Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Order for the city of Homestead. Still 05/20/2026, and it is now 07:15PM. Madam clerk, can we have a roll call, please?

Board member Ross? Here. Board member Konski? Here. Board member Fletcher?

Here.

Board member Cannibal? Board member Abula? Chairwoman Bailey. Chairwoman Bailey. Here. Chairman Lawson.

Here.

Ex officio Lawrence Ventura.

Here. Okay. All right. Director Storch, do we have any additions, deletions or deferrals from this agenda? No. No.

Okay.

No. Additions, deletions, or deferrals. So first we have the minutes of February 18 before us. Moved. Second. And seconded. All in favor? Second. And also the April 22 minutes. Moved and seconded. All in favor? Alright. Mister White.

Alright. Please be advised the following items on the agenda are quasi judicial nature. If you wish to comment upon any of these items, please indicate the item number you would like to address when the announcement regarding the quasi judicial item is made. An opportunity for persons to speak on each item will be made available after the applicant and staff have made their presentations on each item. Swearing in all testimony, including public testimony and evidence will be made under oath or affirmation.

Additionally, each person who gives testimony may be subject to cross examination. If you do not wish to either be cross examined or sworn, your testimony will be given its two way. The general public will not be permitted to cross examine witnesses, but the public may request the local planning agency to ask questions of staff or witnesses on their behalf. Full agenda packet on each item is hereby entered into the record. Persons representing organizations must present evidence or their authority to speak for the organization, and further details of the quasi judicial procedures may be obtained from the clerk.

In accordance with code section two-five 90, any lobbyists must register before addressing the local planning agency on any of the following items. At this time, I'd ask the LPA members to disclose any ex parte communications concerning the items on this evening's agenda.

None here. Okay. So

then at this time, I'd ask anyone in the audience who's wishing to speak on tab two this evening to please stand, raise your right hand to be sworn by the clerk at this time.

Do you hereby swear or affirm to tell the truth and nothing but the truth, so help me, Gone? Thank you. You may be seated.

Mayor, council members? Tab two, tab three, and tab four are all related items, dealing with the same property, same project. Tab two is quasi. Tab three and four are legislative matters. I can read each one to the record, introduce each one. You can have a collective conversation. However, before voting on tab two, we need to you'll need to vote on the legislative matters first before the actual rezoning.

Okay. So let's let's go in that manner.

Alright. So tab two, card number five zero two two, is an ordinance of the city of Homestead, Florida approving the rezoning requested by Bluenet Towers common of an approximately 10 acre parcel of land from retail commercial b two zoning district to multiple apartment r three zoning district for property generally located Southwest Southwest 8th Street, Lucy Street, and East of Southwest 1 92nd Avenue, Tower Road, as legally described in exhibit a and providing for an effective date. Card number 50 21, which is tab three, an ordinance of the city of Homestead, Florida amend the comprehensive plan future land use map designation as requested, Blue Net Tower Commons, an approximately 20.33 acre parcel of land from technology mixed use TMU to medium density residential use for property generally located South Of Southwest H Street, East of Southwest 192nd Avenue, as Leila described in exhibit A, providing for severability inclusion in the city's comprehensive plan and providing for an effective date. And finally, tab four, card number 5,038, is an ordinance of the city of Homestead, Florida amending the city of Homestead comprehensive plan by amending text of the medium density residential use future land use category contained in objective two policy 2.1 to permit density up to 15 dwelling units per acre for properties containing an invested rights determination, providing for conflict, severability, inclusion in the city's comprehensive plan, and providing for an effective date.

These are all first reading.

Okay. So Mayor? Yes. Do we need to discuss these now or can we please push them on to the council meeting? We we could do that. We could just vote to to push them on and have a more full comprehensive discussion at the regular council meeting. I think I'd rather do that than we can get some of these other people to Right. But we still have to do it in the order. Got it. So that would be tab.

So

yeah.

With regards to the text amendments to the future land use, text amendments, it's required to be heard by the LPA, and you all should take some public comments.

Okay.

Sorry to tell you that.

All right. So we're going to open So I think we've all been briefed. We understand what this is about with respect to tab four. So let's open the public hearing for any public comment or, you know, if the applicant wishes to come forward, I understand we'll have a more comprehensive discussion at the council meeting. But let me open the public comment on this item on tab four. If you wish to speak, come on down. Give us your name and address for the record. Try to position the microphone where we can hear you.

Hi. Can you hear me?

We certainly can. My name

is Susan Sanchez. My address is 30961 Southwest 195 Avenue, Homestead, 33030. I really wish, before you do all of this building, 15 units is a lot per acre for that area, and our infrastructure is horrible. Horrible. Tiny, tiny two lane farming roads, basically, is what we have in Homestead.

And recently, even at all these little four way stops on 197th Avenue, backed up. It's incredible how it has changed. And the potholes don't even get me started on that. We just don't have the water, the power infrastructure, or the roads to support this. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? Let me just say to you know, it's great to have an audience that's that's paying attention. Understand that as the property is currently zoned, Right? And this this conversion would be up to 15 units per acre.

And it's from what I understand that this property owner has come in with site plan approval for townhouses, not apartments, even though the category is r three apartments. The site plan that has been submitted that we've not seen yet is with respect to townhouses. You may have heard of the state statutes that were enacted a few years ago generally called Live Local. These properties currently enjoy a business zoning. Under the state Live Local Act, a property owner has the right to come in and in this case, if they can do it without any variances, build high rise apartments of up to 31 units per acre with no public hearing and no public input.

So as perverted as it sounds, this is minimizing the the top end of what could under state law that ties our hands here from saying no what what could be. I just I want everybody to to understand that that nuance there that Tallahassee and this is not just unique to Homestead. The the actions of the state legislature three years ago really preempted, as we call it legally, tied the hands of of municipalities from denying certain uses. That if they could figure out a way to put 31 apartments per acre on this 20 acres, they have the right under state law to do that. So if it's any consolation, if this is approved, we're reducing from exposure of 31 down to 15 in terms of townhouses.

I don't think any one of us up here disagree with you about the road infrastructure. Some of that is out of our control. Those are our county roads. We've solved the wastewater problem. The the first step of this project was taken almost three years ago now and because of sewer issues has not been able to to go forward.

We the city has the water capacity and it also now has the sewer capacity. Road issues are somewhat of of a county issue. They pay impact fees, and we have a good dialogue going right now with our district eight commissioner about recouping some $60,000,000 that were paid by developments in Homestead to Miami Dade County for roadwork. So I just I just wanted everybody to understand that, you know, that's more backdrop here than we're potentially popping down 15 units per acre in what used to be farm fields. So is there anyone else from the public wishing to speak on this matter?

So I'll close the public hearing. And, again, this will go for more, you know, full discussion on the council agenda later this evening. We need a motion on tab three first, four. Tab four.

Tab three or yeah. We need a motion on tab four.

Right. The tax amendment first. First,

Then tab three.

Right. Okay. Then two. Okay. So I need a motion on tab four, which is the comp plan text amendment.

Okay.

Moved by vice mayor Bailey. Second by Councilman Fletcher. Any final questions or comments from I guess we're still board. We're not council members yet. We'll change those hats at the next meeting. Alright. So let's have a roll call vote on tab four.

Board member Cannavoy? Yes. Board member Roth? Yes. Board member Fletcher? Yes. Board member Abula? Yes. Board member Konski? Yes. Vice chairwoman Bailey? Yes. Chairman Lawson?

Reluctantly, yes. The motion carries. Now we need to go to tab three. Move by vice chair Bailey. Second. Second by, board member Fletcher.

Right. Board member Ross? Yes. Board member Konski? Yes. Board member Abula? Yes. Board member Cannavoy?

Yes.

Board member Fletcher? Yes. Vice chairwoman Bailey? Yes. Chairman Lozner? Yes. The motion carries.

And in tab two. Moved by vice chair Bailey. Second by Board Member Fletcher. So have a roll call, madam clerk.

Member Fletcher?

Yes.

Member Ross? Yes. Board Member Cannibal? Yes. Board Member Konski? Yes. Board Member Abulon? Yes. Chair Vice Chairwoman Bailey? Yes. Chairman Laszmann? Yes. The motion carries.

So question for mister Pearl. This was the rezoning, the underlying rezoning, which would be a second reading. Correct? Are there any second readings on these? And we can tie site plan approval.

No. This is first reading.

Right. This is first reading. The rezoning will require second

reading. Everything will require two And

can we hold these until we have the final site plan so that they're all tied together rather than just a naked rezoning? We

can place them on the agenda together.

Okay. Let's do that. I know it's in process.

Okay.

Very good. Thank you. Alright. So anything further, miss Storch? That's it. Okay. Mister attorney, attorneys. Alright. So that concludes the LPA. So I need a motion to adjourn. That's been moved and seconded. All in favor? Any opposed? Alright. We will can finally convene the regular council meeting in just a couple of