Planning and Zoning Meeting - Regular Meeting

was that your compter thef was for so and I and I I was telling like how it went to me as a PowerPoint and how it went to someone convered that always that's why and slides oh so so you did send St so you did so you did send it to them as a PDF I do right so she forward the PDF to me next time I just to go don't any right before what happened for for my bonus she had uploaded the whole PowerPoint which had a whole bunch of old slides hey how are you you look the same how come you never R you don't what's up with you and there was something that caught your eye abely which thing okay oh no no no no no oh oh oh this no no no you know it it's it's like I saw it on the agenda

and I said it's like a bad Penny it's like a bad the e e

e e e e

e e e e

e e e e yeah is this a coincidence or

what e e e e

father was the first pediatrician the state of a specialty and then on top of that you know he's we you know ever since he retired e e this is a very small town doing great she's in Austin Texas really why do they I I always question I tell I asked my wife what did we do that all our children move away from us instead of I I know I I know families that kids have moved but the house across the street from them to be

that close to them my wife we ended up buying a house very near ours a long time was a rent you rent and we rented it and then another one comes up and we bought that one and so I'm thinking this one's great we can sell this one real fast put down some debt and all she goes no we have two2 [Laughter] and they're never going to be able to buy a house like so why am I buying their house exactly exactly that seems to be a very popular thing seems to be a very popular thing I think so I think because my my mother-in-law lived on bird Ro and you moved to man last time 25 years ago and my father-in-law passed not long after we and my wife says her next door so she had me go over and say hey if you ever want to and then she we that's how I got are you Abby I'm Robert ab's not here today oh he's not here and what about you he's not here

either recording in progress good evening Let's uh let's uh let's get going let's call this order uh this meeting to order uh please silence all your phones and um as our chairperson would say beepers if you still have some um good evening this board is comprised of seven members four members of the board should constitute a Corum an affirmative vote of four members should be necessary for the adoption of any motion if only four members of the board are present the applicant May request and be entitled to a continuance to the next regular schedule meeting of the board if the matters continue due to lack of quum the chairperson of Secretary of the board May set a special meeting to consider such matter in the event that four votes are not obtained an applicant except in the case of a comprehensive plan Amendment May request a continuous or allow the application to proceed to the city commission without a recommendation pursuant to resolution number 2021 d118 the city of cor Gables has returned to traditional inperson meeting however the planning zoning board has established the ability for the public to provide comment 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 be Valu lob is registration and disclosure any person who acts as a lobbyist must register with a city clerk as required

to pursu to the city code as as Vice chair I now officially call the city of Cora's planning zoning board meeting of February 12 2025 to order the time is 607 Jill could you please call the roll Julio Gabriel here zinski here Felix Paro here Javier Salman here chip Withers uh requested to be excused AB instead also requested to be excused Robert beart here should we as okay we'll come back to that notice regarding expert communication please be advised that the board is a qualifi Judicial board which requires board member to disclose all expert communication and side visits an expert communication is defined as a contact communication conversation correspondent memorandum all written verbal communication that takes place outside of the public hearing between member of the public and a member of the board regarding mark matters to be heard by the board if anyone made any contact with a board member regarding an issue before the board the the board member must State on the record the existent of the exper commmunication and the party who originated the compensation also if a board member conducted a side visit specifically related to the case be before the board the board member must also disclose such visit in either case the board member must stay on under the record whether the experted communication and or side visit will affect the board members ability to impartially consider the evidence to be presented regarding the matter the board member should also state that his or her decision will be

based on substantial competent evidence and testimony presented on the records today does any board member have such communication or side visit to disclose at this time no no okay s anyone who speaks this evening must complete the must complete the roster on the podium we ask that you print clearly so the official records of your name and address will be correct now with the exception of attorney all person physically in this chamber who would like to speak on an agenda item before us this evening please rise to be sworn in thank you zoom platform participants I will ask any person wishing to speak on tonight's agenda item to please be to open up your chat and send a direct message to Jo Menendez stating you would like to speak before the board and include your full name Jill will call you when it's your turn I ask to be concise for the interest of time the form platform participant after the zoom platform participants are done I will ask the form participant to comment on tonight's agenda as well I will also ask to be concise for the interest of time now I will ask for the approvals of the meeting for January 15 2025 I move second Jill please call a r Su calinski yes Felix Paro yes Javier

Salman yes Julio Gabriel yes a Robert Bear yes procedure that we will use tonight we will first identify identification of the agenda item by Mr clier will be the next will be the presentation by applicant or agent then Will Follow by the presentation by staff we will open for public comments in the chamber Zoom platform phone platform I will close the public comments we will bring it to the board for discussion at that time we would consider a motion discussion and a second of the motion and finally we would do the U the the final comments and the voting by the board with that in mind Mr CER could you please start the agenda Mr chair uh prior to commencing today's agenda do we need to take any action in the form of a vote to excuse our fellow board members I think that's that would probably be a good idea anybody wants to make a motion for excuse for Mr the two board members Mr Withers and uh Mr eisenstein I will make that motion to please excuse them could you repeat that I couldn't hear it a motion to excuse Mr Withers and Mr Eis St from today's meeting so move we have a we have motion a second you can do it by Voice vote all in favor I I all oppose passes item E1 an ordinance of the city commission granting conditional use for building site determination approval pursuant to zoning code article 14 process section 14- 202.5 building site determination and section 14 -203 conditional uses to separate two single family building sites on the

property Zone single family residential sfr district legally described as Lots 11 12 13 and 14 block 1 1 N Riviera section number 10 5810 majori Coral Gables Florida one building site consisting of lots 11 and 12 the North Parcel and the other one building site consisting of lots 13 and 14 South parcel including required conditions providing for repealer provision cability clause and providing for an effective date item E1 public hearing okay before before we let the applicant start um in an abundance of cautions I'm will recuse myself from this item the applicant is not my client the father is my client so in and and so there's no perception of any potential conflict I will recuse myself from the item I will come back after the item but I want to stay for the record the AppLink is not my client I don't get compensated by the applicant I work for the father so I don't want any misunderstanding by anybody and I don't want anybody to put on record something that's different that's the facts so at this time I will recuse myself I will have to pass the Goble to somebody Mr samon will you want to take care of it sure and I'll come back Mr CER do we still have Quorum we do four people constitute a quorum however as you know the rules are that it there's a minimum of four votes

for a recommendation either for approval or denial otherwise it goes without a recommendation to the Mr Shan should have picked another chair yes also everybody that sit there fun I was going to pass it to you but that's okay um do we not have to offer the applicant the chance to uh to defer this item until we have more members well that that under the rules the he does have the option if he chooses to to defer the item to another day for another meeting if he if he so wants to at his option at no cost to the applicant that's what the rules say I'm not aware of the cost but why don't we just uh we're setting the date now do we have to what's the situation on the notice well first of all why don't we see if he wants to defer I would suggest that we ask the applicant his uh his desires with regards to this matter please know that we only have four members able to vote for your item you would require unanimous approval for passage uh it is up to you as to whether or not you wish to defer this item until we have more of a full bark hello uh Mr City attorney can you also as a point of clarification um describe the process of continuance without the board's recommendation and going straight to City commission did you read your name into the record by any chance Eddie Baker 1450 brookl Avenue Miami Florida 33131 only well this is what the rules say if only four members of the board

are President an applicant May request and entitled to a continuance to the next reg regularly scheduled meeting of the board if a matter is continued due to a lack of Quorum the chairperson or Secretary of the board May set a special meeting consider such matter in the event that four votes are not obtained an acent May request the continuance or allow the application proceed to the city commission without a recommendation well first there that only would occur if four votes are not obtained then you can allow for a continuance and then it would be heard or it goes to the city commission with uh without a recommendation understood thank you uh so we'll continue thank you okay you will continue as and you will proceed with this or you going to ask for a continuance to to the next available Mee not a continuance oh he wishes to proceed did you say that for the record please that you wish to proceed I wish to proceed all right thank you because we've been talking about continuances and it's very confusing am ambiguity right that's the trademark of a lawyer right um I I believe am I able to share I think I have the option but uh I don't know that it's coming up cgtv can you please allow him to okay there you go there we go so thank you board members uh as you recall we were before you uh previously

and and this presentation was uh largely the same I won't uh go into to great detail but rather just highlight the changes since the last time we were before you um by way of background we were at uh City Commission in January um shortly before the meeting we obtained a uh structural report from an engineer that evaluated the current condition of the existing home on the property the opinion of the engineer was that there was extensive repairs the costs of which would surpass the value that repairing would provide and that the better option would be a demolition so the staff had not had a full opportunity to review this report so the city commission was the of the opinion that we should allow them time to review the report come back to Planning and Zoning Board and then at some point in the future come back to the city commission so that's part of the reason Main why we're here today uh on the same matter again so um again this is a property on the west side of major of majori street it's four platted Lots just over 20,000 square feet we're looking to subdivide it into two resulting Lots 10,000 square feet each um these percentages again were shared with you all previously and our part of the record uh with respect to the requirement that the property is in within context of the neighborhood uh within 1,000 ft of this property 60% of the properties are 10,000 ft or less 79% have of 100 foot front edge or less um I will highlight here the 50 letters of support since we uh were before you

we canvas the neighborhood uh as you can see here these green stars are people that sign letters of support these are not people you know in North Gables these are people on majori Street these are people a stone throw away from this subject property and they didn't sign these letters because they were forced to right people sign letters of support because they voed their opinion they uh elect elected officials to voice those opinions and the fact that they sign these letters should hold just as much weight as a warm body that sits before you and speaks before for you um you all have seen these illustrations of the elevations again the dco property which is the the Southern and mamori to the north uh the frontages The Joint site plan the individual elevations Florida vernacular Mediterranean style again of course before the board of Architects for approval uh I'll just touch on a couple of the zoning criteria which was the highlight of our last meeting um part of the reason that the we are of the belief that the criteria can be met despite the recommendation of staff is that the this B criteria here is really our biggest obstacle at least in the views of Staff the reason being that upon approval of this subdivision you would have a existing home that straddles the property resulting property line creating obviously setback non-conformity um excuse me uh but of course there's this

language that's bolded and highlighted there that says if there's a voluntary demolition right the property owner voluntarily uh demolishes the property that is a automatic um deemed dis uh noncompliance of this criteria so the position that we are trying to explain we tried to explain the commission and we will explain to you again today is that the state of this home is not something that would be voluntarily demolished it has had natural you know be it termites or just national uh natural degradation to the point where it's a very costly Rehabilitation right so this isn't a voluntary demolition but rather one that was caused uh By Nature um Mr chairman yes I don't want to interrupt uh the presentation but just for clarification For Me Maybe for all of you you said the commission so this was remand remanded back to the planning board because I don't think that was clear in the in the in the packages we got yes it was in the description in the summary from the staff that this had been submitted to uh to the commission it had been approved is that correct it was submitted to the commission at that time there was testimony uh raised by the applicant about potential issue on whether it was voluntary or involuntary demolition the uh commission said well since uh staff hadn't seen a report yet of the applicant and had not and this was not heard by the Planning and Zoning Board there was a decision by the commission to remand it back to you for

consideration in light of this testimony and uh and then you would make a new decision on and just to make sure the only testimony is whether it was a voluntary demolition the the the additional was test there was full testimony of the application but in addition to what you all heard there was this additional testimony about they're meeting the criteria because that they contend that it's an involuntary Demolition and so that they believe that that this wouldn't not apply and the commission said well since you all haven't heard this testimony they want it brought back to you all for a decision now I think you can hear the entire application but they were they the reason why they brought it back was for you to hear this issue thanks for their claric I'm sorry for the now you can see why I wanted to find out yeah and and also just to add on to city attorney's uh statement it was also to afford staff the opportunity to review right because they only had I believe a couple days if if not less um so that was also part of the reason um so again the I'll just start with the first one which I think uh is crystal clear that we we uh meet as I noted with the percentages and and the staff also agreed with us that um the building site would have a street fundage equal to or larger than the majority of the existing homes um of course the the last criteria we do not meet but only two of three are required

um so this is the this is the snippet uh from the architectural the engineering and Architectural inspection report performed by property Consulting Group in December 10th uh I'll just highlight the bolded and underlining tax significant deferred maintenance with degradation of key building components apparent B based on the age and level of deterioration a complete Demolition and replacement is the most practical approach to result in a safe and usable structure and I'll just um note that the application which I mentioned at at the prior planning and zoning board meeting uh that was before this board and also subsequently before the city commission the property at 69 majori Street had a similar situation where it had not been maintained for quite a long time the woman who was living there was elderly and uh it just was in a very poor poor uh condition one that could not be saved and the board and the commission uh I believe the board didn't make a have a formal um recommendation given the number of votes um but nonetheless the commission did agree that the home was not something that could be saved or that was worth uh repairing uh I just wanted to touch on a couple items with respect to the definition of voluntary demolition um so this is from the zoning code any act or process of wrecking destroying or removing any building or structure or any part thereof that has not occurred as a result of any disaster right so if it is the result of a disaster then it's not a voluntary demolition disaster few references in the zoning code to provide some context

on what the definition of a disaster might mean and there's only five references four of those five references explicitly say either natural or man-made right so uh natural man-made disasters I think we all kind of understand what those are if it man-made if somebody bursts a pipe and floods a whole house that's a man-made disaster if something's natural right something like a hurricane or a tornado uh something caused by nature to be clear um so again we are of the opinion that the fact that this is that this home would not be voluntar Dem voluntarily demolished that we would not automatically be deemed as not uh satisfying that criteria and in fact you know demolition of this house would create uh no non-conformity upon approval of this uh conditional use and that's all I have to share with you I'm happy to answer any questions also if I have uh may have a few minutes for rebuttal thank you will staff be presenting to us today pres excuse me Jennifer yes yes not a for formal presentation but discussing yes so just update you what was attached to sorry Jenifer Garcia applian Z director um was attached on this item was a memo one-page memo from staff that kind of summarize what was discussed at this board um back in November was discussed in the city commission and why it was remanded back to this board to look at and part of that memo is attached the engineer report um now I am not an engineer but we do have our staff here um Mr um deputy director U for development services um Douglas ramz here he is a structural engineer and he can be able to answer any questions a board may have about the specifics of this report we did reach out as as a memo says we did reach out to the applicant to schedule

site visit for us to be able to have staff there to look at the the damages that were um talked about and discussed in that report that site visit did not happen before tonight I think it still has to be scheduled um and that's really all I have so if you have any questions about the report that's again attached to that memo we do have um our director here has has the director reviewed the report yes he has is HE capable of rendering an opinion as to what of course the validity of that report is please good afternoon Doug Ramirez acting director of development services my background is in Structural Engineering I practiced as a structural engineer since 2004 I was licensed in 2010 the State of Florida recognizes me as a structural engineer and I've written many reports similar to this one so I leave it to your judgment whether I'm qualified or not to render an opinion on the matter I read through the report uh we did uh request that the applicants grant us access to the property the report made many statements but it did not provide sufficient evidence uh quantifying the concerns that the report States I can go into detail with what it says but when I would write a report like this when I was in the private sector I would be very careful that if I was making statements about whether or not a building should or should not be demolished whether or not something was feasible I would quantify it in some way I would provide evidence in photographs as part of the report uh there is insufficient backup in this report to substantiate the conclusions that it reaches that's that's the bottom line um staff understands that sometimes report

writing can be very uh Gray and so that's why we requested that access be provided so we could see the building ourselves and see if we agreed or disagreed unfortunately uh the applicant was not able to arrange access for us before this meeting so I can't tell you definitively because I couldn't get into the building to see it with my own eyes all I can tell you is that the report as it's given to us makes statements that are not substantiated by the photographs and sufficient evidence in the report to back up the statements chairman let me I was going to ask if he could clarify because he didn't say that the you know he didn't say the report does substantiate you know one way or the other uh um he didn't I I see your point and that's exactly where I was going there go the the the summary of that report what was the conclusion if I may I can read you the paragraph please to thank conclusions the existing structure is highly aged and in deteriorated condition Rehabilitation of the building is not economically feasible due to age poor condition termite damage mold and water intrusions Code Compliance and structural issues the word the work necessary to correct the identified deficiencies and ensure a safe and Code Compliance structure is Impractical to perform such would entail cost prohibitive Replacements of primary components including Foundation floor slab framing roof exterior walls and me systems the cost for rehabilitations is prohibitive and far out ways the more practical alternative for full removal

and reconstruction okay that's pretty definitive um question has a city uh declared the building in unsafe structure no would such a determination be made upon inspection by you if we could get into the building we would be able to make a determination the photographic evidence would not support that I'm going to ask the applicant one more time do you want to defer this item or do you want to continue forward we would like to not defer okay very good um do we have any members of the public that wish to speak to on this matter yes we have okay let's let's hear their arow testimony David hartnet if I could ask that um that the videographer bring up the pictures that I has to be uploaded Mr chair uh board members my name is David hartnet I'm the attorney in fact and Son of Katherine hartnet who lives right next door I appeared before you in November regarding this matter um she lives directly west on the marmore side of that I do have a letter that I've submitted to the clerk and I have that

as well as um I have some handheld pictures that you may want to look at and pass along with you if I could approach and and if you want is that that be acceptable okay these those pictures would just go to the board members and then this letter you can just pass one out to hand them out yes that's that's fine to hand them out okay okay um while you're doing that um I I will read just a portion of the letter because it's similar but not the same as uh the one before and that is just a moment has has the applicant had an opportunity to VI these documents that you're handing out to the board do you have extra copies I can certainly I have an extra copy of thank you the the letter and I presume the applicant has since it is their pictures on the MLS listing for the rental of the property in 2024 okay just want to make sure that the applicant since we're Distributing to the board is seeing what's being distributed and and those pictures will be the ones that are on the uh that should be shown um while I'm [Music] speaking may I proceed Shar yes please okay again my name is David hartnet and Mrs hartnet lives directly Due West on 510 marmore my address my home address is 7720 Southwest 129 Street Pine Crest Florida My office address is 8900 Southwest 107th Avenue site 301 um I do spend at least one or two days uh including stayovers at the marmore property almost every week uh I am intimately familiar with the property as well since I uh moved in there when I

was two years old and my parents live there ever since um by way of background Mr Hart at Jim who passed away in 200 23 his father was mayor of cor gaes Katherine's father was mayor of Miami and he also built the Church of the profer his development company um so besides that background um we respectfully request our arguments and submittal uh to the board of Architects on the August 15 2024 meeting the Planning and Zoning Board November 14 2014 meeting and the city commission January 14 2025 meeting be incorporated in the record I believe they've been attached and are part of the public records of the city of corg already ready um it is our understanding that the reason for this matter is back here before the planning and zoning board agenda is because the applicant now claims that the property must be demolished and considered an involuntary demolition that meets the criteria for an exception under the building and Zoning code AS expressed in the staff memorandum uh that's part of the package of course this plea came at the last minute during the city of cor Gable's Commission meeting on January 14th 2015 which was after the Planning and Zoning uh staff had recommended denying the application and after the Planning and Zoning uh board this board voted 7 to zero to recommend a denial of the application in November the pictures of the property in the public domain of Zillow and multi-listing service from the 2023 listing just before the applicant bought the property for sale before the applicant's January 24 2024 purchase and the developer applicants 2024 MLS listing to rent the property for

$113,000 show that the building was in fine shape and structurally sound at least as they wanted to rent it out these pictures have been submitted for your review as well as at this meeting certainly the issues discussed in the applicants engineering evaluation of January 22nd 20 2 report which was after we had already gone to the city Commission on January 14th would most likely have been discovered by a Renly prudent prospected purchaser through the normal inspections that one would do if you're going to buy a property before they closed on the purchase in January of 2024 we agreed with the February uh 11 2025 Planning and Zoning staff report again recommending to denial of the application and request that you again vote to recommend denial of the application if they could bring up the pictures um on the thing I I'd just like to show you what the property actually looks like since the applicant for whatever reason and and staff you can just um Advance the pictures as you they are on the screen this is from the 2023 you can see the date stamp they were pulled off of Zillow this is what the property looks like just before I believe they bought it and it was part of the listing that is there um if we could Advance the pictures just a little bit quicker um that this was the condition of the property um presumably when they acquired the property uh and closed on it in January of 2024 so this is what the applicant says was structurally unsound and some sort of disaster that it needs to be torn down um that go that picture there goes

back to the back um the the back grounds on the North side which are the green space that was cultivated with a garden with various fruit trees and other things like that that's what the listing was and then I believe you're going to come in another couple of pictures to that's the oversight the white roof house is my mom's house at 510 marm more um magories to the right now this is from the ml listing it's pulled off the market but this is what they tried to rent the property for and the following pictures are from 2024 this is the MLS uh for $113,000 um the next slide will describe the property as a Charming rental available August one five-bedroom home bonus room 4,000 square ft oversized land use is a gym just moments away from the Grove South Miami Coral Gables and then these were the pictures that were posted and still in the MLS listing in the public domain and they are the same ones I believe that are there so I believe they were advertising in 2024 after they acquired the property and we can just Advance through these um this is what they held out to the public that they now claim before you and say the property is in such bad shape that it's structurally unsound and needs to be demolished so um the only other thing that I would say as it relates to um this application and the exception of which staff recommends you deny it is uh I had referenced before when I was before the

board the city of cor Gables itself took a position in 2016 related to the closer uh development and its right to defend its restrictions this property if you recall is a little more unique because it also has attached to it restrictive covenant that says you cannot subdivide the property now the commission took that out of the ordinance from the start of this application it took it out back in um I want to say July of August of 2024 as a condition that would be part of the criteria which also would be there but in the city's brief to the Third District Court of Appeal it argued and cited to the city's code which says and I heard the words of economic feasibility as to what's best as to do we have to tear it down or can we repair it or what do we do with the house that's not a disaster and part of your code that's in the City of Coral Gables specifically addresses that economics is not the only thing it is the best use of the property so when we're talking now that may be as to other development things but the point is this the code is there not because some people that live in 500 uh 5,000 sare foot houses away from it the code is there and my mother has the specific standing as the adjoining property holder even specialized more says the Third District Court of Appeal to argue against the applicant as it's traveled here which is subdivide the Lots put two four bedroom 4100 squ foot twostory homes that go corner to corner and if the staff would just there was discussion at the end of this board's meeting in November if I if the videographer would just pull up the PDF I went back and just looked there was a lot of focus that was on

maiori um and I believe commit uh board member Salon said he grew up close on that Street um I certainly know well these numbers that I'm looking at are the lots that go from basically um basically from almost us one down through Miller Road of the five blocks north of the applicant's house that they want to tear down when they say it's 50% and I know the code says a th000 square Fe square feet as to what you look at as to the criteria but there was a lot of of discussion even from board member bear the first time around about well what's the lot size on the street well I went back and looked 19 of the 21 houses from marmore directly on the north side of that property to Miller Road are greater than 10,000 square feet most of them are 125s there are some that are 18750 uh there are some that are 17 on the other side of Moore on the San vicen side there's a property that is 3/4 that's 17 half uh 177,000 plus so when we're talking about the need to subdivide this to build it into the uh the the area or whatever we still maintain that it does not satisfy that criteria even though staff says it does as to does It Blend in and be part of the true neighborhood but the the reality is this that house does not have to be torn down because it had a disaster to it it's no different than the structural repairs that go on for various properties the fact that they went out and got an expert to somehow app that there's some uh repairs that are necessary or a termite uh uh termites there that for whatever reason they didn't identify through an inspection or whatever um you see the pictures that's what they held out to the public in 2024 and we respectfully

request that you uphold the Deeds restrictive covenants you enforce the zone and uh go with staff's report and again deny the app application by unanimous vote thank you very much unless you have any questions any questions for the for the uh for Mr Harden I have a a brief question that has to do with the fabric of the neighborhood the fabric of the neighborhood based on the streets that you're talking about average over 10,000 squ feet so if you turn and go a couple more blocks or something like that then you'll see uh properties that are that are maybe less than the 10,000 square fet one of the questions I have possibly for the applicant attorney is that um a petition was signed and petitions can be sometimes deceiving can we see the wording of the petition that was uh provided to the neighbors that that you said all those people signed uh just for a point of clarification am I responding to this or is this part of my rebuttal is Mr harut finish with his presentation or should I responding to the question I well he's responding to a question from the chair I don't think it's actually his rebuttal until we finish the testimony You may wish to before he answers this question get all the testimony in and then on his rebuttal bring up this question on the

petition just for purposes of of um efficiency of time wish to do it to keep it simple I have uh no further questions from Mr Harnet or okay is there anyone else who wishes to uh speak on this matter yes Carlos Sosa hi my name is Carlos Sosa and I am a structural engineer for the last 60 years I have worked in building concrete buildings in Venezuela for 4 years and here in the United States with my son I have done remodeling of houses buying houses and remodeling them and selling them Mr chairman I apologize for the interruption but can we get his address yes I was going to get to that can we get uh your address please sir I leave right in front of the property we are evaluating I live in 5811 major okay thank you I bought 68 581 maor Street about 12 years ago it's a house that has been built almost at the same time 70 years old it has been remodeled at a reasonable price and the house looks like the house that was shown before it doesn't look at all like the photos that we see here I only want to stress that these photos do not present information that as a structural and engineer allow you to make the conclusion that it has to be demolished could you please direct your

comments to whether you wish to support the item before this board or to uh request that we deny it are are you in favor or are you against this item I am against I think that the house is not to be and you're speaking as a as a as a neighbor and homeowner yeah in the in the immediate area if we could confine your your your testimony to that I think that your opinions as an engineer I'm where I'm sure that they'd be very valuable or less Salient to the point than your position as a neighbor with regards to support yeah but I'm just stressing that the report here uses engineering terms that sir you're talking to a board where there's four senior Architects three of which are here we understand and we know what we're reading so thank you thank you and I appreciate your you're coming forward is there anybody else who wishes to speak on this item Francisco seor good evening board members my name is Francisco senior and I live in 62 San viente Avenue uh very near you know the proposed uh uh the proposal that we're looking at uh today well we already looked at it back in January and I expressed my discontent about you know uh you know uh the proposal I know I I I was uh in favor of the uh staff decision to deny it you know at L here for a long time uh cor was got to this point because of us the B living here for a long time and we like to live the same way you know my my thoughts uh about

Legacy uh being presented it you know the intention of that purchaser was to Dev the house that let's look at the intention now they try to say that it was not a a it's not a well voluntary uh uh definition you know they start bending things uh 50 getting 50 uh uh letters from residents if you invest the same amount of money that they have invested in getting those 50 you could probably get a 100 it's it's it's a matter of you know investing money getting getting you know things but anyway the last few years I have seen how many of our residents have not been happy with some of these developments that have been approved in in the past longtime residents like the ones that helped build the City of Coral gab is are the ones that help this build the City of Coral G the way it is today moving forward we should be cautious in in taking into consideration the residents that will be affected by splitting this building in two sites allowing two homes to be built to the max they will not they will have more square feet that if only one house you know is is built on the site you know owner can legally make one big house there and still be smaller than the two that they're trying to make I definitely would not like to live in the immediate radius around the proposed development you know if it is is approved if I'm no mistakes in these restrictions on already build building sit and the unity of title where where were requir for obtaining the building permits where were imposed around the late 70s and that was for a reason it

was to preserve our neighborhoods you know the way they looked preventing larger properties to be demolished and then be split into smaller building sites residents want to preserve their neighborhoods mistake has been made in in in the past I agree with the with the with the planning board original uh in decision and uh also so the applicant does not meet all the requirements to divide the property no voluntary de demolition within 10 years and not owning the property for 10 years or more I hope this as a decision is made just think of the people that live very near that the lady that lives right behind their house they they they destroy their life of of that you know the the immediate neighborhood or neighbors I thank God I don't live behind that property it it would really change you know my life and also probably the property value would be affected most houses in Maori are one story with a few that are two stories but not that big if I'm not mistaken the the previous uh zoning limited the square footage the previous uh zoning in coros limited the square footage on the second floor and that was was changed down the line and then K was allowed to be building more square footage on the second on the second floor the only two big homes that you find is basically are at both ends of bori okay it be it would be uh uh to the north it was is is a Chinese village and the Dutch pill at the South the proposed development

of two houses built to the max is is is not located at at either end of majori the LC that purchased the property knew that it was considered a single building site because of the existing footprint of the house and the unity of title they can build one home in the property but two is not right the lot frontages is similar to the neighborhood but the proposed velopment is not it is not in tune with the rest of the neighborhood and will look out of place just like the two look like a mistake that was made of the two houses that were built in in majori between Savona and Caligula every time I drive by and I look at them it wasn't it wasn't actually the the individual that bought the property Was An Architect that lived in Hardy and so all the two the neighbors and all of that oh I want to move in that you know there I want to sell my my house uh in Hardy and move there and and and I'll sell the the other one but you know he didn't I didn't know what that he was going to be building there you know the houses are like two big boxes you know completely out of out of place completely out of place okay uh so I I hope that uh the planning board continue with the same decision that they made in in in January okay thank you very much is there anyone else that wish to speak on this item Alberto espo I think we have a a live one here we have two more two more okay in the interest of time could you please confine your your your um statements uh to new information or in support of or in uh opposition to the

previous statements I agree with uh Mr senior I'm against approval my name is Alberto Espino my whole family has lived in that area my daughters were born in 540 gerona I live in barello I own two houses in aduana my daughter lives in 5511 San viente and owns two houses in marmore one of them 534 marmore I have another daughter in Victoria so I'm I represent the whole family and we hope that you will not allow the division of the law thank you thank you for your attention and brevity somebody else anyone else wish to speak yes oh I'm sorry he he did say his his number the number address gave everybody else you gave yes you gave all your all your friends and family can we have your address just for the record5 mar thank you I thought I heard it okay go ahead hi good evening uh my name is Marlin Ebert and I live at 6510 San Vicente Street for those of you who do not know that part of the city um maiori once it crosses over Hardy goes two blocks and it becomes San Vicente and I live in that block uh I'm here basically I don't know anything about the demolition but I'm here to say that um I remember I'm sorry that chip wethers isn't here tonight I remember remember asking him in the 20 years that he was on the commission how many lot splits happened in Coral Gables and he said I could count on one hand and I think that that's what really makes a difference in Coral Gables that we aren't all Cookie Cutter Lots all the same size um in my

block just south of Hardy we have I have a lot that's 25,000 foot fo not my lot a neighbor's lot with one house these are all one housee Lots 19,000 Square ft 16,000 11 10 I mean they're all different and I think that's what defines Coral Gables that we aren't all exactly the same so that's my point please don't let them subdivide this lot thank you do we have anyone online that wishes to uh no anyone on the phone no having heard all the testimony in the room let's uh close it for uh public okay that's fine I thought he could rebut after we close the public I know we say that but technically it's still part of the public hearing so then he can close it it's really it's a technical thing dumb technical is it totally dumb should close the public and then he can rebut at that that at that time that makes more sense whenever you'd like me to come up or sit down just let me know no go ahead it's fine shall I proceed yes please okay thank you uh board member parto just to address your question uh so the letters of support were all submitted to uh planning and zoning department as part of the record uh these were not it was not a petition that was circulated there were letters that were handed out and homeowners sent them back either via email or via uh mail postmail I I'm sorry I may have said petition but I meant what is the content of the I will read you the the letter I am familiar with and strongly support the conditional use application

to allow for the construction of two single family homes on 10,000 ft Lots at 5810 majori Street as I believe it will be beneficial to and in keeping with the neighborhood and I stress the last point because part of the discussion as one of the neighbors alluded to was the alternative right I discussed this at the last hearing um I don't think we got the presentation up do we I was having an issue connecting to show you because we did have some renderings and that was what I think fueled a lot of this support because the people in the neighborhood don't want the alternative which absent Board of architect review for design elements is an as of right 7,000 squ foot twostory home um so I can try to pull it up but while I uh do that I'll just go ahead and address some of the comments that were made by uh the neighbors uh so to speak to Mr Harnett and his mother who's the neighbor right the this report did not say anything did not say that this home was structurally unsound and unsafe right we never alleged that somebody could not live in there what the report says is that the critical Building Systems like a roof an HVAC system a foundation were degraded to the point where the cost of repairing them would substantially be outweighed by the value that would be added to the existing structure right you have a 70 plus year old home that has an assessed value by the Mi County property appraiser of just about $475,000 if you replace a roof on a house that size if you replace an aack you're talking about 25 to 50% of this

structures worth into something that's 70 years old I get the overarching theme that's been conveyed right it's scary change is scary for a neighborhood but we're talking about two new homes we're not building a 30 unit five-story six-story multif family we're building two single family homes in a community where you have 10,000 foot Lots going on that I appreciated Mr harnett's Sketch right but we can't pick and choose when the criteria of the code benefits you right there's very clear that it's a majority within a thousand feet you don't need to necessarily be right on majori street right it's the context of the neighborhood not just one particular Street and we were well above the required percentages uh a couple other things to note the roof is obsolete again that's probably the largest ticket item you're talking $50 00,000 minimum for a property of that size to replace its roof um moving on to another statement with respect to uh Mr Francisco Senor we'd like to live the same way right again going back to change right change is obviously hard to understand when a neighborhood changes different families come in different uh PE or people with different desires from their homes right not everyone wants a one-story ranch house that takes up 70% of the loot coverage people with families want large yards and the way you get that is by building two-story homes um which you know 70 years ago 50 years ago were a lot more expensive than they are today to build uh investing money to get signatures no money was

invested to get signatures people were canvased right this is how applications for quasi judicial matters community outreach is part of the process I don't need to speak more on that built to the max as the percentages show uh in the presentation which I uh noted earlier again well below the law coverage maximum well above the minimum open space these are not homes being built to the Max and these homes are not going to destroy anybody's lives including Mr harnett's mother um finally the Lots all the same size you know the the staff report I'm speaking to uh the last speaker's statement that there's 25,000 squ foot Lots in the neighborhood of course right but in that immediate area within a th000 square a th000 ft most of the lots are not that large right so it's more about creating cohesiveness of other areas staff report noted that it it's a very unique property given the size uh so that's really all I'd like to touch on I don't have the presentation it's not connecting to the internet for some reason but were you able to ever get it up or you would have to rejoin Zoom yeah the the Wi-Fi for the building is not working for me so nonetheless it was a massing I'm happy to share it or I don't know if there's any way to put it up but yeah I address any questions do any board members have any questions for I've got one question about the uh way you obtain those signatures because uh those letters were in our packet by the way it was a form letter it was a very long letter it was a very

complicated letter to understand if you were an 80-year-old resident truthfully or a 72 year old resident it was complicated to understand but let me get let me ask you this when you presented the letter did you present the picture of what could be like a maxed out house on that property yes so basically kind of like the theory if you don't like this project we're going to build a big box store there was that kind of that kind of as of right right it's it's that's kind of the the decision that a homeowner and a neighbor needs to make what do you like better I I understand but that's a little threatening I would say like if you don't do this we're going to really Jam a big one in here I I don't think that was the message this is not uh you know we're professionals we're not uh lone sharks we're not forcing people to sign things and let me just touch on the letter the letter I just read to you was the letter it's two sentences there were earlier letters that some people prior to the Planning and Zoning Board if I recall correctly a longer version of the letter largely the 50 if not maybe 30 40 of those letters were the two or three sentences which I just read to Mr parau which are part of your well what was what was in our packet was the long version and I'm reading this and I'm saying my God it's it's a lot to to digest even the first sentence was a lot to digest okay so uh I'm just saying it's almost sounded like threat I mean if your project was so great why did you have to say or else I did not say or else no but by by the by the mere implication of showing them a maxed out one it's not about showing a maxed out house it's showing people that what can be built there either by us by anyone in the future when we went to we had our community

meeting that's required by the code the overwhelming tone absent a couple of the people that are here today was we don't really want a huge house there we want a couple houses that are more in keeping with the neighborhood that was the that's that's the point of it right all right that's the only question that I have but I have more comments later close the Let's uh close the public hearing there's that's it is there anybody else who wish to speak on this matter hearing none I hear I close of public input [Music] um do I have a motion so we can open discussion yes I'd like to make a motion um uh to deny the application again based on the staff report I um that's the motion okay do I have a second a second we have two seconds okay uh is there any discussion on this item that we wish to Mr chairman to have with regards to your motion I'd like to make a point if um I I listened carefully to the new testimony and I agree with our director um that you know it's it's not there um deferred maintenance on a property uh if you leave it long enough it's called neglect uh we saw a historic building in Miami Beach torn down because of neglect the biggest thing here is really the neighborhood the neighborhoods here all have their own character they all have not just the character that modest homes mid-century homes which are now 70 years

old when you when you preserve them I like my home it's 75 years old and I built a major addition to it 35 years ago a lot of people talk about carbon Footprints and things like that there's nothing better than to save the planet by redoing a home compared to raising the home and then building new I understand that sometimes it will cost more to renovate the home than to tear it down and build new preserving our neighborhoods is essential about change when you move into Coral Gables you move into a specific neighborhood you see smaller Lots like in the North End Of The Gables and then you see larger Lots south of the highway you pick and choose neighbor hoods when you're buying if you have small kids and you want a sidewalk there are other places that don't have sidewalks so you think about the safety of those kids on roller skates or on a bicycle if you're near a library if you're near the youth center every neighborhood has a character and it should be preserved the Covenant that was signed by Bob zoner a good friend of mine who was a great City attorney that was done many many years ago and Covenants used to be a bond that you can rest assured that it would be preserved and I know that it can be removed by the commission but I think it would be a

mistake to remove it because once you remove one Covenant it doesn't matter how many covenants you remove the last and most important point I'd like to make is that I understand the developer would be able to build two brand new houses and it would be easier probably to sell two smaller houses than one large house in this neighborhood but one of the things about having two houses versus one large house is that normally you have a lot more people a lot more cars because it's two houses and in fact if we instead of having two lots we make them into 450ft Lots now you have two three times 4 12 cars maybe compared to if it was one large house where you may have three or four cars the impact of the amount of people there is very important many of these areas and the uniqueness throughout the City of Coral Gables including areas that that have very very large homes the calculations have been changed over time as Mr Sixto said these calculations that were changed were for the motivation of adding more square footage if you go back to the original code you would see that you had certain limitations and the calculations were substantially less there is an advantage to having two homes because you pick up x amount of square feet more and if you do the calculations the economic calculation of a of a business deal it makes more sense to build to I think that there is a message here that one of the things is that we have certain items in the code that are

there specifically to preserve certain things a consistency something you can depend on there are many other municipalities in my Miami date County that used to look very different haia which I like haia and the people that live in hiia used to be known as an area that had very large lots I'm not telling you something that I don't know in fact my neighbor across the street Mr Gary Hobbs lived in hilia then they started to subdivide those lots and now it's become something that it's very very very different than what it was back then there's a big difference between change to make more money and preserving to to maintain the consistency of those neighborhoods each neighborhood here is unique each neighborhood is under change some change is good and some change isn't good and I think that this change here would be very bad that's all I have to say Mr chairman you would just add anything to that I I would I I first want to thank Mr Hartnett for his uh experience and his research in this and for his persistence because I think what you had to say in your research uh convinced me of a decision uh and I and I want to uh thank the neighbors who came out I thought you were articulate uh you're you were very well thought out and heartfelt words and uh I really appreciate you you taking the time to come out and let us know your thoughts about this you know we're talk we always talk about compatibility these these

would stick out like two sore thumbs in the middle of single family homes that are one story uh as it was cited on either end of miori there are larger homes but these two are right smack dab in the middle of that street and they would stick out and therefore be incompatible uh I do not believe they meet the criteria uh and Mr Ramirez I think your thoughts uh in reading the report were very valuable in making my decision as well uh and we're talking about change as as Felix mentioned change uh Mr Baker if people want larger homes and larger Lots or whatever they want there are other places in Miami dat County they can shop around but this Coral Gables the fabric of these neighborhoods is being destroyed and assaulted constantly we have to preserve our neighborhoods and the character of this neighborhood is special so change for what the better or to make a buck I'm always for change for the better but I always listen to the residents on what they want because they live there they've got to live with whatever comes so uh I appreciate uh your thoughts on that but I've made my decision thank you Sue will do you have anything you wish to add none um we have a negative staff recommendation item two of the requirements for approval of this item the lot split of 5810 majority fails on number two if if you carefully read the condition of what that is set forth in uh item two of the prerequisite conditions I think it's my opinion and and my

recollection that uh that item was created specifically to avoid speculative purchase of larger lots to be able to split them and that's where they rent a file therefore um I see that as a a insurmountable hurdle to this this particular request and that's all I'm going to say having heard testimony and the opinions of the board could you please call the role Felix Paro this is to deny that was to deny to recommendation for denial based on Department recommendations so the answer is yes so the answer would be yes yes hul Gabriel yes zalinski yes jaier Salman yes it passed to the N Mr chair you want to take like a three let's take a five minute break if we can but let's try and keep it short so we get so we can get to the the next item recording stopped e

e e e e

e e e e

e e e e

e e e e

e e recording in progress okay we're back Mr klier if you could please read the next item on the agenda please good job item item E2 in ordinance to the City Commissioner Carl Gables Florida granting approval of a site plan amendment pursuance of zoning code article 14 process section 14-23 conditional uses for a country club originally approved by ordinance number 2016-3 as amended by ordinance 2022-2023 112 Country Club section part five 1155 blue Road Carl Gables Florida all their conditions of approval contained in ordinance 20-16 d34 I'm sorry 2016- 34 shall remain in effect providing for an effective date item E2 public hearing the applicant please thank you

good afternoon board member staff Nelson Delon with Locust architecture address 500 South Dixie Highway Suite 30744 I'm sorry 33146 PowerPoint PowerPoint okay am I controlling this thing or is no they're probably searching for it oh okay okay there you go should for the for the applicant the PDF right this PDF file is that it no I'll present yours uh applicant PDF there it is there it is okay thank you thank you board members I'll try and be um brief and then um as I'm presenting I can Circle back if you need me to explain anything further so the uh the project is the replacement of the existing eight tennis courts and Tennis facility that's directly across the main Country Club on Blue Road the existing facility are shown on these photos the top three photos are of the tennis building itself and then the bottom middle the existing courts and the bottom right the facility the overall site plan of the entire facility I'm going to skip through some of these so our current site sits

directly across the entrance to the main club itself the uh um blue Road itself has been um updated upgraded with um a street beautification project the entrance to the tennis portion of the facility has already been paved it faces directly opposite the main club entrance so this you know is it this SL so this is the uh proposed building which sits slightly back from the original and I have photos which will rather of a slide which will show you an overlay of the existing in the proposed which I think will be very helpful so I'm going to move through some of these this is the our pedestrian amenities this is a private facility so it's really not open to the public to enter it but within the site itself we're adding uh benches and uh bicycle parking the parking lot itself for the most part exists as is but there it is going through modifications to comply with current code with current parking uh widths and with circulation within the site itself and adding additional landscape areas this is the current facility uh eight courts and a small tennis building the courts are under sized for regulation place so part of the Project's scope is to increase increas the court sizes to meet regulation size so with this next slide we're superimposing the proposed over the existing so when the courts were expanded to meet regulation they grew from our fixed property Edge which is on

the West toward the East the uh facility is surrounded on three sides by the golf course and on the northwest corner which is the upper left portion of the the slide is the start of the single family residential neighborhood the court that exists there now is the starting point of the new courts and the um hedging and Landscaping that are between the neighbor and us will remain that neighbor was included in multiple meetings during the design phase so they're very aware of the project and they had no no opposition to the project the uh tennis facility building itself has been pushed back with a court surrounding it so the new building and we'll see this in the elevations and the renderings is designed so that the second floor of it acts as a mezzanine Veranda to overlook the tennis court play below so in the in the expansion of Courts 123 we lost five parking spaces along the west Edge the rest of the parking lot you can kind of see the overlay in red Dash over what was there already and it's more than anything a series of adjustments to comply with current parking the bottom portion of the site extends and and is bound by the cart path of the golf golf course so the cart path created a very strong delineation on the east south and um southwest corners blue Road defining the North and the neighbor on the west defining the uh Northwest Quadrant the um overall second floor plan and ground floor plan this is this is an important site because this this slide shows the relationship of the tennis court on the bottom image which is on the right

center to the very first residential home on the bottom right the scale of the building was very much designed to fit in more so with the residential context than with the commercial context of the uh context of the existing um Club across the street so you can see scale-wise the roof lines are about the same height the home is actually quite a bit larger than the tennis facility the tennis facility itself is under air about 3,700 square fet and when you include the roofed areas of the wraparound Verandas it increases that to about 6,700 square feet an aerial view showing how the um tennis building itself fits within the site push back slightly from the parking area with um sight lines to four of the courts adjacent to it the building we tried to push um not centered within the courts which would have made it uh visually accessible to all the courts but we wanted to keep the building addressing the street itself so this is the pedestrian entrance Crossing the main club onto the facility and with a restructured driveway within the facility as you come up to the building for the drop off you're centered with the building itself the uh tennis facility is designed with the same material pallet as the main club so the roof tile the stone treatment the shutters the window types they're all mirroring what's existing across the street this is a view from Court six and seven looking back at that upstairs covered veranda and then an aerial from the uh back end of the site the landscape architect is the same

landscape architect who worked on the original club and facility so he's done an existing condition study he's photographed all of the existing trees those that were maintaining and those that are being relocated the proposed new land ape plan um so to the existing parking lot on the upper right side currently there's no Landscaping within the island So the plan is to introduce a few mahogany some sable palms and then within the central part of the of the site itself between the building and some of the courts were introducing green area and a small tree and that's uh an internal Gathering space and this is the material pallet for the landscape that will be surrounding the the facility and I'll end the presentation with that I know you're all Architects here so any questions you have I could Circle back to any image thank you neon if if we want to have the staff presentation now right good evening uh planning Bing planning and uh zoning board forgive me uh Craig Southern newest member of the Planning and Zoning Team all right let's see here um so the application that we have in front of us tonight is a conditional use application for a major amendment to an existing site plan uh also pursuant to an ordinance uh number 201634 so if you take a look at the location map you'll see that the subject property is encapsulated by Bird Road to the

North University Drive to the east I think it's uh compos Sono Avenue to the South and then uh the subject property is bisected by Blue road so on the south side of blue Road you'll see that uh that's where the project area is Project area is about 2.3 Acres where the entire Riviera Country Club encapsulates about uh 113 Acres current use is a recreational use um the address is 1155 blue Road and current zoning is special use district with the future land use designation of both Park and recreational use and single family low density the application of has been heard by the and been reviewed by the development Review Committee the DRC uh last year November 22nd of 2024 it just recently went to the board of Architects last month January 9th and then it also had a neighborhood participation meeting that the applicant held uh on January 29th so why we're here it is a major Amendment to the existing site plan but pursuant to the existing ordinance uh 201634 I just give you a little history uh from our staff report basically in 2016 ordinance 201634 granted site plan approval for the clubhouse and the fitness center that's north of blue Road requiring any modifications to undergo the Planning and Zoning Board and the city commission review um as you can see pursuant to section

two uh 1D that is that's why we're here tonight in front of the planning zoning board um also in 2022 the river ER Country Club received approval under ordinance uh number 2022-2023 of 2023 uh quickly you'll take a quick look at the future land use map and the zoning map um it's pretty consistent with both uh the surrounding um future land use designations and uh the special use district is predominantly surrounded by a single family to the South we do have the University of Miami and the doctor's hospital uh quickly we'll take a quick look at what the existing conditions look like um the applicants architect did a good job of describing it but we've just got some photos for you here of what the existing tennis court and facility look like so when we delve into the site plan um it's predominantly uh it's completely consistent with all the side development standards of our zoning code uh it's far below uh the floor area ratio requirements um it meets all of the setbacks we don't have any flood zone issues so once again I'll uh briefly kind of delve into the staff report in the sense of um the proposed site plan includes a new two-story tenis Center designed in the island British colonial

architectural style the reconfiguration of the existing eight surface tennis courts will now meet the United States tennis Association tournament standards modifications to the existing parking lot to incorporate additional Landscaping uh relocation of the dumpster enclosure installation of bicycle racks the extension of a sidewalk along the public ridway to provide a continuous pedestrian access along the north side of the Tennis complex which is on the south side of blue Road um and basically this just helps to enhance the club's uh uh connectivity with pedestrian activity uh landscaping and um traffic circulation so once again you can take a quick look at what is being proposed by the renderings um we'll break it down one more time the review timeline DRC last November Board of Architects the beginning of January of this year the neighborhood participation meeting was at the end of January of last month currently we're having the planning and zoning board meeting presently and then there are two City commission meetings uh for the ordinance to be heard uh there was 792 properties that were uh notified through the Thousand uh foot radius um multiple public notifications uh two times letters were sent to all the property owners the 792 for uh the neighborhood participation meeting and tonight's meeting three times there are property postings for DRC Board of Architects Planning and Zoning Board uh there's been three website postings for the DRC

Board of Architects and tonight's meeting and then a newspaper advertisement for tonight's planning and zoning board meeting um the staff report intricately um delves into the consistencies of uh the comprehensive plan so staff's determination is definitely that it it meets all of the requirements for the comprehensive plans goals objectives and policies so staff's recommendation tonight is uh for approval with conditions uh pursuing went to the conditions that were contained within the original ordinance of what brought us here tonight of ordinance 26-34 um there are no conditions in ordinance uh 2022 but just that there's an ordinance attached to the subject property so staff does make a recommendation of approval with conditions thank you thank you very much and congratulations on your first presentation to us good job good to meet all of you um at this time I'm going to open up to the uh public comments in the chambers Mr chairman can we limited to three three minutes of piece I I think so we have a packed house so we're going to keep it to two minutes instead seeing no we're gonna close the uh public hearing on the chamber I'm G open up to uh anybody on Zoom platform Jill no anybody on the public on the phone no okay seeing none we're gonna close the uh the public comment and I'm open up to the board discussion and I'm start with my right Julio please any comments F no problems with it thank you have heard good can I just go ahead and make a motion well we got to just save it but use the use that as an excuse for

discussion and now we can just go through it go ahead I'd like to make a motion to accept the staff recommendation for approval okay second Sue any comments um just out of curiosity um you said you're going to have an increase in in car traffic not very much but why would you have an increase in car traffic if basically the footprint is the same yeah I'm not sure how the traffic would increase it's the membership is capped um the only way you could become a member now is if a member leaves so they're capped at I believe a th000 total so the the um membership itself wouldn't increase at all with this it's basically swapping like for like except now with courts that meet regulation play size and a new tennis facility yeah I I was just curious I mean the report says it would increase traffic by I mean like seven cars and six cars and I'm not sure is it that you adding more space there that you had no we we um we have a net loss of five parking spots on that side because of the Court expansion yeah I mean I was just curious I mean I I I there was no reason why cars would be increased but it's in the report uh just one thing uh do you have tournaments there right now You' got USDA they're internal to the club they're just internal now making it us well they so what happens is because the courts themselves are not regulation they're not able to so the from my understanding is the regulations are you need to have eight courts regulation size in order to be able to compete in tournaments um I'm assuming what they would do is compete maybe against other clubs aside from their own internal competitions yeah because now they're going to be USA so you can have more

competitions there correct uh truthfully architecture only oh okay the less I know the better off I am okay okay those were my only only questions thank you Felix um in your uh meeting with the neighbors um was there a big outpouring of neighbors or any concerns that you should the the meeting we had on the 29th uh probably had about 20 25 neighbors that that showed up um a good majority of them club members that live right in the area so I think it was more of a curiosity as to what was going to happen no major no objections no no certainly no objections to the design or to the tennis courts or to the existing parking or changes no well I I think that uh you did a very nice job in in uh bringing that up to standard and also putting in the two-story building the two-story building is very similar to the kdik U tennis center next to the builtmore hotel very very similar and um obviously the style and everything is in keeping with all the refurbishing that the country club has has done over the past few years uh you've also done improvements on on Blue road that have uh made it a much better a safer Community for pedestrians and and and people on bicycles and and all the different things uh the other thing is that U because you have the tennis courts on ground level uh and the scale of the of the building itself that is substantially less than than the adjacent um U

Homes is also in keeping with the the community so I I see that this is a not only a win for uh for the country club members but uh uh when for the the existing neighborhood it's very compatible thank you I thank you pH I have one question please first of all it's a beautiful project I have no problem with it but when they did the country club we were without practical use of blue Road for years and the conditions were horrible do you foresee any kind of work that's going to be involving uh work in or on road yeah certainly not impacting blue Road at this time the the idea is to phase it take out three courts use that as a staging area build the building do the first three courts in the front and then flip the staging area to the parking lot and finish the the other five courts so there's no water and sewer improvements on the roadway there's no widening of the roadway there's nothing addition of a sidewalk which was and that'll be some what 5 10 ft from the edge of the road so it's the sidewalk is more like 10 to 12 feet from the edge of the road very good that was it was my only question thank you noan you done a great job I I really commend you for doing a really nice beautiful job on this court I am I'm an immediate neighbor I live on H pintac coure which backs up to it I'm very very pleased what the club has done over the last whatever six seven years it and have you heard you're right it took a long time but that was an incredible undertaking because they did not only the building the clubhouse that did the the course they redid it and they done a great job so I'm very very happy um the the the neighborhood did come together because there was multiple meetings I didn't go

to the last meeting because I didn't have to it was already conveyed the message you guys done a great job I'm very pleased with the outcome so we have a motion and a second correct can you please call the role have your yes Julio Gabriel yes Su Kinski yes Felix Paro yes Robert beart yes thank you very much thank you thank you board members thank you we have one more item but I think this item coming up and I'm going make a uh a suggestion I think it should be a full board it shouldn't be the five of us I I agree 100% with you uh and I I just want to bring up one point if you don't mind okay I I have asked multiple times times when this item has come before us I've asked for staff to please look at the um city of Miami Beach ordinance the reason about about Liv local specifically about Liv local the way that the section is written there which is clearly separate we don't know what the future of Liv Loco is it could be expanded it could be reduced it could be whatever when you have it there separately I think it does uh a lot of good I understand what staff is trying to do with the uh parking and the tdrs and the other uh details they could easily be put in the new section where uh where the tdrs and and the parking and the other things would be uh in a separate section I think it would be clear it will have less confusion for any applicant and and also it would be a much better tool I think and the other thing is that this is also an opportunity to also put

certain constructs uh that that can be added um to live local if it's looked at very carefully so I I'm making that suggestion now I think for the third time and and I would like you know if if that's a bad idea I would like you know staff uh uh to be able to give me a reason why why but I think that it would be a cleaner solution and it would be something that we as a whole with all the members should consider it I I think I think the as a whole memb a whole should be I'm not sure if that's a staff or that's a legal interpretation or or or for them to look at because you know I don't know if staff have the authority to modify live local no no I'm sorry the format we're talking about the format Miami Beach has had this format already since the beginning of livebook okay the the thing is that you know it's like creating chapters you know you go when you're using the code right now the things that are being proposed by staff is the parking and then well if you have this you can't have the tdrs it can't be but it's inserted into the code and it becomes very confusing uh to be able to understand it if you go to the new chapter which Miami Beach calls it development approvals under the live local act you have all the sections there and there you can amend that it is a much cleaner way of doing of of addressing live local I'm not talking about changing or any legal it's uh it's to identify and clarify for the use of the applicant and for the use of the public and the reviewers okay and I would love and I've mentioned this before I would love a broad

presentation about live local BEC I you know and and it may take all evening to do but we're looking at little Snippets here and instead of looking what we can do as a city to counter what the state is telling us to do and here's an example in here it says about Med bonus so they can go 450 fet and yet they still get a Mediterranean bonus according to what you've written in here no no you cannot live local has you and and maybe you are saying something that maybe we have to get somebody to come in and really explain live local the way that it's intended it's written because you my understanding I'm not an expert with LIF local you got to do everything as of right you cannot allow to get a variance a waiver nothing okay it says right here the project May apply it says right here the project May apply for Coral Gables mediteran design bonus per section 5-200 of the zoning code well you see I I I think you may there you may have a point you may qualify live local may qualify for a bonus that is allowed to do as any other applicant could request you see this but but but but but hold on okay so let let's say that uh an applicant comes in with a 450 foot project because they're one mile from the Douglas project no no no because it has to be within your city not outside your city okay it doesn't say that in anywhere in here it says within one mile it doesn't say well within my of your municipality well it's not clear here yeah it doesn't say it in here Mr chair if I may I I think this this is I think this is U the confusion

and this is us here uh the public has to be aware of what this is and and Sue Has previously asked for you know a better detailed explanation of that uh that way everybody could be on the same page uh I my portion that I have asked for multiple times before has to do with the clarity you know of how we amend the code okay which is a new chapter so there there are two things going on here I think is to make sure that we're on the same page as far as what can or cannot be done with bonuses and all the other things that have to do with the lib local act and and the second thing would be the procedural part because I would hate to see this just buried in the code and and then tomorrow something happens you have to remember where you had it in the code and and I say that simply from my experience in the past of of of rewriting sections of this code and again I just want to reemphasize everybody's saying no that's not right but it's it's right here there's no mention that this is one mile within the city limits number one number two it clearly states the project May apply for the Coral Gables Mediterranean bonus design okay so what I'm saying is there might be other things that we can control other than tdrs right or parking that we should be making a motion on altoe tdrs the parking met no Med bonus for projects like this but we have to have a better understanding of what in here I don't think we should nibble away at it I think this is an opportunity to look at it understand it and figure out what we can do to counter it and and Mr chairman there's another issue also that should be addressed and that is from what I understand when you look at when you look at the major factors of live local

specifically the live local act in a summary height density F use and parking from legal um interpretations that I've already seen and I am not a lawyer uh I have seen that for example on height you cannot mimic within that mile radius a building that has obtained bonuses for that height so in other words it would be limited to the height of that building before the bonus is applied which includes Med bonus which is a bonus so so something to think about this is complicated and it it should be the same as what we did with the Mediterranean bonus component where we had a dedicated uh meeting I think it would be wise to do that I I'll leave it up to the board members Mr CER is this something that we should leave it up to staff to present to us or this is something maybe that well I don't think this this has been deferred on multiple occasions I'm not aware and I think staff is has a pretty good presentation I don't think you all have had even had a chance to actually hear from staff on this item yet so so so I think it might be a good idea to consider a separate meeting uh if you can find another day in this room to just have this item heard um and that might not be a bad idea if if the board wants to request it and staff is able to find a day to have it I mean I've been asking for this for for months now I think we need to we need to understand what this is about I mean I just want to to level your expectations a little bit this is a

preemption from the Florida legislature this is not something that local governments have elected to do the legislatur has determined you will do this so there are limits to what what a community can do and I think what staff is trying to do is get try to get exactly what we were able to accomplish and and whether it be in a separate section or in the code I mean that's up to and I and I appreciate that but like I said Med bonus I don't think South Miami has a med bonus we have a med bonus it's Unique to Coral Gables we should be be saying that you know this is unique to us and it should be excluded from projects as a result this is a privilege it's a bonus but we may not be able to do that we may not be able to do that because the the the uh the statue really clear says that whatever you're allowed to do as as of right because you know Med bonus may not be as right but you have the right to request it everybody has the right to do that so the an applicant is coming in with with a SP sp102 that live local I in my opinion I'm not want to play the you know the legal but has the right to request for that under our zoning code but this goes this blows away our zoning code but within our zoning code of course you can apply for a med bonus doesn't mean you have to you can apply it for something and do the live local if you allowed to do that for one application you could do it for another Mr chairman I think there I think the the issue the height and what the limits are on the height so and and they look to unfortunately within a mile of your your jurisdiction that that is and that was an interpretation you don't get when you

look at the height you don't get the credit for any bonuses when you're looking at what the maximum height is so you can't uh a building when you're looking at the tallest building if that building got an extra four or five floors because of a bonus you don't get that Mr but what I'm saying there's a building 450 ft right now in Douglas if you can't nobody could do in in cor with a 450 ft building it's within a mile no it's a different municipality and that's clearly stipulated yeah it's within the city limits with the city okay well where where is it in here I see it well it's part of the state law I don't know if we it's a state law we don't even need to right Mr chairman what I'd like to ask Mr C what I'd like to ask Mr caller is it's it's we know what they say they can do but they also have limits what we need to understand is what they can do and also what the limits are right and I think that you I think if you all give staff an opportunity to make a present we haven't really had a formal presentation by staff right we're talking all around it but you haven't given staff the opportunity do something let's wait for the next let's if you want to have a special meeting exactly let's table this to the next meeting and staff will do the presentation in next meeting and hopefully by that time you could clear up all the questions that right the board member have we needed a motion to have it on the agenda for the next meeting well what is the what is the sense of the board do you want to and I I'm asking staff what's the possibility even getting this room because we're limited I want to make sure that we have all seven members press I know that's an issue but did you want this as one item on the agenda is that your desire this is very complicated the presentation but the question is we only have this one

room now so I don't know how if we can even get this room for one the PowerPoint that's part of your staff report it's probably 20 something slides so maybe a good solid 45 minutes ration no but wait a minute this this this is the presentation that you've had in your staff be before I I don't want to hear the same presentation again I haven't given presentation to this board yet to the commission what I mean is okay here's a here's a perfect example so recently in the city of Hollywood there's a developer that is suing over Li the city and the reason that they're suing the city is because City of Hollywood made a determination that the tallest building within that jurisdiction is the the uh Margaritaville Margaritaville was given all sorts of bonuses and incentives and they held them to what the what the original was and the developer in this particular case that's in the courts right now this is very complex and and I would feel you know better to have not just a presentation from the planning board but also a presentation from the legal department our legal department at the same time s simultaneously as a dual presentation because the the ramifications that we have are are huge because it's not open the barn door and you do whatever you want based on the state law the state law has flaws and I know it has flaws and we need to understand what it is so we could write a section for the live local act that addresses those issues now and that's being proactive in my mind well I think I think

you you turned it off okay I would like the board to hear her presentation all I think and then what I would suggest is let's see what the questions are then I'll be happy to come back to you with any of the legal questions I will say this about being sued anybody can sue anybody for anything so whether the City of Hollywood has a good case or not I don't know I think I have the complaint was sent to me but I would suggest that the board set aside time to really listen to the staff's presentation and let's see where we are from there so I don't know if you want to make it on a separate date I don't know what does our schedule look like do we have what do we have for applications for next month I think there may be a couple of text Ms for the next meeting I'm not expecting any projects I think if if we don't have any projects let's just keep it for next meeting okay and if we have to if we don't have time for the text Amendment we'll pick up the text Amendment the following meeting cor right okay so let's not let's not set any special meeting yet let's hear your presentation you're you know try to be try to have as much information as possible and I I do think that legal should have some some answers for us when it comes of what you could do and you cannot do as a municipality right and I and I have um and I I think the presentation will reflect that but we will we will supplement it okay all right so do we have a motion do we have to defer this item to next meeting I make a motion to defer to the next meeting this item do

we have second second all in favor say I I I I so what's next that's it that's it a motion to adjourn any motion to adjourn I'll make second all in favor I thank you very much we'll see you next meeting recording stopped