Planning and Zoning Meeting - Regular Meeting

Hey, how's it going? You're smiling. That's a good thing. I'm living.

What's up, girls?

Is it really a congratulation? Should we wait for... No? Move? We'll give it one more minute. It's on? All right. All right, good evening. Calling the meeting to order. The time is now 6.01. One moment, please.

Okay. Okay, recording started. Thank you.

Do you want me to do that again or call them? Please do. All right, calling the meeting to order. The time is now 6.01 still. Good evening. The board is comprised of seven members. Four members of the board shall constitute a quorum, and the affirmative vote of four members shall be necessary for the adoption of any motion. If only four members of the board are present, an applicant may request and be entitled to a continuance to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the board. I'm on. Y'all want me to go closer? In the event that four votes are not obtained, an applicant except in the case of a comprehensive plan amendment may request a continuance or allow the application to proceed to the city commission without a recommendation. Pursuant to resolution number 2021-118, the City of Coral Gables has returned to traditional in-person meetings. However, the Planning and Zoning Board has established the ability for the public to provide comments virtually. For those members of the public who are appearing on Zoom and wish to testify, you must be visible to the court reporter to be sworn in. Otherwise, if you speak without being sworn in, your comments may not have evidentiary value. Lobbyist registration and disclosure. Any person who acts as a lobbyist must register with a city clerk as required to pursue it to city code. As chair, I now officially call the city of Coral Gables Planning and Zoning Board meeting of May 2020 to order. The time is 6.02. Jill, please call roll.

Just a correction, May 20, 2026.

2026, apologize.

No worries. Ignacio Alvarez.

Here.

Robert Behar.

Present.

Alice Bravo. Present. Shane Glasson, sorry.

Present.

Thank you. Felix Pardo.

Here.

Gonzalo Sanabria. He's not present. Alex Bussello.

Here. Notice regarding ex parte communication. Please be advised that this board is a quasi-judicial board, which requires board members to disclose all ex parte communications and site visits. An ex parte communication is defined as any contact, communication, conversation, correspondence, memorandum, or other written or verbal communication that takes place outside the public hearing between a member of the public and a member of a quasi-judicial board regarding matters to be heard by the board. If anyone made a contact with a board member regarding an issue before the board, the board member must state on the record the existence of the ex parte communication and the party who originated the communication. Also, if a board member conducted a site visit specifically related to the case before the board, the board member must also disclose such visit. In either case, the board member must state on the record whether the ex parte communication and or site visit will affect the board member's ability to impartially consider the evidence to be presented regarding the matter. The board member should also state that his or her decision was based on substantial competent evidence and testimony presented on the record today. Does any board member have such communication and or site visit to disclose at this time?

Mr. Chair, I do. Okay. I have visited the site. This is a couple blocks away, a block and a half away from my home. I've been to the site. I've looked at the site, but then again, I've looked at the...

Which site? Which matter?

Oh, I'm sorry. On the second matter on today's agenda, but I feel that I can be very impartial as far as that particular application, and I feel that I have absolutely no conflict of interest, but I wanted to disclose that. I also know a number of people that are in in the room simply because they are my neighbors. And I have not been approached in any way, shape, or form by any of the people that are present and even those that may not be present in discussing this matter. And I've stayed in arm lengths away. And I wanted to make sure that this is full disclosure and make sure that it's as part of the record. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Understood. Thank you.

Swearing in, everyone who speaks this evening must complete the roster on the podium. We ask that you print clearly so that official records of your name and address will be correct. Now, with the exception of attorneys, all persons physically in city commission chambers who will speak on agenda items before us this evening, please rise to be sworn in.

Excuse me, Mr. Chair. Yes.

Mr. Sanabria just arrived at 6.05.

Zoom platform participants. I will ask any person wishing to speak on tonight's agenda item to please open your chat and send a direct message to Jill Menendez stating you would like to speak before the board and include your full name. Jill will call you when it is your turn. I'll ask you to be concise for the interest of time. Phone platform participants. After Zoom platform participants are done, I'll ask phone participants to comment on tonight's agenda item. I'll also ask you to be concise for the interest of time. Can I have approval of last... Four meetings minutes.

I'll make a motion to approve. Second.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make some comments on the minutes from the last meeting.

If you will allow me for a second, please.

Yes.

Mr. Chairman, when the election took place in an impromptu manner, I voted no for the nominees. And I want to tell you that it's not anything to do with the nominees. It's just the way it was processed. which is something I'm not accustomed to. It's being done much different than other boards that I have attended. So I want to tell you that my vote for you as chair and for Alice Bravo as vice chair is a definite yes. It had nothing to do with the nominee. So congratulations and welcome. Let's do some good things together. Thank you, sir.

Thank you, Mr. Sanabria. I think we have a motion and a second. Jill, can you call roll?

Yes. Robert Behar?

Yes.

Alice Bravo? Yes. Shane McLason?

Yes.

Felix Pardo?

Yes.

Gonzalo Sanabria? Yes. Ignacio Alvarez? Yes. Alex Bucelo?

Yes. The procedure we use tonight is the identification of agenda item by Mr. Caller, presentation by the applicant or agent, presentation by staff. We'll then open up to public comment, first in chamber, then Zoom platform, and lastly phone line. We'll then close public comment, open up to board discussion, and then entertain a motion discussion and a second of the motion, and then board's final comments. Mr. City Attorney, can you please read the first item?

Mr. Chair, I'm sorry, through the chair.

Are we going to... Well, actually, thank you for that. Before we get started, we have a new board member, and before we introduce or have him introduce himself, Mr. Menendez is here. He was with us for, I think, close to a year, so we would like any final comments and thoughts.

So, excuse my appearance, it's been a... Pretty long day. I just want to thank you all for the privilege of serving on the Planning and Zoning Board. It's been a genuine honor to work alongside such thoughtful and dedicated colleagues, fellow residents who give so generously of their time and service to our community and to contribute to the future of our city. I'm especially grateful to Vice Mayor Anderson for appointing me and placing her trust in me to serve the residents with integrity and professionalism. That confidence and trust have meant a great deal to me and I hope I've lived up to them during my time on the board. I'm also grateful for the trust this board and the residents we serve placed in me. The conversations around this table, sometimes spirited but always in good faith, reflect the very best of how local government should operate. Now I'll carry these lessons from this experience with me long after tonight. To the staff, my fellow board members, and everyone who took the time to share their voice, thank you. The work you do matters, and I leave knowing this board remains in capable and principled hands. Thank you.

Thank you, and good luck.

Mr. Menendez, thank you very much. It was a privilege and an honor to be serving with you, and you were instrumental to this success of this board. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Mr. Menendez, I'm sorry, through the chair. No, please, absolutely. Why are you resigning again?

I'm Craig I'm I'm a candidate for a commission seat that's up in November so I thought it would be best to avoid any impropriety or illusions of impropriety not that I had any plans to do anything but there's a lot of members of this community that come to this board that might support me or not support me or have issues in front of this board that I just I felt it was something to to send a message to be beyond reproach and focus on the candidacy and not have any potential conflicts of interest come before the board where I might have a opinion or a voice or a vote on. So that's pretty much the reason why I stepped off.

Through the chair to the city attorney, is it automatic the people that are going for office should come off the committee?

I believe it's the, from what I've been advised, I believe it's up to the member. If the member feels that it would be best for them not to serve, that's a personal decision that they make.

Mr. Alvarez, to that point, two years ago, I ran for office, and I was sitting on this board. I also resigned, just like he's doing, just for lack of conflict of interest, as I would say. So I, too, two years ago, to run for commission seat, I also resigned from the board.

No, I only ask because I know also Gonzalo's is also running, so I don't know what the position is for Gonzalo on that, if he's going to stay with us or not stay with us. That's what I was asking.

It's up to the individual whether they feel that it would be better for them not to serve or to serve. There's no requirement for them. It's not a resign to run thing that's under state law as far as whether a board member chooses to continue to serve or not. It's up to the individual board member and how they feel.

Thank you again. But Mr. Menendez, I commend you for your, what you're doing, and I think it's correct.

I think through the chair, I know I see this all the time in the commission meetings, should we take a picture with Mr. Menendez? I think that's a great idea. Yeah, so do we have a camera or, I could use my camera. Use your camera, yep, it's your idea. Yeah, just say goodbye for everything.

He was my counterpart here. Thank you.

He replaced me with Robert.

Does he receive anything to commemorate his time with the board?

Like a little mini gavel.

You never got off. You stayed on.

Now, before we begin, if we can have you introduce yourself to the board as well.

Of course. Good evening, everyone. My name is Shane McGlashan. It's a pleasure to be here. I'm a resident and homeowner in Coral Gables. I'm also a practicing attorney. I live with my wife, Natalia, and it's a real honor and a privilege to be here, and I'm going to do everything I can to serve this community. Thank you. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, there's sort of a housekeeping measure on the agenda that maybe we could take first because I noticed that the Assistant City Attorney is here to present the item. It's entirely up to you. It's really just a provision relating to appeals. It's not relating to a piece of property. It's just a... It's a timing, how much time, what's to be in the notice, and I don't believe there's anybody here to speak on it. It's entirely up to the board. If you want to take it out of turn before you hear probably pretty extensive testimony tonight, I would anticipate.

I would move for that, yes.

I'll make a motion to move it forward. I'll second.

There we go.

hearing favor well if you want to i think it's i okay perfect item e3 an ordinance of the city commission amending article 14 process section 14-208 appeals of the city zoning code to revise appeal procedures extensions deadlines increase specificity and notices of appeal limit the scope of stays establish provisions regarding consolidation Related approvals and abandonment of appeals providing for severability clause repealer provision codification and providing for an effective date item e3 public hearing Good afternoon.

Mr. Chair vice chair and fellow board members. Thank you for taking this item first for the record assistant city attorney and city prosecutor Gus the bios So this appeal amendment, it's before you strictly for a recommendation. If you have any recommendations that we can further along to the commission, I will give you a quick little highlight of what the actual changes are proposing. The first one is in the appeals of staff decisions, which is not something that the city frankly faces very often. But when we looked at other municipalities in the area, we found that ours was a very, very long timeframe. Most other cities we found anywhere from 10 to 20 days was an appropriate time. We are proffering to reduce that to 15 just to bring it in line with similar municipalities in the area. We also had a string of appeals in the recent history that lacked specificity. So it's very difficult for the city clerk, the city attorney, and anyone to schedule appeals when we don't really have an understanding of what it is that's being appealed. So one of the additional things that we have requested to change is to the notice of appeal shall provide The particularity why it's being appealed, the basis, the standing, all of those things need to be included as part of the notice of intent to appeal. Additionally, you'll notice that it states that within 14 days of filing the written notice of appeal, they must provide a completed appeal package. The reason why that's being included is prior to this code change, the way that our code is currently written, most appeals you have 10 days. And when you get a written notice of intent to appeal, 10 days is given to you. And what that means is you can write a simple email to the city clerk's office and saying, I intend to appeal A, B, and C. From that moment, the clerk's office gives you a package. That package then gives you an additional 14 days to complete the package. But that document, that 14 days, was only included in that package. It was never codified in our code. So we decided we're cleaning it up. We're going to clean up that form. We're going to clean this up. We're also going to include that language in here. We've also included language that final decisions shall not be, shall be appealable. Only final decisions will be appealable. Once again, not an issue that we've had, but we thought it was a good cleanup to make sure that, you know, preliminary decisions, opinions, any sort of non-binding final decisions couldn't be appealed, because once again, no final decision has been made. You'll see the same language is added on the second page that mirrors on the first document. Then we do dive into a little bit into the remand so the city commission when they remand something back to a lower board typically one of the options that the commission has if they believe there wasn't enough some sort of you know procedural error or some sort of fact-finding issue and they want to send it back to the lower board they can remand this just specifically states that once that any remand shall be limited specifically to the issues identified by the city commission. And no, this is not a new opportunity, a new bite of the apple to present new information or new arguments by either side. And one of the other items we're also going to be doing is consolidation. This is something we've found in a lot of other similar cities, where whenever it's practical, we can try to consolidate multiple appeals on multiple issues of a particular project. It's been an issue where we have a singular project or over the years, where every aspect of that project, whether it goes to one board or three boards, gets individually appealed, or individual items can get appealed, any changes before the Board of Architects then get appealed. So what you end up having is basically just this unnecessary, significant delay on a project. Somebody just taking advantage of the fact that the process has so many approval steps to take advantage and delay the project at every single step. Additionally and I believe lastly we are addressing the sections of postponements before the first postponement is an automatic one in Discussion with the City Commission and discussing with staff. We believe that's not appropriate So none of them will be automatic, but the first one should be granted if there is good cause up to 21 days the second one would also be granted not to exceed 14 days if there's extraordinary circumstances and And that one must go to the city commission for approval. So it takes staff out of the equation where staff is put in a very awkward position, asked to continue and continue and continue projects. In this particular way, we take it to the city commission, the final decision makers. And if they want to grant additional time, so be it. And in no event shall there be a third postponement granted unless there is an emergency declaration or a disaster. Now, one big caveat that I should highlight for everybody, because this is a question that a lot of people may have, Nothing in these sections would prevent additional postponements upon agreement of all parties. Why do I say that? If there's a hurricane and it's followed by a second hurricane and there's no way to meet the previous deadlines and there's perhaps, let's say, we're waiting for some information that's not really available. If the city and the appellant and if the opportunity in the particular case where the property owner is not the appellant, if all three parties agree, We have no issue with it being extended further, but it's something that must be agreed upon by all parties. And I think that takes care of all the major changes. If any appeals are not heard within the time frames, they'll be deemed abandoned and void. And if you have any other questions, I'm happy to answer them.

Thank you.

I've got a question.

You want to wait for, like, board, oh, you want to, oh, a question, I apologize, go, yes, sorry, go.

Absolutely. I understand that you're looking at this from the applicant's standpoint, in other words, a building, a development, or something like that, but the appeal period seems to be something that the public and usually an agreed party is directly affected by it. By shortening that, you're not providing anything on the other side as far as ease of a speedier method of appealing a decision where you have an agreed party. So it seems to me that it's only weighted on the side of the applicant by shortening and making stricter the ability to appeal And normally it's not someone that is just hoping to drag the feet of the project to make the developer pay more money, but it's more like someone has a true objection and has to gather a bunch of information to be able to then rightfully appeal. It seems to me that it's a little one-sided. Maybe I am wrong, but for me, The ability to appeal a decision is extremely important for the aggrieved party, usually someone that's going to be affected possibly in a negative way. So as far as the speed in shortening these time periods, it becomes more difficult. Keep in mind that most people that appeal aren't lawyers. Most people are residents. they would have to go out, hire a lawyer. Do this, do that. Get the information from staff. you know, all these searches, all of a sudden you've reduced that time period where it becomes almost impossible for them to appeal unless they have a lawyer in hand, unless they know the process. And most residents don't know the process, and they have to rely on people that will return emails or phone calls. So that is my great concern, that I think that, you know, the way it is now, And with all due respect to other municipalities, you know, for a municipality of 50,000 people and with the amount of development that we have here and with the people that have concerns, I think it's wrong to try to shorten and limit that because it puts the normal resident that is affected in a very bad position, I think.

I can address that very easily so It's not shortening the time period at all for the purposes of intent to appeal only decisions from city staff meaning The timeline that you have to appeal the Board of Architects historic preservation Planning and zoning board Board of Architects every other board in the city is not being touched I'm being touched you have the exact same amount of time you have ten days of all notice written a notice of intent to appeal Subsequent to whatever day you file that notice of intent to appeal, you have 14 days. That is the way it is currently handled and is not being modified in any way. The only thing that was an outlier was 14-2084, which is Appeals of Decisions of City Staff, which, as I stated before, rarely comes up because it's basically an administrative decision that somebody chooses to appeal. And this still gives you 50% more time than you would have than if you were appealing the Board of Architects, the Historic Preservation Board, any of the other city boards. So you're actually getting significantly more time than you would with any other board, but just in this section. We're not affecting or changing any other notice of intent to appeal timelines or application portion. That's exactly the same that is not being touched.

I have another question. How long did you work on this?

It's been something that's been discussed over the years. We've probably dabbled over, I'd say, frankly, over two to three years.

So you had input from staff and

Oh no, this was worked in, we had probably, I'd say at least half a dozen meetings over the years about addressing not only this package, this particular code section, but the actual appeal package. The appeal package has a bit of redundant information that doesn't coincide with the code, like I specifically stated before, how the 14 days was never codified anywhere in our code, and now we're choosing to codify it, so basically when somebody goes to the city clerk's office, picks up an appeal package, they're not getting conflicting information from what's on the city code or the zoning code and what's on the appeal package.

Felix, I think this is going to simplify the way I see it.

I printed it. I read it very carefully. I read it backwards and forwards. And I have questions for the city attorney's office. I would like to have simply a deferral before we change something like this. simply to be able to understand it. We received our package, as you know, Friday afternoon. And I printed it. I read it. I read it again. I went back. I tried to go back and then find out exactly what the differences were. And the whole point is that I've already stated my point about my concern about the ability to appeal. I think it

you know, you- But this is appealing like the staff recommendations. It doesn't appeal planning, zoning, board of architects, none of that. I mean, it's not changing none of that, which to me are the one that would be more concerning for the residents. to have an opportunity to do that. For me, the staff, I mean, at the end of the day, the staff is going to say something, recommend, and they're going to come to the boards. And this is where you're going to appeal.

I understand the concern. My concern was I felt like I really needed to be able to have enough time to discuss with staff so I could understand it.

With all due respect to staff, I mean, I don't care what they put together. You know, they do. I care what the board's decision, whether it's this board, the Board of Architects, or any other board, that's the decision I want to have the opportunity, the correct time to appeal. Because, you know, we come here and the board comes, you know, board staff member comes and presents something that at the end of the day, we change or, you know, makes modifications. To me, the concern is, as Mr. Svajo stated clearly, it's not affecting the time frame for the other boards, the planning, the board of architects, none of that. That's not being compromised.

Which are all the boards that are being affected by this change?

No board is being affected by that particular change.

So it's only what that is being affected?

So in terms of the shortening of the notice of intent to appeal, no board is being affected. It is strictly decisions from the city staff. That's it. Decisions from the city staff. Correct. So if you have a decision from the DRO, the city architect, although typically the city architect, you just go to the board of architects, but let's say for whatever reason the city architect makes a decision and you choose to appeal that decision. You have 15 days to file your notice of intent to appeal the city architect's decision.

So an average person that sees that, maybe there's an MOT that has been approved by the manager's office and someone is concerned with the MOT. So all of a sudden you have 15 days to run around and try to find the ability to appeal that decision once you find out who made the ultimate decision on that MOT, which in this case would be the city manager. So you might be going to public works trying to figure out what's what, and it could take you 15 days easily to get the right answers to be able to point in the right direction.

You can make the same argument for every other board. I mean, the fact that you only have 10 days, you can make the same argument. I think it's pretty much in line with all other municipalities. I am making that argument. Yeah, I think it's in line with every other municipality. I think it's pretty consistent. I think we're being more than fair. But if you'd like to make that recommendation, at the end of the day, we're here to take some recommendations, and I'll be happy to include them with our presentation to the city commission.

Mr. Chairman, the reason I was asking for more time is because I wanted to be able to learn a little bit more about this because every decision we make in changing administratively something, you know, it's... Mr. Chairman, if I can ask Mr. Pardo, please, in simple terms, rephrase your concern so I can understand it. My concern is that... Speak to the mic, please. My concern... is that when you look at the different decisions that are made administratively by staff, there are an enormous amount of decisions that affect people. And those people don't know necessarily who they can or if they can appeal to any of these things. There is a lack of clarity. If you're within staff, it's clear to you. To compress it, I don't quite understand the reasoning behind compressing the amount of time for those staff decisions. And some of the staff decisions are direct decisions that affect people and their quality of life. So I was just asking for time to truly comprehend what the ramifications are of this change.

Mr. Chairman, if I may, can I ask the assistant county city attorney, what is the actual timeline that this has to be? Why this is before our board at this time?

The only reason why this is before this board is because these changes are in the planning, in the zoning code. So if these changes were in the city code, it wouldn't come before this board. But because these changes specifically are in the zoning code, the zoning code requires that it comes before this board for recommendations before we take it to the City Commission.

So there's no urgency from your side for this to be heard today. It could be deferred. Is that correct?

We would prefer that there wasn't a deferral. I was told to request that if there's any recommendations, any concerns, I'll be happy to incorporate them and provide them to the City Commission, who are the final decision makers. But at the end of the day, I am in no way, I can no way bind this particular board to vote one way or the other.

Felix, if you have some comments or something, you know, to add it, I mean, I'd be more happy to support something that goes, but, you know.

I mean, I think it could have been presented by staff a lot more clearer than just the strikeouts because there are ramifications to these decisions from different offices and different staff members. The question is, I don't know enough And like I said, I printed it specifically to understand it. But based on the presentation that I saw tonight, with all due respect to the Assistant City Attorney, it's just, what are the ramifications? I feel very uncomfortable with it. I only asked for this to be deferred to the next meeting simply to be able to understand it better, not to sideline this. but simply to understand it better. If I'm forced to vote, I'll vote no. But it's up to you. I just ask for time.

Joe, is there any public comment?

Sorry, not on this item.

Okay, so let's close public comment. I guess open board discussion.

I'm happy to answer any questions.

Yeah, I mean...

I'm please just to try to facilitate the discussion would you say in your own words what this is accomplishing and the benefit of it.

So in essence, this is a clean up for our zoning code specifically our appeal section currently our appeal section, there's a bit of a discommunication between our appeal package which is what's provided by the city clerk's office and what's currently in the zoning code. This attempts to bring those two items together so that they both reflect the same type of dates. We did find in our review of this, it was one of those, we're going to review this. We're going to try to update this. We're trying to clean this up. And as part of that process, we looked at every section to see where there could be improvements. One of those sections we found that incredibly excessive is the appeals from city staff. At the end of the day, the person that typically will appeal the decision of a city staff member is the applicant themselves. meaning you're not going to have an aggrieved party because on our code, to have an aggrieved party, you need to receive notice. So the only person that's going to receive notice of an administrative decision that was denied is the applicant. The applicant is going to have more than enough time to file their appeal. So if an applicant, let's say, whatever the decision may be, a zoning reviewer has denied plan X and I'd like to appeal that decision, I have 15 days to file a notice of intent to appeal. Once you file your notice of intent to appeal, you'll get an additional 14 days to get all of your ducks in a row, make your payment for the appeal, get your mailing labels that are required, and then we'll either take it to typically either the Board of Adjustments or the Historic Preservation Board for it to be heard. So the majority of this would not affect general people in the public. In regards to your comment about MOTs and things of that nature, that's something that At least right now, I can't see it being an appealable because you're not an aggrieved party by the definition of our zoning code. And we also found that the current postponement section of the appeals section had been ripe for abuse, where parties had been abusing it on both ends. And that doesn't mean that we can't extend it. We've had extended it, especially when there's both parties are agreed. If I'm building a two-story home on Sunset Drive, and I need to go to historic preservation because my property was historically designated, but we disagree. It was denied. I want to go to the commission to get it resolved. There is nothing that would prevent me from asking for an extension of six months. Because at the end of the day, the only injured party is me. It is my property. I'm injuring myself because I can't continue with my proposed redevelopment or proposed addition or change or whatever it may be. The only injured party is me. The issue really stems here from somebody abusing the process and causing a third party, who's typically the applicant, a significant amount of delay, something that could have been delayed maybe a month or two months or three months, in order to make sure that everyone's appeal rights are addressed. Because this in no way attempts to remove anyone's appeal rights. But at this particular way that it's currently written, you can have a property that's been appealed four, five, six, seven times with postponements of months to cause unnecessary delay. And I think for the betterment of all parties involved, we'd like to be able to consolidate, minimize postponements, so at the end of the day, we can get in front of the city commission, who's the final decision maker, and that's really what the goal is.

So if I may, it sounds like you're A, codifying what is the practice in the documents that we distribute, and also you're making staff's time more efficient. They don't have to go digging for something months later. They can deal with it on the spot, and then due process, or anybody else that's interested in the topic, the matter will resolve in a reasonable amount of time. I'm satisfied with the information.

Mr. Chairman. Go ahead.

then so what I understand is when you look at your applications for the appeals they are not according to what's in the zoning code right now in other words the the handouts that you give for the package there are in direct conflict with what's in the right now the zoning code if you read it the only

Date, time, limitation you will see is 10 days to file notice of intent to appeal. That's it. But once you go to the city clerk's office and you pick up your appeal package, you're going to find on the very second line, you have 14 days to complete this package. It simply is not codified in our code. So this now codifies it. So now you know, if you just look at the city code or the zoning code, You're not limited to just 10 days. You know, I don't have 10 days. I can submit my notice of intent to appeal on the ninth day or the 10th day. I'm going to have an additional 14 days. So I'm going to have in total 23, 24 days to complete my package, get all my ducks in a row, do my research, get my mailing labels, make my payment, and take care of all the things. And then from then, it obviously, also you have additional time because once you file all that information, there needs to be at least 13 days for notice. So if you file, let's say you file everything, you complete it, and there's a commission meeting or The appropriate board for your particular appeal is historic preservation. There's a historic preservation board meeting in seven days. You're not going to be on that meeting because we don't have 13 days of notice. So you're going to be on next month's meeting. But this at least codifies everything so that everyone can look at one document, in this particular case, the zoning code, and know the entire appeal process.

Mr. Chairman, I understand now this is one of the questions which was not part of the package that we received today. So I feel more comfortable now based on

Exactly what the assistant city attorney just explained Great mr. Alvers At some point if this item we did we did we did mr. Alvers Is this explained to the the person that's doing the appeal is there like I in the application process Hey, you have this day this day this day this day. So everything's on there.

It's on there So the notice of intent to appeal is something that you typically will only find in our zoning code But if, let's say, you have a particular application that went to the Historic or Board of Architects, whatever it may be, if you ask staff, hey, I don't agree with that decision, I'd like to appeal, they'll simply tell you you have 10 days to file that notice of intent to appeal. We are very... liberal when it comes to that interpretation because at the end of the day the last thing we want to do is infringe on anyone's due process rights. So that can be a simple email, come in, write it on a piece of paper. If you hand me a post that says I intend to appeal and sign it and you hand it to me, I'll provide it to the city clerk and that starts your clock for your next deadline, which in this case would be an additional 14 days to complete your package.

Yeah, but my question is that to avoid a regular person having to read the code, this is set in the package that they get. Okay, now you have this. Now you have like a timeline so the person knows.

If the person goes directly to the clerk's office and pick up the appeal package, all that information will be provided on there.

I have no comment.

Shane, any comments? No comment, thank you. Mr. Sanabria?

No, I just wanted to, I've overheard that to file an appeal, you need an attorney? No. You don't? I don't think you do.

No.

Okay. I don't have any questions. I have a motion to approve.

I have no further comments either. Let's close board discussion.

Motion to approve.

Second. Joe?

Sorry. Alice Bravo?

Yes.

Shane McClasson?

Yes.

Felix Pardo?

Yes.

Gonzalo Sanabria? Yes. Ignacio Alvarez?

Yes.

Robert Behar? Yes. Alex Bucelo?

Yes. Thank you again. Appreciate your time. Thank you.

You should stay to the end of the meeting to do this.

I started off my day with a code enforcement board in this room at 8.30 in the morning. I'm very happy to be ending.

So you started with my father then?

Yes, he was sitting right over there.

If we can have the next item. We're going to start with the first item? Yes. Okay. First item.

Chair, should we do the second item because everybody's here for the second item?

Up to the board.

I think it's a good idea.

Okay.

Motion to start with E2.

Well, my motion is to start with E2 because everybody's here in the crowd. Just to help them out.

Second your motion. All in favor? Aye. Aye.

Okay.

Item E2, an ordinance of the City Commission amending ordinance number 1952 as amended, which changed the zoning on lots 1, 2, 3, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24, block 120, and lots 1 through 5, block 131, country club section 22. 430, 440, 450, and 520 University Drive, Florida to remove certain conditions of approval that limit the use of the property to overflow parking and that reverse the zoning the property to single family zoning. All other conditions of approval contained in ordinance number 1952 shall remain in effect. Item E2, public hearing.

Good evening, Jennifer Garcia, Planning and Zoning Director. If I could have a PowerPoint, please. for item E2. Thank you. So before 1972, these two properties, one being between both on University Drive, one between Sarto and Camilo, and one between Rivera and Calima, were zoned single family. I'm assuming they were vacant at the time. And then Through Ordinance 1952, again, the year 1972, a little confusing, I know, the Commission then approved to change the zoning to single, sorry, to, let me go back, to special use. And part of that ordinance, ordinance number 1952, included four conditions of approval. The first one has to deal with keeping the property as was then in 1972 to not be paved for overflow parking involving both the library and the youth center. The second condition of approval has to deal with using that property that's now zoned special use to be used as overflow parking, again, for use center and for the library. Condition number three involved limiting the ingress and egress to only be from University Drive and that there should be some kind of means erected to close off those properties to not be used unless they're used for the additional parking needed for overflow parking for Youth Center and the library. And then condition number four has to deal with the zoning and that if the city decided that there was no use for either of those properties, that the zoning would have to be reverted back to single family without involving public hearing. So today we are looking just at the property, which is known as 520 University Drive, which is between Riviera and Calima. This is not involving the north property, which is between Sarto and Camilo. It's just the 520 property, again, between Riviera and Calima. And there you are looking at the plot. So the current future land use of the nation is public buildings and grounds. And again, the zoning is still zoned, special use zoning. So what was proposed to you before today only affects the property at 520 University Drive, and to take away that restriction of only using the property for over for parking, but to also allow for any kind of park use. So the property would still need to be kept at a park-like manner with existing trees, The second condition will be amended to again only affect 520 University Drive to also allow any kind of public park in the future. Condition number three would be amended then to specify that the ingress and egress is a deal with the temporary overflow parking. Would be against keeping it from University Drive Unless otherwise determined by the police department and then condition number four would be removed altogether So that the city decide to rezone the property be single-family residential use that they would involve the public through public hearing process and So this is the first meeting dealing with this exact ordinance change. We moved to city commission for first second reading as any ordinance is done. The letters were sent out within 1,000 feet of the 520 University Drive property, as that's the property that's being affected by these changes. And those letters were sent out one time for this meeting for tonight. The property was posted once as well. Website was posted as well as newspaper advertisement. So staff has determined this is consistent with the goals as far as locating parks near single-family neighborhoods, residential neighborhoods. I recommend approval. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions from the board before we open to public comment? Jill?

Excuse me, we have several speakers. Sylvia King?

Mr. Chair, are we going to keep the time?

If I could have Coral Gables TV pull up that PowerPoint that I sent.

Sorry.

Sorry. Box six.

Okay.

Good evening, I'm Sylvia Perez-King, 3617 Harlano Street. I'm a member of the University Green Neighbors Association. We filed a complaint.

Lower the mic.

Okay, thank you. We filed a complaint to enjoin the development of a bark park at 520 University. No amendments to Ordinance 1952 should be considered while the litigation is pending. We waive no rights by voicing our objections here. I'm gonna make three points First this hearing should not take place. There should be a deferment Residents within a thousand feet of all the parcels listed in the ordinance were not mailed notice The ordinance applies to all the parcels not just 520 taking away overflow parking at 520 University Shifts the burden directly onto the other lot and those property owners. They have a right to be here and This hearing should be deferred for that reason. Next, the intention of the city is to put a Bark Park at the 520 University spot. But we have a lot of, we have an overwhelming need for parking in our community because the library has a lot of events. This first picture, one of our members, just a random day, no events at the library. The library parking lot was full. Here we have cars parking on the swale next to the library. Here we have cars parked in front of 520 University and all along the swale heading towards the youth center. Here we also have more cars because it went all the way up to the youth center. And here, in fact, we see the cars parked in front of the youth center. Parking is a really big issue here, and we do need overflow parking for special events. Take, for example, the literacy festival that happened recently. The city opened an overflow parking lot directly across the youth center. They didn't open up 520, just the one in front of the youth center. It quickly filled. Actually, I think I skipped a slide. Well, there's a slide before this one. Let me see if I can get, yeah, here we go. The overflow parking lot quickly filled up and people started to park on the swales all the way down Camilo Avenue. This is another angle of the overflow parking opened by the city. Cars parking along the swale, all along University Drive. And they found their way to 520. Even though it was not marked by the city, they did not put up barricades or have police officers there but the the public found it and they parked there and here you can see they saw the little sign posted there which by the way the city wants to say that the other parcels aren't part of this but they were signed as well for this hearing they just didn't mail to the neighbors but anyhow these cars are parked on 520. there is a need when there are special events to have parking in the community. Also, we developed our own little plan here showing what parking at university, what we're talking about. We're talking about 83 parking spaces for a future, for a Special events the city has no plans for the place of the the lost parking when they put a dog park there those spaces are going to be gone and Parking is going to be chaotic and where will the burden fall it'll fall on the residents of the community who do not want a park there and There are plenty of parks in our community for off-leash dogs. We have Chewy. We have Salvador. You can go down to Chapman Park. We don't need any more dog parks. What we need is parking for the library to support it. Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm sorry, William?

Good evening. My name is Bill Rivenbark. I'm a member of the United University Green Neighbors Association, which is a 501c4. I live at 3616 Harlano Street, approximately 125 feet from 520 University Drive. And I would like to speak about the Coral Gables Public Library and give you some statistics, which you may find interesting. to make clear why Ordinance 1952 should not be amended. To best understand why Coral Gables Public Library needs to be able to have access to overflow parking in the lot, you need only look at their current door counts. Door count is Miami-Dade Library speak for head count, how many people come in on a daily basis to visit the library. This includes special events in county-wide early voting attendance. In February of this year, I emailed the Miami-Dade Public Library System a series of questions regarding attendance at the Coral Gables Branch. I received a timely and very thorough response from the Public Records Division of the Miami-Dade Public Library System. Here's what we learned. The Coral Gables Branch Library averages 30 to 40 programs per month. Programs in their speak, again, are special events, certain courses, certain topics, what have you, other than just someone going in and out of the library. Their program-related attendance estimates between 1,000 and 1,250 people per month. That's 12,000 to 15,000 people per year. visiting the library for special programs. Currently, for fiscal year 2025 to 26, the door count averages are approximately 26,000 visits per month. That's 312,000 visitors annually, the third highest among all 50 branches of the Miami-Dade library system. Last year, Fiscal year 24-25, the Coral Gables branch averaged approximately 31,000 visits per month or 372,000 visits per year. The second most visited library in terms of door count surpassed only by the main library in downtown Miami. From 2018 to 2024, countywide early voting at the Coral Gables Branch Library has ranged from 16,000 to 25,000 participants. That's a large number of voters in a concentrated two-week period for the primary and the general election, with governor, US senator, US House of Representatives, and many other state positions in addition now In addition to the Coral Gables elections, the numbers will again be high for a two-week period, primary and general elections. Throughout the years, the Coral Gables branch has consistently ranked among the top five of early voting locations in Miami-Dade County, where everyone coming through in or near Coral Gables cast their ballots. A door count of 372,000 annually, 15,000 special event attendees yearly, and 25,000 voters during early voting. It's easy to see why the ability to have overflow parking in the lot must remain. Taking away the overflow parking at 520 University makes no sense. The numbers simply do not add up. Thank you.

Thank you.

Jean Davis.

Good evening. My name is Jean Davis, and I am a member of the University Green Neighbors Association. I live at 3710 Harlano Street, and I would like to ask What is the true purpose of these proposed changes? The planning and zoning staff reports acknowledges that the city's interest in having a 40,000 square foot off-leash dog park at 520 University Drive immediately abutting three single family homes. The report says the city's request would not allow densities or intensities beyond what is permitted under the applicable future land use map classifications of public buildings and grounds. But how do you reconcile the current passive green space open to everyone with a 40,000 square foot dog park, which is only for the dogs? The report also says that it will provide ample and effective opportunities for public participation at all levels of the city of Coral Gables, governance and decision making. That sounds good in theory, but we were told we couldn't have input as to whether there would be a dog park, but we would only have input into how it would be designed. The report says that the city will ensure recreation facilities are well managed, well maintained, and that Quality opportunities are available within a 10-minute walk to all residents. The passive green space that is there now is readily available to everyone. I would also like to speak about the future land use compliance. If this is about a dog park, planning and zoning board members should know the report says that it does not permit uses which are prohibited in the future land use category of the parcel, but only places a dog park is mentioned in that document is under policies REC-1.4.2, which references working with the county on Chapman Field County and dog park facility for the city and residents of the city sponsored programs. I thank you very much.

Thank you.

leno fernandez good evening board members my name is leno fernandez and i live at 415 kadima avenue i'm also a member of the university green neighbors association In general as you've heard this dog park is just not a not a great idea traffic The city is still years behind trying to catch up With our current traffic issues on Kadima and Riviera and where this dog is dog park is wanted It's customary for for your board to review traffic studies before making recommendations on development matters and yet none to our knowledge has been conducted. University Drive from Lejeune Road to Bird Road and Granada Boulevard to Large Collector Street, moving an ever-growing number of east-west commuters during morning and evening peak hours. This two-lane road each way is also a major approach for fire rescue services, going constantly to doctors' hospitals. Evening rush hours collide with peak activity at the library and the youth center. Long lines of cars can stack up at the intersections of University Drive and Riviera, as well as Segovia at University Drive, waiting for traffic lights to change and pedestrians to cross. The idling school buses, student pickup and drop off at Coral Gables High, after school drop off at the youth center, church services and the expansion plans for somerset somerset academy all contribute to the neighborhoods traffic congestion please ask for a traffic study before uh someone is hurt or someone's pet the city is uh rushing into amending ordinance 1952 without any objective basis and without consideration of the reality of the day-to-day need for protecting 520 University Drive for the safety of our citizens. Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Jose Val.

Yes.

Hello to everyone. Good evening. The board is being asked to vote on a matter without having all the information.

Can you please, sorry to interrupt you, can you please state your name and address for the record?

Yeah, hi. My name is Jose Val, and I live in 520 Kadima Avenue, right in front of the open space, open green space. So the board is being asked to vote on a matter without having all the information, and some of the information you have may not be correct. I live, as I said, in 520 Kadima Avenue, immediately across the street of 520 University Drive with my wife and three young children, ranging from six weeks to five-year-old today. Today is her birthday. As the association president, I would like to speak about Ordinance 1952 and why the buffer is important. Before tonight's meeting, you may not have known about Ordinance 1952. Our attorney reminded the city commission and the city attorney about it in January 13, 2026. City commission meeting, but they said nothing. In 1971 and 1972, the planning and zoning board and the city commission after the notice of public hearing was duly published and notification of all property owners of record within 300 feet was made. Held public hearings seeking to change the zoning of the property to SUs with special conditions. Lots 1 through 5, block 131, aka 520, 430, 440, and 450 University Drive, had been zoned single family, RS14, for homes at least 2,500 square feet until the library and the youth center relocated to the current day locations. Ordinance 1952 stipulated that the properties could only be used for overflow parking, that ingress and egress be the university drive, that the properties be kept in a park-like manner that the trees and foliage preserve in the current state, and that if the overflow parking was no longer needed in that zoning of the properties, revert back to single-family zoning. The change of zoning and thoughtfully conditions were developed through notice public hearings to provide an important buffer between the library and the youth center with a quiet single family neighborhood to the south. These protections provided added assurance that the three homes, and mine, immediately abounding what is known as 520 University Drive, including the two-story 1925 early Mediterranean home. The neighborhood has relied and continues to rely on these conditions, including the revert clause, for more than 50 years. This innovative yet tested overflow parking arrangement provides passive public green space while protecting the neighborhood from parking and traffic intrusion during planned. Occasional special events, just as example, these events include the Extreme Heck Hunt, the Literacy Festival, the 4th of July, Nimer at 4.05, countywide early voting in all presidential, national, state, and local elections, political campaign events, sporting events at the youth center, soccer, baseball, and basketball games and tournaments, hurricane and emergency centers, and other high traffic events all year round that you will hear about from other speakers. The temporary barricades help guide parkers during large-scale special events. The city rarely chooses to use 520 University to provide needed parking relief during special events. Please keep the buffer in place. Our neighborhood It's a collection of individuals and family, babies, young children learning to ride or skate, teenagers walking to the youth center, young families with strollers, seniors, some in the later years, blessed with a complete network of sidewalks, mature trees, historic homes, and treasured green space that can accommodate library overflow parking so patrons don't park in the neighborhoods. Docks are walked, wheelchairs are rolled, strollers are pushed, and people of all ages and backgrounds get their steps in as part of the daily routine. We're not here, we're not here to debate whether bar parks are good. Your business whether you take your dog to one it becomes our business when the city tries to force a dog park in our little neighborhood when the Sony and dog ordinance clearly forbid it and we're really don't want it. We fully support dog friendly amenities in Craig gables we simply believe they should be placed where they are compatible with the surrounding uses and do not impose. proponage impact on a small group of residents our goal is not conflict but a solution that serves the community without sacrificing the safety character and quality of life of our neighborhood we appreciate your consideration thank you sarah cortez

Hello. Good evening, everyone. I'm Sarah Cortez at 511 Kadima Avenue. I am a member of the University Green Neighbors Association, as well as living in that historic home that Jose just mentioned. The proposed dog park would actually be right next to me in the backyard, which I have mentioned before in public spaces. I have a dog. I do not want a dog park in my backyard. I'm an emergency medicine physician by training, and I'd like to share some comments about mental health and why passive green space is so important. I do believe that our founders and those who came before you recognized how important green space is and what a blessing it is to our community, and I do believe that we are losing it slowly but surely. I am worried about that for many reasons, obviously. But green space is breathing space. Respecting wildlife and preserving habitat on green space, providing for overflow parking when needed, allows everyone, not just dogs and their owners, to escape from the hustle and bustle of the world we live in. You can stroll around the sidewalks of the triangle with your dog. You can walk through the grass or maybe do some gymnastics through it, as my daughter does. You can listen to the birds and watch the wildlife. Your kids can do that. Today, this is public green space that provides a helpful respite to all. Mental Health America noted that children living in neighborhoods with more green space have a reduced risk of developing depression, mood disorders, schizophrenia, eating disorders, and substance abuse disorders, all of which are on the rise. Spending time in nature is good for you and your mental health. It positively impacts mood, focus, stress levels, and emotional regulation, all of which I need right now. Let's all remember, green space is breathing space, and it's good for everyone. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Rose Bauer.

Hello. Good evening. My name is Rose Bauer, and I'm a member of the University Green Neighbors Association. I live at 3716 Segovia Street. I have lived in the area a lifetime. I would like to speak about dog parks and property values. The planning and zoning report, these ordinance changes will not result in a substantial decline in property value or neighborhood character noting that access to nearby open space can enhance the desirability and residential neighborhoods and support long time stability. I have always loved and cared for animals. including a few cats that live in the green space that I feed daily. I have a 10-year-old Australian Shepherd, and I have been a loyal and active member of the Cat Network for many years. But tonight I want to speak about my profession. I value the historic charm of the city beautiful. I have been a successful real estate broker in Coral Gables with Rivera Real Estate for 25 years and much of my success comes with knowing the market. Some might disagree but I feel compelled to speak about the impact of off-leash dog park would have on adjacent homes. The triangle today is a beautiful habitat for animals and people. It is mostly certainly an amenity while providing overflow parking for the library. There's a big difference between this natural green space and a large, all-consuming dog park immediately close to multiple homes. If dog parks are not properly maintained, problems surface not only with the sound of dogs barking throughout the day, but with odors, tired landscaping, and trash. These factors influence the price of sale to the seller because of the surroundings. Homeowners live in coral gables in part because of the security and beautiful canopies. Let's not negatively impact the neighborhood and the homeowner's financial future by adding another dog park next door. Thank you.

Thank you.

I don't have any more speakers that signed in.

Anyone on Zoom?

No.

And anyone on the phone? So let's close public comment.

Did you sign in, sir? I'm sorry. Your name? Sorry, just come up to the podium. Oh, he didn't mark the item number. So go ahead. Sorry about that, sir.

My name is Barry Golden. I'm a member of the University Green Neighbors Association. I live at 3628 Harlano Street. I am five houses away from the proposed dog park, 520 University. Before the city considers revising the ordinance, removing certain protections and conditions and considering additional uses, a comprehensive parking study and review should be undertaken For example, no formal current or future demand studies have been conducted. A member of the University Green Neighbors Association conducted an informal parking count between 5.30 p.m. and 6 p.m. at and around the library during the first two weeks of February 2026. This included daily surveying the 48-space library lot, 11 including two handicapped parallel parking spaces in the circular drive in front of the University Drive entrance the 20 angle parking spaces on the west side of Riviera the five angle parking on the east side of Riviera and the 22 spaces in the swale of Segovia in front of the west entrance of the library The youth center parking lot parallel to University Drive and the Segovia North parking lot by the playing fields were also surveyed. On most days, all parking spaces were exceeding capacity, including those areas under the banyans marked no parking on University. Depending on programming at the library or at the youth center, parking regularly exceeds capacity and drivers drove frantically around looking for space to park. I have personally witnessed the library and youth center overwhelmed with cars and trucks. The available parking is woefully insufficient and care cars naturally spill out onto the 520 University. It should be noted that there are no announced high volume event during any of the days surveyed. Please don't make any changes until a current or future parking study is performed. High volume events need easy access to overflow parking. It makes no sense to take away the overflow parking there. Cars will have nowhere to go other than our properties. So I said that I live five houses away from 520 University, OK? I've lived in Coral Gables for 20 years. July will be 20 years. I love Coral Gables. It's an honor to live here. I mean, I love where I live. I don't live in Miami. I live in Coral Gables. I'm proud to say and tell people I live in Coral Gables, because you know what? This is the safest, the most beautiful place in South Florida. I walk my dog around 520 University almost every day and every night. I will not take him to a dog park, OK? I've had dogs for the entire 20 years that I've lived here. I had two dogs at one time. I'd walk two dogs around the 520 University, around the library, around the youth center. I'm there every day and every night. And now that I think of it, Sarah brought up a fantastic point. the mental part of just walking around that quiet green space. I do it every morning. I guess I just take it for granted that I live in a peaceful, beautiful, amazing city, and I walk my dog in quiet. I don't have to listen to a bunch of other dogs barking and yapping and this, that, and the other people walking around in cars and dodging cars, walking around the sidewalk. I walk my dog in peace, and it's beautiful. It's my opinion that the city commission didn't follow proper policy and procedures when they voted in November 2025 to move forward with this dog park. Nobody, none of these people that are standing here right here, none of the people that were at the January meeting knew about it, and they told the city about it. We're having a zoning hearing today. You guys posted a sign on May 8th. This little orange sign that I think Jose Val took a picture of, he noticed it the day it popped up. There were no signs in November letting all these neighbors know that the city commission is planning on putting a dog park here. Nobody knew about it. They tried to say that they did. We didn't know about it. Nobody knew about it. They came to the January 13th meeting, and 50 people from our neighborhood, the people that are most impacted by this dog park, the two blocks around 520 University, they didn't know about it. But when they found out about it, we united and came together and said, we don't want this, and we don't. And they had a chance to rescind the November 2025 vote and go back, start all over again, maybe find another green space somewhere else in Coral Gables. They didn't do that. They didn't listen to all the neighbors that were at that commission meeting in January and said, we don't want this. They didn't listen. They just moved ahead with a vote to go forward with the dog park. So... Stand here today telling you that the people most affected by this dog park feel like they were bamboozled by the City Commission because they didn't know about it and We don't want it. I hope you Do the right thing. Thank you.

Thank you

so let's go public comment before i open it to board discussion uh mr city attorney can you give us some insight on the on the pending litigation i heard a couple of the participants mentioned litigation there there has been litigation filed by a group they're seeking to join the city can you not hear me okay there has been litigation been filed by a an organization they're seeking to enjoin the city from having um utilizing this property for a dog park uh and when the city went back and looked at the the regulations that were in this 19... The ordinance didn't take place in 1952. It's just the number of the ordinances in 1952. It has a rather unusual, a reverter clause. Most reverters are ownership clauses where the property reverts to an owner at a particular time. What's unusual about this reverter clause is it says it reverts back to single family zoning if it's not used for the overflow parking. Back in 1972 was ordinance passed. Zoning was looked at at that time as being legislative in 1993, there was a case called Snyder versus Brevard County where the Florida Supreme Court said that rezonings are not legislative, they're quasi-judicial. So there needs to be a hearing notice and an opportunity to be heard. So it's somewhat problematic that there's a reverter that reverts back to a different zoning when there won't be a hearing and opportunity to be heard. So that's gonna have to be addressed at some point. I think the city is trying to address it by eliminating the reverter clause because, but it is a little unusual to revert a zoning to a different zoning separate and apart from whether this should be green space or not green space. There's a legal issue about whether property can revert back automatically without a public hearing to go from one zoning to a different zoning. So that was the issue on the reverter. Because it's not an ownership reverter, it's a zoning reverter, which you don't really see very often. I've never seen it before.

If it's reverted back to single family, What happens? I mean, if it's not used for overflow parking anymore and it reverts back to single family, what happens?

Well, the property is owned by the city at this point, but you could build houses on it.

Your city could sell it and you could build houses.

Your city could sell and build houses on it. I would recommend that before it reverts, there should be a public hearing and notice an opportunity to be heard because... Ordinarily, when you rezone, that's a quasi-judicial hearing.

Isn't that what we're doing here?

No. No.

Okay.

What we're doing here is whether the ordinance should be amended to... To go from a... One, not limited just to overflow parking, and two, to... and it's a recommendation. We're not actually doing the activity, but recommendation is to whether the reverter clause should be deleted and whether the property, this area that's a park, is just limited to overflow parking.

Through the chair? Yes. I'm going to put my lawyer hat on. So the litigation is seeking to avoid the revert, or what's the litigation seeking?

No, the litigation is seeking to prevent the city from utilizing the property for a dog park.

but the city's not a party to the lawsuit just yet, correct? No, the city is a party to the lawsuit. It is already a party to the lawsuit.

It sounds like what's going to happen is the courts will throw out the deed if the deed is not correct. Well, it's not a deed.

And you know what? You're right to think of it referring to a deed because ordinarily reverters are in deeds. Right. But this is not an ownership reverter. This is a zoning reverter, which is a little bit unheard of.

Where are we with the litigation? Should we be deferring this?

Well, I think there's a complaint, and I think there's a motion to dismiss, and the city is attempting to rectify what it sees as a problem with that number 1952-1972 ordinance. Okay. Through the chair.

I think there are several components here. Let's try to break them down. The original intent, back in 1972, my friend Mayor Pete Phillips, Jr., who was a great mayor, that's when it was signed in, in 1972. And obviously, there was a problem in the neighborhoods. And the problem in the neighborhood was being caused by the popularity of the youth center and its activities and the library and its activities. Those uses there are under the S zoning, which is special. Special meaning special for special use, et cetera. It's very, very specific. But it seems to me that if you look at the restrictions that were placed with tremendous thought and posting and publications to those neighbors at that time, is that specifically they looked at those areas not as paved parking lots, but park-like manner. That is what's in that resolution that was presented. Furthermore, because they were trying to protect that single-family neighborhood adjacent to those two uses, they said that the only access to those two areas for parking would be through University Drive, not through the side streets, which include Riviera. and there's a traffic light on Riviera and University. So therefore, what they were doing is keeping it in a park-like manner, and if that necessity would ever dwindle, then it would revert back to the original zoning. The only zoning that was changed from the original zoning, which was single-family, was to special use to be able to park not to make it into a park, but to park on that area that was bark-like. So when it wasn't being used intensely, the neighbors in the area had a green buffer zone to university, to the youth center, and to the library. There has been so much time that has gone back over 50 years that the library has been completely redone and the youth center was completely redone about 35 years ago. The youth center is the crown jewel of the city of Coral Gables. And the library is part of the quality of life that we have here in the city of Coral Gables. It is our only library, public library in the city of Coral Gables, which is used by residents, by University of Miami students, and by students throughout, the elderly, and everyone else. The foresight that Mayor Phillips had, and that commission at that time, was to make sure that there was a buffer and that the parking issue was not forgotten about. And in fact, 35 years ago when the youth center was redone, the amount of parking on site was increased and it's still not enough. Listening to the speakers is an eye opener. With all due respect to staff, I look at what they have said the statistics of the intensity of special events there. And by the way, I ran into Mr. Sanabria on Saturday because as a 41-year member of the Coral Gables Rotary Club, we gave out more than 600 books free of charge to children that were there at that special event. And the special event was packed. And The games, the intensity, the buffer, all of these things. I want to make sure that there's no doubt in my mind of what the intent was of the original commission in 1972 with Mayor Phillips. It was to protect the single family homes from the impact of those uses. The second thing is the reverter clause, and I'm not as smart as a lawyer, but I will tell you that the intent was obvious. It becomes a normal rezone back to the zoning that it was, which was single family. Not commercial, not a swimming pool, none of those uses. I also noticed that the speakers tonight did not say one word about the intensity of the differences of green spaces compared to active spaces. I designed an award-winning park, nationally award-winning park. And that park is a 50-acre park with all sorts of sports, baseball fields, football fields, soccer fields, tennis courts, beautiful. That is not a passive park. That is an active park, and the youth center is an active park. But the buffer is a passive park-like area, which is green. Mayor Phillips was very smart, and that commission was very smart in making sure that happened. When you look at the reverter clause, in my opinion, it is clear. It goes back to what the rest of the neighborhood is. But after the additional popularity of those two institutions, the library and the park were redone again already within the 50-year period. It is obvious that there's still a demand and a requirement and a need for that additional parking for those uses, not for the single-family homes.

Which is why having a hearing on whether the property should be rezoned to single-family makes perfect sense because you don't rezone property without a without a quasi judicial hearing because people might very well check a single-family zoning might not be appropriate for that property today i'd totally disagree with that point for the simple reason this is in litigation and there's a very good chance that this revert or may get thrown out period so that's just my personal opinion but i i don't know if you'd explain why i had my question i think that the the i think the issue for you all is whether you feel that this, the restrictions that are on this property currently are appropriate given the circumstance. That's what you're being asked. Your recommendation could be, very well be, we need to keep things the way they are.

Mr. Collar, one thing, and we've known each other for many years, and one of the things that I have done on quasi-judicial boards, on dozens of boards that I've sat on for this city over the years, is that I listen to the people that are affected. We just had this conversation with the assistant city attorney that was here earlier.

Which is exactly what you're charged to do.

Exactly. And the whole point is, The difference of a passive area compared to a bark park, because that's what they're referred to normally, and the ones that we have, I have no problem with the Chewy Park, which is under the underline, perfect location for it. Salvador Park, I know they have issues over there, but to go into this area, take away the intent that was there to buffer this neighborhood is altering the neighborhood in a very negative fashion.

Well, that is what your decision is to do.

And the point I'm making is that listening to the statistics, listening to the way that they were prepared, listening to the evidence that they provided as the people that are affected, this board cannot ignore that, I don't think.

Mr. Chairman. I think we should all, before you give your opinion about me, let's hear the whole board.

Let me start this way and then we'll work it.

Don't speak on my behalf.

Mr. Chairman. Go for it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This gentleman in the green T-shirt that came up with all those numbers, that's fantastic. And also, I want to tell you, I did have the privilege and the honor to run by a booth of the Rotary Club And there he was, Felix Pardo running it. I think he's been doing this for 41 years. Kudos and congratulations. What a beautiful event. Very well attended for our children and I parked in that overflow parking. And I want to tell you all that you tolerate that. If I was a neighbor of that overflow parking, I'd be sitting where you are moaning and groaning about it. So I commend you for being tolerant for that. And it really is a bonafide, benevolent gesture that you do as neighbors to allow that to occur. So thank you very much from that end. Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Any comments?

My comment would be I appreciate all the statements I've heard from everyone on the board and everyone who came up here. I've heard a lot about dog parks. From my standpoint, this is a straightforward zoning issue relating to only a change in zoning. I don't think we're sitting here today making a decision on whether or not to institute a dog park. And as far as Mr. Collar's statement on the reverter clause, I think that would also make sense. I see this as a zoning issue only. I don't see this as a dog park issue today. I don't consider myself making a decision on the dog park today. Those would be my statements.

I appreciate all of you coming out tonight to give your opinion, and I want to echo the comments. I'm surprised that you prefer the parking to APARC use. But that being said, I also agree with the comment that the matter before us is the zoning change and not the specific end product. But I think... When I moved to the Gables, I shopped many homes, and there are a lot of homes that have no backyard whatsoever. So it's probably a good idea to have some dog parks where they can run free. I know we have dog-friendly parks, but the parks are required to be leashed. So this probably is an amenity that's needed somewhere in the city.

That's it. Mr. Behar? Okay. I'm a bit concerned and confused because if the reverted clause goes into effect, this becomes single-family zoning. And the city could have the option, and I'm sure it will be challenged to sell those lots as single-family lots. correct me, the attorneys, and I'm going to use Mr. Pardo's phrase, I'm not an attorney, I'm not the smartest attorney. I'll leave that to my son, but he's not here, so I have to defer to the attorneys. If that goes to single family, the city will have the right to sell those lots, and somebody could come in and build single family there. And you prefer that, you know, you would prefer to have, I don't know how many lots, six lots of single family, than a dog park or the overflow parking that I agree, I may not agree totally with Mr. Sanabria, but I will have to agree with him today that I will be very upset to see that. This is a resolution or whatever legal terminology that was done 54 years ago and things changes. I, my office is immediately or 150 feet from the park, the dog park you're referring to, Chewy Park. Let me tell you, at first I was hesitant and I had my doubts. It is very nice to see how those dogs that like, as Bravo mentioned, don't have to be on a leach. There's no noise there, and it's clean. And I walk, because when I cross the street to go to Graziano's, I walk by it. I don't see the dog park being dirty or being more. Furthermore, or the last point I think I'm going to make is, I was in Brooklyn a couple weeks ago visiting my son, and I hadn't been to Prospect Park. and I went to Prospect Park and I saw families that are all over the park, much bigger park, and I'm not gonna compare the green space here to that, but I did saw family enjoying themselves with their dogs in that area that was newly created to have the dogs running loose, not being leeched and not walking them through the park on a leech. I feel that this is something that could be beneficial. Yes, does it have to be done correctly? No question about it. Would it be, and I don't know the depth of this property that we're questioning here that we're talking about. Could it be a buffer between the residents, the residential houses, to the south, I guess, and the park. But I do see this. as a positive. I don't see it as a negative. And this is not, you know, this is a great location to put it because you do have an active park across the street that you cannot let your dog, you know, loose on that youth center. And by the way, I've been a resident of Corrie Gables for not as long as you Felix, but for 36 years. And I used to coach my kids And, you know, in the youth center. And those lots rarely, rarely get utilized, you know, for the overflow. Maybe the event that took place this past weekend, I will grant it. I wasn't there. I didn't see it. But for the most part, on the weekends, those lots are completely empty. So I think the use of the dog park here, I think it will be a good thing. Good for the for the whole community for the whole city and that's my opinion.

Thank you. Mr. Overs I'm gonna go in order on my notes. First of all, this is for the city attorney. One of the speakers spoke about Improper notice. Is that an issue? That will affect this meeting

I don't believe it does because the item was revised to reduce the parcels that were impacted by this. And when you measure the 1,000 feet and the planning zoning can confirm this, but when you measure the 1,000 feet from the parcel that's now been limited, it meets the 1,000 foot radius. the other parcels are beyond the 1,000 foot radius for this parcel. So by limiting it, you've essentially, if there was an issue, it's been cured because they've reduced the impact of the proposed ordinance.

Through the Chair, I think that, were you mentioning

the November Commission meeting, which was not... One of the speakers said that there was improper notice for this meeting. For this meeting.

I could have sworn I heard when the November meeting... Well, there's two different notices that were mentioned.

In November, you heard from people that they were not aware of what was going on what was talked about tonight which i was aware of thousand-foot radius was met with them the parcel that this item has been reduced to and that was what comments were the other people should have gotten the notice but The the the item was reduced in its scope, so they were not impacted in the notice.

And and I just wanted to mention one last thing. which is the example by Ms. Bravo that people that don't have yards, people that have single-family homes have yards. The problem is all these buildings that have been built, that they don't have yards, really that's where the dog parks should go, where they don't have yards, and then that way they could have access to bigger areas. You see it in urban areas, whether it's Chicago, Boston, New York, but the point is that these areas, their dogs are in their backyards, then the owners choose to walk their dogs through their neighborhood, which is very different. And the other thing is the intensity. When you get, you may have no dogs, but you also may have 10 dogs, and the barking, et cetera. There was a dog park that existed on Anderson Road and it was made into a dog park and then it was removed as a dog park because of the negative impact on the single family homes nearby. So the park is there, but it's no longer a dog park. In fact, it has a sign that says no dogs.

Okay. I think my colleague made a great comment. This is a zoning change versus the end product. But if we go to the playground, it could be any playground. It could be a dog park. It could be anything. So we are talking about the end product here. And I don't see an issue with trying to change it. But this is where my problem is. I still do believe that we should be deferring this and waiting for the litigation to be done. Because you don't know what's going to happen in that litigation. What happens if they throw out the... this reversion clause, and we're right back here. You don't know what the judge is gonna do. So my personal opinion is we should let that litigation play out. Nevertheless, I have a problem with buying a house, knowing that there's gonna be parking there for special events, and then switching that to a 40,000 square foot duck park. If I was the owner of the house, I would have a major issue with that. Um, I do have a dog. I love dogs. I take the people that know me and people that know me, I take my dog everywhere, restaurants, my office, it goes everywhere. But there was a couple of residents here that mentioned if this, they put this in my backyard, I don't want it in my backyard. And I don't know what has been done. I read this in the news, I see it in all the Gables blogs, I see it in the commission meeting. What's been done to address the members, the residents that will be directly affected to have this dock park? I don't see it. I don't see the traffic study. I don't see the parking study. I don't have any information relay on it telling me the gentleman in the green shirt is correct. He may be totally wrong, he may be totally right. I don't see anything that Gables has done to address that. Being a former police chief, obviously, if there is a dock park and people have to park in different areas, law enforcement could take action for that and stop it. But I think that this is too early. I think that staff should go back and conduct more information. I am for a deferral. If not, I'm going to be a no on this item for the simple reason that I think we should be doing studies. I think we should be doing, I think the city should be working with all the concerned residents and addressing their concerns because if I buy a house in Coral Gables, we change cheap and they put a 40,000 square foot dog park directly in my backyard, my dog is going to be pissed and I'm going to be pissed. For that reason and I don't know if I'm gonna have support from the from anybody here I move for this to be deferred until the city comes back with more information for us to consider including parking studies traffic studies and their attempts to Work with the residents to try come up with something that everybody's happy with

Thank you. I'll keep it brief. I heard all of you. I think I'm going to echo mostly Behar's comments. I do think I myself have grew up in, I was born and raised in Corgables. I grew up in the youth center. I've rarely, even when we ran for office twice at this point, I never saw that park be used as an overflow. I'm not saying that these events are not, but I think they're far few in between. Ultimately, I do think it's a beautification of the city. I myself live next to a dog park. I was one of those residents that was against it. Always been against the dog park, but now I see myself using it. Ultimately, and I'll keep it brief, like I said, I'm with the staff's recommendation of approval.

Mr. Chairman?

Yes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm with the neighbors in this case, and I'll tell you why. And I'm also with a youth center, and I'll tell you why. That's an overflow of parking that the neighbors have tolerated for a very long time. If we put a dog park there, we may be satisfying a few, but we are harming many. And I'll tell you why. During this literacy art festival just this past weekend, which I attended, I have attended a few of those. There was hundreds of people. There was no place to park. And the good people that live across the way at 520 allow the overflow to fill that lot completely where you could hardly even move a car out of there. So I don't see the point of even approving this from the sense, not just of the neighbor's sake, but also the youth center's sake and the events that take place there. If we have a dog park there, we're going to negate many other events that are beneficial to the city through the youth center. So therefore, my vote is no on this item.

Any more board discussion? Motion? I defer.

I want to put up a motion to defer this item until my concerns are addressed. I don't know. I want to get a second.

I'll second the motion.

Sorry, motion to defer by Member Ignacio, second by Pardo.

Shane a glass can okay can't before we before we go there what what exactly the deferment is gonna do have Staff come back with with what?

Number one all I see is the whole neighborhood is upset and Is there anything that staff can do to work on the neighborhood to come up with a better plan? Everybody's be happy number one number two. I want to see a traffic study and parking study. I want to see that guy's the green shirt. I'm sorry. I don't know your name. So I apologize bill if he's right because If I bought my house there, knowing that there's gonna be, that area's gonna be used for parking, I accepted that when I bought it. I didn't accept them to build a 40,000 square foot dog park or park or whatever thing and then now I have people parking all over my house and people parking in my front yard and messing up my county swale and causing all different types of damage. So I wanna get more information to see if Bill is correct. So I think that the city should be doing much more work on this, and that's what I'm asking for them to prepare and come back to us with.

And the third item that you... I'd like to... I'm sorry, the third item? I was going to say the third item that you mentioned as a lawyer is that it's in litigation right now.

And correct, and my third item is we should wait for litigation to be over.

Well, with regard to litigation, I think the city is looking to resolve this issue prior to the litigation, number one. Number two, I understand there's a certain urgency, so if the... of the item getting to the commission. So if you all feel that there should be a parking study and a traffic study, I think that could be included in any motion. Either motion to approve or motion to deny. And you're denying it based on the fact that there's no parking.

I'm for deferment because otherwise I'm going to say no.

Yeah, but I think you're missing the point. It's not to have one done. It's to have the results to be able to use it to be able to vote. Well, that's my point. It's not the other way around.

Well, it can be a motion to deny based upon not having sufficient parking study.

I just hesitate because every time I hear, well, we're going to get a traffic engineer, no, I want to make a decision based on the information that staff should have brought before us, not the other way around.

Listen, right now we have a motion and a second to defer.

To defer, right.

So I'm about to say that. I was about to say that, Robert. Call the roll. Call the roll.

Shane McCluskin.

Respectfully, I do not vote to defer.

Felix Pardo.

Yes.

Gonzalo Sanabria.

I vote no because this should be turned down right here and right now.

Ignacio Alvarez.

Yes.

Robert Behar. No. Alice Bravo? No. Alex Buscello? No.

At this point, any motion is in order.

I'd like to make a motion to deny the application.

Seconded.

Jill?

One second, please. It was seconded by Mr. Sanabria?

Yes.

Felix Pardo?

Yes.

Gonzalo Sanabria?

Yes.

Ignacio Alvarez? Yes. Robert Behar?

No.

Alice Bravo?

No.

Jane McGlaskin?

No.

Alex Bucello?

No.

I'm going to make a motion. Another motion would be in order.

Everything is in order. To approve with conditions. And the condition is to have a traffic study and a parking study done. prior to commission because it's not going to come back to us. All right? It doesn't come back.

That's correct. Your recommendation is that you're approving with the recommendation that there be a parking study and a traffic study.

Yes.

That's a recommendation.

They don't have to do it. Well, you're...

But nothing that we do here is everything's a recommendation. I get that.

But we're just... That's the nature of this board. This board doesn't... With the exception, I think, something to do with preliminary plots, which I just learned about, that you don't make decisions, you make recommendations.

I'll second Robert. Mr. Behar.

You can call me Robert. We have a motion and a second. And I'm going to add that the green area incorporates a buffer. Separating from the single family That could be determined by Parks Department or whatever No Ignacio Alvarez, yes Robert Behar.

Yes Alice Bravo. Yes Jane McCluskin Yes Felix Pardo.

No

Alex Lucero.

Yes.

It passed.

We have one more item. I would recommend you might want to take a five-minute break for the reporter who's been going since. Can we not go? I'd rather go. I'd rather go. I'd rather go. Okay, let's go.

I'd rather go. It's 8 o'clock.

Okay. Item 1. resolution of the city commissioner of carl gables florida granting an amendment to a previously approved conditional use resolution number 2016-140 with all remaining conditions of approval to remain in effect pursuant to zoning code article 14 process section 14-203 conditional uses to allow private school use with educational instruction from kindergarten through fifth grade with an existing daycare facility with no increase in square footage or student capacity on the property legally described as the East 12.64 feet of Lot 3, all of Lot 7, dash through 45 and alley line between block 35, Carl Gables section K, 320 Heralda Avenue, Carl Gables, Florida, including required conditions providing for appeal or provision, providing for salvability clause, and providing for an effective date, item E1, public hearing.

Thank you. Hello, my name is Maria Pluchino, and I'm here representing Giralda Preschool of Coral Gables. Can we have the PowerPoint, please, the applicant PowerPoint? Okay. Thank you. So today I will explain our request for the proposed kindergarten program and how it fits within our current operations. So Giralda Preschool is requesting conditional use approval to modify the current childcare preschool use to a private school, initially offering kindergarten for fall this year with the potential to expand through fifth grade in the future. This addition does increase the facility's approved capacity of 174 students, as it will serve only 10 students and will be accommodated within our existing art room. So we don't need any physical modification in our facility. This is not an expansion of the facility, but an expansion of the services we provide for our families. So our facility has an indoor playground that is allowed because we are in an urban area. And as I said before, the kindergarten will be located in our art room that has an area of 436 square feet. About parking, we have six designated parking spaces only for drop-off and pickup. And also the garage building has 305 spaces available not only for the school but also for the restaurants and the retail this is our indoor plan so the kindergarten would be on the right in this on the right side this is the site plan as you can see there are the six reserved parking spaces with direct access to a sidewalk leading to the school So Giralda Preschool is an Apple-accredited school, and it also holds the Gold Seal Quality Care Program that is offered through DCF, that is the Department of Children and Families. So we have to maintain high standards, and it includes low teacher-to-student ratios. I'm not going to bother you with all the ration in each class, but I would like you to know that we have 96 students in total, with 16 teachers and three administrative staff. So there is a significant gap between our current enrollment, that is 96 students, and the school-approved capacity of 174 students. Traffic and our arrival flow. We are open from 7.30 to 6.30 p.m. And we have two schedules in the preschool. From 7.30 to 2.30 p.m. is part-time and full-time from 7.30 to 6.30 p.m. And most school arrivals are from 8.30 to 9 a.m. Okay, the proposed kindergarten program will be open from 7.30 to 3.30 p.m. And the kindergarten students have to arrive at 7.30 sharp. So as you can see, we have different schedules, and we have more than 30 minutes between one schedule and the other. Then it will minimize the congestion when dropping off or picking up the student. So as a community center school in the heart of Coral Gables, many of our families arrive by walking or biking or with strollers. I can tell you that 70% of my families in the preschool leave around 1,000 radio from the school. So thank you very much for having me, and if you have any questions.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I favor this item. I think we should listen to all the comments. I think it's basically an internal improvement within the boundaries of the school. It's no expansion, there's no zoning changes other than internal modifications.

Let's hear from staff and then we'll have board discussion.

All right, good evening, Mr. Chair, Planning and Zoning Board. Greg Southern, Planning Official with the Planning and Zoning Division. May we please have the staff PowerPoint, please? Thank you. So the item before you tonight, as Mrs. Pluccino had just indicated, is a request by the existing Heralda Preschool of Coral Gables for an amendment to a previously approved conditional use from 2016, Resolution 2016-140 for the subject property located at 320 Heralda Avenue. So if you take a look at the aerial map in front of you, even though it's a little blurred out, you will see that the subject property is encapsulated from the north side, Geraldo Avenue, south side, Aragon Avenue, Lejeune on the west, and Salcedo on the east, just southwest of where we're currently located here in the central business district. Currently, it is a preschool and daycare, as Ms. Placino just indicated. It's got 96 students that attend it. It's currently within the future land use map designation of commercial medium rise intensity, and within the zoning district of mixed use too. So the request, just to refer back to the staff report briefly, basically has submitted an application requesting an amendment to a previously approved conditional use as previously mentioned resolution 2016-140 pursuant to zoning code article 14 section 14-203 to allow a private school use with an educational instruction from kindergarten through fifth grade with an existing daycare facility with no increase in square footage and or existing student capacity. As you can see, there is a neighborhood participation meeting that was held by the applicant on April 23rd there at the preschool. And then we've also held a development review committee, a DRC meeting April 24th. So the proposed amendment authorizes a private school use with an educational instruction from kindergarten through fifth grade with an existing gate daycare facility while maintaining all existing approved operational limits of the site. The property currently operates as a licensed early childhood education facility serving children from infancy through VBK, and the requested amendment would formally recognize the private school entitlement within the existing daycare framework subject to conditions of approval. The proposed private school use would initially consist of a kindergarten program serving approximately 10 students located entirely within the existing 436 square foot art room. Ms. Pluchino did bring up an interior floor plan. We're gonna take a look at that again. But all that's really changing of the existing 9,087 square foot tenant space is just this 436 square-foot art room that's going to be converted into a kindergarten for 10 students. So there will be no expansion of any additional square footage to the tenant space, no structural modifications. The request maintains the existing approved intensity of development and will also continue as previously indicated to remain the cap of a maximum of 174 students. Once again There's only currently 96 students attending the daycare, and the proposal is to add 10 students for this fall. That's when the proposal is to open up for the kindergarten is this fall. So that would be a total of 106 students. So operations and circulation with the original conditional use was something that was brought up. That was also brought up at the Development Review Committee. So the facility currently utilizes six designated off-street spaces within the garage for student loading and unloading. And as a part of the conditions of approval from staff, which we'll get into later, all vehicular drop-off and pickup activities must occur within the parking garage. Curbside or street drop-off along the Giralda Avenue is strictly prohibited. drop-off and pickup times between the daycare and the kindergarten programs must be at least staggered by 30 minutes and School staff will monitor and enforce operational procedures to minimize congestion and insert ensure safe circulation so In respect to public notification to all property owners within the 1,000 square feet, we've already sent out two mailers, one for the neighborhood participation meeting, April 23rd, and then also for this meeting, this Planning and Zoning Board meeting, both times 583 notices were sent out. Once again, two times letters have been sent out, two times property has been posted for the DRC and the Planning and Zoning Board, two times website posting for the DRC and Planning and Zoning Board, and for this meeting, there's been a newspaper advertisement. So the findings of fact by staff pursuant to section 14-203.8 of the zoning code, standards for review of conditional uses, Based on the analysis contained within the staff report, staff finds that the proposed conditional use amendment is consistent with everything that is required within that section 14 pursuant to the comprehensive plan. It is compatible with the surrounding mixed use development patterns. It does not increase intensity of use. It will not adversely impact the surrounding properties and it satisfies concurrency and circulation requirements. Staff also finds the request supports the continued provision of educational services within the Central Business District while maintaining the existing approved operational framework. Additionally, as Ms. Placino indicated, 70% of the students currently live within a thousand foot radius. So this is beneficial to the neighborhood. So the Planning and Zoning Division, based on the complete findings of fact contained within the staff report in front of you, recommends approval with conditions. The conditions are detailed within the staff report that everyone has, but I'll briefly summarize them for you. Maintaining the maximum enrollment cap of 174 students, limiting operational hours between 7.30 a.m. and 6.30 p.m., requiring all vehicular drop-off and pick-up activity to occur within the parking garage only, requiring staggered scheduling and operational enforcement measures, requiring any future expansion beyond kindergarten to undergo separate development review committee review, and additional regulatory evaluation prior to implementation. And that would include Miami-Dade County, Miami-Dade County traffic, and et cetera. So all other conditions, which were three conditions that were originally contained in Resolution 2016-140, shall remain in effect of the application. So if you have any questions for the applicant or staff, we're readily available. I have a question, Mr. Chairman.

Yes. Does the applicant agree to those conditions?

Yes, I do agree. Go ahead.

Is there any public comment? No comment. Board discussions?

I'd like to make a motion to approve. No comments. All good. Motion to approve, please. You have a motion to approve? Yes, sir. I'm going to second it.

Okay.

Jill? Ignacio Alvarez? Robert Behar? Yes. Alice Bravo? Yes. Shane McGlasson?

Yes.

Felix Pardo?

Yes.

Gonzalo Sanabria?

Yes.

Alex Lucelo?

Yes. Thank you. Before we adjourn, I want to piggyback on something that Ignacio mentioned. And I, again, commend our former, not with you guys. There's something else. Well, no, for him, it's like off the record. Yeah, you got a great voice, but don't talk so much. But no, my point is, my point I want to make is that I agree with you. Anybody, you know, whatever happened in the past is the past. Anybody running for office in the city of Corregables that sits on this board should come off, because this is a quasi-judicial board, and I think that it doesn't look good for having candidates sitting here while they're running for office. And I want to put that on the record before we go. With that, Mr. Chair, I'm done.

Any other comments?

Mr. Chair?

Yes.

Anybody whose term has over-expired since you are over-expired. Your nine years should not be on the board. So that's something that I will have to take up with some other people, and it should be clarified.

We don't need to be doing what happens in the commission. There's no reason to go back and forth. If you have an issue with Robert, tell the city manager who just resigned, by the way. Will do. Okay, he just resigned, by the way, for your information. But I concur with him. Fine. Nobody running for commission should be on this board because it doesn't look good, Gonzalo.

We got two other people that have done it right here. Gonzalo, it doesn't matter.

Just because, wait, Alex, just because somebody did it before doesn't mean it's right. I'm just telling you, Gonzalo, it doesn't look good for you.

I hear you. I think there was a motion to adjust

Not yet.

Now I'll make a motion to adjourn. Just for the record, I did resign when I ran for office. Yes. If there's a motion to adjourn. All in favor?

Aye. Aye. Good evening. Have a good evening.

There are multiple opportunities to engage during the Commission meeting, whether it be by being present, as many of you are here, via the phone, Zoom. There's opportunities to engage on a litany of different topics, and we look forward to your guidance throughout the meeting. I also like to welcome the chairwoman for the Miami-Dade County Public Schools, Maritera Rojas, who's here with us, who we're honored and blessed to have her representing the city beautiful. Thank you for your leadership and your commitment. You go above and beyond, and we're blessed to have you serving us. Thank you. If you haven't had a chance to meet, with the chairwoman. She meets here in the city on a daily basis with constituents and with parents. Please reach out to her. She's incredibly available and always interested in hearing your ideas and how we can continue to collaborate between the city and the school board. Thank you for being here. I'd like to, like I said before, welcome everyone here. It's a good morning. It's a blessed morning here in the city. Beautiful. And to start us off this morning, We have our senior pastor, Bill White, from Christ Journey Church. Good morning and welcome to the city, beautiful.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, esteemed commissioners and community leaders, what a privilege to be with you today. For just a 60-second history moment, if I could, celebrating our city together, 100 years ago, Mr. Merrick was inviting us to be one of the first five churches in the city beautiful. He sold us our first plot of land for $1 and then gave us the funds on which to build a temporary tabernacle structure right across the street from the Cardboard College of UM. Then after the devastating hurricane of 26 blew it down, he let us meet in the dining room of the Biltmore Hotel and then in the country club of Coral Gables, and then by the canal on the UM campus. Then we purchased another piece of his property on Ponce de Leon and built an office building to meet in a building that we would later sell the proceeds for and then buy the place on Segovia and Riviera where we've met from 1949 until now. Now if you're wondering why am I telling you that, I believe it's because I think Mr. Merrick really wanted us to succeed in a time that was challenging. So from 78 members, we have now grown to over 5,000. and through the decades have been honored to serve the people of Coral Gables and our entire county. We learn from the Bible, Jeremiah 29, that God wants his people to seek the peace and the prosperity of the city to which he has carried us and then to pray to the Lord for the city because when it prospers, we will too. And I'm thinking, who knows, maybe that's why Mr. Merrick, a pastor's son himself, wanted churches in his city so we could succeed together. Whatever the case, we have been so pleased to be doing that for 10 decades now. And it is my honor and pleasure to invite God's blessing here today. Could we bow? Gracious Almighty God, We pray your peace and prosperity for this city. We thank you for the mystery and privilege of life, of sharing it with each other. We thank you for Coral Gables and that from the beginning, our lives have been woven together. We pray your blessing, your favor, your protection, your care for all of those who call Coral Gables home. all the children in our schools, the patients in our hospitals, the businesses, all the businesses in every profession that serve, that we might share community together in this place. We remember our first responders and those whose call to serve places them in harm's way. We pray for those serving here to build a brighter day for us all. And we pray for peace in our world, that we might prosper together under your gracious hand. Bless us all, that we might all be a blessing to others. We ask in your name. Amen.

Amen. Reverend, we would like to extend our best wishes to you and to your congregation. It is truly an honor, like you said, 10 decades. Looking forward to the next 10. It's an honor to have you here, and we will be celebrating your incredible, incredible church. I think it's on item A5 and looking forward to it. Thank you. Now, a personal point of privilege, Commissioner Lara, please take it away.

Thank you, Mayor. Good morning. So today we have the rare privilege and honor to have an esteemed resident of the city of Coral Gables joining us here today, Dr. Hal Silberman. and he will be leading us today in the Pledge of Allegiance. But before we ask Dr. Silberman to come up and lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance, allow me just to give you a little bit of background on this extraordinary man. As we continue this tradition at our commission meetings, the Pledge of Allegiance. It is especially meaningful this morning to recognize a member of what Tom Brokaw famously called the greatest generation, Americans whose courage, sacrifice, and sense of duty helped preserve freedom around the world and shape the nation we know today. Today, we are deeply honored to welcome Dr. Hal Silberman, a World War II veteran, long-term Coral Gables resident, and someone who is truly part of the fabric of our city. Remarkably, Dr. Silberman recently celebrated his 101st birthday. the very same age as the city of Coral Gables itself. Both were born in 1925, and both continue to represent resilience, strength, and enduring spirit. Dr. Silberman, before we continue, would you mind coming to the podium so everyone can see you? We can all celebrate you.

You'll have to excuse me, but I have impaired hearing. So would you like me to pledge allegiance?

Not yet. I'm almost done celebrating all the things that you've done in a couple of seconds. We'll ask you to read it. But I'll raise my voice because I really want you, above all else, to hear what I have to say. I hear you now. Very good. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Dr. Silberman served in the United States Army during World War II and was assigned to the Pacific Theater, where he served in the Philippines and later occupied Japan following the war. During his service, he worked as a medical technician, helping care for wounded soldiers returning from combat. He has said that serving his country during that defining moment in history was one of the greatest honors in his life. As Memorial Day approaches, we are reminded of the extraordinary sacrifices made by the members of Dr. Silverman's generation, men and women who answered the call to defend freedom during one of the most consequential moments in world history. Their courage and selflessness secured liberties that we continue to cherish today. Even at 101 years old, Dr. Silverman continues to lead a life of service and community involvement here in Coral Gables, inspiring all of us with his patriotism, humility, and extraordinary life story. We found his story so compelling.