provide the housing that we're trying to attain for for for our community by the Sunset date they don't keep this F we're not we're not adding uh F to these properties they have to earn the properties have to earn the F by providing the type of housing we need for our community is that correct Mr attorney that's correct so to the ex so to that extent we wouldn't have a Bert Harris uh potential exposure uh as we may with other types of of f matters where you give F but then you can't take it away because it's a taking of property is that correct anyone could always bring a claim but I think that if if um if the if the bonus expires um you know on its own ter if the ordinance expired on its own terms then no I don't think anyone could bring a claim on that basis perfect thank you colleagues are there other uh questions comments and and just for the record um I was asked to repeat this announcement if there's anyone here for an item having to do with the lake view neighborhood unfortunately there was misinformation provided to the public there's no item on today's uh land use agenda pertaining to the lake view neighborhood and so I apologize for for for any member of the public that's here expecting for for for any such item uh there's no item on today's agenda having to do with the lake view neighborhood yes yes I and I had done it earlier before the meeting started but thank you commissioner Dominguez you're recognized thank you um I really like the vision um for this project I think it's important to revitalize that area of Lincoln Road and I think it will do a lot of good bless you and um that wasn't me uh but I do have some questions I know that the city had recommended and supported um not having any parking um my biggest concern would be having a commercial loading zone if there's any staff that works at the property whether it be uh the sanitation workers or front desk that's going to take uh deliver iies from Amazon or whatever the case may be that there is parking for those people if the janitor the electrician the plumber needs to come that they have parking on site to be able to fix what needs to get done in in those units yes uh commissioner we did address that in both ordinances we have a requirement for off street parking for building staff Andor service operations shall be provided at the same ratio as required loading spaces fantastic wonderful commissioner Bond so I um I love the idea of of this um I think at various times we've talked about doing something similar along West a um along uh Washington which would lend itself very well to an increased height in exchange for more residential uh Missing middle housing um so in principle I'm I'm in favor of this what I'm starting to get concerned about and including my own things that I've proposed as well you know I I come from cities where you have um retail on the ground floor and then you've got two three four sometimes higher um residential units above it makes for pretty rich and robust um Community fabric it's a live work play kind of environment it's great um I think it could help Lincoln Road I know you guys are working very hard to revitalize Lincoln Road but the one thing I still hear from residents about what a lot of us miss about Lincoln Road is the smaller stores not the giant National operators and if you have people living there full-time they might help support those support those and and find a path forward um but the one thing that I'm concerned about is that you know I'm stepping back um thinking about how all of these very many zoning changes that we are collectively um uh putting forth as as a body um for different neighborhoods around the city North Beach South Beach West hav um Washington Lincoln Road I have not seen and I don't know if you guys have done in the planning department any schematics of what it will do to what our city will look like and how it will feel and what the traffic issues may or may not be holistically and we're talking and it's exciting to be part of a commission that has such a unified view of how do we get more people um who are the missing middle living here again and and rebuilding the the heart of our city but at the same time how does that work holistically so if we do a project here and a project there or a zoning change here a zoning change there I want to see how it all works together I want to see you know because we're talking about some not insignificant height increases here right it's not going from two stories or three stories to five or six in some cases it could be a lot more and it might be okay I'm not saying it's not going to be okay but I would like us before we codify things into law to have I don't know if it's a an a workshop or a charet or whatever to look at all the things that we are have already passed or in the process of passing laid out schematically so we can see what we're doing because it's going to be a lot harder to undo it than it is to do it um again we are super unified in our vision of what we're trying to accomplish here but I don't want to let the fact that we are excited about the opportunity to effectuate change for the greater good not in our haste that we don't take a step back to just make sure we're not completely changing the fabric of our city in ways that we might not be able to uh that we might not be able to undo if if necessary or not not do but modified and so let me let me ask this of of the planning director because so we have uh items three and4 uh which um which you know seek to address Lincoln Road my item specifically on the East End of of Lincoln Road those 200 and 300 blocks of Lincoln Road that have been very challenging in fact you look at the uh crime statistics um you get to the 300 block of Lincoln Road crime spikes uh when you get the official data uh from the Miami Beach Police Department so so it there's there's a duty on us to to to address that in ways Beyond policing uh and it's you know by reenvisioning this area and how do we create community and uh the right type of community that uh that that creates a safe environment um but so we have item number four which is the east of Lincoln Road we have item number number three which is the West End of Lincoln Road separately we have uh Washington Avenue and clearly uh you know we need to see a transformation especially when we look at some of these nuisance establishments that we have there you know places I'll put it out there I know the City attorney will probably cringe but you know Vendome and and exchange and others um that you know you have people massacred outside of these places so so again we have a responsibility to to to to use the tools that we have Beyond policing Beyond code enforcement to reimagine these areas um so we have that Washington Avenue as well um we just discussed commissioner dominguez's item uh which is very modest in in in its in its scope which others do we have that are commission policies that are being driven forward those are the four that are pending now um there is two coming yeah there is an item on the there are some referrals on next Wednesday's commission agenda um one for the cps2 area at Lennox and six Street um and I think that's the only F increase per se um unless I'm I'm missing one from from next September but those those four that you had alluded to Mr chair I think are the four main ones okay I and in theory you know don't disagree with you that we need to look at these together how do they all come together um you know what what does our public works department say about capacity not capacity in our infrastructure independent on you know Washington Avenue well our infrastructure might be able to support the Washington Avenue policy but is it able to support um is the is the infrastructure able to support the impact of the Washington Avenue policy together with the Lincoln Road policy you know um is how do we have the right uh public uh Transportation you know plans uh in place um I'm gonna I'm going to propose for and and and I know we're going in a very good direction here um and I sense support from our colleagues here but I do think it is prudent it is is responsible for us to consider that to consider the infrastructure impacts that any of this has and make sure that we're properly planning would we be inclined to perhaps have a special meeting where we look at these policies together Washington uh the of West Avenue the CPS uh items that we just passed the ocean front uh uh items that we're looking at and these together together so we can analyze them together I I know I I want to know with some of these other items how are we making sure uh that forgotten middle is being addressed I want to make sure that when we're giving F that it's not just we're giving F to create housing well I want a I want a specific type of housing I want to make sure that it's not just housing that cater to the billionaires and the Uber rich people I want to make sure it's housing that you know putting aside the infrastructure thing that we're creating the housing that the people that work at the schools the the the people that work in this building at City Hall that you know young attorneys that are having to go and uh and move to the mainland because they can't afford the type of housing that they want here in Miami Beach because uh the housing has gotten so expensive that we really are yielding that and so I I don't mind to bring these all of these policies together and have that holistic analysis lay it all out in a map seeing where we want encourage that development we can have the conversation to together with a live better policy that I that that I want to develop that I have on the agenda that we're referring to this committee so we can have that holistic discussion I'm open to that if I might oh sorry yeah agree with the thank you agree with the overall sentiment and thank you for letting me chime in even though I'm not a sitting member of the committee you're are a member of the city commission and all memb are always welcome I appreciate that um I did put together just a couple of slides to help convey kind of uh uh the vision if you wouldn't mind uh just going through those real quick and it it's really all the comments that you and the rest of my colleagues have been saying about residential housing are just absolutely spot on it's been my vision for years and years and probably the primary Catalyst about why I got involved with our city uh but also I want to emphasize from an economic viability standpoint you know where we see our struggling commercial corridors but also Mr chair what you point out the public safety benefit we cannot keep fighting Public Safety by just increasing police increasing police increasing police we need to look at the urban environment and what type of policies especially in urban planning that we're putting forward that facilitates this type of environment that sees such uh you know inadequacies in our Public Safety and when we look at uh pet or uh retail Corridor Lake Lincoln Road it truly is an outlier when we have just the commercial Corridor and if we could just uh I'll take 30 seconds to just run through these slides about some of the preeminent retail corridors throughout the world and it's exactly the type of vision that we're looking at here don't laugh because I put these all together myself um and uh I'll stick to the numbers guy I'm not a Arts guy um as you'll soon see but you know kind of mix mix use planning uh yes I I I actually really like that you know some times I can be more effective without words um and this just kind of uh details what some of the benefits of mixed use urban planning are I'm not going to uh talk about these because I think we've hit some of these points uh but the walkability is actually taking cars off of the roads the economic viability there's no better way I'm sorry PJ could we I thought I'd be able to do it yeah the next slide uh the walkability this is going to take cars off the roads whether for residents or for um uh the workers as well the economic viability right we're no longer the only game in town so less people are coming in from across the bridge they're staying in their own local areas like the Design District like Bickle Winwood uh meric Park the Miracle Mile so we need to rely on what's here and it's a great way to help promote Lincoln Road is by bringing our customer base right on top of linol Road and Community Building uh you know in our summer travel in my summer travels I was fortunate enough to be over in Europe it was so great to be in these plazas right where there's a sense of community you not just going there for a specific purpose to go to Sephora yes I have a seven-year-old girl so I'll use that or Lululemon you're actually going there to have a sense of community and I'm just going to highlight uh PJ if we could just kind of flip through the slides um this is over in Paris right this is their main retail shopping Corridor they don't have vacancies there why they have not only tourists but they have building customer bases and PJ we'll just you know kind of flip through each of these this is in Rome by the Spanish Steps their their preeminent shopping district uh Via del Corso this is over in Barcelona uh P de Garcia there wasn't a single retail vacancy that I saw and the sense of community that they had in those areas and this is local here in the US this is Coral Gables what we all think of being one of the most restrictive areas anywhere right the biggest nimas in the world they have adopted the mix use development for uh yeah putting out some Twitter lingo right uh for their retail corridors Rodeo Drive Beverly Hills this is Willshire Boulevard in Winwood and the other examples here are countless um the uh the derli mall in uh South Miami that that's being revitalized by the same architect that worked on our Ocean Drive Vision so really this is just keeping up with the times and coming into a policy that we should have had for a long time but I'm so proud of our commission for at least having the vision to to move forward there so Mr chair thank you for uh allocating me that time uh couldn't be more supportive of this Vision um so you know again I think we're all in aligned with this vision and it's really just a question of um making sure we're doing it holistically and I would suggest it's not just um a meeting where we're looking at documents with numbers but it's you know diagrams and vision boards and and not vision boards like I'm putting out into the universe but you know showing what it could look like um and it's and it's really and and the infrastructure for sure the sewer lines and public works but it's also you know we've got all these These Streets that go this way and maybe we need to reimagine how the streets actually work and start thinking about making a bunch of one-way streets to keep the flow of traffic and really look I mean this is we have a chance for the next year and a half at least to really make enormous change in the city for the greater good and why would we deprive ourselves the opportunity to do it in a really Grand way in terms of true planning true urban planning which your department I know I talk to your staff all the time um especially when I when we were on the planning board about wouldn't it be great if well we have an opportunity now in a number of sections in the city where the commission is extremely aligned to make significant change so let's make it holistically let's make it work let's talk about the the streetcape let's talk about how streets are going to be used let's talk about how the traffic is going to flow you know we we hear um about the plans that are coming from North Bay Village and we also hear that nobody's thought about how that water is going to affect us here in Miami Beach or how the flow of traffic is going to affect us in Miami Beach so we can't control what they do do over there but we can definitely control it here so let's do it let's let's take an extra month or six weeks or whatever it's going to take I mean the next commission meeting isn't until the end of October so this is a great time for us to like really dive into it and sometime between now and then have a workshop and you know whatever the mechanics of that are to really dive into it and and and more specifically you know I think the policies that we have are good and I support these policies um but I I do want to see how do they call come all in together that's exactly and some of the other policies I just want to make sure how do they truly not just today but into the future uh continue to support uh that Middle Market individual uh that needs housing uh you know what what what stabilization we requirements we we put into we work into uh into into incentives could we put into into incentives to make sure uh that um that that individuals of certain income limits are are able to continue affording uh to live in Miami Beach uh commissioner Suarez thank you Mr chair U yeah speaking of workshops we have a workshop on Washington Avenue um coming up I think is it today or tomorrow next Tuesday yeah next Tuesday um so that that's already part of the process right I mean we we we are going to put legislation out we I'm not trying to rush this at all um but what my fear is if we try to put everything together you have this you have something that sort of loses its vision for each kind of neighborhood so like Washington Avenue is very different than Lincoln Road and Lincoln Road is very different than West Avenue um which is very different than Fifth Street um but I think we both have the the vision of primarily residential less less cars on the road and I think that as our guiding Compass is what really is going to move forward I'm not particularly a fan of trying to Bunch it together and and wait you know a year and a half to to to to get some meaningful legislation out um I'm fully supportive of uh between now and and planning board meeting which is going to be I'm not sure when for for this particular item uh when the earliest would be uh and then between two readings um and having a 67th vote on this that throughout that process everything's going to be fleshed out and um if we need to get Public Works to determine if we can handle you know the capacity uh certainly I don't want to build without knowing that we can or cannot um but you know I I think the residents of Miami Beach want to see some change we want to see some affordability in housing we want to see less traffic and I think uh and and not not to mention but we we see vacant storefronts on Lincoln Road we see storefronts on Washington Avenue that we don't necessarily you know there's too much of them you know we we want to we want to push the needle forward and in the right direction um but I think it's all part of the process we this is you know we're on a committee right now this I didn't put this on the agenda this is uh it's going through a strenuous process especially when even the planning board for example only can hear these types of items four times a year right so um we we have to wait for those specific times to do it so I I don't I don't see a particular need to delay considering that this is and this is like a six-month process anyways if you think about it if if I if if I may and I'll tell you as the sponsor of of one of the items and a you know big supporter of of some of the of the other items I do see a value between this meeting and the next land use meeting for us to have just a special meeting put these all together have have staff do an analysis for us uh that we that we you know see how how how these all do come to come together uh I don't think there'll be a delay uh I think we can do it uh we've had uh meetings in in the past and I've made commitments that I would never delay items here in committee and we've put we've gotten through some pretty controversial stuff um that that we've been able to push forward so if um I'd be very willing uh to make sure that that there's not a delay associated with this because I want to see my own legislation move forward get pasted uh without any great delay but I do think in the interest no and the I'll tell you why is most important in the interest of public trust is very important and that's something that's very important to me um for a long time floor area ratio F had been a very contentious issue in our city um and I and and I think it's it it does we we need to show to to the public that we truly are being very measured that we that we are being truly as thoughtful as we can as we put these uh items forward and we have been and you have been we all have been very very thoughtful um and we all have done tremendous amounts of Works behind the scenes in putting these items forward but I think for the public it's important to to to have the public discussion on how they all do come together on how our infrastructure uh can handle this on for example on what plans um from my perspective does the police have when you increase population you also need to increase police resources um you know how are they going to be planning for for that just you know a general conversation about what is the ultimate outcome when you put all of this together and and my commitment would be having that conversation at special meeting between uh the next before the next land use meeting so that we truly do not cause a delay on this on this policy or any of them yes thank you Mr chair so uh Tom if you can give me maybe you can Enlighten us on the time frame um where where are we with this with the planning board um having ldr uh amendments being heard and and if we delayed it to the next uh land use meeting what does that do so the the uh for ldr amendments that include an increase in flo area ratio there's a requirement for two planning board hearings and in between those two planning board hearings there's a requirement for a public Workshop so for instance the um the the land use committee endorsed the Washington Avenue residential use incentives at your June meeting and we were able to get that on the July planning board meeting as the first meeting the public workshop for that item is scheduled for next Tuesday and we anticipate that item going to the planning board for its second transmitt um meeting on September 24th um these ordinances would follow the same track it's basically as soon as we can get them to the planning board and in order for us to calendar on the planning board we have to do an impact analysis where we work closely with public works with our transportation mobility department to do an analysis of the area in terms of the expected impact um we've done that for Washington Avenue and the same would be required for these areas of blink Road right so as colleagues you can see it certainly seems like we already have a robust way of of of of looking at these uh LD we don't the the planning board does right but but Tom you said that the planning board and staff has to look at infrastructure uh sanitation sewer uh Transportation they take that into account with the planning board or is that does that come before the commission uh meeting or both so after the the planning board takes reviews that that impact analysis um they will then transmit the ordinance with all that data to the city commission and as you're aware it requires two hearings before the city commission as well as a second Community Workshop meeting in between first reading and second reading all that analysis is provided to the city commission as well and just to get this right so you we need to have two readings on the planning board two workshops jobs and two commission meetings and we need a six sens vote correct yeah so um and because of that is why I'm suggesting because we're going to be putting our staff and the planning board through that entire process that we make sure that you know that the public truly is very well aware and sees our our vetting of this uh before we give this its final vote here at landuse I Tom let me let me ask you this voting on this today as opposed to next month so that we can in between have a special meeting of the committee to discuss these together it won't delay this by a year just push us back that process by a month correct so it's not that we're going to lose the cycle is that correct that's correct the the cycle keep in mind for f increases is twice a year MH um um and so second reading will always line up on either October or April and so unless the commission wants to wave the cycle and allow the ordinance to be adopted earlier um there there is going to be a a longer cycle for f increases but we don't miss the cycle uh by by uh by having this come to us in next month no t with all due respect I'm not talking about um what is being discussed we are a seven mile island of sand in the middle of the ocean what happens in one neighborhood impacts another neighborhood we're a mile apart from all these neighborhoods I'm not suggesting that we homogenize all the different programs I'm talking about let us take a minute not delay anything by a year or six years or six months but have one month and we don't even necessarily need to delay anything but in between all these 8 million checkpoints which are great because they're certainly different from the way it used to be one of the things that we do is take all of the things that we're agreeing on and plot them out on our on our map and say you know what this is how it's going to look this is what we are doing to our city in the quest of serving our residents best I'm not talking about delaying and I'm not talking about the sewer lines for a development on two blocks of Washington I'm talking about how the city is going to hang together because once this goes we can't roll it back but in the process over the next whatever it is four or six months that it goes through all of our checkpoints we can give ourselves the the luxury of a meeting and a staff resources I get it it's not like it's just going to appear you guys are going to have to your team is going to have to make this happen but to see how it looks like do we really want 10 story buildings on Lincoln Road let's see what it looks like you know what maybe it looks great and we think it's wonderful maybe we decide it's really better if it's between 5 and seven and that's fine but let's have that conversation before before we are so far down the road that we can't tweak it so well and and commissioner bot I think this is where right here is where we have that discussion but I'm talking about having something wait wait I have the floor this is where we have the discussion as to the zoning policy but I agree with you on as it relates to the other impacts which is why at one point there was so much concern in our city that F became this horrible taboo when in fact it is a great tool that when used responsibly can help people people people that are being priced out of our city whose livelihoods are being affected and we could restore the human fabric of this city that we have lost so when used responsibly that F can be great but the zoning policy this is the the body where we discuss that zoning policy but as it relates to having some sort of special meeting between between between now and our next land use meeting I'm very much in favor of that to consider the other impacts that are not necessar necessarily the zoning policies but the impacts on on the rest of of of the community so I'm willing to do that if we have concerns about the zoning policy this here today is the venue to discuss okay this ordinance I'm concerned with this ordinance because it might be imposing on a historic district it might be imposing on the character of areas that perhaps are is more characteristic with LW rights I might be concerned with um you know guidelines if those type of concerns this is the venue today to raise that but I don't want to you know give you a false expectation that if we have a special meeting that in that special meeting is where we're going to be discussing setbacks and that type of stuff this today this nandy's committee is the opportunity to to discuss those parts of the policy yes this is the committee that has those discussions and make makes recommendations if after we have this Workshop or whatever we're going to call it and we look at things holistically we say you know what we have more opportunity to build up a little taller here and we think in in retrospect it might be a little smarter to make it a little lower there when it when it goes to the commission with our recommendation we can make a recommendation with an amendment like we're not signing anything in blood right now and I'm not saying I support this I've said this a hundred times I support this but but I want us to get it right and not let just you know stuff get created because we didn't take the extra step through during the the process without prolonging the process to see how it hangs together that's that's all yeah thank you Mr chair and thank you U commissioner bot for for really your thoughtfulness and you you were very sensitive to uh wholesale changes and and I understand that um and and so am I um so let me just get a couple clarifications so if we do a special land use meeting between now and the next official land use meeting it's not going to delay anything um it might push the planning board hearing a month um because if for instance the land use committee recommended in favor of the area from drexell to Alton today we could probably get that to planning board um in October uh September might be a stretch depending on when the special meeting is we still might be able to get it to the planning board in October okay uh so look if we want to have a special land use meeting to discuss specifically Lincoln rad okay um and I guess vet it a little bit more uh I'm I'm I'm okay with that um I think it would be a little unfair to bring in Washington Avenue um separately because that's already sort of in the process um yeah I mean certainly we can discuss it at the meeting but I certainly don't want to it's not bringing back policy just seeing it okay it wouldn't be necessarily what how I Envision it is Washington Avenue is already in a process we can't bring that back from the process what I am what what I would imagine what I see is given that that's already in the process and now we have other legislative items that we're bringing forward is just seeing how does it okay we've we've already got that in in the process we have these uh that are coming forward it's not bringing it back uh to reconsider it or change it it's just seeing visualize it visualize it all together see you know how much how much housing does it yield you know um you know what does that what does that mean uh in terms for example we know for sure even even by trying to encourage people to take public transportation and even by encouraging people to use micro mobility and telling them no parking we still know people are going to have cars because we deal with this in other parts of the city including the historic district where buildings don't have parking the city needs to think okay we're going to have to make allocations to provide for parking the city will uh and so just you know that type of you know making sure that the left hand is talking to the right hand so that the zoning policies that we are creating translate um to the right type of parking policies uh Public Works policies police policies to make sure that we are growing uh in the right way if I may yeah and then guys let's wrap this up because we have other items on the on the agenda and uh and and commissioner Suarez you want to move having the special meting and we can have staff uh uh um have staff uh work on setting a date and then we can bring this back to the October meeting yeah yeah and and and I'll second that and just to close before I open up the floor to the public quickly please so it it to me it is including all the areas that we're talking about because because we need to talk about you know where the bus routes go and you know it's there are whole holistic things we need to talk about so it's not to relitigate the policy it's how does it work together as our city and that's what the the point of the the meeting is and I think I've beaten this poor horse to death thank you thank you uh if there are members of the public wishing to speak on the item please approach the podium if you're in person if you're in Zoom please raise your hand and before we go to to the public let me recognize commissioner Dominguez I'd had a quick question so if we have a special commission meeting uh in September uh special land use meeting in September can it go to the October commission meeting uh yes the uh your item on the residential use incentive is on the October 30th meeting and if it's discussed as part of this special meeting you we absolutely can still take it to the commission October 30th thank you yes all right with that I'm going to open up the public uh opportunity to to be heard Daniel you have two minutes to speak thank you Daniel Calo with Miami Design preservation league so this is a very important initiative and so we're all happy the commission is taking this on but I do want to say that in 30 plus years of urban planning that the city's done they've always had Master planners come and make what's called a vision and thank you for commissioner for bring that up because this whole city is a vision it's built on visual visions of what we want to make and so me personally reading the zoning I don't understand it I need to go home maybe go somewhere quiet and understand it because there's no visual at all in there unless I miss something so I'm really hopeful that you do heed to the suggestion that we design the vision that we look at Lincoln Road what is the maximum height that will be compatible for the historic district and also adjacent to Flamingo Park uh neighborhood because without that I just can't see this would be the largest up zoning and now without a vote a referendum so we've got to convince us and the neighborhoods around these areas that it's a right thing to do so I would ask that you engage in some massing diagrams for the next meeting thank you thank you Tom it would it would it be possible to get some some massing visuals uh uh at that at that meeting yeah we've actually put together some massing visuals for the Washington Avenue proposal that we shown to the planning board and we'll make those part of the package and we can do the same thing for Lincoln Road um when it when it comes back to you thank you with that uh Wayne Roberts on Zoom uh welcome uh please unmute yourself thank you Alex um I got my first question is um that the there was statements that the developers would profit off er that um that the residential units could not be converted into short-term rentals or monthly rentals um but can the commissions in the future change that ruling and make it on a 47th vote um um uh Tom I'm that's I'm sorry uh Wayne and I'm just gonna pause the timer uh because I believe this is an in Covenant uh that becomes a legal document that's that's uh registered with the courts and runs with the land is that correct Mr attorney that's correct and so would a future commission be able to change a covenant uh that's registered with the courts the commission would need to amend the code to do that and would also need to release the Covenant okay thank you right right so four sths in the it take five V to the code and right it would take five V so the proper the proper really is you know it's disingenuous to me but um additionally um uh 150 ft on Lincoln Road just you don't need a visual to to S to see that in in your head um we're not Miami I don't want to be Miami this city the residents of the city has basically voted down fa every f um ruling uh or referendum that that was profited by the Comm missions of the past [Music] um I understand the commercial the brick and mortar commercial uh way of life of America Has Changed dramatically over the last 20 years with Amazon and big box stores I fully understand that and we have to do something to uh make those uh investors and land owners um successful um as well as the city I don't think 150 ft makes any sense what whatsoever on Lincoln Road um you're talking 15 stories wholesale uh there you know there's got to be some moderation and a visual will certainly make it uh evident to anybody in this room uh that that would change the Dynamics of Miami Beach in a in a a truly negative way and that's what I have to say about that thank you thank you Mr Roberts and just and just for clarity um I believe that that an item number three that 150 ft uh applies for the areas north of uh on on the areas from 17th Street up to Lincoln uh Lane North where currently uh you'll see like for example on Meridian Avenue Mr plany director there currently are buildings that are close to pretty pretty close to that height is that correct correct okay but then on the other parts for example it goes nowhere near 150 ft and the other parts it goes to 100 ft and other areas to 75 ft uh so it does it it that's in a on a smaller area where it would go up to 150 fet and it's because it's in context to the height that's existing there today correct not on paper but on the built height that currently exists correct thank you uh Peter welcome Peter cannabis one Lincoln Road Ritz Carlton I just want to say that this is probably the most positive and uplifting City meeting that I've ever attended uh I really appreciate the sentiments I've heard today particularly the efforts of Commissioners Fernandez and uh Suarez um I just want to quickly qu clarify my role here uh I've just been trying to provide practical information to the city and this committee um to help Revitalize the um particularly the 200 300 blocks but in a meaningful way that actually works um neither my company nor any of my partners have any economic interest in the two and the 300 block but the the people this is really all about people I think Morris Lapidus all said everything he did was all about people and I think all of us really believe that so the the people that support our community the residents and the tourists alike um they judge the quality of life at a neighborhood level they don't look at building envelopes the way that uh developers do so um anything we do really must be about uh rebuilding neighborhoods that really has to be our goal and I think that's the sentiment that I've been hearing here today thankfully um the pattern that I've been seeing on East Lincoln Road uh for a number of years now is kind of a Devolution uh to almost uh what it used to be when uh my brother and I foris came here and put the Ritz Carlton in it was a very rough neighborhood at that time uh I see that cyclical pattern uh happening again and you know a couple years ago I had the Good Fortune to find a visionary commissioner Mr uh Fernandez and um we shared the common understanding that um a public private partnership was a good way to leverage limited City funds to achieve districtwide results and in absence of a master plan impactful District plans can um get us to some of our desired goals quicker and that's sort of what I've been trying to um you know work with the cooperation of the city and commissioner Fernandez so um I know that uh we have uh produced some suggested uh legislation and I know staff has also as Tom uh clarified today come up with their own um uh visions and I think that this is really a process I've heard both Commissioners Suarez and uh uh bot uh speak today and I think each of them is a little bit right this is this is a process and if we're going to get this right the devil is in the details yes we do need to do massing studies but not just for the city develop need to do them too because at the end of the day for this to work they have to back in to something that's economically feasible so they're going to have to do their own studies um I just want to say that uh this is going to be my last development this is my personal swan song I'm off to other things uh as the owner of one Lincoln Road I really feel an obligation to um to add to the legacy of the people who labored before me to maintain Lincoln Road and keep uh keep it what it is I would like to yeah I I just I I gave you an extra minute uh so if you could wrap up your stat I'm I'm done I just do have one other request I have a very brief uh video that uh I would like to show you I think it's under two minutes I think it speaks to a number of comments I've heard from commissioner bot and some of the other Commissioners I think it may be helpful if you would allow me to show that um Mr director have you reviewed the the video is this the video that you had forwarded to us on um and I think it's specific to the two and 300 blocks so let me let me let me let me let me do something let me there's other members of the public that are still on Zoom let me finish with them uh and out of a courtes courtesy to you because you have been so Hands-On with your time uh sharing your vision I I'll Grant you the time after and done with the with the other members of the public all thank you thank you uh Mark needle you have your hand raised uh welcome you have you have two minutes to speak hi I uh have not had a chance to read any of this um I'm just listening and uh there's some things about it that um that I've that are appealing to the approach the idea that there is that this we're talking about proximity to public transit eliminating the parking to reduce the massing uh the unit size I think I heard there was a Max of 1,200 the average should be lower so that the uh it matches the affordable the naturally affordable mix uh that works in a neighborhood like Flamingo where I live um I would I would just say um anytime you're talking now about increasing F uh I really agree with the sentiment that you need to make sure the public understands I could go from supportive of this to very uneasy about this depending on um whether the the plan you know how how much height is in involved in this how much is the stepp is there appropriate stepping away from uh from historic uh areas um I would just say this don't go for a home run when you can start build a rally with a with a single and then another single and so forth uh if if people have the sense that this is an overwhelming tide of things that maybe in well intentioned but not fully thought through um it'll make people like me very uneasy and it'll make other people probably uh you know even less supportive whereas going slowly and build going for the small winds and making it very understandable that these are incremental changes that have uh leverage larger policy you know living changes for the you know the shift uh is important one other thing I do think you need to address uh through the code a way to uh if if a property is built with a bonus uh that is um that is six7 vote I think it should not be withdrawn with less than a 67th vote the code should address that and make it very difficult to circumvent thank you Mark um and Mr attorney let's let's work on legislation um regarding the amendment to a covenant that's proferred um specifically as as we were discussing if someone propers uh voluntarily propers a covenant to not have short-term rentals in their property and that's part of an f um incentives as granted through a 67th vote of the city commission it only stands to reason to me that a reversal of that that would then allow transient or shortterm should should at minimum also require a 67th vote of any future city commission uh and so I'd like to work on legislation on that we we can look at that as part of all of these U ordinances that are moving forward and you like to co-sponsor that well well wouldn't that be part of the original yeah we can include that as part of each item yes so so Washington correct okay okay perfect but as a standing policy in general I think we should have that standing policy uh for any future you know or even past for example we have uh you know in the CPS districts in south of fifth we have incentives F incentives that were actually approved by the voters we have a number of f incentives to do away with transient and short-term that were actually approved by the voters um you know a fourth seventh vote of a future commission shouldn't be able to do away with that Covenant that the voters you know indirectly approved and so and so I just want to make sure that aside from what we bake into these pieces of legislation we have standing legislation that would apply uh that to amend future covenants to do away uh with um with um with short-term rental prohibitions that it required that 67th vote thank you Mr attorney any other members of the public wishing to speak Annabelle good afternoon everyone thank you for this opportunity to speak I just want to say that on behalf of the your name for the record please Annabelle yis yes on behalf of the bit I think you know we are feeling very positive and and we welcome this opportunity to reimagine the road and what it could be um but I also don't want it to stop the train from moving forward because I think we're at a point where it's a critical need now to really design what Le R could be in the future and we know how long things could take sometimes so while I I do understand having a visual I do understanding what it can be I think a lot of these AVS are not going to be front facing on linkor road there is going to be a setback I think it's been very prudent and thought out process of the height um we're feeling very positive this is something that can move forward and it will be very positive for the road we need year round residents and this will afford the opportunity for Link Road to have that and I think the businesses will see the success of having that so thank you for the opportunity thank you Annabelle and thank you to all the members of the Lincoln Road bid and the staff for the great work that you're doing trying to keep the energy alive on Lincoln Road thank you for being here Mr Larin welcome you have two minutes to speak so good afternoon Mr chairman board staff Michael Larin T Health BC Boulevard here today representing the Ritz Carlson ownership group with Peter canavos staff has done a great job in drafting this legislation I just have one minor change I'd like you all to consider and it's absolutely exciting that you all have recognized this shrinking City phenomenon and the debilitating effect it's having upon our city in terms of so many different things um one thing I want you all to consider are the setbacks what I've done I've highlighted our language in red and the setbacks as Tom has drafted it it's after you get to 50 ft in height then the tower portion has to set back 50 ft Fe from Lincoln Road and then 25t from the side streets I think that's a bit much it's it's too much and what I'm recommending in in response to that is that give this door preservation board the sole discretion to say okay if it's not going to be 50 feet then it can be reduced to 20 feet and then balconies can also encroach into this 20 foot area by 10 feet because everyone nowadays wants an expans the living area with their balconies I think when you with the with the depth of these Lots is not so great these are not Ocean Front Lots which has an incredible depth to them these are lots and as you go up and down Lincoln Road the depth of these Lots shifts you know as you go farther west they don't get as deep from the 200 300 block there's somewhat deeper on the south side because there's a private drive there but I'm asking you all to consider getting some flexibility within here because I'm concerned and I don't have the benefit of a masing study yet this is just my gut instinct telling you all that I think a 50 foot setback on lots that are not so deep is oppressive and it might harm the Redevelopment effort thank you Mr Lin um with without a massing study I can't agree to this amendment to at least to my piece of of legislation um and and just just to you know educate myself and and the public Mr planning director right now I guess the requirement is is uh there has to be uh a line of sight uh study uh to understand and the impact of of having setbacks and not having setbacks and to determine what the setbacks would be is that correct yes the line of sight's taken from across the roadway and it um it's a line drawn from approximately six feet high at a diagonal to the lowest point of the building and then it continues of and this and our draft policy did away with that and it said okay we'll do uh a standard 50 feed because in fact even the line of sight study could have required a greater setback correct and so as it is you know we are providing already an incentive so let's let's look at the massing let's see what the massing tells us uh and uh and as part of the review because we're going to have this massing at our special meeting uh and uh and hopefully we can uh you know consider this bet this to determine objectively with visuals what the true impact of the setbacks would be are there any other members of the public wishing to speak on this item on Zoom you can raise your hand or in person come to the podium seeing none I'm going to close the public opportunity to be heard um as a courtesy uh to a great stakeholder uh Peter uh who has been uh a great uh wealth of information and wisdom in urban planning uh uring his fion I'm going to allow for staff to show the video that's been sent uh to the planning securing the future of Miami [Music] Beach we all know the problems of crime and drugs the city has been losing population for many decades shrinking cities create long-term problems vibrant cities need vibrant populations vibrant populations need vibrant amenities in safe spaces but where in a builtup city can we create these spaces the Washington Avenue and Lincoln Road corridors have the potential for reurbanization so how do we do it through urbanism 101 by density by mixed uses and by an architectural regulating plan successful cities have a pattern of decreasing densities radiating out from a mixed-use urban core but Miami Beach's City Center is the reverse of this pattern it's neither dense nor has mixed uses to change this condition we must correct two historical elements from its Inception Lincoln Road segregated commercial and residential uses bankruptcy and the depression halted Carl Fisher's use of taller buildings causing the risk averse developers of that era to put up lower profile structures the Lost synergies of this land use pattern created a vulnerable and Perpetual roller Co coaster economy for Lincoln Road and the City Center that causes economic underperformance even to this [Music] day our task is clear we need to create more residential combine it with retail and Commercial and clean up our streets to eliminate crime and drugs we need new land use and zoning guidelines this effort requires certain principles property owners and government must cooperate closely to meet the objectives of each regulations must incentivize owners to reinvest in New Uses incentives must encourage rapid action by owners to alter their properties and the regulation should employ visual elements to help ensure architectural integrity together we can turn this into [Music] this thank you um and uh so there was a motion on the table uh that I seconded to to have a special meeting of the landuse committee staff will work on on scheduling that meeting and we'll bring this item back to the October meeting of the land use committee and at that committee meeting it is my expectation for there to be a vote on these items okay with that uh we can continue to item number five staff staff uh staff is going to work on that because I don't I mean what is there is there a date that anyone would anyone like to propose a date September 19 September 19th commissioner Dominguez is proposing September 19th is that going to provide staff enough time to to prepare information massing studies and the type of information we would need yeah I think that it it might be a tight print deadline but I think that we could have um everything prepared by the 19th Tom what's that when you mean a tight deadline for print to when I say a tight deadline to print we probably wouldn't be printing it until like a few days before as opposed to a week before I would say let's say because I also do believe you know whatever you prepare it's only proper for the public to get it you know be able to read it we're going to have a public discussion the 26 could work uh on on my calendar in in the morning I don't know if the 26 can work with uh I'm going to be out of town I have I have a marine conference on the 26th okay 25 and 26 how about on the uh 27 24th the 27th could the 27th work that's also the 27 it's from the 25th to the 27th um 24th 24th also works before the senior B September 24th Tuesday that works for me okay we could accomodate on the 24th there's a planning board meeting the 24th um but that meeting should be over by by late afternoon if you wanted to have the meeting like around 3: or 4 that that that works for me uh and Tommy you're sure we'll be able you'll be able to put together the comprehensive information we'll we'll need by that date and you all do great job uh in preparing actually some grade um analysis zoning analysis for the planning board and I would say that's the level of analysis that would be great to have for uh this meeting okay uh you know we often don't get that that level of information at the city commission level because we're not the local planning agent gency but I would say on something as substantive and important as this it'll be great to get that level of information all right so with that uh we'll have a special meeting of the land use committee on September 24th and the item will be heard for a vote on in at the October meeting okay with that Mr director Let's uh introduce item number five okay um item number five is amend the Land Development regulations to allow for administra review and approval of understory areas and to review the current maximum Building height requirements for single family homes to promote resiliency and reduce flood risk commissioner Suarez this is your item uh I want to recognize you to speak on this item thank you Mr chair so as we have seen over the last I think a couple months where we've had some serious rain events where we've had probably hundreds of millions of dollars in home in Damages um from 100e storms that were back to back in a matter of days that Miami Beach is very susceptible to to climate change and we're at a critical point now where we have a situation where weather patterns are very unpredictable and one thing is for sure Miami Beach is flooding more and more and one of the issues isues for single family homes is flooding spe especially on Alton Road as we have all seen um and so I I did a little research and I I wanted to see how we can ease the burden of property owners to to raise or to to to mitigate this sort of damage from um from flooding and it turns out that uh there is a particular way to build a house where you have an under story uh very similar to the single family homes in the keys or it's like on stilts um however the under story doesn't doesn't visually appear to be on stilts uh it it uniformly designs for the rest of the house uh and if you are a homeowner and you want to build a single family home without having to go through a cumbersome process with the drb what you can do is you can build a a mound or like a a hill that's a mountain yeah and uh you can buy you could sort of bypass the the drb approval uh if you want to build an understory which really has a lot more value uh visually speaking and uh aesthetically and in actual value because those homes are are more valued uh financially uh you have to go through a drb approval um and not to mention that when you when we encourage homes to be built on these large Mounds for flood of elevation any sort of nearby home that is not that that doesn't plan on demolishing and building up they're more susceptible to flooding because water will uh dissipate to the next the next door neighbor um there's less there's more water to displace and so with an underst story on the other hand it's meant to flood so if there is a catastrophic event or there is a a major rain event and there is flooding on the first floor it's designed to be flooded for example example it's a storage it's a garage it's where you could put a ping pong table if if you will uh it has many uses it's not considered living area um and so you know one of the things that I've consistently heard and everyone has heard is the building process is is very cumbersome to get a building permit this is one of those blockades of getting a building permit most people do not want to go to uh go in front of a drb because you have to hire typically a a a lawyer to help you through the process and typically it's going to take more than one uh review on the drb and so staff recommended this I believe at last year and it we did the resiliency code yes um and it was a very tight decision given the fact that we we've had all these rain events in the last six months they're just going to get worse and I certainly do not want to encumber our residents on on resiliency I think we should make sure that whatever incentives we have to upgrade the infrastructure of their homes whatever we can do for them let's not put any roadblocks in the in front of them so uh I welcome the feedback of my call thank you commissioner Domingas you're recognized thank you um when I started the resiliency was just being rolled out and it was actually my item for it to go to drb and it was at the recommendation of uh speaking with several staff members so it's interesting that now a year and change later we're trying to take away the drb um process from it I certainly don't want to encumber uh residents but it was put in place for a reason and I like to hear from uh Tom Mooney to see uh what's changed in the year so just as a point of clarification when we um brought the resiliency code and the ldr updates to the Commission in 2023 there was already a requirement in place for drb review of understory homes what we had recommended is that be removed and that they be able to be approved administratively the commission disagreed with us um and left the drb review in so we had recommended that the drb mandatory drb review be removed um but the commission disagreed and and left the mandatory drb review your mic is not on yeah what are the implications to take away uh the drb review so um if drb mandatory drb uh review was removed um any applications that sought waivers or variances would still have to go to the drb um because it it wouldn't allow those but what would happen is people who are proposing an under story home that did not seek variances or waivers that are basically built in accordance with the code they would no longer be required to go before the design review board the the understory homes could be reviewed administ aely so let me just speak on this single family um this is my observation on it independent of staff's position implementation wise the homes that have the underst story I believe I personally find them to be less visually and anesthetically impacting at least adversely in single family neighborhoods especially in single family neighborhoods where we're trying to preserve historic homes what I've witnessed is that when you have when you don't have the underst story and then they need to build a you know BFE so they create the mountain and the retaining wall that has a greater impact on the Aesthetics and on the surrounding homes than the homes that have the have the under story and it almost forces the the the surrounding homes to be demolished and raised to be at that same elevation and so if if any needs to go to drb in my opinion it should be those homes that don't have the underst story because of the impact that they're going to have to the adjacent properties and so because of that I from from the implementation of underst Stories the the the impact that under stories have on a on a budding properties I have not seen a negative impact in fact I have homes around me neighboring me to have under stories and quite frankly I think it's beautiful I think it's I I think it's great it does serve an important resiliency purpose and you can still have an older home an older low-scale home next to it that's not visually impacted by the retaining wall by this monstrosity of amount and what I would do uh commissioner is not only support what you're proposing I think the opposite should also be done if you're going to if you're not going to do the underst story and you're going to do the mound because of the greater impacts you are having on the surrounding homes then that does have to go to the drb for for for review Mr chair I I totally forgot I have a presentation if I can put it forward it's a couple slides uh PJ if you could put it up please uh okay just so that everyone gets sort of like a visual on under stories if you go to next slide please uh this is the goal approve underst stories administratively based on resiliency code recommended by the administration the understory is a superior type of home understories offer better C catastrophic storm surge protection better rain event flooding protection and more usable space Hills mounts and water downhill to flood the neighbors under stories currently require drb approval we need less resit tape for building permits not more uh next slide please uh couple more things prevent water from reaching the interior of the home during floods provide elevation without requiring sign ific significant top topographical changes like grading building on an artificial Mound uh allow for the home to be blend into the existing landscape can be more cost effective than constructing a hill or Mound and provide insurance discounts and so that's important because as we all know insurance is going up significantly and providing this is certainly a benefit to insurance cost next next please um consistent of non-habitable spaces like a parking garage or storage uh it can be vented to allow flood waters to FL to flow through without creating structural pressure actual and believe it or not there is structural pressure when you have a mound Believe It or Not which is what I've learned um allow water to flow naturally naturally beneath the structure helps prevent water from pooling around the foundation reducing the chance of erosion so this is another thing so if you notice some of these homes with Mounds on on it after a rainstorm it's sort of just the there's rain puddles just sitting everywhere in front and on the sides and they're not supposed to be because they're supposed to be able to retain the water on property but in implementation the water does flow and they're not able to truly correct me if I'm wrong Mr Mr planning director I mean when you have that mountain you're supposed to have a certain level of water retention to to avoid that uh overflow flooding to the surrounding neighbors correct and and and and P if you go to the next slide I don't want to I want to go over some visual so you know these are some visuals um of of the homes and you can see the under story uh you can go to the next slide I think it gives a better bit better view go to the next slide this is more representative of of of an underst story again it's very similar to the Keys and as everyone knows whenever there's like a hurricane that goes by the keys they're required and they're actually mandated to to to be built with an underst story uh next slide please this is an actual home that was built uh and has an under story in Miami Beach next slide please uh another rendering and as you can see it's it's even even the even the Landscaping sort of Blends in okay um and it's more visually appealing especially from the ground level exactly next slide there just another one and I think that was the last one in the PJ yeah so you you could you can you could you can uh cancel the slideshow I want to recognize commissioner Dominguez but first let me just ask a quick question the home height is there a difference in in the home height when there's an underst story as opposed to there not being an underst story under stories are allowed to have three additional feet of height for purposes three feet yeah three feet so that's not even that's like and how much is one floor one floor is typically anywhere from 12 to 14 F feet okay so three feet so so it's not that an under story can have an extra floor of height they're able to have three feet yeah and predominantly so that the understory area is livable and or usable I should say and those homes that don't have an underst story that are new when they create that mountain they would generally then be more or less the same height they would be allowed to build the same height except for those three feet correct and in some instances is they might build to close to the same height because height is measured from base flood elevation plus up to a maximum freeboard of 5 ft so if somebody does a mountain that is at BFE plus 3 BF plus 4 the two story height is being measured from there okay thank you commissioner Dominguez uh when something's administrative review then that means that the neighbors don't have a hearing they don't know anything about it like what happened with you and Meridian with the Airbnb it was administrative review so you had no idea that it was there that was a change of news yeah that was but it was administrative review is is my point as opposed to um but what we ended up doing was what we ended up doing when um when when there were administrative reviews we required a notice of the administrative review as a result of what happened uh in south of fifth uh in this case uh if there were to be an administrative review of the underst store um what would be the notice requirements to to the neighbors to commissioner uh dominguez's point in historic districts we have a couple of different notice requirements one is a posting so if something is not required to go to the historic preservation board the property is posted that same requirement does not apply to areas outside of historic districts so in single family districts when somebody makes an application for a new home if they're not required to go before a land use board there's no minimum notice requirement so maybe we could maybe you know would it be possible to and and and to your point commissioner Dominguez because I agree with you residents do require do deserve a certain level of notice um could it be incorporated into the ordinance for there to be a notice posted of the administrative review in the event the public wants to provide a comments stop it it could be incorporated but since there won't be a board hearing you know any any comments from the from the neighbor would have to be sent to staff yeah well but it also provides the public the opportunity to be able to request staff for example for a rendering and they want to know okay what's going next to my home and and that type of stuff right um so you know yeah yeah exact look if you would agree sure if if we if we want to provide neighbors with notice that that's always important that that's totally fine with me um it's again I'm not trying to to to to to um make the situation between neighbors difficult I'm simply saying that you know this is a staff recommendation that was passed up at the last commission the last Commission in my opinion got a lot of things wrong I think we're here to fix it the building department process is broken and these are these little wins are something that we can do to really make it easy to build in Miami Beach not only make it easy but Build a Better Home and and a more resilient home so some a home that can last the next hundred years and so um I'm okay with uh with with letting the the residents know um a posting requirements sure so with that would you move the item and I'll second with the chair yeah yeah commissioner Bond and then I want to open up to the public and so we can then move on to the next item but by the way great item second yes okay so commissioner bot so I again appreciate the idea to make this more streamlined and to make it easier for people when I was on the planning board Alexi uh chair Fernandez I don't remember if you were still on the planning board with me or if you had already become commissioner but there was an item or a couple of items I don't remember where we were presented with the opportunity to take um the vetting process out of the board's hands and give it to the administration as an administrative review and the planning board soundly unanimously rejected that because the benefit of having a Board review a project means that there are more eyes on a project and issues that might not have been um recognized or you know opportunities to improve the project get discussed and and and Incorporated and you know if there's a way to do something between an administrative review even with a notice because I think no body is going to understand how that works and sending in your comments does not allow for a rob a robust discussion to try to find the best solution so I I don't feel like that's sufficient but I do understand the desire to to make this a more streamlined process I don't know what that solution is but I'm not comfortable with it the one thing I would say commissioner is that these are not projects these are people's homes uh and uh and and we want them to be more resilient and and that's and I know you agree with with it and I and and I get completely where you're coming from um the thing is that right now I believe the policy discourages people from taking the resilient approach and so they're still building that home or if we want to call it a project but what they're doing is that they're doing something that is much more visually impactful which is the mountain which then puts a concrete wall on their neighbor that the neighbor has to see that concrete wall up to the property line or with a small setback from the from from the property line and that that doesn't have the review uh from from from from the drb uh and so to me it's you know especially when we're trying to preserve historic homes if I can what will push out a historic home more having a home with an under story and at the same elevation ground elevation but with an understory or having a home that now is at a much higher elevation with a concrete wall with spill over water onto onto the property that's going to cause more displacement and so and so I appreciate where you're coming from and uh and uh you know I I I don't share the same opinion I think in this case the policy is hurting um and if anything what we should be doing is just is actually sending the homes that don't have the understo to the drb I'm going to open up the floor to for for the public who wishes to speak if you're on Zoom uh you can raise your hand uh Daniel you have two minutes to speak thank you commissioner ziel Calo so you know this is an issue of a right to know and I know this commission is very pro- resident right to know what I will tell you as someone who grew up in the single family neighborhood is there's nothing worse than all of a sudden one day a bulldozzer coming next door to where you live and you as a resident having no idea what is coming up I mean we've had people with cancer that have been you know impacted medically by by this so you know I think we'll try to digest this idea of like that the mound is a reason it's not about the mound the mound should also go to the drb I think that's the issue is that unfortunately because of the state preemption there was now that mechanism removed for review of the pre 42 and so the commission kept in well if there's an unders sory because most of the homes are under stories then we would still have that review process the design review process is very important for residents not just the homeowners that are building uh but also the people that live there so I would strongly urge that you keep the design review process there that you equalize it so that the Mounds go just like the the UN stories but you don't remove it because just like last time you're going to have the HOAs come and say please don't do this if we were in a community in Naples or every home were exactly the same like a sha Community they would have HOA regulations but these are public lands uh public neighborhoods even the islands are all public uh City owned so we need to have this review it's a very bad idea to remove it and you're going to get a lot of complaints from Neighbors uh if you remove it um so I would strongly encourage that you don't happy to meet with any of you to discuss why we got to this point but design review board has been very good for the city and I think we need to continue that strong resident input thank you thank you Daniel um Mr attorney this is an amendment to the ldrs is that correct that's correct and that means be uh before it goes uh back to the city commiss does this need to be referred to the planning board or is this a dual referral to the planning board this is a dual referral so that means before it comes back to the city commission there'll be a planning board recommendation that's correct and the board hasn't reviewed it yet that's correct and so and so it'll be you know I'll value to commissioner bot's point I'll I'll take into consideration I'll I'll value what whatever their their input is uh on this um I just I just do think that the policy right now does discourage a resilient a more resilient approach that uh could be less impactful to the neighbors there's a motion and a second and and just I just want I just want to bring up a good point because Mr zaldo made a point where you know one day you see a bulldozer and the next but you know on the flip side of that you know if you have a neighbor who just doesn't want to see any sort of change next door because for whatever reason and I've heard my share of reasons um because they don't like the neighbor who's coming in or who's buying it or they just simply don't like the design by by a you know by sort of discouraging development uh of these single family homes and and and and for for for whatever reason you have you have a neighbor who who's just adamant that I don't want to see my my neighbor's house torn down I mean that's to me I I think I have an issue with that especially when it comes to resiliency you know right now we're we're facing catastrophic floods I mean we just had two 100e storms back to back in a matter of days and we've had homes on Alton just continuously get flooded and you know we're we're here complaining about drains getting uh not not being cleaned out and here we have an opportunity to really make something meaningful and remove the red tape of uh of a billing permit process I mean you know it's easy to come up here and talk a big game about hey we're gonna do something for the billing department but when really want to rubber meets the road and we have an opportunity to to to speed that up and streamline it we should take advantage of that thank you commissioner Suarez commissioner Dominguez and with that we're gonna want to make sure sorry yes no pleas I want to make sure that um I understand the motion is it to um give notice to the residents notice and um the city Administration uh does the review and the Mounds now require drb well I I don't does can we incorporate the mounts going to drb as part of this item if it's fine with the sponsor I think we could Tom do you agree I think I that because supportive yeah because it um we it has not gone to the planning board yet we could amend the title to include that but okay just for clarification purposes with that commissioner resp for clarification purposes yeah um that would mean all homes other than understory homes would have to go to drb because um home new homes now have to be located at Bas flood elevation plus one at a minimum and typically homeowners want to go a little higher than that and virtually every new single family home that's not an understory is on a mound let's keep it separate then let's let's keep it separate so so that we can get the information but I do believe um we do need to encourage people to go the more resilient route that is less impactful to their neighbors I do believe that the under stories are much less impactful to the neighbors living close to several of them uh and living close to several mounts as well um and so and so let's let's do separate policy on that so that we can really understand that but if if it means that every home that gets built that hasn't understory that chooses not to do the understory that that every home that gets built has a mound that chooses not to do the understory has to go to drb you know that's a big incentive you know not having to go yeah that's a big incentive in going the resilient route we want homes to be more resilient and I I'm sorry I don't want my neighbor one day building a new home on a mount that's going to put water on my yard that's the biggest offense you could do to that the policies could do to to to to neighbors and so and so let's let's keep it separate but I do want to see a draft policy and draft analysis on what the potential impacts could be uh in having those mounts go to the drb so there's a motion uh was made by by commissioner Suarez uh I second you motion it I second it or VI and so with that uh I think it's 321 321 we can show the item adopted with that um Mr planning director let's introduce item number six okay item number six is discuss the proposed Sixth Street overlay commissioner Dominguez thank you uh so this item uh was uh sponsored by commissioner Miner and I'm a co-sponsor I've been working with the Flamingo Park neighborhood association on this and I think that all parties have come together on language and I'll let Tom te it up okay thank you um commissioner Dominguez um when this item was last discussed at the land use committee the direction given to staff was to incorporate the remaining items um where there was a difference of opinion between staff and the Flamingo Park neighborhood association and that included the prohibition of hotels within 200 ft on the south side of 6th Street as well as the issue regarding the maximum Building height for properties near uh 6th Street we still continue to believe that um it would be more prudent to allow up to 50 fet in height regardless of lot size but we have Incorporated the um recommendations of the Flingo Park neighborhood association in the draft ordinance in that regard the only remaining issue pertained to the applicability of properties fronting Lennox Avenue and the following draft revision to the boundary section of the ordinance um um has been developed uh which we believe addresses both the concerns of the property owner uh on Lennox and 6 as well as the Flingo Park neighborhood association and this would basically establish the boundaries as uh properties located from Fifth Street to 6th Street between the east side of Lennox Avenue and the west side of Washington Avenue within the cps2 district except for those lots with Frontage on Lennox Avenue and Washington Avenue as of January 1st 2022 um however we added this the following additional language in the event a lot with Frontage on lenux Avenue is Unified with another lot such unified sites shall there and after be subject to the regulations herein so if the property that is on lenux and 6 remains a standard loan lot it would not have any of the regulations applicable to it however if it is combined or aggregated with an AB budding lot then at that point the regul would become applicable thank you um so I'd like to move the item and I think there's people here to speak on it commissioner doming you're moving the item with um with with the language yes with the draft re revisions okay uh with that if there's members of the public wishing to speak on this item please approach the podium if you're on Zoom uh please raise your hand on Zoom Scott welcome thank you Scott needlman with the flo Park neighborhood association and as you've heard um this has been going on for for quite a while and we're happy that we've I think all parties are are on board now with the language and I and I do want to thank Tom for years of back and forth uh with us um to get this through um so again thank you and um I'll let the um also Michael um uh speak as far as the um you know what was going on with some of the property owners with it thank you thank you Scott Mark needle on Zoom welcome you have two minutes to speak hi um I W to be I gotta Echo I want to support the uh item I appreciate the efforts um of everybody to achieve consensus this is definitely what we've sought to do all along we remain open to working with staff uh to at the planning board uh to consider any improvements to to it but having the flamingo ordinance as the Baseline I think really uh is an important uh step uh it took us extra time to do it we did you know come back from planning board in order to uh start again with the more um uh compatible uh ordinance and I think it's easier to adjust it from there at planning board uh if needed and it'll come back back to commission as well for a final so thank you for your work for your efforts all around and we also expect to have a a an appropriate compromise on the other remaining um uh pre-approved uh you know previously approved site for the with that little small open air Restaurant on Jefferson um we will come to an agreement on that uh In The Same Spirit um at planning board thank you Mark Michael welcome you have two minutes to speak thank you Mr chairman good evening Mr chairman Commissioners Michael Larin T Southwest K Boulevard here representing Russell galet we had the privilege of working with the Pingo Park residents um commissioner Suarez threw us together and it was uh not bloody at all uh Russell behaved himself quite well and the Flamingo Park residents were always very courteous and kind as a result we achieved this compromise and we're here to support it so thank you so much thank you Michael Mitch novic uh welcome you have two minutes to speak good early evening uh again Mitch novic just want to express my support for this ordinance with some concern uh related to possible noise intrusion or noise emanating from the small restaurant on the Southeast corner at Jefferson and six thank you thank you Mitch Daniel welcome you have two minutes to speak s with Miami Design preservation league and thank you this is a process where the community came together made a plan and so thank you to the sponsor for doing that I just want to make sure that there was that last minute proposal to increase the height on that lot on lenux but that's not in this ordinance it's a separate item that um commissioner will bring uh at the next commission meeting okay but as long as it's not part of this I think this this is good thank you thank you um and I just want to confirm about the concern having to do with noise uh outdoor noise of uh Music Television is being prohibited uh and I believe is 200 feet from 6th Street is that correct Mr planning director that's correct okay all right and uh and seating in the restaurants are going to be limited that's correct okay so hopefully with the safeguards that commissioner Dominguez has wisely put in here with the support of the neighborhood hopefully concerns should be abated uh commissioner uh B you're you're recognized thank you um it's kind of a thrilled to see this come to fruition it's come before the planning board when I was on the planning board and so it's kind of uh full circle to see it come be batted around a number of times go back to the drawing board um people who might be on opposite sides of things come together to find the the path forward so with that I will very happily second it excellent and commissioner Dominguez correct me if I'm if if if I'm wrong I believe as part of your ordinance it's also prohibiting outdoor bars is that correct Tom can you expand on that actually outdoor bars were already prohibited in the CPS District so okay all right great all right so there really shouldn't be any concerns uh with with noise good job commissioner domingus uh so the it has been moved and seconded I think by acclamation we could uh show that adopted excellent work thank you with that let's move on to item number seven okay Mr chair item number seven is discuss creating a registry of plan residential developments in zoning districts where short-term rentals are permitted to ensure properties comply with the city's short-term rental regulations and facilitate code enforcement efforts in the event that any units on the property are rented on a short-term basis commissioner bond this is your item you're recognized yeah thank you so um as everybody is painfully aware we are preempted from doing very much of anything about short-term rentals um this is um just giving us the opportunity to know where short-term rentals are either already operating or planned to be operating so we can ensure that if they are that they are um complying with the rules of our city including btrs and um paying the the applicable taxes and fees Etc because one of the things right now is that a lot don't and don't know they're supposed to and some of the platforms work for the city to be compliant and some tell us to take a long walk off a short pier um you know it helps everybody just know who's doing what um so that we can properly proceed as a city as communities and as neighbors and Tom you can probably do more Justice than that now I I think you covered it and I think just for clarification purposes uh commissioner B what you're talking about is a registry of any residential building that would be eligible to have short-term rentals within a district because currently we do have a requirement that any short-term rental obtain a BTR for every unit but I think what you're talking about is all the buildings that would be eligible at some point in the future even if they're currently not doing it well and we also know that not all short-term rentals are doing what they're supposed to they not all registering right so it it will help us enforce properly even if they're permitted to they're still supposed to operate as a properly functioning business and so this will just give us a tool in the tool boox to make sure that everyone's doing what they're supposed to with that is that a motion on your item sure I'll second it are there members of the public wishing to speak on this item if you're in person feel free to come to the podium if you're on Zoom raise your hand thank you Daniel for all mdpl I just want to say it is so important like in town center that we thought we had that master plan and then it ended up being all short-term rental so thank you commissioner for bringing this forward we need to make sure also in our new master plans for Lincoln Road Washington Avenue that we we don't we don't let happen what happen in town center because that would be another decade lost thank you thank you Daniel uh s Dees on Zoom welcome you have two minutes to speak s you need to unmute your yeah what that mean um oh good afternoon U uh Commissioners yes I do I do like to see that that would be really great even though we you know our area we could have short-term rentals we probably have will have one building build for short-term rentals and I think I would like to see how you guys are going to mitigate that that will be really really great and at least so people residents are aware the areas that this could be built or not or is it coming to the area that would be really great in advance thank you thank you s but I'm going to close the public opportunity to be heard uh Tom uh anything else to be placed on the record uh yeah I just wanted to clarify Mr chair that what we'll be doing is moving this item to the city commission favorably with direction to the administration to develop the registry structure in coordination with the Adam sponsor thank you uh I'll be happy to Second your motion commissioner bot if you move your item so moved all right second by The Chair by acclamation let's show that item adopted with that let's go on to item number eight Mr director okay uh item number eight is discuss a possible ordinance to require Property Owners to properly dispose of yard trimmings and leaves to avoid the clogging of storm water drains uh commissioner bot I believe this is your item you're welcome to introduce your item thank you and I think D commissioner Suarez had the same idea um so it's basically uh the notion that right now people uh do yard work or hire people to do yard work and they're very happy to sweep things down the drains and when we have big storms or or they they just don't really think about the drains as something that needs need to be a little bit more protected and so when we do have these big storms the drains don't operate as fully as they should because they're already clogged with normal Landscaping detritus and so um I would like to as other cities do already um uh make it uh the responsibility of the homeowner to bag up their lawn trimmings and their leaves and branches and they can either bring them to get composted or their land Landscaping Company can take them off site but they should not be going down our city drains um other cities do this already and you know there's there are a lot of different ways to attack resiliency this is one more and it's not particularly honorous thank you uh is there comments from the deas on this item uh I see we have our Public Works director here um is there any comments from the administration on this commissioner B you have a motion on your item I do I move it I'll second all right and uh by acclamation we can show that adopted I I'm sorry there members of the public wishing to speak on this item I think has her hand raised but I think that might be from the last item I don't know S no no I'm sorry I let me lowered it yes all right with that we can show this item adopted uh thank you commissioner bot uh with that let's move on to item number nine Mr director let's introduce the item okay uh item number nine is expedite the opening of the Baywalk and move the development of the Baywalk up on the geobond prioritization list and present the Baywalk plan to the land use sustainability committee thank you uh commissioner Dominguez you've been leading on this item please uh give us an update uh well David Gomez and I are becoming BFFs and uh we talk so often about the Baywalk and uh we did just a few days ago and if you could give an update uh to us here on the days I'd appreciate it Happy to uh as part of a sorry David Gomez uh insim division director with Capital Improvements as part of a standing item on the commission agenda we've been coming back monthly to give updates on the Baywalk project uh the the developer responsible for the fabrication of the construction design and construction of the pedestrian bridge has agreed to come regularly and and provide their updates they have made some progress over the last month or two particularly when with regard to permitting with do uh and they've made some advancements on some of the dewatering permits that are required and I have the developer here to give you a more specific update sure welcome Hector Morel with tarot um as far as the pedestrian bridge we we we've been advancing with uh fdot fdot now is at uh last stages of of of approvals routing the the approvals um they've accepted all all comments or response to the comments for the pest Bridge um we've gotten all Duram approvals for for the watering as well um and we've gotten our drb and our umot concurrence letters issued by C Beach so we're we're kind of the late the last stages of being being able to start probably at the end of this month um so once we get everything aligned we can we can definitely start work um getting out there to start uh mobilizing our utilities are you behind in any way with your project schedule well so because of because of permitting we are we are pushing back but I think we're still going to be at the end of at the end of uh at the end of 25 to completion we're still targeting that um how delayed are you right right now we're still shooting for the end of of 25 is we've always been projecting project scheduled where were you supposed to be now and where are you at now so we were supposed to be starting with uh utilities at the in September early September so now we're targeting end of September so we're just going to have to accelerate a little bit of that work to to to to be able to to advance on that okay if we could bring it back next month continue getting updates thank you thank you thank you David thank you Hector and commissioner Dominguez thank you for your continued leadership on this item um let's introduce item number 10 Mr director okay item number 10 is review the future land use map classification for Pride Park all right this is an item I've placed on the agenda because under our comprehensive plan um the um and under the future land use map um Pride Park is currently classified as a public facilities uh in the Civic and convention uh Center uh this District um and which what that means is that it provides for development opportunities it provides for opportunities uh if the convention center ever wanted to expand it could expand into Pride Park if someone one day wanted to build a structure on Pride Park they could potentially build a structure on Pride Park um and it wouldn't benefit from the same protections that Parks have in the charter by this uh change to the to the Future land use map classification for um for for Pride Park we would be changing it to recreational open space within the Convention Center District putting it under that recreational open space uh category under the future land use map would give it the same classification that all of our other important iconic Parks have and granted the same Charter protections uh that all other Parks have and most important ly it will protected from there being you know easily you know a barroom a garage an expansion of the convention center ever happening on that site um Mr planning director is there anything else do you need to correct me on anything that I've stated no everything's fine okay uh is there a comments from the deis I'll move your item I'll second it any other comments commissioner bot I just have a question for clarification yes I'm supportive of this so that's not an issue but just so I understand does this change how I mean we've had a lot of conversations with residents there and with staff about how this park gets used by the convention center does this limit further than what we've already limited um the number of days that it can be used no it doesn't limit the number of days but it does limit how the space could physically be used in the future uh you wouldn't you wouldn't be able to have a structure you wouldn't be able to alienated easily it just adds a certain level of other protection alienate it like call it names and make it feel better but U Mr attorney correct I don't know that's an accurate answer um to commissioner bot's question about that's the right answer that this doesn't address how many days a year it can be programmed yeah okay either there members of the public wishing to speak on this item seeing no members of the public uh the the item's been moved and SE we can show it adopted by acclamation perfect thank you uh with that uh item number 11 was withdrawn by the sponsor uh colleagues let's introduce item number 12 okay item number 12 is review traffic impact study requirements in the Land Development regulations for new developments and consider whether ldr amendments are appropriate to strengthen the city's review of a Project's impact on Transportation infrastructure as well as enhanced traffic mitigation measures required of applicants thank you commissioner bot this is your item well you're welcome to introduce thank you um so what we hear all the time um when new projects are being contemplated in fromont the planning board or when people come to talk to us um is oh yeah we've done a traffic study there's no issue and um they may have and maybe that's what that um traffic study has shown but I don't feel um that those traffic studies go far enough as we were talking about earlier um how it affects the neighborhood beyond the confines of that particular project parameter whatever it may be so whether it's single family home or a Redevelopment of a full block the the roads are all interconnected and as we are seeing firsthand as things on the mainland and and the causeways get impacted our entire city gets backed up completely and becomes impassible um you know and the the major developments happening North Bay Village um there were no traffic studies to my knowledge that talked about how that there those projects are going to impact people in Miami Beach going to and from work on the mainland so I wanted to open this up for conversation with staff about how we can strengthen that have more stringent requirements and broaden the scope of what gets looked at so it's not just literally that square block or that whatever the radius is so that we can figure these things out holistically um we as you'll probably note in the in the memo that that we prepared we discussed this with the transportation department and we provided a summary of what the current methodology is for different types of circulation and traffic studies and they're based largely on the intensity of a project proposed obviously a duplex is not going to have the same level of analysis as a mixed use office retail restaurant building uh or a destination building um in our experience both the requirements for a traffic study including the um the method of transportation that's required as well as the peer review are very robust um traffic studies are required not just for applications that submit for a cup but any drb or HPB application that would be considered a threshold project over 5,000 square ft and the methodologies that are used um are very robust um to the extent that they could be further enhanced um it would be difficult only because of how thorough they are now um if it is something that you'd like to continue the discussion on um we could either uh continue the item to the next meeting and then ask Transportation staff to participate in the discussion or we could certainly meet independently with Transportation staff to do a deeper dive into exactly what they do so that everybody has a um a better understanding yes is there something that can be done to expand the this the area covered by this the traffic study the the transportation department does use a very broad area in terms of current traffic as well as projected traffic from projects that may not be generating traffic impacts yet and so they'll use both current traffic counts as well as projected traffic counts to the extent that those should be extended or expanded we could certainly talk to the transportation department about that to see if the current uh range of of the study area needs to be expanded yeah I just I just think things have changed and Jose welcome back from vacation it's good to see you um it because now we've got um things that were not contemplated when these were written right so 395 is a disaster almost all the time there's going to be work on Alton Road sooner rather than later even though we've we've asked them to delay it a little bit um the 79th Street Causeway is going to go under construction and there's going to be construction uh on the other side of the 79th Street call we we're hoping to get the bridge a little slightly better than it is now um but that's going to be an incremental Improvement it's not going to be significant so I I understand that it's robust but it doesn't take into consideration the fact that once again we're a Seven Mile Stretch of sand in the middle of the ocean and we're all stuck going on and off the island and up and down the island in the same handful of of of thoroughfares and and you know I maybe we do continue it and we meet independently and then either you know dispose of it at the next meeting I'll second your motion to continue to the next meeting is that okay with yeah and then I can um coordinate a meeting with Jose so that um we can all sit down together and you can get a more thorough understanding of both the land use process as well as the transportation Department's review process okay so we'll show this continue to the next meeting thank you let's introduce item number 133 okay item number 13 is discuss amending notice requirements in the Land Development regulations to permit the city to use a publicly accessible website hosted by Miami day County as an alternative means of publishing notices and advertisements for land use board applications which are currently required to be published in a newspaper of General circulation commissioner uh Suarez this is your item um we've discussed similar items in the past so I anticipate this probably a quick item yeah um I'm I uh I second your motion I I I move the motion by acclamation we can show it adopted by acclamation all right great presentation thank you no slides no slides all right item number 14 item number 14 is amend the definition of floor area to exempt unisex gender neutral restrooms from the definition of floor area yeah thank you uh and this is an item that I've placed on the on the agenda um just just because it's it's one of the small things that um that we can do um for individuals who who are transgender or non-binary and to make them feel safer make them feel you know just something as simple as as using a restroom uh shouldn't shouldn't have to be a controversial issue we can achieve that by encouraging people to provide unisex or gender gender neutral restrooms uh and so by making uh unisex and gender neutral uh bathrooms exempt from from the floor area calculation we in essence are incentivizing uh the provision of those restrooms um so I don't know there's I'll second it there's comments from the deas I'll third it all right uh by as there are members of the public wishing to speak on this item and seeing none in person none in Zoom we can show this adopted by acclamation uh Mr director item number 15 item number 15 was withdrawn item number 15 was withdrawn uh let's proceed to item number 16 uh item number 16 is to discussion and consider the potential resoning of the mxc mixed use Entertainment District in North Beach along ocean terce between 73rd and 75th Street to a different zoning District classification North Beach commissioner Tanya Kon you have recognized North Beach in the house um so the mxc was designed to incentivize to underdeveloped and and sorely needing some TLC areas of the city one was Ocean Drive and one was Ocean Terrace I can I can say that we have set I might be able to safely say it but I can't get the word I can say that we have successfully accomplished those goals in both areas um I'm going to leave the Ocean Drive mxe conversation for a later date because it's a heavier lift but I will tell you that even though um Ocean Terrace right now is a bit of a mess um we do have a big beautiful project coming the park is going to be open I hope by the end of the year we think maybe um but it's going to be glorious and then the the the um the hotel and the the condo is going to be up there and we are seeing major changes ready in North Beach so the intent of the mxe zoning has been accomplished we do not need to leave that door open for unintended consequences of um activities that we don't particularly want there so I think it is time to remove that zoning and classify it with something more in keeping um like cd2 with what's going on I love it I second your your my emotion your emotion uh I think it it really distinguishes the item and um and it puts it align with the future that it has awesome thank you is there any comments from the de any members of the public wishing to speak on this item seeing none uh we can show the item adopted by acclamation wonderful good job commissioner Bon um Mr director let's introduce item number 17 number item number 17 is an ordinance to monify the height of allowable fencing and Shrubbery of Oceanfront properties facing the beach walk to improve Sidelines for pedestrians okay uh this is commissioner bot's item commissioner you recognized so this is very simply um trying to make this um uh shared use path safer for everybody who's using it whether pedestrians or cyclists or rollerbladers or anybody else um there are principles that are uh guidelines the sep head principles to help um make things uh more clearly visible for those trying to uh um uh engage in law enforcement activities but it's also just common sense when you pull out of the side one of the entry points you want to be able to see around the corner so that you don't get run over by you know somebody trying to improve on his mile or somebody zooming by on a bike or a scooter or whatever um so this is just requiring um and it would apply obviously to the city's properties as well but this is just to um um set forth standards by which all properties that above but the beachwalk on the western side um would need to uh adhere um in order to ensure that there's better visibility for those using the entrance points from the regular streets to the beachwalk and coming around the corners coming back off commissioner just I have a few questions on this item so this would lowered the height to what amount um so I'll let Tom go through the specifics of it but they're pretty standard guidelines yeah what we had come up with um based upon the direction of the L use committee at the last meeting are two separate amendments to the code one is an amendment to city code section 14-1 to establish Beach Walk access and visibility and the second is a companion Amendment to the ldrs to make sure that when development projects are reviewed that this section is properly referenced and the amendment to section 1401 14-1 states that on all Ocean Front properties there shall be no structure or planting within 25 ft of a street end or public access point to the beach walk which obstructs pedestrian visibility between a height of 2 feet and 10 ft above the adjacent grade so essentially there has to be between a a twoot minimum and maximum 10 foot Gap where people would have an unobstructed so so a hedge for example a hedge couldn't be higher than two feet Hedges are typically higher than two feet within this but they couldn't be as part of this ordinance correct so let me ask you this let's say um I don't know what's one of the pro like the W let's say the W what's the W's Frontage on uh on the Baywalk on the beachwalk The W I think probably has close to 200 feet of Frontage on the bay walk on the beach walk on the on the beach walk so but this would then say then let's say at the beach access point they would have to go 25 ft 25 ft from a beach access point and then 25 ft from the street end they would have to limit their hedge to 2 feet correct and so and so and so then you're saying then that on a property that's got a 200t frontage on the beachwalk you're saying you know you're going to possibly have up to 75 feet where you're going to force a private property owner to have their hedge which a lot of times these Hedges are important also you know for privacy on in the property you're going to lower them to two to two fee you know but to clarify yes um it's not on it's not the entirety of their property it's just for Sight line purposes I understand I understand so further set back like it can be stepped up so to come around the corner it comes down to two feet but you can still create the privacy and have the tall shrubs deeper in in the property so the shrub you know it kind of goes down and how far deep would they have to go in the property uh in order in order to go back up um the the 25 the 25 foot requirement um would apply in the case of the W from both the south side of the property which is the the public Street end portion of it as well as their beach access point right um the way that this is written I don't believe it would be 25 ft in each Direction on the on the private beach access point but 25 ft in total but when you combine it with the public Street end that's close to 50 ft in total so on okay so then is 25 ft is a radius yes okay so it's not 25 ft in each Direction no okay the intent is a radius so that if you're standing at Center Point it would be a 25t radius so if you're off to either side you would still have and how wide is the is is the average uh beach access point 10 ft eight or most beach access points are anywhere between 10 or sometimes 15 feet but I'd say probably 10 feet is is closer because it's usually two gates and so and so then so then you would be going uh probably about 7 and 1/2 ft then in each Direction correct okay and then so so so so you would have to then keep the height to two feet for let's say seven and a half ft of each direction of a beach AIS point but how deep how deep do you have to go before you're able to achieve height again it it would be the same 25 ft in depth no so like if if you're if I may yeah yes yes um so this is the property and here are the street ends so we're not saying their entire hedge has to be 2 feet we're saying when you come out here like it has to be it has to be 2 feet here but back here it doesn't so when you're in the property you don't you're not looking out over two foot headge but what Tom is saying is that if you if you're within that 25 foot radius if he he he he answered correctly actually because what he said is given that there's a radius you can't go back up and height for as long as you are within that radius so you're in essence killing the Privacy no that's not what so maybe we need to table this in yeah I think that and I was just talking to Dave about this it might be good idea for us to put together some diagrams because let's say this is a 10-ft beach access point that this is the beach access right here you could go out 7 and 1 12 fet but um at some point where you're standing you're going to need to see that way if there's a hedge right up to here you're preventing that but the question I think is how deep it should go does it need to go 25 ft into the property or it does not it can be a lesser amount and still provide that yeah triangle and so I think what we need to do is one bring back a diagram that shows that and then two have that clarified in the text of the ordinance yeah because the goal is not to limit people's privacy I know I not go no I I I know you know but but we need to make sure that that is the the net takeaway too so that um it is really so that when you're coming around a corner you don't get crushed by somebody who's coming in the opposite the direction and so we just need to clarify that so let's continue it and work on it for the next otherwise this is going to become a Paparazzi string no we nobody wants that we just want people not to like have to take their life in their hands to say was this a dual referral to the planning board or was this just to the land use committee no this was a dual referral um and the amendment to to chapter 14 does not require planning board approval so that would just come back to the commission as a first reading ordinance so then let's continue it let's continue it so that we can get the the graphics all right with that and thank you commissioner Bob because it is important and there's so many we got so many complaints about people's safety on on the beachwalk and not just the typical aspects of safety that we think of but also the safety of of B of you know people on bicycles you know people on on running or or whatever and they get startled and you know people have crashed into each other so I know you you really are addressing something very important and I thank you for that and actually I forgot to open up the floor to anyone from the public wishing to speak on this item uh I see we have a caller on zoom and there's no name but I assume this is Matthew uh welcome you have two minutes to speak yes hi good evening uh Commissioners committee members Matthew ganof I just want to thank uh commissioner bot for this Common Sense legislation to improve Public Safety on the beachwalk and uh and I think your concerns that you brought up uh chair Fernandez are are are well taken and uh just just want to make sure that everyone understands that as you mentioned you know it's about everyone being able to see everyone else whether they're uh you know entering the beach walk or they're leaving a hotel and the W is actually a prime example they have multiple points of egress and at times when the shrubbery grows thick and Tall you can't see someone coming out and it could startle people even on foot uh so um you know I think the points that you made were very well taken and hopefully you know Common Sense standards are applied here to help ensure everyone safety on the beachwalk and thank you again for uh for bringing us forth all right any other members of the public wishing to speak on this item seeing none um uh I think uh we we'll continue this to the next meeting by acclamation all right um with that let's call Mr director item number 18 okay item number 18 is review the city's modal prioritization strategy established in 2015 as part of the transportation master plan so I'm just going to keep my comments on this very uh limited I'm not going to seek uh to change our prioritization uh because I I know we've been very forward thinking um a very forward thinking community on this um n you know national standards actually um I do get concerned when when in the hierarchy in the modal hierarchy um we are prioritizing fright even over private vehicles um you know I got prioritizing public transportation and pedestrianism I get prioritizing bicyclists but to prioritize big trucks over private vehicles to me is concerning now I know it's important because it's a policy that's used for the allocation of of spaces on our public streets and we need to make sure that on our public streets we have space for trucks to pull over to make deliveries to avoid them blocking uh the flow of traffic but I just want us to be aware this will be a problem once we see construction of housing with no parking this the fact that we are encouraging people to to live here in units that that doesn't have parking doesn't mean that they won't use a car doesn't mean that they won't have a car doesn't mean that they won't call for an Uber it doesn't mean that that uh a friend won't come to visit them in personal vehicle and and that's going to create much greater demand for for on street parking than even these uh these uh these these freight trucks themselves and so you know it's something that we have to be aware of our community is going to have to prepare uh public parking wise to address these these issues uh we're going to have to build garages we're going to have to find funding for that and and to be able to address this um but I just wanted to put that on on the record because I do know how important this policy is that was adopted back in 2015 and I do understand how forward thinking it was and it still is important it is it is still a goal that we need to to to reach um so I'm not going to seek to change it but I did want to put it out there because it's something that I do want our staff uh to be mindful of both at the planning department and at the uh transportation and parking Departments of the impacts this is going to potentially have in the future I don't know there are any comments from the de on this um I don't know if staff has anything to add on this seeing not I see that we have a member of the public with their hand R wishing to speak on this uh you're you're welcome to speak you have two minutes we have someone on Zoom wishing to speak on this item okay seeing that the person is not unmuting themselves with that I'm going to close the public opportunity to to be heard and we can proceed to item number 19 item actually 19 was was withdrawn withdrawn correct correct and Mr chair just for clarity purposes item 18 has been discussed and has now been concluded thank you okay um U Mr director let's introduce item number 20 item number 20 is to uh Review massage therapy regulations in North Beach thank you uh this is an item I'm bringing forward at at the request of residents I I introduced this a while back uh back in September uh 2022 uh um it's been it's been through uh through this committee through the planning board and uh and I didn't want to move forward with it uh sending it back to commission until we had a hearing of it in this committee as it does relate to uh North Beach and I wanted to give an opportunity to my colleagues especially our new colleagues and commissioner bot who's from North Beach to chime in on this um but the proposed ordinance uh would make uh restrictions on the hours um applicable uh to uh to to massage therapy centers in the north beach overlay pretty much the entire area uh north of 20 North of 63rd Street pretty much mimicking the same hours of operation that currently exist um in Ocean Terrace and the Harding townside area policies that were adopted way back in uh 2015 and it basically what it says is that massage therapy centers cannot operate between the hours of 9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and we're doing this because in the past uh you know we've seen uh unfortunate nefarious uh activities occur as some of these uh establishments we've seen sting operations occur in our city um uh in some of those uh types of of establishments um it also proposes legislation uh to limit the locations of future of these uh establishments to State schools uh that are certified uh for for massage therapy licenses um for buildings that have at least uh 50 units where where where these centers are there as an accessory use infitness centers and you know wellness centers that tend to be very legitimate um instate licensed medical offices and and Clinic like physical therapy centers so that you still have the service available but we ensure that it truly is a legitimate and safe uh environment um Mr planning director I don't know if there's anything else as relates to this item that that needs to be described on the record uh the only other thing I would mention is that we've also uh included um conditional use locations for massage therapy centers and that would be within Office Buildings located in a commercial District uh such as the TC District or the TCC District um provided the Massage Therapy Center is located above the first floor and uh within multif family residential buildings Apartments site hotels and hotels with less than 50 units um those could get a massage therapy license as part of the conditional use in order to better regulate the operation thank you so uh I'm going to open up the uh discussion uh to to the day I value our colleagues uh feedback of commissioner Dominguez you recogniz thank you um this is a great item and I remember uh all the work that you've put into it over the past year or more um and so based on what I'm reading here Tom this wouldn't apply to like the carolon or um hotels of that size that's correct they would continue to be allowed to have massage therapy centers wonderful thank you any other comments from the days commissioner bot yeah so obviously I know how long and hard you've been working on this and we all know um that there are some really unsavory characters operating ostensibly as massage centers um what I'm trying to figure out how this would work just down the hall from just down the street from City Hall we have a Massage Envy um franchise um and they are all over the country and they're generally in retail locations not on the second floor so if and maybe I'm just not reading this correctly so if a Massage Envy franchisee wanted to open a location in North Beach they would not be able to unless they were in a a multif family Residential Building or in a office building above ground floor when a lot of their businesses walk in is that am I understanding that correctly so it would be permitted um anywhere in a multifam Residential Building apartment hotel suite hotel or hotel with at least 50 rooms as an accessory use there there wouldn't be any location that's not generally the locations they have but in in terms of the um commercial buildings So within Office Buildings located in a commercial District um or the TCC District or the TCC District um conditional use would be required if the Massage Therapy Center is located above the first floor let me ask this um yeah because commissioner bond does bring up a good point uh and I and and I think we have a number of safeguards here to protect from from you know from the farious establishments you know we want to make sure that we get good commercial and certain retails that could be vacant and you know there's nothing wrong with a massage therapy center um there's nothing wrong with a Massage Envy uh and and and perhaps maybe under the conditional use you know we can allow ground floor you know centers and Retail uses but as a conditional use uh and really what I hope out of the conditional use is that there's you know proper vetting um you know not the typical operational vetting that goes into um a conditional use permit of you know flow and deliveries and parking that but like actually like safety vetting like we're actually like who is this operator is this a reputable operator and that type of stuff so I think that the recommendation would be to just remove the line that says provided the Massage Therapy Center is located above the first floor so it would be cup approval but it would allow it at the first floor as well yeah yeah I'd be open to that all right any any other comments from the de are there members of the public wishing to speak on this item seeing none in person none in Zoom uh can we show this item as adopted all right as amended as amended okay and this already went to the planning board is that correct actually this has been approved at first reading so um it was referred back to the land use committee prior to Second reading so we can bring this to the commission uh for second reading on October 30th with this change okay great thank you it's only been how many years oh my God a long time I was waiting for commissioner bod to make her way to the days I knew that the day would come that commissioner bod would be sitting here as the commissioner to be able to review the policy with her all right with that let's uh go to item number 21 okay item number 21 is North Beach Comprehensive use regulations all right uh this is this is an item I place on the agenda establishing a new overlay uh again similar to the last item that would apply to all areas located north of uh 20 of north of 63rd Street it does a number of things the first thing that it does is IT addresses those establishments that we've come to known as nuisance uses earlier we were talking about the mxc uh and the mxe down is down in South Beach as opposed to the mxe in North Beach and one of the things we've done to try to fix the mxc down in South Beach was to create a number of prohibited uses the tobacco and vape dealers you know there's times you go block by block and you have multiple tobacco and vape dealers block after block and it starts to define the character of the area uh the same thing with the vitamin stores and by vitamin stores why why are we addressing vitamin stores you know people are probably asking why would a why would a City Commissioner not want you to go get vitamins well the problem is that you know a lot of these you know Shady type of uh CBD places where you don't know where whe really selling uh operate under the guise of vitamin shops in fact there was an issue that we had in South Beach that we had a socalled vitamin shop uh selling pot uh to underaged uh children and there had to be an undercover investigation they got shut down and it it actually uncovered a much bigger and wider problem pawn shops pawn pawn shops is is one of the uh establishments that would be prohibited under under this overlay and uh and these you know this these over these souvenir t-sh shops that we see that they open up you know one next to each other and start to also Define the character of the area the ones that are existing can stay there they become legal non-conforming but new ones won't be able to open up and so we're trying to address this issue that block after block getting defined by these establishments that aren't really contributing to the retail vibrancy and the type of economic activity that areas that are emerging and thriving and have a bright future like North Beach deserve other uses that have been identified as problematic if there are too many um are packaged liquor stores we're not making them illegal but we're saying no more than six in the in the area currently there are six and we're saying let's keep them at six we're saying uh check cashing stores we know check cashing stores play an important role in the vibrancy of our community there's a lot of lower income individuals that depend on them currently there's two and we're saying no more than four so there's still room for more but we just want to put a cap on them so that we don't have the issue that we have on Washington Avenue they have liquor store you know uh convenience store uh check cashing store tattoo Partners block after block convenience stores currently they're 16 to 19 existing we're capping them to 25 and I just want to clarify convenience stores doesn't mean Supermarket doesn't mean Bas uh and we're not outlawing any of those we're saying convenience stores which are like 711s Walgreens CVS and others they're still legal you can continue to have them we're just saying in order to promote vibrancy in retail options we're going to cap them at 25 and we continue to encourage I would love to have you know more more uh Supermarket options in North Beach including bodegas uh and so this does not address that and never has sought to address that toat two Studios um right now there's nine existing in North Beach and this would propose a limit of nine in north beach again because you don't want the area to be filled with with tattoo studios we're not saying make them illegal in any in any way we're just saying you you know we want also you know other diversity of of businesses that's the gist of what this does we want to preserve you know the pack liquor store that's there and the check cashing store and the and and the convenience store that people love because they can run out of their home and go grab something and we want to keep those artistic tattoo studios that uh that that people enjoy but we don't want to create a proliferation of it so that we can have it with in a in a moderate amount that don't that doesn't start to define the area um that's what this item does I'm going to open up the floor to to my colleagues and then afterwards I'll open up the floor to the public commissioner Suarez you're recognized I think this is a great item I I I appreciate your for thought I think even before I was elected you when you were on the planning board you uh you brought this issue or or you discussed it and I think this is a great step for North Beach to to modernize and um I'm fully supportive and I I'll move the item thank you I'll second the item any other comments from the days all right uh commissioner Dominguez no all right uh I see um Elizabeth Laton has her hand raised in zoom and if anyone from the public wishes to speak uh you can raise your hand on Zoom or come to the podium Elizabeth you have two minutes to speak good afternoon everyone um commissioner Fernandez thank you so much for bringing this I know that we have talked about this for two years and we we're we're desperate to have some distance separation from these types of nuisance businesses um and I appreciate you doing this thank you and we'll work on the retail lighting up in North Beach by the way thank you thank you all right with that uh there's a motion on the table that is seconded by the chair we can show this item adopted by acclamation thank you colleagues I appreciate it and chair thank you for doing the work on this over the last number of years and getting it done it's teamwork everything is always teamwork and actually I want to thank um commissioner Dominguez because under the last iteration of the landuse committee some of some of this was about to get uh sidetracked and not moving in in the right direction I I happened to be out of town for that landu committee meeting commissioner Dominguez uh actually was able to save the item and uh for me and so commissioner Dominguez all these years later thank you so much for since we're in the sunshine we and I can tell you thank you for that thank you for uh for for saving this item so we can move it forward thank you all right colleagues uh two items left two items left yes we're we're in the final stretch um Mr director let's call item number 22 okay uh item number 22 is review amendments to the Land Development regulations to amend the hotel approval process uh this this is commissioner Magazine's item and we have the pleasure of having commissioner magazine in the house uh so commissioner magazine I'm gonna recognize you to present your item sure I'd be happy to um this item was last discussed by the um land use committee um on May f um actually um I'm sorry on June 10th and when the item was discussed to June 10th um the administration was requested to come back with a draft process in the form of an ordinance um based upon certain criteria which included City commission review occurring at the beginning of the approval process that the commission approval would apply to non- Oceanfront and non-waterfront hotel projects um and then to use item two identified in the land use memo options for the June meeting as a base um and lastly the commission requested that the reviewer criteria include impacts on residential uses the attached ordinance um establishes a hotel approval process in the form of a commission warrant and basically what would happen is um if a hotel use is authorized in a particular zoning uh or overlay District um they would first need to make application to the city commission prior to the review by any land use board and that would either be the planning board if required uh and the design review or historic preservation board as applicable and it would include the approval of any building permit for hotel projects that exceed the following thresholds uh first new hotel construction that exceeds 15,000 square feet of floor area or new hotel construction exceeding 30 Hotel units or the conversion of more than 25 existing residential apartments or more than 5,000 square ft of office or commercial space within a single development site to Hotel sweet hotel or hostel um the exemptions include hotels proposed to be located on a Bayfront or oceanfront property um or if a hotel is proposed within an existing contributing building within a local historic district provide that provided that any new addition contained no more than 50 Hotel units um the warrant would be uh reviewed and potentially granted by the commission uh via resolution and it would require an affirmative vote of 57s of all members of the Commission in order to approve the resolution um this would be done as part of a public hearing uh which would occur prior to the acceptance of an application to the planning board design review board or historic preservation board so the commission would need to approve the resolution granting the warrant before an application to a land use board could be made um lastly in reviewing the application for a commission warrant um we have identified criteria that the commission would follow in determining whether or not to Grant the warrant there are nine criteria that have been identified and they include um compatibility um impacts on affordable and Workforce housing proximity to residential uses whether adequate off street parking has been provided the impact of employees of the hotel development on the demand in the city for housing public transon and child care impact of Hotel on existing infrastructure um whether or not the applicant has taken measures to employe residents of neighborhoods joining the hotel whether the applicant will take measures to encourage Hotel workers and guests to use public transportation and whether the hotel development will support small businesses in the immediate area if there's consensus on this or other options um the land use committee can make a recommendation to the commission to refer the ordinance to the planning board thank thank you for that Tom um and the intent on this and what we discussed before is very much in line with uh what we've been talking about prior to uh this item here and that is finding housing for the missing middle right and essentially how I Envision this is if an applicant comes and they're able to build a hotel as of right we start early in the process and say well we understand that a city must grow or die but we want to grow in a smart responsible way and I think collectively we all see and say maybe except for more sporadic uses like along the ocean front or bay front where that's not going to be used for full-time residents anyway let's grow through a residential population as opposed to more Transit usages so this provides just a further Safeguard it gives us the opportunity to kind of get out in front uh a great example and this is in uh denigrating the properties uh in any way uh whatsoever but um for an infill project like where the uh hotels are along Fifth Street Corridor right fine products but I would much rather say uh early on in the process you know what that's kind of in the middle of a yes it's on a corridor but it's a budding residential neighborhoods to both sides how can we work with this project applicant to essentially turn this hotel that they're able to build as of right into a more conducive residential project uh that I think we all uh wish and desire to see um so that's where this item stems from uh we since this was first proposed we have um made progress in you know kind of putting further incentives to residential usages and it's in the pipeline to cut back on some of the incentives for hotels uh so maybe you know uh some of those things kind of take care of itself but I do think that this is another prudent Safeguard thank you uh commissioner so I just have a question I love this item I think this item is great and I'm going to support it if anything I would like it to be strengthened a little bit with the size in the units well um so for example Hotel um the following Hotel developments would not be required to seek a commission warranted it would be a hotel located on a Bayfront or ocean front property I completely get the ocean front because that's where we usually have our larger hotels but on the bay front you still have certain areas in our B front um you know especially areas in North Beach um you have areas you could potentially even have uh certain hotels that are Bayfront on Bell Isle I think what are some other areas uh Tom I know not West Avenue because in West Avenue uh we have the overlay that prohibits it as well as in Sunset Harbor where we have a vision plan that prohibits it but I think Bel Isle we could potentially have a hotel someone come in a corporation come in buy up a building and convert it to to to hotel right yeah the south side of bell a is on rm2 which currently permits hotels and how about um areas like in North Beach in North Beach there's limited areas that are are zoned rm2 that could potentially have limited Bayfront exposure so if you would if this is a friendly Amendment let's I would suggest keeping Bayfront uh properties as part of those having to come to the commission I'd be happy with that in fact uh it was probably my fault I said Waterfront um and I was actually envisioning Ocean Front because that's where my mind went and and staff rightfully so kind of took me uh literal with my words but I was envisioning ocean front uh while we're on the term of strengthening it if I could just uh uh ask staff of one thing Tom some of the smaller hotels seem to be excluded and in fact that's somewhat where my worry lies because that's what comes down in a lot in the middle of a lot of our residential areas uh I don't know the square footage of this but another another great example for where this ordinance would have been useful is in the Sunset Harbor uh uh situation where if they would have come to the commission before all those plans were in place uh we would have been able to negotiate a better deal that's more conducive for the neighborhood there um but in terms of uh not limitting or not including the smaller scale hotels I think you said under 15,000 square feet yeah the the the draft that we had come up with and again this draft was for purposes of facilitating this discussion and so to the extent we need to fine-tune this at the committee level we can certainly include and incorporate whatever amendments are approved here in the ordinance that we bring to the commission for referral to the planning board but what we had suggested as a as kind of a starting point would be um if hotels were under new construction that was under 15,000 ft of floor area so that would be a small hotel on say a 7500t lot in the rm2 district um to the extent you think that needs to be modified and it should be even smaller in order to get the exemption we can certainly do that that's where I would lean because I think some of the problems where we see in the hotels it's not the larger ones that are Waterfront or even along Alton Road but it is a small one that pops up on Sixth Street or you know in the middle of uh Flamingo Park or in the middle of Collins Park commissioner you've picked up on one of the points I was going to to mention because you know it does mention that exempt from this recir would be Hotel proposed within an existing contributing building within a local historic district provided that any new addition contain no more than 50 Hotel units so when we think about it that is usually when where where our most attainable affordable even Section 8 housing is let's think let's think an example of that um I think uh was the Riviera Apartments the Riviera Apartments would have been protected from through a warrant process would have come to us um had so had the policy existed so would you so so you're proposing this second bullet that says hotels proposed within an existing contributing building within a local historic district provided that any new addition contain no more than 50 Hotel units no longer be Exempted and that those have to come to the city commission okay I agree with that okay and so what we'll do is we'll remove that in total so even if you're contributing building in an historic district you still if you want to convert to a hotel you've got to come to the commission if of course that's yeah we're removing payr yes yeah and and and it just seems to make sense because that is that is where I think we truly are seeing our greatest displacement very vulnerable areas commissioner magazine amazing work and thank you thank you for for for looking out uh for those who who have housing insecurity in our in our community and for your very reasonable amendments and before you move this just for clarity purposes uh I'm going to adjust the ordinance so that um in terms of the exemptions the only exemption will be a hotel that is proposed to be located on oceanfront property and I think that that makes perfect sense that that is where we have historically in our city had uh you know this type of Hotel development and um uh commissioner magazine do you want us to leave the applicability uh thresholds in place which would be new hotel construction exceeding 15,000 square feet of floor area or is that something you'd also like to adjust as well I I know this is kind of just sticking my finger in the air but I would like to see it uh lower okay because I think where some of our problems are are you know next to commissioner Suarez's house where you know one of these small boutique maybe not a hotel in that instance but it could be a similar situation those are the things that we don't want slipping under the radar okay I think that there is um you know an urgency for an item of this nature uh since this was not a dual referral correct correct um commissioner magazine guess it's your item um you know I think it would be prudent to request that this item be included as a referral to the planning board at next week's meeting because I do think this is very important to the quality of life of so many of our residents being being pushed out of our city so would you agree to if our staff requests for this to be placed at next week's agenda y of course all right and we can do that Mr attorney yes okay yes and then so for the um since we're going to be moving this forward pretty quickly um do you want to go ahead and reduce the applicability from hotels exceeding 15,000 square fet to hotels exceeding 5,000 square F feet Yes okay and Tom just to make sure that I I know we've had issues where things that are part of the way through the approval process get caught up that that's not my intent is to derail any projects that you know have essentially already been planned for this is planning for stealing my friend and colleagues uh commissioner about the city that we want to see and not looking to derail anything where there's already been time and money spent on uh yeah and then in terms of the other two Provisions in the applicability um is leaving new hotel construction exceeding 30 Hotel units or do you think 30 should be a lower threshold as well yeah that's the same uh premise of the square footage okay so maybe 10 Hotel units okay and then the last one would be I mean Tom not to beat around the bush I just be out front is there a reason why we have any lower floor limit no this was something that was scrap it I mean that's what I'd like to do if you're building a a two room Hotel come to the commission for approval it will be Tak away housing inventory okay anyel not yep yeah okay I agree and Mr chairman if I may I'll be brief but I know when this came up at a pre at a prior land use meeting I advise the committee that when the commission um is reviewing one of these requests you'll be sitting in a in a qua judicial capacity like the land use boards do um so you'll be required to uh keep track of any expart Communications your decisions will have to be based on the review criteria in the ordinance um and there will be you know a presentation by the applicant public Hearing in support or opposition and a rebuttal so those will be treated like quaza judicial hearings uh that you're accustomed to seeing before the land use Sports I didn't take you serious when you said it without the beard but you know that hit home and so and so Mr attorney let me let me just ask you for for the record uh when a when an agency sits in a quasi judicial capacity whether it be our agency or or another agency like the planning board they have to adhere to review criteria is that correct that's correct and in this case one of the review criterias is whether the hotel will negatively affect the availability of existing affordable or Workforce housing is that correct that's correct okay thank you just wanted that for the record I like it when we get to consider the impact on housing we last last item number 23 Mr director okay uh and then the last one we'll show that done by acclamation and we will do our best to get this on as a supplemental for the September 11th City commission meeting thank you um item number 23 consider the creation of a new capital project to install floating walkways Andor the acquisition of the outlaw of 2811 Indian Creek Drive to complete the Indian Creek pedestrian pathway thank you uh Mr director I think you're probably all sick uh hearing me talk about uh the Indian Creek pathway the public invested a great amount of money in doing this beautiful area um that um that this beautiful prominade along the Indian Creek um Canal waterway that goes from 24th Street almost all the way to to 41st Street um a number of property owners um actually all property owners in a in a segment of it except for for one uh gave easements to the city uh to to to accommodate uh this this pathway and now what's happened is that you have the the pathway you have one property owner that didn't give the eastment and then you have a bridge and for people to to to get from the pathway back onto the sidewalk they have to walk on a seaw wall which is highly unsafe get off the seaw wall into a 2T right of way to get back onto the sidewalk it is it is the most unsafe and selfish thing to their neighbors that um that that that this property owner has done um and the most offensive part of it the most offensive part of it is that the taxpayers paid to have this property owners Seawall fixed all the other property owners that gave the easement gave the eastment and had their sewwa fixed and this person had their seawa fixed and modernized by the taxpayers of the city of Miami Beach and this person is now creating an unsafe environment for every pedestrian that's on that walkway that has to get on a seaw wall in order to access the public right away again and our city and our residents deserve something better and safer so I am going to pass this off to our uh interim assistant City Manager David Martinez to guide us on what what the administration is is recommending I know you've been looking at possible possible eminent domain proceedings to to take over this property and create the level of connectivity that the public deserves good good afternoon Mr terar and thank you for that um I'll introduce the the discussion and let the Public Works team fill in the blanks um so yes this is something that's been going on for quite some time and we had not been successful obviously in working any kind of uh Arrangement or deal with this property owner I know that the Public Works teams as well as uh our city attorney's office have have been in touch with the property owner uh to try to work something out amicably um the property we're talking about of course is strictly the property on the water side of of Indian Creek on the west side of Indian Creek we're not talking about the property the the folio property on the east side of of Indian Creek so with that I'm going to let Brad Kane tell us a little bit about where we've gotten and what our next steps look like thank you good afternoon chair Fernandez all Commissioners um we we've had discussions um as um our and city manager Martinez said with the property owner um unfortunately um as you stated before uh he is not willing to um give an easement he is not willing to do a quick claim deed as other homeowners have done along uh Indian Creek um and has he blocked the Public's access from from his property not to my knowledge I can't speak to that there's a gate there's a fence around his there's a fence yeah okay but um there are there are a few options uh that you know we're at this point uh that we can only do at this point to try to you know get this public benefit to our residents um I will let um John Carlo who is our assistant city engineer talk about some of those um and uh we'll see where we can go yeah so like like B mentioned we're looking at different options one of those come to the Pod sorry thank you good afternoon welcome yeah we look at different options and I think the the path forward will be to to try to get purchase an eement a six foot asement that's the the option that we would like to to to entertain and and and and get a an appraisal and and a and to make sure if it's possible and that that would be one of the options that will allow us to have us the six foot path that is continues to to have a that section consistent consistent with the rest of the pathway exactly we we we we currently have a six foot pathway so that's the intention to to just purchase that and just to to put on the r we do have an eement but it's a a utility that goes through that property so the value of that we we'll see what comes when we request it but already we have an utility it's not a above ground ement but still there's you know limitations that that property can do in terms of building in the future so that that you know maybe a factor for us in terms of of how much we have to pay for the so so so so just to put this um in in to to clarify for for the public this is the out parcel yes the strip of land on the west side of of Indian Creek across from 2811 Indian Creek we're not looking to eminent domain the entire property is that correct that's that that'll be the next step if if if it's not possible no we're not looking to eminent domain the entire property just the just the we're only looking to do an eminent domain on the outlaw which is a small strip of land and and we're looking to eminent domain and eastment it's not even to eminent domain the entire all is to do an eminent domain for an Eastman correct Mr attorney that's correct for for a six foot is a yes okay that'll be the first one yeah okay what what action does the city Administration the city attorney's office need from this committee and from the city commission to uh get this done if the committee is inclined to move forward you could take uh that you could make the same recommendation that the finance committee made um when this was heard by Finance in in in June which would be to recommend that the that the commission authorize the administration and the city attorney's office to continue to negotiate with the owner of the of 201811 and if those negotiations are unsuccessful uh then to to to have the the City attorney um take the next steps toward an filing an eminent domain proceeding but the important thing is that it's in everybody's interest to to try to achieve a a a negotiated settlement here without filing suits so I I think our our our our initial recommendation is still to try to negotiate uh with the owner and if that's unsuccessful then we would proceed but but but but we've made contact with the owner is that is that is that correct Mr director yes that's correct we have done but it was only for for easen but not purchasing that we're talking about now we're GNA purchase the Ean instead of him give us an Ean or a quick claim D so we're not looking to purchase the eastmen we're looking to eminent domain the eastmen and one thing is to purchase in the market and another thing is to eminent domain and and this is for a public purpose where people's safety people's safety are being in danger we create these Pathways to promote pedestrianism to promote safety in the way that our residents are able to get around our city but in this case something that's supposed to be for the safety for the welfare for the good of the taxpaying public this one one property owner is now forcing the public to get on a seaw wall imagine a handicapp person imagine an elderly person imagine someone that just trips it is so it it is so infuriating and it's so wrong that someone benefited for their personal property from the taxpayer's dollar that their seaw wall got fixed and it's expensive to it's over what is it over $1,000 a foot probably over $1,200 linear foot to fix a sea wall yeah that's in that in the general ballpark yes and that and and and then now there's this this same person is the one that is putting our residents and those pedestrians in danger commissioner Suarez thank you Mr chair uh who is the property owner again I I think it's on through a corporate entity but I I don't know who's the principal I believe it's Alan waserstein the is the owner of the property is is that the same relative of uh Jose Smith I that's not I I just I have no knowledge of that firstand I mean is there any way you know because he's a resident of Miami Beach is there any way that we can contact Jose to hopefully broker a deal here because um certainly we do not want to we would rather go through a negotiation and purchase it instead of eminent domain right um you know maybe we need to bring as many parties together as possible possible to really to really hash out a deal here but okay but here's the thing when you do a purchase a private purchase you usually pay a premium especially when the selling entity isn't looking to sell and the buying entity is approaching the seller when you have in a domain you're paying the assessed the publicly assessed value by the property appraisers correct me if I'm if I'm wrong Mr attorney well in in either event the the city would would have to would have to pay for this property right whether whether we negotiate a price with property owner or whether we initiate the the process for for that's not what I'm asking eminent domain carries other costs too it's it's it's costs that that just inherent in the litigation in the in the types of attorneys who handle that work um so I think and that's why you know I I I think the the recommendation is still to try to negotiate a price with the with with the property owner first because we're going to be paying anyway if if you can allow me to finish Mr thank you um yeah there in some and in some instances whenever there's the judge is going to decide what the price is going to be if I'm if I'm not mistaken and that may or may not be higher than the value of the assessed value and so um that that's why I mean I I would I would encourage bringing all relative parties to the table and trying to re you know just make sure we we get this last deal um H hashed out what what is the last sticking point on their negotiation what do they want you know I I think they they just want to be compensated I think there's so what was the last offer I was not involved in any you know actual we never offer money for this lot for this loss that we obtained in the past it was it was H it was given to the city through a quick LD or an eement so it wasn't M it wasn't money to for the remaining Lots we just gave them that the ability to have a dock basically they still have the ability to build a dock in the future if they need if they want to have water access they still have that right as part of the of the negotiation with the city so but correct me if I'm wrong if we have where are we negotiating I mean what was our position what was their position do they just are adamant on not selling or they want they have a certain price in mind I I can I can probably tell you they probably have a number in mind we didn't get that far we really just wanted to revisit the issues firstly if he was willing to do a quick plre or he was willing to do an easement um we also notified him that you know this was not going to be if any type of M Dain was done it would not be the whole parcel it was just a portion you know of the out parcel that we'd be looking to do and you know he's seemed to be okay with you know that if the evident OB process happened as it related to that but there it's it's a monetary issue right right and I just want to caution you know just because we em in domain something they may get they may get more money out no I don't think so I've seen plenty of Ament domain proceedings at the you know that that we've had to approve at the county that way went but question it's usually pretty it's not the same thing that they'll get on the market right it's Waterfront I mean that is something to consider so but let's assume that we do eminent domain do we do we still have the option to go through with it like let's say the assess value comes back and it's more the the eminent domain value that a judge rules is more than the assess value um are we still do we still have any options or do we have to follow through with the eminent domain like what what if it's something ridiculous where it's like $5 million over the asking price I mean this is a em domain is a highly regulated process there is a mandatory pres uh negotiation process that would come first so it's only assuming you know that we did not reach a a resolution at that phase that we would proceed to litigation and and it's you know it's litigation like any other right I mean we would be uh we'd be we'd be you know we'd be arguing over the over the value of the property would it would it be possible through the chair maybe we invite the property owner to the next land sure well I frankly I rather not do that I rather this is because this may end up being a legal process I rather speak through our attorneys uh let me ask this where are we in the process of obtaining appraisals on the eastment that's the next step that's what're we're going to do now have we requested those I I don't think so do that I don't understand I I I just don't understand how two weeks ago I was told that we were going to request appraisals and here we are two weeks later why has there not been an appraisal ordered I can't speak to that Mr chairman but my understanding is that since since you know every other property along this stretch has worked with the city and has has has has granted easements to the city or quick claim be for these properties uh the reason this is before you is because the administration needs authorization from the city commission to to formally approach this this property owner so to negotiate no to negotiate to to pay for an interest in the property this would be the first for whatever we do we're going to need an appraisal and I want to know why have we not requested the appraisal that I was told over two weeks ago that was going to be requested why has that not been requested who was supposed to request it and why didn't they request it I will ask our public works department what the process for there for you to obtain an appraisal is and the cost Etc yeah good afternoon uh desel TR from the city attorney's office uh we researched the um the formula for calculating value specifically specifically for eminent domain which is a little different it can Encompass um you know fair market is is a little different in uh eminent domains so we prepared the scope for Public Works to order it and we just gave it to them I want to say like two or three days ago okay so they have to now go through the process of you know bidding it out for three different appraisers a cost and that it's a little bit of a process to actually get the signed retainer for the appra okay so uh so Mr attorney uh put me on the proper posture so that so that we can do the most appropriate motion based on the discussion I would recommend making the similar motion to the to what the finance committee made which would be to recommend that the city commission authorize the administration and our office to to negotiate with the property owner if those negotiations are unsuccessful then we could uh proceed to you know to The Next Step motion and I'll second it and and please pleas uh let's put there that that once you communicate with them and whether they're successful or not that an LTC be issued uh you know giving us an update okay thank you colleagues uh for that right um Mr chair with that will that conclude that item based upon that um yes okay yes because that is because we have to make a motion that goes to the city commission it' be great if we could somehow get that on next week's agenda uh if possible I don't think it's a complicated item um and and and also I just want to make sure I didn't misspeak earlier I want to make sure it's clear on the record the 40th Street uh overlay item that was not withdrawn that was deferred uh and so and so I just want to make sure that uh that that the record is clear on that yeah and we have that down as a future item okay great and I Mr director I think that concludes our agenda it does all right well colleagues thank you very much for your uh for for your good work Mr attorney Mr director Mr assistant city manager thank you all for your support and to the members of the public who participated have a good night thank you thank you e for