Planning & Zoning Board - Regular Meeting

Recording in progress.

I'm going to call this meeting to order. If everybody could please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Board Member Lozada. She's on.

I'm here, sorry, I was trying to unmute myself.

Board Member Murphy.

Here.

Board Member Torralbinez. Here. Vice Chair Gonzalez.

Here.

Chair Shaw.

Present.

Yeovil Corn.

I need a motion to approve the minutes from the last meeting. So motion.

I second it.

All in favor? Aye. I signed it without writing on the front page of this. Thank you. All right. So we have two items tonight.

3A. from the variance. We're gonna do that first.

All right. Item 3A, a resolution of the Mayor and Commissioner of North Bay Village, Florida, approving what conditions are denying a variance application by Gaia Homes and Investment Corp for the property located at 1540 North Treasure Drive, folio number 2332090090770. To allow a reduced straight side north setback of 9 feet, 9 inches, where 15 feet is required. And a rear east setback of approximately 2.5 feet from the easement boundary, where 7.5 feet is required. To allow an in-ground swimming pool to remain within the required setbacks and partially within the utility easement.

Is there a present...

Thank you. Today I will be presenting the variance request for 1540 North Treasure Drive, which is in regards to a swimming pool that was installed without the benefit of securing the required approvals. So as mentioned today, it is the variance request for the swimming pool.

One moment.

Sorry, I'm trying to remove the Zoom window from my screen. Okay, there we go. The applicant requests approval of a variance in accordance with the provisions of the land development regulations that allows for consideration of a hardship. So the applicant installed an in-ground swimming pool and they are requesting for approval of the variance for it to remain within the setbacks that's installed. It does not meet the required setbacks and it is partially installed within a utility easement as well. that's existing on the property. So the code requires a seven and a half feet setback from the easement. However, as mentioned, the pool is currently installed partially within the easement at approximately two and a half feet within that five foot utility easement that's at the rear of the property. And I will show an image of the survey showing that condition as it exists today. The code also requires a street side corner setback of 15 feet. So the applicant is requesting a reduction

side setback of approximately in a setback and just to go step back from the negative so percent reduction Is the applicant...

Okay, can you... Get back in 100%?

No problem. Let me... Maybe that'll... There it is. Okay, here. I'll... Tangle here on your... As... Stated in that orange.

You can see underneath the orange color, the swimming pool is approaching into that existing utility easement by two and a half feet. So the code requires the swimming pool to be set back 10 feet from the utility easement. So in this case, 10 feet from this line, if you can see my mouse on the screen, moving toward the house. And the swimming pool instead has moved in the opposite direction into the utility easement. So thereby, there is no setback that's existing with the swimming pool right now as it relates to that utility easement because it is encroaching two and a half feet into that utility easement. So in order to allow it to remain in its current state, we have to reduce the setback requirement from 10 feet to negative two and a half feet. Gotcha.

The green line is the property line?

Correct. The green line is the property line.

The green line is the property line. And then I guess that would be the west side of the utility easement. It's supposed to go 10 feet from there or 10 feet from the property line.

So in this case, 10 feet from the west side, that west edge, which is within the property of that utility easement. So seven and a half feet, sorry, from that utility easement.

And this is ongoing construction going on today?

It is already installed. So the images you see on your screen was when it was being installed. And the bottom right image.

Being installed when? Like this year?

Yes, this year.

So how'd they get a permit for it? They have not received any permits or they just arbitrarily decided to dig a hole and pour concrete and put water in.

As far as I understand, it looks like the swimming pool came prefabricated.

Yeah, sorry. If you want to come up, actually, since we're going through this, please state your name and where you're from.

My name is Julio Alonso. I'm the current owner of the 1547. It's a fire glass pool. It's not a concrete brick, I mean, fabricated in place. So I really apologize, whatever happened, I know, you know, I'm here after the fact. So I didn't know, I'm Canadian, so I didn't know, you know, for a fiberglass pool, we really need a permit. So I thought, you know, it's a small pool, 8 by 14 feet, something to refresh. And then I realized when I just purchased it with that, The pool, I cannot install the pool without a proper permit. Even I was thinking idea to just put it on something even smaller than that. But anyway, so this is not the point. The point is, you know, I didn't, it's a fiberglass pool. So what I did is a helicopter pipe, concrete slab, and then it's seated on top of that. So we didn't create it like a, Like you say, a lot of concrete, all the stuff. It's just a small fiberglass pool. It's only four feet, the depth of the pool. And it's less than eight feet by 14 feet. Who installed it? What company?

The fiberglass company installed it. And they didn't know that they needed to get a permit?

they they they say they say uh basically probably we we don't need a permit for something for a fabric glass pool some of the municipalities they don't they allow to put it up a fabric glass pool and then so in the same day when i once installed the pool uh uh maria was uh maria maria maria tavarez i don't know the name okay She was there and she told me, you can't pull the pull. I say, okay. So I don't know. So I was, the hole was there. So the crane was there just installing the pull. And I said, okay, you know what? So I allow her to come inside to take picture. I say, okay, I do whatever required. I didn't know it was so complicated. So to obtain, of course, the permit to install the pull. And I didn't know at the time we're gonna fall in a balance. You know what I mean? So, and... So if you look at the whole neighborhood and every single house, you have a pool in the back. So no one is 10 feet away from the power lines in the whole neighborhood. Not anyone. I'm not saying, you know, blaming the other people who already put the pool. But if you look at the picture from the top, everyone has a pool in the neighborhood and nobody is 10 feet away from the power line. That is not a... Whose easement is it?

FPL?

We're not sure.

Utility is water and sewer.

Does the city have any problem with it being close to the utility line? The issue is if it remains and we have to get in there,

then we get in there. And whatever damage happens to that pool or whatever we have to do... That I understand.

You don't have a problem being close to the pool. I mean...

I can sign an affidavit.

No, I don't think that's... Look, I'm all about being aggressive, but being inside the easement is just not, I don't think, the right thing. It needs to be adjusted somehow. Yeah. Is there underground...

of utilities in that area, or is it just a power line going into it?

Is that an access, just for access, or is there anything underground?

Because he's on the corner lot. Is it going off from the north side, or is it coming out of the west side?

So what we know is that there are overhead lines currently within that easement. As far as what's potentially underground planning, we did some research. We weren't able to really find anything specific. I believe the applicant is not. There's nothing underground.

Where does his home connect to the sewer and water? Is it on the north side? Is it in that easement? Or is it on the west side to the driveway? Where does the sewer and the water connect to the house?

No, the sewer is on the east side.

the east side and it goes and it goes through that underground yes the only the only the only uh utility goes in the back between all the houses all the line across is of the power line see but now the other issue is is the pool where the underground goes from the easement to towards your house no he said no the underground plumbing

So it goes to the east side of the house. I'm sorry, to the west side.

West side. I'm sorry.

Yes.

I got a quick question. What's the distance between the edge of the pool that's closest to the house and the house?

According to the survey, it's approximately 5.2 feet.

5.2. That doesn't fit there.

Is there a metric that's supposed to be a distance from the house?

I'm not sure what the village has. I know in previous experience, it's typically around four to five feet, depending on the building regulations.

What is the current? This is between the property line and that edge of the pool.

The property line and the edge of the pool would be approximately two and a half feet.

Two and a half feet.

I'm assuming you mean the rare property line, correct?

Exactly.

Okay.

The east side, where the pool is.

So in order to be compliant, he has to be seven and a half feet from the Eastman, from the edge of the Eastman towards the house.

Yes, that's correct.

The pool, you said, was eight feet wide.

Inside is less. It's 7.5.

7.5. And you have five feet right now. Correct.

Between the house and the pool, comply with the setback.

See, I'm a contractor. Whoever you hire to do work on your house, always has to check within cities because each municipality, each county, each city has their own code. So they might have done 100 pools where they didn't need a permit. This is why sometimes you need to ask because, again, since I am a contractor, I'm not really worried more about the easement as to you having an uninspected pool installed in your house. That's a safety issue thing. You're swimming in it. There's a short. You get shot. You die. Your family members get hurt. It's an unexpected structure. yeah but we did it we did it according to uh to the city the building uh the coast everything but the so we're seeing the same place where he would have checked for those codes is the same place he would have found out that he needed the permits yeah i mean uh let me can i make a motion or no what's the permit so it will be inspected hold on one second you can't do an arrears inspection

okay all right was there a recommendation by the by you guys yes um staff recommended denial simply because out of the seven criteria that's required to be met the applicant does not meet five completely partially complies with one and complies with one more okay so that answers that question can i make a motion yeah wait i've got a question before we continue

There are multiple pools in that area that are similar to the ones that he has. Very similar. So I'm making a motion to approve his pool. I think someone wants to make a comment.

Yeah, it's me. It's Sherry. Hi, guys. Go ahead. Two things. First, I'll second the motion to approve. But prior to that, my question is, it seems like from all of the setbacks that you guys are talking about, if there is no variance, there's no way this property owner could even fit a pool on this lot. Is that correct?

Yes, that's correct. Based on the layout of the home right now, it would not be able to fit a lot. And one thing that I do want to mention is that the home is set back 34 feet from the front property line, whereas the required setback would be 20 feet. So the home is set back quite a bit more than what's required.

All right. Thank you for the answer. And yes, anyhow, yes, I second Paul's motion.

So before we deal with any of the motions, is there any public comment on this? Is there anybody online for public comment on this? Going once, twice, public comment closed. All right. So Paul has a motion on the table. What was it? It was seconded.

By Abramson.

By Sherry?

OK. Yeah.

So roll call, yeah.

Board member Murphy? Yes. Board member Abramson? Sherry?

Sorry, I was muted. Yes.

Board Member Lozada?

Yes.

Vice Chair Gonzalez?

No.

Chair Shaw?

No.

Motion passes 3-2. Thank you.

Thank you so much. I will meet all the conditions, whatever.

I got one requirement. I want you to dig up the pool and put it at my house.

if i have to do that i do it for free you know i i have a nightmare with that i really apologize i really thank you for it okay thank you sir i'm going to be able to yeah you have the commission meeting next but thank you for coming so i'm going to come back on the 16th right i believe so yes you'll have to check with whoever you have to check with but the the from now is approved no well for the planning and zoning but you still have to go to commission so okay

Okay. Make sure you talk to and get all your appropriate people in place. Okay. Thank you so much.

We don't approve. Commission approves. Okay. Thank you. All right.

Next item.

Item 5A, an ordinance of the Mayor and Commissioner of North Bay Village, Florida, amending Appendix A, Sunbeam MBV Special Area Plan with the Unified Land Development Code to address workforce housing requirements, among other provisions applicable to property zone Sunbeam Special Area Plan, providing for solubility, conflicts, codification, binding effect, and an effective date.

good evening once again um bnz board members my name is craig excuse me craig pinder village planner today is the sunbeam sap request to amend the text of appendix a and i would like to just specifically clarify that these are text amendments only it is not going to amend the conceptual plan the conceptual site plan that has already been approved They are largely text requirements, text amendments, and it will not change the overall volume of the building or size or shape. So the proposed sex amendments will allow for the following. It will allow for an increase to the height for rooftop equipment. It'll also allow for the increase to the overall roof area that the rooftop equipment can occupy. It increases the pedestal height for Sunbeam MBB North. It adds clarifications to the density bonus program in coordination with the development agreement. And it establishes regulations regarding construction hours. So just quickly, this is the project location, which is along JFK Causeway or 79th Street Causeway, located on the north side and the south side where those sites are highlighted in red. The total site is approximately 12.912 acres or 562,446 square feet. For the proposed amendments for the rooftop amendment, it increases the coverage of architectural features, roof structures, and rooftop equipment required to operate and maintain the building from 20% to 50%. It also increases the allowable height of the above mentioned structures from 20 feet to 30 feet. As far as the pedestal amendments, it clarifies that the height of the pedestal for the Sunbeam MBB South shall continue to be limited to seven stories or 100 feet, while the height of the pedestal for the north side shall be limited to 10 stories or 120 feet. It establishes permitted construction hours from dawn to dusk, Monday through Saturday, and prohibits loud construction noise before 8 a.m. Monday through Friday, after 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and before 9 a.m. on Saturday. Construction activities shall not be permitted on Sundays or national holidays unless there is an emergency as determined by our village managers. And as far as workforce housing, it clarifies that the density program, the density bonus program, and community contribution fees associated with the SAP shall be subject to the terms of the amended Sunbeam North Bay Village SAP development agreement. Staff finds that the proposed text amendments to the Appendix A is consistent with the development and community character goals of the North Bay Village Comprehensive Plan and the pillars of the MBB 100 Master Plan and complies with the applicable criteria set forth in Section 4.19 of the Unified Land Development Code. As amended by the ordinance, staff has no technical objections to the proposed amendments and recommends approval of the application request. The applicant is also here to address any specific questions for the text amendments. And that concludes my presentation. Thank you.

Any questions coming up?

Can you state your name and where you're from?

Good evening, board members. Leanna Kozlowski with Shubin Law Group, Law Offices at 100 Southeast 2nd Street. I am here this evening on behalf of the applicant, Sunbeam, and I'm joined by Andy Anson and James Brie. I think Mr. Pinder did an excellent job of explaining the very limited scope of the amendments that we're seeking to appendix a we also had a presentation that practically mirrors your presentation um so we won't bore you with those slides what i will add though is that um the crux of the application is really amendments to the development agreement and i know that's not before you tonight uh to the extent that you want us to answer any questions related to the development agreement and provide context we're available to do so

Yeah, the general question that I would have is, this is an amendment to the original filing, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

To Appendix A.

Okay, so what was it that prompted this amendment? Were there any changes in the... in the site plan or any changes on the design of the property? What caused these amendments?

And it's really the development agreement and the requirements in the development agreement. This started as a dialogue with the commission and with the mayor about the workforce housing requirements. And as we engaged in those conversations, we learned that the needs of the village have changed. since the time that the development agreement was entered into uh the village has and the mayor can elaborate um infrastructure needs and need for funding up front and so what we're doing through the development agreement is essentially providing a rather robust community benefits package above and beyond what was initially contemplated uh i could briefly walk you through you know the three main elements if if you would indulge me for a moment so we're essentially seeking to transfer property at 7560 west treasure drive to the village within 90 days of the approval of the development agreement which still has to go before the commission and we hope it will do so later this month that site i understand has been identified as an ideal site for park space for the village and also a storm water station which is a necessary component to what the village has going on with improving drainage the second property two properties actually are at 61 1601 and 1657 north treasure drive we also want to dedicate those properties to the village for public park space or perhaps to provide workforce housing. It's really dependent on what the village wants to do. Sunbeam is also prepared to contribute $200,000 toward the construction of a public park space. And the third component of the development agreement is contributing an in-lieu fee um for six percent of the units that would have been at 1401 79th street causeway all of these benefits amount to about 12 million dollars in value for the village so that was the starting point and um as mr pinder addressed the amendments in the appendix are essentially some cleanup items to relate back to what we're doing in the development agreement and to, um, allow some other, um, improvements and, and some wiggle room on, on the rooftop equipment, just in consideration of what's happening in the development agreement.

Okay. And that in new fee is for work in exchange for workforce.

Correct. Is there any other questions? No.

Um, I have one thing on the time for construction. 8 a.m. to 5. I think in the summer months, June, July, and August, it should be 7.30 to 6 for loud noise. I mean, the sun doesn't go down until 8 o'clock. So I think it should be at least an extra 90 minutes to get this project done quicker. I assume from this conversation, the development agreement is not finalized.

No, the development agreement needs to move forward to the commission for two weeks.

Okay, so here's my other recommendation. And Andy, since you're right here, three years ago when you stood up here and you did this beautiful video of how you love this community, those lots have sat vacant. sat vacant just disgusting in my opinion and sorry to use that word but something could have been done to activate that for the community and that's what the community really needs is activation to the waterfront it didn't have to be the whole property it could have been a small amount but you got families and stuff now they can't afford to eat they could go walk outside they could go to that park they can enjoy something rather than it just sit there so what i would recommend from the commission is to stand up and say to some type of activation. And this is the same conversation when I was sitting over there on the PNZ board three years ago and I voted no just for that exact reason, because I knew nothing would get activated unless something was put in writing. And it hasn't. And I think it's a horrible thing and a detriment to this community that nothing was done, especially within the position that you are in in this community. so i would recommend something on the wet east side of the old building or around it something to activate the waterfront some type of small park that sits there until construction actually starts because everybody's like oh that construction's going to start in 18 months it hasn't it's been three years and something could have been done there so you don't have to say anything but i want to look you in your eyes and tell you my thoughts and the community would have appreciated that being done especially with the video that you put out here of how great you are to the community those are my words Everything else is fine on here. And I just gave you 90 minutes to do more loud construction. And I just gave you 90 minutes of additional construction time. So I think that should be a favorable thing as well.

Thank you. Well, with the park that will get built on the former Treasure Island Cove condominium site and the apartment next door, we think that's very good activation. That's part of the reason we're helping to pay for it. and in some ways may be better than across the street because the residents from Treasure Island will be able to just walk there and not have to deal with crossing 79th Street. Our activation in my mind, a lot of people talk to me about activation. Our activation in my mind is going to be our first building because we really look at this project under a 10 or 15 year horizon. And the first building will be, open to the public with the restaurants at front of the bay. You'll be able to see it as you come over the causeway from Miami. And for us, that's really the first step in activating our property. That in conjunction with significant land that we're giving to the city to be able to have a public park.

That's great, but it's not enough. That stuff's not going to be done for years. Look, I've been here. I've been doing business in commercial real estate for over 20 years. It took 15, 20 years for Miami World Center, and the retail is just opening. So you can't tell me we're going to wait for that building to be done when everybody in this community wants something activated. And like I said, it could have been something small, but it would have been an appreciation to the community. And you wouldn't have had to spend that much money. You could have had to put a lease on it. Every developer around here that's on the river, Miami River, the river in Fort Lauderdale, they'll lease it out to somebody that'll put up a tent and have some type of food trucks or something where people can bring their kids and their pets and stuff like that. Three years. Three years. That's 36 months of sitting there vacant. That's all I'm going to say. and they can do a motion or whatever, but everything's great that you said, but it's not enough for when everybody's, since day one that I've been up on this board for whatever amount of years it's been, it's been activating the waterfront, and nothing has been done, and you're a person that's, you know, your stature in the community, and you're a person that can get things done, and that hasn't been done, and it's been three years since you got your full approvals. So that's my those are my feelings. And I know that's the feelings of the community because you hear it out there. Why can't somebody be done on the on the waterfront? It doesn't have to be large. Some small is fine. I mean, people walk from Harbor Island. People walk across the street, the school. They can walk from Benihana's all around. There's condos around here, too. So it's just not Treasure Island.

When you say 10 to 15 year horizon, can you elaborate on that? What does that mean? It's going to take that long to have this project completed or a project very big. I know there are different faces to it, and I know it's pretty big.

I think 10 to 15 years is probably realistic.

Okay. Is that to complete everything, or...? In other words, you'll have your first building, like you said, that's what your activation is going to be. That obviously, I would think that would be within the first three, four, five years.

Well, that building were required under our development agreement to apply for the building permit in March. And that's what we're working towards. We have our approval from the FAA. We have approval from Shoreline and continue to work on getting the construction drawings done.

Okay, interesting. And once you start construction, will the community, if it were to do something, as the chair suggested, some sort of activation to make it an asset or amenity for the community, would the community still have access to the water while that construction is going on or not?

Well, the first building is where the Grove by the Bay office building is. So during construction, well, there isn't access now. There won't be access during construction either.

On the Causeway side.

On the Causeway side. Okay. There is no anticipated access until the construction of each phase is completed.

Okay. So what's going to happen to that site while the Grow By The Bay is being constructed? That's your first project, right?

Right. Grow By The Bay is the first one.

What's going to go on the north side of the causeway?

At some point, the Channel 7 building will come down, the radio station building will come down, and TRIO will come down. The time frame of the station and WIOD is probably, We just started construction on the new channel seven building in Miramar last month. So that's a couple of years away by the time we actually move in. So you're probably looking at better part of three years before those buildings come down.

Okay. And again, empty echoing the chair's words. Could we do something better with, for those three years there and that property to, to, create an amenity or something that's going to contribute to the lifestyle?

That's really very difficult for me, particularly in light of the dedication of the land that we're doing, the contribution to the park there, the liability concerns of having people on the property with the bay right there, the need for proper parking, proper lighting. It sounds easy, but when we really get into it, it's not that easy to do. And as I say, I look at it, the company really looks at this with a longer horizon than trying to do something on a temporary basis there.

Okay, well, yeah, nothing's easy, right? Would you be open to it if to work with the city, with the village on considering something, at least exploring it? If the village wanted to do something. We don't have an eyesore there for another, you know, five to ten years.

It's also good from a practical standpoint because we are going to need parking for the construction workers. That'll be even just initially on the Grove by the Bay site. So that parking lot will be good for that. You know, I certainly don't want them spilling out into the right of way or. other private property, which they won't, but yeah, it makes it that just that much more orderly having them there. So it's a big property. It's, it's not easy. The fire department, for that matter. Right, right.

Again, I just find it hard to believe that every developer out there on the Miami River, on the river in Fort Lauderdale, they can do it, but you can't. That's fine. You've said your piece. Let's make a motion to move this on.

I've got a question before we move on. Hi, everybody. This is Sherry again. Two things. The city has already identified that lot on North Treasure to be used for soccer and only. It's not a park. It's not for residents. Um, it was out there already. I don't know how the city put the information out. Maybe Frank can, um, expand on this, but it's been pretty clear that it is not, uh, it's really just for soccer, like period end of sentence there. Um, the other thing is that, yeah, maybe this is something, you know, that the commission should consider. Maybe the commit, the, the city leases this property, the waterfront property, um, And then the city does something, you know, whether they, you know, do something in whatever, pave it, make it gravel and open like a farmer's market or, you know, food trucks or something. So would you be more willing to deal with the city on this than to lease it out to somebody else?

I think that was a question to you.

There's a question for me. I think if the city wanted to do something on a small portion of it that wasn't going to interfere with our use of it, we would consider that. I can't make any promises right now.

Okay, so that's what I meant by remaining open. I know there's probably more complexities involved in doing that that we can consider here now, but if you're open to some sort of partnership with the city to try to, and again, the reason I'm requesting this is that it's a long time horizon that we're talking about here. These lots have been sitting there. I mean, I was in the commission back in 2012 And we were trying to get those lots developed back in 2012 and 2026, you know, looking at more than 10 years later and nothing, nothing's happening. And I hear lots of comments from people that come from other places and you guys have waterfront properties sitting there for so many years doing nothing. What a waste. Yeah. And, you know, it's, it's, it's something that, and, you know, also from a tax base, it's a lot of revenue that could be, have been, been generated there, had those been developed. And I know there were some issues with the prior developer and all that. I'm familiar with all that. But again, in terms of being able to possibly do something. And I know you need staging. That's what you're talking about, right? Staging for your construction across the street and all that. It's a big lot. I think there's probably a way to accommodate something, suggestion of a farmer's market, access to the water. And I know that you have to look at the liability and all that, but I think that's something that may be worked out with the village to actually give access to, and you know, use that property a little bit more as an amenity for the owner, since it's just going to be sitting there probably for another three years before you break ground on it, right?

And I do have a question. Would it be possible to get a schedule of what your project build-out is going to look like? Because I think that if we put our heads together, I'm sure we can come up with something that would work.

There is a schedule. As a matter of fact, we're required to updated as we did once a year. It hasn't changed since the last schedule, but it shows a phasing plan.

Okay.

I think I heard that you are open.

You're willing to... I think the next conversation has to be with Frank, with the city manager and with the commission. I think that he's made it clear that yes, this is a possibility. Maybe this is something he could explore with the city. Let's just take it and move it from there.

To be fair to everything on this is that I stand by all my comments, one. And two, to benefit you, on the Far East side, which are budding that condo that's right across the street, it would probably help tremendously if the waterfront and some type of pathway was opened up in the back. Because then the city can then probably take it upon themselves to start having... I guess you call conversations in a nice way to open up what was supposed to be a boardwalk behind there that would connect Benihana's. Because why are we going to wait 15 years for you to finish this project, which it is going to take 15 years? I mean, you can't deny that to have that finally opening up and then and then start having the conversations with that condominium. If you could have that opened up, everybody's going to enjoy some type of a small park. It doesn't have to be large. and and it and it's going to one be a benefit for the community and two it's going to help you know start to activate that whole boardwalks heading heading east because continuum's going going forward and they're going to get going and then it'll be the last piece of when mg does their project and benihana's boardwalk's already there so i think it needs to be discussed and the commission should really take it upon themselves to really push this and it doesn't have to be large but it needs to be something

you and i agree you and i ryan finally agree on one thing uh which is we'd like to see that boardwalk built behind the bayview condominium uh if somehow that could get built we would certainly be a little more receptive to having activation on the property it would probably help if you can fight with them and say that it's already open on this side to some degree and it's definitely finished on this side yeah well they're very adamant against it but If nothing else came out of this discussion, we finally have something we agree on.

That'll be the only thing. Does anybody want to make a motion on this?

Well, I'm just curious. Who's your architect and engineers, structural and MEP?

Okay. I think I'll get this right. The architect is Architectonica. Bernard? The structural engineer is MGA? MKA. MKA. Civil and soils is Langan. Mechanical electrical plumbing is MGE. We have the fire sprinkler consultant, SLS. Landscaping is EDSA, Edstone. Excellent.

I make a motion to approve your amendment.

Do you want to condition that in some sort of No, I don't. Looking, you know, working with the city, possibly activated.

He's already agreed to work with the city. So, I mean.

Why don't we make it a condition then? I would like to make it a condition.

Okay, go Sherry.

I think we have to, do we have to, I mean, the motion falls flat with no second, right? That's correct. There's no second.

So the motion dies.

Okay, so then I would make a motion to approve with conditions.

Ms. Abramson, this is Heidi. Good evening. I'm sorry I'm unable to be with you all this evening. I know my associate Daniela Simo is representing our office. May I recommend that the board make a motion with whatever the recommendation is on the ordinance amending the SAP And then separately make a motion because it sounds like what you're suggesting are things that you would like the commission and administration to consider for the development agreement. So perhaps that could be a separate motion, just things for the commission to consider.

Yeah, that's probably one of the years.

But are we dealing with the development agreement? Okay, so I make a motion.

We're going to do it as is right now, and then we're going to do a second thing is what we recommend for the commission to take up.

Okay, I make a motion to approve the amendment as is.

Do you want to add an extra time for construction during the summer?

If you want me to add the time in the summer, 7.30 to what, 6?

Yeah, for loud noise.

For loud noise. Okay.

7.30 is kind of early, Ryan.

It's summer.

We started at 7, almost all projects.

You guys are early risers. All right. Anybody want a second? Is there a second? Oh, really? What's that? I'm sorry. Oh, okay. I was wondering why you were so quiet. Yeah, someone else has to move.

Heidi, can you just repeat what you said one more time?

Sure. So my recommendation for the board would be for you to do two motions. Obviously, the development agreement is not before you this evening, but I understand that you are, you know, you're in a recommending body capacity. So I would recommend that you address the item that is before you, which is the SAP. make a motion to either approve, approve with conditions, or deny. Sounds like you're doing a motion to approve. And then separately, and Mr. Pinder can include this in the staff report to the commission, and we can certainly brief the commission members during their briefings with whatever other recommendations you have.

So it's two motions, Sherry. It's one for as is what is presented, and the second is, which is gonna have to be separate anyway, because it's a separate conversation that the commission and the manager have to take up with the developer.

If I may just clarify that the motion on the table right now is to approve

the special area plan amendment with a condition to amend the hours of construction from 7 30 to 6 p.m right that is what is on the table right now right okay so this other second part that's being suggested that will be a separate motion but that will not happen here tonight that's not you you can do that motion yeah that is what um heidi is it's recommended even though it's not part of the agenda that's what our legal department's recommending yes is that legal You're good? All right, then I'll motion. I'll go ahead and I'll motion to approve the SAP. You will second? I'll second Paul's motion. Okay, thank you. With the hours, right?

With the hours of construction, yes. Board Member Murphy?

Yes.

Vice Chair Gonzalez? Yes. Board Member Lozada?

No.

Say again?

I'm terribly sorry. I'm having issues with muting and unmuting myself. I said no. No? No, correct, no.

Board Member Abramson? Yes. Chair Shaw?

No.

The motion carries, 3-2.

all right so can i just before you guys start crafting this second motion which i think is particularly useful as someone who is going to be reading these recommendations as we go into the development agreement negotiations i want to provide a little bit more context especially in light of sherry's comment about the the miscommunication or misunderstanding about the park So this item is before the Planning and Zoning Board tonight as an amendment to the SAP. And as Liana explained, it started with amendments to the development agreement arising out of the purchase of that property on North Treasure Drive. They bought Treasure Island Cove, and we all started wondering what are they going to do with the property that used to be Treasure Island Cove? And I cannot speak to the conversations that any other commissioner had with Sundeem. I can only speak to the conversations that I had with Andy and members of his team. about what he was going to do with that property. And so the conversation evolved. And now we have amendments to the development agreement that the commission still has to approve. And so the reality of what is going to happen on that site, Sherry and to the public and everyone, has not been ascertained. It has been sort of floating around. What are the possibilities of what we could do with that site if we were to acquire it? what could we do with that site if it were to remain in the Sunbeam ownership? Would they be willing to do a temporary soccer field for our program because we lost our soccer field when we broke ground on building a new soccer field, right? So we were kind of Fleshing this out, and it was a very live process for a while. We knew we needed a temporary program for our soccer program. He had just acquired that property and completed demolition. We went over and said, would you be open to allowing us to use this space for our soccer program? And so all of this evolved to the development agreement that we're all going to discuss on the 16th. So I think my communications to residents about what is happening on that site have changed depending on what I knew at the time. I think I've always been sort of forthcoming that it's not certain because it has to come to a final vote before the commission. And I certainly have, as of late, communicated to residents on a one-on-one basis what I understand about the development agreement, the version of it that we're going to see next week or two weeks from now. And I can't speak to what Commissioner Acosta posted or what Vice Mayor Cook posted or what Commissioner Trevone posted or said or texted, I really don't know. But the reality is, is that we didn't know and we're not gonna have confirmation until September 16th when the commission votes on the development agreement. But my understanding is that in exchange for a release of certain workforce housing obligations, The applicant, Sunbeam, is proposing to deed over significant property to the village, that it will be ours, that it will be village property so that we could use it for soccer if we wanted to. We could use it as a park long-term. And then there's the single family home property at the corner of West and North Treasure that is really the only location possible for a pump station to address the severe flooding issues on Treasure Island, at least the West side of Treasure Island. So that's sort of the deal and how it came about.

And that's just about community benefits. And that's all been happening. We demolished. Services and to house. I promise you that we will take. Questions. but then the committee remains on and you know they were going to put all and now Now there's going to be a. A lot of this really.

I feel. A little different.

I would welcome you to come in.

You know, using your 30 minutes, but I will take time as a courtesy to respond to you now.

I'm a member of PNZ. I'm not using my three minutes.

This is Sherry. You can talk as long as you want tonight, but I'm saying, like, your questions are really about the deal and, like, how we're treating this, right? I mean, I don't need to respond. Your comments can just be comments, and I can just forget I said anything. Go ahead.

It could be one way or another. You can respond or not. I'm just telling you how I feel. I don't, you know, there's something about this that, you know, I noticed that there's something a little different. The conversation about workforce housing being held on property with one developer was a big conversation, right? And now here it is where it's just kind of thrown in there like, hey, there's a lot that's still being negotiated into the developer's agreement, into the development agreement. It's a completely different conversation.

We amended our workforce housing requirements several, was it a year and a half, two years ago? We amended our workforce housing requirements a while ago to allow for that payment in lieu instead of requiring workforce housing to be developed on site. And I agree with you, it was a very long conversation. I went back and forth about it for months and had a lot of meetings with residents and stakeholders about what made sense. And we ultimately, the commission adopted a payment in lieu alternative. That payment in lieu alternative was not in existence at the time that the Sunbeam development agreement was approved. So we modified our code to allow that payment in lieu. We have had that payment in lieu in effect for about a year and a half. And we have been aggressively developing and promoting workforce scholarships, grants, and loan programs to assist residents with maintaining their housing. And so we're working on that, but I assure you the workforce housing conversation is still evolving. We do still have that requirement for workforce housing. The payment in lieu is still required. with every development agreement you have sort of a different set of deal points and and sherry specifically i remember after the sunbeam sap was approved i i think you made a comment in one of the commission meetings that we don't want more workforce housing the village what we really need is money um and i heard that comment and took it to heart and so i I kind of thought that this would be a great option for you because we're not getting money per se, we're getting land, but the land value is very high and the location of the land is absolutely, in my mind, critical to the village overall because we do need a home for our soccer program. But I can assure you that I do not support an exclusive use of soccer at that site. I want us to do all kinds of things there. I have big dreams and certainly we want to have a community visioning charrette about what to do with this property if and when the commission votes to take possession. But I thought that to get these key properties that the village really needs for the long-term health of, I think, Treasure Island and therefore the village. That was important to me, and that's why I entered into these conversations. And again, I can only speak to the conversations that I had and not those that anybody else had.

I just want to cap it off.

Sorry, just very quickly. I stand behind my comments. I still do to this day think that, I mean, we can't fit the workforce housing that we currently have and that we do need money.

and that you mean money and or land yes so i i don't i'm not walking that comment back at all okay all right so i just uh just want to cap it off um since i was kind of the one that opened this little pandora's box suggesting that we do something um i just want to make my position clear as to what i what i was referring to and what my suggestion was i'm not suggesting that the developer i mean the developer has been generous from what i've heard uh with all the concessions and donations they're doing to for the village and i'm appreciative of that my my my suggestion what i was requesting from the developer given the the time horizon that that was that was uh explained to 10 to 15 years is that if it's possible if the developer is open to working with the village to see what we could do with that. I'm talking at the north end of the causeway, where the water access would be at. To open that up somehow, I'm not saying spend tons of money developing it and creating parks and routes and benches. I'm saying something that it could be open to the public, taken into consideration all the complexities that come with that, liability and traffic flow and access to the property and all that. Just open... working with the city, with the manager, to see if there's anything that we can do to make that an amenity of some sort, whether it be a farmer's market or the food truck that was also suggested, something that the residents can use while the first property is being developed until you break ground on this. I understand once you break ground, then obviously construction starts. all that has to end. But in the meantime, since we're looking at about a three to possibly five-year timeframe to have that space there doing nothing, providing no sort of amenity for the community, I think would be a waste. So if we can find a way to create something without a huge investment and addressing all the other issues that might come up, I think that would be a positive thing for the community. I think the community would appreciate that as well.

Look, there's tenants that will take on the reliability and put something up. And look, I get you want the space on the west side, but for the further east side of that property over there where there's a building at right now, there could be something that's temporarily done until you need the full scale of the lot. I mean, nothing's going to happen for a while. And this really should have been done three years ago. That means there would have been three, four years of something there. But you can't look at the past. So there could be something done at least now for the next year or two until you need that full property. I don't know if that needs to be a motion. Can I ask a quick question?

If you put something back there, how are the people going to get there safely? Seriously?

If they could walk down the... You would have a whole spot from the front of the sidewalk to the back of the water.

Oh, you want to go from the highway here all the way back?

You don't have to use the whole thing. Use a small park. Open it up. Have the little path there so eventually that you can start opening a conversation even with the, look, it's going to take time for all this. You can't just wait 15 years and have that back there. Something can be done. There's all types of things. I mean, I see it on all types of development lots all over Fort Lauderdale, Miami. And it's a waste. So I don't think anything needs to be a motion. I think enough has been said on this. The mayor is sitting right here. The city manager is sitting right here. I think they've heard enough. One of the commissioners is in the back. And I'm sure the other ones might listen to the video. But I've been saying this for three years. And that's why I voted no every time. And I'll continue to do that.

Okay. I've got a question for Heidi. Heidi, what do you recommend as far as a motion here?

I think you could just say second what Ryan just said and we'll be done.

Well, no, because I don't agree with what you just said. And I know that the mayor and, you know, Commissioner Acosta are there, which is great. But, you know, there's other commissioners who are not there. And I would like something read at the commission meeting.

So what I was trying to do earlier was just split it up so that it would be clear what your vote was on the SAP itself. And then any recommendations that you have related to the project that we can list those in the staff report. And it's easier if it's in the form of a motion. I am recognizing that the development agreement is not before you. So, you know, we are, I think the commission always loves to hear from the community. So I would If you want to make a motion and say, I would recommend that the village commission consider X, Y, and Z in the development agreement, you can do that. You can also attend the meeting in your individual capacity, as was suggested by the mayor. And of course, all of you are welcome to attend and make your remarks individually. But if you want an actual formal recommendation from the board, then my recommendation to you is that you do that in the form of a motion.

Are there any suggestions from either the clerk or as to how we could possibly get that accomplished?

If the board chooses to simply make a recommendation, I can definitely update the staff report and put that as a recommendation for the development agreement. If the board chooses to make a motion, I will also update my staff report and reference that and update my presentation as well and make certain that the commission knows at the meeting.

Okay.

If we offer a motion, can you provide the language?

I'm going to give it a shot with the language.

Go ahead.

I'd like to make a motion recommending that the village staff and commission start talks with Sunbeam Properties to formulate some sort of a lease or partnership, whatever it is that they can come to terms with for the properties located on the north side of the causeway. Does that cover it?

Yeah, I think so. It's pretty broad. For what purpose? Did you say the purpose?

You said Elise? I was just going to say, what's the purpose? Thank you.

I wouldn't specifically mention anything about Elise. I would make it a little bit more broad than that. I just wanted them to get together. And partnership. Partnership. But she said Elise. And or. I would say.

I think I heard earlier you guys said you wanted the space activated. I just, I think she said at least her partnership for the properties, but.

It could be for, I mean, I don't know what it is. Maybe you find a third party hospitality person to come in here and put it, you know, a 10 up, then like something like, you know, that's, that has fake grass. I don't, I don't know. She, some type of tenant, if they said they could do farmer's market in there, it doesn't have to, I don't think be large. I don't want it, you know, or it can be start off larger and become smaller as they take up the property, but it's going to sit there vacant for another 24 months. And I don't think it's right.

We're just making the recommendation.

So, so why don't we use, you have to turn on the mic. So why don't we use the language that you proposed at the beginning, activate that they work. Toward exploring, activating that. Yeah. I would use that.

I think that's pretty, would you suggest is that, would that work?

Public use?

Yes. Okay. Okay. Okay. Public use. Well, when you said purpose, I thought like a specific thing. Like public use.

Public use.

So that it doesn't sit empty for three years.

Look, there's hospitality companies that will come. I mean, look at the company that did the wharf on the development lot in the Fort Lauderdale River.

Nobody has an issue with the concept.

We just need words.

I'm not good with words. I just, you know.

But I think from the previous conversation that that Andy feels more comfortable, and maybe I'm putting words in his mouth, but with negotiating with the city. So, you know, like, I think that whatever this partnership agreement, whatever it is, needs to be with the city. And then from there, if the city wanted to subcontract some hospitality group to put on, I don't know, a carnival, a fair, a farmer's market, whatever it is, then the city is liable.

Public use... I would probably, let's see, I would say that the motion, the proposal would be that some being engaged as a city to explore how we can temporarily give access to the waterfront property on a temporary basis. For public use. For public use. Absolutely. For public use. And I would say that. That's it. I think that.

Okay. So then I'll modify the motion, you know, that the recommendation is to the Commission to engage Sunbeam in the conversation to activate the north lots on the causeway for public use.

Great. Second.

Motion passed.

All in favor? Aye.

Thank you.

Thank you. Well, that's it. All right.

Anything else? Meeting adjourned.

Good night, everyone.