Planning Board - Regular Meeting

[Music] like that. Hallelujah. [Music]

Heat. Heat. All right. Please take your seats. The meeting is about to begin. Remember to speak into the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record. Please stand by. We are going on air in

5 4 3 2 1. Good morning everyone. Welcome to the June 10th planning board meeting. uh have a pretty short agenda so it should be a pretty quick day but we will start with uh if I can get a motion to approve the minutes from the last meeting. Motion to approve. Second. Okay. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? Okay. They are approved. Mr. City attorney. Good morning Mr. Chairman and members of the board. Today's meeting of the planning board will be conducted in a hybrid format with the board physically present at Miami Beach City Hall and applicant staff and members of the public appearing either in person or virtually via Zoom. To participate virtually, the public may dial 1-877-853-5257 and enter the webinar ID, which is 861-4342 6327 pound, or log into the Zoom app and enter the webinar ID, which again is 861-43426327. Anyone wishing to speak on an item must click the raise hand icon or dial star9 if you're participating by phone. If you're appearing on behalf of a business, a corporation, or another person, you need to register as a lobbyist with the city clerk's office. If you haven't registered yet, you should register before you speak to the board. You don't have to register as a lobbyist if you're speaking only on behalf of yourself and not any other party, or if you're testifying as an expert witness providing only scientific, technical, or other specialized information or testimony in this public meeting. or if you're appearing as a representative of a neighborhood association without any compensation or reimbursement for your appearance to express support of or opposition to any item. Expert witnesses and representatives of neighborhood associations shall prior to appearing disclose in writing to the city clerk their name, address, and the principal on whose behalf they are communicating. If you're an at an architect, attorney, or employee representing an applicant or an objector, you must register as a lobbyist. These rules apply whether

you're appearing in favor of or against an item or encouraging or arguing against its passage, defeat, modification, or continuence. Lastly, I'd like to swear in any members of the public or staff who will be testifying today. Please raise your right hands. Do you swear or affirm the testimonial you'll give in this proceeding is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, we're going to start with a request for continuence. Planning board filed PB240661 commercial industrial residential height and setback regulation modifications. And good morning everyone. Actually this item has been withdrawn. So the board does not need to take any action on PB24-0661. We'll note that's been withdrawn for the record. Okay. Next one. Planning board file 25747 vendor appointments to land use boards. Um the city is still working on preparing this ordinance and we're recommending that or asking that the board continue this to the July 1st meeting. July one and you'll keep us posted on that meeting, right? Yes. Okay. All right. Next one is planning board file. We do need to take a motion and u for the continuence. Oh, we do. Okay. Someone moved to continue this to July. Some moved. Okay. Jonathan is okay. All in favor? Anyone opposed? Okay. Planning board file 2407191315 Collins Avenue. As the board may remember, um this was last before you a few months ago and the board continued it till today in order to see how they were operating. Um they have since opened up since the board last um heard this application. They are still in the process of amending their documents. So I did pass out a letter provided um by them. Um they are going to be updating the request and they are asking that the application be continued to the September 9th meeting. Um if you'd like to speak on the application, go ahead. Yes. Thank you very much. Uh, can I share with you some pictures or no? You don't need to share. No, we can. Okay. So, I wrote I wrote a small speech. I'm sorry that we don't have any more like So, if

you could just introduce yourself. Yeah. Yeah. Jamil Deep, co-founder of Be Hospitality Group doing business since 96 here in Miami Beach. So that's my name. And we bought this small, beautiful location called Donatella, which is a boutique hotel and a super high-end Italian restaurant. Last time I couldn't speak because someone mentioned that this is a nightclub because we have a lot of speakers. We don't have a lot of speakers because it's a nightclub. We have a lot of speakers because we don't want to high have a high volume on it. And you can Google it and you can go there. Maybe it's the best Italian restaurant. Not in Miami, maybe in USA. We have top chefs from everywhere in the planet, top managers. So, what we're trying to do, I live in Miami Beach. My kids study in Miami Beach. Yesterday, I stole my car from Miami Beach. No. So, we're trying to improve the city. That's how you know you've made it, by the way. We love the city. No. So, we've been working for 30 days. And what we're trying to be like everywhere in the world like some other countries, no removing that tourist trap kind of operation and bringing good quality because I believe so much on what's happening. So we want to put a little bit of us there. So what we're trying to do is have a a music programmer, sometimes a violin. We have it on the grand opening. We we asked for a special permit. A lot of people from the city were there. No complaints from the neighbors. So I'm just here to ask you for the favor to It's part of the experience. It's happening everywhere in the world now. The people they I think Instagram it's like those pictures, fake flowers. They're they're on the past. Now people they want to have a different experience. I want to have a meal and a violin and something different. The place it's absolutely beautiful. You can Google it and see the

reviews. Yel trip advice or Google like real reviews from real people. So I'm here representing ourselves. So who who's asking for continuance? No, we we can this cannot be heard today because they have to update their plans. Update their application. Okay. So So what where we're just ask he's just asking that the board continue the application to the September 9th meeting. That'll give them time to update the plans and the board can hear it then. I'm sorry. I'm I'm not a lawyer. Not just asking to continue that maybe we can start doing. No, no, no, no. The only thing the board can do today is continue the application. The board cannot to vote to approve or discuss the application itself. We're only here to discuss the continuence of the application. Yeah. And we're happy you you told us what you said, but in September, you'll come back. Perfect. Um they just want to make sure that everything's operating properly and and you know. Okay. So, put on your calendar the September meeting. It was 90 days. No. No. Um, we can you can continue to the September 9th meeting. That's that's the date the board meets. The board does not meet in August. The board meets next, right? We don't they don't meet in August. Perfect. So, thank you very much. That's it. I hope that you guys can stop by and try the food and see the place. No, absolutely. Sounds Sounds great and we wish you luck, but we'll see you in September. God bless you guys. Good luck. You too. And before before we entertain a motion to continue the application, we just have to take public comment. See is there anyone here to speak on this item? Anybody in chambers? Anyone in Zoom? There's nobody on Zoom with Okay. Can we get a motion to move into September? Okay. Is she? Can I get a second, Keith? Okay. All in favor? Anyone opposed? Okay. We'll see you in September. Thank you. Thank you very much. And I'm sorry. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Progress reports. The first one is planning board file 230606 1759 Pretty Avenue and 1724 Bay Road. Tracy, oh, actually, we need Sure. I'll give a brief introduction on this application. So, the planning board last reviewed um this site on January 30th where they made modification to the CUP, including increasing the number of

restaurant seats and the maximum occupancy load of the establishment. Condition two of the CUP requires that the applicant appear before the board after the um for a progress report after the first BTR issued to the property. On March 6, the first BTR was issued for um the restaurant, the subject site. So, the applicant is before you today based upon that condition of the CP. the board the um applicant will be or the property will be back before you um within a year because the code also the um COP also requires that when 75% of the building is in operation they come back before the board for a progress report specifically related to conditions on the traffic. So we're here before you today um just for this um standard progress report. We did note that there was a um a violation issued to the for the valet operator. We're not having a BTR. However, a BTR was issued on April 8th. So, we're recommending the board hear from the applicant. Any public testimony and suspend the progress report at this time? Okay. And just so everybody knows, this is primarily the Uchi restaurant in Sunset Harbor. Go ahead. Good morning. My name is Tracy Slavvens. My address is 3800 Northeast First Avenue, Sweet 200. I am here today before you regarding the 18 Sunset project which is located at 1759 Perie Avenue. Um it's a recently completed building. It's got its first main tenant open which is Ucho. Um hopefully some of you have tried it. Um it's awesome. So I highly recommend it. It's a wonderful addition to the neighborhood. And I do have a few slides just to walk you through what the building's looking like today and what our uh slated tenants are that will hopefully come online within the next year and bring us back for our second progress report. Um so um as you know, you've seen this project a few times. We've been before you um three separate times. Um and the approvals morphed through the COVID era and finally landed on having ground floor retail office space and residential

office on the top floor of the building. Um the tenants are lining up. Um the Lamborghini lounge is going to be located on the south side of the building facing Perie Avenue. That's intended to be a salon style showroom of sorts. There won't be car sales or test driving or anything. Um, but you will be able to have Lamborghini branded experiences, look at special cars, and potentially order cars. Uh, Uchico is the restaurant that's been open now since March. It's doing great. Um, again, I highly recommend you trying it out. It's the sister restaurant of Uchi and Winwood. Um, Kiten Yacht Group is a luxury yacht brokerage. GFL Environmental will be opening soon. That's an environmental and engineering firm. Um, Aries Management is a financial office. Uh, Predium Partners is also a real estate and financial office. Ottomar's Pigway is a watch company that will be having a residential office on the top floor. Um, which is um, intended to be a place where you can experience the AP lifestyle. Um, order a watch, take delivery of your watch, or just spend some time around the brand. And then Endeavor is a private family office residence that will also occupy the top floor. These are some images of the finished building. Um, as you can see, the park is in the foreground. This little stretch of Perie Avenue has changed significantly in the last few months with both the completion of the building and the completion of the park. Um, it's really looking amazing and it and it looks a lot like the renderings that we've showed you over the years. So, it's very nice for me to come up here and say that. Um, here are some various views from Perie. Um, you can see the lofts in the foreground and the Sardinia or restaurant in the background. Um, the finishings on the building are just being completed.

There's wood accents. The landscaping on the different levels, glass everywhere. Um, the breezeway is complete and that has the removable ballards that will allow for emergency access as needed. Um and Uchico is on the left side of the screen. This is the roof view. It's also completed um with the pool and some entertaining area. And this area will be utilized mainly by the residential office spaces. Um this is the view from the bay roadside and you can see the city and the Venetian causeway in the background. And then more more examples of the finishings in the building. This is the breezeway. And that completes the progress report. I'm here to answer any questions you have. Um, as Michael had noted, the valet had a little bit of a hiccup getting started um with the opening of the restaurant, but everything has been corrected and the building is in full code compliance at this time. So, Tracy, I know I asked you informally, but the Lamborghini space is an event space. So, not a not a restaurant. It's not a restaurant. It's not a car showroom. It's something in between. I I call it a salon. Um, it's an it's a place for customers to enjoy the brand. Um, they will offer you drinks and you can touch cars, but that's basically it. Okay. Um, it's it's not it's not a car showroom for sales. It's not a restaurant or a bar. So, they're not trying to generate revenue there. It's mainly a like branding exposure. Got it. Okay. And when's that supposed to open? I think soon. I've seen the stickers on the windows. Um Lauren Goldstein, the project manager, is not here, so I'm not exactly sure, but I know that the construction on the interior is well underway. They have their permits and they are actively working. I guess I I guess my I raised this concern of blocking party uh with with traffic when we was first approved a year ago or however long ago. And my concern obviously, you know, listen,

valet hiccups happen. I'm not concerned about the BTR issue at all. um that was fixed. But my concern is once, you know, when there's a Ferrari event, I'm sorry, Lamborghini event, uh at this plus Uchi, it's going there, it's a really tight space. So, there needs to be a plan. And I'm I I guess I'm I I want to make sure we have oversight of the I guess the new traffic flow, especially because when we did the original traffic study, it wasn't based on, you know, there being necessarily special events at this at the at this venue. There was going to be another restaurant. Um and so my thinking is to maybe, you know, come back, you know, at some point when Lamborghini is open just to kind of check in. Okay. Um I don't know how the rest of the board feels about that. And and then the other thing that comes to mind, I'm not taking issue with this building per se, but it seems to me this the the benefits that we give to certain buildings to put as an incentive to give residential to to build residential uh in our neighborhoods. We give them incentives and now it seems like this was a a workaround where they have like a brand buys the residence and they have I don't know who they're going to have residing in this premises probably nobody maybe clients or maybe they just use it as an extension of their office but in the future when we're giving incentives for residential I would think we want to make sure it's actually going to be used as residential and not as I mean in the presentation they said it was going to be for you know, clients or or visitors or clients, something like that. And I mean, that to me seems more like an Airbnb experience, which I know is allowed, but um and I know this is not Airbnb, but just something to think about when we're approving these things in the future, is

how do we put guard rails on it to make sure it's actually used as residential? Well, I think so. This actually this application was originally approved as a mixeduse building was residential above and um ground floor commercial restaurant use. they did come back to the plan board and there was 3P was modified to add office space. So it did go through a process and that was reviewed by this board to introduce that office use into the into the building. Well, right. But but what I'm saying is that there is still a residential element to this building. It wasn't completely removed, right? In order because you have to have a certain percentage of residential in order to get the um the um F bump to 2.0 in the district, right? is my point is that they do that and then then a a luxury brand comes in and buys the residence and doesn't actually use it as a residence. They use it as a continuation of their office. And once the doors are closed and the locks are put on the doors, we have no knowledge or oversight as to whether there's an actual residence there. They wouldn't they wouldn't be able to get licensed for an office use in that location if it's licensed as a as a residence um or apartment use. So it's split like so I'm saying there's clearly a now a residence they're calling it a residence but there's nobody residing in it and my point in just saying is the whole idea was to increase the well they did it to increase the F but the the purpose of the incentives was to help the housing crisis that we have here in Miami Beach and if we want to get serious about housing you know going into the future we just need to be, you know, thinking about loopholes, you know, so to speak, and making sure that they're closed off for the future projects that we we incentivize. Understood. Is there anyone in chambers to speak on this? Anybody on Zoom? There's no one on Zoom with their hand raised. Okay. So, um they recommend suspending. You want to have something.

So, there is there is a condition. I discussed this with Tracy to verify. It does say that um um when a BTR is issued for any use on the property that the application applicant has to come before the board for a progress report. All right. So that's already Lamborghini will have to do that. That that's we're I'm going to verify the conditions. Tracy asked me to, but that's that's what's stated in the CUP now. Okay. And pending verification, they would require to come back come to the board for a progress report based upon that. Right. So technically we can suspend this one and then the BTR will trigger a new requirement. Correct. Could we could we though if that's the case? If the BTR triggers a new visit to the planning board, great. If not, can we continue it and we can cancel it administratively if if we are coming back anyways. Does that make sense? Because I just if it turns out that it doesn't require us to come back, I think it's hard to add that add that requirement. Now, we already have a condition in the board that says when 75% of the of the of the building is occupied, they have to come back to the planning board over no less than a year from the initial one. So, it's going to come back before the board um before um March of next year anyway based upon that condition. So, um I know and absent any violations, but you're pretty confident a new BTR will require it. Okay. Okay, that's all right. So, then someone want to move to suspend this one, please? I'll move I'll move it. I'll second it. Okay. All in favor? I anyone opposed? Okay, thanks Tracy. Thank you. Okay, the next one is planning board file 240707 281st Street 231st Street Washington Avenue, La Hardin Busher and Jenzoasi. And this staff report begins on page um 26 the board packages. Um the board may remember this has been on the agenda for quite a while this year. Um, back on January 7th, the board approved a modification to the CU in order to add

um the third floor of the existing building with a new um um restaurant component that was approved by the board on January 7th. Later that month and on January 28th, a PTR was issued for the operation of the restaurant on the first and second floor of the of the of the building. On opening night, there was a live band performing in the courtyard and they did receive a violation for that. We did send a letter to the applicant advising them to approval before the planning board for a progress report in March. Um in March the board heard from the applicant and continued the progress report um to a date certain of today. Um since that time is not in our staff report there was a violation issued to the valet valet operator for using um um unauthorized um metered parking spaces. So, we are recommending at this time that the board set a revocation hearing for the um um for the September 9th meeting or at a minimum continue the progress report to hear the outcome of the violation. I know that the applicant has stated that the valet operator separate from the establishment, but we consider all violations issued to the property. Um, so we are that's we are recommend hear from the applicant any any public testimony and set a revocation modification hearing for for for September or at least continue the progress report to the September 9th meeting. With that I'll turn it over to the applicant. Good morning Mr. Chair, members of the board uh Nicholas Rodriguez 200 South Biscane Boulevard Fernandez Larkin and Tapenz. Um so as Michael mentioned we were back here in March. Um and as promised uh there were no further events at the venue. This was just a one-time thing. of part of the opening and since then it's the the restaurant has really been wellreceived. Uh I do have a short presentation and some slides that I'd like to walk you through addressing uh some of the concerns that Michael has raised and that I raised in the staff recommendation. Um so going to how the restaurant has been received. We received a really nice email from Gerald Pausner who was really involved in the the you know preparation

of the CUP. He's on the board at the Cosmopolitan. Um they really enjoyed it. They say it's one of the best things to happen to South of Fifth in the 20 years that he's been living there. The restaurant has been really positively reviewed and there's nobody claiming that the the road is being blocked by the valet. Um there's no complaints about noise connected with this restaurant. Um Michael did uh have a a site visit um and confirm that we are in compliance with the conditions of the CUP requiring a noise limiter. So you can crank the music on the system. It won't necessarily go up um to a a level that violates the CUP. Um, unfortunately, uh, as Michael mentioned, there there was a violation issued to the valet operator. Um, we don't receive any notice of this. The first time we learned about it was when the staff report came out. So, the owner doesn't get any notice. Although, uh, the staff report does mention that it's connected to the property. The property owner doesn't get any notice of this violation. We have no idea that's happening. Um, as far as the characterization that the spaces were being used, uh, were not authorized. I think that's a mischaracterization of the violation, what we have here on the screen is that from April 1st to May 1st, there was a payment made to use those spaces. And, uh, we do have the valley operator here if you guys would like to hear from them. But I think the issue was more about the amount of time that the cars were in the valet spaces while patrons were coming to get their cars. And they've appealed that violation. And I think that's a completely separate issue from the operation of the restaurant. Valet operators have a license. They're subject to enforcement from the from code enforcement. And if they continuously violate their license, their their BTR will be revoked. U I don't think it's proper for the restaurant operator uh to be subject to the actions of a third party. Um albeit once we're made aware of these types of things going on um where we are coordinating with our valet operator to make sure that there's no issues in the future. Um, but just to be clear, there is no issue with the valet operation. They have properly rented the spaces,

they've paid for the spaces, and there's been no queuing or problems um with the valet operations. Uh, and I know Michael didn't mention it now, but in the staff recommendation, there was a a mention of some noise complaints. Um, and I I've spoken with Naen, who's the general manager, and she's kind of tried to run down these noise complaints and figure out where they're coming from. Uh, unfortunately, they're all coming from one person at the neighboring building. Um, this person does not engage with the code enforcement officers. The code enforcement officers continuously come out. They don't hear music that's uh rising to the level of a violation. They're consistently playing ambient music. And unfortunately, there is a pretty long history of this particular person, you know, using the system and falsely reporting things against her condo association, against the neighboring restaurant. um to the point where there's even an entire YouTube channel uh that this person has started um claiming false things about the restaurant operator. Even things like that the restaurant operator is distributing fentinel and these crazy things um that are obviously not true. Um I don't know why this person is saying that potentially uh through the videos they seem to have a problem with the with the restaurant operators Macedonian descent. Um so we we don't think that these noise complaints which are not violations by a person who's not credible and it's not corroborated by any other evidence, any other complaints um should form the basis of any further revocation, modification or progress reports. Um there's just simply not any evidence. Uh as we mentioned, the sound limiter is installed. This is an email from our acoustic consultant who's out of Washington DC confirming that our sound limiter is in place to keep music ambient within the property lines. Um, and there's a pretty significant landscape buffer that that the owner installed in between the two properties. Uh, and if you see here, there's even like there's no tables on that side. There's a significant space where there's no tables, no speakers. Uh, it's really hard to believe that there's any

music being heard at the building next door. Uh, and even the code officers that have inspected the site agree. Every time they go, they say there's I walk to the neighboring property, I don't hear the music. Um, so we don't think that those noise complaints are forming the basis. Michael, is it can we confirm that it's all from one person the complaints? I don't have that information. We didn't raise that as a reason for us to continue or ask for a um revocation modification hearing. I went to the site um last week. We tested the music at the maximum volume and it's well below even ambient level. So we don't have any concern level. Can I uh number one my to the president to the chair um I thought that we thought you had recommended that revocation and we thought that was excessive. Oh yeah, we're not recommending. I don't I don't understand why we're continuing to call it a a revocation. Uh, you know, a progress report. I understand, but uh I I don't believe it's accurate to state that they're in any danger of their BTR for that third floor being revoked. Um, and you are stating right in staff recommendation revocation modification here. Right. So, so our our recommendation to set the hearing doesn't mean we're going to actually recommend that the the CP modify to revoke. I would make a first thing I do if I if I'm allowed to in a motion is that I do not believe that this should be titled revocation. Uh I don't think that that it's appropriate and I would like to either cancel or suspend that concept. No, this this is this is a progress report, but staff can still the board can recommend whatever you want. That'll be a motion you'll make. The chair, Mr. Marks, just on that point, I just wanted to make one more point here at the end is is um you know, the owner is going through a lending

process right now and we've been in touch frequently with the owner's lender and their council and they really don't appreciate the difference between a progress report and a revocation. And it's exactly when these staff reports come out, it's really damaging um to the owner and his ability to continue. We'll deal with that with with a motion at the end. All right. And then so the only other comment I would make is that I and my wife walked by there to go to a different restaurant on a Saturday this Saturday at 100 p.m. and I heard no noise walking from the sidewalk. Um so I I mean my I've heard nothing in the neighborhood, nothing reported to the neighborhood association. Uh I think they have been a benefit to the community as stated by the closest credible neighbor which is um the uh Cosmopolitan and its board member Robert Pausner. So um I would just like to put my own come back. We're let you make a motion. Is there anyone here in chambers to speak on this? Anybody on Zoom? There's nobody on Zoom with their hand raised. Okay. Um Melissa. Yeah. Um just um clarification about the parking issue here. Um I I just find it interesting how they come to the planning board and we approve these these parking plans and yet they have no they have no connection to the valet parking like all of a sudden it becomes a valet parking issue. So I think it's up to the applicant to make sure that the valet operator does give them notice of a violation so that can be addressed. So yeah, I think that's an important part is if you guys are getting the approval on this and you guys are holding the responsibility. It's for the the property owners um to to stay in touch with the valet service and to be informed of some of the uh the issues you guys are having. That's not uh it's not something you wash your hands away from once you guys um you know get the the the the planning board uh to approve the the the planning the parking plan. I agree. And I'll just echo Keith's com. I've been there

multiple times whether I'm meeting or just stopping in and and I've never heard any excessive noise and I they've always been so gracious and I think the place is a great addition and I appreciate what you're saying about the lender. So, um that's just my two cents. So, did anybody else have any The only thing I'll say to echo what Melissa said is just it's your responsibility, especially in projects where the valet parking lanes and the spaces that's an issue in the application, especially in those types of projects. You guys retain ultimate responsibility of it. So, I don't think there's no responsibility for the owner. But um to me I it's a issue that seems to have already been fixed and it's a non-issue and it's completely unrelated to the music issue from before. So I'm in favor of what is it? Suspending. You can conclude it if you want. I'd like to make a motion to suspend. Do you have any I'd want suspend or conclude question. Should we conclude or suspend? It's the same thing. You can the same thing but I just want to make sure all the board members have a chance. No, I'm on I'm on board with that. I just know that um I mean just moving forward I know the reason you want to do that obviously are the financial reasons. Um I don't know if we we want to take those into consideration but regardless um I don't I don't think there's been an issue here since since we heard it last. Um you know obviously if there's something that happens moving forward you'll be back here. Um so I I'm okay with suspending and and through the chair we do have an annual progress report requirement that's new. So, we'll be doing one in writing and when the third floor opens, we'll be back for a progress report for the third floor. So, there's it we're on the schedule to come back anyways. It's just maybe three months after the summer probably. When's that when's the they're working on their permits for the third floor now, so it's not ready yet, but um you know, hopefully 6 months or so, they'll be getting getting to work on that. I'd just like to say that I have

seen that website and I concur with you. Uh it's a little different. Um, also I agree with Keith and also Melissa. I'd like to see uh the valet somehow be tied in with the owner operator so that everybody knows what's going on because it's not right to penalize you if you don't know. But there needs to be some better communication and or even a written agreement somehow. Agree. And to the extent we just wanted to clarify that the spaces were rented, right? It wasn't that the restaurant was using public parking spaces. I think whatever the violation is, it's not the that the spaces weren't rented. It's they were rented. Keith, you want to move it? Yes. I'd like to move a motion to suspend. Okay. Second, Alyssa. Okay. All in favor? Anyone opposed? Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. The next progress report is planning for file PB 2110448 23523rd Street. And this was last before you for a progress report on on April 8th. Um so from history of this application on July 27th a modified cup was issued to Miami Loud Holdings LLC as the operator of the neighborhood impact establishment. Condition two of the cup allows the submission of an affidavit to transfer approval to the new operator. Um that does require a progress report before the board or scheduling that progress report prior to the applicant submission and staff's acceptment of that affidavit. So, um that's why this um applicant was before you on April 8th for the progress report. As noted in our staff report, there have been no new violations issued to the property um since the April 8th meeting. However, we did know that there was one app one um violation that was issued on March 6th that wasn't included in our prior staff report and that was for also issued for um the valet operation. Oh, because of

this, we are recommending that the applicant hear testimony from the applicant in public and um continue the progress report to the September meeting in order to hear the outcome of the special magistrate hearing which is scheduled for July 3rd. But I'll turn it over to the applicant. Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Mickey Morero here on behalf of uh Bakar, the the operator of this venue. Uh as Michael said and you know we we can con uh agree with his report there have been no new violations uh against the operator since the April 8th meeting. Uh we're closely monitoring. I've been in touch with code. I was hoping they would be here. I don't think they are but it's you know my impression from them is that the operation's been going well. They haven't had any issues. They haven't complaints. No noise. No queueing. No issues just like the prior application. And Nick and I huddled on this on Friday. we first found out that there had been a third party valet violation in reading the staff report and and I think a misson is correct. There should be some way for you know for that to because I I would have looked into it. I actually went into the system and the description of the violation isn't even uploaded. So it's just it's a valet violation. Another lawyer for that company appealed it. I I will be in touch with them but but we have no knowledge of how it happened, what occurred. My client wasn't even aware of it. Uh but as far as things they control, they've had no issues. Uh we continued, you know, there was some hiccups in the beginning with the naming that caused the license to be suspended which they were closed for a while, but that we got past that working with Michael and staff. Uh and we we we would ask that you just conclude the progress reports here because they've had zero violations. It was pretty smooth a few months prior, but now they've had nothing else and we hope it continues that way. Um, we'll be in touch with the valet company when we have a little more time just to figure out what happened to be in communication with them, make sure it doesn't happen again, but we weren't even aware and still don't really know the facts of the violation fortunately. Question for you, I mean you and staff. I think we dealt with this some previous applicants that were in front of us

where we tied the operator to the landlord. So, anytime an operator was noticed, the landlord started getting the notices. So, can we do that for anyone associated with an address? Yeah. I mean, we can we can ask code compliance to for sure do that. And I was going to I was actually going to ask the gazette same thing. Yeah. Just to make sure they're all right before we have board. Are you finished for now? Anybody in chamber to speak on this? Anyone on Zoom? There's no one on Zoom with their hand raised. All right. Start with Keith. Yeah. Uh I just would um in this situation um because it's a new operation uh because of the uh noise complaints and the seriousness of some of the complaints in March. Uh my personal opinion is I'd like to hear back and if there's no violations suspended in September, but I'd like to continue this. I think there it was a noise issue. We don't have any noise violations. It was just noise violations at all. No, the first issue was a the BTR sort of the naming of the place. Yeah. The owner. I'm sorry. And then the second issue is the that just came up now was the valet operation. And I can explain that first violation if you need more clarity. Yes. Yeah. The one on 32. So the one the measures imposed about alcohol and about uh 50 cents performance. Oh yeah, we discussed that one at the April meeting. What happened was the timing of the notice. You have to notify the police department certain amount of days before you you have an act. And if you sign the act within that time period, you have to notify them immediately. They do this regularly. I'm copied on the emails two or three times a week whenever they have any whether it's an artist, whether it's an athlete. Uh and they've done events for the Club World Cup. They did inveh uh this past week. They always notify the police. This one they missed it by a little by a few hours, but they eventually did notify. We discussed it

last at the last planning board meeting. Nothing's happened since. Okay. Wait, Michael, sorry. Reiterate what the staff recommends that it be brought back in September. We're just recommend a continuence of the September meeting of the progress report. Okay. and and we're happy to come back. But again, the the only reason he's requesting that and we discussed it is because of the valet violation that we're not even handling. But you know, just like the last one, that's the only thing open here. No other violations have been issued at all. I think again because the new operation is the first, you know, we we can we can move on. I don't think we have to follow the progress report and if there's something comes up again, you'll be back here. So I think, you know, saving everyone a little time Any other got a motion? All right. Can I Any other comments? All right. Motion to um conclude the progress report. Yeah. Second. Okay. All in favor? Anyone opposed? Okay. Thank you very much. All right. We're on to new applications. First one is planning board file 25740681 Lennox Avenue. And the staff report begins on page 52 of the board packages. This is the former um yard house location on Lennox Avenue. The applicants requesting a cup for the operation of a neighborhood impact establishment including indoor entertainment. A total of 296 296 seats are proposed with 263 seats indoors and 33 seats outdoors. The total occupant load including back of house and performance areas is 566 persons and the proposed um patron occupant content is approximately 400 people. The applicant is proposing indoor entertainment as part of a new restaurant operation which will consist of um live performances 5 to eight um per night. For comparison purposes, the former yard house operations included approximately 403

seats and the traffic study provided as part of that operation was analyzed for 445 seats. Now, as part of the um application, the applicant is requesting the indoor entertainment operations from 11:00 a.m. till 2:00 a.m. We have no objection to that. They are requesting the outdoor operation Sunday through Thursday from 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. and Friday and Saturdays from 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. Now, the applicant has done a good job in terms of isolating the location of the um outdoor component, including restricting the outdoor seating to the southern half of the property, including moving the entrance from um from the front of the property to the to the side. However, we are recommending some additional modifications to the hours of operation, including the exterior exterior hours operating from Sunday through Thursday 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. and Friday and Saturdays from 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. Regarding the um the sound system, we are recommending that before a BTR is issued that planning staff go out there with a sound consultant and test the the sound system to make sure that sound and vibrations from the interior are not felt on the exterior. Um and we'll set the sound um um settings at that time. Regarding the exterior, we are recommending that um that the entertainment be limited to strictly the interior and only the um outdoor area have ambient background music with speakers also limited to the southern um half of the property. We are recommending that the the the music stop Sunday through Thursdays um at 10 p.m. and Friday and Saturdays at 11 p.m. Uh we also recommending no subwoofers on the exterior and that a condition be put in place that outdoor music shall not be plainly audible at a distance of 100 ft or more from the property. All these conditions are to protect the residential um Palm View neighborhood to the north. And we are recommending that um as as is typical for any type of application like this that a progress

report be scheduled within 60 days of the um property opening without turn it over to Monica for a presentation. Before you go first, it's great to see you. It's been a long time, but uh any disclosures this new application, any disclosures about communications? Yeah, I I talked you just stayed on the record what you're I'm sorry. Uh yeah, I I I did I wanted to know more about the project so that I just had a quick overview. Spoke with the attorney. Yes. Okay. Same with me. We uh emailed back and forth. Okay. Jonathan, I received an email which I rudely did not respond to because I was too busy, but thank you. No disclosure. No disclosure. Okay. I got the email. You're up. Good morning, board. Uh Monica Enon, MHE Law Office at 7950 Northwest 53rd Street. I'm joined today by our team. Our architect Alyssa Kripplin from Macwork. Um designer Stephanie Kruin from Studio Munch. Um our sound engineer is on his way. He got stuck in traffic. So I'm not sure if he will make it before the end of the meeting, but as Sam Shroyer with Ed Duggar's office, my clients are Ultra Supper Club, which are comprised of Danny Soano and Charles Kabuth. They extend their sincerest apologies for not being here today. There was their intention to be at all of their hearings. Unfortunately, Danny's son has been preparing for his wedding in Morocco for quite some time and it was either move the wedding or move the hearing. Um, I said go to the wedding. I think I'll I can do the hearing. So, um, they do extend their regrets that they didn't cancel the wedding. Yeah, we could have showed up in Morocco. No problem. Yeah, we could have done this over there. Um so Danny and Charles both have each individually have over 50 years of experience in hospitality and service. Um they have a number of restaurants throughout uh Canada

and if I can uh they have a number of restaurants throughout Canada that you can see on the uh on the board. They have high-end highscale um they're not fly by night uh restaurant tours. Locally they have a level six and a mall in Coconut Grove, Sophia in the Design District, and more notably here in Miami Beach, they own Bibblo. Um, these are all topscale restaurants and endeavors. So, we're we're looking at the Yard House property, which is located at 1681 Lennox Avenue. To the south of us is Lincoln Road and across 17th Street is the Palm View neighborhood. Currently, this is what we're looking at. This is the Yard House venue. We have received uh design review approval for some other images you'll see shortly. But I wanted to point out this uh image because you can see that uh there is a kind of an indent in the front of the property that kind of sets back a little bit. That is the area for the outdoor courtyard. The entire rest of the area to the north will not have any seating, any speakers, any use. So I just wanted to be very clear on that. Uh this is what obviously the exterior on the north looks like. So that you can see it is a solid concrete wall. And this is what was what was was approved by the design review board. Beautiful um stylistic uh metal uh grading. We think it's a great addition aesthetically to the area. I think most importantly is that we are removing and you can see from this image, we are removing the main entrance that is currently located on the north end of the property, the northwest corner which is nearest the residential community. We have completely relocated it to the south end of the property and it actually faces the parking lot. It's not

even on the street. You actually have to go through a path to get to the entrance. that will not only assist with noise but also any queuing issues, any people standing around. So, what is the concept? The concept is a very high-end, high-scale uh supper club, the type that that made Miami Beach famous in the 50s and 60s. So, they have everything is curated from this veil. um from the design of the screen to what you're going to see inside. It all comes from this allure of this um lace veil that you see here. Entertainment. The entertainment is something they've taken seriously. And who is curating the entertainment? Well, it happens to be one of the executive directors to for 17 years. Again, this is not fly by night. They are um going to have events throughout the evening. the the um the entertainment lasts between 8 to 12 minutes. Um there's about uh between five and eight throughout during the night so that there's no specific time. There's no queuing. There's no waiting for one event. It's ongoing throughout the evening. We have a couple of stages. We have a stage in the middle of the of the property. It's a small stage where people can come on and off. We expect that as a good circtolelet type style project, they're not only going to be going from stage to stage, but also walking around the venue. We I know the client doesn't like this, but we call this the Muppet wall. And if you are of a certain age, you will remember the Muppet Wall. Um this is the this is what we're looking at for entertainment. It is only inside. There is no entertainment proposed for the exterior. Um the exterior we've also added uh double door vestibules to going into the courtyard as well as along the south. The

courtyard you can see here this is just you know we're just looking at land and an idea for tables but the courtyard is actually less intense than what was previously there by Yardhouse. Yard house had 48 tables on the exterior. We're proposing 33 and again furthest away from the venue. We absolutely have no uh problems with what Michael talked about with subwoofers. We actually that was our plan to have a limiter um which will restrict sound on the exterior only to background only to ambient level. The goal here is while you're waiting for that seat inside, while you're waiting to see the entertainment inside, you have a place you can have a drink. you have a place you can have a snack while you're waiting to get indoors because really this place is about the indoors. It is not about that courtyard. No matter how beautiful they make it, you're there kind of just waiting to get to that next level. So this is what a yard house looks like now. So that you can see just in general what the the amount of tables and you can see here that we have a lot less seating. yard house was approved for I believe it was 45 seat 403 seats by the planning board. They ultimately ended up with 397 seats in their business tax receipt. We are proposing a total of 296 less than more than a hundred less than what they had um indoors. So we do believe that we will have a much less impact on the neighborhood. And here's a side to side comparison where you can actually see the number of seats um that we are proposing for this venue. We have we actually have reached out to the neighborhood. We have support from the Lincoln Road Bid who I know is here.

We did reach out to the neighbors along 17th Street on the north side of 17th. While they like I think the general concept of the project, they do they have expressed uh issues with sound. They proposed conditions that we uh responded to. They they didn't like our responses, but um nevertheless, we had agreed to reduce our hours of operation on the exterior to 11 p.m. during midweek. Um we do believe that that should service the the neighborhood altogether. So, we have we accept all of staff's conditions with the exception of the weekends. We would like to remain open in the exterior till 2 am and we don't understand the need to um limit music an hour before closing. Even if the whole purpose here is to create ambiance while you're waiting to get inside, we would request that uh limiting the hours of music before closing the removed form from the order. With that, I will open ourselves up to any questions that the board may have and limit time for rebuttal. Okay. I have a preliminary question. Is this part of the INC Inc. Entertainment group? It is part of Inc. Entertainment. So I am one of their lawyers and I didn't realize until today. Do I need to kind of withdraw myself? I did not know that. Uh do you represent them now? Do you Well, our Yeah, I mean I have a relationship with some of the partners and we do a lot of their corporate filings and so then I would recommend that you that you recuse because a vote on this matter would ignore the private gain or loss of your client which is Can I sit here or do you want me do I have to leave the room? Uh, technically you have to leave the room. All right. Yeah. Sorry about that. And and uh and we'll give you a a form. Okay. All right. I guess I'll take it over. All right. Do we have any comments from the public? Yes, we do have some we do have one person with their hand raised on um Zoom. Um John Courtourtney. Hi, John. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth, whole truth,

and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. You have three minutes. Thank you. So, uh my name is John Courtney. I'm calling on behalf of the Palm View Neighborhood Association and we represent the single family neighborhood across the street from this site. Um I think as you all recognize this is a proposal for an amplified entertainment establishment. It's just 150 ft from an historic single family neighborhood. And while we're supportive of new concepts in our area, we believes the planning board um has a responsibility to create very clear accountability when an operator is proposing to put such a high impact establishment on the very edge of their zoning district. Uh and if the operator is willing to accept accountability to control their noise pollution and potentially unruly patrons, then we're very supportive uh of the project. And we've read staff's recommendations and believe they do enough to protect the neighborhood while not infringing on the operator's plans. Um the most important recommendation is the use of the plainly audible standard um rather than the impossible to enforce ambient standard. Um, unfortunately, you know, as the uh operator has already mentioned, we have not been able to find agreement with them over the last couple months, although it does seem like maybe now before the board, they are willing to accept these conditions, which were encouraged by. Um, lastly, I just want to say uh that, you know, like I think we should let the operator do whatever they'd like on the site, but just hold them accountable and if they fail to live up to the promises they're making or fail to control their noise, we just don't want our neighbors to be the ones to suffer. Uh, and that there is a a route for recourse uh and for holding them responsible going forward. So, we'll hope you'll accept all the recommended conditions from staff. Uh, and I also hope that if the board engages in extended negotiations with the applicant today that you'll just give me the benefit of of speaking again and to represent the interest of the neighbors. Thank you. John, had you had any um issues with the pass operator in your neighborhood?

No, not with Yard House. Um although I will say I think the idea that um it's just a very different type of establishment, right? That Yard House had ambient music outside uh and it was a neighborhood place, right? It was like a sports bar really is what it became over time. Um though I think it's just a very different op a different type of operation. Um but no no problems with having you know um operators in this site. I think it's we all like having things close to the neighborhood as long as they're um being held accountable for their noise. Hi John. I got your email um a couple months ago and um I had a question about the hours that the yard had. Um, do you remember what those were? I do not know, but they were they were not like a late night establishment. Like I said, it was usually they might stay open late to play like West Coast basketball games or something like that. I think in practice they were um closed quite early. Okay. And do you do you feel like 33 seats lessened from I think it was was it 48 or something like that seats would make a difference in the sound? What if there was some baffling put up um to allow them to keep their hours or Yeah, I think the hours I agree. Yeah, I think that I'm less cons if they want to have ambient music outside, the number one concern is that they're just held responsible for any noise pollution, right? Um but I I think it's important too that I think there's sometimes what happens is there's a lot of promises to put up baffling and um I'm glad the applicant's no longer claiming that the screens are going to be enough to contain the sound. Yeah, I think just whatever it takes. Yeah, I think whatever it takes to contain the sound is what the applicant should be held accountable to, not some sort of potential like I, you know, not using, for example, a noise engineer, a sound engineer to to get approval for anything and then whether that turns out to be true or not ends up being on the

neighborhood and not on the applicant. Okay. Thank you, John. Thank you, John. Thank you all. Is there anyone else on the Zoom? There we have another caller. Uh, Mitch Novik. Hi, Mitch. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you'll give in this proceedings? Is the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes. Good morning, Mitch Novik, 37year resident of the entertainment district. I uh appreciate what I heard from Miss Anon regarding double vestibule doors. That should be the standard and model followed throughout Miami Beach. uh noise uh must always be contained to the property lines and I I wish this applicant well. Thank you. Thank you, Mitch. If I may quickly address one of the questions that came up during Mr. Courtney's uh speech, the hours that the BTR were for yard was 2 a.m. Thank you. We have nobody else on Zoom, so I guess we can take public testimony chambers. Good morning everyone. My name is Annabelle Yopies, the executive director for Lincoln Road. I'm here to share the support obviously of the bid behind this applicant that this is exactly the type of operator that Lincoln Road needs right now. It really will spur the business that we need not only for our residents to have a quality place to go to, but of course our visitors. I respectfully request that the applicant proceed with the hours that they're proposing. They are a quality operator. Obviously, they have a restaurant already on Miami Beach. They have two in Miami and they've never had any complaints. So, I feel that they can accomplish what they say they're going to do and provide the service to the level that Miami Beach would absolutely enjoy. So, we're here to support and we want to move this project forward as

soon as possible. Thank you. Thank you. Question for Madam Chair. Um, I wanted to ask about I'm I'm concerned. I I love the prefab the laser cut wall, but I'm having been in retail, I don't think this is going to stop any sound. Um, what can we do to uh some kind of baffling, some kind of noise attenuation that's going to because this is this is beautiful, but I don't think it's going to stop. So, you're correct. It is difficult to baffle music outside. That's why from the beginning we we always said this would only be ambient music. There is no intention to have anything above ambient level music. What do you think the area ambient? Because what I'm looking at is where you where you can have a conversation without the music inter without the music interrupting. Um also we are not proposing to have any speakers. Um as Michael actually indicated in his report that was based actually on the plans. We have no intentions of having any speakers uh further north of where the actual restaurant seating is which is more than 210 ft away from the nearest residential area. Okay. We will also have interior landscaping within that uh screen. While not a perfect baffling device, it does have some absorption. And in the application that you just heard just a few minutes ago, you had a property that was directly adjacent one from the next. They had a hedge. And I believe Mr. Marks even said as he was walking down the street, you couldn't hear their music. You couldn't hear their noise. Why? Because it is ambient level music. And that's exactly what the client is proposing for this case. I would I would like to add though since I was mentioned um our neighborhood

association and we we do this with all of our outdoor speakers. I know this gentleman said he likes the clearly audible. But what we've done successfully, whether it's catch or that restaurant is ask the operator to put into their obligations into their VTR that they will have it monitored at no higher than 65 dB. Um, it does work. I noticed in the sound report, which I do look at because I think it it's valuable. Um the ambient sound even on weekends is about 6566. So if you do not exceed the sound around then then all you're left with is talking. Um so I just strongly recommend I don't know if we can put that into it but I do think they need a sound limiter at 65 dB on the outside. The other question I would have when we were talking if this is for queuing, uh I have experience with restaurants near our area in which people tend to linger past closing. Um wouldn't 100 p.m. be uh appropriate because why would anyone be there after 1 p.m. if they're going inside? I I think mine is doesn't object to the outdoor conditions closing at um 11:00 p.m. the outdoor seating during the week and midnight on the weekends. Midnight, but but if we were going to push it, we should push it no farther than 100 p.m. I and and I would agree to and and we did have a concern regarding the 12 a.m. on the weekends, Michael. Um we would agree to 1:00 a.m. We think that's reasonable. As you indicated, Mr. marks. It is basically a use um to it's it's kind of a staging area before you go into to your table. So, we would not

have an objection to closing it at 1:00 a.m. Um what we do have concerns about is is shutting the music down early because that is the only ambiance that you have outside. It is background music. It is uh the plainly audible standard that is used in the code. Um and again, that is what was used in in the other project that you heard it earlier and there were no issues. We will have a sound limiter uh and the and the sound system will be reviewed by staff before we have our license. So, they will set whatever with with uh with our sound engineer. They'll figure out what the right levels are and limit it to that sound so that we don't have that impact. Yeah. And I wouldn't put a decibel number in here because it's going to vary depending where you're on the property. I think we have the standard of not of um uh not to interfere with normal conversation. We're going to test that in site. And then also the requirement that it not be playing playing the audible 100 ft from the property. So that will be tested on the site. Whatever that decibel ends up being will be will be set. But we're not going to put decibb in the code. We we did that as a homeowners neighborhood association different than the city and I do understand that. But we do think that if the board if the board as you suggested were wanted to extend the outdoor hours to um 1:00, we strongly would recommend that the the music stop at at midnight. Right. Just before we continue the comments, is there anyone else here in the room that was gonna speak? No, you're good. All right. All right. Let's go down the questions. Scott, did you have any questions or comments? Yeah. I know in our email um exchange, you mentioned that one of the con one of the um things you told the neighbors, you would uh say that noise wouldn't be plainly audible after 11 p.m. 150 ft from the from the property. But you're okay now with what the city's proposing um 100 ft. We were always okay with 100 ft. It was the neighbors who proposed

150. So we were acquiescing to the 150. It didn't make sense to me that 150 since 100t is the requirement and 11 p.m. is the is the regulations. We agreed to to those uh to those conditions. Um they just had more conditions than than just the plainly Ottawa at 150. So, so as you heard, I mean, I think that's, as Michael said, that's probably the most important thing that noise or any sound can't be heard. Absolutely. Can't be plainly audible 100 feet from the property, regardless of what time it is or or where the noise is coming from. Just one clarification, Michael. Um, in in um FA, you say in all outdoor areas, sound from the sound system should not be plainly audible 100 ft from the property. I assume that applies for any noise that might come from the inside of the property as well. Well, we're saying the yeah, for the standard for outdoors is that anytime at the property line, the the music or vibration should not be felt outside. Now, it's going to be hard to test that if you have music outdoors and indoors at the same time. That's what we'll we'll test at site conditions. Well, that's true. I mean, I guess maybe that could be rephrased then that just any noise any sound from the property regardless of where it comes from shall not be plainly audible 100 ft from the property. Yeah, that's that's the intent. You have to be careful though because I mean there's no way to really any sound is like people thinking well I mean you're talking about like sound system any any sound well even any sound from the property. That's because if there's one we could say any any music from the property. Right. Okay. And the way and the way the order is is drafted is it's any sound from the sound system. I would recommend keeping it that way. Yeah. No, I just want to be sure that it it applies. I don't anticipate um this to be like a nightclub venue where you have loud thumping music that you you know is going to break your eardrums. Um I don't anticipate that that's what they're going for here and they shouldn't be

going for that. So, you know, anything above ambient level is entertainment. There's a whole range of what that level is and we'll test that on site to make sure it's consistent with what they um are want to have in terms of their volume, but also ensuring that it doesn't it it's not hurt or felt outdoors. So, just so I can understand, you're okay with uh closing outdoor operations at 12 a.m. on weekdays and then the weekends 1:00 a.m. And you don't agree to you don't think it I personally I don't think it makes sense to cut off the music before that. Um why? Right. Okay. Right. Mr. Freedom. No, it just it creates an awkwardness. Right. So the other thing is if we're enforcing the 100 ft barrier, then it doesn't really matter that extra hour to the residents because they're beyond that 100 ft. And so the other thing is they're coming back. Is when is this planning to be open? I mean what what's the as soon as possible? Okay. So are you is it ready or is it like No, we have we have to wait for this. We had to wait until design review board approved in May in order to get the to start uh design plans. But yes, now if we get the approval from this board, then we can move forward with the application. Um, with respect to the hours, while we did request 12 a.m. uh during the week, we did agree to the neighbors that we would do we would close at 11:00 p.m. during the weekdays. Okay. So, we we did agree with this. We actually agree with staff's recommendation of 11:00 p.m. during the week. We would request the 1:00 a.m. that Mr. Marks mentioned on Friday and Saturday, but we would request that the music be allowed to play until that closing time. Right. Okay. Yeah, I'm fine with that. The the only thing I was just going to say is because I know you you have to come back 60 days after you open. Correct. And it depend, you know, we've seen the situations where somebody opens in the summer and they're super slow and it

doesn't really it's not real, you know, represent. It's not representative of what's actually going to be happening there. And so, but it sounds like you guys aren't opening this summer. I I don't I don't anticipate that. be lucky for and just for the for the neighbors to be listening, you know, part of the process who are listening that part of the process is they do come back after they open. And so that will be your opportunity for accountability if there is something that's bothering you or if you have complaints at that time, you can come and speak to the planning board. Uh I'm in support of it. I think the music should stay through closing time. Um, I think what we haven't spoken about enough is the reduced capacity that's going to be on the locations. Hopefully, uh, there should be a net net positive for the area. It'd be great to get some vibrancy back, you know, to Lincoln Road and and, uh, adjacent streets. Uh, and it seems to be a different offering and more of an upscale offering. So, I'm excited for it. Um, and you know, to Jonathan's point, hopefully hopefully the residents uh understand that you all will be coming back, you know, shortly after opening, so we'll be able to monitor uh how the hours, how the music, how the programming actually impacts uh the neighboring residents. Uh well, congratulations on the project. It is actually beautiful and I think it'll be a huge improvement uh for that building and for that neighborhood and the kind of places we want to see on Lincoln Road. and being familiar being from Canada, I'm familiar with a lot of your restaurants in Toronto and and the ones you have here in Miami. So, I think you guys are very credible operators. There's been just very classy places. Um and um I think this is uh a great project for us to have and just like um the other uh board members, I think we uh we're all on board when giving you guys the hours of uh on music with your hours of operation for outside. Excellent. Thank you. And I I concur with Melissa. I I I was very worried

about this space remaining vacant for a while. It's in a very unique place on Lincoln Road. I'm thrilled. Uh this is exactly what we need. Um and I also concur with my colleagues on the hours and and operations. I just would would caution you about adding a little bit of I I just don't think metal screens with some plants and things are going to do it. I But 33 seats as opposed to what you had. No noise. Are the doors open by any chance? So, so the doors that are that currently exist for yard house, those will be emergency exit only. So, those doors will never open unless there's an emergency. The doors that will access the courtyard are is another double door vestibial. So, it'll trap sound before it escapes into the courtyard. I just That's it. And I'm Congratulations because Lord knows we need it. Is that someone want to make a motion to move it? make a motion. All right, I'll second. The motion is to modify. The only change is to modify the 1 a.m. the 1 a.m. and that the music should remain through correct. Thank you, board. Who has a second on the motion? I say all in favor I I Congratulations. Thank you. Have a great day. Good luck. Should we reinvite Brian back in? Yes. All right, let me text him. You can come back. Brian witness. Pleasure. Nice seeing you live. Did you Good job.

We survived without you, Brian. We do well. We did okay. Everyone's happy. All righty. Last item on the agenda is planning board file 25754601 West 24th Street Lot Split. And this staff report begins on page 67, the board packages. So, the owner of the largest lot within the study area, which is 1525 West 24th Street, is a contract purchaser for the new lot that will be created by this proposed lot split. As proposed, the new singlestory structure complies with the minimum requirements to be considered a single family home, although it has been designed as an accessory structure to the primary residence located at 1515 um West 24th Street with the front of this structure facing the adjacent lot. Because of this, the new structure is well below the maximum lot coverage and unit size allowed for a new single family home. Um, the new home will be required to be reviewed by the DRB. As noted in our staff report, there are some concerns with their frontage elevation facing the street, which is comprised only of two garage doors and blank walls. So, we do believe that that elevation will have to be further developed as part of the DRB application, but we are supportive of the application and are recommending approval of the lot split. Without turn over to Mr. Morero for the um presentation. Good morning again, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Mickey Morero here on behalf of Patrick Dovigi, the owner of uh of these properties. With me today is my colleague Rob Alvarez and from Kobe Karp's office, Taylor Schumatter, project architect. Uh we get the presentation. Can we get the presentation up on the Thank you. So, here's the neighborhood. As you can see, and as Michael mentioned, this is essentially it's just a double lot, one of the largest lots in the area. The the majority of the lots are singular lots uh at about the 12,000 foot range. our properties 25,000 and change. The next slide. So again, these are the proposed lots bringing them in line with just just going back to the platted lot lines, bringing them in line to just

about everybody else in the neighborhood at about 13,000 12,000 square feet each. These are the surveys of the resulting lots that you see in your packet. Here's a staff analysis that we agree with. It was consistent with our analysis. Our future lots are consistent as not only with the average lot size but the median lot size and our proposed unit area will be well below uh the st the median in the area. So we meet all those standards. Here's the massing study that was done. Um you can see even at the maximum we're still consistent and compatible with the homes in the area. Again just more of the unit size projections on what the what the homes will look like. we meet lot. Again, I'm just going through this quickly because it's pretty straightforward, but I'm happy to answer any questions. Um, this is a massing context of the area. You can see our proposed home will be well in line and not overshadowing any of the of the other remaining lots. In fact, our client owns that one larger property which will remain uh and not be touched, but the resulting homes will be well compatible with the smaller lots. There is some limited demolition. Uh I think it's a mainly a pergola and some other small structures that will occur to bring property into compliance. You can see the areas proposed for demolition there. And again I think we we saw this before just an outline of the proposed new construction. As Michael mentioned, we have submitted DRB applications for the new structures. Those are current the new structure that's currently in process. We are making minor changes as as Michael alluded to to address some comments from staff and some changes that the owner has requested. So, we'll probably be going uh in a couple months to DRB and address those issues. But here, we're just discussing the split and we believe and agree with staff's conclusion that we meet all the criteria, fall well below the the median and average sizes. And again, this just reverts the lots back to how they were platted. We're not creating new lot lines. It's just the same resulting

lots. And I think with that, we can conclude. Yeah, I happy to answer any questions. Taylor's here should you have any architectural questions. But we do think it's a pretty straightforward law split. Anybody in chambers other than you to speak? No. Anyone on Zoom? There's nobody on Zoom with their hand raised. Okay. Any questions from any board members? One question. Just what's the intention? Uh meaning you split up and do all So our client actually purchased he actually purchased a lot across the street too. He's got a lot of family moving into the area. So that secondary lot will be used as as of now by the family, but it will meet all the requirements of a singular home and will go through a DRB process. The the remaining other half of that double lot he'll convey to a new owner and they'll just develop a new home there with a new family. But for now, that additional structure adjacent to the larger home will be used by the family, but they want to keep the option open of potentially, you know, selling that as well. Got it. Okay. Elizabeth Melissa, no. No comments. Motion. Someone want to make a motion? Motion to approve. Motion to approve. I'll second it. Okay. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? All righty. Thank you. Do you want to stay in chat a little bit longer or I'm just saying, Mr. Chair, I think we have a record time here for a planning board meeting as far as I can tell. But anyway, board agenda. Thank you all. Have a great day. Mr. Chairman, just I'm sorry. Just because I stepped away for a second. Did the board take disclosures? Uh, we didn't. Did anyone have a disclosure on this? Nope. Okay. Um, and just while we're on the record, so you're going to let us know because I don't I think you're going to be missing three with three missing. I'll let the board of members know if we need to have a meeting based upon any proposed code amendments. Okay. And if we don't have a meeting, the next meeting will be September. Correct. If we don't have the meeting on July 1st, the next meeting will be September 9th. Okay. All right. Then we're adjourned. Thank you. Thank you. That's