Planning & Zoning - Regular Meeting

We ready? Yes, sir. I'm ready. Okay. You want to do the line?

Okay. Mr. Chairman, 6:00 and you have a quorum. Okay. Good evening. Welcome to the city of Halia planning zoning board meeting for Wednesday, September 24th, 2025. Everyone, please rise for the invocation and the pledge of allegiance.

Dear Lord, thank you for giving us the opportunity to serve our city. God bless us all that are serving here tonight and may we make the right decisions for everybody involved. Amen. Amen. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for you may be seated. Yeah, it was they didn't let me standing yesterday still. So this morning Thank you.

Meeting guidelines. The following guidelines apply to today's planning and zoning board meeting. Any person, whether participant via the web platform, telephonic conferencing, or physical presence at city hall interested in making comments or posing questions on any item of the agenda may do so during the meeting. Members of the public may hear the meeting live through telephonic conferencing using any telephone or s cellular phone service. A smart device or computer are not necessary to participate in the meeting if you join by phone. All persons participating via the web platform will be muted during the meeting until called upon to be heard. Participation through Zoom requires a computer or smart mobile device with a microphone and web camera. The participant may elect to participate in the meeting using audio only or appear through both audio and video. The video function of all participants appearing through video will be turned off until called upon to be heard. All lobbyists must register with the planning and zoning board meeting prior to the item being heard. A maximum of four speakers in favor and sports four speakers in opposition will be allowed to address the planning and zoning board on any item. Each speaker comments will be limited to three minutes.

Roll call. Mr. Perez here. Mr. Mason absent. Mr. Ellesius here. Mr. Aa here. Mr. Morales here. And Mrs. Enriquez here. Administration of the oath to all participants and anyone I'm sorry we have forum. Administration of oath to all applicants and anyone who will be speaking before the board of any item. So anybody who's going to speak, please stand up.

Anyone and everyone that's going to speak in front of the board, please stand up. Raise your raise your hand. Are you going to speak in front of the board? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth before this board? summary minutes or a copy of the audio file of the proceedings before the planning and zoning board shall be prepared and submitted to the city council before its hearing. The planning and zoning board recommendations for the following public hearing request will be heard by the city council and at its scheduled meeting on Tuesday, October 14th, 2025. The first item is a smallcale map amendment, but it has been requested by the applicant to be postponed for the October 15th meeting.

Read the address, please. So to the uh the address is a folio and is 042035001 0550. Okay. Um the applicant requested to be postponed. So we No action. No action. No action. Very well. was the land use. Okay. All right. That was the land use uh portion. So, we're going to close that and open up the uh regular planning zoning meetings.

Okay. The city of Halia planning and zoning board meeting. Uh item one, approval of planning and zoning board summary agenda of September 10th, 2025 as as submitted. Motion to approve. Second that motion. Uh so you have a motion by Miss Enriquez and a second by Mr. Glacius. The clerk will call the role. Okay. Mr. Yes. Mr. Yes. Mr. Morales? Yes. Mr. Paris? Yes. Mrs. Enriquez? Yes. Mr. Mason, absent. Item has passed.

A written decision and resolution will be prepared and presented for review to the city council. The city council is authorized to affirm affirm with conditions or override the decisions by resolution. After the resolution is adopted, contact a member of the city clerk's office to obtain a copy of the final decision and resolution. Upon your receipt of the final decision and resolution, contact the building department to obtain your required building permit. Summary minutes or a copy of the audio file of the proceedings before the planning and zoning board shall be prepared and submitted to the city council before its hearing. The planning and zoning board recommendations for the following pro public hearing requests will be heard by the city council at his scheduled meeting on Tuesday, October 28th, 2025.

Thank you. I'd like to take a moment and recognize our madame mayor back there keeping an eye on us. Don't worry, we won't let you down. Welcome. Go ahead. Final decision to allow a rear setback of 14.2 feet where 20 feet are required for an existing addition to be legalized. Property is located at 3481 East 8th Lane Halia zoned R1 one family district. Applicant Barbara Paris address please.

Okay. Um, just for the record, I'm going to read it in English. Um, so her name is Barbara Perez and her address is 3481 East 8th Lane, Halia, Florida. Okay. Okay. Okay. No. No. Okay.

Okay. The property in this application is located on the east side of East 8 Lane between East 34 Street and East 36th Street. The lot is approximately 7,725 square ft or8 acres. The site has been improved with an 1,988 square ft single family home originally built in 1948. According to Miami Day County property appraisal records, the property is designated as a low density residential on the city future land use map and the zoning classification is R1 one family district which is consistent their width. The applicant is before the city requesting approval to legalize an addition rear um area which provides a rear setback of 14 ft and 2 in I'm sorry 14.2 feet where 20 feet are required. The property received a violation BWOP-000000342-2025 in February 2025 for the construction of the rear addition without the benefit of a building permit. The addition is approximately 667.5 square ft consisted of a master bathroom master bedroom and a gym. Following this violation, the applicant consulted with the zoning department regarding whether the illegal structure could be legalized. During a staff review of the survey, it was determined that the rear addition did not comply with the required setback dimension. A review of the city microfilms records um indicate that several prior improvements were permitted, including a pool permit number 1957-39396, a utility room, and a front porch under permit number 1973 2247, a Florida room, bedroom, closet, and bathroom under perpet 1987-1817. Also, the submitted site plan does not include the pvious area calculation in the zoning legend. The site plan must be

revised to demonstrate compliance with the minimum pace area requirements of 30% approximately 2,318 ft. In addition, staff noted that the existing resident layout was not consistent with that of a typical single family home. Staff met with the property owner and recommended reconfiguring the interior to improve connectivity throughout the residence. The revised floor plan now reflects a consistent design that complies with a single family home layout. Given that the required rear setback is 20 ft and the addition provides 14 to uh 14.2 ft, a staff finds that the reduced setback does not negatively impact adjacent properties as the structure is not built to the property line. I complies with the required interior side setbacks. A staff uh recommends approval of the request to legalize the addition with the existing rear setback subject to the following conditions. The applicant must apply for a building permit to legalize the existing addition and the resident layout must be revised consistent with the plans prepared by Raphael Drosa PE dated September 17, 2025. And the site plan must demonstrate compliance with the minimum 30% pvious area requirement prior to receiving final approvals from the planning and zoning division. Therefore, staff recommends approval with conditions. Single family home

me future land use map. Fore [Music] construction. department. [Music] I of records improvements.

FloridaToch. Fore staff. Um, staff [Music] Setbackstruction. Rafael.

Okay, thank you. Okay, any comments or questions? No, no, no. No comments or questions from the board. Anyone in the audience? Anyone in the electronic audience? Close the bar. What's the pleasure of the board? Motion to approve with conditions. Second that motion with conditions. You have a motion from Miss Enriquez and a second from Mr. Glacius. The clerk will call the role. Yes. Yes. Mr. Sanchez. Yes. Yes. Mr. Yes. Miss Mr. Yes. Motion passes. The item is approved.

Okay.

Okay. Gracias. The planning and zoning board recommendations for the following public hearing request will be heard by the city council and is scheduled meeting on Tuesday, October 14th, 2025. Item three is a resoning, but it has been requested by the applicant to be postponed until of um our meeting on October 15, 2025. Item three is uh companion uh companion with the land use. Yes. to the land use. Okay. So since it was requested by the applicant, I don't think we should take any action on that. No action. No action. Folio number is 04203501550.

Thank you. Item four.

Item four. Variance permit to allow the expansion of an existing non-conforming 256 square feet manual car wash business granted by ordinance 9013 lines issuing a special use permit SUP to allow state set use on property zone B1 highly restricted retail district where um where manual car wash use has been and has been allowed. an allowed use in the B1 zoning classification where manual car wash is not permitted use under section 98-1897 where nonconforming manual car washes are only allowed on properties zone C1 restricted retail commercial district and C2 liberal retail commercial district and where a declaration of restrictive covenant has been preferred in 1990 stating that the Nano Car Wash would comply with sections A through G of ordinance 89-81. The proposed expansion includes the construction of an additional 460 square feet structure, replacing an existing 460 square feet metal roof built without the benefit of a building permit and in violation of the 1990 preferred uh declaration of restrict restrictive covenants and that is inconsistent with the current building code requirements. Variance permit to allow 104 parking spaces where the existing shopping center was approved with 106 parking spaces and where 115 parking spaces are required and variance to permit to allow landscape mitigation of 15 canopy trees where only four canopy trees currently

exist at the site that was originally approved with 20 canopy trees. Property is located at 5350 West 12th Avenue, Hay Alia, zoned B1, highly restrictive restricted retail district. Okay. Applicants say on behalf of Hassinto, this item was uh table last meeting. So we need to u Mr. Chairman, there was a there was an error. It was postponed, not tabled. So no action is needed. You can continue with So we can just open it up. Yes. Okay. Name. Good afternoon, Caesar Master with offices at 8105 Northwest 155th Street, Miami Lakes, Florida. Thank you.

The property in this application is a shopping center located at the southwest intersection of West 12th Avenue and West 51 phase. The property has a commercial land use and is zone B1 that is the most restrictive, less intense commercial classification in the city code. The reason for the existing B1 zoning is that the subject property is surrounded by residential properties and uses compatible with the residential such the such as the church across the street on West 51st Place. This application is to request the legalization of one of the two existing metal roof that was built without permits and that illegally expanded the manual car wash use. Since the unpermitted metal roof does not meet building code requirement, a staff recommendation is that the metal roof, the illegal metal roof shall be removed. With that roof demolished, uh the manual car can operate with the existing uh legally approved metal roof. Since the applicant did not provide any improvement plans as accordy to the applicant staff designed a proposal to replace the permitted roof with a larger roof, one that it will comply with the maximum size that it was allowed at the time that the legally uh built roof was constructed. The recommendation here will be approved um will approve the expansion of the condition that the illegal roof be removed or to deny the application if the applicant, you know, doesn't want to move forward with removing the legal roof. As a background for information, the existing shopping center was issued a certificate of occupancy in 1980, including the existing building, a surface parking lot for 106 cars and 20 large trees. In 1990, the property was granted an a special use permit to allow a car wash in the property zone B1, where ordinance number 89-81, adopted in August 1989, provided that

car washes were first allowed in C2 and C C1 and C2 some uh properties. A declaration of restricted covenant was profered by the applicant at the time at the time stating that the car wash will operate from 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and will comply with sections A through G of ordinance 89-81. Sections A through G of the ordinance include among other stipulations that no car wash shall be ex shall exceed 560th square feet. Since May 2019, the manual new manual car wash are not permitted in the city and the ones existing at the time will be permitted to operate as a non-conforming as a legal non-conforming use on the property zone C1 and C2. After obtaining the special use permit, the property owner obtained a building permit to build a manual car wash in 1990 ex including a 256 ft aluminum roof. Over the years, the manual car wash operation was expanded without the benefit of the building permit and a second aluminum roof was built with an area of 460 square feet along the parking lot Easter driveway. The expanded operations continue over the years with the occupational license renewal annually. The legal additions continue over the years including the installation of a shed. The operator of the car wash did not condode a need operation and did not comply with the sections A through G of the 1989 ordinance as provided in the declaration of restrictions. Consequently, and because of other issues impacting the operation of the shopping center, the shopping center owner did not renew their contract. At this time, the shopping center manager is requesting several variances with the intention to legalize the 460 ft aluminum roof that he was expanding without permits. The manual car wash is allowed by the 1889 special use permit. Consultation with

the building and fire departments indicated that the existing 460 ft aluminum roof as built may not be legalized since it cannot comply with the current building code requirements and that it location on the driveway could not be approved by the fire department. In addition, a landscaping resertification inspection was conducted where it was noticed that only four canopy trees remain from the 20 trees that they were originally approved in the property and 104 parking spaces are provided where the property was approved with 106 parking spaces. A staff recommends that given that the special use permit granted in 1989 allowed a manual car wash with an area of 560 square feet, the applicant could be allowed to expand its operation by replacing the existing 256 square ft aluminum roof with a new state-of-the-art 560 ft aluminum roof at the location approved in 1989. A new roof will provide adequate space for the manual car wash operations with better weather protection than the 1990 roof. Provide a storage area to comply with the requirements that supplies shall be screened from the public and not displayed in an unsightly manner and contribute to the upgrade of the manual car wash operation. Accordingly, a variance to expand a non-conforming um use by allowing a new 560 ft car wash canopy. A variance to allowed 104 parking spaces with 106 were pro approved in 1980 and a variance to allow mitigation of 16 canopy trees might be approved subject to the following conditions. A staff recommends that the existing illegal roof of 460 square feet will be demolished immediately and a new 560 ft roof will replace existing permitted 5 256 ft aluminum roof or maintain the

existing permitted 256 room square ft aluminum roof until building permits are obtained for the new um extended 560 ft aluminum roof. and payment for mitigation for the 16 trees will be provided upon submitted the sampling review required for the aluminum uh roof replacement. An alternate or alternative alternatively 16 canopy trees uh with 12 feet to 14 ft high and 3-in calipiber will be installed at the property with the proper landscaping permit. A staff recommends approval of the expansion of the non-conforming use parking variance of land landscaping mitigations with conditions. So just to make it clear the staff has provided options you whether maintain the legal roof and remove the illegal roof aluminum roof so you can continue the operations. The other option is that they can remove both and come for permits for um an extended aluminum roof as it was approved back in 1989. That was the staff recommendation since the beginning since day one. Um this application went to council for one meeting for one reading and we discuss it. Um at that moment you had reviewed this um application already once and um at that point it was um profit or recommended um that the legal roof will be maintained for at least one year. Um I met personally with the property manager um and unfortunately they didn't agree with that one year. So we are here again in front of you um and see what the applicant has to provide at this time.

Thank you. Um just to refresh my memory because I know that this item has been in front of us a couple of times and oops and in front of the council also. Um, did did we you weren't the you weren't representing them at the time, so I'm not going to ask you. You may know, but did we approve or deny this uh application at the time?

The the board actually approved with the condition to remove the legal roof and maintain the option to maintain the legal one or come for permits for the expanded one. Okay, I remember this that Deborah was here at the time and she very emphatically uh insisted in um the removal of the illegal uh carport uh and in lie of building a new one that that will meet like you have it right now, a larger one that would um suffice for for their needs. So that hasn't happened yet.

That not that I'm aware of. Okay. Not that I'm aware. So basically the options are in the table whether you demolish the legal and maintain the small one or you can come remove both and come for permits for a new expanded one or larger one that you got the approval back from n 1989. Thank you Mr. Mystery. I may make this a little easier for everyone but um you may what? I may make it a little easier for everyone.

Okay. But but just by by your background, um I remember this car wash back from 1990. Um the people that are here with me today are the gentleman in the suit that actually started the car wash back in 1990 and ran it for many decades. And then it was sold. He became the property manager for the shopping center. And the gentleman next to him is the gentleman that wants to open the new place. The car wash was not renewed. the lease was not renewed because he saw that they were running it into the ground. It was a mess. It was not kept right. It had become a real nuisance. So instead of going on with that, he said, "Do not do not

you may say you may say do not renew the lease." Um and that's why we're here now.

Okay. Um, I think staff helped a lot and I've gone over this with him and I think that the plans that they drew for the new 560 square foot uh is fantastic. I think you guys went above and beyond. So, what to cut through the chase, we agree with the conditions and the alternatives um with regards to the roofs. either they keep the smaller one, get rid of the bigger one. The bigger one's got to go no matter what. And then they can come in and try to get the 560 uh new design one. And they have the option on the trees to either plant them or pay. And that's fine.

Okay. Mr. Mistri, um you know, we have you and the board in the city. We have a pretty good relationship. Absolutely. We see eye to eye and whenever there is a a a little glitch in the program,

we you step up and man, you bend over backwards and you try to work it out. Okay. I I don't know, man. this I just don't feel comfortable with with you know we have given this individual so many chances so many opportunities as far as that carport is concerned but we're agreeing with it we're agreeing with stuff yeah but here we are again I mean this is something that has been going for a couple of years now and I I feel for the gentleman that wants to open the business right

okay because he's not making any money right now correct I feel for the for the um the property manager because he has a a a tenant whether he has signed or not. Okay. But I mean there there's a there's a sweet beautiful relationship going on there. But there is a a little glitch in that relationship and that has not been fulfilled. I don't know. But if I could, we're not here because he filed a new application or I filed a new application. We're here because of the notification issue that where everything that wasn't finished had to start all over. That's the only reason he's back to PNZ

through the chair. Yes, I might disagree with that. Um because if when we when we had an agreement with the applicant, okay, for what the council actually had agreed, you could have done and move forward, but then the applicant requested for postponement and he wanted to continue the discussion even though we had and we sat down and we agreed for a year. Okay. And that kept on postponing postponing and unfortunately not but you came into a place. So with all due respect, I agree that he has been doing everything, but we had something on the table that we had agreed on. I I can't undo

I know that you weren't part of it. I can't that is that is and I know that this case it has a long history has been back and forth and everything. So that that is professionally. Um if they were things that they were done over the years without permits illegally, they were issues and they were trying to correct it. I get it. But I feel that they keep on extending and extending and extending the issues and not resolving them. And if you have the word at the table and that's for me that doesn't demonstrate a good character. Thank you. I I I second that through the chair. Yes, sir.

Uh weren't these recommendations the same as last time? Pretty much. Pretty much. Yes, they are. And and he denied them last night. He he didn't want He didn't want them. He didn't want any of this. But I'm his representative, and I'm telling you, after we have spoken, he's okay with them. I mean, there's nothing else I can do. And I I still believe the reason we're here before PNZ because it was postponed at council had there not been the notification issue, it would have it would have gone back to council. It would have never come back here. Let me let me check at something at the dates because that happened way No, no, I know that it it was cut in the middle, but he postponed the application on the second reading way before that happened.

Yeah. Yeah. That that is true. But what Caesar is saying is whether or not it was his post postponement or the city's postponement, if he postponed it, it would continue to be postponed to council. It wouldn't be postponed, brought back to the city um to the planning and zoning. We are here because So if we're here because of a sign issue had there been no sign issue, if it would be indefinitely postponed, it would be postponed to the city council, not to the planning board. He is correct on that. But I mean I C are you saying that you profer and that he profers to all the conditions? Yes. That that's exactly what we're saying. But we just need to make sure that he's if I understood correctly two two options. He's agreeing to two options.

Correct. So either to removed either the small one stays and the big one gets removed or the small one goes the big one goes and it's replaced with the one that staff was nice enough to do the plans for him for which I think is the best option. I I agree

which is which is something that was proposed um before and again you know half a doz you know six one way half a dozen the other whatever reason it didn't come to fruition Caesar is not you and I'm talking to you from from here you know that like I you know the risk of repeating myself you know that you and the city and all of us we have a good reputation we have a good relationship and we know we we can stand behind each other. I don't know, man. I just have I just have a a a trust issue right now. A confidence issue. I That's me. But what would be wrong with doing the same thing that happened last time?

That it hasn't happened. No, but you you approve it with conditions, right? And it gets in front of the council and it's the same thing that happened last time. It's what I'm hearing is we want to punish him for not agreeing to what we offered. That doesn't seem it's I don't know to me it just help me help me understand help me change my mind. Yeah. I mean I understand where you're coming from. Uh it was a very uh how can I say we were a back and forth situation with him and uh he he went to council anyways if I remember well after that even you know like dismissing our our disapproval because we were going to prove it

and then he all of a sudden said no if I can't get in my way I'm I'm I'll go with the denial and I'll find now I even this this may be you know a little bit out there But there was even there was even an issue with the with the uh with an affidavit or the power of attorney with the with the property. Yes.

Okay. And which he acknowledged that it was signed somewhere else, not here. It wasn't recognizable in the state and he did correct it. So, thank you. Okay. But I don't know. I I just I just don't feel comfortable and and that's what I'm going to rely on on the rest of the board to you know and you to help me change my mind but right now I don't feel comfortable with it. What is the distrust? What I'm trying to that I'm trying to help. Not you. Not you.

That things have been promised. Um they have been proposed. They have been promised. They've been agreed upon and here we are again going back in circle to the beginning. Nothing has nothing has happened. But were they agreed to? I mean I I wasn't here but I'm hearing that you they went back and forth and went back and forth. There was some there was some agreements, there was some disagreements, there were some conditions uh uh profered. Uh it just honestly my my understanding is kind of what board member just said. It was either my way or the highway. That's what that's what I gathered. That's what he gave us last time.

Yeah. Yeah. That's But that's not an agreement. That's that's my way or the highway. But now he understands his way is not going to work. Yes sir. So right now you're agreeing to Sorry about that. You're agreeing to all the all the conditions. All the conditions. Yes. Okay. So there's there's two options on the table, right? So that Mr. Mestre has stated that his client is open to both options. Whichever one he'd like to keep both options. What do you mean? See which one he can do. So basically the board the board is going to be exactly so basically there are two options right

option number one is to demolish the illegal the illegal canopy and maintain the legal small canopy. That is option one. No extension of time demolishing the illegal immediately. That is how the staff reads. Correct. The existing illegal 460 ft roof will be demolished immediately. And they continue with the legal. So that is option one. Option two is to demolish both so they can request building permit to construct according to the 1989 um approval. Can I can I ask a question real quick sir?

So just just you know so we're all on the same page. If a if if if the item is denied let's say that this item is denied everything remains illegal. Is that is that correct? No, because they have a legal canopy which is the 260 ft canopy, but the large one remains illegal. Correct. So by by by if if you were to approve this item, he would be forced to legalize. Correct. No, because the option the two options actually includes the removal of the illegal. It goes either way, right? But that the large one goes either way, right? So, but that would bring that would be legalizing.

That would be legalizing. Legalizing by demolition. By demolishing. Correct. Right now, as it stands, it is an illegal structure. Correct. If you approve based on either of the options that you're given, both options require legalization. Correct. Thank you.

Okay. Um, another thing that um, Claudia is very eloquently with the word immediately and I want to bring this back to her because she's used it a couple of times and we all know that immediately is pretty harsh word but it doesn't hap it can't happen immediately. um basically with you know following per demolition permits and stuff but okay that same language was in the application last year and that immediately never came about do you you follow what I'm saying? So

yes, exactly. Because we we kept on, you know, and again, Caesar, that's See, I'm I'm running the fence. That's why the the the trust factor comes into play for me because options have been put on the table. Um different. You can do this, you can do that. However, you have this that you that needs attention and it just even though we've approved it, we've denied it, we've whatever cuz this item this is not new to us. We've we've heard this several times before and it just

through the chair. Yes. Um just also to put it in the record as of a way of inspection. Um personally I have seen that there's no operation of car wash currently at that location. There's no what? I'm sorry. Operations of any car wash at the location today. Well, no. The the gentleman the gentleman is waiting. It's not operating. It's not operating. Correct. No. So, I want to just let them know that is no. No. No. We know that. My understanding is it has a valid BTR, but it is not operating. That's what I understand. Right. Well, if I if I understand correctly, it does not have a valid because actually they lost that nonconformity because they never they they didn't renewed it. I think they just did. I believe they did.

Um I don't think so, but under the last time that I checked that they did not um they did not renew it. That is why he lost their nonconformity. So he he doesn't have a license to operate under my understanding and what I lack back the records. No. The property manager may be in contract with the business owner but you know as far as retention is concerned for rental what have you but there's no business going on because there's no license there's no license being my understanding

we would have to check with I don't want to we would have to check with business license so that that's not for this board that's a business license question so if you want that question answered that needs to be done through business tax. Okay. But to me, it seems like you are have three options on the table. You approve one of the two options that were given by the city planner or you deny the item. Those are the three options and um this board should decide on one of the two of the options or denial. Well, sure. Go ahead.

I think my opinion is uh they will have to decide either demolish or make the new one. He got he have to decide either one or the other today. Correct. Staff is proposing and bringing to the table the two options. Correct. So he'll have to make either either one today

through the chair and through legal um you know have in the past move forward any recommendation with options. Well, you what should happen now is um you know if Caesar would like he could he could ask us what option he'd prefer. Okay. If the board is on board with that option, they could vote on that option or the board can motion to approve the other option. It's up to the board to pick one option. You can't you can't approve both options. you need a something solid to say that this is what we're approving. It cannot be ambiguous. So, this board should decide um on what option they prefer. What I'm hearing is that he's open to both options to get this item approved. So, I would suggest to the board to um approve an option that you feel is best for the city

through the chair. I I was seeing there's some letters that are opposed to the car wash that we haven't gotten to and one of the letters recommends to leave the business how it was originally with the small carport and not let it expand further. Uh I'm in favor of that if we're going to do anything just keep it the way because the neighborhoods apparently some of the neighbors don't want the car wash for various reasons. Uh I'm not going to get into it, but they're not happy about the situation. I think we have to read out that letter anyways. We haven't opened public hearing yet. So, at the moment, we'll read it out.

So, uh there is that issue that I'm that I see. Uh if we was to do it because supposedly on the letter, they're saying that this is not a legal car wash in this parking lot is what it's they're referring to. It could be. It could be, but it has if if they don't have a license and they're operating, correct? But we don't have that information. We don't have confirmed for you. We're not that that would be for a a business tax um question. So, how could we approve something that we don't know if it's legal or not?

You should you should base your approval on on the on this is the planning and zoning board. So, your approval should be based on the planner's recommendation and you should base your approval or denial on whether this is um fits the comprehensive code and is compatible with the zoning um within the area.

So, as a point of clarification, when it comes legally for planning and zoning, the small aluminum roof, it is legal. They have a a legal status because they were approved back in 1989 currently. So for that and for our purposes they are legal. They obtain the proper they have a a declaration of restrictions so on and so forth. So that is you know uh legal for your the purview of this board. So what it's what the letter says that they are legal to have that small port. That's it. Yeah. Nothing more.

So so the the the letters that you have um they are they are not fact they are just um letters of objection. So we are unsure whe whether what they say is is objective factual or not. So I I wouldn't I would caution you to um perceive those letters as objectively factual. Um they are just opinions and um they are voicing their um want for not to approve this. Okay. Okay. Anyone else?

I have a question. I thought we could proceed and leave both options open and then later on decide. And I'm I'm bringing that up because the second part has options also. The trees. Well, I I guess I guess you could um I guess since this is a recommending body, I guess then I would correct myself and say you could at council, they could decide the option because they are decision makers. So,

regarding the trees, it's either plant them or pay. It's an option. That's so I I I guess then then you I I would be okay with you sending an approval for the council to make decision with with a priority if the board decides to have this is priority number one or this is you know that's a good I would I would recommend that you you recommend to the council what your recommendation of the option would be whether you prefer option one or option two but since this is a recommending body that would be Okay,

I have a question, Caesar. Um, what is the proposed operating um schedule of the of the car wash were to be approved and built and opened? I think they would have to live up to what the original declaration said, which I think was 9 to 7 or 8 to 7. I remember reading it. But there's there's a schedule in there already. Remember, this has been approved. Um, according to the declaration from back then is 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

Okay. Yeah. Cuz I'm concerned about um the atmosphere at night, you know, the type of crowd. That's one of the reasons they didn't renew the lease. There was a bad crowd and things were happening that shouldn't be happening and that's why they said no more and that's why they have a new owner that's gonna open and operate it throughact how can we be assured that that crowd's not going to be back again that's one of the concerns that was in the letter that I didn't want to bring up but you know it's brought it's been brought up I I am concerned about that

you have a schedule which just says 7 o'clock After that, they police can go by and and close them down or sight him, whatever they need to do. Um, and other than that, it's private property. So, the owner and the property manager are the ones that have to would handle that initially. Um, and if it gets to illegal activity, obviously, the police can go to to be honest with you, I'm not really too happy about the way the recommendation is. It's a little bit too open. I I' I'd rather if we had the the opportunity to have it one way and and the one way that I re would prefer would be the original way that it's supposed to be that what they did in 1989 or whatever it was and have it to that structure to the smaller structure instead of having them be able to expand because you're just giving them the option to expand without you know there's no way to change it. Except just to clarify what what happened is back in 1989 they got approved for a larger canopy for a 66 560 me square ft that was got approved but they built

in that day and a smaller one. So technically they do have an approval for a larger canopy but unfortunately they did not legally build what they were approved for. instead it was, you know, built illegally. It it could be argued that they already have entitlements to the 560. I think that's that's the issue and that's why the suggestion of demolishing both existing or the existing and the legal and illegal um structures and just build one two 560 560 which would encompass which is everything which has already been grandfathered in. Correct.

Correct. Yeah. Guys, remember it's I just hate using the word legal and illegal. There was an approved unpermitted There was an approved permitted hand car wash. Mhm. That had the ability or had the entitlement to have one roof of 560 square feet. There was something built that was built without permits. we can call it the legal structure. Um, but that's really the only issue. Everything else is according to what they were given. Okay. The chair, we need to open it for public uh hearing.

Yeah. All right. Any more comments or questions from the board? No. All right. I'm going to open it to the public. See if there's anyone in the audience that would like to speak in favor or against this item. Do we have anybody on Zoom? No. Okay. Anyone in the audience like to speak in favor or against? Okay. Through the chair, we have um the the letters of objection. So, we'll read that into the record.

Okay. So, we basically received two letters. They're exactly the same letters just signed by different people. So, I'm going to go ahead and read one of them. Uh, read an objection to variance permit for expansion and operation of nonconforming manual car wash business dated hearing date September 24th. Dear members of the planning and zoning board, I am writing as the business property owner in close proximity to the manual car wash business seeking a variance permit for expansion and continued operation at a location zoned B1 highly restricted retail district where such use is not permitted under ordinance section 98-1987 and ordinance 90-139. I respectfully submit the this formal objection to both the proposed expansion and continued operation of the non-conforming car wash based on the following legal community concerns. Number one, zoning violations and improper use. The b this business is in in a zone where manual car washes have never been allowed. permitting a variance would direct directly contradict the original intent and purpose of the B1 zoning designation erode the authority of the zoning code and invite future nonconformity uses in residential adjacent areas. This existing car wash structure started small and continued to grow without a building permit which further demonstrates non-compliance and a disregard for legal land uses procedures and restrictions. Number two, noise traffic and public noises. The car wash has significantly significantly increased local traffic in and out of the shopping center as well as on 54th Street leading to residential homes. This has added persistent noise into

what should be a quiet and safe residential setting. The operation of vacuum machines, pressure washes, loud music from customer vehicles have become daily disturbances that disrupt the peaceful enjoyment of our homes. Additionally, customers frequently seek to wait in adjacent areas like the swell of their church north of the business, littering, consuming alcohol beverages, and leaving and leave behind garbage, including B bottles and food waste often on residential sidewalks as well. This has transformed a familyfriendly neighborhood into a noisy, unsanitary, and unsafe environment. Number three, crime. Crime and safety concerns since the car wash has grown and the exod restaurant has been operating. The area has experience a noticeable increase in petty crime, vandalism, and a police activity. Residents do not feel safe in the neighborhood any longer. Allowing the car wash to continue, let alone expand, would only further jeopardize the security and well-being of the neighborhood. Number four, negative impact on property values and quality of life. The car wash operation has negatively impacted property values in the area. Prospective buyers are dissuaded by the presence of an industriallike business with heavy traffic in and out of small shopping centers, noise and lotterying of all which degrade the residential character of the community. In addition, the local u shopping center business are bothered by the people from the car wash and their clients wanting to come in and to use the restroom. Also, the parking spaces for our patrons are limited. Tree mitigation and environmental non-compliance. There is a conversation about the requirement to plant canopy

trees. However, there is a lack of suitable ground space of asphalt space, tree covering and landscape. There is only limited space for parking that is always taken when neighbors shop at the market. The absence of green space and landscaping not only violates code but contributes to heat, storm water, runoff, and a less lively environment. In conclusion, for the above reasons, I strongly urge the planning and zoning board to please deny the variance request for both the expansion and continued operation of the manual car wash business. Upholding zoning laws and protecting the character and safety of residential neighborhoods must remain the city's priority. Thank you for your time and consideration. re respectfully. This letter is signed by business owners of the near shopping center and the other letter that we received which exactly the same language is signed by Rael and Maximo Hinoris who are neighbors of the car wash.

Thank you. Um there was one small um uh a line here. I'm trying to find it. But if I heard you correctly, uh whether the letter is uh inaccurate or what, but it says that the car wash is not permitted there. Um but yet we're led to believe that it there has been a a permitted um usage of that property since way back So, can you

I think I can I I think what they're saying is a manual car wash is not allowed in B1, which is what staff said, but since this one had the special use permit from 1989, it is a nonconforming use. And when she says in the letter that this will lead to more non-conforming use, that's impossible because the non-conforming basically is like a a grandfather. Something exists that's legal at that time and then later on a code is passed that makes it illegal. That's why it would be non-conforming legal use.

If I'm wrong, Mr. Attorney, let let us. And I would I would caution the only person that can make a zoning determination within the city of Alia is either myself or more than myself, Claudia. So if you have a zoning question, I would not rely on on the letter that you just received. I would rely on Claudia's interpretation. That's that's why I brought it up because right here it says, you know, you know, they have it there and it's not permitted. So they're implying that it has been uh um you know under under violation since day one. Again, I would not take that as an objective fact. The only person that you should rely on when analyzing the zoning code is Claudia. And if she's not available, her staff or myself,

right? And just to make it clear, the car wash had an special use permit, still has an special use permit to conduct a manual car wash since 1989. So for the fact that it's illegal or it's a illegal, I think you mentioned it. That is not correct. It's not factual. That's what that's that's why I brought it up because it's like wait a minute they've been operating under a special use permit since 97 and all of a sudden as you know it's saying that is not permitted that they're illegal. I mean that's but they have been operating under a special use permit since 97.

Correct. So for all intents and purposes, they've been legal as far as the operation is concerned, not necessarily the structure, the layout, what have you, which is what's in front of us now. Correct. So the use per se, it was approved under a special use permit. Special use permit. The use was approved and it continues to be a legal non-conforming use. Right. The structures are the issue. The issue. Okay. Okay. One of the structures. Correct. One of the structures.

So, if I may, and this is what all due respect, guys, I I you know, I I don't I don't like to push things too much, but you're not voting on whether to close this thing down or not. You're basically voting on that big roof that was done without permits. That's it. Yeah. And as far as I'm concerned, if options have been brought forth, um, and I, if I understand you correctly, you're you're open to them. Tear it down, build a new one to comply to, you know, to compliance.

Uh, and and through the chair, I'm sorry, one more. I I stand corrected actually by the record that um on on the meeting by April 9, 2025 um and since the conditions that they are the same as today they were not accepted um there was a motion to recommend denial and the vote was carried six uh to one um by um board member Santi being absent. So it was a recommendation of denial back then. Yeah. Okay. So, I'll turn it over to the board. If

Yeah. So, so if you if you if you'd like to make a motion, I would suggest that your motion be one of uh two. One motion would be to approve conditions with of course the conditions and and your recommendation to the council of which option you would prefer but allowing them to move forward with both conditions or both options for the council to final determine or a motion to deny. Thank you. Okay guys, ladies, you heard you heard it from the man. So what's the pleasure of the board? Do you have any more questions or comments? No comments. No. Okay. What's the pleasure of the board?

Motion to approve conditions. Um, and do I have to choose which one? Yes. Which which would your preference which would you recommend to the council? Um the the second condition, the new 560 ft roof will replace existing permitted 256qt aluminum roof or a maintain existing permitted 256 ft aluminum roof until building permits are obtained for the new 560 ft aluminum roof. Okay, there's a motion. I'll second that motion.

Motion by Miss Enriquez and a second by Mr. E. Glaciius uh to recommend approval with a recommendation from this board for option number two to the city council which is the uh new 500 foot right here. Yes. Yes. The clerk will call the call. Right. To remove both structures and to build a new one. Well, yeah. Well, obviously they have they have to go. Yeah. Yeah. Correct. No, no, no, no. Remove the two little ones and go ahead and replace it with a 500. it with a new. Do you agree with that? Uh, CE, the way I understand it is we're sending both to the council. It's just their recommendation

a preference for the Yes. But the council has the ultimate decision of of course approval with no condition. Correct. Approval with one condition or denial. Correct. So there's a motion in a second. So the clerk should take the role. Okay. Mr. Morales. Yes. Mr. Perez. No. Mr. Yes. Miss Enriquez, yes. Mr. Yo, no. The motion carries. The item is approved.

Okay. Item number five, amendments to the city of IIA ordinance number 2023 124 to permit a five-story multifamily development with 52 residential units instead of an 8story multifamily development with 48 residential units. repealing variances to allow 17% of the units with an area of 692 square ft where 850 square ft is the minimum area required and only 10% of the units may have an area of 600 square ft and wave the building mass and building frontage development standards. Variance permit to allow 48 multif family units 92% with an area less than 700 square feet where 700 square ft is the minimum required and only 25% of residential units may have a minimum area of 500 square ft. allow 22% pvious area where 30% is the minimum required and to allow the mitigation of six parking spaces as per section 98-15797 properties located at 1116 Palm Avenue Halia zoned C2 Liberal Retail Commercial District within the neighborhood business district NBD overlay applicant Cesar Mestre Esquire on behalf of 1116 Property Holdings OZ LLC.

Thank you, Caesar. Caesar Masterwood office is at 8105 Northwest 155th Street, Miami Lakes, Florida. Thank you.

The property in this application is located at the northwest intersection of Palm Avenue between West 11th Street and West 12th Street. The property is designated as commercial on the city's um future land use map and is currently zone C2 liberal retail commercial district and is also within the extended Halia downtown urban center district overlay. The parcel consists of approximately 32400 square ft or 74 acres. The site was previously improved with a car sales lot, a two-story commercial residential building and a mechanic shop. all constructed between 1925 and 1966. However, in 2023, the property was demolished under permit number BLC-010 A23-2024, leaving the land vacant. The surrounding land uses and zoning include low and medium density residential zone R2 and R3 to the north, medium density residential and commercial R3, R31 and C2 to the east, medium density residential and central business district zone C2, R3, R31 and CR to the south and medium medium density residential zone R3 to the west. The property was granted a special use permit under city ordinance number 2023-124 adopted on December 12th, 2023, approving the expansion of the neighborhood business district MBD overlay. The ordinance also approved variances allowing for a smaller site residential units that were permitted by the overlay. Additional variances were granted to weigh building mass and building frontage development standards. Consequently, the approved redevelopment consisted of an eightstory mixeduse building including 9,700 square ft of ground floor commercial space and 48 residential units containing eight one-bedroom units and 42bedroom units.

The proposal also complied with the parking requirements at the time of approval. The neighborhood business district MBD regulations were amended pursuant to ordinance number 2025-00004 adopted on January 28th, 2025. The amendments directly affecting the request. These requests include revisions to the minimum residential unit site standards, the percentage of the unit permitted to contain less than the required minimum square footage, and modifications to the office street parking requirements. In addition, a waiver of the building mass and building frontage development standard is no longer required under the amended regulations. Therefore, the applicant, bless you, the applicant is before the city requesting a modification to the approved ordinance to permit the development of a fivestory multif family building with 52 residential units in place of the previously approved 8story 48 unit multif family building. As part of this request, the applicant seeks to repeal the previously granted variances that allowed 17% of the units to have an area of 692 square ft where a minimum of 850 ft is required and permitted up to 10% of the units with an area of 600 square ft as well as the waiver building mass and building frontage development standards. The amended proposal now requires approval of new variances to allow 48 multif family units 92% with an area of less than 700 square f feet where seven square 700 square f feet is the minimum required and to permit up to 25% of the residential units with a minimum area of 500 square ft. Additional variances are requested to allow allow 22% pvious area where 30% is the minimum required and to mitigate six parking spaces according to section 98-1579 parenthesis 7 of the city code.

The amended the amended proposal front Palm Avenue and according to the submitted plans will include a 262 foot lobby, a 2,248 square ft of ground floor amenity space. The ground floor also features a bike room, trash room, and a back of house operations room for storage of a staff use not accessible to the public. Two stairwells and two elevators. Floors two through five and floor floors two through five consists already on onebedroom onebedroom units each with a balcony parking is provided at the surface at the rear of the building screened from Palm Avenue with a total of 52 parking spaces including three ADA compliant spaces. The site plan further depicts a covered terrace located at the northeast side of the property as well as a prop proposed improvement to the existing bus stop along Palm Avenue. The applicant is requesting a new Siberian in respond to the demanding need for housing and the applicant states in the submitted letter of intent that the units will be provided at work force housing prices. However, no other details has been providing to validate such a statement. The requested variances are expected to have a minimal impact on surrounded properties as the building complies with all the required setback dimensions. To address the reduction in previous area, the project will incorporate an on-site drainage system. In addition, because the property is located within the extended Hyalia Downtown Urban Center, the applicant may provide a one-time monetary contribution of 5,000 per parking space not provided on site as permitted by code. These funds may be then allocated to the city towards offsite parking improvements in that um overlay area. As previously noted, the project is requesting a modification to the approved ordinance which was originally granted under the former NBD incentive points regulation. Under the revised NBD regulations, the applicant now proposing the following setting points in order to achieve compliance. Parking is located in the gr in the rear

and is blocked from the street, you get one point. Implement transportation and multiple improvements, you get two points. public open space such as terrace point u 0.5 and permanent artwork displayed at street level and visible from the street including but not limited to sculptures, murals, buildings, accents and our physical design sidewalks 0.5 points. The total number of incentive points is sufficient to meet the proposed height and density requirements under the NBD regulations. However, while the applicant has proposed artwork and transportation and multimodal improvements as part of the point calculation, the submitted plans do not depict such improvements. According accordingly, the site plan must be revised to include the proposed improvements in order for the applicant to re receive the incentive points. Based on the applicant request, the staff recommends the following conditions. enter into a declaration of restriction to develop the site according to the plan sign and seal by the ro by Robert uh Moriceet A IIA dated August 14, 2025 and that the applicant submitted onetime parking mitigation of $30,000 for six parking spaces at the time of the site plan and concurrency process and provide a list of the rental prices at the percentage of units offered at work for housing and show the proposed artwork on the transportation and multimodel improvements on the site. diet plan in order to receive the incentive points. A staff recommends approval with conditions.

I'm so sorry. You want Spanish, too? Oh, God. All right, Miss All right, Caesar. It's been a long night already.

Um, we have a presentation as you heard. Um, this is on the property on Palm Avenue and 11th Street that was before you uh not too long ago and uh it was approved for expansion of the MBD with an eightstory uh apartment building with 48 units. Um the owner uh demolished what was there, the commercial residential, the corner car sales lot that was there and the mechanic shop. So right now it's vacant land. This is this is this the one that has the the the fencing around got the equipment still inside and Yeah. Okay.

Yeah. on Palm Avenue to the right to the left.

Uh this is a a project of Uni Capital. It's the same folks at Uni Vista and Uni Medical. Um very prominent in the area, very prominent in South Florida. Uh their main thing is uh providing uh healthcare. You'll see uh the renderings on the first page, the first first one where this says right before that. There you go. That shows you the renderings uh from different angles on Palm Avenue. Uh next slide. What I'm seeing here is different than what I have here. Let me your mic. Can you go? Yeah, please. Yeah, that's it. That's it. It just looks so small. Okay, it's 116 Palm Avenue. Uh seeks to provide the residents of Halia with 52 units of highquality centrally located housing along a good transportation corridor. There's a bus stop that is located directly on the corner of Palm Avenue and 11th Street, and that's what they're uh committing to uh improve uh prior to prior to the demolition. Next slide. Oh, that's much better. Next one. There we go. Uh prior to the demolition uh the the area had been a blighted residential and industrial site known for dumping unsafe living conditions and criminal activity. Next slide. What they are trying to achieve. Uh the current zoning is C2 with the MBD special use permit approved by the council in December of 2023. The proposed zoning, there's no change to the zoning. It's just a request on the size of the

unit unit sizes. Um, as you guys um are aware, a lot of the developers are are building uh smaller units. I think it's it's due to construction costs uh and and cost of of putting the building up. So, I think that although they had a great plan on the one that you guys approved before, they found out that in order for it to work, this is a much better concept. and the city changed uh the code so that it would allow for the smaller units. Um this is the ordinance next slide that was approved before um 2023 124. It was a expansion of the neighborhood business district with 48 market rate apartment units and 11,000 square foot medical center. It was eight stories and the density was seven dwelling units per acre. Next slide. The new proposal is 52 workhouse uh housing units and what I've been told by the owner Claudia is that the workforce will be as defined by Miami date county. They'll profer that in the declaration

at the percentage. Do you know the percentage? They what they told me was an average of at 140 AMI the workforce uh the building height will be five stories instead of eight. The dwelling the density is the same 70 units per acre and the average unit size is 622 square ft. Uh they're all one-bedroom, one bath units and they range from 609 square feet to 700 square feet. Just in case you're wondering, the community benefits. Next slide. Uh the increase in affordable housing. Obviously, we all know that uh we're low on on housing stock. So, this would improve that. Improve access to health services. uh beautifification of the area, improvements to the public infrastructure, bus shelter landscaping, and enhanced access to transit and other public services. Next slide is a rendering of what the building will look like on the on the corner. Next one, another perspective. And one more two more showing uh each unit will have a balcony. So, you know, and there is a pretty large uh lobby, 2,62 ft. Uh there's going to be 2,248 uh ft of amenities. Uh that's going to include a gym and a business center. There's going to be a bike room, a trash room, um storage, uh two elevators, two staircases. Um they will um revise the site plan to include the art, but my understanding is they're thinking of a mural. So you'll have uh concepts regarding the mural and also the improvements to uh the bus stop which is located directly the next slide before that. The one before that right

there that one the bus stop is is located directly where they've placed the placed the entrance. that was done on purpose so that the residents have access uh easy access to the mass public transportation. So based on that I would respectfully ask you for a recommendation of approval and we are in agreement with the conditions set forth by staff. It's a pretty nice looking building. It's beautiful. Are they going to have any um any kind of um commercial like stores on the bottom floor? Is it going to be all residential? It's the No retail. No retail. That's what I was looking for.

Yeah. Oh, the amenities, the gym and all that. Okay. Which from what I hear, the amenities are a big thing for people that want to rent units. Amenities to the building, not for the building. Correct. Yeah. The gym is for the building. It's not a commercial gym. Asian correct through the chair just that's a clarification. So the MBD requires mixed use. Okay. But uh we include language um to provide for an active ground floor such as a large lobby amenities that are part of the building at the ground level um because we heard also to provide options and you know different opportunities for that kind of buildings where they don't want to have the commercial component within their buildings

and I respect that. It's just that, you know, the trend lately has been such a big building like this, you know, beautiful building going up from scratch. You know, usually at the bottom floor you have little like a little cafeteria, a little bakery. You know, some developers like it, some don't. I mean, I don't know how many times I've come before you with variances to wave the commercial on the first floor. So, I just just curiosity. That's No, it's not going to weigh any Okay. comments or questions? Anyone in the audience? I know you're you're you're for it, right? All righty. What's the pleasure of the board?

Motion to approve conditions. We have a motion by Mr. Morales and Mr. Glacius and a second by Miss Henriquez. The clerk will take the role. Mr. Yes. Yes. Miss Enriquez. Yes. Mr. Yes. Yes. Morales. Yes. The motion carries. The item passes.

Okay. Item six, special use permit, SUP, to allow a medical research center conducting clinical trials to test new drugs, devices, and other forms of treatments to operate in conjunction with an existing medical center. Property is located at 4440 West 16th Avenue, Hayalia, zoned C2 Liberal Retail Commercial District. Applicant Cesar Mestre Esquire on behalf of Islam Mercedes Medical Research, Inc. Caesar Mewood office is at 8105 Northwest 155th Street, Miami Lakes. You know, you noticed last night how the council was a little concerned about all these uh testing facilities and

I think that happened after I left. Oh, it must it must have been. Yeah. Yes, you did after. I ran out after mine. Yeah. Anyway, go ahead.

This application is for an out parcel within a shopping center located at the southwest corner of the intersection of West 16th Avenue and West 44 Place, also identified as 4440 West 16th Avenue. This out parcel was built in 1985 with a two-story building of approximately 9,800 ft of area. According to the submitted plans, the current land use is commercial and the zoning is C2 liberal retail commercial. Therefore, consistent this parcel property is approximately half an acre and the current u use is a medical center known as Las Mercedes medical center. The current parking count for the property is 26 parking spaces including handicap spaces. It is noted that the out parcel is connected to the main shopping center. Therefore, additional parking spaces could be available to be used. This application is to permit the operation of clinical trial to test new drugs, devices, and other forms of treatments used within the existing building. The hours of operation of the clinical research center are to be Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. operating with qualified professionals. The clinical research center is by appointment only facility with no overnight stays permitted. There will be a maximum of five patients per day according to the letter of intent submitted by the applicant. Since the use of a clinical research center requires the same parking requirements as a medical center and it is current operation, there is no need for a need additional parking requirements. A staff recommends approval with the following conditions. Profer a declaration of restrictions uh prior to the second reading of the ordinance including a maximum number of patients shall be limited for by limited to five patients per day and patients will be scheduled by appointment and no patients may lined up outside of the unit uh of the building waiting for their appointments and no clinical research patients are to stay overnight on the premises. Uh staff

recommends approval of the special use permit with conditions. Thank you Caesar. Thank you. Uh we have a presentation on this one. As staff said, this is part of La Mercedes Medical Centers. There is actually a center operating there now. Next slide. Wait, there you go. We're before you asking for a special use permit uh for a medical research center. Uh they'll be conducting criminal uh clinical trials, not criminal drugs, devices, criminal trans

hopefully not. Uh and it'll be operating within the existing medical center. It'll be phase two and four clinical research studies, a maximum of five patients per day by appointment only, Mondays through Fridays, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Next slide. This is the out parcel uh that's part of a bigger shopping center. It's on the corner of 44th and West 16th Avenue. Next slide. Just showing you that the land use and the zoning are commercial uh compatible. Next slide. Just aial photographs of the shopping center. You can see it's a huge uh shopping center. Uh the little square on the bottom uh right right hand side is the building that we're talking about. In the picture on the right, the picture on the left, it's the top uh square there. That's the building that we're talking about. That's a two-story uh building. Uh next slide is showing you the site plan where the parking is in the building. As staff said, it is connected to the shopping center. So the parking of the shopping center is available uh for for our patients. Uh next slide is the interior uh floor plan. Uh this is the medical center and in the center you see there's a a rectangle there. Uh that's where the medical research is going to be. So they not adding anything. They're not changing anything inside. It's just being the ability to get the license so that they can do this uh as part of their medical uh treatments. The next slide, just some photographs showing you uh the two-story building on the corner west 16th Avenue and 44th Street. Next one, an overhead uh of the of the building. As I said, nothing's going to be changed on the outside or the inside. It's just

going to be a an additional use of what is already there. Um, as I said before, we are in agreement with the conditions uh set forth by staff. I would respectfully ask for a recommendation of approval and I'll be here to answer any questions that you may have. Okay. Thank you. Comments or questions? Anyone in the audience? All right. Was the pleasure of the board? Motion to approve with conditions. Second conditions. Uh you have a motion by Miss Henriquez and a second by Mr. Morales and Mr. Glacius. Cler call the RO. Mr. Glacius. Yes, Mrs. Enriquez. Yes, Mr. Morales. Yes, Mr. Aora. Yes,

Mr. Paris. Yes. Item carries. Motion is Motion carries. Item is approved. Thank you. Good night. Good night. No testing on bats over there, right? The outside. The outside. No, no, no test. No testing of bats, but testing of criminals, he said. There you go. Criminals. Yeah. Criminal. You know, I'm in favor of that. There was a

they they had some question regarding um what they were testing, what kind of, you know, drugs or if it was why we had so many in the city. Um so the the applicants actually addressed that to council and they explained that because of the diversity of the population over here actually FDA looks for a certain type of of population diversity and stuff like that and then basically we meet those those requirements.

Yeah. Yeah. The their their main question was is why is it all of a sudden there's such popularity with this this type of applications. Are we like being more relaxed than any other cities or stuff? So that's pretty much what right

in in an addition to what they the medical centers that they have. Correct. Ben. Okay. Thank you. Hi. All right. Miscellaneous items not requiring advertising all business

through the chair. Um as of last meeting actually um I had asked about um what it was your perception to receive all the documents electronically. So we have move forward and you will be receiving a city email uh soon. So, another another mailbox that you're going to have to check, but all you know, city businesses, they will be conducted through that that email. Just remind you, refresh you at some point of sunshine that you shouldn't be communicating with other board members whenever you receive it. And if you have any questions, just directly um send us question to staff. But uh you will be receiving shortly a city email so we can move forward with the electronification with with moving forward to the 21 century with the application.

Alex, have yourself I'm sorry. Are you done? Yeah, I'm done. Have yourself a safe and an enjoyable trip. You're you're dismissed. We'll we'll take care of the rest. Um a new business. I'm not interested. I'm not interested. But anyway, go ahead. New business. New business. No new business. I'm not interested. That's a new business. Okay.