Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board - Regular Meeting

room to help you keep cool but make sure to turn it off when you leave because fans cool people not rooms.

Small changes washing your clothes with cold water instead of hot water and shorter showers using your air fryer compared to your oven make an impact on your electric bill.

Unplugging appliances and devices when not in use can also help save. Do you have a pool at home? FPL recommends you have a pool pump timer set to six hours a day. For more information on FPL programs, tips, and access to the energy manager, visit the web page, fpl.com.

Atención paisajistas y jardineros de Miami. Ahora es obligatorio tener una certificación de paisajismo para trabajar en la Ciudad de Miami. No te preocupes. Puedes obtenerla de forma gratuita en el Departamento de Reciclos Sólidos de la Ciudad de Miami. El curso se ofrece el segundo y cuarto sábado de cada mes y también el primero y tercer miércoles de cada mes, de 10 de la mañana a 12 del mediodía. No te quedes fuera de juego. Obtén tu certificación y sigue trabajando en la ciudad de Miami. Es fácil y gratuito.

Leave a little early or be a little late. You'll get there when you get there. Just get there safely.

Illegal dumping is a real issue here in the city of Miami. Reporting incidents of illegal dumping is vital to addressing the issue promptly. Residents can report such incidents by dialing 9-1-1 for in act and 3-1-1 for after the act dumping by submitting a report on our official website MiamiZeroWaste.com under the Let's Get Rid of Illegal Dumping tab. Your cooperation is crucial in maintaining the well-being of our community and environment. A legal dumping can also be reported by Crime Stoppers at 305-471-8477. There is a $500 reward for reports that result in citation or arrest. By working together, we can create a cleaner, healthier, and more sustainable Miami for our residents.

Want to green up your curb and beautify your block? Planting a tree in the right of way is a simple, eco-friendly way to make a lasting impact. But before you dig, make sure you've got the green light. The city requires a permit to plant on public property, like the space between the sidewalk and the street. Unsure if it's the right of way? Get a boundary survey or check online. Visit our website and follow the steps. Let's grow a greener neighborhood together.

Who can report an illegal 2.3 incident in Miami? Reporting an illegal 2.3 incident is important in order to resolve the problem without wasting time. Residents who report an illegal incident The ELE 911.8 and 311.8 for the GD factory were also submitted by the ELE on our official website at miamivero.com, a platform to get rid of illegal GDs. Cooperation is important for our community and environment. You are able to report any illegal deportation by Crime Stoppers on 305-471-424-367. You will receive a $500 reward for the crime that causes irritation or arrest.

The consequences of illegal littering are significant. Surprised people in the act can face fines of up to $15,000 and even criminal charges depending on the severity of the infraction. It is important to emphasize that this behavior will not be tolerated in Miami and measures will be taken against those who violate the waste management regulations. La imagen negativa creada por el vertido ilegal también afecta la reputación de nuestra ciudad y puede impactar en el turismo y el crecimiento económico. Por un futuro limpio, detén el vertido ilegal de basura. Juntos, podemos crear un Miami más saludable y sostenible para todos nuestros residentes.

All right. I guess tell me a bit about your experience.

For 15 years, I've been managing logistics and mastering project management skills.

Wow. Sounds like you've got just the kind of skills and experience we're looking for.

Are you worried about speeding cars or cut through traffic in your neighborhood? Safety is a top priority for the City of Miami, and we want to help keep pedestrians safe. If you're experiencing unsafe conditions due to traffic, we have a solution. By completing our traffic form online, you can report your traffic problems and describe the location and your concerns in detail. After receiving your report, the City of Miami will conduct a traffic study in your area within one to two months. This study will track the number of cars driving through the area, as well as their speed. Once the study is completed, the Office of Transportation will notify you with recommendations based on the results. So, if you're concerned about the safety of your neighborhood and want to request traffic calming measures like speed humps or traffic circles, please call us at 305-416-1200 or complete our online traffic form. Let's work together to keep our streets safe.

As technology advances, scammers have figured out multiple ways to use it against us. Scammers target consumers searching for company contact information online by purchasing fraudulent ads that look legitimate. When individuals click these ads or call the displayed numbers, they are unknowingly connected with scammers and share personal information. Victims often only realize they have been scammed weeks later. To protect yourself from online search scams, follow these tips. One, always use the phone number on your FPL bill instead of searching for contact information online. Two, check the URL for misspellings or extra characters. Three, look for the padlock icon, which indicates a secure connection. FPL will never demand immediate payment through an app like Zelle or Venmo, a prepaid card or wire transfer to avoid service disconnection. FPL will never ask for personal information, such as account numbers or your social security number. FPL will never ask for personal information unless you call them, in which case we will ask questions to confirm you are the account holder. FPL does have energy experts who complete home energy surveys, but FPL will never solicit a customer by phone to offer home energy surveys. Our FPL energy experts will visit your home only if you request the survey and make an appointment. To spot a scam, you should know the process for late payments. FPL tries to be as flexible as possible, giving customers 21 days after the bill issue date to make a payment. Shutting off someone's electricity is always our last resort. Recently, we have been seeing an increase in scammers knocking on customers' doors, claiming to be with FPL or a company that works with FPL. If you have a scheduled appointment, ask for the work request number prior to letting a worker in your home. Contact the FPL Care Center or law enforcement if you think you have been a victim of a scam. It is also important that you report the suspected scam or fraud to FPL. Go online to fpl.com slash protect for more information.

You come to an intersection which is blocked by other traffic. You should... A. Go slowly until the traffic ahead moves. B. Get as close as possible to the other car. C. Stay out of the intersection until you can pass through. D. Sound your horn to make the cars move up. The correct answer, C. Entering a blocked intersection can cause gridlock and may be illegal. Only move forward when there's enough space for your vehicle to fully clear the intersection.

Ayúdenos a rastrear las inundaciones en su vecindario reportándolas a través de la aplicación iC-Change. Sus reportes pueden ayudarnos a comprender y abordar mejor los problemas de inundaciones en nuestra ciudad. Descargue la aplicación hoy y comience a reportar.

Millions plan for retirement online. Estimate your future benefits, apply for retirement, and manage your benefits all from the comfort of your home. And give yourself the freedom to do what you want offline. Social Security's online services help put you in control with secure access to your information anytime, anywhere. Allowing you to spend more time with family, friends, or simply just enjoying the day. Social Security. Securing today and tomorrow. See what you can do online at socialsecurity.gov.

The City of Miami Department of Solid Waste is proud to announce the official launch of its new services alert system, a real-time communication platform designed to keep residents informed, prepared, and engaged with their solid waste services. This new initiative reflects the department's ongoing commitment to providing high quality, reliable, and environmentally responsible services to all City of Miami residents. Through the services alert system, residents will receive timely updates on essential topics such as collection schedules, service delays, hurricane preparedness, and other important updates. The launch of this platform marks a major step forward in enhancing public communication, safety, and community engagement. Residents can easily enroll in the services alert system by visiting the City of Miami's official sign up at MiamiZeroWaste.com. Stay connected and never miss an update. Sign up for services alerts today. For more information about City of Miami Solid Waste Services, visit MiamiZeroWaste.com or contact 311.

A parent's role in quality childcare is vital. By participating in daily, age-appropriate activities, children develop essential skills, build independence, and self-respect. Many childcare programs will have various features, but only you can decide what is most important for your family. When choosing childcare, look for a safe and nurturing environment with required supervision that provides healthy, social, and educational experiences. Look for one that has a range of activities, caring teachers and staff, and a safe, clean environment. And make sure the childcare you choose is properly licensed or registered with the Florida Department of Children and Families. You know your child best. Trust your strong mom instincts and your ability to make the best decision for your child. To learn more about choosing a qualified childcare provider, visit myflfamilies.com slash childcare.

Fasten your seat belt and make sure that the kids are also in it. Car seats and boosters provide protection for babies and children in case of an accident. Car accidents are one of the main causes of death for children between the ages of 1 to 13. The best seat is the one that fits the size of your child, is installed correctly, adapts well to your car, and is used correctly every time you drive. If you're going to party, party responsibly. Plan ahead, give up your keys, designate a sober driver or utilize rideshare services. All of these options are much cheaper than a DUI arrest.

A lethal dose is in here. Who gets it?

I won't know. It's scary that it can be put into anything, and we can't even see it or notice it.

The removal of voluminous garbage and garden waste must be carried out following the Miami City Voluminous Garbage Weekend Calendar. Residents who do not receive the city's solid waste services can take voluminous garbage items to the mini dumpster of the Solid Waste Department located on 1290 Northwest and 20th Street. Está abierto de lunes a viernes de 8 de la mañana a 4 de la tarde y los sábados de 8 de la mañana a 12 de mediodía. Visita MiamiZeroWaste.com para conocer el calendario de recolección. Por un futuro limpio, detén el vertido ilegal de basura. Juntos podemos crear un Miami más saludable y sostenible para todos nuestros residentes.

I'm going to be showing you an example of what an empty lot looks like. It has too much grass, they haven't taken care of the lot. We are trying to contact the owners to solve the problem. This complaint came to us from the Miami police. The inspector put a violation notice on the property. What happens now is that they are given 10 days to be able to fix the lot, the property, to sweep, You can't even walk here. Having these lots full of grass and without maintenance is bad in the sense that the neighbors have to get up and see this. It's going to decrease the value of the properties, obviously. It attracts a lot of people who come to throw garbage. A lot of animals come here. All these factors are what makes you report when you see a lot like this. Please call us, we're going to try to fix the situation. To report violations like this, remember that you can call 311. If you have a vacant lot or a structure, be it a house that no one is living in, you have to register it with the city of Miami. Go to the website where you search for Core Compliance, there is the way to register.

Planning an event in one of our beautiful city parks? You might need a permit. Whether it's a birthday party, sports practice, fitness class, or a big community event, if you've got more than 10 people or need exclusive space, you'll want to check with the Parks Department. Applying is easy. For most events, just submit your application two weeks in advance with a $50 fee. Planning something bigger with music or rides? No problem. We've got special permits for that, too. For events at Kenneth Meyers Bayside Park, Peacock Park, or Fuller Street Plaza, there's an extra step. You'll need to attend a quick committee meeting. Don't let permit worries stop your fun. Visit our website for all the details and to apply. Let's make your event happen, Miami-style.

Bye. Bye.

Want to watch the City of Miami Commission meetings? Attend in person at Miami City Hall, or watch them live on the City's website and social media platforms. You can also tune in on Comcast Channel 77 or AT&T Channel 99. Stay informed and connected with your city.

Este hombre estaba manejando muy sobre el límite de velocidad Ve todo el daño Este hombre estaba manejando sobre el límite de velocidad Ve todo el daño Este hombre estaba manejando un poco sobre el límite de velocidad Ve todo el daño

Attention all city licensed landscapers. Help keep Miami safe and dry. Please keep drains clear of vegetative cuttings. Blocked drains can cause flooding in our neighborhoods. Together we can protect our city.

I can and I will. I can and I will. I can and I will. Mantras are really helpful for me in managing my mental health. I can and I will. The mind is so powerful. Love your mind.

We're here at a vacant lot that currently has some issues that co-compliance is here to address. There used to be two structures which got demolished by the city because the owner wasn't able to maintain them. And now the grass is overgrown again and the properties, it's not maintained. So we're here to assess the situation and carry out some type of communication with the owners if we can get them. And if not, the city will have to get involved. They have 10 days to come into compliance and part of the compliance is maintaining their Swale, which would be the overgrowth along the right of way, it would be clearing up the lot as well as registering it with the City of Miami because it is now vacant and is no longer a structure on here and it's not being occupied. A lot like this is a hazard to our neighborhood. It attracts illegal dumping, it attracts trash, stray animals, and it devalues the property values of the houses around us. As a reminder, if you so happen to own a vacant lot, it is to be registered with the City of Miami. By doing so, you can go onto our website. Under co-compliance, it will provide you all the steps that are needed to take.

Estoy bien bonito, ¿no?

Seguro piensas que soy muy chistoso. Espero que no estés manejando y texteando. ¿Sabías que cada año hay miles de choques provocados por conductores distraídos en el celular?

Piensa en todas las mamás, papás y niños que sufren porque alguien maneja distraído.

Un momento en la pantalla mientras manejas. Podría tener consecuencias por el resto de tu vida.

Ya no soy tan chistoso, ¿verdad?

The City of Miami has some great news we want to share with our local businesses. If your business has been a part of Miami for over 10 years, the Office of Zoning wants to give you the recognition you deserve. We're launching a new initiative where qualifying businesses will get an official Certificate of Recognition from the City. It's a celebration of your dedication, your long-standing service, and the positive impact you've had on our neighborhoods and economy. Here's a quick guide to getting yours. Head over to the website link, click on the print button, use the drop down menu to select either your Oracle invoice number or your customer number. Just enter that number, hit continue, and you can download and print your certificate right away. We truly appreciate you being a part of Miami's story and keeping our city strong.

only one thing that will save somebody's life, and that is Naloxone nasal spray. Get 911 on the phone, get the emergency responses there on their way.

There I was, 16, divorced, remarried with a baby, another on the way, and I could barely read or write. It was time for me to change my life and the lives of my family, so I went back and I got my high school diploma. That was the catalyst I needed. Now I have a bachelor's, a master's, and I became a teacher.

Go, Bryce!

Mom, this is your very first yearbook. Your commitment to education motivates me, your co-workers, and your students.

You showed me that if you come from nothing, you can still be anything.

You told me I deserved to succeed. It's been 15 years and I still live by that.

You're the model for success for your kids, grandkids, and your students. When I look at all these success stories, I cannot help but think it all started by getting my high school diploma.

When you graduate they graduate. Visit finishyourdiploma.org to find free and supportive adult education centers near you.

Get on the trolley and discover the best of Miami. Enjoy a free tour of the city with a comfortable, accessible and air-conditioned service. Plan your trip easily with the Trolley Tracker. Consult maps, schedules and real-time tracking. Several routes take you to the most popular destinations. Para más información, llama al 305-416-1132. Súbete y disfruta el recorrido.

Estoy bien bonito, ¿no?

Seguro piensas que soy muy chistoso. Espero que no estés manejando y texteando. ¿Sabías que cada año hay miles de choques provocados por conductores distraídos en el celular?

Piensa en todas las mamás, papás y niños que sufren porque alguien maneja distraído.

Un momento en la pantalla mientras manejas podría tener consecuencias por el resto de tu vida.

Ya no soy tan chistoso, ¿verdad?

U represents U in Miami City Hall. Find out with 311, stay connected to your community and know your elected officials. It's all just a call away. Dial 311, your connection to Miami's leadership.

As technology advances, scammers have figured out multiple ways to use it against us. Scammers target consumers searching for company contact information online by purchasing fraudulent ads that look legitimate. When individuals click these ads or call the displayed numbers, they are unknowingly connected with scammers and share personal information. Victims often only realize they have been scammed weeks later. To protect yourself from online search scams, follow these tips. 1. Always use the phone number on your FPL bill instead of searching for contact information online. 2. Check the URL for misspellings or extra characters. 3. Look for the padlock icon, which indicates a secure connection.

It happens more than you would think because scams are getting more elaborate. It can be difficult to tell what is a scam. These scammers know how to confuse you and take your information.

Scammers are aggressively targeting utility company customers across Florida using sophisticated tactics to pocket quick cash. And it can happen to anyone.

At Florida Power & Light Company, we don't ever want one of our customers to become a victim of a scam. That's why it's so important that you follow these tips to best protect yourself.

If you receive a suspicious call and they say it is FPL asking you to pay something, hang up. Even if the caller ID displays FPL's phone number and name.

FPL will never call you and demand something immediately. An FPL employee will never call you and make you feel pressured to provide personal information.

FPL will never demand immediate payment through an app like Zelle or

you Amen. Thank you. Thank you. do you you Thank you. so so you Thank you. Thank you for watching.

I'm going to ask the city attorney to start reading some of the preamble rules so we can get started.

Good evening, everyone. Any person who was a lobbyist pursuant to Chapter 2, Article 6 of the City Code must register with the city clerk and comply with related city requirements for lobbyists before appearing before the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board. Any person may not lobby a city official, board member, or staff member until registering. A copy of the code section about lobbyists is available in the city clerk's office and online at municode.com. Any person making a presentation, formal request, or petition to the board concerning real property must make the disclosures required by the city code in writing. A copy of this city code section is available at the office of the city clerk. and online at municode.com. Please silence all cell phones and other noise-making devices. Any person with a disability requiring assistance, auxiliary aids, or services for this meeting may notify the hearing board's liaison. The agenda and the materials for each item on the agenda for this meeting was published and made available to the board in advance of the meeting. The materials are also available during business hours at the city clerk's office and online 24 hours a day at miamigov.com. Any person may be heard by the board through the chair and pursuant to the published notice for not more than two minutes on any proposition before the board unless modified by the chair. When addressing the board, the member of the public must first state their name, address, and what item will be spoken about. Anyone wishing to appeal any decision made by this board for any matter considered at this meeting may need a verbatim record of the item. A video of this meeting may be requested at the Office of Communications or viewed online at miamigov.com. Items shall proceed according to Section 7.1.4 of the Miami 21 Zoning Ordinance. The members of the board shall disclose any ex parte communications to remove the presumption of prejudice pursuant to Florida Statute Section 286.0115 and Section 7.1.4.5 of the Miami 21 Zoning Ordinance. Staff will briefly present each item to be heard. For applications requiring board approval or recommendation, the applicant will then present its application or request to the board. If the applicant agrees with the staff recommendation, the board may proceed to its deliberation and decision. The applicant may also waive the right to an evidentiary hearing on the record. The city requires anyone requesting action by the board to disclose before the hearing anything provided to anyone for agreement to support or withhold objection to the requested action pursuant to city code section 2-8. The communications department will broadcast the meeting through all the usual channels and avenues. The meeting can be viewed live on Miami TV at miamigov.com slash TV and on Comcast channel 77 within the city. The broadcast will have closed captioning. A member of the public may submit comments via the city's online comment form. The comments submitted through the comment form, if any, were distributed to the board members and city administration throughout the day so that the board can consider them prior to taking any action. Additionally, the online comment form will remain open during the meeting to accept comments and distribute to the board members up until the chair closes public comment. All comments received will be included in the public record and will be considered by the board prior to taking any action. The public comment options established and provided for this meeting comply with section 286.0114 of the Florida statutes as there are options for members of the public to indicate their support, opposition, or neutrality on a proposition. The city published an agenda as well as included in the notice of the public the items and topics that we discussed at this meeting. The public has been given the opportunity to provide public comment during the meeting and within reasonable proximity and time before the meeting. Board members, are you comfortable with all the notice provisions set forth and those uniform rules of procedure we've established for this meeting?

Yes.

Thank you.

Okay.

May we all stand for the Pledge of Allegiance? If you intend to testify in this proceeding, please remain standing and raise your right hand. If you intend to testify in this proceeding, remain standing and please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you will give will be the truth and nothing but the truth? Thank you, you may be seated. I'll go ahead and call board attendance. Calling Chair Adam Gersten.

Present.

Calling Vice Chair Andres Lopez.

Present.

Thank you. Calling Member Mario Bailey.

Present.

Thank you. Calling Member Lynette Cardoche.

Present.

Thank you. Calling Member Chris Collins.

Here.

Thank you. Calling Member Joseph Corral. Thank you. Calling Member Maria Paula De Corrales. Calling Member Paul Mann.

Here.

Calling member Elon Mottoyer. Present. Thank you. Calling member Joshua Patinkin. Thank you. Calling member Arthur Parasov. Thank you. And calling member Manuel Vidillo. Was he here? Manuel Vidillo?

Okay, thank you.

We do have quorum. Also, member Maria Paula De Corrales requested an absence waiver.

Is there a motion? Move for approve absence.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Okay.

Thank you. And has everyone reviewed the minutes?

Motion to approve.

Move to approve December 17 of last year, February 18, and March 18.

Is there a second?

And for the clarity of the record, that was seconded by Vice Chair.

It looks like maybe Member Porosov. Yeah, Member Porosov.

Thank you so much.

All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay, we'd like to acknowledge alternate member Porosov as a full board member today.

And I'd like to announce the arrival of member Manuel Vidillo. Thank you. And also, I have sent out the online public comments. Are we able to close the online public comment?

Please.

I'm sorry. Thank you.

Okay, so are there deferrals?

Yes, there are deferrals. Let's hear it. The first, there are three items that are requesting to be deferred to May 6th. The first item is PZ2. The applicant is requesting to be deferred until May 6th. This is for the exception at 3100 Monroe. Item PZ4, this is being requested to be moved to May 6th to fix a noticing issue. And the whole entire, everything will be re-noticed for it as well. This is the Coconut Grove Playhouse item. And then PZ10 is being requested to be continued to May 6 by the applicant.

Okay.

And then I do have one more deferral. The last deferral is for item PZ7. The applicant is requesting it to be deferred until June 3rd. Okay.

No, I'm here on behalf of PZ7, 4000 North Miami Avenue. We asked to be deferred to June 3rd to allow us a little bit more time to clean that up and come back before the board.

Okay. How many people are here for the playhouse? A show of hands. How many people are here for the playhouse item? Show of hands. Okay. Okay. You know, between last meeting and this meeting, I just would like to point out that I think this hits home the need for us to just try to improve our communication with the public a little more on the items that are of great significance and importance to what we know. And I think one of the ways, which I already brought up, is to, you know, probably try to have some sort of social media channel that just gives basic information and updates and let people determine whether they want to spend the time to come down here or not. Just because of these back-to-back situations, I think it's not a heavy lift and it's not a big ask. So let's, you know, I don't know how the rest of the board feels, but I think this hammers home the need for that. So just making a note. Are we able to defer all of these at the same time because they have different dates? Yes. Okay. Is there a motion? I'm sorry. Yeah, yeah.

I should have asked if anybody wanted to talk about it. Item number seven is a different date. I'm sorry? Item seven was a different date.

Yeah, I asked if we could do them all at the same time. We can't.

Mr. Chair, the previous meeting when we had a lot of criticism coming forth, we allowed them to make some comments on the records. I don't know if you possibly entertained that.

No, actually we didn't because we said that it would force us to have to do it twice. And so we were kind of... So I think we gotta do the same thing again. and be consistent, so. We have a pretty big agenda, so I'd like to keep everything moving quickly. Is there a motion?

I'll move to defer PZ2410 to May 6th, and PZ7 June 3rd.

Is there a second? Second. Should we roll call it, or voice? Yeah, roll call.

Calling Vice Chair Andres Lopez.

Yes.

Calling Member Elon Montoya. Yes. Thank you. Calling, I'm sorry, Calling Member Mario Bailey.

Yes.

Calling Member Lynette Cardoche. Yes. Calling Member Chris Collins.

Yes.

Calling Member Joseph Corral. Yes. Calling Member Paul Mann.

Yes.

Calling Member Joshua Patinkin. Yes. Calling Member Arthur Parasov. Calling Member Manuel Vidillo. Okay, this passes by a vote of 11 to zero.

Thank you. I'm going to do one more thing out of order. It's my understanding that I saw the mayor here earlier and, oh, you're there. Hello, Madam Mayor. I understand you have some comments.

Well, yeah, thank you. Thank you very much. Glad to be here. Thank you, Lynette. I helped fill out one of your appointments that Pleased to work with you at the county and happy to see you now helping out in the city you live in. I'm here tonight, one of the items that is on the agenda is an item of mine, item number five. It addresses something that I was confronting as a county commissioner in Little Havana. Commissioner Escalona and I have worked on this together. When you have T5 zoning, right, it's supposed to be a little denser. But often in older neighborhoods like Little Havana, you have very tiny lots. And when you try to apply the T4, T5 zoning, it's just unworkable. The requirements mean if you want to build, let's say a little, you can't build townhouses because you're required to put a big driveway and you've got to pave all kinds of asphalt around it. And I had an infill lot at the county and I thought, well, I'm just going to build what the city wants me to build so that I'll have an example of how bad it is. You're building a kind of larger building standards when someone just really wants to put two townhouses. And what this item does is it allows lower density. It allows single family or townhouse build that we might have in a T3. It allows it in T4 and T5. And so when you have a tiny lot where it's literally impossible to build something larger, You're no longer would be required to have this huge parking lot in the back and take up a third of the lot with a driveway to get in and out. We'd be able to have a little garage, we'd be able to have a little backyard. The cost of the units that I built, they're two stacked condos. When we see all these square boxes everywhere that people like to build but most of us hate to look at. That's because it's required. The cost of these units, because there's so much concrete and outdoor stairwells, was about $200,000 more than if we just allowed the townhouse type of structure to be in. We were doing this for affordable housing, so you could build them more quickly, less concrete, less steel, less asphalt, more grass, more gardens. less density. This is one of a number of initiatives that I'm really proud of. The whole planning and zoning team that you're going to start to see to make our streetscapes in some of our older neighborhoods, like Little Havana, look less boxy and look more homey. So I hope you consider supporting it. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

I'll go ahead and read the item into record. This is PZAB 5.

We're doing PZAB one first.

Oh, we are?

Yes.

Oh, we can.

Yes. Okay.

There's nothing currently on the screen because there's nothing playing right now.

PZAB 1, file ID 18901, a resolution of the Miami Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board with attachments recommending approval with conditions to the City Commission, a major use special permit must pursuant to Appendix C, Section 627.2, and, I'm sorry, and associated Class II special permit class 2, pursuant to section 627.1.15 of ordinance number 13114, the zoning code of the City of Miami, Florida, as amended for a mixed-use development within the SD 27.2 Midtown West Overlay, located approximately at 3055 North Miami Avenue, 2997 North Miami Avenue, 2905 North Miami Avenue, 3000 Northeast 1st Avenue, and 35 Northeast 29th Street, Miami, Florida. As Moore particularly described in the attached and incorporated exhibit A, such approval of the must will allow up to 900 24 residential dwelling units, office and retail uses, and associated parking and approval of the Class 2 will allow maneuvering of trucks in the public right-of-way for off-street loading, making findings containing a severability clause, and providing for an effective date.

We ready?

Good afternoon, my name is Zephyr Nunez, I'm with the Planning Department. The application before you is for a major special use permit. The project is located at 3055 North Miami Avenue. And 3000 Northeast First Avenue, 35 Northeast 29th Street, and 2997th North Miami Avenue, along with 2905 North Miami Avenue. The request is for a special major use special permit and a class two special permit. Staff is recommending approval with conditions. The project site consists of approximately 5.344 acres. The property is zoned T624AO, and it is surrounded by T624AO to the north and to the east, and T6AO to the south and to the west, along with T5L. These are existing images of the adjacent properties surrounding the subject site. And these are the adjacent buildings surrounding the existing site. The project is located within the Midtown District, within the SD 27. Just a little background on the property. With the adoption of Miami 21, nearly all the provisions of the zoning ordinance under 11,000 were dispensed with. However, in this particular case, under the Miami Midtown Overlay District, those provisions of 11,000 were retained and incorporated into the Miami 21 code. And the code reads as follows. This code replaces the zoning ordinance of the City of Miami, also known as Ordinance 11000, except that Section 627, also known as SD 27 Midtown Special District, is hereby retained and incorporated as Appendix C. Here to end the provisions of Ordinance 11000, referenced in Section 627, shall be applied to Midtown Special District, providing, however, within the SD 27 Special District, the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board, And procedures related to the appeals therefore set out in Miami 21 shall be replaced by the zoning board and procedures related to appeals thereto in ordinance 11000. Therefore, within the SD 27 is governed by appendix C of Miami 21 and the applicable provisions of 11000. that SD 27 mandates that all buildings with more than 400 units obtain a major special use permit, which is the subject of this request. It's also important to note that if this project was not in the SD 27, this would be a by right project and it would be approved under Miami 21. But because of the overlay and because they're building over 400 units, it requires a major special use permit. So as you can see in these images, the project is located within the SD27. The SD27 overlay is divided into two districts, SD27-2 and SD27-1. It's important to note that within the SD27-2, there is a cap in the number of density units that have been allocated. So the overall density cap is allocated at 1,379. This particular site consists of parcels F, G, and H with a combined request of 924 dwelling units. That leaves a remaining density for the overall site of 121 remaining density dwelling units. This is the last parcel to be developed within the SD 27-2. A project summary of the project site. This is a two-phase project. The maximum height is being proposed, two towers at 28 stories with an overall height of 318 feet. Two stories which are the smaller towers which would be located towards the western side of the site at 18 stories with 218 feet overall height. Four towers combined, 924 dwelling units. With 48,991 square feet of approximate office space, approximate retail space at 106,651 square feet. 1,118 on-site parking spaces, 200 via easement off-site. And a class two special permit to allow maneuvering of trucks within the public right of way for loading for the subject site. Again, the site is located within the southwestern portion of the Midtown District. As you can see here, there is the overall, the subject site, and the rendering from above, giving you a view along Northeast First Avenue towards Northeast 29th Street. Here you have the elevations. These are the tallest towers that are being proposed on the site, which are also adjacent to the taller towers already located within the SD East portion of the site. Again, overall height is listed here. And these would be the smaller towers directly to the west of the site, with the view looking directly off of North Miami Avenue, as you can have the little chart with the red arrow indicating what portion of the site this is, the view is from. And this is a view from the southern portion of the site. The area identified in the turquoise area is not part of the scope of this site. It's a separate property that's not incorporated into the block. Here's a view of the site. This is a view looking north along North Miami Avenue. And this is a cross section of the interior portion of the site. This creates a small park light environment and towards the center of the site providing a needed green space for Midtown with lower scale buildings in the center of the site. And here you can get a view of the cross section of the amenity community space that's being provided. Here is a rendering view. This is a view looking west along Northeast First Avenue in the middle of the site. As you can see here, we have the smaller scale buildings in the center of the site with the taller buildings on the edges. So in reviewing this project, staff finds that the proposed development to be contextual appropriate in terms of its mixed uses, intensity, and overall scale, and it demonstrates functional internal relationship consistent with the intent of the ordinance. The project has been designed to comply with SD 27.2, which prescribes specific uses and facade treatments along designated rights of way. Active and appropriate uses are provided along the required front end supporting pedestrian activity and reinforcing the urban fabric. Here's another cross-section of the center courtyard space. Again, this is a rendering of the center of the site. These are the elevations and renderings of the initial phase. This is looking towards phase one of the site. So as discussed, this is a two-phase project. So phase one consists of the north, northeastern tower, which would be part of the initial phase. Here's a rendering of the first phase. And as a result, staff is recommending approval with the following conditions, that the projects will be developed substantially in accordance with the plans as prepared by Architectonica dated batch stamp by the city on February 5th, 6th, 2026 under file ID PZ18772. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall submit two fully dimensioned architectural cross sections, one in each principal direction for review and approval by the planning director. The cross-section shall demonstrate consistency with the approved design development plans, including building height, massing, and relationship to the adjacent public rights of way. And the applicant shall comply with the requirements of all applicable departments, agencies, as part of the City of Miami's building permitting process. Staff remains available to address any questions that might pertain to the specific criteria as outlined in the staff report. And that concludes our presentation. Thank you.

Thank you, Gordon. Good evening. Brian Dombrowski and Iris and scare on behalf of the applicant effort. And thank you for that. Very comprehensive.

Brian, you got to get on the mic there. Hello. Closer.

Is this better?

Yeah.

Is this better? Yes. All right. Brian Dombrowski and Iris Iscara here on behalf of the applicant. We are asking for a major use special permit. It's probably not something that you guys have seen previously. This is an antiquated zoning ordinance 11,000 carryover that's in Appendix C of Miami 21. We're here before you today because we are proposing a project in excess of 400 residential dwelling units. If this was a typical Miami 21 project, this would never be before you. This would be exclusively approved at the administrative level. We would go straight to building permit. I wanna start to talk about Midtown in general. This site within Midtown has been a vacant piece of property since the Walmart failed there a decade plus ago. Midtown is thriving. Towards the north of this site, you have new buildings that have come in. Midtown's one of the best live, work, play neighborhoods in all of Miami. Um, and this project coming in is really going to bridge that gap to connect Wynwood to the remainder of Wynwood. Uh, I'm sorry, with Midtown, the Midtown park project is providing active frontages on all four street frontages, 924 residential units, 49,000 square feet of office, 106,000 square feet of retail and sufficient parking onsite. And we also have 200 additional sites within the public parking garage. This project is intentionally oriented towards Midtown Boulevard, which functions as the main spine of the neighborhood of Midtown. It then steps down as you get closer to North Miami Avenue. And we really took a lot of time with some thoughtful planning, and I think staff's report kind of reflects that as well. They found that the site, the project is contextually appropriate in terms of the mix of uses, intensity, and scale. We're also within the density cap for Midtown West. So this project works legally, it works numerically, and it works from a planning standpoint. It also comes to you with a strong approval record. UDRB recommended approval. Planning staff has recommended approval. We also have an independent economic study that was prepared by the city, and that's equally compelling. The independent economic and fiscal impact study reflects approximately 7,678 jobs during construction resulting in $408 million in labor income, 2,200 ongoing annual jobs at stabilization, 374 million in recurring annual economic output, and 1.4 billion in total economic output. It also results in a net annual fiscal impact to the city of approximately $9 million. We're not asking for a rezoning. We're not asking for a comp plan change. The zoning's in place. The comp plan is in place. We're just here because of that one procedural quirk in the Midtown regulations. I can turn it over to my architect to walk you through the project, but I know we have a very packed room tonight. You let me know, Chairman, if you want to have us walk you through the architecture, or if you want us to go directly to you.

I think why don't we hear from the public, and then we'll take to the board, and if the board has architectural questions, it's probably a better way to go. Sure. Or let's just see who's here to... Is anyone here to speak on this item, the Midtown Mosque?

We'll also reserve time for... Of course. Shouldn't there be any?

I don't think you'll need rebuttal. Thank you, Andy Parish. I do remember 11,000. I wonder how many of these board members, I know a couple of you remember 11,000, but some of you probably never heard of it before. Because it's 16 years ago that Miami 21 came into existence. And the reason it came into existence was because there were projects being inserted in the neighborhoods that the neighborhoods didn't want. So the basis of Miami 21, as you well know, is successional zoning, T3, T4, T5, T6, each of the gradual steps. I haven't studied your projects, so I don't know whether it's good, bad, or indifferent. I'm sure staff did a remarkable job at examining it. But I do wanna say, As you know, a lot of people have come here before you because the prevalence of high rises everywhere is beginning to really tick people off, and that is not following successional zoning. So I don't know whether this would follow successional zoning or not if they didn't have the must, but the must is 16 years old. How many more musts do you expect are existing in the city of Miami? Do we have any count?

Just to clarify, we're not keeping alive any existing musts.

I don't have any problems with your project, because I haven't studied it. This is a new must. Are there any other musts that we know about? I know there's some in the Grove.

There are other musts within the city. This is a new must that's only allowed within this area. So it's very specific.

Okay, so that's all. You guys will do your duty as usual. But just remember, successional zoning is the key to our city. Thank you. Thank you.

Yeah, that would be great. We're going to take these down if that's okay with the board, but are you okay with that? Oh, is it okay if we take down the pictures? Did you have anything else you wanted to say?

I just want to clarify, it is a new MOSP. Midtown is the only area in the city that has the major use special permit requirement any longer, and we are consistent with the zoning. It's actually less than what Miami 21 would allow in terms of height.

It is less than what Miami 21 would allow.

We could do 48 stories under the T624.

You should, yeah. It's hard to hear you. I'm sorry.

Yeah. We could do 48 stories under the T624 regulations. We're proposing 38 and 28.

Okay. Thank you. I think that answers also Mr. Parrish's question. Or non-question, but... All right, for right now, I'm going to bring it back to the board, see what questions they have, and then if architecture needs to weigh in, we'll go there.

Board?

Starting on my right. Hi. Can you explain a little bit about the item related to the truck maneuverability?

Sure.

And why you need the public right-of-way for that?

Yeah, so 31st Street to our north is currently being utilized by multiple projects there. It doesn't have really any activated retail frontages. So instead of taking up ground floor.

Sorry, so that's where the PetSmart is, correct? To the north?

Correct. There's a PetSmart, there's a public parking garage there, and then the Standard Project. All three do their existing loading on street. And the goal of the Midtown regulations is to increase the square footage for retail. to activate that space. So instead of using it for internal maneuverability, they do have the class two regulations in place to allow for the on street.

So that road is pretty busy. I mean, all four roads around the property are pretty busy. What, what time of day would vehicles be backing up or trucks be backing up? I should say.

We'll have a dock master to manage it with, with the traffic on the street.

And how much commercial is in the ground floor there?

There's 106,000 total between the two phases. It's generally split between the two. Okay.

And Public Works was in support of that item?

They reviewed the must application, yes.

Okay. All right. Thank you.

Thank you. Yeah, I love the fact that you're not going 48. 28 is a good compromise. I think that the city's push to gain density as quickly as it can is something that really ought to find its way into the comp plan as quickly as possible. And that would make it a lot easier for us to vote for it. Because the way the comp plan reads now, it does not ask us to double density, to increase density heavily. But since this is toned down, I only have one question. And just if you could, or if Mrs. Scotto was up there, if you could just show me where you found the 0.8 acres. that the extra 0.8 acres that allowed you to go from 800 to 924 units, where are those 0.8 acres?

Yes, so the way density is calculated within Midtown, it is inclusive of the, there used to be, this used to be a rail yard previously before it was replatted. So you are able to utilize the roads that were dedicated towards your density purposes. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the county's regulations, but you can use half of the roadway. So we pick up half of Midtown Boulevard and half of 31st Street for purposes of density.

And if I could add under Miami 21, you're also allowed to count the density of the right of way that you dedicate. And back in the day, for those of us that were around, this was one huge rail yard with no roads. So prior to the dedication of the roads, each one of the lots was allocated the units that would otherwise be applied to them for the roads that were dedicated to the public.

So why aren't you calling it 6.1 acres instead of 5.3?

Because we're under net lot now. So we use it for purposes of intensity, but we don't use it for purposes of the site. So for example, within the site, lot coverage, I can only use my actual net lot for the lot coverage number. So we have to count it and show that it's extra, but not within the other numbers that the parameters would like. Our setbacks, I can't take a setback and use the road. I have to use the property line and setback.

Thank you. That explains it. Thank you. Thank you. Member Porsoff?

Good.

Member Correll? Victoria? Good. Just a quick thank you and thank you to staff.

Okay. If I may, through the Chair, just wanted to make a correction on the legislation. The legislation indicates four conditions when there really should be three conditions. There's a condition number four which requires a class two permit, but it was advertised correctly, so the condition is no longer needed.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right, well, do you have any closing remarks, or can we go ahead and, anybody have a motion?

Does the Chair motion to approve?

Is there a second? Member Porosov, second. Roll call, please.

Calling Member Mario Bailey. Yes.

Calling Member Arthur Porosov. Calling Member Arthur Porosov. Yes. Okay, thank you. Calling Member Lynette Cardoche. Yes. Calling Member Chris Collins.

Yes.

Calling Member Joseph Corral. Calling Member Paul Mann.

Yes.

Calling Member Ilan Montoyer. Yes. Calling Member Joshua Patinkin. Thank you. I'm sorry. And calling Member Manuel Vadillo. Yes. Calling Chair Adam Gersten.

Yes.

And calling Vice Chair Andres Lopez. Yes. Okay, this passes by a vote of 11 to 0.

Thank you all.

Thank you very much.

As amended.

Okay. Are we on item number three?

Calling PZAB item three, file ID 18961, a resolution of the Miami Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board with attachments approving with conditions of variance pursuant to Article 7, Section 7.1. of ordinance number 13114, the zoning code of the city of Miami, Florida as amended to allow zero parking on a legal non-conforming lot for real property designated T5L urban center transect zone, generally located at, I'm sorry, 1662 Northwest First Street, Miami, Florida, as more particularly described in the attached and incorporated Exhibit A, making findings containing a severability clause and providing for an effective date.

Thank you, Melanie. Good evening, my name is Moosey Watson, I'm the Chief of Land Development for the city. The applicant tonight is requesting a variance to allow zero parking on a legal non-conforming lot through the Live Local Act. Well, not through, but it's a Live Local project. The subject property is on the corner of Northwest First Street and Northwest 17 Ave, one block north of West Flagler Street. It was platted in 1912 with the dimensions of approximately 38.2 feet by 150 feet. The property was subdivided in 1930 resulting in a lot depth of 100 feet and the lot size was approximately 3,822 square feet, which continues today. The property is located within a transit quarter, but it does not qualify for an 100% parking reduction exception, or an exception for 100% reduction. It's within 500 feet of an ungated T3. And additionally, the project does not qualify for 100% parking reduction under live local because it's not a mixed use project, it's solely residential. The future land use of the property is medium density, and it abuts the same future land use to the north, to the east, and the south. And it abuts a more intense land use west of Northwest 17F. The property is zoned T5L, Urban Center Transit Zone Limited. And the property abuts T5L to the north, to the east, and the south, and abuts a more intense T680 to the west across Northwest 17th Avenue. If this was a standard application, the standard parking requirement without the variance would be one and a half parking spaces per dwelling unit and one per visitor for every 10. So that would equal a total of 18 spaces rounded. But because of the nonconformity of this lot, the size of the lot, that's why they're requesting the variance for the zero parking. There's no realistic way for the lot to be 3,800 square feet approximately, and then to fit that amount of parking on this site. And that's why they're requesting the variance, and that's why staff is supporting the variance. Because no matter what the development is, it's going to be very difficult for them to accommodate any type of parking. So the analysis found that this request complies. I mean, this is a special condition. It's an irregularly sized lot. And the conditions, it's standard conditions, but the conditions that are unique to this application are because of the waivers. There are two waivers that are associated with this application as well. And that really concludes my presentation, but approval conditions.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Am I supposed to speak?

You are.

Oh, okay. Good afternoon, or good evening, everyone. My name is Natalie Duran. I'm the applicant, and this is my architect, Tony Leon. So, in short, we had to go through this very tedious project.

Just make sure you talk directly into the mic, or there's also a

I might start singing if I grab the mic. What I was saying was that we had to go through this very tedious process for a variance, very costly, may I just add, for something that no matter what I built, due to the fact that the zoning doesn't even permit parking due to the setback requirements back out, nothing that I could build would be able to accommodate any parking. Sadly, I am 350 feet away from a T3, so I wasn't able to qualify under the zero parking ordinance, which would allow me to do it by right. So I am asking the board to please take into consideration that this lot was plotted this way. It wasn't something that I did. And there is an additional dedication that I have to provide the city. So it's actually making my lot even smaller. So I don't know what else to say, but happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. I don't know unless your architect wanted to say anything additionally.

We just did the best we could on a really tight lot. So we tried to, for all the benefits that we're gaining, I think that we just tried to do a really beautiful project, and hopefully it shows in the renderings and the design.

Thank you. And your name and address for the record, please.

Tony Leon, 3237 Northwest 7th Street. Thank you.

I would also like to add, just in case you want information, the two waivers that we did request is a 10% deviation for the setback and a 10%, I actually don't recall the second waiver, but there was something minor and it was due to the fact that we had so many constraints and we asked for these waivers so that we wouldn't minimize the unit sizes. because we prefer to provide larger units. And we are really trying to do a good mix here. So it's a mix of two bedrooms, one bedrooms and studios. So thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone from the public who would like to speak on this item?

Elvis Cruz, 631 Northeast 57th Street. This makes no sense. 11 units, no parking, less than 250 feet from a T3 neighborhood. Where are the residents and their family and friends who come to visit going to park? This makes no sense at all. Of course they're gonna park in the neighborhood. Please, don't do this, this is crazy, thank you.

Thank you. Board? Anybody? Member Collins? Member Mann?

I usually sympathize with Mr. Cruz, but in this case, it's just 11 units, 11 small units, and there's nothing else you can really do with that property. It's obvious. So I'm okay with it. Mr. Korshoff?

Yeah, if you drive down 17th Avenue and Flagler on that first street corner, 38, that's a no-brainer. 100%. Tony does great work. Can't wait to see it. Thank you.

How many stories? Is this one story? It's three stories. It's three stories? Okay. So how many units per three and four? Okay.

It's 11. The first floor has four. Actually, no, I'm reversing it.

Sorry. If the other mic is there, it's easier to... Ah, okay. Everybody, talk into your microphones. Did you hear that?

By memory, so...

Okay.

He wants to know how many units. I believe it's three on the first floor, four and four.

Okay. Three on the first floor, four and four. I'll translate for everybody as well.

I know the T3, they would have to cross six lanes. 17th Avenue is a six-lane street, and it's 350 square feet, or linear feet, not 250. Did anybody hear that?

Okay.

Okay. Can you hear me now?

Yes. Better.

What I was stating was that 17th Avenue in this particular area, six lanes. So the T3 is actually six lanes plus another about 100 feet away. So I highly doubt that anyone's going to cross six lane Avenue. And there is a public parking down the street on the corner.

And you are also abutting T6.

We are T5, and to the west is T4, and to the south is T6.

Okay.

How did Live Local come into play on this in terms of?

I was originally doing an affordable housing under 316, and then Live Local came about. It's the same exact density that I would have, so the original project was under 315 or 316, and then it was easier to finance with Live Local. Okay.

So you're going to have to meet the requirements and 40% of the units are going to be for affordable.

Member Corral, the mics, you got to get closer.

So.

Into the mic.

You said you had another project that you designed here?

Originally this project, this exact project, I had a different covenant running with this project. We switched it to live local. It was easier to finance locally.

but you could not build it otherwise because it's no parking. The whole parking thing is because the code of the city says you're too close to single-family homes.

We're within the 500 feet. Otherwise, it would be by right.

So I understand what Mr. Cruz is saying. It seems sort of kind of ironic that the code says that you can't build something here without parking because it's too close to single-family homes? You have to talk into the microphone. For all the obvious reasons, sorry about that, for all the obvious reasons to try to preserve, you know, neighborhoods and people parking all over the place, that sort of thing. So this is, I'm just curious how staff sort of took a look at that.

Staff, would you mind, oh, could you put up the...

So my question is, I mean, if it wasn't allowed under our normal code, the code precludes this no parking type of development?

I mean, we do have some... I'm sorry.

I'm sorry. Really quick, though. Specifically, the slide that has the analysis. The things that make the site specifically...

So the reason why Ms. Natalie is asking for a variance is that the lot is 3,800 square feet. A standard size lot in Miami is supposed to be 5,000 square feet, so that's why it's non-conforming. We do have in our code the ability to reduce parking through variances, and she can reduce it 100%. The size of this lot, Pretty much no matter what type of development would go here, they would not be able to accommodate parking. If she was not using live local, she could still do a development of five units and it would be required to have eight parking spaces. But then she could also get a variance for zero parking as well. It's just, this is. the manner in which makes the best sense for her to develop her lot and the manner in which she seeks to do that.

I understand that. It seems going from, it's a very small lot. I'm sort of surprised you can actually get that many units on it, which is great, I guess, but you're going from, we're trying to protect the neighborhoods from... We're also trying to support affordable housing as well.

We know that there's a need in the city for affordable housing, and so that's part of our consideration in recommending approval.

Yeah, okay.

Thank you, sir.

Member Montoya. On my left, are you just, do you want me to come back? Yeah, we can, sure.

Thank you for your presentation. Usually I'm very tough on parking spaces, but I understand your situation, the tough lot, the challenge you have, and I understand the need for additional housing in Miami-Dade County, so I will be supporting it at this time based on those two things.

Thank you.

It's under the live local, so 40% at what level AMI?

120%.

What kind of rent does that equate to?

I don't know it off the top of my head, but I said I don't know the rent.

I will try to look that up and get you an answer. Let me look that up.

Hold on.

We're going to get. A studio starts at like $2,600 and one bedroom is $2,700. I don't know what a two and a three are. Okay. That's the lowest. Thank you.

You are?

Okay. Yeah. Just a moment. I'd like to announce the arrival of member Maria Paula de Carolis. Welcome.

OK, so my apologies for being late. I was in an event for my daughter in her school that I couldn't miss. My husband is out of town. I would like to just make a comment. I'm not going to vote on this item.

I'm not going to vote on this item because I didn't hear the presentation.

but I would like to read what I had prepared based on the information that was shared with us prior to this meeting. And I did watch the presentation in the car while I was driving here. So my comment for this application is that while the law may be substandard, it does not deprive the applicant of reasonable use. And I want to say, we really need affordable housing. So this is not about the type of project that it's being presented because it's very well taken. We are, I personally Want to see more projects like this. The concern that I have is the precedent that it's being made by the lot, that even though it's substandard, there is an opportunity to provide parking. Parking can still be accommodated, albeit the constraints. And this condition represents a limitation that's inherent to the property, not a hardship. And typically these applications are seen as hardships. as defined by the code. In my opinion, a variance should not be used to eliminate 100% of a requirement in order to increase development capacity. It can be mitigated. A variance can be required to reduce the parking requirement, not eliminate it. Should the variance have been requested to relax the setbacks and allow maybe two curb cuts, one ingress, one egress, then that could have been a solution. And then the parking could have been accommodated. I just want to leave that on the record, and I'm going to abstain myself from a vote for being late. Thank you.

Thank you. Can you specify or quantify the dedication?

It's the corner radius. Okay. How many square feet is it?

Please into the mic.

It's a 25-foot radius on the corner, and it creates a little triangle of 12 by 12 by... Pi R squared something.

I don't know the area. It's just.

Yeah. And what's the.

I don't know that. I'm sorry.

Okay. The. And so what you could build by right... Can I show you? Yeah, if you just kind of share it with everyone.

Oh, I only have one sheet.

Yeah, just kind of...

I just... Oh, you need to speak into the mic.

Oh, this was the slide. This was on the slide. It was presented on a slide, yeah.

And the second waiver was the setback. So it was for a one foot difference from 10 feet to nine feet.

So if someone needs to move in or out, With a truck, moving truck, a U-Haul?

It's on First Street.

On First. Okay. Would anybody like to make a motion? Motion to approve. Is there a second? Second. Into the microphone, please. All right. Member Porosov seconded. Roll call, please.

For clarity of the record, that was moved by Mr. Paul Mann.

No. Oh, I'm so sorry. No problem. Thank you, Mr. Bailey.

Okay. Calling roll call. Member Mario Bailey.

Yes.

Thank you. Calling also Member Arthur Parasol. Thank you. Calling Member Lynette Cardoche.

Yes.

Calling Member Chris Collins.

Yes.

Calling Member Joseph Corral. Yes. Calling member, I'm sorry, Paul Mann.

Yes.

Calling member, Elon Mottoyer.

Yes.

Calling member, Joshua Patinkin. Yes. Thank you. Calling member, Manuel Vidillo. Yes. And then calling vice chair, Andres Lopez.

Yes.

And calling chair, Adam Gersten.

Yes.

This passes by a vote of 11 to zero.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Have a good evening. Thank you. Next item.

I'm sorry. This decision is final unless appealed to the hearing board's office within 15 days.

Mr. Chair, I would like to point out that we have a full board. All 12 members are here. And so the alternate member will not be able to vote on any remaining items.

I'm sorry, Mr. Pores.

Unless somebody recuses themselves.

You can't vote anymore.

You can ask questions.

You can ask questions.

And participate in conversation. Participate.

Thank you. Thank you for gracing us with your presence.

calling PZAB 5, file ID 19119, a resolution of the Miami Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board recommending to the Miami City Commission approval of an ordinance of the Miami City Commission amending ordinance number 13114, the zoning ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida as amended Miami 21 code by amending Article 5, title specific to zones to allow the use of the T3 transect development Okay, standards in the construction of single family residences and two family residences duplex in higher transect zones and remove the required additional side and rear setbacks when a development within a T5, T6 or CIHD transect zone abuts an existing single family home making findings containing a severability clause and providing for an effective date.

Thank you. Good evening, everyone. Paul Genovese, Chief of Urban Design with the City of Miami. Going through this amendment, there are kind of two different portions to this. We will start with the T4 and T5 single-family slash duplex standards portion, which you heard the Mayor speak about early on. This modifies and adds legislation to the Miami 21 code to allow for single-family residences to utilize development standards applicable to T3L when developing in a T4 or T5 transect zone. Two family residences, also known as duplexes, may utilize the development standards applicable to T3O if being built in the T4 or T5 transect zones. Code sections pertaining to different transect zones may not be combined in this scenario. Part of the reason why we're proposing this amendment You can see from this project that we've had come across our department recently, having to build that driveway to parking in the rear causes a lot of impervious coverage on the site as well as additional cost for all of that pavement. And in a scenario like a single family home or a duplex, to do all of that for only two to four parking spaces just doesn't seem affordable or feasible. It also causes the buildings to be a much smaller and less efficient floor plate, as you can see in this drawing here, or having that floor plate have to extend over top of that driveway. Moving on to the second section of the amendment regarding setbacks when abutting existing single family in T5, T6, and CIHD. For those who are not familiar, CIHD is Civic Institutional Health District, like Jackson Memorial in that area. We want to iterate before we get into this amendment that this has nothing to do and does not modify the existing setbacks and protections for T5 or T6 projects when they abut T3 and T4 lots. So this image that many of you are probably familiar with showing T6-8 abutting side and rear T4 on the left and T6-8 abutting side and rear T3 on the right. These are remaining. Nothing is changing regarding these setbacks. Any other provisions such as landscape buffering requirements when there's balconies within these setbacks, this is only pertaining to T5, T6, and CIHD zones where there are single-family homes in those T5 and T6 lots. So currently in the code, it states that the building elevation indoor balconies on the rear side shall be set back a minimum of three feet from the property line. While these setbacks create additional spacing, they also encourage glazing in balconies on these side and rear facades. which we've seen in some projects that have gone up recently in T5 zones, tends to have a lot of eyes on these existing single-family homes and their backyards and their roofs, and it's not exactly the most private situation. Future infill that may happen, so if you look at the left side of this diagram, that square with the roof on it, if that single-family home were to get redeveloped down the road, adjacent to a proposed or existing multi-family building. It would create this very narrow three foot or maybe even six foot gap between the building and those side windows, which are indicated with that heavy red line on the left. We're creating unusable side yards in this scenario, something that's only three to six feet wide that doesn't really serve a purpose. And those side glazing or balcony areas have very poor ventilation, lack of views, creates kind of a Manhattanization effect that isn't kind of the urbanism that we're looking for in this city. As we move to the proposed amendment for this, It reverses the setback requirements to allow for zero lot line when abutting a single-family home that is also a T5, T6, or CIHD lot. Once again, I want to reiterate that if this was a T5 lot coming in to do a multifamily project and the adjacent lot on any side was T3 or T4, they would have to follow those setback standards and provisions that we have in the code. Those are remaining. Zero lot line facades cannot have glazing or balconies per the Florida building code. So this would create more privacy for those existing adjacent single family homes. It would most likely end up with large rear lot separations as your glazing would be on the front and the rear of the building, which may create a nicer backyard for these multifamily projects. And that ends with better views, ventilation for all the units with that kind of glazing. And of course the floor plates would be more efficient and thus more affordable to build. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Would anyone from the public like to speak on this item?

Elvis Cruz, 631 Northeast 57th Street. I looked at this legislation on the agenda. It did not make a lot of sense to me. I sent an email to David Snow, the planning director, because I wanted to make sure I understood that this would allow for a zero side setback up against single family homes. Now you just heard the gentleman from the planning department say that it would not be much fun to live next door to balconies and whatnot. looking down, but it's okay to have a solid wall right on the property line, straight up. It's a T5. T5 could easily be over 70 feet high next to an existing single family home. So it's a matter of pick your poison. Setbacks exist for a reason. They should be respected. So please keep that in mind. Also, the Morningside Civic Association at their meeting last night, we passed a motion to oppose any change in the City of Miami zoning code that would decrease the setbacks of any transect next to a T3 neighborhood. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? Bring it back to the board.

This is strictly in T4s and T5s, right? This has no effect in a T3 neighborhood, correct?

Neither in a T4. Those setback, you know, those drawings, I'll put it back up on the screen. Nope.

The point I'm getting at is that if somebody wanted some privacy, they wouldn't move to this lot. It's a special situation, and they would probably build something that looked like the house next door, but on a smaller scale. So I understand Mr. Cruz's concern, but this is nowhere near a T3, so it could probably only help.

And part of the addition of this piece to the first part is that if we're going to allow people to come in and take up these higher transect zones like T5 with a single family or a duplex, putting this in kind of offsets that in a way. And it also, you know, these three-foot setbacks as it's provided right now, I understand the concern about the blank wall. but three feet's not much further, and to have all that glazing and balconies overlooking your property, you know, is a concern that we think is important.

Right, because, I'm sorry, can I just jump, so that would mean basically that by right, sorry to skip, I just, we'll forget this, but so that by right, you'd be like, sure, put balconies here versus wall, right?

Yeah, and it's also, you know, looking ahead to if or when one of those single-family homes redevelops adjacent to one of these multifamily buildings, the developer might come in only, you know, with the current legislation, they could go zero lot line because it's multifamily next to them. they're redeveloping the single family home, but multifamily next to them, they can go zero lot line. That existing project only had the three feet and had their glazing overlooking the single family home. Suddenly they just have a three foot gap with their window staring at a blank wall, like you see in New York and et cetera.

Understood. So in a sense, is this sort of like a cleanup also something that just kind of really slipped through and then we started to see all these problems and

Yeah, we did some extensive analysis on it, looking at, you know, how new projects may come in and be proposed with the setbacks or with zero lot line. And, you know, it's our recommendation that this will create, you know, both sensitivity to the existing single family while also promoting as, you know, things get redeveloped, a better urbanism without these, you know, little gaps that are pretty much useless and collect dust.

The one example you gave earlier showed the... It is an example of a bad result, I think, with the parking in the rear. And so does that mean that also this will push development back, especially where they're abutting something already?

Yeah, so for this part where you can build the single-family or duplexes in T4 and T5, they would just have to follow single-family, the T3L design standards, and for duplexes, the T3O design standards.

Right.

Okay. Thank you. Sorry.

Yeah, this is long overdue. This is a good move, especially on a 50-foot lot when you have three-foot setbacks on each side. You're talking about almost a 15% difference in being able to build a bigger footprint on your building. So this is long overdue. Good move.

Thank you. Member Correll? You good?

Just generally good protections. Thanks. Thank you. Yeah.

Yes, I have a couple questions. One is, have we looked at how many sites within the city, how many circumstances we have T5s abutting T3s?

This amendment doesn't touch that. So anything that's abutting T3 or T4 is remaining exactly the same. This is where it's a single family home that is on a T5 or T6 lot and adjacent to another T5 or T6 lot.

So the amendment would only benefit sites that are abutting a T5, like a T5 abutting a T5.

Yes, exactly. There's still all the protections and setbacks when you're abutting T3 and T4, which are typical areas with single family homes.

Okay, and the other question that I have is what will happen to projects that already exist that have the three-foot setback and the windows?

Can you repeat that, please?

What would happen? Do we know how many projects are already in existence with the current legislation where we have projects that are at T5 with the setback and the windows and now we'll be looking into a blank wall, possibly?

Um, there's several that we've seen come through the department. Um, you know, one specifically near the underlying currently, which. City five zone near mass transit right near us one. And, you know, they provided that setback and it's, you know, a lot of glazing and balconies overlooking a bunch of people's backyards.

I think my question is different. My question is, I'm sorry, maybe I'm not being clear. My question is, do we have an idea? This legislation will revert a condition that we're trying to cure that is existing. How many projects do we have in the city with the current conditions?

So to answer your question, this provision only came in a couple of years ago. It was a reaction to a certain situation. We don't know of any that have been built with the additional three foot setback that was required under this provision. In fact, what's happened is that developers have come forward to us saying that it's actually become a barrier to their T5 development because now they happen to accommodate a three-foot setback, which is in fact reducing their development rights. So we've been careful to do the analysis and turn it back to what it was before, but we believe it's the the appropriate thing to do. So we don't know of any projects that are actually currently being built with this additional three-foot setback.

So you don't foresee that there's a new project coming in with a blank wall and the setback is existing on the neighbor and then those windows are going to be looking. I'm trying to figure out if this condition will ever happen. We haven't seen it. Okay.

Member Cardoche? Any comments? Member Bailey? Comments? All right.

You forgot about the safety concerns also. People, you know, going into those little three-foot setbacks. It's a no-brainer. This is slam dunk. Good move. Motion to approve, Mr. Chair.

All right. I'll take a motion. Motion to approve. Any seconds? Second. All right. Thank you, Mr. McAdosh. Roll call.

Calling member Mario Bailey. Yes. Calling member Maria Paula de Corrales. Yes. Thank you. Calling member Mario Bay. I'm sorry. Calling member Lynette Cardoche. Yes. Calling member Chris Collins.

Yes.

Calling member Joseph Corral. Yes. Calling member Paul Mann.

Yes.

Calling member Elon Mottoyer. Yes. Calling member Joshua Patinkin. Yes. Calling member Manuel Vidillo. Yes. Calling Vice Chair Andres Lopez. Yes. And calling Vice, I'm sorry, calling Chair Adam Gersten.

I think he's walking up. Yep.

Okay. This passes by a vote of 11 to 0.

Thank you all.

Okay. Calling PZAB. Sorry. Can you get to that page? Number six, file ID 18981, a resolution of the Miami Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board recommending to the Miami City Commission approval of an ordinance of the Miami City Commission amending ordinance number 13114, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida as amended by amending article three titled General to Zones to modify the affordable and attainable mixed income transfer of development density program making findings containing a severability clause, and providing for an effective date.

Good evening. Savannah Steiner, Assistant Director, Planning Department. If you give me just a second, the presentation is coming up. You may remember this from a previous PSAB hearing where you did approve or make a motion to approve this legislation. You did include a recommendation and I'll go through that. There have been some changes made to the legislation. Additionally, city commission at their last meeting further amended it, and so this is why this is back before you. Just give it a second to catch up. So this program is our attainable mixed income housing program. It is a transfer of density program where where affordable housing or attainable housing mixed income projects may sell any additional density that they have. So they can go from a sending site to a receiving site. This program was introduced into the city in 2022. And in 2017, all We introduced into our comp plan the ability to double your density throughout certain areas of Miami in 2017 as per Miami 21. So it's not in every situation you're allowed to double your density. We further expanded that actually, I believe, last year. And so it is only in limited situations where you're able to double that density. So again, this is to make some changes to our attainable and affordable mixed income housing transfer density program, and just refining the requirements. So the original program allowed affordable housing developments within community development areas, our CRAs, and opportunity zones, which are federally defined areas, to sell any additional density that they had after they built 200 units of affordable housing. They could sell those units to be able to finance their affordable housing projects. Those areas, the CRAs and opportunity zones, are what we call the sending sites. And receiving sites could only be located in a TOD or a transit corridor, and they had to be T5 or T6. And then CIHD as well are the three areas that are the three zones, transect zones that can accept the density and then they also have to be in a TOD or a transit corridor. So your previous meeting, the program also allows you to either use option A or option B of 3.152 to be able to qualify for that. So it was 40% of your dwelling units below 60%, 10%, between 60 and 80%, a max of 10% at any price, so market rate, and then the remaining had to be below 100. Or you could do option B, which is a different price, or a different breakdown of a similar affordable housing. Again, only the maximum of 10% of your dwelling units at any price. At your last meeting when you heard this and did recommend approval, we added option A, which is our 3.151A, it already exists in our affordable housing program. And this allows a minimum of 80% of the dwelling units as affordable housing, providing they're serving residents below 60% of AMI. So we did add that as a program that you could build under. The sending sites, so originally the sending sites included the CRAs. You had to build 200 units. That is not changing. There's been no change to that language. What has changed is that in opportunity zones, we've lowered that unit count to 70 units. And then we've added a new sending area or sending sites. they have to be located in a neighborhood development zone. So in the map, you can see in the orange, yellow, and pinkish orange red color, as well as in the blue outline, green outline, and black outline, Those are the CRAs, the Opportunity Zones, and the Neighborhood Development Zones. So the affordable housing projects must be located within one of these areas in order to proffer selling any additional density they may have after they utilize whatever they need for their project on the open market. The previous, and I'll get to this in just a second, the previous program also allowed the city manager to negotiate a fee. This fee went to either the CRA or to the housing trust fund, the affordable housing trust fund, and that fee was between 15 and 25%. So in the proposed language, we are making some changes to the receiving sites, so in addition, So in addition, for the receiving sites, we're adding that they can purchase up to 50% of their additional density through the program. Currently, they're limited to 50%. It also provides an exemption for any additional density from the parking minimum requirements. So the parking requirements only apply to our base density. And then it also fixes that fee that I just mentioned at 20%. The money is still going to the CRA if the project's located in a CRA. Otherwise, it goes to our Affordable Housing Trust Fund. This is a map of T4, T5, T6, and CIHD properties located in a TOD area or in a transit corridor. Again, this program does not apply to T4 properties. It only applies to T5, T6, and CHHD properties located in TODs or transit corridors. So anything kind of in the brown to pink, red, and then this blue area is what could potentially be a sending site. Since 2022, we've only had one affordable housing project utilize this program. which is also why the intent is to lower that number from 200 to 70 in the hopes that more people will utilize this program to finance their affordable housing. So again, the receiving sites are not changing in terms of location. That's been how the code has been written since 2022. There has been some confusion. For this program, the TOD does not extend a mile. It has to be within the shed of the TOD. That means it has to be connected either by a sidewalk or a bike lane. We do have other programs where the TOD and the TOD program expands up to a mile. This one only expands up to a half mile and is limited to being connected by the pedestrian shed or by the bicycle lanes. And that's the properties that you're seeing here. This program, what this program does not do, it does not allow you to change your height limit, so it does not give you any additional bonus height. It does not change your setback requirements, so you're not allowed to change your setback requirements through this. You cannot change your FLR, your maximum floor area, it stays the same. So if you need any of those additional things, you either have to go through one of our other public benefits programs, or you have to go through the exception variance process. The only thing that this does is allow properties to sell density and for sites to receive density, so it only changes the underlining density. Again, at City Commission, this was heard on April 9th, 2026. The City Commission, during their first reading, did vote to approve with the neighborhood conservation districts being removed. So the legislation that is in front of you has the changes that I've gone through today, and then it matches what was substituted at City Commission. The City Commission further amended that for the neighborhood conservation districts to be removed. That is not included in your legislation tonight because I had like less than 24 hours to write that, get it approved, and that did not happen before I published the agenda. We try to give you a minimum of five days to review our agenda packet. So the neighborhood conservation districts are not included. What we do recommend, and I'll go back to my first slide, was we do recommend that you approve with the neighborhood conservation districts to be removed, and this mirrors the city commission's motion.

Thank you very much. Would anyone from the public like to speak on this item?

Elvis Cruz. For item six, it's important to know the big picture on citywide density. In 2016, the planning department calculated Miami's maximum density potential, and they found the city was already zoned to allow the construction of eight times more housing units than were counted in the 2010 census. So we were already zoned to enable eight times that population. That factor of eight was before adding subsequent special area plans, before adding or transferring bonus density for affordable housing, like this item today. Before adding bonus floors to transit-oriented developments or via transfer of development rights, which can then buy transfer of development density. Before adding any Live Local Act buildings. Before adding ADUs. Before adding rapid transit zoning. Before adding transit station and neighborhood developments. before adding Commissioner Pardo's 48-story high-rise condos on Watson Island, before all the upzonings that have happened since 2016, before adding Commissioner Pardo's doubling of density in Edgewater, before adding any other height and density bonuses that have been invented since then. There have been several. It's hard to keep track. We don't have the infrastructure to handle all that density. It's not just about traffic. There's also portable water supply, sewage treatment capacity, garbage disposal capacity, per capita park space, and hurricane evacuation time. Miami 21 and the comp plan speak of protecting neighborhood character and scale. At a minimum, you should exclude all historic districts and NCDs from this legislation. Please, historic districts should be excluded. Please stop the insanity. Please vote no on anything that increases density or height. In closing, I ask everyone here in opposition to this item and to exclude historic districts and NCDs, please raise your hands and be recognized. Okay, look around. If anybody can take a picture of this, that would be wonderful. In fact, let me do it now.

It's on video.

Okay, everybody, there it is.

Thank you so much for coming and caring. Mr. Cruz, I have a question.

Sir.

If there was a commercial property in a historic district, would you be in favor of allowing additional density in an adaptive reuse context in a historic commercial property?

No, because what we're talking about here is additional density. That commercial property in a historic district already has baked in the appropriate amount of density, we hope, under the existing Miami 21 rules. Now, it's very important to know, affordable housing is being used as the political camouflage to continue to favor developers but we can achieve affordable housing under our existing laws we have tax exemptions we have tax credits there's section 8 vouchers there's a number of different mechanisms already in place without having to do this insane thank you eternal escalation sorry i just have a question uh on that if if there was a historic building with like a ground floor

retail already with residential above, would they be able to apply that as it is now and increase the number of residential, make smaller residential units on the second floor, third floor?

So it's kind of a complex question because historic preservation has their own transfer of density and development rights program already. So a large amount of our historic buildings that could potentially be receiving sites are also sending sites for their own ability to restore and renovate and adaptively reuse their buildings. So technically, yes. However, most of those buildings, a lot of those buildings where we know that they're already zoned T5 and T6, a decent portion of them have already sold their density or have certificates of eligibility to sell their density.

In theory, to preserve the older structure.

In theory, right, to preserve the structure or to pay for the restoration.

It kind of worked both ways, but...

Right.

Right, got it. Okay, that's all. Thanks. Thank you, sir.

Sorry. John Dolson, 4205 Lenox Drive, Coconut Grove. I share the concerns with... Sorry, guys. I share the concerns on just packing people in more and more space, more and more going up. Everything you said is absolutely true. Also, you know, I'm stuck between a rock and a hard spot on this thing. I don't like this whole process. It looks like a shell game to me. We're just shoving things around. One spot to the next. But having said that, I think the Commission did the right thing last week. If you're going to move this forward, for heaven's sake, protect the NCDs. We have enough trouble protecting our neighborhoods right now. Those NCDs have been in place from, what, 2010, 2016? They're not as strong as they need to be. But people invest in homes and they move in here for a reason. and then their neighborhoods get destroyed as we increase the density and we put these high rises up. We do things like the well, and we're just doing a lot of stuff that doesn't make sense. So if you've got to do this, please protect the NCDs and the historic neighborhoods. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Can you guys just do this? It would be better so we could keep it rolling.

Debbie Dolson, 4205 Lenox Drive, Coconut Grove. I would just like to echo many of the comments that I heard at the last commission meeting. I hope that all of you listened to those comments, and many of our wonderful neighbors that are sitting right here made those comments in support of exempting the NCDs. The reason we have NCDs, of course, are to protect us from overdevelopment and increased density. So please pass this forward with the NCDs exempted as our commissioners voted upon in the last meeting.

Thank you. Thank you very much.

Hello again, Andy Parrish. I remember when I was on this board that I had to keep reminding myself we're not just the zoning board, we're the planning board. And in Miami 21, it gives this board wide latitude to what it can do as far as making recommendations. Remember, all the zoning things we do on this board are just recommendations to the city council. Not always. They are quasi-judicials. Some. Some are, okay. Anyway, mainly you make recommendations to the board. Often. And you're planning purview. I'm very worried that this rush to do more and more high-rise, even in parts of the city that need shelter. I mean, there's people from the Grove who have shelter. They're worried about their quality of life going down as their property values go up. So there's a lot of disparity in the city. as to what the solution is, and it's not easy. We do know that high rises in poor neighborhoods are the cheapest to build, the easiest to assemble, and Elon does it. He knows it's difficult, but to, okay, we can disagree, but in wealthy neighborhoods, it's where the profit is. The more density you have, the more units you can do, the more you can reduce parking. So my concern is, as to quote Jane Jacobs, we need variety in the city. Some of you have lived in, I've lived in a high rise before. When I get out of an elevator in a high rise, people don't, usually don't say hi. They look down at the floor or get off the elevator. And I've built houses in single family homes, which are getting prohibitively expensive to do. But people with kids or pets, are more likely to live in a community. Community is built by variety. And this rush to do everything in both the poorer sections of the city, the mid-level rises of the city, the wealthier, to do everything high-rise, I think this planning board might have somebody like Dover Coal or any of the other urban planners come before you and say, what other opportunities are there for our city other than to constantly build higher and denser? Is there anything else we can do? And if this is a planning board could make that recommendation after you brought Dover Coal or DPZ even who did Miami 21 to talk to you, they might have some ideas about other ways we could do it. I mean, ADUs were one of them. I support ADUs. I also wouldn't mind having many more apartment buildings in T3, which would probably piss off a lot of my neighbors. But there are like a half dozen apartment buildings already in Coconut Grove that are completely accepted into the community. They're always full, usually with students or people in transition. And they work. But nobody's doing that anymore. They only want to do more dense and higher. And I think in the end, we're all going to be sorry. Because the livability for everybody is going to decrease. So I think this board, if it chose to, could take it. Because remember... I'm not going to disparage our commission other than to say they have to get elected and reelected. And you know where their dollars, their campaign dollars, are coming from. They're coming mainly from the development industry, and they like high rises.

Thank you.

So I'm urging this board to consider more diversity, just to have a Jane Jacobs kind of city where everybody has something and they appreciate it. That's called a community. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Much lower than Andy.

Good evening, Billy Corbin. I want to speak in favor of remarks that the chair made earlier in the evening to suggest to the administration and the staff to allow the board to, whether it's through social media or some other means, to have more transparency and communicate in real time with the public. I wish the commission would do it the same as well. This is an important board doing quasi-judicial work, some of the most important business of the city. And I feel that the last meeting, remember, the canceled meeting, That was foreseeable. And tonight, the Coconut Grove Playhouse, which I came to speak on, there was apparently a notice issue. That was foreseeable, obviously, as well. As much as I appreciate the notifications being placed on the door, it seems like too little too late. Incidentally, I appreciate everybody who came out last time who had to schlep back out again this time. So I would encourage you to take whatever action you can to... inform the public about what you will be hearing and what you won't be hearing. Alternatively, a friendly suggestion, Mr. Chair, you could just replace the board with a giant rubber stamp, which would seem to have the same effect. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Cliff Losh. I live at 2811 South Bay Shore Drive. I'm not as eloquent or as knowledgeable as some of the prior speakers, and I adopt pretty much everything they've said, but the one thing I do bring is that I happen to represent quite a few people. I'm here as president of Park Grove, which has about 360 units, and representative of the South Bay Shore Drive Condo Association, which represents about 3,000 people, and I'm pretty confident that I could pull every single one of those people and they would not support this proposal, but they would not oppose the proposal so long as it carves out the NCDs. Since the commission's already preliminarily approved it with the NCDs carved out, I'm having trouble figuring out why it could possibly get passed by this board without carving out the NCDs. that's pretty much all I've got to say, except that it would also be nice to see some real planning that incorporates, and nobody here is against low-income housing, it's obviously very much needed, but I think everybody here would appreciate some real actual planning that shows a coherent, rational plan to have more low-income housing, but without ruining neighborhoods in which it doesn't belong. Or in this case, it's even worse. It's really just transferring density from possible low-income areas to build really expensive condos somewhere else with no parking, which doesn't seem very planned. So with that, I conclude. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you.

Good evening. Elisa Margulies. I live on Rice Street in Center Grove. Not all legislation has to be one size fits all, especially in a city as diverse and complex as Miami. What works in one neighborhood is not automatically a good fit for another. In the case of PC6, the residents of Coconut Grove and the NCDs, we didn't ask for this. In fact, we're here respectfully asking to be excluded from it. No one here denies that Miami needs more affordable housing, and in areas that can absorb additional density, we support making that easier to achieve. However, residents of the Conservation districts are already paying the price of overdevelopment. We live with sidewalks that are routinely closed for up to two years during construction. Our roads are a mess, and the daily traffic is soul crushing. And with an easily achievable low threshold to transfer density, the potential for exploitation will be too tempting for certain developers. Ask yourselves, in the NCDs, who exactly stands to benefit? Is it a luxury condo with 380-plus parking spaces that already stretches the credibility of its transit zone designation? Or properties along 27th Avenue east of US 1 where additional density won't solve an affordability crisis but will result in more gridlock? Adding more density without first fixing the inadequate public transportation system and infrastructure gaps will not solve the NCD problems. It will simply magnify them. Policies should be tailored to meet the unique needs of a community and not negatively impact them, and therefore I ask you to please exclude the NCDs. Thank you.

Thank you. If we could, yes, please, with a clapping. Thank you.

Go ahead.

Hi, my name is Henrietta Schwarz, and I live at 2627 South Bayshore Drive. I'm here to support the NCDs, but also the historic districts. And this is something that the Planning and Zoning Board really needs to kind of stop and take a minute and breathe. Because I think if I were to turn around and ask everyone here, do they want more density? We know what the answer would be. We are all, as the previous speaker just said, we are all dealing with soul-crushing traffic. Some days it takes me 12 minutes to go three blocks from my house on South Bay Shore to get to US 1 on 27th. And this passed at the commission unanimously. to carve out the NCDs. I'd like you to consider adding the historic districts. And there's a reason. Our neighborhoods are dying. Edgewater is gone. I mean, Edgewater is gone, gone, gone. And the flooding and all the other issues that are coming with all this, it seems like mindless density. And I know that all of you have homes here. Do you live in apartment buildings? Do you live anywhere where you need to go on a major road to get to a highway? Do you deal with soul crushing traffic? Do you know how you're gonna get out of your home in a hurricane? We have almost a half a million people residing in zone A. How do you propose they all get out? While you just okayed a 28 story building with I can't remember how many units it had in it, on top of the thousands of units that are already in that area, I would actually ask you to recommend to the commission to stop and not pass this. Don't pass these transfer credits. Take a beat, see what's gonna happen. What are the downstream effects of this? And also, you in the planning and zoning, When something bad happens in this city, we're all coming to look for you. Because you're the ones who are approving these high density areas. And you also have the ability to stop it. Thank you.

Is there anyone else from the public who would like to speak on this item?

My name is Vicky Perla and we own two units here across the street in Park Grove. And there's also not everything fits everywhere. And we in this area that are lucky to live here are bound by the coastline, very small historic streets, Dixie Highway, which ties everything up into a ball of knots. And so to imagine the type of density that is being proposed, it just doesn't even make sense when you look at the land. When you look at, you can't even get through Coconut Grove. There are no other ways of escaping because of the coastline, the nature of the inlets, the roads, the fingers, and then what we have on the other side. So if you just think about it in terms of what might possibly fit, This isn't the place to shoehorn it into. That's it.

Thank you.

Member Fadil? Member Collins? Anyone else over there?

Well, I don't know where to start. This is one more tool for the city to use to increase its density, which appears to me to be an unstated goal. Mr. Cruz was right. I remember when he pushed for that report about what the build out to maximum density under the current existing codes back in 2016 were. And I remember eight times more people in the city was available without a single upzoning additionally. And just that prospect was scary. And he's absolutely right that since then, one tool after another has been provided to developers to increase that and who knows where it is now, but I'd say it's double that now. And I just don't see the concurrency. If the city thinks that it is, believes that it is that important, the double density, that the increase in funds is that important, that they have to throw quality of life under the bus, really. They really need to state that, and they have to make that clear to the public somehow, and I would think that amending the comp plan would be a pretty good place to start, although no single family homeowner will want to know or read that the city is no longer going to fight to protect their quality of life. Because I could read here, I've got a copy in my computer here, of LU1 in the comp plan, which states pretty clearly the lead-off element, the lead-off batter, is protect the quality of life for the city's neighborhoods. That's the lead-off to the comp plan. And the city is trying... If the city needs density that badly, it needs to make a case for it. It can't just kind of bring in these tools in a suitcase and offer it here and there, bit by bit by bit by bit. I think it's encouraging that they have, that the commission on their own removed the NCDs. I think that was a recommendation, even though we didn't have quorum. I think that was pretty clear that we were really unhappy with the NCDs being included. And I think that not just historic neighborhoods, but I think there are many established neighborhoods in this city that would like to be NCDs if they knew what NCDs did. Although I remember this summer, This board did not respect an NCD3's additional standing in a diminishing, which surprised me. So I think the NCDs, if they expect protections, they really need to step up and call for it and make their rights more defined. Because without NCDs, They're vulnerable. And I don't know if the city, I don't know if there are amendments that have been filed with Tallahassee stating that the city needs this extra density. I imagine that probably one of the, I mean, we all know the developers have to make some money. But the biggest problem we have is we don't have transportation. And that is a multi-billion dollar solution. And where is the city going to get billions of dollars? And where are they going to put it? 95 has to be extended. 95 has to be extended as far south as possible to take the pressure off of Dixie. How do you do that? Underground? Overhead? Out in the water? I mean, it's a really, really hard issue. Where are we going to get our fresh water? Where are we going to get sewer treated? I mean, these are all issues that I think the city is saying, well, we'll get there. Let's bring on the density because that'll bring the money. And then with the money, we can fix the problems. So I think it's going about it a little bit backwards. And I'd like to approve this because anything to get affordable housing in this city is a good idea. But I suspect that transfer density... awards would not go to affordable housing. I think they would just build more high rises for outside money. So it's a tough one. I think the city needs money. If it's going to solve its problems, it probably has to increase its water supply somehow. It has to increase its sewer capacity with all this density coming. It really needs new roads. And to get those new roads, it needs money. And I suspect that what's behind this push to double density is a push to get larger chunks of state and federal funding. And if that's the case, they should state it. They should take it to a referendum, take it to the voters and say, look, the only way we solve this is to have more outside money and do that. We've got to have more people. We've got to have the population for it. We've got to have the density for it. It's a real issue we've got here. But I'm uncomfortable. Adding to the problem here, as much as I'd like to be able to vote for this, because they did take NCDs out of the picture, I could possibly vote for it if they also, if we recommended that we include historic neighborhoods and any... Established neighborhoods. I mean, the roads is not an NCD and they probably ought to be. There's a lot of neighborhoods in the city that probably ought to be NCD is in order to get protection and they don't have it today. So. So I'm really uncomfortable with this through the chair. Yes.

I just want to remind everybody that T3 zone properties and T4 zone properties are not eligible for receiving sites. So all of our neighborhoods, most of our historic districts are T3, and so they're already by nature excluded because they are zoned T3.

I understand that. You made that clear in your presentation, and it's one of the reasons why I'm on the fence on this one because that's big, the fact that T3s are today exempted. But still, there is the question of increased density without infrastructure, without the concurrency. And you're going to bring, and we've talked about this before, the state is building, and the county are building all these in-ramps, more and more lanes to bring more and more cars into the city, and we're not doing anything to accept them. So it's going to get uglier. before it gets better. So I would prefer to see a slowdown in density building until we get that sorted out to some extent.

Can I just make a comment? No. Can you come to the microphone at least?

Okay, yes, please. Thank you. So you say that the T3s are exempt from this, right? So how did the Lincoln get approved? Because it sits literally across the street from a residential home.

The address of the property you're talking about?

The Lincoln project on Lincoln and 27th that then dead ends to Tigertail, there are two residential homes there. How did the Lincoln get to eight stories and if that's protected as you say?

So that project is not zoned to T3.

It is not T3. The house across the street from it is T3.

So this program does not allow T3 zone properties to be receiving, nor did that particular site receive anything through this program.

No, I know. But when you're telling everyone to just... It's okay because the NCDs and these historic districts where these residences are... will be protected, but we know what is happening. They are building the Lincoln in front of not only a house, it's a house that's owned by a fro. Does anyone know who the fro's are? The fro's are the original homesteaders here in Coconut Grove.

Well I think just on that particular question, You know, what the staff was saying is that the particular site that the building was built on was zoned other than T3 or T4, but also not really germane specifically to this item because they're talking about the density transfer, and that's not what happened there. Let's keep on our way first, and then we can come back, okay? We have an order here that we do stuff, so do not... Enough to shake your head. I'll come back. We're just trying to stick to the game plan here. Okay, thank you.

No, thank you guys for coming. I think it's great to see people getting involved in the community, so you're to be commended. But I would encourage you not just to pay attention to stuff that's happening in your neighborhood, not just worry about Coconut Grove, because that's frankly what we see. And we, so if you're only gonna come here because it's in your neighborhood, then nothing's gonna change, ever. So give that some thought if you really wanna see some change. And I can tell you that this particular, and I'm happy to, I'm glad that they added the NCD language that you guys we're asking for, I think that's appropriate, and there's no reason why this shouldn't pass with that addendum to it, but I can tell you over the last six, eight months, we've had, this is really A nothing burger, as they say. It's not a huge increase in density. I mean, wait a minute. She said, excuse me, it's only been used once in the last two years. One time. And it's literally giving affordable housing developers who are building 100% affordable housing another financing mechanism. They can use the money that they're getting to sell these rights to someone else to actually build only affordable housing. Yes or no, that's exactly what they're doing. But that's not the point. The point is that there have been so many things that have come before our board, so many three or four TOD changes that have quadrupled 10x density in this city versus this particular item. That's why you need to pay attention, not just in your neighborhood.

We're going to... I understand there are maybe some more things that need to be shared with the board. We're willing to entertain them. Maybe if we could just get through our board comments, take notes like we do, and then we can afford a little extra time to the few folks that may have something additional to add. But right now, we just want to get through the board comments and discussion, please.

I 100% agree with your statement. Well said. So I 100% agree with it.

Real quick, I'm not sure, but I think you are on the board currently most familiar with affordable. So I just think, like, contextualize.

Well, I mean, if anyone wants to ask me any questions about affordable housing, I'm an expert in it, and I can answer any questions that you guys like to ask. What was the gentleman that said that we have enough funding for affordable housing? That's not true. We have a deficit of about a 90 to about 200,000 units depending on the account for affordable housing. And it is documented for decades that it's not enough funding. There's not enough Section 8. There's not enough tax credits. There's not enough funding from the city. There's not enough funding from the county. So I just want everyone to be factual here and not be emotional. but there's not enough money for affordable housing. We're not even close.

Okay.

Just a quick comment. I think this is a good tool for the arsenal to have, right? To be able to balance now before you all is the fact that you can ask for your areas not to be included in some of these aspects. The negative of it, unfortunately, is that If we are unable to pass something like this, we will not have another tool in the arsenal that will affect, unfortunately, people like me, people who are a little younger, who are starting to go into the workforce, and I just need a little more help, so therefore I go into workforce, and I would love to continue living in somewhere. I grew up in Corcoran Grove. I live two blocks from here. I walked here. So it's things like that that I would love to maintain living close to my parents. I understand there's traffic, there's a bunch of other issues with that, but being able to do something like this, giving this policy tool Another push and then being able to also acquiesce to what you guys need is OK, perhaps not in my neighborhood, perhaps not in certain other neighborhoods, because it's not just about the microscope that we're looking at right here. We are both looking at the micro and macro of this. The macro is we need more affordable for my generation, for people who are trying to make a living. And just need some help. And at the same time, we also want to protect people like yourselves, like my parents who already live in Coconut Grove and want to protect their areas completely possible. So then we'll make sure to remove NCDs into some of these aspects, knowing fully well that perhaps sometimes your locations will be not benefited by the workforce housing that could become. And unfortunately, that's a reality. But if it allows us to pass legislation to put another tool, I'm all for it to remove the NCDs and a good balance. So thanks.

So I just want to go on the record of saying I'm in support of this item. And one of the things that I just think is incredibly important is that I don't disagree at all that we have larger infrastructure problems. But I don't want to let perfect be the enemy of the good or it's the other way around or whatever it is. I don't know, whatever it is in English, the expression. And I really like the fact that one of the items here is making that fixed 20% to remove that item of the negotiation of is it 15, is it 25? What kind of horse trading needs to happen? So I think the staff did an excellent job in going in that direction. I think we're all in violent agreement that NCDs need to be removed. We heard that last week, and I think I haven't heard anybody to date say that that's not going to be the case. And it wasn't too long ago when folks were in this arena, you know, looking at the properties like Grove Park and some of the other, Park Grove or some of the other ones that were there, in violent opposition because those were 20 stories. And so what we're seeing is a natural progression of some of the density, and some of these neighborhoods are being protected. So I think that... We do need to make that incremental gain. I think this is a step in the right direction. But I would also encourage us to continue to come to these meetings and try to continue to push for the broader infrastructure of which the county is responsible. There's a lot of things that are out of control with the city, out of the direct control of the city and are more at the county level. So that's where I would encourage us to continue working with the city, but also at that county level as well. So thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you, Seth, for this. Currently, I'm not in support of it, and the reason why, there's a few reasons. So I understand there's a need for more affordable housing, but I think this only allows affordable housing in certain areas. And so when you purchase and you transfer, it doesn't ensure that, like, the other places that are receiving there are actually gonna create workforce and affordable housing in those areas. So yes, like, you have cheaper development in CRA zones and also in, like, And also in the, I forgot the other one.

The opportunity zones.

Correct, opportunity zone. And so that's one. And also, like, just I have an issue with increasing density because, like, I live in the Edgewater area where there's a bridge that's not working and you have increased traffic. And so I like that. I see the idea, but, like, I don't like this collectively. Thank you.

Thank you.

I just want to quickly thank everybody for coming out tonight and expressing yourself. Thanks everybody for coming out and expressing yourself tonight. I live in coconut grove to, and so I suffer the traffic also and i'm grateful for the ncd prohibition that we have introduced by the Council, I think that protects the Community very well. i'm also grateful for the addition of some affordable housing in the city and mechanisms to get homes built. The more affordable homes we have, the cheaper it will be for people to live here. And it's very expensive to live here. We see that in the data. And a lot of people are moving out of Miami because they just can't afford to live here. And it's unfortunate. So I'm grateful for this legislation.

Yes.

One follow-up question. Did you staff ever consider like the transfer of the credits that they mandate the type of the units that they feel like workforce and things of that nature? Was that ever considered?

So for the receiving sites to also have to build a portion of affordable housing. No, that wasn't considered. Currently, we have several other programs that you can go through where if you build affordable housing, you can get increased density, increased height, increased FLR. So this was really meant as a way to fund those sending site projects and then allow for market rate projects.

Thank you. Would you say that part of the reason this... It doesn't seem likely, just based on other things that... Other legislation that we passed... that it'll go from one instance to many, many instances. So I'm curious for everybody's point of view here to understand how great of an effect even this change would have considering all the many other options. I mean, you're right, we just heard live local as an option. So some of these receiving sites would be like, well, I don't need to buy these services Tdds because i'll just build live local so you know i think it it's important to kind of understand like is this one of these changes that really does in a good way maybe maybe lopsidedly benefit the affordable developer throwing these credits into the ether to be purchased but are highly unlikely to be purchased

So, I mean, we do have, we have another transfer of density program, which is our historic preservation program. There are credits currently on that market. They have a slightly, they have less receiving sites that those can go to, and so as a result, they actually sell for less on the market than my understanding that the affordable ones have been selling on the market. Transfer of density, transfer of development rate programs across the country are typically only successful in certain environments. There are cities throughout the country who have implemented or proposed transfer of development rates and then they've set and done nothing. There's a suburb outside of Atlanta that has a highly unsuccessful one. Montgomery County, Maryland probably has the most successful historic preservation transfer of development right program it was highly successful their first round the second round that they did of it not as successful and so a lot of it is dependent on your market and whether there is a demand for units and what type of units those are on your market and then what and then the price that those units are selling for in terms of your transfer of density so in I've worked in other cities before where we could have introduced a transfer of development for historic preservation, for saving small farms, for affordable housing, and they never would have been successful. Not one unit would have ever sold because that market demand is not there. So I think that's part of what you're seeing in the fact that this program since 2022 has only been used once. is that is there a market demand to be able to buy those units? Of course, the threshold is really high in the affordable one. It is 200 units and that's a pretty high threshold. So once you get into 200 units of affordable housing in a single project, you're typically looking at either some type of county sponsored housing project or city sponsored housing project. not a smaller affordable housing project where maybe if I'm in one of these sending sites and I only want to build a triplex, I can build a triplex but I have one more unit and I can use that one unit. If they're selling for $25,000 on the market rate, there's somebody in a T5 or a T6 that may pick up one unit. So it's also about the amount of units that are on the market. So it's all market driven.

And another reason why it probably hasn't been used a lot as an affordable housing developer, we build typically the maximum density. So typically there aren't any extra development rights that we can sell. So that kind of limits the supply for these development rights.

I also had in my notes, to just go back, there was the good question about when we clarified, I think it was Ms. Schwartz, about the T3, T4, and even though the building example that was used didn't apply, I think the concern is well taken, and I think that's why the exclusion of the NCD makes sense, because in that question, though, is the question, okay, we have T3, T4 sort of scattered, and then there's T5 or T6 or whatever sort of scattered in there, if the overlay is there, then it would prevent that by the exclusion of the NCD or let's say a historic. So I think we were sort of talking about two different things. Both were accurate. But to clarify, I think the question, even though the example wasn't right, the it's sort of taken altogether is a good question because it would exclude that building if it's in the, to your question that you asked, would exclude that building if it fell within the NCD moving forward if it were excluded both, you know, at the second reading of commission. So in other words, if the NCDs are excluded and that building fell in the NCD, YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO USE THIS PROGRAM THERE. I THINK THERE WAS LIKE TWO PEOPLE THAT HAD SOMETHING. IF YOU COULD JUST GET IN LINE AND MAKE SURE YOU SAY YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE.

Elvis Cruz, 631 Northeast 57th Street. There's an important point that I want to make sure everybody understands, because at the beginning of the meeting, Ms. Steiner mentioned that there's a substitution memo that doubled the amount of buyable density, meaning a property could go and double its currently allowed density. Am I correct? It went from 50% to 100%?

So previously under this program, you could buy only 50% of your double density through this program. So if your base density is 150, you can double your density to 300 units per acre. You could only buy 75 units from this program. you can now buy 150 from this program.

So you can double your density using this program?

So you've always been able to double your density, but before you would have to buy maybe the rest of that density through the historic preservation program, another public benefits program, or, for example, you could stack them and then maybe use the resiliency trust fund if you're in that area. to buy additional density. So this one does allow you now to do 100%.

Understood. But the point I'm trying to get to is with this program, you can double your density and you don't have to add any more parking. Now, an earlier item today, you remember there was 11-unit apartment building and it was mentioned that, well, you're not allowed to have a parking reduction exemption within, is it 250 or 500 feet of T3? It's 500. 500. So my big question is, will that 500 foot buffer apply to these double density units that are not going to have any parking on site? Will T3s be protected from this program?

So the way the language is written is that all additional density is exempt from parking requirements. So the base density is still required to meet all parking requirements.

So in other words, the double density, the extra density that somebody buys with this program, doesn't matter if you've got T3 across the street. Okay, you get it? This is going to ruin T3 neighborhoods if this is allowed without a 500-foot buffer. So in addition to NCDs, which has already been exempt, in addition to historic districts, which I'm hoping, I get the sense you might be leaning in that way to also exempt that, you should also require the 500-foot buffer. Let's not throw our single-family neighborhoods under the bus, please. Thank you.

Guys, let's please, I ask, just respectfully, please, with the clapping, just stop so we can keep going.

Hi, I'm Chris Ernst from 2831 Bayshore. Sorry for getting a little hot under the collar and shaking my head. I apologize. But the conversation around the Lincoln really struck a nerve in me because it seems like nobody here is against low-income housing. We all want to have everybody benefit. It's just that the slow drip of the lack of planning and the methodology that you guys are employing here is a layering on effect of, I feel that you're going to get us with an exemption one way without, and take away our exemptions one way or another. So if we didn't have the Lincoln go to eight stories because of one exemption, we're going to get, or not exemption, If we're not going to get it through one method, you guys are going to hit us with it in another legislation. I don't think if you were to layer on all the rules that you guys are letting the developers get away with on top of the map of Miami, if you saw the addition of all the laws that you guys are letting pass and come hell or high water, we're going to get an eight story building in the neighborhood. Seems like to other people's point, it's a lack of methodology. You guys aren't thinking about the cumulative effect of what these seemingly independent bright ideas are doing against the legislation that's already been passed. You aren't giving us any, there's no break. And just finally, I had this conversation with somebody else the other day. Think about how an ambulance is gonna get through streets around in coconut grove to the other woman's point I mean I feel like when I see an ambulance in Manhattan I pray for the person in the ambulance because I know they're probably not going to get to the hospital in time with all the traffic I feel like that's what's happening here in this city again I apologize thanks for letting me thank you thank you please

Thank you, my name is Bob Linton, and I live at 2811 South Bayshore Drive. I appreciate the opportunity to speak to all of you tonight. And I understand and appreciate the tough job that you have dealing with a huge amount of density issues that have occurred in the last 10 or 15 years as Miami has grown meteorically. I've been in this area, and I recall it, and I won't get into the details of it, but since the 1960s, that the infrastructure really hasn't changed. However, tonight, I don't really want to talk about that or about Coconut Grove specifically, because it was said by one gentleman tonight that we shouldn't be myopic because we see this as an issue for Coconut Grove. So let me ask a more universal question that applies to your entire jurisdiction. This proposal appears to encourage developers to overcommit for affordable housing, which we all agree that we need, And certainly we need people help and support throughout the whole area. We don't want to see people moving out, no doubt about that. But at the same time, we encourage developers to overcommit for affordable housing, but also to under deliver in any particular area where they've made a commitment. should they not be required to fulfill their full obligation in that same district where they were approved before they can get additional approvals to build new projects. In a sense, do what they say they're gonna do. But to make matters worse, Developers can profit by selling their over-commitment to other developers, and in that exchange, not even provide affordable housing. I think that's something perhaps worth discussing. Thank you.

Mr. Chair, thank you for reopening public comment. I wish that the city commission meetings were conducted as inclusionary and collaborative as this. Three points. I want to say I agree with everything that Mr. Mann said earlier in his remarks, including that there should be some kind of referendum item that comes to voters with a comprehensive plan, as opposed to this kind of incremental backdoor change. But I do want to correct the record in that You inferred that this is some kind of secret or unspoken scheme. I would challenge you, sir, that Mayor Eileen Higgins ran on this very platform. She was explicit about increasing density. I believe her exact words were, I will look at every single available piece of property owned by the city and see what we can build on it. how much we can build on it. She was known as the developer darling. So if you have an issue with any of this, I encourage you to speak directly to her. She will have an opportunity to veto this, presumably, at some point down the road. Second, I would be remiss if I did not call out the absurd remarks by Mr. Corll tonight, the audacity to admonish concerned citizens for showing up to a meeting to discuss issues that impact their neighborhood, because it may or may not impact another neighborhood. I mean... I know how difficult it is to attend these meetings and to get up and speak, but people from other neighborhoods are welcome just the same to attend and speak and address issues that impact their neighborhoods. I was really very surprised and disappointed by those remarks. And finally, Ms. Steiner, you made a point earlier this year at a PSAB meeting. You cited, and I'm paraphrasing, some data out of Boston, as I recall, that you told the board about. And you said that the data shows or a study shows that for every one person that shows up to a meeting to speak out against something, there are 10 more people who didn't show up to the meeting that support it. So I would posit this evening that for every one person that showed up tonight against this scheme, there are a thousand more that didn't show up tonight that are against this scheme. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any other comments? Yeah. Yeah. No, no, no.

Member De Corrales. Yes. So I would like to ask a few questions because I have doubts. You said that the base density would require parking. Correct. But not if it's affordable.

So they still have to meet the parking requirements for affordable housing. So there is reductions for affordable housing, and those reductions would, that's for the sending site. So the exemption that we're talking about is for the receiving site.

Yes.

So the sending site still has to meet all of our parking requirements. There's no exemption from parking other than whatever parking reductions that are currently available through Miami 21. Those are currently available to them now. This allows for a parking exemption for the density that is transferred to the receiving site. So the receiving site does not have to build additional parking based on that density.

OK, but if the receiving site is building an affordable project and they're doubling the density, what would it look like?

So then if the receiving site is also building affordable housing. They're not required to through this program. So they're proffering to build affordable housing. They can take advantage of the reductions in parking to their base parking requirement. There is no parking requirement for the added additional density. So, for example, if somebody can build, if their units per acre is 150, they buy, they can go up to 300, they buy 150 units per this. Our parking ratio is roughly about 1.61 per unit after you do all of your community spots and everything like that. So they would have to build, I think it's 480 parking spots, right, for 300 units. This program exempts them, and so they would only have to build the 1.6 for the original 150. And that would reduce their parking, you know, so then they would only be building like 240.

But they would also be able to...

They could further reduce that by taking advantage of any other parking reductions that are allowed through the code.

Forty-five percent is my information, the information that I have. If they're within a TOD.

Right, if they're in a TOD, they can do up to 50% by process of exception and paying into the trust fund.

My understanding is they can do 15% by write, 15% by wherever, and 15% by warrant.

That's correct. They can go up to 50% by process of exception.

But very easily they can get 45. Because it's right waiver and warrant. So those are the things that concern me a little bit when I look at this legislation. And I also echo that There is tremendous merit for the community and the neighborhood to come in and speak on behalf of their needs. And I want to also encourage that other neighborhoods do the same and come to the table. We want to hear them. We want to listen to what their needs are and how they receive this. We do, I think, and I echo also the comments from fellow members where comments have been made that this is incremental steps to getting to more affordability, and I can see that as well. It's that we are in the realm of planning, and I'm concerned of what all of this, when we piecemeal legislations, what it looks like holistically as a city so it's a very difficult position that I believe that we're in because we do want to promote affordability we understand the concerns the traffic concerns and the and the lack of parking allegedly that this can create and the much-needed parking Yet, a section of the neighborhood, in my opinion, a section of the city showed up today, and these, if approved, not allowing it on NCDs, but everywhere else, my concern is where is the diversity? Where is the inclusion? So, it's very difficult.

Thank you. Is it okay if I?

To the chair? I guess not. Sorry. Got to get this off my chest here. Sure. I hate voting against affordable housing almost as much as I hate voting for something that's going to damage quality of life for single-family neighborhoods. So I have a question for two people. First, for staff. Since this is predominantly to assist... in the progress of affordable housing construction in this city, would it hamstring the legislation if the transfer credits were required to be also for affordable housing, not for more luxury buildings?

So, hey. So I think the question is, why am I buying density to build affordable housing when I can already get that without having to buy it through other programs? I could just do live local, not proffer as low as... Depending on the program, I can go up to 1,000 units per acre under live local. So... why would I buy density and then build affordable housing when I can build affordable housing and get more density than is what I'm gonna buy through this program? So, I mean, for the most part, a T6 property has, the density cap is 150 units, and then it's doubled through programs like this to 300. Unless you're in one of our residential density increase areas, And there's a couple of those. Those are mostly in Brickell and downtown. So unless you're in one of those, then you're capped at 300, but you can get 1,000 units per acre if you build live local. So if I'm going to build affordable housing, I'm better off and I'll get more density through another program. So I don't know that there's a reason to require the receiving sites to build affordable housing Because there are other programs that are going to cost me less to build that affordable housing already available.

All right. Thank you. Board Member Mottoglia has answered that question with his nodding, with his agreement of your assessment. I think, oh, sorry, were you? No, just in closing. I'd like to see, in order to be able to vote for this, I'd like to see, at minimum, the 500-foot buffer with budding T3s, inclusion of the historical properties, and, of course, locking in not just NCDs, but I'd like to see some sort. Well, the 500-foot buffer will help all non-CD T3 properties, I think, enough. Thank you. That's the only way I can support this.

Thanks. I think the radius use is interesting, too, because I think where you would be the selling or sending sites, if the receiving sites were in some radius, it's assuming also that there's a lot of density already where the sending site is.

So most of our sending sites are, of course, they have to be located. They're already in a TOD or a transit corridor, which are high density areas. Do we have some T3 properties that abut those? Sure, yes. Those do exist. So you could include, if the board would like, a recommendation to city commission to include that 500 foot buffer when those instances occur.

Or also exclude... exclude the 500-foot buffer if the T3 is a budding, right? Because wouldn't that, in the instance, what I'm saying is that if you were able to build an affordable site, and your example of you have some scattered T3s budding now next to this affordable site, to sort of conform and concentrate that it would be a better use of those T3 sites in places where there are now already the towers or whatever's larger affordable sites.

So I think we're, I mean, we have a few instances where T3 abut T6, but I think more common is where we have T3 abut T5. And so then you're going from 65 units to 130 units.

It's probably hard to use a catch-all to identify those properties. The piecemealing thing is really important. And I think the Opposite idea is the idea of, you know, referendum master planning. But the downside to that is think about how long it took to even develop Miami 21, then implement it, vote on it. clean it up, you know, 25 years. So I think that's the, that's like what Member de Corrales is talking about is we have to weigh out. It's like, okay, if we master plan affordability and wait for that, the studies and the planning and all that stuff, how long, how many, maybe decades are we waiting for a final outcome when the issue is now? You know, data-driven, it's here now. AND THEN I THINK THE IDEA OF EVERY SINGLE MEETING WE TALK ABOUT HOW INFRASTRUCTURE JUST DOESN'T SUPPORT WHAT'S HAPPENING, NO MATTER WHAT WE DO, NO MATTER WHAT WE HAVE NOW OR WILL HAVE IN THE FUTURE. But, you know, thinking that any of that is going to change when, you know, we can't, we have a billion-dollar non-bridge that won't be finished ever, probably. It's just not going to happen. So I think, you know, we have talked about, there is some silver lining. I don't want to go off on a major tangent, but we were talking about this at a couple meetings ago, and it's really true, is that, and I'm not, you know, autonomous vehicles, things like that are going to become our public transportation. So I'm not as concerned, um, the very short term future. Yes. In the medium term, probably not. Um, but, um, I also think there is another way in which we get affordable housing, which is you look at the overbuilding in Wynwood and, you know, they're giving away four or five, six months free at this point and turning some of these apartments into Airbnbs, which are not affordable housing. Right. So I think the other interesting thing that we see is that while, yes, it's true, certainly in 2008, where condos became apartments or condos, got foreclosed on and were still condos, but people could afford to buy them and now have equity and a lot of those people are teachers and public servants. I think it's always better if affordable is born affordable. And so I think that's sort of a check in the box of using this. I'm compelled by the idea that I really don't see, compared to all the other schemes, I don't mean schemes, but I mean, you know, the other ways of legislation that exists, like Live Local, YOU KNOW, HISTORIC PRESERVATION, ALL THESE TYPES OF THINGS. THIS IS JUST A TOOL, BUT I DON'T SEE IT AS HAVING A MAJOR EFFECT. IF, FINALLY, I THINK WHAT SEEMS LIKE MOST OF THE BOARD AGREES, A, OBVIOUSLY THE NCD'S, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYBODY HERE WHO SAID THAT THAT'S WRONG, AND WE DIDN'T GET THE CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT THIS A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, AND WE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE ARRIVED AT THE SAME PLACE. I think the historic districts sounds good I don't know the nitty-gritty effect of that and I imagine if we send that to commission they can hash out whether that works or not between now and the next commission meeting there may be reasons why it wasn't included at the last commission meeting but It seems like a lot of us are in support of that idea. And I think looking, again, I don't know exactly how it applies writ large across the whole city, but the 500 foot thing seems to be a really good idea to look at and probably implement in balance to a very large change or potentially usable change to increase density. Does anyone else have? Mr.

Chair, I have one question. Yes. Mr. Staff, is there a time that this is needed by this specific legislation? Because I think, like, our board, we've raised a lot of possible unintended consequences, and then we talk about that, like, we're planning committees. We want to make sure that we get it right. And so is there a time, like, issue that you have?

This has been to first reading already at the City Commission and it's scheduled for a second reading on May 28th. Your recommendations, I mean, we know that the City Commission has already included the NCDs, so all recommendations from this board are passed on to City Commission. And oftentimes they're incorporated into the legislation. And so that's something that may potentially happen. And sometimes that is reviewed at each briefing with city commissioners. They're not taken lightly.

That's sort of... Oh, go ahead. Sorry, it was... No, no, I'm sorry. Go ahead, please.

So am I hearing correctly from the Planning Board that we would object to having a proposal that says we would like to approve this with the exclusion of the NCDs, consideration of the historic districts, and ask the staff before the other meeting to explore what the implications are of the buffer, allowing this to continue to move ahead with the feedback that we've heard very clearly from the audience.

Yeah, I mean, I think it certainly seems like we could take a vote and probably that's where we would end up. Someone wanted to make that motion?

I'll make the motion. So the motion would be to approve with the recommendation of the NCDs, recommend that this- Being excluded. Being excluded, consideration of the historic districts to be excluded, and to have the staff look at the implications of the addition of the 500-foot barrier with the T3.

Not just look at it, but actually recommend it.

Well, I don't really know what the implications are, so... I think we...

Sorry, would saying something...

I'm making a motion so you can deny it if you don't like it.

Well, just as I think it's pretty close, I mean, the idea that if we recommend, the recommendation would come with questions from the commission to, at briefing, how would this be implemented? So assuming that that's... So I think maybe just a more solid, affirmative... recommendation of these three items and then how the nitty-gritty of those could be worked out between the Commission and staff if the Commission wants to take up those ideas at Commission.

And I do have a map that does show, I know that I showed previously in my previous presentation, the areas that were T4, T5, T6, and CIHD that were within a TOD and a transit corridor. I do have a map that shows the limitation of adding that 500-foot buffer. It was not in my presentation, but I'm happy to share it if you would like to see it.

Okay, so does that sound like an accurate or acceptable?

I accept that, yes.

Thank you for allowing. Can I say what he said?

For the motion?

Exclude NCD, exclude historic, and exclude 500 feet, and you guys figure it out, staff and commission.

I think that's the motion. Do we have a second then? Second. I think we can take roll call.

Patinkin was second.

I forgot that I had it. Calling member Lynette Cardoche.

Yes.

Calling, I'm sorry, calling Joshua Patinkin. Thank you. Calling member Mario Bailey. No. Thank you. Calling Chris Collins. Yes. Thank you. Calling Joseph Corral. Thank you. Calling Maria Paula De Corrales. Yes. Thank you. Calling Paul Mann.

For clarification to the maker of the motion, is that buffer a 500-foot buffer?

Yes, that was my understanding. Yes.

Thank you. Calling Ilama Toyer. Yes. Thank you. Calling Arthur, I'm sorry, calling Manuel Vidillo. Thank you. And calling Vice Chair Andres Lopez.

Yes.

And calling Chair Adam Gersten.

Yes.

Okay, this passes by a vote of 10 to 1. As amended.

Thank you all for coming out. But the meeting's not over. We still got to go. So as you guys leave, please keep the comments outside so we can keep going with the meeting. Thank you. Do you guys want to take a break? Yeah, a five-minute bathroom break, if that's okay. I'll show the map.

Thank you. Thank you.

Ms. Grovedal?

I think I think we should start our meeting right now. Yes. All right. We got to move. We got a couple items left. I think four. But let's go. Let's let's go. Fellas. I'm sorry. Let's let's save this for after the meeting. We got to I think there's a couple more items here. We've got to get rolling.

Call CZAB 8, file ID 18984, I'm sorry, 18964, a resolution of the Miami Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board with attachments recommending approval with conditions to the City Commission pursuant to Chapter 55, Section 55-15 of the Code of the City of Miami, Florida, as amended to vacate and close a 15-foot-wide public alley that runs east from an existing private property line for approximately 143.85 feet, generally located in parallel to Northwest 71st Street and Northwest 72nd Street, and terminating at Northwest Fifth Place, Miami, Florida, as more particularly described in the attached and incorporated Exhibit A, making findings containing a severability clause and providing for an effective date.

Good evening, Vicky Taranto with the Planning Department. As my colleague pointed out, this is an application to vacate and close a 15-foot wide public alley. The property is generally located at the northwest corner of Northwest Fifth Place and Northwest 71st Street. Staff is recommending approval with conditions. Site information, the applicants are the owners of the property located at 7136 Northwest 5th Court, 585 Northwest 71st Street, and 571 Northwest 71st Street. The alley is generally located at the northwest corner of Northwest 5th Place and Northwest 71st Street, while the property is bounded by Northwest 5th Place to the east and Northwest 71st Street to the south. The alley dead ends on the private property to the west and access on the east is impeded due to an I-95 support column. The request is to close a vacate and abandon from public use the alley at the property and to install a gate and safeguard the property from ongoing criminal activity. The property is zoned D1 with the flume of light industrial. This is the applicant's request, and it has been stated on the record. And staff is recommending approval with the conditions. The conditions that are on the top two ones, those are the ones that are particular to this application, while three through seven are ones that are standard conditions. Thank you.

Thank you, hello, and good evening. My name is Estreita Sibila with law offices at 232 Andalusia, Suite 230, Coral Gables, Florida. I'm here this evening on behalf of JMPE Holdings, JP Investments LLC, and Tardin Wholesale Warehouse LLC. Essentially, this is a simple application. It's an alley to nowhere that we are looking to close. These are originally properties that were platted in 1925. When they platted the property to the west of us, there was no continuation of the alley. The portions that ran within our plat that are further to the east were closed by resolution of the city on their own behalf. We've essentially been before the plat and street committee. They've recommended approval. We have approval from the planning staff as well. We're just asking for you all to have a quick vote and approve us so that way we can move on. If you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them. With me today is also our principal, Johan Pedraza. and our surveyor is no longer here, unfortunately.

Thank you. Is there anyone from the public who would like to speak on this item? Seeing or hearing none, does anyone on the board have any questions? Okay. Is there a motion? Motion to approve. Is there a second from Board Member Metoyer? Roll call, please.

I'm sorry, for clarity of the record, who moved the motion?

Mario Bailey.

Mario, I'm sorry, Mr. Bailey. No problem. Thank you so much. Calling member Mario Bailey.

Yes.

Calling member Ilan Montoya. Yes. Calling member Lynette Cardoche. Yes. Calling member Chris Collins.

Yes.

Calling member Joseph Corral. Thank you. Calling member Maria Paula De Corrales. Yes. Thank you. Calling member Paul Mann.

Yes.