Planning Board - Regular Meeting

[Music] Welcome to the City of Miami Beach Commission chambers. We're glad to have you with us today. If you require ADA assistance or accommodations, please notify the city clerk or any staff member and we will be happy to assist you. As a courtesy to everyone present, please silence all cell phones and electronic devices at this time. Lobbyist disclosure reminder. If you are a lobbyist appearing before the city commission or any city board, you must have registered with the city clerk prior to participating. If you have not yet registered, please do so immediately. Presentation reminder. If you submitted a presentation within the 24 hours prior to the start of today's meeting, please check the computer located at the podium to ensure your file is properly loaded. When the floor opens for public comment, please step up to the podium, speak clearly into the microphone, and begin by stating your name and address for the record. How to participate in public meetings via Zoom. Once you have joined the Zoom meeting, go to the bottom panel and click on the raise hand icon to notify the meeting host that you would like to speak. As soon as the host grants you permission to speak, a dialogue box will

pop up on your screen with two options. Select the unmute button to begin speaking. After you finish speaking, mute your microphone and click on the lower hand icon. If you are joining Zoom via phone, tap the keypad icon and press star 9 to notify the meeting host that you have raised your hand to speak. A voice operator will prompt you to unmute your microphone by pressing star 6. Once unmuted, you may begin speaking. After you finish sharing your comments, be sure to press star 9 to lower your hand and star six to mute yourself. We kindly ask everyone to conduct themselves in a respectful and professional manner throughout today's meeting. Thank you for your cooperation and thank you for participating in your local government here in the city of Miami Beach. [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Music] Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. [Music]

[Music] Hey, [Music] hey, hey. [Music] [Music] [Music] What am I? [Music] Hey, [Music] don't be

[Music] 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.

Morning everybody. Welcome to the September 9th planning board meeting. Hope everyone had a great summer. Um, we have some sign we have a long agenda, but uh for the first time we're going to try a consent agenda for several items where there has been no adverse public comment and we believe it's non-controversial. Um, and there was a new agenda handed out. So, we'll follow that. But we'll start today. I think we have a full attendance. We do. Um, uh, to the board, the minutes from last meeting were handed out this morning. If someone could make a motion to approve them, that would be great. Motion to approve. They get a second. Second. Okay. All in favor? I.

Anyone opposed? Okay, those are approved. Now, I'll turn it over to the city attorney.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning to the members of the board. Today's meeting of the planning board will be conducted in a hybrid format with the board physically present in the commission chambers at Miami Beach City Hall and applicant staff and members of the public beering 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 in to 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 in the Zoom app or dial star9 if they are 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 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 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 staff or the public who will be testifying today. Please raise your right hands. This is anyone who's going to testify today on an application. Uh, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Thank you. Thank you, Nick. Okay, we're going to start with um requests for continuences. The first is planning board file 25776, liquor store prohibition on Lincoln Road. We like to request that this item be continued to the March 10th, 2026 meeting date. Okay. Do we need to hear comment on that? Um, anyone here to speak on this item? Anyone on Zoom? There's nobody on Zoom with their hand raised. Okay. Um, anyone comment here? We want to mo move it. Someone want to move it? I'll move it. Okay. Second. Scott, any shield? All in favor?

Anyone opposed? Okay. Move to March. Okay. Next one is planning board file 25777, increased distance separation for tobacco and vape stores. And with this item, likewise, we'd like to have this continue to the March um 10th, 2026 meeting day. Okay. Anyone here to speak on this? Is this affected by state legislation? Motion to continue. Anyone here to speak on this? Anyone on Zoom? No. Nobody on Zoom with their hand raised. Okay. Motion to continue. Okay. Can I get a second? Second. Second. Okay. All in favor? I opposed. Okay. Move to March.

Next one is planning board file 257731784 West Avenue. I believe if the applicant's here, they would like to request a continuence till the October 16th meeting. Does the applicant want to speak? Okay. Anyone here to speak on this item? Anyone on Zoom? On Zoom with their hand raised. Okay. Someone want to move? Motion to continue. I'll second it. Okay. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? Okay. And the last one is planning board file 25763600 Washington Avenue.

Likewise is a request to for continuence to the October 16th meeting. Anyone here to speak on this one? Anyone on Zoom? There's nobody on Zoom with their hand raised. Okay. Any move to continue? Okay. Melissa seconded all in favor. All opposed. Okay.

All right. Um we're going to go on to our seven consent agenda items. Michael So, I'm going to go through and read each of the items and we'll ask for um public comment and also ask if any of the board members wish to um pull an item off the consent agenda. So, starting with the first item, it's PB25-0742 for 3925 Collins Avenue. This is an application for modification to a previously issued conditional use permit for the operation of mechanical parking garage. Specifically, the applicant is requesting to change the owner operator and update the conditions of approval. The second application is PB25-0759 for 30.

You know, Mike, I'd rather let's just see if there is there any public comment. Anyone here to speak on the first item? Is there anyone on Zoom? There's nobody on Zoom with their hand raised. All right. I just want to Sure, we'll do that individually. Yeah, if you don't mind. I think it'd be better. Um, anyone in the board any any problem with with voting on it? Okay. So, it'd be voting on a favorable recommendation. So, can I get a Well, I think we'll do we'll do one vote at the end. Okay. One vote for all of them, but just Okay. I just want to go one by one about public comment. Okay. And and just to be clear, these are public hearing items. Um they can only be approved as part of a consent agenda if no member of the board pulls the item for discussion and no member of the public uh request to speak. Correct.

Okay. The next item is PB25-0759 3500 Flamingo Drive. This is a single family home lot split. This is an application um to subdivide the existing single site comprised of two plated lots into two individual buildable parcels. Is there any public comment on this application? There's nobody with their hand raised online. Nobody in chambers. Okay. Next one.

The next application is on PB25-0780. This is 7605 Collins Avenue, a comprehensive plan and future land use map amendment. This pertains to the um parcel of land located at 7605 Collins Avenue to change the zoning from residential single family RS to public facility PF. Is there any public comment online for this application? There is um one person with their hand raised online. Joh. Um,

good morning. I just wanted to alert you that your volume is very low. My computer is all the way up and I can barely hear you. I don't actually have a comment to this item. Thank you very much. Okay, we'll speak louder. Thank you. And by the way, if the board when when we go one by one, if anybody on the board wants for any reason take this off the consent agenda to tell us at the time. Okay. Thanks. The next item is PB25-0781 7605. Collins Avenue, the same as the prior address. This is a zoning district change to change the zoning from um RS4 residential single family to GU government use. Is there any public comment on this application?

There's no one online with their hand raised. No one.

The next one is PB25-0787. Good standing requirements for zoning amendments. This ordinance applies to private applications for code amendments and comprehensive plan amendments and requires that prior to consideration of any such amendments by the planning board that there be no open zoning city code building or life safety violations on the subject property. Um also requires there should be no outstanding fees, fines or open bills due to the city when prior to the um ordinance being reviewed by the planning board. Is there any public comment on this um application? Okay, next one.

The next one is BB25-0788 notice requirements for rescheduled Landis board meetings. This ordinance basically codifies and requires that we place on the county website whenever a meeting has been cancelled. We give a 5-day notice um um prior to the um the applications coming back to the planning board. We've already started this process. Whenever an application is continued, we automatically place it on the county's website. So, we're already implementing this process. Is there any comment, public comment on this application? Okay.

And the last um consent agenda item is PB25-0767 for 515 Jefferson Avenue. This is an application request and condition approval for an educational institution in the CPS2 zoning district. I have a question. What about these last two? Uh 782 and 783. Those are not on consent agenda. Okay. I think there's someone to speak on the item. Thank you for that. No, you're here for this.

Good morning. My name is Paul Savage. The law office is at 200 South Biscane Boulevard, Miami, Florida. I'm here on the consent agenda item number 20 just to say that we agree with Mr. Belaluch and the conditions of the staff and have no further statement and agree to the consent agenda placement. Thank you so much. Okay, we do have um one person online with their hand raised on the last one, I believe. So, Gerard on the 515 Jefferson, you're on mute.

Hello. Are you able to hear me now? Yes. Okay, great. Um um we live in the building. if you could introduce yourself with your address and then tell us what item we're talking on. Thanks.

Great. My name is Jer Vnoli. I'm the board president of 6 26 uh Meridian Avenue and I last I met with the city. They were putting a fire department and they were very late to tell us um the plan switch. just trying to find out what's been going on with the project uh for 515 Jefferson. Has that now become an educational spot? So, this the current application is for a school at this location. There's no application here or um anything um in process to put a fire station at this location. Mhm.

Okay. So, it had a change must have changed without any notice. Okay. Okay. Oh, there's been there's been no indication here for a a fire station at this location. This is a shopping center. Oh, yeah. He's saying it wasn't a change. There was never a plan for or an application for a fire station. So, I'm confusing this with the lot right next door. I thought that was the address. Okay. It's not, but thank you. Any other public comment? All right. So, um can I ask about this one? Like so is is drop off pickup all was taken care of and staff's in agreement with that and then also the noise attenuation in terms of nearby neighbors everything's

correct. Yes. Okay. It's also just a expansion of a it's a temporary location for while they're expanding their school. Yeah. It's just prek. All right. So as Michael said we're going to vote to approve all seven of 10 in favor. Sorry. Motion to approve. Second. Okay. Anyone opposed to all these being sent with a favorable recommendation? Okay. Anything else need to be done on those? Just um take a vote. Yeah. All in favor? All in favor? I I Anyone opposed? Question. If we wanted to suggest something for consent agenda, is that something we would send over to you or is it something that you just

Well, we base it on um comments we receive from the public or the type of application. Um if we anticipate um complexities with the application like for example today there were some items that we did initially have on consent, we took off consent because of um public comment. And Mr. Mr. Chairman, in the it's only if the public comment is adverse. Correct. Yeah. Okay. I

if in the event that a board member wanted to pull an application for discussion or a member of the public wanted to testify on a particular application, uh my recommendation would be we handle it like the city commission does when they're with their consent agenda where if it's a pulled item, then it's then it's heard um after any items that are not pulled. at that point the the board could take a vote to approve them and then we would hear the the pulled the pulled items. So if you know I think I think just procedurally would work better if anyone wanted to speak or pull the application then we separate that one from from consideration but but vote first on the ones that you are approving. I agree.

Quick quick question for for the chair. Um and I guess it's for the process. Um, a lot of times applications come up and we're all in favor of them and a lot we're all in favor of these, but sometimes board member may just have a question to clarify something. Um, when would you suggest we sort of bring that up? For instance, I just for the consent items for the consent items. Well, that's why I wanted him to go one by one so that as he announces them, that's when I would either want to comment because I was just thinking like um something just came to mind. I mean, I'm in favor of everything. the school at 515 Jefferson. This is on because it's a school and any school um regardless of where it's located requires conditional use.

Correct. But as you may recall um there is a pendant ordinance before the city commission that would allow schools to be approved administratively. So if that ordinance is ultimately adopted, then this school would not have to go to the planning board for um a C. Okay. So yeah, it's questions like that. I mean obviously we're all in favor of that but sometimes things like that just for a clarification for one of the board members. Okay. Yeah. So each time we have one we'll go one by one. We'll see if there's public comment. Anyone want to take it off the agenda or questions and then we'll go to the next one. So

all right we're on to new comprehensive planning code amendments. The first one is item 13 on the agenda planning board file 25782 the distance separation exemption for tobacco and vape uses in North Beach. And this staff report begins on page um 93 of the board packages. This ordinance was referred to the planning board by the city commission on July 23rd of this year. Um the attached ordinance amendment creates a narrow exemption for a tobacco and vape uses in North Beach as part of the operation of a convenience store. Specifically, a tobacco vape dealer operating within a convenience store would be exempt from the minimum distance separation requirement from another tobacco vape use if the following thresholds are met. This includes the convenience store must be located in CD2 zoning district front and Collins Avenue between 65th and 67th Streets. No more than 5% of the floor area of the convenience store shall contain tobacco, vape, or smoking device products. Now staff noted in the report that the current definitions for tobacco and vape entities were drafted broadly to apply to all types of tobacco and vape products. Um the reason for this was to ensure that these products are adequately controlled and do not become easily accessible to children and minors. In this regard is important to reemphasize the following intent of the current tobacco and vape product regulations. And I'll just read this. It is the intent of this division to limit access and exposure of tobacco and vaping products to children and adolescence due to their addictive m nature and damage effects on health. It is also the intent to limit the proliferation of tobacco, vaping and smoking device product dealers in areas where the city encourages tourism and to minimize the negative implications that these types of businesses may portray to the city's visitors seeking a unique vacation destination. As indicated in report, staff has major concerns with the proposed amendment that does relax the current distance separation requirements for tobacco and vape uses. And we believe that this could encourage um future requests for limited exceptions to this requirement. As such,

we are recommending the planning board transmit this to the city commission with an unfavorable recommendation. Okay. Anybody in chambers on this item? Anybody on Zoom? There is nobody on Zoom with their hand raised. Okay. Board Jonathan,

I guess the only thing that I I question, has the city ever uh worked to because within those stores there may, you know, like a convenience store that has tobacco products. They may put up, it may not the products themselves may not cover more than 5% of the area, but they may have signage throughout the store that that promotes, you know, tobacco or nicotine products. And so I guess I'm I'm wondering um we can't we can only regulate the signage within the first 10 feet of the storefront. We can't regulate the signage within the store.

Okay. And then I guess the other question I have is in terms of tobacco and and vaping products. There's other products now that are not necessarily tobacco, but they contain nicotine. And so I'm wondering whether it would be more appropriate to suggest to the commission to in to broaden it if they want to broaden it to nicotine products. Are you talking about um

broadening what's classified as a tobacco and vape use or because this what this ordinance does is is lessen the restrictions. It allows someone right now for example um within this area no no new um business could add tobacco tobacco or vape products to their business. this ordinance was give would give them an exemption and allow them to add tobacco and vape products as part of the media store. Right. And I'm talking about because it's limiting it to that area. So then everywhere outside I'm wondering if there's a loophole, but I mean it's not necessarily important for this like we I'm fine with this one, but I'm just saying in the future. So, all right, Michael, can you clarify what uh motivated the commission to be loosened

um one one um one business wanted to add tobacco products to their operation and they couldn't because they're within the distance of another tobacco dealer. So, this the only way they could do that was with this exemption. So, this is one business, not not several, but several. Well, um there may be other businesses that that take it any could be multiple businesses could take advantage of this, but it was motivated by one business making a request for a change. Okay. So, so um Mr. Chair, may I speak spot zoning? Yes.

Sorry. So, I spoke to the sponsor about this and uh my understanding is that the store uh sold to a res relative and not I guess they didn't they weren't aware that they were or maybe they were I don't know that they were giving up their tobacco license or their ability to sell because there are restrictions in North Beach because there's so many uh different uh places there on every block. Uh I mean you could basically go down and it's you know alcohol tobacco surf shop alcohol tobacco surf shop and um my understanding is that they wanted the ability to have their tobacco license back. Well, you know, I guess if I'm opening a business, I or I'm selling a business, I have to understand what the rules are when I sell that business and what I'm giving up as a result. And I don't think that just because just because somebody wants something back that they gave up, you should just get it back. Um, and to be honest, um, there were problems before, uh, and we have been trying for a very long time to eliminate those problems. And I'm going to be voting no on that.

You mean voting no, meaning I'm I'm not favorable. I'm not in support and I'm I'm not in support of of an unfavorable recommend. Oh, no. I am in support of an unfavorable recommendation, but I'm not in support of of making a exemption for one place. So that's just okay. Anything else? Motion. Timone want to move it? Move it with an unfavorable recommendation. Second that. Okay. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? Okay. All right. The next one is planning board file 2550783 concurrency and mobility fee installment plan.

And this report begins on page um 105 of the board packages. There there have been some modifications um since this report was sent out. I'll let Nick provide updates, but I'm just going to go over some brief information on this ordinance. So the current code requires the payment of concurrency mitigation fees and mobility fees. It relates to increases in development intensity. These fees are assessed to offset impacts to the city's infrastructure and transportation system um to make sure that adequate infrastructure is available to support new or intensified uses. In commercial corridors where we have higher vacancy rates, the immediate payment for the full amount of these fees, particularly for small businesses, um for changes of use without new construction may create a financial burden. This proposed ordinance seeks to help mitigate that. And as drafted, this included a installment plan option to pay installments over six months. However, I believe the commission sponsors now um removed this as part of the request. And now this would include only a waiver for certain um commercial districts including 41st Street, Lincoln Road, um Washington Avenue, and um 71st Street. Nick, do you have an update on this? The only thing I would add, Michael is correct, that the that the um at the request of the sponsor, this ordinance will be amended to uh to to make uh to make it a a complete waiver along the corridors that that Michael just listed. The only other um change um that I would add is the sponsor is proposing a one-year sunset. So after a one-year period following uh enactment these this uh incentive call it would would expire.

The reason for the sunset just sorry can you clarify Nick? You would um I I think that a sunset would allow the city commission to and the administration to evaluate the the success of the program after a one-year period and decide whether to extend it. Um this is all changes like these are intended to to spur economic activity um and encourage new businesses to open. But it is it is requiring a considerable amount of changes with staff level though to be making these changes. Right.

Well, what it would do effectively is wave um applicable concurrency and mobility fees along these corridors 100%. What Melissa might be talking about though is that in I think the recommendation said that planning would have to hire maybe that was with with the installment plan. Well, that's only with the installment plan with the waving of the fees. Part of that, correct? Okay. Anyone in chamber to speak on this item? Anyone on Zoom?

Nobody on Zoom with their hand raised. Do you know what what was the I know these are the sort of our biggest um commercial corridors, but was there any talk about doing this citywide or any in any commercial uh district in the city? Because it's um again, I understand these are the bigger areas, but there are a lot of places not on these roads, not in these areas that a lot of businesses that could benefit or new businesses that may be able to benefit. My understanding was only focused on the um these commercial corridors. I'd love to see it expanded, I mean to every commercial corridor, but I mean it's it's it's a good start.

Um because you know mobility fees, businesses are paying those and like you say in the in the report, it goes toward um infrastructs ensuring that there's adequate adequate infrastructure. Obviously the city there's no we can't build more roads. Um, so to mitigate the the impacts, I guess we're putting the money into the trolley and other things. Um, but I guess there's only so far that can go. Um, so I don't know. I I would just like to see it expanded. I don't know if the board has the the um um will you want to recommend that the area be expanded to the entire city? You could.

Yeah. It's a trial. So if it's, you know, the city is not um it's not working out for any reason, you know, after a year it goes away or the I should say the fees come back. Well, the the only thing that I would I agree with you that it should be expanded to the to the whole city and this is generally great. But if the incentive is to try and move businesses into these certain areas, this might be the incentive that's needed to get them, you know, to populate these specific areas. And then if this works, you can kind of start to focus on other places. It's why I asked if there was any discussion or what was the reasoning behind just these districts.

I I can speak to 41st Street. I know specifically they were trying to do that because of, you know, the high vacancy rate uh and just there's been so little interest. They're trying to provide whatever incentives they can. Very high. Um yeah. So I know that's for it seems like I mean I'm just putting that out there. I um I'm in favor of this, but if we can, you know, recommend an expansion, I'd be fine with that as well. We can do that. We can make a separate recommendation for expansion. No,

you could. Yes. But remember, just bear in mind that these are concurrency is what funds improvements to infrastructure, mobility, fees, fund, transit related services, and improvements. So I think um I would what I would recommend to you is if there are additional areas where you would like to incentivize uh new business development um that you know that that would be that would be appropriate for the board to recommend. Um I don't I don't know Michael if if the board could do a wholesale exclusion or waiver. We should just that would require I think further study. We don't have the information right now, but may maybe the recommendation is that the commission evaluates more neighborhoods to be included into, right? Yeah.

Yeah. Fine. All right. So, let's start with a motion to send this favorably. Can I get a motion on that? I'd make a motion to send this favorably. Okay. I'll second with I'll second it with the with the recommendation. The recommendation. Yeah. All in favor of that. I Anyone opposed? No. Do you want us to do a separate motion or you got the recommendation? I think we can include it in the recommendation is obviously unanimous. Yes. All right. Great. Okay. Next one is planning board file 25786 40th street overlay.

And this staff report begins on page um 111 of the board packages. And this um ordinance came about over the last um couple years. And this was last referred by the planning board to by the city commission on July 23rd. There was a um community workshop public meeting that took place on November 19th of of last year. I'm just going to give a a brief summary of the area and what the um ordinance amendment proposes. So on page 114 of the board packages, we provided a map that shows the the um the 40th street religious overlay was established in 2010 and applies to religious institutions in the residential single family district that is located on the south side of 40 street between Chase Avenue to the west and Pineree Drive to the east. The overlay allows pedestrian friendly religious institutional uses through the conditional use um permit process. The prop the proposed ordinance does the following. It allows the introduction of dormatory and standalone schools in allowable use. The total number of dormitories would not exceed four dormatory units per pled lot and each dormatory unit would have a limit of up to four beds. It does require design review board approval for sites containing two or more pled lots. The maximum unit size has been increased from 50% to 100%. Now remember this is um zoned single family. So the regulations I mentioned here are all related to the single family the single family zoning district. So again it allows the maximum unit size to go from 50% to 100%. The maximum lot coverage has been increased from 30% to 50%. Coverage stairs and walkways would be exempt from unit size and lot coverage calculations. The minimum front setback would be reduced from 30 ft to 20 ft. The minimum street side setback would be reduced from 10 ft to 5t. The maximum number of stories has been increased from two stories to three stories. The

maximum building height is increased for flat roof structures from 24 feet to 36 feet and for slope roof structures from 27 ft to 39 ft. Um the open space and extended setback requirements for homes exceeding two stories would not apply to the overlay district. Limitation of two contiguous lots um in terms of aggregation has been expanded to up to three contiguous lots within the overlay. Now, this would not allow rooftop access um for uses on the roof. Now, we report the subject overlay is a transitional area from the more intense commercial properties to the north of 40 street and the established single family homes immediately to the south of the overlay boundaries. Now, similar transition areas also exist other in other parts of the city. Residential office or lowintensity RM1 zoning districts as an interface between single family districts and more intense commercial districts. In this regard, the increased in height intensity proposed in these amendments is not very inconsistent with the regulations of the RM1 residential multif family zoning district. Additionally, both DRB and planning board approval will be required for new developments. We're recommending that the planning board transmit this to the city commission with a favorable recommendation.

Okay. Anyone in chambers to speak on this? Anyone on Zoom? We do have one person with their hand raised. Dave, go ahead, sir. Can you hear me? Yes. Please say your full name for the record.

Oh, David Sack. Um, I live on 377 uh Royal Palm Avenue. Um, right next to the religious overlay. We've been at the 40th Street 40th Street or right next to the 40th Street overlay for over 10 years. Um, and I know this overlay has has been there. There's been religious institutions along it. Uh myself and my neighbors are very concerned as I think anyone would be if they heard there was a 36 uh or 3 to four story building being built expanding the lot lines right next to our homes. Um this is something that um you know we have heard about for the last year. We were we've been concerned that now there's going to be these very large buildings with uh coming in uh where there were three single family homes, there's now going to be one uh very large building. I've seen the renderings. It looks like it's going to be a nice building, but I don't know how the city can approve in an area that's been residential for 100 years to put in uh to just get rid of lot lines to go right up to people's houses um uh without some kind of regulation. I understand if they want to redo it. It sounds like it's going to be nice, but we need to respect um you know, the residential rules and the residents that are along this. Um I I I just don't see how this could be done. I don't think anyone on the board would want a four-story building built up against their lot line. Uh those of you who are residents of Miami Beach or wherever you have your homes, unless you're in a condo, um it's just not why you buy a house in Miami Beach. Um and I understand progress. Uh and as you said, there's, you know, this the other part about this is it says there's dormitories. Um I appreciate the clarification. there's only going to be four dormitories per per area, but um for this large of a building, I can imagine there's going to be a lot of uh people staying there. We have already have a traffic and parking problem in this area. We've had pilot programs that

we've appreciated efforts to try and reduce the traffic. Um another issue is when you know where are the people staying in this large building going to park and and how will this affect our traffic? So, um, you know, I'm just wanted some clarification from the planning committee, you know, why we why we're letting go of all these, you know, residential regulations and and what accommodations are going to be made for the residents. Thank you. We have another caller online, uh, Schlommo Storeman. Well, you want to do you want to address any of his questions or comments?

I mean, let's hear public comment, please. Okay. Um, I guess slowmo um hung up. Um, Adena Stillerman, I just wanted to know if he could repeat himself because I just got on. Who this last speaker? Yes, please. Well, You could join via our YouTube our YouTube page, City of Miami Beach, and you could actually rewind the meeting.

Okay. Oh, I came on today in support of this project. Okay. Thank you. Now, we do have Schlommo Stillerman. Uh, can you hear me this time? Yes. Go ahead.

Okay, great. Yeah, I'm here in support of the project. Uh Dr. David Sack is a wonderful person. He's a neighbor of mine. Um I I believe that we did go around to all the neighbors and we have uh 13 of the neighbors, immediate neighbors on Royal Palm and and Prairie uh who all signed a petition in favor of of this. And I think it's just a question of uh taking the time to sit down and really understanding the project. I believe that once people sit and understand the project, they would be in favor and and I would be happy to sit a little bit more with Dr. Sack and explaining the details. But to address his his overall concerns, um, look, I I live in the neighborhood also and then I'm aware of the traffic, but Yudi does not actually contribute at all to the traffic because we're an organization that operates nights and weekends when there is no traffic. So we we've uh we've never contributed to the traffic and and we we will uh we have no issues with the parking because our the people who come to UDI go across the street. We have plenty of parking lots. So it doesn't contribute at all to the the traffic or to the parking. And the the concerns of having a uh a large building, three or four stories, uh when you see the the actual renders, it's it's nothing like that. It's uh two stories and in some areas goes up to to three stories. And we're it's very much in line with what you would see in other uh transition type of uh areas in throughout Miami Beach.

Thank you. Thank you. We have a Dave again. Dave, he's he already spoke, right? Yeah. If you needed me to I don't need to repeat myself if you can rewind it and I can talk to do uh Rabbi Tillerman offline. Okay. Thank you.

So, I just want to note that um the reason why this is before you today is that under the current religious overlay district, those um requirements are that any new construction has to comply with the single family regulations. This ordinance is before you because it's proposing to change those regulations to allow expanded volume, expanded footprint for this um you know proposed religious use. So that's the reason why it's before you today. Otherwise, this is would not be allowed as of right. The as you know the board um reviews code amendments all the time. This is just like any other code amendment for a zoning district or a specific area to allow expanded you know footprint and and volume. Are are they planning on joining all the lots together?

Well, I think the proposal is to join two lots fronting um 40th Street and make um um one I guess my my issue is that like I see this I've read the materials. It's an overlay. I understand how that works, but I haven't really seen or under I don't have an understanding of what is being proposed. They're all talking about, you know, uh the renderings and stuff. I haven't seen that. Uh I don't know if that was in our package. No, it it wasn't. Um it wasn't.

And so I just given the concern of the neighbor which you know and you know I always I'm always in favor of you know allowing more time for them to talk to the ne to Dr. Sack or or any neighbor if if there's concerns. But, you know, one of the concerns we also have to consider like, you know, yes, this is a a an institution I've heard today that they don't, you know, they're going to be mostly weekends and they're going to, you know, they don't they're not going to be using cars and everything, but this property may change hands, you know, later down the road and it might have a different use. And so these are things as a planning board I think we have to consider is the future of the area, future owners, future operators and and the impact to the area. And so I haven't seen anything about, you know, what's proposed. I haven't seen anything about, you know, I'd love to meet with the people who are doing this and and to understand, you know, what the plans are, but I guess for right now, I have reservations given the concern by a neighbor as well as the the what I'm what I understand is going to be big structures going in this neighborhood.

Well, just to be to be clear, um that project would come back to the planning board. So the planning board would be reviewing that overall project as part of a conditional use permit. This is something that wouldn't be done as of right both the name also DRB.

Yes. It would also require present board and planning board. So issues of operations, use um occupancy, traffic, um circulation all be reviewed by the planning board when that does come as part of a CP. I guess what what I could speak to is so the synagogue that I go to is is down the block and you know Yehudi has been a great kind of player in in the area in the sense that most of their operations understandably so are Friday night through Saturday night. Um you know I know that like a friend of mine met his uh wife kind of going to Yehudi and now they're staying in the community. So it's been a great kind of attractor. you know, I'd be in favor because I've seen what they've done. Uh, and I think that whatever has to be approved through the planning board, through the DRB can have, you know, uses very restricted, but also specific, right, that if it changes hands, if something happens to the property, making sure that this use can't be kind of just carried on um to any type of, you know, subsequent ownership. Um, but yeah, I mean I think generally from what they've done and hopefully what they will do, they've been an asset to the community, there's a big city parking lot that's literally right across the street that at night is more often than not empty. Um, especially on the weekends. So for for that reason, I'd be in in support.

We do have um more public comment if you'd like to hear from the new callers. The next caller is Sarah Banducho. Sarah. Hi Sarah. You have three minutes. You might be on mute. Sarah.

Hi. I just wanted to call and say my support. I don't really have three minutes to say. I just wanted to show my support for Yudi. I think it's really important for the community and I just wanted to be here as a community member. Thank you. Our next caller is a Zoom user. Please say your name for the record. That's the city.

Make sure you're off your mute button.

My name is uh Mayor Kushner. I live on uh Royal Palm and 45th Street. Um and I'm frequent in the neighborhood around Yehoodi. And I do uh I do see a lot what they do. Amazing amazing uh work in the community. And um but again uh I've never never realized an increase in traffic because of events that are going on. It's mostly weekends and uh nights when I'm already like not uh you know not home and uh well when I'm already like uh home and uh and um just amazing people and amazing you know just nice people. There's nothing there's no extra noise. There's no uh you know there's no uh there's just it doesn't I don't I don't see real bother you know besides if unless you're on the property you you don't really see what's going on in there. Um so I'm in support of uh what they want to do.

Thank you. Our next caller is Alashiva Goldwasher.

Hello. Yes. Go ahead, introduce yourself and then make your comments. My name is Ellie Shva Goldwer. I just wanted to show my support. I live on 42nd Street and I just think Yudi is nothing but an asset to the community and I was raised here my whole life. I remember when the Ritz Project started and everyone was panicking. Same things, traffic, more people in the neighborhood and they've been nothing but an asset. No one notices a difference. It only adds to have a big, beautiful building and nice people. That's all.

Thank you. Our next caller is Esther Seagull. Hi, good morning. Can you hear me? Yes. Thanks.

Hi, I'm Erall. Thank Thank you for um allowing me to speak. Um, I'm just wanted to show my support and favor. Um, as somebody who actually grew up on for like and lived on 41st Street over the last 30 years, um, I have friends that have been a part of Uhudi and have it it's impacted their life and it's also brought them to Miami Beach to settle within our communities in Miami Beach and raise their kids here. To me, I feel like it's just been such an enhancement and such a positive benefit of having you in like the heart of Miami Beach. Um, so yeah, I'm definitely uh in support of it and um yeah, thank you. All right, thank you. Our next caller, is it Yehudi?

Hi, my name is Yehudes Khan. I was born and raised in Miami Beach and I just wanted to call in and show my support for this project as well. Thank you. And that concludes our Zoom callers. Okay. And just uh Dave and everybody else just understand that we are making a recommendation. This will go before the commission and if you want to speak there and that that obviously you want to attend that meeting. Sorry Mr. Chairman, we have two more callers now. Oh, all right. Then we're going to cut it off. Um Hannah, hello. Go ahead. Yes.

Hi. Hi. Yeah. I just also wanted to call in and show my support for Yehudi and all the amazing things they do for the community here in Miami Beach. Thank you. Our next caller, uh, Jacob Khan. Hello. I'm I'm Jacob Khan. Just wanted to show my support. The Cutie is an incredible organization. Has done tremendous work for the Ryan Beach community. It draws people to move to the community, to marry in the community, helps the youth of the community, the young professionals. Uh, big support. Thank you. We're going to close the public hearing. Well, is there somebody else on the No, that's it. That's it.

All right. We're going to close the hearing. All right. Someone want to move it? Go ahead. Question. Scott. Sure. Go ahead. Scott, just two quick questions. You had the um um the uh uh public outreach meeting. Um how did that go? I mean, what was the feel of the neighbors? I heard from a lot of them now. I don't have any I don't have information on that. You don't? Okay. Um I mean it sounds like the neighbors are Yeah. pretty favorable, but I had a couple of questions. One more question. Um

you know to address one of the concerns that the first caller had um in terms of massing um you know a lot of times we we do a you know when we have an overlay I mean this is in a like a bigger area. We kind of step down some of the massing um when it's near it's difficult to do this because we have such narrow it's such small but I think you if you have like the 6T overlay, you have like a whole block.

And that's I was looking at that you you you decrease the minimum um uh front set back from uh to 20 ft from 30 be in favor of maybe even more and then you know requiring more of the massing to be pushed more toward 40th street away from the residential this the single family homes. You know we just see that in the city you know with a lot of these new new homes being built where there's you know five feet from the property line 25 foot wall. That's a So essentially to follow up on Scott, could the minimum front setback be taken to let's say 10 ft as long as more than the massing is Yeah. maybe a bigger rear setback or more of the massing is pushed towards 40th Street.

But the rear setback would go away because the rear setback would be the um the property line going north south. So when you join the two lots, there's no rear setback. There's just going to be the front and the side setbacks. And the five foot setback that's proposed for the side for the interior sideyards that's consistent with, you know, most older homes were constructed with a with a five foot setback. So it's not like out of the ordinary. Consistent. Got it. But if the board wanted to recommend, you know, um reducing the front setback further as part of any transmitt, they could I mean, as long as we could somehow, again, the idea is just to push some of that mass toward 40th Street. how however you think that can be done.

I think it's also a careful balance of not having something then project too far forward of all the other homes along the block. I think that's why we recommended the 20% back. Yeah, but I mean it's on pushing more toward 40th Street. You're projecting into you know a lot of empty or parking lots or the back some commercial spaces. So I I'd rather see more of it there than more of the massing there than against the the single family. The front setback would be though along so um 40th Street would always be a side facing the street, a side setback. It would never be a front setback. The front setback would always be on the on the north south. So that's why I think to your point though, it's not a one-sizefits-all thing for for these neighbors

for the for the neighbors. You know, you can't just say front setback or side setback because each of these lots have different fronts and sides. Can't we just leave the setbacks as they are now? If I were as the first gentleman spoke about

and ask and and and honestly I I don't know anything about this. I I know that there was a some uh I think there was a meeting maybe six or seven months ago. Why don't we have any renderings or any documents or anything to look at? I I I had written to the city and and I didn't get any response, but my questions were the same pretty much as as you all. Um I had only just gotten these documents on Friday, but I don't know. I'm I'm concerned about the future ramifications of the neighborhood. It is a residential neighborhood. I don't have so much a problem with with the use at all, but but I don't I I I wouldn't want a anything right up against my property line um at all. Um

I think I think that that that um I don't know how much public outreach has been done. Has there been mailers? Has there what what kind of public outreach has been done? Do you do you know? I can't answer for sure on that. I know that there was the community outreach meeting. This has been at the language committee um a few times. I would like to make a comment.

Um I haven't had a chance to speak. Uh I agree with those that say we don't have enough information. uh if we're going to go with height changes, lot combinations and and it's going to be an overlay that we can support. I'm if we have the ability to delay this to the next meeting and request the proper information including renderings and understanding what they're going to do and how this affects the backdoor neighbors because I would like that gentleman said whether it's right or wrong we don't have enough information to know that I have a house and 5 ft from me is going to be a threestory mass uh I would have some issues isues with that potentially. I don't know because I have no information. You're asking us to vote blindly on something.

But I think and and staff can correct me if I'm wrong. This is about an overlay. It's not about a specific project once they have their plans finalized. They would then come back to the planning board and the DRB at which point the project would be only but we're already giving them permission to increase the height and decrease the setbacks. So they can come back and we can't say no you can't have 5T and uh between you and a house and 36 ft maximum height and three lots together. How can we say no to that once we approve this? Why why didn't we get any documents? It was not provided to us. It was not provided to me.

I I you know, I think I think the the concern is that uh this is not a project we're approving. We're actually approving an ordinance amendment. And so the consequences of that are beyond one project. And I think that for people to be more comfortable, including some of the neighbors, we would have uh I think better renderings to understand how it's affecting the residential neighborhood and and also get information um as to how much public outreach has been done and and what the feedback was because I don't I I literally don't know anything about you know much of this. Yeah, I'm surprised that there was not somebody here today to provide the rendering information. Sure. So would that would that happen as part of an overlay discussion or that would happen with these specific projects?

Well, no, because the overlay we're allowed like Keith said, we're allowing we can't retract after that. You Exactly. I don't I think we're mostly in support, but we need more information before we can, you know, that's all a yes or no. Michael, is there any urgency to this so we can I believe that the sponsor wanted to have this voted whichever way by the planning board um and moved along. We can't we but we can recommend to wait a uh push it back to the next meeting and they'll push back their votes. What what happens if this is either favorable or unfavorable? It goes to the commission. They have the ability to either they can do whatever. All they do is they do whatever they want.

You know, we don't have enough I personally do not have enough information to vote it. I

can I ask um why why are they doing you so just to clarify you only they only will need DRB approval if it's two lots or more and so if they do a new threetory structure on one of the lots and then separate it from a threetory structure on the next lot they wouldn't need design review board approval for those two new bigger structures So, I just got to add something to clarify, pick a correction. Um, the interior side set back on the south side is 10 ft, not 5T. So, I'd make that correction. Maybe that'll help allay some of the concerns the board members had in terms of the the massing.

So, there's 10T separation. It's a 10-ft setback from the property line. And um Tam just let me know that this has been advertised for the September 17th city commission meeting. So that's why we would like to have this transmitted one way or another to the city commission today. We don't have any I don't I don't have like can I go back to can I just go back to my question in terms of the design review board approvals only needed for when they're doing a project or building a structure on two of the lots together. Correct.

Okay. Is there I mean I would be in favor given the impacts to potential neighbors and the neighborhood. I would be in favor of all I mean because that that was part of the pitching pitch was that they're going to have to come back for design review board approval. But so I would suggest and that's one way to kind of move this pro move this forward but also protect the neighborhood and the neighbors and the impact on you know whatever is to require design review board approval for everything in this overlay. Anything that's beyond the current you know the regulation. And so if they want to take advantage of this new overlay just one or more lots

that could be a recommendation and and then as part of that we could also make it that any subsequent owner has to also come back and the use doesn't kind of that'd be part of the planning board review process typically like you do now um you can require that when this comes to the planning board any change of operator come back to the board as part of that. So, so any establishment in this like so everybody needs this planning board approval. Yes. So, even if it's one of the the dormatory with like one room in it, it's going to be a standalone school requires um planning board approval.

How can Wait just a second, please. This is a school, right? Is that right? Yes. So, how how is it being h where's the traffic plan? Where's the where that's going to be all part of the next and there are schools there by the way like there are schools currently and and Okay. And they obviously want us to move this forward. So, so can we leave the setbacks as they are now? Because I honestly don't I I wouldn't want you know a zero lot line property. I mean, if you're buying a home in Miami Beach, um you're that's part of your you know what there's no zero lot line proposed.

Well, but it's close to it. I mean, there's really not that much of a difference. Um so, how what can what my understanding is it won't work if you leave them the way they are, right? Yes. You you you will not be able to get the the um the volume needed square footage with the existing setbacks, right? So yeah, let listen, you can vote forward or against it, but they want us to vote on it. I'll make a motion. I'd make a motion to approve this with a favorable recommendation.

Sorry. I'll make a motion to approve this with a favorable recommendation uh under the condition that any and all future projects that are to be done along this overlay have to come to uh planning board and DRB for approval. Second. Okay. I just clarify one thing. So, you're saying that every um every lot um in this overlay the uh there will be at least 10 ft between the the south lot line and any structure. Correct.

And we recommend maybe there's no no um can't be any variance for any anything. I wouldn't recommend no variance provision. there may be some hardship or certain circumstances that is a a much harder um threshold to to to meet. So I wouldn't recommend no variances. There may be instances that that warrant that and the neighbor's not opposed to it. So all right, we have a motion and a second. Let's vote. I you want to do one by one or um let's let's uh are anyone opposed to it? Okay. And move forward with those with that recommendation.

Okay. All right, progress reports. First one, uh, planning board file 220553455 Lincoln Road. And I passed out this um, staff report. It wasn't part of your board packages. This is um, PB22-055. This was handed out this morning page 455 this morning. Okay. may recall this was um before you initially on March 4th of this year due to um code violations. There's a restaurant on today's cut in that that was a consent of the consent. No, this was not a consent. Sorry.

Um this was last reviewed by the board on May 6th. It continued to July. The July meeting was canceled. It was continued till today's hearing. As noted in our report, there have been no new citations or violations on the property since the board last heard this. So we are recommended that the progress report be concluded at this time. Great sir.

Good morning. Michael Yianopoulos 200 topiscane boulevard joined by my colleague Michael Larkin and the general manager Jose Ake. Uh as staff mentioned we were before you on March 4th and May 6. Our team has worked very hard and very diligently to make sure that all conditions are complied with. We've had zero issues since uh our first pro progress report um sorry our second progress report in May. and we would uh respectfully uh request to conclude this uh progress report. Okay. Anyone here to speak on this? One thing to say. Hold on. Anyone on Zoom? There's nobody on Zoom with their hand raised.

Okay. Um I work in downtown Miami. I'm always hearing about downtown Miami restaurants and you know, Coconut Grove. I've heard such great things about this restaurant, bringing people to the area and just it's now become a destination. So, I hope it continues to do great and be great. And thank you. It's a fun place. Thank you. I agree. All right. Any uh any other questions or comments and want to move it? Make a motion to close it out. Okay. Second. All in favor? All oppose? Thank you, sir. Thank you.

Okay. The next progress report is planning for file 240715 1800 1810 18118 Michigan Avenue and 103918 Street lot. And this is a progress report um based upon non-compliance with the conditions of approval. The board may remember on November 26th of last year, the planning board approved a lot split application to divide the site, which was four platted lots into four individual um buildable parcels. We sent a cure letter to the applicant on August 8th based upon the violations listed on page one and two of the board packages. Um the first one was to um failure to comply with the um requirements for vacant and abandoned properties in all districts by not having a fence. Um and the second one was to not complying with the the CUP, sorry, the conditions of approval for the lot split.

The conditions of approval for the lots split basically say that the applicant has to comply with the um requirements in the code for abandoned and vacant properties. So by them getting a violation of that that that entailed another violation of the cup. So we're asking to hear from the applicant in terms of the um correcting these violations as well as hearing from the members of the public. We are recommending to um then continue this progress report to the November 4th meeting date.

So through the chairs for the record, Nicholas Rodriguez, 200 South Biscane Boulevard. Mickey Morero is handling this application, but he just went down to meet with the building official. So, he had a 10 a.m. meeting on this property regarding these violations. So, if we could skip this one and return to it, Mickey will be back and he'll have a more substantive update cuz he's meeting with the building official right now about this property. I'm just curious. So, we approve a lot split conditionally, then they don't meet the the requirements of the conditions. So, what are it's kind of a weird situ split? I mean, I that's a difficult situation, right? Okay. I drove by there. So really the key is making sure they comply or kind of next time we could say, "All right, we're not allowing the lot split." Right. Well, I would suggest we um table this item until

Yeah. Yeah. I was just curious because that's a weird Okay. Yeah. We've never I've never seen a um revocation or modification of a lot. Yeah. Me neither. All right. But to be clear, you do have that authority. Yeah. I figured, but it's just kind of a we like I said, it's a odd situation. All right. We'll defer that. We'll come back to that item. All right. We're on to previously continued applications. Planning board file 2407191350 Collins Avenue.

So, we're moving right right along on our applications today. Um, this is on page seven of the board packages. You may remember this. This first came before you substantively on February 4th of this year. This is when the applicant was proposing to have um both ambient and above ambient level entertainment within the courtyard of a renovated building at 1350 Collins Avenue. At the time, the applicant was proposing both um a DJ and a violinist. They were going to have above background level music during um various times of the day on the weekends. Since that time, the applicant went out with the um sound consultant by the applicant. We did test the sound system back in February. We tested it at ambient levels and above ambient levels in the neighboring properties and found that at ambient levels, the noise was not plainly audible in the guest rooms. Once it got to above ambient levels, it clearly was audible and could become a nuisance for those um those neighbors. Now, the applicant has revised their request. They're asking for um ambient level music only with either a DJ or a solo violinist. No longer they're no longer asking for entertainment at any time above um background level music.

Now um so they need entertainment to have someone live there but the but the level of the music will maintain at ambient just the fact of having a DJ. Right. Right. Right. They need entertainment

entertainment or violence. So we are recommending that you know we do think that having it at ambient levels will help should should um allay any concerns with it being a nuisance as long as the um the sound system is set to not exceed those volumes. We are recommending that I'll just go through some conditions of approval that we're recommending um that this entertainment only be allowed as part of a restaurant always serving meals and entertainment is prohibited anytime that food service is not available. So this does not become a standalone bar or standalone um entertainment establishment. We are recommending a requirement that entertainment shall not exceed ambient levels at any time. Entertainment is limited to a DJ or a solo violinist is profered by the applicant. We are recommending that these that the DJ or solo violinist be located within the interior of the building. They may have the doors open to allow the sound through, but we're asking recommending that the the DJ or solo violinist be located within within the interior of the building. We're all recommending limitations on these hours at this time um only on Saturdays and Sundays between 12:00 p.m. and 4 p.m. and entertainment not be permitted outside of those hours and not permitted on Mon um anytime Mondays through Fridays and recommending that the sound be tested again with staff on site to ensure compliance with these conditions. We do believe that this should satisfy concerns of the neighbors and recommending approval in accordance with the conditions I just mentioned.

Okay. Is the applicant here for this item? Yeah, I was say Oh, they are. Okay. Hi, my name is Jamil Lib. We opened the place 3 months ago and uh honestly I don't think that we didn't we don't even need any more entertainment. It's a great restaurant with great food. I would love to What's the name of the restaurant? Donatella. Donatella. It's a really good Italian chef from Napoli. I hope that you guys can help us. It's not been easy. No, but it's going to be always level music. I met with my neighbor on the street like two, three weeks ago and we're So, you've been open and have you been playing ambient music? Yeah, ambient music. Yeah. Just without a DJ friend.

Yeah. And we send our music our music programmers sometimes sometimes to set up the because we have a computer and a lot of speakers that you can lower this one, lower that one. So we're very interested not to have a a problem with no one. Yeah. Yeah. I'm How long have you been open? 3 months. Okay. And you've been playing ambient music without complaints? With no I no complaints at the I've been there. I've been there and and it was fabulous. Okay. But no complaints so far in three months. Correct. at the ambient level. Oh, my my my asking is that you guys help us to promote and come. It's a great restaurant. Yeah. Yeah. Did you hear all the conditions that that the staff recommend? You're okay with all those?

We were trying to do in the daytime for a brunch, but look, if we put a DJ or a violin, it's just going to be maybe an expense. It's being so tough that we don't know if we want it. No. Right. You got to wait for you know this place there's a lot of like u wedding not weddings but the when they ask for the hand of the the bride yeah engage so sometimes they want to bring a saxo a violin sometimes it's 6 p.m. It's a beautiful location. We're just trying to find the way to not to lose money. Yeah. Okay. I have a question.

Before you get, does anyone have any disclosures to make on this application? Okay. Go ahead, Elizabeth.

I' I've been, but I I we wanted to see what we, you know, what we approved. Um the food was fantastic. Um and it was really enjoyable. Um it was not loud at all. Um, but I I want to just make sure if we approve this that there won't be any speakers or anything like that that you're going to add back to the front of the building or any of that kind of thing. And I want to make sure that the that the residents are protected or not the well the residents but also the neighboring buildings are protected. Honestly, we we remove the speakers when you told us we have to like on the inside behind of our planters just because no one walks sometimes there just to let them know that we're alive but but very low. I mean the the the music on that street is so loud and the ambience so bad that it's killing us.

We just don't want any more loud. If you move that place to South of Fifth or to another place, it would be like triple the sales. We're just honestly it's been challenging uh challenging investment but we we are Miami Beach. We live and born and not born love Miami Beach. No my kids. It's been a tough summer I think for every slow season. So it's it's and I think it'll start picking up anything that our neighbor any complaint we're willing to work with anyone. Yeah. Well thankfully we haven't had any. So is there anybody else in chambers speak on this item? You are. Come on up. I think he's a hotel.

Good morning. So, my name is Juan Pablo. I own the uh Shepley Hotel, which is the neighbor to the south to the Donatella restaurant. Uh so, I must say that they've been open for 3 months. We have we have uh zero complaints so far. We were very afraid. Uh we were here uh months ago when we had this meeting. Uh Michael was in our property when the sound tests were made. It was very clear that anything above ambient level was a killer for us. Not only for the noise itself, but for the vibrations. And it's very easy for you to relate with an hotel experience. you go inside a room, if you immediately listen to your neighbor's music, there's a problem there right away. So, uh I I want to say that uh we are in favor of their current operation. I got lost in the descriptions of the

So, just so you know, they're going to stay ambient. Exactly. This just allows them if they want to have a violinist or a DJ, but the music level has to stay the same. Exactly. So the only thing that frightens me in this things is when we have to be very sophisticated with the rules and who's going to be there to actually impose uh things. I'm 100% for the ambience thing. We will be opposing any non-amb our take. The the cup doesn't allow that. So you're okay. And so far you can confirm there has been no issues with with at the hotel. There's no complaints so far. I I couldn't listen to it. I said, "So far you you can confirm."

No, no, so far it's been amazing. It's been very slow. Uh I guess as it gets busy, it's going to be a different chapter. I'm afraid when Well, the music can't change. Yeah. So, this is pretty much our And and so so you know, our job here is to balance the interests of people like you and then businesses we want to succeed, but we also want hotels and residents to succeed and so and be happy. And so if you do have a problem in the future by new operations, reach out to Michael and and we can and I must say that they've been impeccable so far. So this is just assessment. Thank you. Thank you.

Anybody else in chambers? Anybody on Zoom? There's nobody on Zoom with their hand raised. Just clarification. the times. I just want to be clear of the times that that the um uh live music is is uh allowed because I know he mentioned something about 6:00 p.m. like we might want to have something at 6:00 p.m. when we're recommending noon to 4. Yeah. Noon to 4.

4. So you're okay with noon? Yeah, cuz if you guys allow us just to have it open and the neighbor on the weekends, maybe from 6:00 to 10:00 p.m. We have a hotel on top. It's six rooms and you know, it's a old building with wood floors. If I if I put volume, my own customers kill me. I'm I'm going to I'm going to just say that I'm going to support what staff has recommended and just out of respect for the hotels that we stick with this. You could also, you know, amend the conditions later on, operate and then come back and ask for later hours. Yeah. Like uh how many time?

Well, no. I would suggest you op you operate for some time and you can make an application to come back for later hours in the future. Okay. Can I ask a question of through the chair of the legal um we have this issue south of fifth uh first amendment rights of limiting a specific I'm shocked to see there's a violin mentioned here because we had this in south of fifth where if you allow a violin you can allow a drum an amplified guitar an amplified sachs yes we have sound issues and they can get code but doesn't it open up to any instrument.

So, so that's a great question. The the situation with South Fifth several years ago um was a provision in our code that uh that that distinguished between types of entertainment and and that had to be amended. Um the reason you're seeing in this conditional use permit a DJ and a solo viol violinist is because that's what the applicant has applied for. So, so the applicant is only seeking um to do to to have a DJ and sol violin. So, he would have to come back if he wanted a sex. That's correct. Yes.

What we thought it's imagined that a proposal and but it's if you go and see the place, you're going to understand that we cannot No, I I just wanted to make sure I wasn't Thank you very much. You were talking about the brunch play. I remember that. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you. Um All right. Any someone want to move it? I'll move it. Okay. I'll second it. Okay. Um with all the conditions mentioned by staff. So all in favor I. Anyone opposed? All right, sir. Thank you. Thank you. The the the cup was granted. Thank you very much. God bless everyone and please promote Donatella. Good luck. People come over. Thank you. Next time wear, you know, shirt or billboard when you're up here, you know.

Yeah. All right. The next is planning board file 25757 uh 1426A Alton Road application for reapproval of the cup.

And this application begins on page um 47 of the board packages. This is an application requesting the reapproval of a conditional use permit for a neighborhood impact establishment consisting of an alcoholic beverage establishment with entertainment and occupant load above 199 persons. Now, as noted in our report, the applicant is requesting reapproval for the operation of the existing foxhole bar, which was initially approved by the planning board back on March 27th of 2012. Before that date, the bar was operating for many years, but without an entertainment component. The board added entertainment to their license or operation back in 2020 2012. Foxhole Bar temporarily ceased operations in 2021 due to undergo um extensive renovations which stretched over uh several years. Now, the code does require that when there's an approved conditional use that remains idle or unused in whole or apart for a continuous period of 6 months or for 18 months within any three-year period, whether or not the equipment, fixtures, or structures remain should be required to seek reapproval of the conditional use from the planning board. That's why the applicants before you today, the operation remains substantially consistent as it was previously approved with an occupancy load of 254 persons and 60 seats over uh two levels. the hours of operation would not exceed noon to 5:00 a.m. Now, the current code in this area does restrict hours to um 2:00 a.m., but for establishments that received a BTR prior to um I think it's April of 2015, they can continue those operating hours. Um

it's the same location as same location. Yes. Yeah. It's entered off on the on the side. Um now with this with this reapproval of the cup we have updated to to reflect um the typical requirements of a new cup. This would include an annual progress report before the board. So in the future this they're going to come before you every year for progress report. We've also updated the conditions in terms of the applicable code sections. Um the applicants here um answer any questions. We are recommending that this um be approved in accordance with the conditions in the draft final order which starts on page 52 of the board packages. Did you add any conditions from the prior?

We added condition regarding um the progress report on the annual progress report. Okay, that it and just that the applicant shall provide access to code planning and building or any that's that's another typical condition we add as part of any new any new CUP. Okay. And um that's pretty much it. Okay, sir. Any um disclosures on this one from the board? No, no disclosures. Okay. Good morning. Good morning. Angel Fabes, resident of Miami Beach since 199. All right. Where is that? There you go. There you go. I think you can talk. Go ahead.

Uh good morning everyone. Thank you for your time. Uh my name is Angel Febris. I've been a resident of Miami Beach since 1999 over at 5151 Collins. Uh we also have operated Foxhole uh since 2012 right here on Alton Road. Um between Alton and West Avenue. Um, we were in front of the planning board so many years ago. Uh, ever since then, we've never been called to the planning board. We've never had a progress report. We've never had code compliance. We've never had uh any violations. Um, basically we are here more of a technicality to get um, foxhole, you know, granted. Um, we've been open now again since December. And again, zero code compliance violations, zero noise ordinance violations. Um, it's just basically a regular watering hole for the neighborhood. Um, and

you still have the sports bar TVs. You still We sure do. Yeah. I believe, you know, probably most of everybody in Miami Beach has been to Foxhole. So, with that, I used to see him stumbling out at 3:00 a.m. Sorry. Go ahead. No, that was me picking you up. So, yeah. Um, with that, you know, we would just like to I'm glad you're back. It's a fun place. Thank you. Thank you very much. And yeah, with that, you know, that's about all I have to say. Okay. You have anything to add? No, I'm part of the new foxhole. Um, I didn't know if you wanted to say anything else. No, I second everything that he says and, you know, thank you for your time. Thank you, Mr. Belucia. Help us through this. Anybody in chambers speak on this? Anyone on Zoom? Nobody on Zoom with their hand raised.

Okay. The only question I have is they're going through this to get around the 2 a.m. No, it's not to get around. It's just um they're grandfathered. But are they They were close. They have to get this to get grandfathered. Have they been operating to 5:00 a.m. now? Yes, we have. We've been operating since 5:00 a.m. since 2012. Maybe you can go over the recent renovations and the the time frame it took you only because it's been dormant. They have to reapply for the cup. That's all. It's the same. I mean, it's been When did it It's been dormant. When did you reestablish? December 30th, 2024. Okay. All right. Yeah,

I understand. Yeah, they're a great operation. They No, I've heard of the Foxo. I haven't been, but you're welcome to come. All right. I used to be someone want to move it. Make a motion to approve. Okay, I'll second. Okay. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? All right, sir. Good luck. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you everyone. Thank you very much. Thank you Mr. Beluch for all your help. Watch a dolphin win. There's no amount of drinking that can help you with 10 p.m. Okay. Cuz I have a bedtime. All right. Next one is planning board file 25741 1100 Lincoln Road. And this staff report begins on page um 59 of the board packages. Yeah. Yeah.

PB25-0741 for 1100 Lincoln Road. This is an application requesting conditional use approval for a neighborhood impact establishment

including indoor entertainment with an occupant content exceeding 199 persons. Now, this project um repurposes an existing 78,000 foot 18 screen movie theater, the Regal Cinema Site at 1100 Lincoln Road into a new museum featuring interactive art exhibits and ancillary food beverage service. There's no proposed changes to the structural parking or loading changes as part of this operation. The applicant will go through um in details how one may traverse through from the ground floor up to the third floor and and through the um the exhibit. proposed hours of operation are um 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. Um we did note that I'm sorry and Thursday through Saturday would be 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. We did note as part of their transportation analysis that this proposed use reduced their expected weekday PM peak hours by 190 trips would be reduction intensity compared to the movie theater operation. Um, I know we've received lots of public comment regarding trying to keep the Regal Cinemas where they are. Staff cannot do anything to force or the board cannot do anything to force a movie theater to remain in this location.

Well, so that I have a question about that because we got thousands of emails about that. I mean, what has the the current user indicated any desire to stay there? I mean, not that I'm aware of. No, I mean, right, because the letters make it seem like we have the ability to keep the theaters there and not let them do what they want to do. We don't have that power. And I'd like to say something about that. I just want to make sure I understand. So the op the current operator is not indicating any desire to stay. Correct. So they're they're leaving regardless. Yes. So it's a matter of what replaces it. I want the public to know that we're not getting rid of your movie theater. I used to go to the movies all the time. Since co I've gone to the movies once.

No, no, I understand that. But but the the letters from the residents would suggest that we have the power to keep the movie theater there and we don't. want that to be understood because I I I hate to make the public think we're disregarding their concerns and emails, but they're not really we're not landlords.

They're they're leaving and you know I movies have changed over time. Um, now we have streaming, we have Netflix, we have Amazon, we have all these things and we're going to have vacant theaters all across the country. And I don't think people really realize that it's going to take some, you can either have an empty space that's going to stay there forever, which it likely could or you could have some, you know, vision. So, I just want to again say that is this is happening, right? So, I mean, we'd all love the theater there, but they're not staying. All right, before you start, any disclosures on this item? I used to go to Regal all the time. Same. But, all right. Used to.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Again, my name is Paul Savage with offices at 200 South Biscane Boulevard, Miami, Florida. And before I get into this presentation and into the nitty-gritty, there are four things that I want to say. Number one, I want to recognize and thank our city's professional staff, principally Michael Belalouch. As he and Debbie transition, uh they have worked tirelessly in a manner that as the baton is passed over, the baton is not being dropped. they are actually covering d zooms and meetings and emails and reviews and doing double work essentially to make sure that the business of the city is promptly and accurately conducted and also to the benefit of the applicants. So thank you Michael and thank you Debbie and we look forward to Debbie joining us. Uh secondly I want to thank this board. It's always my pleasure to appear before this board and I appreciate your sophistication and your service to this board. So thank you. It's my pleasure to see you again and good morning. Item three is uh it sounds like the board gets what I was going to say, so I'll just make it very short. The cinema is leaving. As a matter of public record in the federal bankruptcy filings nationally, both this cinema operator and others are in very tough times since the pandemic by virtue of cultural changes and evolutions that was mentioned. uh the advent of streaming legacy media is changing and evolving and so the cinema is as and I've seen all the emails and I love the theater and the cinema we all like to go there um but it is leaving and closing no matter what this application does and we cannot compel that business to be fruitful so that it sounds like you got it and then the last and fourth thing is that this use is unusual and I did not understand it. Um, I didn't understand

what it was and the name uh wasn't clear to me and I was concerned about some of these popup so-called museums in Winwood where it's for Instagram and you take a picture next to a 14oot ice cream cone or something and it's cute and it's funny and I thought maybe this was like a lowbudget, you know, bad choice we were going to have to make. But in fact, as I came to learn and become friends with Mr. B and learn about his vision and his excellent architect team who has worked in Disney, Universal Studios and other facilities where patron movement and circulation is really their bread and butter. This is going to be awesome. This is really cool. It's going to have not only the most advanced technological interactivity that's very new fangled, but also rooms of legacy blue chip art that you will, you know, it will be a proper bonafide art museum. And so we, you know, we're not going to have this this vacant odd building in the community. Uh this is great. So, um with that, um I want to go ahead and and click through our presentation. Uh this is uh this is a a render this is a front page. This is a render of uh and and Steve will describe uh sort of going through this how long it will take and and what you will experience. Uh these are our members. I our team members. I have Brian Park here from BH Properties uh who's been a fantastic owner of the facility. Of course, Steve is here um uh with Superhum. um he's the president and principal of that entity. And then we have our architecture firm uh like I said who's done work in Disney, the latest Universal Park and including the Harry Potter uh parks.

Quick question. Is this does this concept exist somewhere else or is this something brand new to

um Steve will get we'll get to that. Um there are places there's one there it's not his but there are there are examples in Tokyo and Amsterdam. There's smaller examples in Miami. Um this new sort of experiential where you and there might be lasers, there might be fog, there might be smells, you know, to interact with the art. Um so, uh just to put our feet on the ground, this is the site here. I will say that it should have a little sliver cut off where the Banana Republic his uh contributing structure is. That is not implicated in this. This is only the modern uh 90s era theater building. Uh we're not touching the uh the art deco building on the end. Um just to make that clear, this is the old site plan as built in the '9s uh with the uh seating etc. Um and uh those rooms are going to be essentially the same except all the seating taken out so that you can have changeable event uh demonstration spaces and art spaces. Um this is uh the existing condition that we all uh know very well. It's been there since the '9s. Um if you go in there now, there's really like a skeleton crew left um uh for the movies. Now um now uh what we're here as Michael Belaloo summarized, we're here on a conditional use permit to allow uh for entertainment and alcohol service um at this site. Um, and with that, I'm going to um turn this over to Steve Burke, the principal of Superhum, and he's going to um talk about just what this is exactly, uh, what you can expect to experience and the flow through the facility. So, thank you, Steve. Thank you, Paul. Um, good morning, everybody. Uh, I'm going to do my best to summarize five years and millions of dollars of my investment in 4 minutes and 20 seconds. Uh, so I'm going to try and get through this as fast as possible. Go ahead. If you need

more time, go ahead.

Thank you. Uh, so I've been an art fan and an art enthusiast for the last couple decades. I've been to 150 museums worldwide. As you all may know, experiential um, has really caught on since CO and the original Van Go Museum, which was essentially just projected images on walls with some screen saver type things. Uh, this is not what Superhum is. Um, Superhum is the first of its kind. You asked, "Is there something similar?" Uh, I would say it's sort of a blend between Team Labs in Tokyo and the Museum of Modern Art in New York. No one's ever made an experiential with storytelling with uh show elements with Disney architects and engineers and with Picasso and Andy Warhol and Alexander Calder, Mark Shagal, Yako Vagam. We have millions of dollars of art coming into this museum. And what makes this really unique is we're using the infrastructure of the existing theaters. We're not changing everything. We're not doing anything to the exterior. We are essentially giving you a room by room experience where you'll go from theater 1 into theater 2, theater 2 into theater 3, three into four, about 50 people per group. So it's never going to feel crowded. You won't just buy a ticket and wander the museum. It's very very uh organized and structured the same way you would see a structure of traffic flow at Disney World or Universal Orlando. As you see, this is our proposed circulation. So, I'm sure we are all familiar with the Regal. We've all been there. This was my theater that I went twice a month for the past uh uh maybe 10 or 15 years until I started not going to the theater. And I think we're all a little bit guilty of that. Just for the public record, I am not the reason why this theater has struggled. I am not superhuman is not the reason why we're removing your movie theater. Uh this is a trend that's happening. And if you go

on a Friday or Saturday night, you will see that the theater has 20 30 people at most. So um what we're proposing is to not let the building go dark, to do something really unique and amazing, a huge investment both on my part and the part of my investors. And um and the way we're you doing this exhibition is as follows. So you see the very first theater when you go up that long escalator will essentially be our ticketing room. This is where you get your ticket. This is where you get your QR code scanned and every single visitor of Superhum will receive a bracelet with NFC technology that's going to track your experience throughout the theater and also tell us which scripts we've given you in each of the rooms. Why do I mention that? Because superhum is not a oneandone experience. If any of you have been to Super Blue, you've noticed it rarely changes. You'll go once and you've seen it. What we're doing with Superhum is technologically unique. Each room is going to have three or four different scripts per room. And when you get your bracelet and you go through the museum, let's say you have friends visiting from New York 2 months later, you're not going to go, "Oh, I already went to that superhuman. I have no reason to go." We will make sure it's a completely unique experience for the visitors each and every time. And that's something that's never been done before. So, as you see here, after you get into the ticketing room, which is going to look something like this, you go into exhibit number one, which is our scanning pods. We have 25 of these scanning pods, which are double-sided, and you're going to tap your bracelet to the scanning pod. is going to scan your face and that is going to be our way of knowing how to personalize the experience for you because your face is going to appear in many of the exhibits themselves. We have a room that's going to look like a traditional museum gallery. You'll be able to tap your bracelet and Brian, you'll be in the Mona Lisa with the long hair looking at you as you walk by. Your whole family can be in the last supper and there's going to be original pieces and digital pieces combined to make a really unique

type of gallery room. So these scanning pods is the first part of the experience which begins the high-tech technology that's going to allow superhuman to be a different experience every time and to customize the experience for each of the users. The image on your right is a volutric screen that's going to be hanging from the trees. That's where your face will appear in the tree of life. Go ahead. Yeah, thank you. It's five years of my life has gone into this. So I'm trying to get through as quickly as possible and I'm not going to go through the entire creative plans but just give you a basic idea of what makes this really unique and special. See these are some of the other renderings. Now this tunnel has already been built in Amsterdam by an incredible team. It exists in the Amaze Museum. Some of the installations that we're doing exist in other museums around the world. They're my favorite installations. So we're not reinventing the wheel completely. We are designing a lot of new installations. We are uh doing really really amazing things with the engineers and architects that work for Disney and Universal. But this particular one has already been built and it's spectacular. Here's a rendering of showing what a traditional museum uh gallery would look like. But as I mentioned, this is going to be a group show that rotates out every 9 to 12 months for different artists. And you'll be able to appear in the different artists work alongside their traditional oil paintings and acrylic paintings. This was a room designed by the creative team at AOA. As I mentioned, AOA architectural team for Universal and Disney. They had a part in Star Wars Galaxy's Edge. They had a part in the wonder uh wizarding world of Harry Potter. And this is a room we're using projection mapping technology, volutric screens, jumping water as you'd see at Epcot Center to tell a story about conservation. This rendering is a room that's already been built. It's called Trumpet Flowers, built by an artist duo called Amigo and Amigo out of Australia. I first saw it in Las Vegas. Truly incredible piece.

Each of those buttons plays a different musical sample. So 50 people together can press the buttons and play jazz with one another. I saw it in Las Vegas. Children love it. And that leads me to this is a familyfriendly. This is not a nightclub. This is a museum that we are putting along the lines of a MoMA or a Chicago art institute that becomes a tourist attraction. but also friendly for families and friendly for residents so that it becomes something that we can be proud of as a city. This one's already been built. And what makes this unique is that we could have on Monday it could be jazz, on Tuesday it can be electronic music, on Wednesday it could be country music. All those buttons can be programmed to be different musical samples again so that it's not the same experience every time you come.

That's uh a quick uh presentation of some of the renderings. So you wanted to Is there a liquor license affiliated with this pro this property? They will get one. Yes. And there is one for the theaters. The code was amended a while ago to allow um the theater to sell alcohol. Got it. Okay. And we're quick question now. Is this something where people join as a member? You pay every time you go or how does that work? So we're looking at tickets approximately $39.99 to $49.99. We'll have annual memberships. We also believe we'll have private events in this space. Art Basle, Jazz Festival, uh food and wine festival. We're designing the finale. Yeah. Would have to get special event permits for like those type of things. Anything outside of the occupancy or hours would require special.

All right. All right. So, let's um Is there anyone in chambers to speak on this item? Anyone on Zoom? One speaker. If I could just conclude. Ly, come on up. Oh, well, hold on. If you haven't concluded your presentation, conclude. Go ahead.

Uh right. So, in conclusion, uh we would respectfully request your favorable action on the application for a conditional use permit with the conditions as outlined by staff, which we accept. Um, and I was going to read into the record a little bit of the uh Lincoln Road uh business improvement district. uh they submitted a letter into the record that this museum will be a welcome and critical uh component of the ongoing revitalization of Lincoln Road and make it an even more attractive destination during Art Basle and other art themed festivals and events. And this new cultural venture will serve both longtime visitors and visiting tourists, all of which are critical to the continued improvement and growth of the Lincoln Road business community. Uh they were very excited. We presented to them. they started imagining restaurant reservations being made around a family visit to this. Uh so it it's been very wellreceived and no one can explain that better than Lyall who'll be able to explain their position even better. So uh I would just I don't need to come back up here but if there are people who complain or have an issue I would like a little bit of rebuttal if that's okay through the chair. I would like

will come up. But since I know there's people on Zoom, um I hope you're listening. If you're comp if you're calling and to say, you know, don't let the movie theater leave, please understand that's not an issue. We can't prevent that. So, anyone on Zoom that wants to talk about this project, you're welcome. But again, uh your comment shouldn't be, "Don't let us lose our movie theater." Thanks, Lyall. I don't want to lose the movie theater.

Lyall Stern, 690 Lincoln Road. I come here both as the president of the Lincoln River Business Improvement District and also as as a resident and long-term business owner on the beach. No pun intended. This is a superhuman effort. You know what goes into taking a project this size of this magnitude both in terms of capital and uplift and city approvals etc. I think the reason why we're so excited about it at the bid is because it checks several boxes. One, it takes a very, very difficult large space which would be very difficult to backfill because of its construction, especially with the kinds of uses that our citizens have said they don't want to see on Lincoln Road. The big box type users, it gives us a significant cultural footprint, gives us an investor, developer, business owner who's who's well capitalized, has spent a tremendous amount of time going through the process. So, we're excited about it and we're and what we're what I'm especially excited about is there's no lag time. If they can get through the city approvals and get through their building permits, which they've already started, their demo permits, then we'll be one of the few cities in the country that that will have a movie theater box that as the theater is exiting will be immediately redeployed and be redeployed in a use that our citizenry and our tourists want, which is culture. So, we're excited about that opportunity. We're excited for the theater to not be empty. Uh, look, we used to go to the theater all the time. Quite candidly, I don't not sure the last time we went other than maybe Top Gun. So, we're we're excited about this particular use for the box. We're excited about what Steve and his investors have put together. And we're excited about the ability to to tell the world that this is what's coming and not having for our community a big empty box on Lincoln Road. So, I urge your support and I

thank you for today. Yeah. Anybody else in chambers? Okay. Zoom. We have some callers online. The first one is Lou.

Hi all. Good morning. My name is Lucia Praau and we've made it quite clear this is going to be approved and the theater is dead and there's nothing that you can do. I just wanted to highlight that this theater has been here since 1999. In 2022, BH Properties took over that and acquired that theater. In 2023, they agreed to lower the rent after Regal almost bankrupted. And for two years, they've been paying whatever they agreed on, and there's been no threat of this movie theater closing. Steve Burke has been online smearing the theater, very hostile, very um just aggressive demeanor, writing to people about, you know, his project that he obviously will have passed due to all of his efforts. But I just want to clarify that at this point, Beach Properties is the landlord to Regal. And if Regal can't pay what this superhuman museum will pay with its millions, then obviously we understand how the American capitalistic system works as Steve tried to highlight that none of us understand those of us who would love the theater to stay, which understood. All I want to highlight here is that even if Regal wanted to stay, they wouldn't be able to stay because again, their landlord has whatever, you know, lease or monthtomonth or whatever their current situation is. Um, they're even hiring online. If you go see on LinkedIn, Regal is still hiring for Miami. You know, I obviously I don't know what their full involvement in is. I just want to say that that is technically their landlord. And if you're in an apartment and they say, "Hey, it's going to be $5,000 and you can't afford that, then I understand that you have to leave. But it's not by a full choice, but rather, hey, we're making this so expensive because we're going to have this immersive thing where it's going to be $50 a pop to go versus, you know, a $10 to $20 movie ticket." And I also want to say that there's a petition online that's been signed by 200 plus people. As you said, you receive thousands of emails. The residents don't want this museum. the residents want a movie theater despite the defeat. Um, but I just wanted to say

that and yeah, good luck to our community. Hopefully this isn't a temporary measure to erase 30 years of cinema. Okay, Lou Lou, hold on because uh Elizabeth wants

Ma'am, can um I just wanted to say that I I understand where you're coming from. Um I love the movie theater also, but they are bankrupt. They have filed bankruptcy and they've done it twice. Um they are closing stores, they're closing their theaters all across the country. Um and as much as none of us want to lose our theater, we are losing the theater. So it doesn't and and by the way, I don't know if you or anybody realizes that to have a movie, even to get a license to play the movie, um you're in the negative. You're in the you're in the red just by having it and trying to stay open. Um, we we really can't have a vacant space and we just we just can't. So, I hope that that helps.

But how would it be a vacant space if Rio hasn't even announced they're leaving? They're technically being evicted. You want to see it that way? Or like there's been no publicity on this measure whatsoever? Like, and again, Rio is still hiring. If you're still if you're hiring people, how do you know that that's a that's a I'm not trying to argue with I'm just saying, how do you even know that that's a that's still a current um ad?

It was posted 12 hours ago on LinkedIn. LinkedIn is pretty accurate. And if you go into the theater, which we often go, it's functioning as normal. There hasn't in 2023, that's when they released those many like, you know, news articles saying Regal's bankrupt. They're leaving this. They're closing all these theaters. Oh, Regal signed a lease with BH Properties. They're staying on board. There's been no article saying that Regal is leaving the Miami Beach like theater. The only thing that's been brought up is this application for this museum which would then Right. But ma'am, when Lou, when you say you're nobody wants the museum, that's under the assumption that the theater would stay. Do I understand you? That's the assumption that right now,

right? It's not that you're against the museum, but you just don't want the theater to leave. Exactly. And also, there's so many vacant buildings in Miami Beach, and Steve Burke has his eyes set on the one movie theater we have. Okay. When is the lease up? Do you even know? I have no idea. We don't We don't really care to, right? No, I'm just saying. I mean, did is the theater looking to vacate as soon as possible? No idea. You don't know? Okay. Just Sorry. On a technical matter, I I do need to swear in, Lucia. Um, we Lou, do you swear that what you testified to is accurate and true? Do I swear to what?

Hi. Sorry. Do Do you swear that the testimony you just given is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing about the truth? I'm confused about the testimony. I'm saying what I've I have to swear you in because this is a qua judicial hearing and I did not get to swear you in before you started. Yeah, you just gave your opinion. You can say yes. You that's what you feel. Do you That's what I feel. I didn't hear anybody else be swore in throughout the meeting. So, you're the first speaker. Thank you. Can I make a comment? I I agree. Do me a favor. Let Let's finish the Zoom hearing and then we we'll all comment here. Do you mind if I let the public finish or is it something about that last speaker? It's something about the last

Yes. Go ahead. And it it it just has to do with and maybe they can Larkin's team can respond, but what is missing is BH Group saying that Regal Theaters was offered a new lease and they rejected it. Regal theater uh said they want to walk away. Has nothing to do with the applicant, but we are talking about a important civic. I mean, when I think about it, I know times have changed and I'm an old person, so I'm going to make a reference, but even Mayberry RFD had a movie theater and Miami Beach is now going to be left without a movie theater. There are there are movie theaters on Bickl. There's some in Aventura. Why? You know, we this board cannot control that. But I think we need at least an explanation not of superhuman but of the owner and did he make a good faith effort to keep a movie theater there to talk to them to talk to AMC before they decided to do this. Not that we can impact it or that I'm a commissioner, but isn't that a minimum requirement? Shouldn't the this the people of our city know why we're losing this movie theater? And if it is, oh yeah, Regal's closing, they don't want to be here, then that's that's good.

I think I I think Keith, what you're commenting about is about the planning overall this city, like I said, and I think those are discussions we should be having. I just think it's important today because there was so much confusion the last two months of people writing to us and keep bringing up the movie theater as a loss for the city which is which is something the planning board need to discuss but for today I just think it's important that we don't go in the direction of discussing the terms of the need for something because we're going to have callers are going to and so if we're encouraging that kind of discussion I'm not encouraging the discussion I just think it would be beneficial to the applicants the of the owner to explain to the community why Regal is leaving

they're not making but I think they did explain it which is the bankruptcies I mean movie around I I just I don't think it's our business to get into a lease agreement and who had was offering better you know lease terms or whatever I mean if we as the planning board we have certain oversight if we want to suggest an ordinance that gives tax incentives or or f increase to movie theaters then that's something we can recommend to by the way the same for gas stations

right right storage units there there's a lot of things that we've seen over the years you know disappearing or that are important but here you know we there's a movie theater that's gone bankrupt that's been struggling for years it's a massive massive space much more than they need in there and you know just there's something that's really going to be sounds really incredible huge investment to the neighborhood the businesses on Lincoln Road want it and there's a handful of residents who I understand, you know, want this opportunity to continue going to the movies. What I would say to that, my my sentiment is we want this to succeed. We want it to do really well. We hope that you do well. Uh, one of the things that I we all see over the years is projects that cater to residents and and encourage residents to come and visit. Those are the ones that do better because word of mouth spreads. You know, Joe's Stone Crab has been there for years. They're accessible because, you know, every there's certain things on their menu that they leave accessible to everybody. And so, you know, just encouraging you to, you know, encourage residents to join to come for discounted rates on certain weekend, whatever it may be. But I think that's what's going to get, you know, community buy in and get your, you know, support for the many years to come, hopefully. All right, let's go back to public hearing. We have

another caller. Uh, Grace. Hi, Grace. Do you swear I affirm the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Yes. Thank you. You have three minutes.

Uh, hi. So, I am obviously I understand that um we can't go against what this is going on that this has already been basically passed on by uh the current uh landlord, but I think what has happened here is that there's been a lack of approach to the community. Um like I we the previous person mentioned that there is a petition out there. Um it's been shared on Facebook groups. People have been outcried about this that they don't want the superhuman museum. Um some people have said that they would rather have a theater that has more indie films or more diverse films but they want the one theater that we do have in our community because the community that we have there are a lot of senior citizens. There's a lot of families and understand the superhuman museum supposed to cater to families, the youth, tourists, etc. However, I think we are doing a disservice for the community that we already have that already spoken out against it. And um the individual who wants to make the superhum museum is making it competitive to MoMA. Um, but unfortunately they don't have any industry experience when it comes to residential art and it's difficult for a local to be understanding that because it's it's not something that they've done in the past. So, they're doing something completely new. We don't know if it's actually going to work out. It's all hypothetical, but you're taking the one land or one community group that we have. The film is industry is tanking as people have been saying. However, I don't think that is happening. I think a lot of more youthful people are actually becoming more film uh cap uh cophiles. They're more interesting in film. Um just for instance, 35 mm that's coming back. Like they're they're booming in sales. Like those are things are coming back and I think if we take that away from our community, we're doing a disservice to the community that's already had an outcry. And uh

Grace, I have a question, but you're again making the assumption that the theater wants to stay there. Is that your assumption? Uh, it's not an assumption. The theater, when we spoke to uh some of the theater people, they were shocked to hear this. They had no information about this. What do you mean by theater people? Did you speak to the landlord or the people that run the theater?

I spoke to a few managers and they were shocked by it. They didn't even hear about the proposal. Um they they when we told them about it, they said, "Oh, these guys were coming in to look at the building." And they had no idea why. And so there hasn't been a lot of communication when it comes to the community nor the people who are actually holding the current lease. And when we spoke to them about it, they said they've been paying their their lease. They've been paying the rent. And um the thing is like there's been a lot of complaints online too about the escalator not working, the AC not working. So the landlord's not doing the job for Regal to help them be a booming business. Like I've been in the building before and complained about the AC and they're like, "We've told the landlord and they haven't taken care of it." So, there's an issue for me as a resident who's seeing this happen to a business that they're not being helped or supported by their actual landlord. Um, there's been multiple reviews saying there is no AC, there's the escalators aren't working. Um, which is an issue because that's the landlord. Um, so for for us is a resident. So, ma'am,

that's an issue. I just um Regal has announced it's closing for this location. Um the hiring uh that y'all are seeing online might be for other locations in Miami. It is on the closing list as part of the bankruptcy notice. They rejected the lease as party to the bankruptcy. So I just wanted Yeah. So we just we just don't have that power that you guys assume we have.

I I think the people that are calling, you got to be make sure you're detaching your sentiment to losing a business that you you wish was still there to what we're reviewing today. So if you treated it as a business that you were happy to see leave, you'd be welcoming this new business probably differently. So I just think it's important people are calling that um they they they they distinguish between the two here. I'd say Lyall, you know, find another movie theater. There you go. Seems seems like there's a lot of interest all of a sudden. Let's continue the public hearing. That concludes the online callers. Okay. Okay. And I just wanted So, wait, Elizabeth, just so can you publish where you've just uh there's there's an article that that I can send to you guys from where? Um and also,

so Regal formally announced they are closing this place.

They're closing this. It was rejected. And also, I wanted to say something. Um in retail, there's triple net leasing and the AC, the escalators, all that kind of stuff. that's the tenants responsibility and they are not making enough money to cover those costs. So, um I'm just I just I want people to understand nobody wants to lose the theater. I don't want to lose it. You know, there's all that sentimental, you know, stuff where you want to go and have popcorn and get all the extra butter in the bottom in the middle and all that stuff. But, but this is this is 2025 and almost 26 and and this is just these are these are changing times. I just want everybody to understand that. I think it's important for people to understand bit better the concept of I mean I this is new but I mean for having experienced some of the comparison to the team lab in Tokyo and these are usually fantastic you know museums that are sensorial that attracts uh locals attracts the uh tourism and um I think that what Lincoln Road needs is a combination of those two things and so I think we're extremely lucky that we're finding tenants to fill into this big location and if it can be done pretty quickly. So I I understand people are upset about the the movie theater, but this is not this is something that maybe people are thinking is going to be gimmicky. Uh but I think that we are looking at a um a business that can have a huge potential impact on Lincoln Road that we need right now. Right. So

So just for the edification of all the people calling in, can you take us or explain to us what is the land is the current lease with the theater up? When do you guys take over? if this is approved like I so uh we did have some slides prepared uh that illustrate that um the ownership is in the red based on uh collection of ownership of the property or the theater? The ownership of the property BH properties. Okay. Okay. which is also my client and owns both the theater and the Banana Republic Art Deco building, right, which is not part of this application,

but um we have put information into the record to show that as the caller described our rental income is based on the income of the of the patrons, you know, you know, it's based on the sales rather and that based on that ever decreasing stream that's getting smaller and smaller, the carrying cost of the building and with inflation and it's a large building is getting larger and larger. I understand I understand the landlord's interest, but my question to you is what what's the current lease with the movie theater? Okay. So, um

yeah, so I'm going to go ahead. Um I'm really not competent to answer that exactly. So, I'm going to turn over this testimony to my client um a vice president at BH Properties. Okay. um Brian Park and he'll he'll answer that for you. Yeah. I mean, you've sat here and heard these comments. So, I I I guess what the PE what what I and the public want to know is, you know, is every effort being made to keep this theater. If the theater said we're out, then obviously that's the answer. But if you could just kind of elaborate on that situation, it would be great. Happy to. Good morning, everyone. Um just introduce your your name and your Brian Park. Uh executive managing director. I'm an owner's representative um of the land 1100 Lincoln. Okay.

So, we've owned the property. We actually purchased it as a note. We did a Dean Lou foreclosure and have outright owned it for call it two years and then since we've owned it, we went through Regal's Chapter 11 bankruptcy and since then have given it I think it was mentioned that they're on a uh a very reduced rent. we're not covering our operating expenses. And similar to everyone, just us as a company, this is our fourth, maybe third uh project that has a movie theater box. And we're working with cities like in Seattle um and in tax in Dallas to try to reposition these boxes. And we've been working with this particular operator uh quite closely to have movie theater sales uh return. So they've since their bank restructuring they've been we're we've been at a loss a reduced rent which at least allows them to rebuild their sales which they haven't done. They're not close to pre- pandemic levels. So at the current state of their lease they're monthtomonth. We've left them monthtomonth. Um their lease expired I believe around March March or April and we've been monthtomonth with them. Just in in full transparency, have they indicated a desire to leave or was their preference just keep lowering the rent even though you're operating at a loss and they would stay there?

Yeah. So they we have expressed at some point we have to get to either close to a market level rent or at least a step a process to get there. Their sales are not there and they're not ready to commit to uh get there. So that's kind of the current state. uh they have threatened to close because for them you know I can't share too much about their struggle but let's say their business is having challenges for various reasons bottom line their sales are not okay so if if I understand the law correctly even if we said no to this project you as a landlord could if they're monthtomonth you could just terminate their lease and they're done anyway correct correct it's completely within your control and power yes and theirs okay

and theirs or theirs it's actually mutual Right. Yes. I appreciate. Right. But if they're monthtomonth, I'm just saying if if they're not paying rent and you're losing money, you could just terminate the lease. Yes. Okay. So, I want everyone to understand that. Uh, thank you. You answered my questions. You're welcome. Appreciate. All right. Um, sorry. Any other questions from the board?

Uh, what? Just one more question. Curiosity. um as a not for the board but speaking as a resident there are other uh companies like AMC. Is this the the other movie theaters the national chains they're not interested in picking up a Miami Beach theater? Have you talked to any of them? Have they reached to you? There's certainly been interest, but I I think the struggle has been um a couple of factors. mainly the capital cost that they would have to invest to get the theater back to normal and it's typical um and this they they do monitor the sales all the uh ticket sales revenue is public information.

Sure. So they do look at how the theat's performing and based on that there's either a very low rent that is proposed that it's not affordable for us kind of the same situation. That's ultimately why we decided to hope that Regal would improve their sales and improve their operations. It just hasn't happened. So there has there's been interest, yes, but there hasn't been a strong commitment to proceeding. And as a resident, that's the transparency. They have to be able to cover their they have to be able to cover their taxes, their insurance, their their business. I understand.

Would it be fair to say that even if this project wasn't on the table right now that that you all would be terminating the lease with the theater anyway? Or you would keep them there until you found a a tenant that would actually pay. So what you want? we would keep them there until we found a tenant. And that's kind of the situation that we're in currently with Superhuman. It took some time to negotiate, get to a lease structure. They've obviously spent a ton of time coming up with a plan to present to uh the community and um and we're supportive of it, but yeah, we've kept them monthto- monthth in hopes um of either their application approved or another user would come. Okay. Yeah.

Are you finding that just out of curiosity, are you finding the the other places that you have in other parts of the country difficult to lease?

It's a good question. I think every market's different, I would say. But what is consistent is that the theater industry as a whole has been struggling. the sales are just they've certainly done things the AMC's uh the landmarks they've certainly made reinvestments to incorporate food and beverage and um doing anything they can to bring back patrons but I think you had mentioned in your introduction the behavior of movies of content watching is just completely changed with the introduction of online streaming the accessibility of it and it's just the behavior has changed the volume has been there's been a huge paradigm shift as how people watch movies and that's just the reality of today. All right. Thank you.

Okay. Any other questions? All right. Listen, we're all sad to see the movie theater go, but you know, the economic reality is again that we don't really have that power to stop this. So, Nope. Um, somebody want to move it? I'll move it. I'll second it. Okay, let's do a roll call. And I would like to also say that that honestly we should be really thrilled that we are not going to be left with an empty space because that's that's the reality. At some point even if it's not in two months or even four months it's leaving and I hate that but I mean

Steve have the gondola from downtown to bring us to the to the I still remember that proposal which I think would be cool except for hurricanes. Many people remember that he once proposed to have a gun gondola from Miami to the beach. So Oh, that's traumatic. When he ran for mayor, that was many years ago. Um, all right. So, we have a first and a second. Can we do a roll call on this one? Sure. Want to um This is for approval based upon um staff conditions. Mr. Cton, yes. Miss Bey, yes. Mr. Marks, yes. Mr. Tone, yes. Mr. Needleman, yes. Mr. Lias, yes. Mr. Yes. All right. I wish you the best, Steve. Please make it special. Good luck. Thank you very much.

Thank you so much. Yes. Be a success, please. Okay. All right. We're on to new applications. We can go back to the progress report. Oh, is he here? Mickey. Oh, Mickey's here. All right. Uh, we're going to go back to progress report. Planning board file 240715 1800 1810 1818 Michigan Avenue and 103918th Street. Lot spit for non-compliance. and we had a very interesting discussion about what the penalty would be for this. So hopefully you'll get it rectified.

So again, as I introduced before you came earlier, um Mickey, this is before the board due to um a violation was issued for non-compliance with the requirements for um vacant and abandoned properties, but not having the um the property fenced off. We sent out a cure letter to the applicant back in August advising him to appear before the board today for a progress report. We're recommending hear testimony from the applicant as well as members of the public and this time recommend that the progress will be continued to the November 4th meeting. Without turn over to uh Mero.

Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Mickey Morero here on behalf of IRS IRS the uh estate of Ira Rose and Rita his wife. So, as you may recall from when we had the lots split here, this is a very unique lotslit application. originally wasn't that we were trying to develop anything and create new new new lots out of nowhere. This was just these were already three lots, but the prior owners did illegal improvements that went over the property lines. So, in a very broad interpretation of the code that does qualify for lots, but we're fine with that. So, we went through the process and that had to predicate our HPB application, which we did and now we're in the HPB process. We're hoping to have that HPB application approved already. It's been continued a couple times. We are scheduled for next. will be in this room a week from today. And we believe we now have staff's support for the modified uh application. It will include most mostly demolishing the existing home. Um it is a single family home that's remaining and replacing it with essentially the same type of home but rebuilt above flood and now in a much better condition. Uh so so that's that's what's before the reason that we still have these violations. And actually, while I was when when I missed when it was originally called, I was meeting with the building official on this very property. The the requirement is that we fence off, put a decorative fence. It costs a lot of money. We're hoping to demolish this after we get the HPB approved. So, I'm okay with Michael's suggestion of November. By then, we'll have had a ruling from the HPB. It just doesn't make a lot of sense to spend tens of thousands of dollars on fencing and landscaping. We're proposing to come in and demo it right after, and we'd have to redo all that fencing and landscape.

Is there any fencing now? Well, there's the two home there were three homes. There was three structures originally. The ones that were demolished, yes, they're fully landscaped and decorative to fence. All that was done. It's just the one remaining lot that's pending before the HPB. And again, if we spend all that money to landscape and fence it and then demo it shortly after it just doesn't make a lot of sense. So, we're we're committed to doing all those things, just hoping to get past. We thought we would have had the HPB application approved by now, but it was continued a couple times, once for quorum. The last time in July, the board had some comments. We've we believe we've addressed those comments and we're scheduled to be heard on Tuesday and if we get approved then then it's going to move quickly into hopefully getting that structure demolished, getting plans in for the new home and then all these things will resolve. And so we have another violation that Michael didn't mention but they because illegally two units were added. It does zoning there is single family. Single family homes don't need a 40-year but because the prior owner illegally added two units which were never approved by zoning never could have been put there. building says you have to do a 40-year because it's multif family. Again, we're hoping to demolish the building. It's vacant now. Nobody's there. So, we're not going to do a 40-year for that. Uh but but everybody understands we've been working very closely with staff. There was a lot more violations on these properties that have been resolved. I've been working very closely with code and building and the magistrate, but it's a very unique situation. Our clients inherited this property from the prior owners and it was in very, very bad shape. So, it's been a labor of a lot of sweat equity and getting these things right. Yeah. And we're we're almost there. So, we're okay with his recommendation to come back in November where we'll have a lot more information.

Hold on one second. Anybody here in chambers to speak on this item? Is there anybody on Zoom? There's nobody on Zoom. We did receive an email from a neighbor regarding concerns with the application and I went by the property if and it's a mess. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, it's bad. What I was going to say is that even though whether or not you guys are demolishing or not, there's a responsibility to the neighborhood to make not let it be an eyesore. And the if you guys are can't put fences like basic fences inclusio and you're looking to put money into a whole demo de demo and reconstruction. I mean come on. It's just a minimum of you guys can be doing but it's not a basic fence. What it is is a it's a decorative fence and it's fully landscaping the it's it's when you have a vacant site that's what you have to do.

Let me clarify something though. Um so before they could demolish the structure they have to get the approval from the store preservation board. They have to get the full building permit for the new construction, then they can demolish the site. So, you put the fence, it's going to be a long time before they demolish the building. So, I think they should take make an effort to install like a a wood fence, which they could do, something that has, you know, you know, um not as expensive as a metal fence, but something that would fence off the property, comply with the minim minimum standards, because it's going to be some time before they're able to demolish the house and at least, you know, satisfy the

100%. That should be that should be part of the cost involved. It's dangerous, too. I mean, it's dangerous. I mean, these are, you know, I have these things in North Beach there and all over the beach. These are just properties that are just just a wreck. There's no reason for that. I mean, take some responsibility and just do what's right. That's all.

So, and I will tell you, we have we we get constant requests from code. We've boarded up the windows. We've kept the property uh safe. There's some there are some wood panels there that were temporarily there just because it does keep the vagrancy out. So we're we're again there was probably 90% of the things we've been asked to do they've done. They've got a full permit for a brand new seaw wall. That's you know that that job's in the six figures. There's a lot that's gone into this and at some point you know they we just once we get that HPB I think Michael's right we'll work with you to find a fence that works that's reasonable because yes plans have to come in but they're going to demo it. So we want to make it as reasonable as possible.

Right. Demo. I think at some point very in the near future you should come in to see you know I think there's portion isn't there a portion of the fence that's there. So can you add to the fence or Yeah. The 1810 and 1818 is fully is fully fenced because those buildings came down. We landscaped it. We planted all the trees and and all that's been done for better part of I think you could work with us to install the minimum necessary um fencing requirements to secure the property. So we'll meet with you guys. You know, I ideally I think we'll be informed by what happens next Tuesday and then go from there and work with you to find a fence that makes sense. I think um

eventually you're going to put up a construction fence there, something for the property. So, I mean, I'm okay even if it's not a wood fence, something to go up there, but it has to look halfway decent. Maybe even a chain link with the um the mesh on it, a green mesh or something. Something that really It can't be It has to be code. And that and that's it. even attemp they can't do a construction fence because they don't have a building permit yet for the site. Yep. And so, Michael, what do you want us to do here? I would suggest um continuing the the property report to November with a direction for the for the property owner to come in to get a permit to for a fence that's minimally compliant to secure the property before the November meeting. All right. So, want to move it? I'll move that.

Okay. Second, Keith? I'll second. All right. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? All right. So, you got your marching orders. All right. Okay. New applications. Planning board 25775 801 South Point Drive, unit CU2.

And this staff report begins on page um 127 of the board packages. This application first became first came before the planning board back on March 28th of 2023 for a cup for a neighborhood impact establishment for a restaurant located at um two of the existing ground level commercial spaces at 801 um South Point Drive. At that time, due to concerns over residential units above, the board had several conditions of approval in current, including physical modifications required within the space to make sure that the sound from within space was not affecting um residential units above. Wait, Mike, what was in this space before?

Um, another restaurant. Was this red or it was vac? No, this is nothing's ever been in this space. The red is across the It's the same building, but it's totally vacant. Got it. Okay. Been vacant for a long time. Yeah. Yeah. So, um, how long how long has it been vacant? Since the building was been built. So, this is a this this is the first applicant.

So, the the sound study that was initially provided based upon the recommendations for the physical improvements was based upon certain sound level. The applicant has since revised that sound level downward and has since suggested modification to those conditions based upon the lower sound levels. Uh, we did have that sound study reviewed by our peer review peer reviewer Arpeggio. They agreed with the um the sound study, the revised sound study submitted, but they did have some additional recommendations that we've incorporated into our conditions of approval. This included that um that the the floor mounted subwoofers be installed in vi vibration isolating mounts as well as that the commissioning exercise for the sound system um should be done utilizing precise sound level limits in terms of both the DVA and DBC to ensure that both high and low level frequency sound transmission to the residence is controlled. We included those revised conditions in our conditions of approval along with the applicant's revised conditions in terms of their physical improvements. So we are recommending that the application be approved subject to the conditions that we have the revised conditions noted in our staff report starting starting on page 135 of the board packages. Turn it over to

Okay, before you start any disclosures on this one?

Yeah. Um couple one. this I was on SNA when this first came to approve this hasn't gone back to SNA uh I did get an email I don't know if anyone else did from uh Nick and I asked one question which I think is pertinent I can state it now if you like but I asked if the neighbors had a approval above of this change and Nick can reply to that but I can state that it normally this this would go to Sona and it did not and I think it's because in my personal opinion uh that the neighbors did not give an affirmative so

okay it doesn't mean that we don't have to agree or disagree on on the planning board but I do want to disclose that the neighborhood was not in involved yeah just just so you when I asked for disclosure, it's whether you had communications. I did communicate with him and he told me that there was an issue with Maria and their homeowners association. Okay. Any other disclosures? I got an email from Nick but didn't respond. I'm sorry. Okay. Scott, I got the email everyone the same. Okay. Sent me an email. Sorry.

I didn't get an email. If if anyone did receive an email about this application, um if anyone did receive an email about this application, those need to be forwarded to staff so they can be made a part of the record since this is a Oh, I'll forward mine. Okay. Oh, I I always assume they copy staff. So, I didn't get an email. I'm jealous. All right. I I did send it. I don't know. Maybe I got your address wrong. Sorry. Go ahead.

No. uh Nicholas Rodriguez, 200 South Biscane Boulevard representing Gaia Miami Beach. Uh I'm joined today by Connor Brown, our project manager, Alexi Polyakov uh from ownership who are joining us via Zoom and Andy Swirllo, our acoustical consultant, and last but not least, my colleague Michael Larkin. If we could please call up our presentation. So we, as Michael mentioned, we are here asking for a modification to a CUP that was approved back in 2023. um Gaia is permitted and building out their space. They took a pause on building out the space uh when the cost of of installing this um additional soundproofing that they had agreed to in the original CUP uh was just too much for them to burden. So, they have actually stopped their construction um and are seeking this modification, but they are hoping to pick it back up and open uh before the end of the year. The space is substantially built out. Uh just for context, this space is at the corner of Washington Avenue and South Point Drive. It's a really prominent corner. Uh it's kind of sad to see that this space has never been activated on this prominent corner. It's been dark. Um as we know, you know, empty storefronts are not good. Uh it's been kind of a restaurant Armageddon this summer. Uh so Gaia is entering a different market from when they enter uh got the COP approval. Uh so they're looking at ways to uh improve their chances and staying power on and keep this prominent corner activated. And you see that's uh the rendering that we previously presented of what it'll look like when it's actually there. Uh so the request today is really to modify condition six of the original approved CUP uh to make it more appropriate for the type of restaurant that's actually proposed. Uh and what happened in 2022 2023 when we uh first submitted this application was that the sound consultant really uh did a sound study and assumed the worst case scenario. uh they really modeled it and and designed and made recommendations based on like a

poppy steak or a komodo or a much more rowdy and uh lively atmosphere than what is really expected at this restaurant. This restaurant is a fine dining establishment. It's more like Catch or Joe's. Um you you'll see some of the interior renderings that we presented uh last time before the planning board. And so the soundproofing conditions in condition six of the original cup, they were direct copy and paste of our sound consultants recommendations for a much louder restaurant. Uh what has come to light is that the restaurant will be a typical fine dining restaurant uh just like a Joe's or a catch which normally don't provide any soundproofing but given the fact that we had residential units above we have always been committed to put soundproofing in and make sure that those residents above do not hear this restaurant at all. So to be clear the standard here is not changing. The unit owners above will not hear this restaurant. uh and our sound consultants report and the city's peer reviewer agree that as presented the the units above will not hear this restaurant. Um and we're agreeing to all of staff's conditions. We have one tweak uh to condition 6 A3. We can return to that at the end if we like, but I just wanted to make you guys aware uh just in terms of the measurement of the average distributed sound level rather than just one point source measurement of 75 dBAs. Um, but we can return to that at the end. So, just to familiarize you all with the floor plan here, uh, this restaurant, although it has 234 seats, 30 of those seats are outside. So, they don't even and there we're already voluntarily committed to not have any music outside. So, those 30 seats are not a part of the analysis of the amount of sound that's being generated inside the restaurant. The restaurant is also divided into multiple spaces. Uh, so there's not really one big dining room where there's 200 seats and people talking over each other and loud music. It's really divided into a main dining room, a bar, and smaller spaces where

the sound is expected to be more contained. Uh, so we are aware of a letter that was submitted by the Maria condominium. And uh, we do believe that some of the assumptions uh, and conclusions in that in that letter are incorrect. And one of those the things mentioned in the letter is that this is a 234 seat restaurant and everybody will be in the same room yelling over each other, yelling over the music. That's just simply not the way the restaurant is configured. Um you can see the red outline is the outline of the tower above. So the residential units sit in that red rectangle. Um the residential units are not located over prime the primary portion of the main dining room. Uh they're really located over uh the bar, some areas of the kitchen. Uh, and it is an 8 inch concrete structural slab that's there. Something that was mentioned in the consultants letter that was submitted was a six-inch slab. That's just incorrect. It's an 8 in slab. Um, in some places it's actually a 12-in slab. So, uh, just getting out ahead of that. So, uh, in December of 2022, we did conduct a sound study in connection. We collected data. We went up to the residential units and put a decibel reader, collected data and and uh did a made an understanding of the amount of transmission loss of sound that was occurring when you played a loud music or a loud noise in the restaurant space and heard the the noise in the unit above. Uh we actually played it at a sound level of 98 dBA and 103 dbc. much louder than we would ever be considering in the restaurant so that we would actually hear it and understand how the sound the the loss of sound transmission. Um, so I'd like to introduce Andy Swarllo as our expert witness. He's our acoustical consultant. U Nick, if you could promote Andy on Zoom or Michael so he can explain a little more about what we did in 2022.

And um, Andy, while we queue you up, do you swear? Hi everyone. Can I Can you hear me there? Yes, we can hear you. Do Do you swear that the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Thank you. You can proceed. Andy, can you hear me? Okay. Okay. Yes. Yes. Can Can you hear me? Yes. So, Andy, I just want to ask you a couple questions. So, uh, before we get into the details of the 2022 sound study, can you just briefly describe what qualifies you to testify as to the design and acoustic treatment of spaces like this?

Um, yes. I have over a decade experience in the industry. Formerly, I was a partner at WSDG uh in Highland, New York, where we specialized in designing music studios and live performance venues. So I have extensive experience limiting and creating sound isolation solutions for dynamic sound sources whether that is a subwoofer or performers. Um I've I've done that at the highest level. Um

okay I think that works. So, um, can you just briefly describe what we did in 2022 in measuring in the units and specifically, you know, what was the intended level of music that you were designing to protect against at at that time,

right? So, Nick, you you summarized it very well. We brought in a portable PA system, cranked it up as loud as we could get it, measured the sound downstairs, and measured the sound upstairs. The difference is the transmission loss of the base building structure. We use that to calibrate a model in insul software where we put different configurations of a hung sound isolation ceiling below that. And we used a spectrum that we had measured in actually it was in Poppy Steak in Miami. uh which has significant bass and is upwards of 95 dbc uh which is it it's difficult to talk you need to lean in um if you have a table of four you might be talking to the person next to you not the person across from you at the table unless you both are leaning forward that is I' I'd call that a a a lounge type of sound level. That's what was being imagined during the very early stages of the project. Now, this was back in 2022. So the recommendations for that would have been a sound isolation ceilings with two layer two layers of drywall hung from springs. If they wanted to get louder than that, we could put more layers of drywall on to create more decoupled mass hanging from the structure. And then the walls would be furred out with a similar

complement of drywall uh using isolation clips to prevent direct mechanical connection of the wallboard layers to the base building structure. Now what is happening is informally we would call it a fine dining sound level where 75 dBA might even be a little bit loud but the sound of conversation is usually planning board describes this as as ambient. in music. So 75 dBA and that would be measured using the fast or the the slow max setting on the SPL meter. Um

so Andy I think you're getting a little ahead but that that's fine. So just um sorry uh so just in terms of the modeling that you discussed here that this graph that's on the screen now um that's the modeling we conducted in 2022 and that essentially shows uh that at 85 to 90 dB is what you guys are planning at uh that it would be below measured ambient levels in the unit above. Is that essentially what this graph is showing? Correct. And the the red line above shows what you would get at with that sound level with no sound isolation ceiling. Right? So with no ceiling, it would be above Indian.

The orange line represents with a sound isolation ceiling. Same music level upstairs. So, what we have here is the 2025 version of this where Oh, and we should start the the black line with squares is the ambient sound level measured upstairs in unit 204. That is 35 dBA or NC30, which is what we would use in architectural acoustics. That's the NC30 line right there where at 1,00 hertz is just about to touch it. Um, that measurement was made with no activity downstairs, no activity in the other restaurant space, the Kosushi space. It wasn't open at the time. It's taken during the day. So it was as quiet as you would get in that unit. The loudest thing going on in that unit was the refrigerator running.

So in this, if we're reading this graph correctly, essentially with no sound treatment and 75 dba's music, we wouldn't appro we would be close to ambient, but we wouldn't go above it. With our proposed soundproofing, we're well below ambient in the unit above. That's essentially what this graph is showing. Correct. Correct. If we are 10 dB below ambient, there's no chance you're going to perceive the sound.

So, thank you, Andy. And that's enough for now. Appreciate it. So, in addition to the soundproof ceiling that's above between the 8 in concrete slab, um Gaia also is implementing interior design. So, there's going to be a decorated ceiling of drywall below that. Uh that is going to, you know, be what you actually see in the restaurant. And these renderings are just to give you an idea of the type of restaurant uh that Gaia is. It's really not intended to be a poppy steak like that type of atmosphere. It's intended to be more like catch or like other restaurants that are in South of Fifth. Uh so we do believe that the the previous conditions in condition six were just an overkill and way too much soundproofing for a level of restaurant and essentially it's killing this restaurant uh financially before they've even had a chance to open. Um, and we wanted to point out, as was mentioned earlier, RED did operate in this building. Red did not need a cup. Um, they were a popular restaurant. They had no soundproofing between the ceiling at all. Um, and they, you know, we're not aware of any complaints from the building. Uh, certainly, uh, if there were any, you know, some soundproofing would have helped, and we are committed to to, uh, putting in soundproofing in the ceiling. Um but given the fact that restaurants have existed in this building uh have been successful or for a certain amount of time um and then not really had noise impacts to the units above. Uh we think that's empirical proof which according to the letter that was submitted uh by Maria we have no empirical evidence and we've done no scientific analysis of our uh our sound analysis. It's just simply not true. Uh so we respectfully request that this application uh be approved with the modifications and the requested modification to the condition. I don't know if we want to get to that on rebuttal.

I'm going to um suggest a modification to your suggested modification. I think you'll accept this just to cut it off. Um this is a modification of condition 6 A 3 under the underlined portion at the end. You can find this on page 137 of the board packages under entertainment under um entertainment. Okay. Under the underline under underlining section at the end, we've mod modified to say in no case shall the sound level within the space exceed a level that would interfere with normal conversation and take out the the decibel level measurement. Okay, that's fine. Yeah, we agree to that.

Um and so with that, we respectfully reserve time for rebuttal and thank you very much. Okay. Anybody in chambers speak on this? Come on up. Thank you for allowing me a chance to speak. My name is Justin Smith. I'm an attorney um who serves as general counsel from Ara Condominium Association. Um, I'm here today to represent the collective best interests of that particular community. Um, this building has residential units as you are well aware and those residential unit owners um have voiced concerns to the association. They are concerned that if the cut modification is permitted that they will experience disturbances within those units and therefore it's incumbent upon the association to investigate those concerns. Again, the the board has an obligation to those owners to act in their best interest. So given this proposed cup modification, um the board of course reviewed the proposal and became concerned um regarding the fact that it appeared that everything is contingent upon this 75 um max excuse me 75 decibel maximum level for the music. Um, taking that concern into consideration, um, the association retained its own independent consultant, um, SR Acoustics, Mike Drafic is present here from SR Acoustics, um, to opine as to whether the association's concerns were valid. Um, that independent report does confirm that the association did raise some valid points and that there are legitimate concerns that the noise will transfer and disturb some of those units. you know, we're having um owners reach out about things such as, you

know, I'm afraid my grandchildren will come to visit and won't be able to sleep because the restaurant is open or it's planned to be open until 2:00 in the morning and the noise may exceed the 75 dibels, maybe 75 dibels of music, but perhaps the conversations and other, you know, activities going on within the restaurant would exceed that level. So again, to confirm whether that's a legitimate concern, the association retained SR acoustics. And one of the key points I wanted to point out um to the board from that those findings before Mike gets into some of the more scientific um findings um is that um that report does confirm that the cut modification relies on electronic limiters, a solution that addresses only music playback while ignoring the far greater contributions of patron voices, impulsive events, and low frequency mechanical noise and every independent study of restaurant environments shows that noise escalates to levels well above the thresholds cited in the cup modification. So

you're talking about non music noise. Yes, exactly. The the concern here is that um what's presented is solely based on the music rather than taking into consideration some of the other components that involve a restaurant. Is that inside? Is that inside or outside that you're I mean there is both. I mean and I mean because they have outside which obviously is going to have people out there you know laughing, eating, drinking as well.

So there's sound soundabsorbing um stucco that you can put on top of the concrete. There's also soundproof stucco that you can put over hung ceilings. Um and also padded fabric, all kinds of soundproof things. I'm I'm trying to understand. I mean, I I I obviously understand because if I had a restaurant below me, but there wasn't any issue with Red, correct? And they didn't have any soundproofing. I'm

My understanding is is that from time to time there were complaints from residents about RED uh primarily when there were special events or, you know, something that would be louder and out of the normal operations. But I also understand that especially towards the tail end of red, it wasn't a very busy restaurant, so they weren't experiencing those sort of issues and they didn't have any soundproofing at all. But this one is going to have they aren't ne is that correct? They are going to have sound. Okay. And you obviously took that into account, correct? Yeah. No. So I mean, and the other thing I want to explain is since there's never been anybody in this space is how you determine that people talking is going I mean do you just use

I have it all here. And so in my original report that I sent to you and that I'm being, you know, told that I claimed that there was 6 in slab, which let's just start there. There was not enough information. They provided details in their cup amendment in 2025 to your team. And in those details, they did not specify the slab thickness. So me as an independent consultant, I can only look at the data that was provided to me at the time when they requested me, which was very recently. And when I looked at the data, it was not sufficient for me to say that they had adequately dealt with the space. And you'll see that throughout my report also on vertical flanking, which deals with steel columns. So even with concrete, we have to worry about how sound flanks not only there through windows and and other places. And so that's where I'll start. Um but uh yeah, I'm Mike Drap. I'm with SR Acoustics. Uh we have operated for 40 years out of Omaha, Chicago, and Tampa. I mean, we've worked on projects uh uh many hotels for Kimton, IHG, Marriott. We've worked on medical facilities, public safety facilities, just uh and and and and many other things. Mississippi Civil Rights Museum is one. So, we have extensive experience in the realm of sound isolation and architectural acoustics and and again, thank you for being here and everything that you do. So, I was asked to provide an independent review of Gaia's restaurant request to modify the conditions of their conditional use permit. And I want to be clear at the outset that I was not the original acoustic consultant on this project. I had no involvement in its original design. My role is limited to review what has been submitted, compare it with the safeguards this board required, and offer my professional judgment on whether the proposed changes provide the same level of protection. Before I go on, I'm a loud guy. I go to fine dining establishments all the time. Um, my dog bark is at 150 115 dBA. So, it just gives you when I'm hollering at the bar, which I do in fine dining establishments

quite often, you know, obviously I'm going to be quite loud and noisy. So, these are things that we want to take into account, especially in a mixed use with residential development, but I'm going to move on. The first and most important point in this is the applicant has not provided the basic information when I had seen it that would allow me to even really determine with some reasonability with confidence that this design will work. The actual thickness of the floor slab was not disclosed. It was this morning and I also saw their study this morning. Just a minimalistic detail that didn't address the columns and treatments. No sound isolation tests which we now saw from their 2022 application were supplied and without that data I could not certify equivalency. The absence of proof should be your concern or should be a concern at least at that point. So when this aboard when this board approved the Herman in 23 it did so with those specific safeguards. A spring isolated ceiling with two layers of drywall possibly more. additional protection for walls and columns, strict controls on penetrations, and a requirement that music be kept at conversational background levels. These safeguards were not decorative. They were found they were the foundation for your finding that the project was consistent with the code, particularly 118192, which requires conditional use, protects public health, welfare, and neighborhood values. The request before you would replace that system with a lighter ceiling, which could be in the field, you know, uh transmission loss reduction. uh I mean in an increase I mean a reduction in transmission loss of around 5 to 10 dB possibly. So this is definitely a change that will reduce the sound isolation that you had originally required in the space. On paper it sounds precise. In practice it does not address the real sources of the disturbance. Sometimes a limiter can reduce the sound system but it cannot control people's voices. It cannot control a cheer from a crowd, a scraping of chairs, or a crash of dishes. Research shows that once background noise rises, people instinctively raise their voices to be heard. That effect is known as the Lombard effect, and it means restaurants often easily reach 80

to 85 dBA with peaks closer to 90. Restaurant noise is not a single source. It's a mix of overlapping elements: background music, conversation, bursts of laughter, cheering, clattering dishes, pots and pans, scraping chairs, compressors, ventilation, deliveries, and late night cleanup. The hours proposed on this are 2:00 a.m. For a note, each sound is different. Some continuous, some impulsive, some low frequency. Together, they create constantly shifting and intrusing sound environment. In reflective spaces, glass, drywall, tile, sound does not dissipate. It reflects. It layers upon itself. And this buildup makes voices and music harder to control. And the overall sound field becomes more intense. Now why this matters is taken together noise escalation and sound buildup means restaurant noise is likely is not likely is like not like ordinary household noise it's continuous it overlaps it peaks suddenly and in mixuse settings it persists for hours directly beneath residences this is why stricter safeguards required the original cup conditions recognize this reality weakening them without proof of equivalent performance ignores the nature of restaurant noise and risks exactly the kind of disturbance the cup was meant to prevent. This is not about choosing one consultant's opinions over another. This is the integrity of the conditions you established in 2023 and those conditions allowed you to conclude the project was compatible with the community. Um, if they are weakened without proof of equivalency, the legal and factual foundation of that approval is undermined. In my professional opinion, unless and until the applicant provides verifiable data showing that the slider system performs as well as the spring isolated ceiling, you required against all the possible noise intrusions, not just the sound system. The responsible course is to keep the original safeguards. They were not optional. They were essential to protecting the health, the welfare, and the values of this neighborhood. Now, you know, and again, I I'm simply speaking on what had been provided to me at the time and what I

can speak to. An 8in slab is is is an improvement. um will sound flank over. I mean like he said it had before you know they have like they've already done they have a two ceiling so you have some separation and I think that you know I I think that if we could see more details or we had more you know understanding of exactly how everything was going to be it would be easier for me to make some determination to help them understand what they're going to be experiencing. So thank you. All right. Um let's let's open it for public. Anybody here speak on this item? I assume you live in the building. My wife join me.

Just introduce yourselves in your address and then

Well, thank you. Um Peter and June Felix, we live in the building, apartment 406, directly above Guyia. Um first and foremost, let's make it clear. We're very happy that this building, this space is now being built out. It's been a complete eyes saw, dreadful situation, frankly, almost unhealthy. But that's that's that's a history. But it does raise in our minds who's going to take this over and make it reasonable in terms of our living in the building. Um, we've heard about the plans. There are things that make us fearful. Uh, one is that this restaurant is going to be open until 2:00 a.m. in the morning. I don't understand how that's possible in a residential area.

Yeah.

So, I would raise that as an objection personally, but that's a different issue to the sound. We're fearful because we know, we live in Miami Beach, we live in South Miami. We know that it can get very noisy in restaurants. We also know that if a restaurant is very successful, it attracts a whole contingent of people with their fancy cars. Let's be realistic. This is a high-end restaurant, very expensive, based on successful restaurants in Dubai and London. And it's intended that this will be topofthe- line and eyewateringly expensive. Now, just imagine If the VIPs who are apparently intended to sit be in this lounge, the VIP lounge, are still there at 2:00 in the morning, are these people going to be worried about the noise that they're making when their Ferrari comes along and picks them up? I mean, we're talking about really an absurd situation for a residential community, and that is our fear. Now, we very much like the idea that a quality restaurant would be there, but we are very concerned that this could be the thin end of the wedge, weakening already the sound constraints. That's why we would object to it. And I just don't buy. I'm sorry. I know nothing about the finances of the Dubai and London restaurants, but we understand they're amazingly successful. This restaurant is financed by money coming out of Dubai. And I just don't buy this argument that this restaurant cannot afford to put in the enhanced soundproofing which is already demanded by the cup.

So if we're hearing you right, no Ferraris.

No, we're not fixing the Ferraris. We're just unfortunately throwing that in. I'm sorry. He's throwing that in because that is a pet peeve. However, let me just um put yourself in this condition. You're uh you're you bought an apartment in a beautiful area. We love all the restaurants there. That's one of the reasons we're there. That being said, the original proposal was essentially like a sound system, like a sound booth, right? You could sleep, you could go down to the restaurant. Now what they're saying is oh the ambient the um sound system will be at 75 dB. How many of you have been in catch or in Joe and screaming at each other across the table because to the experts um uh explanation the ambient noise is beyond the music. So all they're doing is saying okay the sound system will be at this level controlling conversations all of that is very very difficult to do. Our conditional proposal was based on a protection of that not actually uh impacting the residents. Now that's being taken away. They're saying oh you know let's just st let's just take that back. This also does not prevent I'm but I don't know all the code people having special events. Let's bring in some special equipment so that for that special whatever celebrity event we're going to add more woofers, more sound to make it, you know, Basil event, a Formula 1 event. So there is deep concern. I've talked to all of the um our neighbors in our line. They're deeply concerned. They may be on the Zoom. I'm not sure. But it's it's um a problem. We love Call Me Gabby. We go to Joe's. We go to all of these

restaurants, but it's different than being in our building. I know you raised Red. Red failed, by the way.

So, the fact that it had no soundproofing is not a great example because there were hardly ever any people in there. Um I think maybe there was a week when it was actually successful. So that's not an applesto apples comparison. We want it to be successful, but why are they walking back from what they originally agreed? The other thing is they said they've ceased um construction. They have not ceased. 8:00 a.m. in the morning, we are still woken up by all sorts of equipment. So, if they're not even withholding or complying with what they agreed to do just in terms of neighborly friendliness, how can we feel comfortable that they're going to continue to comply with what they're saying is going to be an a modification on a sound system which can easily be changed.

I have a question. If if if they changed the hours and ended at midnight and added extra the extra soundproofing. Excuse me. I'm sorry. I didn't know if you could hear me. If they changed their hours to midnight to close and added the extra soundproofing, would that help alleviate your concerns? Yeah. I don't know if that's something I don't know if the hours changing would be something they'd be a minimal to, but I mean I I I definitely understand where you're coming from. Yes, I I would have an issue.

Absolutely. Um, you know, the original proposal sounded very credible, right? You're like in a sound booth. You're in the restaurant. It's not really affecting the rest of the neighborhood. That's fine. We we're happy with that. Why they need to change that? I, as Peter said, these are well financed people with very successful restaurants other places. I find that really questionable as to it is jeopardizing this project.

I have extreme problems with this. Uh I have a problem that this is the first time a restaurant came in front of the planning board or the commission that I know of particularly Mr. Larkin who is an excellent representation of his clients without having this go in front of Sona because I'm sure the neighborhood association when they heard you speak would be dead set against this. Yeah. Okay. I that's an absolute. So, the fact that it wasn't presented to the neighborhood

uh would be a reason not only to reject it, but if somebody was still wanting to vote for it, at a minimum, it should be delayed until they present it to the neighborhood association and we hear from you. Number two, I've never heard of someone agreeing to certain soundproofing and then coming back later and saying, "We're going to stop because it's too expensive." If we're wrong and we allow this and they hear the noise, what is their what are they reduced to now living with that noise and code because we just changed what they already agreed to. I it I don't understand it. I can I I not here to talk about the financial of Gaia, but if you're going to have fine dining, if you agreed to it initially, if you presented it initially to the neighborhood association, now you're coming back not presenting it not having open disclosure and you're asking to significantly change the sound because you think the decibel level will be different. I I I don't understand the justification for even being here.

I just want to make one clarification, Keith. The the the board cannot require an applicant to appear before. Absolutely. I am stating why we don't have a resolution in support or against. They they bypassed it. That's that I want that on the record. And I want it on the record that they are asking for economic relief from an association above them that has grave concerns. And I hope that my board members put themselves in the resident's shoes when they make a decision on this.

Well, I I'm just going to tell you that that there's no way we're going to approve a project if if it's going to be disruptive to your quality of life. So, it's just a matter of working out the requirements that that soundproofing that they engage in. So, there's no way, you know, I just want you to know that. Um, I would say ours as well. I I'm just I mean, this is a a residential neighborhood and other residential neighborhoods have 12 is I mean, I don't know. I'm just Mr. Chairman, do you want to continue with the public comment first? Yeah, I do. Is there anyone else in chambers? Thank you for coming in. Is there anyone else in chambers to speak on this? All right, I'm assume I'm assuming.

Yeah, we have some callers on Zoom. The first is Steven Tishman. I Stephen, do you swear that the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Uh, yes, I do. Thank you. You have three minutes.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, my name is Steven Tishman. I'm an owner at 801 South Point Drive, apartment 206. Uh I am actually the apartment which is directly above the restaurant. Um and uh I want to state uh publicly that I am opposed to the sound modification is currently proposed and consistent with our homeowners association's position. Uh while like the Felix's I'm very supportive of the restaurant uh and frankly very supportive of the restaurant, I just want to make sure that uh uh that uh uh on behalf of the tenants that they stick to their lawyer's comments uh which is is that quote the tenants will not hear the restaurant at all. Um uh I don't understand uh how the restaurant's owners who had previously agreed to a certain noise protection level that was permanent and designed to protect the tenants now want to reduce the permanency by installing an electric noise limiter to their music systems and reducing the permanent noise protection level. Um, what I don't get is with all due respect is is this was a fine dining establishment before, it's a fine dining establishment now. The quality of the restaurant hasn't changed. So, if it was fine before, I don't understand why it's not fine now other than for economic reasons. Uh, you know, uh, what they want to do is not a permanent solution, nor is it a permanent protection. How are the tenant How are the tenants supposedly uh going to protect themselves against the quote I'm sorry the electric noise limiter didn't work that night or I'm sorry we had a special event and they brought in their own speakers and microphones. Uh I asked the panel to please note as our um um noise consultant said that the noise limiter does not protect against ancillary noises such as kitchen patrons

additional cars etc. only the music, assuming it works. And just as an example, I've rented U-Hauls that had speed limiters and they can be undone and you can still speed. Furthermore, you should be aware that with my experience with the owners, construction people has not been pleasant. Uh, twice I and the Maria staff after midnight have had to attempt to stop the drilling in construction which woke up my young grandchildren. Uh, as I said, after midnight, the worker's response was, "Well, the landlord said that it was okay." And there are numerous construction drilling as early as 6:30 to 7 a.m. And we spoke to these people many times with no uh benefit at all. I understand that this is an economic decision or they'd not be asking for modification. We would assume that the uh restaurant would not be a good ne, you know, would want to be a good neighbor and do what is necessary to reduce the noise as much as possible. We cannot protect ourselves, as you said, to this variability on behalf of the restaurant without your support to keep the noise protection levels at the levels of the existing proposal. Frankly, I don't understand why we're here or this is an issue. Thank you very much for your time.

Thanks, Steve. Next, next caller is Shane. Hi, Shane. Can you state your full name for the record and then I'll swear you in? Shane French. I am in 801 South Point unit 504. Thank you. Do you swear that the testimony you'll give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Yes. Thank you. By the way, they've eliminated that in court. Now you just have to say the truth. You don't have to say the whole truth, and nothing about the truth. Just letting you know. Well, just the truth then. Um, you have Thank you. You have three minutes.

I'll give you some truth and some uh some opinion of mine. I concur wholeheartedly with uh the other residents who I honestly have not had the pleasure to discuss this matter with. Uh I'm only on this call. I'm actually traveling and I've been on the call for about an hour and a half now waiting uh to speak up, but uh I personally am right above this uh this restaurant. Uh I'm up on the fifth floor, so so I may not uh get it as bad as the residents on the second floor, but uh with the hours of the restaurant going to 2:00 a.m., uh it is a a serious concern uh for all of the property owners. And and I would just say if if if the restaurant is claiming that they're stopping construction because of their sound mitigation costs, uh good luck doing business in Miami Beach if if you're that strapped. I mean, it's it's just a ridiculous argument, frankly, uh to something that they've already agreed upon. Uh I do wish them luck. Um, uh, when it comes to the sound at Red, as as previous residents have already, uh, uh, testified, um, there you'd go in there, and I loved Red, but there was me and maybe three other people in there. Uh, this, I think, is going to be a different animal. Uh, much more crowded, a lot more activity, and and it it is very, uh, concerning, and, uh, I wish them luck. I I I am happy that the unit has been uh, occupied. Uh but I I'm just not buying the argument that this is a you know well we're stopping construction because we can't afford sound mitigation. Um you're they're going to have some some much bigger issues in the long run if that is indeed the case. And I appreciate your time. Thank you.

Thanks Shane. Safe travels. Next. Next caller is Brit. Hi Brit. Can you state your full name for the record? Good afternoon. My name is Britney Gado and I also live at 801 South Point Drive. Thank you. Do you swear that the testimonial you'll give in this proceeding is the truth? I do. Thank you. You have three minutes.

So, first of all, thank you to the board for allowing myself and all of our neighbors uh to share our opinions on this matter. We really appreciate the opportunity to be heard here today. I live at 801 South Point Drive and the reason we purchased a home in the south of Fifth neighborhood is because it has historically been known to be the quiet residential area of the beach. Of course, we want businesses to succeed in our neighborhood just as much as the board wants businesses to to succeed across the city. However, I would say that over the past few years, it has gotten significantly louder in the south of Fifth neighborhood, most notably the sports cars that are drag racing up and down South Point Drive at all hours of the day and night. We feel that the addition of this noise pollution from this restaurant directly below our home would be a major disturbance to the residents of the building and overall community. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Anyone else? And that concludes our online callers. Okay, we'll close the public hearing. Um, do you want to respond to

Yes, just briefly. So, um, unfortunately, there seems to be a really large fundamental understanding about what this proposal is. Um, it seems to have been communicated to these residents that were proposing just to use a limiter. Um, there was always a limiter in involved. where we're proposing to lower the limiter and continue to create a box. Um it's just the thickness of the box is getting a little bit thinner because of the level that it was previously designed to was essentially to the level of a nightclub. If every restaurant is forced to soundproof their their restaurant to the level of a nightclub, um essentially you're you're signing them up for uh unparalleled cost of construction. um you know and it appears to also have been communicated uh to the residents and the association that you know the cost is just not a big deal. Um it it is a very significant cost uh just because they're wellunded and people can uh point to where their funding comes from uh doesn't mean that it's not impacting their ability uh to do business and and p you know uh be successful. Uh again, the biggest thing here is that there's a fundamental misunderstanding from the neighborhood about from the building about what we're proposing here. You can see the conditions that are in the draft order. It's a layer of drywall on top of additional uh you know, Andy, I think, can explain it better and can I call Andy back in uh to explain exactly what we're doing um and respond to Mr. Jbach's concerns? Nick, I'm I'm missing some of the fundamentals that the residents are. This was approved,

right? What changed the ch What changed with the restaurant? Did Were they going to do a nightclub? Were they going to have DJs? Of course not. Was it going to be a schllock house or a fine dining restaurant? What people are saying is you there's a economic reason that's causing you to change what you agreed to. Why did you agree to it in the first place? You're speaking for the GIA, I assume. So, yeah. So, it was the conditions were directly lifted from the sound consultant's report. Um, in hindsight, the sound consultant overestimated what the sound was believed to be in the restaurant. It was just

assuming a worst case scenario that did not exist.

Okay. assumed you assumed the worst case. The people up above and the neighborhood associations all backed you and now you're coming in and saying, "Well, we can do less." What What if you're wrong and you built all this and now you're getting nothing but noise complaints? What's your solution? What's your plan B? If you do this for economic reasons and they start hearing noise, the the conditions of the CUB address that there's going to be commissioning. So, we're going to ensure before the restaurant opens, before they're able to receive a certificate of use, um that they're going to do commissioning, stand in the units above and ensure that they don't hear 200 people in the restaurant talking.

The the the concern raised from crowd noise, I would like Andy to be able to respond to that because um that is honestly the idea that crowd noise is going to go through an 8 in slab through soundproofing that's intended to stop music, it's just not true. Um and the sound the the city's independent third party peer reviewer agrees with our conclusions. Um the the expert from the association admitted he didn't review any of the data. He had he didn't review any of the report. Um and he he essentially just came up here and said it. Now he's saying it's not true. But he did not he he said he was not provided the information. He didn't ask for it. Um, so

Nick, what what about doing the soundproof stucco over the walls and or um doing the backing over the the ceiling back baffling and things? We are. That's exactly what we're doing. Are you doing the walls as well? Yeah. Andy, um, could we promote Andy to explain exactly what the the six conditions that were? Yes. Andy, are you there? I am here. Can you hear me?

Yes. Okay. So we are making provisions to the project to isolate sound that you know we did not go into that level of detail in the letter provided to planning board for the cup update. Nor were we asked by SR acoustics to provide any of this information. And on the second page uh of of Mike's report, he says, you know, I haven't reviewed any of this uh just the letters and uh the these are all general recommendations. So, in our experience, the complaints from residents adjacent to restaurants come from music. In all my years, I have not heard of complaints coming from kitchen sound.

Andy people inside the restaurant. We could just go one by one through Sure. the conditions that we're proposing cuz it's it's really the the fundamental misunderstanding is what I just want to clear up. It's not just a limiter that what we're proposing. We're proposing a soundproofed box of a restaurant. It's just a different

also is is Nick and is, you know, after 12:00 and you're in a residential area, even though you're a high-end restaurant, you're going to have your, you know, noise from the outside and the cars and your Ferraris and all those things and, you know, I just are you willing to change your hours because I think that that's a that's probably if if you're in a residential area and you've got cars racing and all that. I mean, I know, you know, some of the restaurants that are down there now have that going on and I'm just concern. I mean, you know, there's got to be something that we can come to that's fair for everyone.

Yeah. I mean, if if I'd like to let Andy just go through so we can clear up, but um we're we're not here on a request to change the hours. Um the association supported the hours on the original uh cup and uh the hours you know all restaurants south of Faith are subject to the same hours. They all close at but was that with that was with different soundproofing though. Correct. But the soundproofing is irrelevant to what happens out on the street. Correct. That is but but it's still after the hours which is you know the exterior will close at 12:00 a.m. So the exterior closes at midnight. I think it's 11 actually for the CP. The the exterior closes at 11:00 I believe. Or is it midnight? I I read midnight.

Oh, it's Sorry, you're right. It happens sometimes. Sorry.

So, the the sound isolation provided by the design that we have reduces 75 dB at 1,000 hertz, about 70 dB at 500 hertz. That's what we're talking about with crowd noise. And that's going to be well below the level of interior ambient noise in the residences upstairs. As a professional, I am not too concerned about this. When it comes to commissioning, I'm happy to uh test that and we will. So, just to to reiterate, the city's independent third party peer reviewer came up with the conditions staff is recommending approval and our sound consultant who actually did the studies uh confirms that the units above won't hear the sound. Um, and essentially what we're hearing is misinformation about just relying on a limiter to reduce the sound creating a lot of concern. I completely understand that. if that was what we were proposing that should be rejected but that's not what we're proposing. So I just want to be clear as to what's before the board today. Uh unfortunately you know the this information has been presented to the association in a way uh that's not entirely accurate. So

yeah, just a couple minutes. Mr. Chairman, just bear in mind the public hearing is closed. So, and we've already had the rebuttal. So, if we reopen the public, we'll need to give the applicant an opportunity to do any final rebuttal. That's right.

I mean, I It's just because they're saying I'm saying things. He's making claims that I made that, you know, an assertion that I did not. I said without the information I couldn't assert. And the issue here is is that I could not look at any of the data because they did not supply it. We had a private meeting. We asked them for the data. They cancelled the meeting, ended it immediately, and would not give us the data we requested. We have done our due diligence um to try to work this out before this hearing, but unfortunately they wouldn't provide any of this. Right. and and so are you able to provide what he's requesting to them?

Absolutely. Uh we we never declined them. Um they requested the information 2 days before the hearing after they had already sent their letter of objection. So at that point they created an adversarial situation and we were not adversarial. Well make a suggestion. The letter was sent out. You didn't know any of the facts.

Excuse me. It sounds like um maybe there's miscommunication between you guys, but um I don't know I don't know if this would pass with with the um city's recommendation today. Um and okay, you say it's going to cost a lot for for the soundproofing approved. I see the tight, you know, the the kind of ornate ceiling that's going in there. Okay, I can understand that. Maybe there's something else that can be worked out, other kind of soundproofing materials or some kind of design that would satisfy both the the association and the owners and your client. Uh maybe you get together with him because apparently you guys are not on the same uh page and try to come up with a solution that both sides are happy with. Honestly, when it's within a condominium building south of Fifth and the amount of taxes these people are paying and they're in and their need to have a piece of peaceful and quiet enjoyment.

Yes, it's it's important.

We understand um if that's the will of the board and we'd like to hear if there's any more feedback from the board. Um really just we we did try to get them to give us some additional recommendations other than just do the original thing uh that we had agreed to but we had you know voluntarily profered that into the cup and we received nothing. What we received was the the letter. I would profer that that we suspend this that you talk and try to work something out at least within the next scheduled planning board meeting and that even though we don't require it um it would be a good idea if you get Sofna involved because this is a neighborhood issue and and it's it's when it affects one building it affects them all. I mean, we went through and we had no problems with catch. Uh, you name the restaurant and we worked this out. This is the very first time that I've been here since, well, I've been on SLnip since too long, but it's the first time in this neighborhood I've seen residents 100% against and being proposed and not worked out. I think they're your tenant. Um, they're they're your clients. So they're the people that are going to recommend this restaurant and you don't want the people above to be upset. I mean, it's bad business.

We agree. It's in our mutual interest to keep the sound down. That's what we're supposed to do. Take 30 more days and figure it out. Well, we we would respectfully request a continuence to continue to if the association hired you, obviously I want you to work with them. Don't be unreasonable. Be fair, but but protect the residents. So, I think we're all inclined to to move this for a month. Is that enough time? Is that enough now? Yes. And you'll commit to providing them with the information they need. Sure. All right. All right. So, someone want to move to and everybody will be happy and and everybody will want everyone to be happy. We want to succeed. Yeah.

So, I'll I'll move to uh delay this with the intent that they're going to talk to the condo association and with a recommendation that they also get the neighborhood association to help mediate this issue. All right. So, move so make the motion. You made it. Yes. Okay. Scott seconded. Okay. All in favor? Anyone opposed? Okay. Thanks a lot. Thanks for all your participation. I know y'all will work everything out. Thank you, ma'am. Yes, maybe. Um, all right. I'm going to let you all grab your lunches, which are here, and then if you don't mind bringing them back to the uh table, we'll just continue. So, take a 5m minute break.

[Music] My dad. [Music] Everything. [Music] [Music] [Music] Hello. [Music] Down. [Music] [Music] I'm a [Music] [Music]

[Music] Feel [Music] well feel well. [Music] on [Music] love. All new. Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music] [Music]

[Music] Black. [Music] Hey. Hey. [Music] Heat. Heat.

[Music] Thank [Music] Please stand by. We are going on air in 5 4 3 2 1.

Egypt and locker are on my to-do list. All right, welcome back everybody. We are

You're gonna have to tell me. Moving on to uh new comprehensive plan and code amendments. The um first one is planning board file 257661600. I guess they're companion Washington Avenue and planning board file 25765600 Washington Avenue. Correct. These are companion items. So we'll take them together. And because this also does entail an increase in F, this requires the applicant to go through the six-step review process. This includes um step one which is today's meeting. This is the first step in the process. The board will review these items and continue till the November meeting. In the meantime, step two will take place which is a community workshop meeting. After that, the planning board will hear this back in in November with a recommendation to the city commission. After that, the city commission will review this the first time. There'll be another community workshop meeting before um the final adoption hearing before the the city commission. Now, the board may remember that um this parcel was subject to the Washington Avenue um um amendments that were reviewed by the planning board last year. Ultimately, those amendments got um held up in the city commission and those are currently pending before um the city commission. I believe um they were continued till till um December 17th of this year. In the meantime, because the applicant was concerned about the the status of those amendments, they filed their own private application for the specific site. So, in case the um amendments that are currently going through the process did not get adopted, the applicant has more control over their own private application. This is essentially very similar to what was approved for the Washington Avenue um area plan. Includes the same increase in F uh the same up to three 3.25, the same height increase up to 150 ft. They have included um massing studies or application that was continued today. Um takes advantage of

the um the code amendments that are currently pending before the city commission. Um that I'll turn over to the applicant. This is the first step in the process. We're supportive of this application is very consistent if not almost exactly the same as the amendments that are currently in process for the city commission. Um, we are recommending that the board review this and continue the application to the November meeting to allow the applicant to present for a community workshop. That I'll turn it over to Mr. Casden for his presentation. Thank you, Michael. Uh, thank you, Mayor.

Mr. Chair, members of the board, Nissan Casden and Cecilia Torres Toedo of Acreman representing the applicant uh which is the property owned by Ambassador Paul Seahas, the 400 block of Lincoln Road from Lincoln Road to 16th Street from Washington Avenue to Drexel. Also with us here today is Maria Steed, the general manager for Mr. Seahas's properties. Uh if we can tee up the presentation. Okay. Uh we uh are requesting your review and favorable recommendation of our urban core comprehensive plan and LDR amendments. If approved, these incentives will enable a 210 market rate residential rental project designed by the world-renowned architect Enrique Norton at 1600 Washington Avenue. This would be the first significant rent residential rental product in the city in decades. We will be presenting the project for CUP approval in October. Uh these um the city of course has recognized the need to incentivize residential development. A couple of those items have come before your board as well. One uh and passed by your board for Washington Avenue. That was the commissioner Suarez's uh initiative and also for Lincoln Road with Commissioner Fernandez and other commissioners. All based upon the realization that there needs to be market rate attainable rental housing in this area in order to serve the people who work here and the businesses that are here as well. It will also help stabilize the community by making it a less transient community and more of a residential community which will be good

for safety as well as the public uh as well as businesses. What we have done is filed this specific application because both the Washington Avenue and Lincoln Road initiatives and by the way this is consistent with the Washington Avenue initiative uh were deferred by the city commission till at least December. We're ready to go forward with this specific program. And there's a unique aspect to it because this is truly Miami Beach's urban core. When I was a child, uh, we used to call this downtown, the intersection, the corner. I don't think Mr. Eliz, you're old enough to remember that. I

say when you were a child, 80 years ago,

uh, the that was Miami Beach's downtown. It was where the the businesses were, the offices were, the lawyers, uh also the retail street, Lincoln Road, all the centers of activity and the hotel. That is Miami Beach's urban core. And if you look here, you can see some of the historical pictures of that urban core going back to my childhood when when there were banks and uh and professional offices and there was a retail center and the convention center. It was a very busy busy area. It is also and remains today the economic hub of the city of Miami Beach. There are 200 plus businesses along Lincoln Road. The most important office buildings, 420 Lincoln Road, 407 Lincoln Road, uh 1601 Washington Avenue. It remains the business center, business core of Miami Beach, but it's also the cultural and civic hub for the for the community with the New World Symphony's New World Center, with the Gleon Theater, and with the Miami Beach Convention Center. So it remains the cultural hub, the civic hub as well as the business hub of the city of Miami Beach. And also, and this is very important for residential use, it is the mobility hub. Washington Avenue is one of the best transit service streets in Miami Beach. And Washington Avenue is served by both the Miami Beach Trolley and various Metro Bus routes. Uh we're showing you some more images of the activity in the urban core. One thing that's important as well though to uh look at and in respect to the amendments that are being requested which are modest in scale, we are seeking to increase the F from 2.75 to

3.25 and the height allowable height from 100 to 150 ft. is the existing context of the neighborhood. So you have as I mentioned before uh601 uh these are the these are the properties that ambassador Seahas owns containing the entirety of the block. Uh the uh urban core legislation now uh contemplates as I say we're proposing a slight increase in height. Ambassador Seahas has owned that block since the 1990s and he has put millions of dollars in restoring the historic architecture there as well as bringing in great tenants including the flagship Zara store. the uh the urban core legislation, the urban core legislation, uh these properties already have in the existing CD3 zoning the highest density that is allowable uh which is 150 units an acre. However, because of the height limitations, uh the and the F, they are not able to achieve that density. That density is important in order to be able to achieve the city's goals. So therefore, we're asking for, as I mentioned, the modest increase in F and in height to accommodate residential development consistent with the density that is allowed in this area. This urban core legislation furthers the uh policy 1.1 10 of the city's comprehensive plan by providing adequate F and height to better realize that contemplated density. Uh I would also like to point out how the urban core legislation is very

contextually appropriate. What you're looking at there in that the image on the screen are buildings that will be uh as significantly actually exist or will shortly exist that are significantly higher than what is proposed. That is the convention hotel which is under construction at 185 ft. 407 Lincoln Road which is approximately 180 ft. 12 uh 1601 Washington Avenue at 124 ft. So you can already see that this scale is a scale that is appropriate and already existing in that neighborhood. Uh finally you can see the changes that we are proposing the density remains the same uh uh under at 150 units an acre. This will facilitate the construction of 210 residential units on the corner of 16th and Washington Avenue. Uh which is actually under 150 units an acre. The intensity that is the F would go from 2.75 to 3.25 and the uh height would go from 100 to 150 ft. Also, it is important to note that the parking for what is proposed will be able to be accommodated in the existing garage that has been built on Ambassador Seahas's property. So, with that, we ask for your support for both the land use plan amendment as well as the the LDR amendment. I think this is exactly what everyone in the city has been looking for for this neighborhood and for the stability of our community and we remain available to answer any questions.

Okay. And staff, if I understand correctly, we have to defer this November, right? No, it's a matter it's a review it and continue it till November. Right. Okay. Because there's on this process now. Got it. So, this is your first Yeah. swing at it. Is anybody else in here to speak on this? Lyle. Hi everybody. Lyall Stern, 690 Lincoln Road, wearing my Lincoln Road president bid hat uh on this shirt on now.

I do right much much more formally and have a shirt with a collar. So we reviewed this uh at the bid. We we endorsed it. we support it uh as both a a bid member, a Lincoln Road property owner, resident of the city. I think that this is exactly what we want to see more of, especially in our central district. It goes to new architecture, cleaning up the street, creating a live work environment, creating more pedestrian activity from local residents. Uh right now we have residential nodes, whether it's the islands or West Avenue or what have you. This node is a very transient node and this will create the further connectivity to the road and the nodes around it uh and also give a new building structure uh on that portion of Lincoln Road. So we endorse it for all those reasons. We we like the residential uh intensification uh of uh of the area around Lincoln Road uh and urge your support uh and everything else that Mason said. So thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else? Anyone on Zoom? There's nobody online with their hand raised. Okay. Yes, you um couple of things. Number one, my biggest issue with this plan is that it's not up and down Lincoln Road, but I think this is really, uh, you know, what Lincoln Road needs in order to save the retail, uh, you know, obviously decrease vacancy, and it's just a great plan. My question on a serious note is, is there anything that ties this project to being an apartment building versus a for sale product? Uh, well, no. What there is is there will be and the legislation requires a covenant that there can be no short-term rentals. That was what I was going to ask.

That's standard. So I I think what I'm asking for specifically is for sale versus you mean apartment versus cond there is not but uh and if you look at you the cup will be coming before you on this project. You'll see the way the units are designed the sizing of the units and such. This is not designed to be a uh a for sale product, but it there's no covenant uh or uh that it would not be for sale. But if you look at what's as I say the sizing of the units and such, you'll see this is definitely a rental product. So the intention from ambassador Seus is to have this as a rental. Got it.

Okay. And I guess this is now a question for city staff. We've discussed this before. Why is there no way to I guess tie uh property approval to, you know, for rent versus for sale? Well, as a as a general rule, um zoning relates to use and not ownership, right? So,

um if what our code regulates is is uh is whether a use is is residential or commercial or industrial or mixed use. um you're in a slightly different position here because this is this is proposed as an incentive for development. Um but I don't think the the the city could condition its approval on on whether the property is is used for for rentals or um whether it's used for for condominiums. There are various preeemptions in fact at at the state level um that relate to condo and co-op property um that that that prohibit us from adopting regulations on the basis of of how the property is owned. And I'm not saying that the applicant would be interested in this at all, but if the city were to offer, let's say, an additional incentive to include workforce housing or or something along those lines, is that something that could tie ownership to a specific rental use versus for sale use?

I I think so. Yes. If the city were were um we're going to offer that as an incentive. Yeah. M

Mr. May I may I comment on that because this is obviously a comment a thought something of great discussion. I think one thing that the city and this moves in that direction. I think what uh was proposed for Washington moves in that direction. When you look at regulations regarding the sizing of units uh you know so that they could be smaller units potentially but not micro units but smaller units. Uh you look at you know parking regulations. you're setting the uh the business environment for rental product to be built as opposed to oceanfront luxury condominiums. And so I think without dictating the market, whether it be condo or rental, I think you can create a series of regulations uh that would favor rental construction.

So I think that's that's true by and large. But in Miami Beach, people can sell anything, anyone. So, as much as we might try and, you know, dictate policy or or I'd say, you know, zoning uses and and, you know, minimum unit size, maximum unit size, all of that, people will buy anything in Miami Beach. At least that's the hope. Um, so I'm just trying to think of what else we could do up here, even if it's not relevant to this project specifically, uh, to try and tie ownership to for rent versus for sale. But are you saying you prefer a for sale project? I'm saying I prefer for rent, right? And I think that's really the missing middle piece to get kind of that density back into a living. It's cheaper to rent today than on. It's crazy.

Well, not only that, people are moving outside of Miami Beach to live and trying to figure out how to get them to stay here. Correct. All right. Any other take advantage of that, Scott?

Yeah. Um when we um were talking about the um um the Washington Avenue uh incentives, I mean, I said that, you know, we were contemplating like all up and down Washington F increases and height increases. And I was say saying that, you know, maybe that's not a good idea for Washington. Maybe certain areas should have higher F than others. And I mentioned specifically the city center area and I said this that would be the area, one area for an F increase. So in that aspect, I like it. I think it's a, you know, if we're going to do anything on Washington Avenue, this is the one area that needs it that that could benefit from it. Um, but also with the overlay we or or the Washington Avenue incentives, we also talked a little about how that could kind of still try to fit in somewhat with the context of the the built up context of the neighborhood. You know, we talked a little bit about setbacks and things like that. Um, so when I see this project, which is basically a large building, there's, you know, no setbacks. It's it's um there's, you know, I'm not an architect, but it doesn't seem to be um that sort of um how should we call it? Uh doesn't have a lot of different lines on the building, let's say. You know, it just looks like you doing whatever you can to maximize um um the available square footage. So, I'm a little torn that way because, you know, I even though this is a great area for an F air increase, you know, I wouldn't want to see one of these after another all up and down the street. So, um you know, I'm in favor of this moving forward, but I think, you know, maybe the commission ought to look at that, you know, because if this is what they're saying is going to be all up and down Washington Avenue, I think then there's, you know, I wouldn't be in favor of that. Um, so it's something we we should uh well I don't know if that's coming back to us. I don't think it is the Washington Avenue incentives. It's

something that the the commission should um I guess consider moving forward. Um

I I just wanted to get that out there. The the other thing is that um you know this because this is not part of zoning there this is a private application. what we've seen recently with private FC increase applications a public benefit element. Um I don't know if you want to consider that but because this is a private application um you know maybe that would be uh something to sort of um move it forward quicker. I did notice one thing in your proposed ordinance you're also um asking to to wave all the mobility fees. So I I don't know maybe something

I if I may a couple of things and first of all I did fail to mention as well as you know that the Washington Avenue Business Improvement District has endorsed this item and I think you're you're you're correct in saying if there's one place that is the the model place to have this it is this place because it's the urban core and so I think there's consensus on that uh in terms of I would also say that by the way as you know there's the existing parking garage there and that actually serves as will remain and that's much lower. It's five stories. So that's a sort of a buffer to the to the to the west. With respect to public benefit, this project a this project is the public benefit and b the other two F increases that were passed. This is less than a 20% increase in F, you know, a 50% increase in height. The other two were either double or in one case almost triple the F. Uh big difference. So

I just said this this what what we're doing is frankly uh Ambassador Seahos has been uh restrained and modest in his approach. He is just trying to get as much F as he needs to make a viable project. I bring that up the public benefit because I did see the the in the ordinance wait asking to wave the mobility fee and then that made me think well I mean we're you're getting the F increase and asking for more maybe you know something back. I mean, he could have come in and asked for, you know, doubling the F, but he just wants to be able to have enough to do a viable project and as a result, this is what in increases the chances of this really happening. Okay. She would have.

Any other questions or comments? I I think it's something that we've needed for a long time and I'm happy to see it. All right, Michael. Do we need to move one at a time? I mean, we're just moving it to November. We can do it together. Huh? We can do it together. Continue both items to the All right. So motion to continue PB250766 and 25765 to next month's meeting. Oh, second. Is it next month? November November November meeting. Get a second. Yeah, I'll second that. Okay. All in favor? Anyone oppose? Okay, that's it. Thank you very much. And by the way, it's a pleasure to see you all. I hope you had been a while. I hope you had a good summer, everybody. Thank you.

Um, couple things, guys. I want everyone to know the next meeting is on a Thursday, just so you remember. And we want to say goodbye to Michael and tell you how lovely it is to work with you and we're going to miss you. Where you going? I'm not going to DRB. I'm going to Historic Preservation Board. Oh, that's right. HB. I was staffed to the HPB for 10 years from about 2003 to 2013. So, I'm going back to Historic Preservation Board. And Debbie Tack, who you've seen before, is going to be coming to the planning board. Yes. Oh my lord. Yeah. Good luck, Michael. Thank you for everything. Thank Nick has been great working. I'm staying. Yes. People always drop Except for you, Nick. Thank you, Nick. Yeah, that's true. We brought him back. All right, that uh journs the meeting. Thank you, everybody.