Planning & Zoning - Regular Meeting

Here. Here.

Yes, staff has a clarification on item 7D. The request, we wrote it as a garage conversion. It is a garage conversion, but it's also a 1,500 square foot overall single family home addition. So that's the only. Item 7D, RSP 2549.

Is there any desire or part of anyone's attendance to make a public comment?

Thank you.

Minutes for the June 26, 25 meetings.

Yeah, I have one kind of overall correction. A barrel tile, it's misspelled. It says barrow throughout the entire. Not one place. You're very consistent. That's good. It is a word. It wouldn't come up in spellcheck, I don't think.

Motion to approve minutes as edited.

Second.

Second.

All in favor say aye. Aye.

Please be advised that the following items on the board's agenda are quasi-judicial in nature. If you wish to comment upon these items, please indicate the item number you would like to address when the announcement regarding the quasi-judicial item is made. An opportunity for persons to speak on each item will be made available after the applicant and staff have made their presentations on each item. Swearing in, all testimony, including public testimony and evidence, will be made under oath or affirmation. In accordance with Section 2-100 of the Village Code, any lobbyists must register before addressing the board or any of the following items. Board members must disclose any ex parte communications concerning any items on the agenda pursuant to Section 2-86 of the Village Code. Board member disclosures at this time, if there are any?

Any board member disclosures?

No.

There are none.

Okay, so the board clerk will swear on any persons who wishes to testify on any of the quasi-judicial items.

Thank you, sir. This is item 7A on your agenda, 54 Northwest 107th Street. The law is approximately 9,225 square feet in size, contains a one-story single-family dwelling originally built in 1947. The existing structure has a living area of 1,420 square feet. It's configured with two bedrooms, bathroom and a one-car garage the applicant seeks to demolish portions of the existing structure while utilizing the building's existing foundation and proposing a 478 square foot single-story addition a 230 square foot garage conversion and an overall interior reconfiguration of the residence and a facade modification and new roofing system. The total household area indicates 1,898 square feet of under AC square footage and will consist of three bedrooms, three bathrooms, a home office and a covered patio. Staff has confirmed that the R15 zoning district is compatible with the single family future land use We've measured the site plan against the 20 different zoning criteria as found within your village zoning code and found that it generally complies with the regulations and therefore we're recommending approval along with all of the stipulated conditions as found in your report. Thank you, sir.

Any questions for the planning director?

Just a quick one. Eddie, I'm assuming this one came in prior to the conversation we had last meeting about sets needing to be a little bit more appropriate for planning and zoning? Yes, this was already in the queue. Okay, fair enough.

Okay. Would the requester like to present?

I'm representing the...

Please identify yourself, your name and address.

My name is Steve D'Agostino. I'm representing the address, 54 Northwest 107th Street, Miami Shores. I'm speaking on behalf of the owners, Deb, Zena, and Jessica Sheeler. We went through this project. They had issues with, like you mentioned, there's only one bathroom. And at the end of the day, they wanted to go through a design to have what they felt is more their dream home to kind of give more space for their living quarters. As you can see, their intention here is to add a master addition off the rear of the existing structure, add a covered patio so they can sit in the shade by the pool, and incorporate the western garage into the dwelling. The only other exterior changes to that is we're going to be relocating some of their equipment, their air compressor, their air condenser closer to the house because it doesn't comply with the setback. We're going to be moving their entry walkway to the new covered patio, which is a little more leftward from its existing place. And initially, we were trying to get a two-car parking space there on the western side, but it wouldn't fit with the 10-foot setbacks. So after going back and forth with the owners, as well as being assisted by planning and zoning, we elected to do two single-car parking spaces on either side.

Any question for the presenter?

Yeah, I have a question. Where the second driveway is, there's a hump in the road right there?

Correct.

So you're going to have to kind of negotiate that?

Yeah, they were fine dealing with that in the interim, but we were going to come and ask if that could be relocated in the future. Since it isn't a hard-built asphalt speed bump, it is something that can be unpinned and relocated. And the only other addition is... to that is there is that speed bump sign as well that would have to be relocated with it.

Right, there's a sign there as well.

So on that, the two parking spaces, why couldn't both of them be located on the east side of the property?

They both could have been put on the east side, and I did propose that, but the owners elected that this was their preference.

Eddie, is two drives, do we allow two driveway structures?

The code doesn't discourage two driveways.

Any other questions?

Yeah, the only other question I had is, did I see that there was already a P&Z approval from the 2021? Did I get that right?

I think you're referring to the stamp that was on the survey and I believe that survey was submitted when they did a pool renovation and it was within the time frame that we could reuse it so we did.

I don't have any other questions.

Do I hear a motion? Any comments from the audience regarding this application? If there are no comments, comments closed.

Do I hear a motion to approve a staff comments?

I'll second.

All in favor say aye. Aye. Lakeside opposed? Passes unanimously.

Thank you.

7b RSP 2541 890 North East 98th Street item 7b on your agenda. The law is approximately 20,576 square feet in size. It contains a single-story single-family dwelling originally built in 1938. The existing structure has a living area of 2,155 square feet. It's configured with a two-car garage, three bedrooms, and three bathrooms. The applicant proposes a two-story addition of an approximately 5,510 overall square feet with full interior reconfiguration, which results in a new total habitable area of 7,665 total square feet for the residents. The site plan proposes to match the same architectural style and roof material for the home. In total, six bedrooms, six and a half bathrooms, a three-car garage, and swimming pool with exterior deck and terrace areas will be provided. The R20 zoning district is compatible with the single family future land use and staff has generally found that the site plan meets the 23 different zoning criteria as found within the village code and therefore we're recommending approval along with all of these stipulated conditions as found in your report. Thank you.

Any questions for the planning director? Would the applicant like to make a presentation?

Good evening.

My name is Kenneth. I'm an architect. I'm representing 890 Northeast 98th Street and the owners, Michelle and Andrew Lenahan, who are here this evening. As mentioned, the lot... The existing lot is 20,576 square feet. And I think if we can skip ahead to the photos of the existing property, I think the defining feature of this property is an existing masonry screen wall. I think we'll make our way down there. That's got a combination of clay brick and patina iron work features and details. And that was, and I think go, here we are. Maybe the next, if you can zoom in on the second image there. So just a really fabulous masonry screen wall with details, various points of ironwork features, and really the driving point for the design. We really tried to work with the accesses of these walls to lay out the house on the property, almost like that the wall itself sort of told you that there was an estate coming at some point. And then also, as mentioned, the existing house is 1938. It's 2,155 square feet, very nicely detailed. And its defining feature is a vaulted living room space, which would be retained with exposed beams and tongue and groove plank decking. If we go back to the plan, you'll see that we're actually I think we can stop here on the floor plan, right here. This is the existing house here and the new house in the black crochet walls. One interesting feature is we'll be creating a breezeway between the existing and the new, and that's really a part of the design. the design intent. I think we, you know, embracing not just the Mediterranean and Spanish styles, but embracing the spatialness of them, arch arcades, terraces, a lot of sight lines through the property. I think that the volumes and the spaces will be consistent with other historic homes in the neighborhood. You know, very careful placement of fenestration when we, I guess we can advance to the elevations. Very careful placement of the fenestration, similar to some of the other historic properties in the Shores, the two story volumes. Some other specific notes, we've got good street trees in the parkway. We're going to be adding two trees to do a consistent shaded parkway. Many of the trees on the site are palms and they would be either relocated or replaced for the new design. We have several locations. I guess if we go back to the site plan, I think, which is maybe three or four sheets ahead of this. Oh, two. There we go. Several locations where we'd actually infill the masonry screen wall with the application. So we've got the northeast corner here at the intersection of 98th and 9th Avenue. We're going to retain the area where the existing septic is. We will be putting in a new ATU system. So the application has us completing the corner there with the masonry screen wall. The existing garage is here, and that's where the new garage will be. We have an additional bay to that garage, which is like garage storage, but only the driveway would access the two existing bays. And then that little section where there's an existing pump house right now, this would be the other area here on the other side of the driveway where we would be asking for a replacement of the masonry screen wall. Then we've got, with the termination of the new wall under the application, we'd also be duplicating some of the curved masonry screen wall features and creating a new entrance that aligns with the design. And then the other thing to note that's great about the masonry screen wall We have all the mechanical equipment situated on the south elevation, and that wall is at about five and a half feet high, so fully screened. Several new, some other items to note, several new chimneys, an outdoor fireplace, an indoor fireplace. We have a wood oven and a little barbecue area that terminates on that gable end with an exterior staircase. And the materials proposed for the new additions would be similar to the existing clay, iron work. The window and door metal would be something we're looking at manufacturers that offer like a pastel color that would be similar to some of the other historic properties. And I think that's about it.

Thank you. Thank you. Any questions from the board?

First, I think the design is wonderful. Thank you. Can you talk to us about the setbacks?

The existing garage setback on the south elevation is at 15 feet, and we would be maintaining that with primarily the two-story volume that would be situated along the alley.

Is that the front of the house?

This is the back of the house on the alley. The front of the house, the existing house is here, which has an existing 25-foot setback, which would be maintained in a one-story volume that's added along that north elevation. There is an additional setback for the second story. I think maybe if we go to the second floor plan, that might help to tell the story. Right there. So on the second floor, there's an additional, I think it's 7.88 feet setback to where the second story begins. And then this is the one story volume that's got the existing setback. And then I think you're up to 40 feet for the veranda that would be the east.

I've noticed that the second floor has a set of doors leading out to an elevated terrace. Are those doors desirable, very desirable by the owner? And the reason why I ask is we've adopted kind of a disposition where we're trying to avoid having elevated terraces that could be used for congregations, a public congregation. And we've made other applicants. notably on smaller lots that are facing side yards. This one's a little different, but we've made other applicants remove doors that access these elevated terraces. That would be the only thing that is of concern, I think, to us, or to me, rather, just for the point of consistency.

So I think on the east elevation, we have essentially what's a catwalk. And then on the interior where I think you're speaking of where we have the doors, this is a terrace that's really positioned over the courtyard, and it's very internal to the house.

And then this second story piece, that's really what's presenting itself to the street. And then if we go back to the elevations, you'll see that on either side,

We do have an ornamental masonry screen that kind of, here we are.

It's the stairs leading out of, it's the doors leading out of the stair landing that leads to the hallway that is immediately adjacent to bedrooms three and four. If we go back to the plan, page A1.3. You have doors that lead out from the master bedroom and then you have doors that lead out from essentially a common area which is a stair landing.

Correct, right here.

No, the master bedroom is fine. It's the doors that lead out from that stair, the stair landing.

So those lead out to that. This is the four-foot arcade, but they do provide access to the second level terrace that's essentially looking over the pool, which is the intent of it, but definitely internalized with the courtyard of the house.

And how would you feel about removing those doors?

Removing the doors at the top of the stair landing, I don't think that would be an issue. I don't think that would be an issue.

Okay, great. Otherwise, I think that the design is wonderful. I commend you on the work and the attention to detail and your sensibility to the existing site and trying to find inspiration and how to contextualize the design with the neighborhood as well. I think you've done a great job. Thanks. Thank you very much.

Any other questions for the applicant?

No, I just wanted to add that I'm very happy to see that you kept most of the existing wall there, a lot of charm and character. And I think you did a great job of putting that all together with your addition.

Thank you.

Any public comment on this application? Yes, please. Identify yourself and your address, please.

So my name is Nicola Meyer. We are the neighbors right next door, 860 Northeast 98th Street, and I just wanted to second what Mr. Spirk just said. When we saw the plans, we were very excited about what you guys are doing to this house. We live next door since 15 years, so we saw this house over all these many years, and We were always kind of thinking about how much potential this lot has, and we were even thinking, I wish we could buy it one time. So yeah, we also very much appreciate what will be done to this house. It's a great addition to our little pocket of Miami shores, and I commend you guys for all the details, and You know preserving this house. This was frankly our biggest concern When we when we knew that our neighbor was putting the house up for sale. We were actually We're actually fearing that somebody else would really put it down to the ground This house doesn't have any historic designation obviously and and put one of these little cubes on it or big cubes for that for that matter So yeah, we're super excited. And yeah, thank you so much guys for what you're doing to this lot and to this house. I

Thank you for your comments. Any further comments from members of the board? Do we have a motion, please?

Motion to approve with staff comments and the applicant's proffer to replace doors accessing the elevated terrace from a common area with either a fixed glass system or otherwise operable window system, such as to create or to eliminate, rather, access to an elevated terrace from a common space.

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Opposed, like sign. Unanimous vote. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Item 7C, RSP 2548.

Thank you, sir. Property address is 68 Northwest 92nd Street. The lot is approximately 7,680 square feet in size, and it contains a single story, single family home originally built in 1940. The existing structure is a living area of 1,107 square feet. It's configured with a one car garage, two bedrooms, and a bathroom. The applicant proposes an approximately 177 square foot garage conversion to accommodate a new bedroom and bathroom wing. The total interior habitable area of the home will increase to 1,284 square feet. In total, three bedrooms, two bathrooms are being provided. Staff has confirmed that the R15 zoning district is compatible with the single family future land use. We've measured the site plan and found that it generally complies with the 22 different zoning criteria as found in the village code, and therefore we're recommending approval along with all of the stipulated conditions as found within your staff report. Thank you.

Thank you, Eddie. Any questions for the director from the board?

Yes. Eddie, I'm taking a look at the existing driveway. And I think that when we wind up eliminating the garage, we might have a non-compliant condition. And I want to just get your take on that. As I read it, we'll wind up with a driveway that's 31 foot 6 inches long by 6 foot 11 wide. My understanding is that those dimensions don't satisfy the requirements for two parking spaces on site. But perhaps I'm wrong. And I'm looking at page A-1.

I think when we assessed it, given the depth of the driveway being at 31 feet, we naturally assumed that there were going to be stacked vehicles, so two vehicles stacked within the driveway.

And I think that our code follows Miami-Dade County code, if I'm correct, requiring an 8-foot by 18-foot parking space, which would mean that that length would need to be 36 feet.

It's possible.

I don't have the

Find it here on the code. I think you're correct. Yeah, so the required driveway has to be 18 feet minimum in length, 9 by 18, correct.

Do you think that if they widen the driveway here that there would be any issue of nonconformance?

Well, they are dealing with an existing condition, right, but based on the, impervious data that they're proposing, they have the space to kind of play with it and make the two vehicles fit. Okay, thanks. Yes. That's all I have.

So what's the remedy?

I would say that the applicant would have to revise the driveway area so that they can accommodate the two vehicles, and it's going to involve increasing the driveway width to do so, and just make sure that you stay within the impervious standards.

I would imagine we could, I mean, assuming that there are no other issues, we could put that in there as a condition? I think so, yes.

Any other questions for the applicant? Any comment from the public regarding this application? If there are no comments, the comment period is closed. Board members, any further discussion? May I have a motion?

OK.

I will make a motion to approve with staff comments and the additional condition that the driveway width be increased to the minimum required to allow for two parking spaces on site.

I'll second. All in favor say aye. Aye.

Good evening and thank you.

7D, RSP 2549.

The property address is 165 Northwest 95th Street. The lot is approximately 9,225 square feet in size. It contains a one-story single-family home originally built in 1952. The existing living structure has a living area of 1,354 square feet configured with a one-car garage, two bedrooms, and two bathrooms. The applicant proposes a single story addition of approximately 1,500 square feet, a garage conversion, and overall interior reconfiguration of the existing residence. The new total habitable area for the home will indicate 2,900 square feet in size and will consist of four bedrooms, five bathrooms, a home studio, and a new swimming pool and outdoor deck area. The home renovation will propose to maintain neighborhood aesthetic while also modernizing the exterior facades of the residence. Staff has confirmed that the R15 zoning district is compatible with the single-family future land use, and we've measured the site plan and generally found that it meets the 21 different zoning criteria, and therefore we're recommending approval along with all of the stipulated conditions as found in your report.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any questions for the planning director from the board?

Good evening, members of the board. I'm the architect of record and owner of the house. This is my husband, who is the, of course, owner of the house and engineer of the project. First of all, thank you for your time. We're very happy to be here and excited to move to Miami Shores. We've always loved this village. It's a beautiful neighborhood, so we're super excited. This is a rendering of a facade that we're proposing for the home. We're basically proposing to maintain the existing house. The only thing we're doing is a bit of a resurfacing. We're changing the existing stucco. It's sort of a yellowish color, so we're proposing to change it to enough white. This is the proposed facade, but if we move to sheet A002, we can see that we're basically preserving the location of the windows, the doors, and everything. It's just, again, a bit of a resurfacing to freshen a little bit the look. We're also changing the stone on the planter on the front to the stone that you can see here proposed. the Shell Reef, and we also brought the papers that we're proposing. We're changing the material of the driveway to those papers that you can see here. Those will be the same that will be on the other driveway that we're proposing on the other side of the property. If we can jump to Sheet A002. I think it's a bit further up. Yeah, just below. A little bit below. OK. You can see that we're, again, we love the character of their neighborhood. So we're proposing to maintain the same architectural style, just freshening a little bit the materials. Then if we go to the next sheet, we can see more renderings for the rear of the home. We're proposing to maintain that very modern slash classical style while adding this bigger window so that we can take better advantage of the rear of the house and the pool that we're creating. Then if we move on to sheet, just the first floor plan so I can explain a little bit of how the, okay, that's actually perfect. You can see that the house basically ends the existing house where you have this line here. So we're keeping the same layout, everything as is, and then the addition is basically just sticking to that part of the house. Regarding landscape, we're maintaining everything that's on the property. We're only removing one avocado tree, and we're replacing it with considerably more canopy because we still have to add the street trees along the line, and we have two frontages. I believe that's it, but we are here to answer any other questions that you may have. Thank you.

Any questions for the applicant?

Yeah, I have a question. I think it was on the survey. Yeah, it says Northwest First Court, Northwest Second Court. It's Northwest.

It's on the first.

It's on first, right? Correct. Okay. You may have to get that. You may have to get that corrected before you.

No, thank you.

Just for your final. Why is it called Gamma House?

Because his last name is Gannon. My last name is Magdaleno, so it's Gamma.

Nice.

We actually have a dog and her name is Chippy Throopy. So if you see my Revit file on the computer, it says Chippy Throopy House. But we thought this might be a little bit more serious.

No, I think it was very nicely done. I think you've kept it in scale. And you've utilized that lot. It's hard to be on 95th Street, but I think you did a great job of turning the corner and being very contextual and to scale with the neighborhood. Thank you. It's a nice job.

Thank you. I appreciate it.

I echo my colleague's sentiments in terms of the design and the attention you've put into it. I only have one concern. I noticed on your roof plan on page A103 and then also probably better seen on your section A300, you have converging roof slopes between the existing and the new. And I'm wondering what your plan is to drain those things.

I'm the structural engineer of the house.

Okay, there's a lot of water going into what assumingly will be a gutter, except you're showing what looks to be some sort of a beam element that's separating the two.

My idea is going to be to create an upturn beam on top of the existing beam. Obviously, all the overhangs on the existing have to come out. What we're going to create is going to be basically the new beam and the new overhang over here, creating a cricket in between just to get water from the side of everything that we have in the component.

Correct, so I understand your question, and you're right, because in the drawing it just shows the slopes of the roof, but the idea is to have a cricket on the middle that splits basically towards the east and the west, and then towards the west we have a gutter that captures the water that will still be maintained all around the roof, and then towards the west we have the flat roof for the new parking space, so that will also have the drain. So basically the water that will be coming on from that new roof to the old one will be diverted by the crickets.

I think it's a challenging detail. I don't think that's going to work, but your alternatives, I guess, are to do a little bit of a flat roof there, which, you know. What my concern, my kind of follow-on concern would be is that the roof line winds up gaining height. Which means that it comes back to us. So just trying to avoid that from happening Otherwise, I mean it's not a reason for me not to vote to to go forward with it It's just something that I think guys should be aware of.

No, thank you.

Thank you for comment Any other questions for the applicant Open public hearing on this application But he has a comment want to make a statement I Okay, thank you very much for your presentation.

No, thank you.

Any further comments, concerns, or discussions from members of the board? Being none, could I have a motion, please?

Yeah, I'd like to make a motion to approve per staff's recommendations. Second.

Including any conditions imposed by the report?

Yes, by the staff's recommendations.

You have to do that one.

All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Passes unanimously. Thank you, everyone.

Thank you so much for your time. Have a good night.

Goodbye, everyone. Thank you. Thank you. 7E, RSP 2550.

Yes, sir. Property address is 57 Northeast 93rd Street. The lot is approximately 9,600 square feet in size. It contains a single story, single family home originally built in 1939. The existing structure is a living area of 2,420 square feet. It's configured with three bedrooms, two bathrooms, a laundry room, and a playroom. The applicant proposes a facade modification and an overall addition of approximately 745 square feet to the existing one story home. combined with an interior reconfiguration of the residence. The new total habitable area will indicate 3,165 square feet of under AC square footage and shall consist of four bedrooms, three bathrooms, and a relocation of the main entry, thus creating a new foyer. Staff has confirmed that the R20 zoning district is compatible with the single family future land use and we've measured the 20 different zoning criteria and found that it generally complies with the proposed site plan and therefore we're recommending approval along with all of these stipulated conditions as found in your report. Thank you.

Any questions for the planning director? Any questions from plan deck? Mr. Bruce, the table is yours.

This is a pretty straightforward project. Additions in the rear. There's some interior renovation. We're keeping very similar scale when it comes to what we're adding in the back. We're actually not gonna have four bedrooms. We are playing the name game, so one room is gonna be called a den. We're not touching the septic system because of that. We should be okay with DOH. The septic system stays the same in the front. We are only relocating the door when it comes to facade modification. We're basically relocating the door from a very difficult approach to a more applicable central approach to the house. But the elevation of the house stays pretty much 99.9% the same. Everything else also stays the same. Pool stays the same, everything else.

Any questions for the applicant?

Yeah, I have a question. Very well done. Very nice as far as the scale, keeping with the neighborhood and everything. When you take that front stoop out, what are they going to use that? You're going to face now your front door to the street, which is nice. I went by the property to See, the fence or the wall there is going to stay, correct?

Yes. The present stoop is covered. You can't see. Right. The structure in front of it stays. When the door moves into what we call now the playroom, what I'm proposing is just cutting a hole into that wall and just giving it a little bit more view. But it ends up being just an exterior space. It's not going to be included in the habitable area for the house.

Okay. Yeah, I like the fact that you're now facing the street. It makes it very easy. I know if I had come up to this house, I would have gone, okay, which way do I go?

I did the same thing the first time I went to visit them. I was trying to, where's the door?

Where's the door? Nice job.

Any additional questions for the applicant?

Just comment. Again, nicely done. Echo my colleague's comments. I live three houses away from this, so we're welcoming the addition to the neighborhood. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Now open for public comment. Any comment on this application from those here? Close public comment. Any additional questions or comments or discussion for members of the board? Hearing none, do I hear a motion?

I'll make a motion to approve subject to staff's conditions.

Do I have a second?

Second.

All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, none. Next sign. Thank you very much. Passions, unanimously. 8A, R, S, P, 25, 24.

Thank you, sir. So just a brief explanation. On this item, the original approval was before you two months ago. And the reason it was placed under discussion and possible action item is because What they're seeking now does not modify the existing site plan in the sense that it's a change in what was originally approved. And when you look at the village schedule values, in order to assess a fee, it's either new construction, single family addition, a garage conversion and their request is not really, it didn't fit or align with any of those requests. What they're seeking, which was placed upon them, was a condition and what they would like to do is have that discussion with the board, present their findings and see if the board decides to take action on the item. So I'll briefly, I wanted to, explain why it was set up that way. And then I'll just introduce it very briefly and I'll turn it over to the property owners and the board. On May 22nd, 2025, the Planning and Zoning Board approved development order RSP 25-24 for the construction of a 1,215 square foot home addition to an existing single family residence. It also included a 575 square foot covered outdoor terrace area. In total, four bedrooms, five and a half bathrooms, and a one car garage being provided. The development order was conditioned upon approval whereby the applicant proffered to revise landscape sheet L1 and keep and or relocate specimen tree number 20, oak tree. The applicant has since obtained relevant findings, including but not limited to a certified arborist report for the tree, and is now seeking that the board consider amending the condition of approval to permit a tree mitigation plan consistent with Miami-Dade County Chapter 18A.

CHRIS RODGERS. Any questions for the clear book we want to look at? Please.

Don't I have an audience? Hi.

State your name and address, please.

Sure. Ekaterina Tarachenko, resident at 465 Northeast 102nd Street. I also go by Kat. Makes life a lot easier. So I, unfortunately, was not able to be here in May. It was my husband and our architect, who neither of them can be here today for... work and personal reasons. I was actually going to have our arborist who ultimately actually did the report in a tree come, but he had a death in the family, so he couldn't come. So you get the very inexperienced version of whatever people have told me. So I want to open up with saying that we are all on the same page. We love Miami Shores. We chose to live here because we love the greenery, we love the character, we love the nature of the family. I love the fact that I can have my boys come home, and I say, just go outside and find your friends. You know, you don't find that in a lot of places. This is something really, really special. So we love the home. This is one of our neighbors across the street. She's actually responsible for us buying the house. Anyway, thank you for coming. So we understand about wanting to preserve the green nature, and we want the exact same thing. I absolutely don't want it to be Keystone. You know, we came here from Manhattan. I had enough of the concrete jungle, right? You know, when I see these big, giant boxes popping up, I'm like, that's not in character. So we're all after the same thing. When we walked away from this meeting, I had to do a tremendous amount of homework. So I called over 30 different people, including the company that you mentioned, who said, uh-uh, we're not doing it. I got five people to actually agree to come out, look at it. I got three people to tell me, we'll give you a quote. Two of them said, give me $1,000 before I give you a quote. And the one guy that didn't ask me for money basically wrote a liability statement of, I'm not liable for any damage that is likely to happen for the relocation of this oak. In parallel, we had an arborist come in and do the inspection of the oak. The tree is sick. And his thing is actually, guys, even if you want to do anything, I tell you to take it down. We don't want to take down the tree and not replace it. Our plan has always been to replace it with additional canopy and additional coverage. I can go into the details of the findings of the report, the quote, but basically, to make the long story short, there's only a 20% to 40% chance of success of replanting, which is Like, if you bet your money on something, those are not good odds, right? So I don't think that gets us to what we all want, which is a green Miami shores, right? I would much rather plant trees that can take. They just planted a new tree in front of our house. I'm like ecstatic. It's awesome, right? It's going to give me a little bit more shade, reduce my AC bill. It's awesome. So that's one. Two, the risk and the liability that we as individuals, because the tree relocation gentleman does not, he specifically said the liability is entirely on you on any damage that happens. So we would have to personally take on liability for this thing potentially falling. Then there is a minimum of a 20-foot radius of excavation, and the arborist actually thinks, given the mature nature of the tree and the root structure, it's more. This now encroaches into the back alleyway, and I don't know how we would deal with garbage pickup if for five to six months that thing is excavated. So it's a huge inconvenience. I don't even know how to start to get permits for something like that. And again, the person who does the tree relocation, he's all like, that's all on you. And then at the end of all of that, there's going to have to be a big crane that comes over and carries this giant tree over my house, which again, the liability is entirely mine because he doesn't want any of it, that could destroy the house that we're trying to build and then potentially not take root. Again, he assigns about 20% to 40% success rate to this Relocation and then it could fall on their house our other neighbors houses. It could hit kids that are running around It could hit cars that are driving by like this is a huge liability that I really don't want to take on and I want a green Miami Shores and on top of that there is the cost I mean, so the quote is somewhere between eighty two two hundred and seven thousand dollars and For that kind of money, I could get one of those really fancy oaks and plant it, right? We don't have that kind of money, right? There was a reason why we changed from the original plan of building a brand new house because the quotes from the GCs doubled from the time we started that project, right? We don't have endless pockets. So when I take a look at this and the research that we've done and all the findings, and again, The arborist is like, you've got to take the street down in the next two years anyway. I'm like, I'd rather take it down and have a mitigation plan that's totally in line with what the Miami-Dade County has to say and create a proper green lush garden. I sit at my desk, and I look out the little window that I have in the converted garage, and I look at it, and all I see is greenery. It makes me happy. I'm on all these horrible conference calls and people yelling, and it just takes me out of it. I love it. Right, so our goal is the same. I just wanted to make sure we go about it in a way that gives us the greatest opportunity for success.

John Aucott Any questions for the applicant? I have some. What is the mitigation plan?

So we will, I think the original plan that we had was gonna have three additional trees that we plant around the property, but we will comply with whatever calculations the Miami date at a minimum for planting the additional trees. So we would get fresh trees and plant them, and not palms.

I was here for that meeting. I thought it was kind of an interesting discussion. I do wanna complicate, complicate, I do wanna compliment you. on really the material you provided. It's extensive. It's very clear. It is both persuasive in terms of the lack of value attached to removing the tree and does build a fairly strong case. Is the tree actually sitting on the property line? Is that why it's the issue with the alleyway?

It's very close to the property line in the back. It is actually encroaching on our existing driveway. It has grown through the metal fence that we have. So one of the biggest concerns that John Allred, who is the arborist, has, he's like, guys, when you take that metal out of that tree, you already have termite damage inside. Like, there's no way to stop the critters from coming in.

Do you have any idea how old the tree is?

Hold on. I think he had it somewhere. I don't remember seeing that, but... No, he doesn't say how old, but he says, in his own words, it's a very unremarkable oak. There's much more special ones. But no, we don't know.

That's an eye of the beholder kind of a comment.

I think for me the key was 35% health rating and all the photographs of the deteriorating conditions. These are things that are not easily seen as we do a drive-by through the alley. I feel the same way that you do. I think that the work that you've done is commendable. I thank you for that. We do need to make sure that we're trying to protect as much as we can, but I think you've made a good case, at least from my perspective. And the mitigation plan is L-0.02. While it was possible to design the house, and Miami-Dade County would say that there's an alternative, but I think that the fact that that tree's in such poor health is for, at least from my perspective, is all the justification that I needed in order to be able to vote in the affirmative.

Thank you.

Any other comments from members of the board? Any public comment on the item before the board?

Your name and address. My name is Olga Ramos. I am the owner of 444 Northeast 102nd Street. I, too, bought a older home with a lot of charm that also had a lot of, there's a lot that needed to be done. Anyway, so I can appreciate what she's about to embark on. We also, I believe so passionately about this subject that I actually did all native plants. in both the front and back because, as we know, we need to mitigate as much as possible what's happening with the water rising and everything. And I know that she loves my yard because she's told me. But anyway, but I also agree that, I mean, it's beautiful. The tree's beautiful when you look at it, but when you get really close, you realize that it's so big. And it is, it's on her fence and it's almost like, you can see where the roots are about to go into the back part. And I just, when she told me that the request was to move it, I thought, how? How? It just seemed impossible. To the extent that I can offer that, I know that her and her husband are very dedicated to Miami Shores. They love it. I convinced them to buy the house on July 4 during a celebration. So yes, I can 100%. And I know that all the neighbors, by the way, talked about the tree. And I know all the neighbors also agree that it would be best to be just remote.

Thank you for your comments. Any further questions for the applicant? Now, exactly what do we want to, what were we approving?

Motion to remove the condition. Absolutely.

The motion would be a motion to release condition number one. Motion to release condition number one.

Is there a second?

I'll second.

All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Those like sign. Passes unanimously. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Before we adjourn, I don't know, is there a section I didn't see on the agenda that we had some staff, board member comments? Is there a section in there that said board member comments this time?

Board member comments, item nine.

The village has its own arborist, right?

I have been instructed that yes, there is an arborist on staff.

I think that that arborist report was pretty thorough and had an enormous number of photographs that really did a good job of pointing out the deficiencies of the tree. But I wonder if we could make it a policy as we move forward to utilize the village arborists a little bit more thoroughly in some of these reviews. In Fort Lauderdale and in Miami Beach and in Coral Gables they have very similar policies whereby if you are looking to mitigate specimen tree you have to have your own arborist produce a report demonstrating the rationale for that mitigation and then in the case of us it would be our village arborist and in the other referenced examples I gave you there are various cities. The city arborist or in our case the village arborist would have to validate that arborist report. Could we make a policy where when we have an application come before us, that has a native specimen scheduled to be removed, that we already ask them for an arborist's report validating the rationale for the removal and have our village arborist validate that arborist's report prior to it coming to us. That would prevent these kinds of things from happening where they've been delayed for two months because we have the best of intentions in trying to preserve the canopy, when we have that information, it's really clear there was no valid rationale to relocate that tree. We just didn't have the proper tools at our disposal to make that decision. So I'm wondering if that's something that is doable.

I think to answer your question, Theoretically, yes. It would involve obviously putting teeth to it, so having the code amended in order to outline a process for that to take place. But then on second hand, it would also involve staff speaking with and coordinating with the Public Works Department What's this gentleman's, you know, time frame? What's his availability? Like, is it going to fit in? You know, we would have to work out those logistics. And if that's how that would work out, how would that, would it be feasible?

Can we ask you to do that, to check out that?

We can get that out, yeah.

Because the truth is there hadn't really been that many that have come before us. There happened to be a few. at that same hearing two months ago, but that was the oddball. There aren't that many that come through where their specimen tree is being removed.

I think the difficult thing, now that I'm starting to think about it, is what would be the trigger, right? Like how, like, because I guess what we're saying is would every single RSP request have to go for this review? So how does the staff determine when it's appropriate?

John Aucott When you look at the disposition plan, and it calls for a specimen tree to be removed, and the specimen tree is defined as a trunk caliber above a certain number of inches, I think it's 20. That would be the trigger. And like I said, there aren't many of those that are happening. I do have one more thing to follow up on, too. The other thing would be whether or not the motion, the demolition protection, whether that was put on the agenda for council. I don't believe it was, but maybe I'm mistaken.

Yes, it was. But there was, I don't know if there was a miscommunication or something, but because no one was there to present it, council deferred it to September.

Okay, so it will be in September, and I think I was the person that was supposed to show up to present it. I just didn't realize it was on the agenda.

Yeah, it was on there, yeah.

Okay, all right, I'll make a note.

John is going to make his report in September, or he did?

I'm not aware whether or not he did.

I mean, I saw that. Any other questions, concerns, things to bring to them? Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, guys. Great meeting.

Motion to adjourn.

Motion. Second. Aye.

Dan has record time.

Dan, we're electing you chair.