It's 5:30. Let's go ahead and start the meeting, please. Okay. May the meeting come to order, please? Thank you. All right. Welcome everybody to the whatever which holiday this is. I've
lost track. I think Columbus got lost and found. >> Well, it's also indigenous people who actually belonged here. So, welcome to whatever holiday this is. Whatever you choose to celebrate. LPA chose to meet anyway. It's a good time. So, uh if we can start with the pledge of allegiance, please.
>> And Corey, would you pledge lead the pledge, please? I allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for
all. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Could you go ahead and give us a roll call, please? Madam >> Roger Young >> here. >> James Ry
>> here. Corey McGra Aable >> here. >> Tony Hammond >> here. >> Greg Dully >> here. >> Lori Leland >> here. And Cheryl Culverson >> here. >> We have a quorum. >> Miss Jennifer, do you have anything for us tonight? Or Mr. Quick, do you have
anything for us before we get started? >> Nothing for me. Just um you've got I just want to introduce you. I'll reintroduce you again to Jamie who was here last time. Um, it's actually works out. I have a conflict for the November meeting. So, she will be you'll be in good hands with Jamie. >> Jamie, we look we look forward to
scaring the hell out of you. >> We're good at it. >> I I just will have a want to have a discussion about something afterwards. >> Okay. All right. I don't can't see my agenda. I have my
>> Oh, no fails. I'll put my glasses on. All right. Um before we get started, we have a fairly short agenda, but we Oh, thank you. >> Otherwise, I'm going to do this from memory. Oh, good. I'm good so far. Um does anybody on the committee have
anything they would like to add or delete from the agenda this evening? Seeing none, they're good. I'm pardon. Okay. Sorry. Anyway, moving on. This is the time for public comment. This may be about the particular subject that's going to be on our agenda this evening
or you may comment on something else. Regardless, please keep your comments to three minutes and keep trying to keep retain civility here. Do I have anybody in the public who wishes to make comment at this time? Seeing no rush to the microphone, we'll
move on. Okay. Consent agenda. We need to have a motion to approve the minutes unless anybody has an objection to the minutes. >> I make a motion to approve the minutes. >> Second. All right, Tony. All in favor, please. Would you
please the roll call, please? >> Roger Young, >> yes. >> James Ryan, >> yes. >> Corey Ael, >> yes. >> Gregory Daly, >> yes. >> Cheryl Coberson, >> yes.
>> Tony Hammond, >> yes. >> And Lori Lon, >> yes. Motion pass 70. >> Thank you Mr. Quick. Sir, we are pass the consent agenda. Do you have anything that you wish to ask you or Miss Robasard?
>> Anything? >> No, nothing other than uh than what's on the agenda. >> Okay. Then go moving on. We're going to go on to public hearings and this will start with the first ordinance we have in front of us. And is this something that we need to combine like we've done with some previous >> Yes. Yes, I was going to ask if you want to do that cuz they're there's
>> I already asked in one card. >> Oh, okay. >> There's two separate items, but they they're companion items. Um so I can read them both if uh just in terms of ease uh um so we don't don't have to duplicate the uh presentations if you'd like to hear them both together. Um I >> I would personally love that. Yes.
>> All right. Let me read both titles. >> Thank you. Uh the first is an ordinance of Alamada Village of Islands, Florida, considering the request of Tai Harris, PA, agent for Horse Pens LLC to amend the villages future land use map from conservation to mixed use for the subject property on overseas highway located on Upper Madakumbi Ki with real
estate number 009-6850-00002000 and to establish a new sub area policy under objective 1-2.11 as legally described herein. uh providing for the transmitt of this ordinance to the state department of commerce and providing for an effective date upon the approval of this ordinance by the state department of commerce. The
second title is an ordinance by Alamaro Village of Islands, Florida, considering the request of Ty Harris, PA, agent for Horse Pens LLC to amend the official zoning map from conservation to neighborhood commercial for the subject property on overseas highway located on Upper Madakumbi Ki with real estate
number 009-6850-00002000 as legally described herein providing for the transmitt of this ordinance to the state department of commerce and providing for an effective date upon the approval of this ordinance by the state department of commerce. All right, moving on. Let's I'm assuming we should deal with part one first and
dealing with the amending the flum from conservation to mixed use is do we have anything here from Mr. Harris is our presenter? >> I'll I'll do my presentation first. Jennifer, my apologies. >> No worries. Um so uh here tonight with the ordinance for the future land use
map from conservation to mixed use and the zoning map amendment from conservation to neighborhood commercial for the subject property on overseas highway with the real estate number 0000968-50-00002000. Um, Ty Harris on behalf of the property owner Horpens LLC submitted the
application uh requesting the approval for again the future land use map amendment from conservation to mixed use and the zoning map amendment from conservation to neighborhood commercial. The subject property comp comprised of approximately 6.4 acres 3.16 of which is
mangroves and wetlands. The current use of the property is considered is riding stables and horse pens. The proposed they're also proposing a sub area which would limit the uses to the existing riding stables and the potential development of workforce affordable housing. The flum amendment. Oh no,
sorry I said that. Um the applicant has agent has submitted a needs analysis detailing the map amendment request. The subject property has a current existing conservation future land use designation. The property to the north is designation designated residential high. The properties to the south are
designated conservation and the properties to the east across overseas highway are designated mixed use. The character of the surrounding area is mixed use with residential uses and tourist uses. The property contains a mix of habitats including mangroves and high quality hammock. The applicant
provided a vegetation survey and I have included that in your packet. The property is recognized as habitat to several protected animal species as well. And pursuant to the vill's GIS data and records, the parcel is defined as hammock, disturbed with hammock and mangroves.
Um, in your packet, there's a full analysis of staff's review of the comprehensive plan policies and the data for approving flum and zoning amendments. Um, after reviewing all that, at this time, staff does not have a recommendation regarding the uh review
the passage of this of either one of these articles, I'm here to answer any questions that you might have. >> Any questions for Mr. Berbasard before we start with the presentation from Mr. Harris? Hearing none. Mr. Harris, would you like
to come up and present? >> Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the LPA. My name is Ty Harris. I'm the attorney for the Limbbeck family who owns the horse pins. Um, and my address is on Plantation Key.
So, up until this morning about 11:00, I didn't think anybody had a problem with this application. And then I started receiving phone calls. Um, and it became kind of an interesting conversation as the day went along. um somewhat about conservation
property and some and some about affordable housing in general. And um I'll share kind of the gist of what I heard, but I want to start with the beginnings of the property. The Limbbecks bought this in um 1976.
So when they bought the property, we were still in the county, Monroe County, and this was zoned agg and this was an appropriate use. And the story, as it was told to me, is a bunch of the kids got horses. They needed a place to keep
them. And it was not just one family, it was three or four families. And and that's how the horse pins came about. And it's been like that ever since. So, fast forward into what I've always termed the original sin of the village, which was the downzoning of all those
properties on um on US1. And this is one of the properties that was impacted. Um the village got rid of the a zoning. Um whether you think that was a good thing or not, we do not have an a zoning classification in the village of Alam Marada. Um and the property
unsurprisingly was zoned uh conservation. So now we have a situation that you have seen many a time over the last few years where we have a legal non-conforming use of the property, the horse pins, but a
zoning and flume that if the use was to go away for 360 days or more would disappear. So rinse and repeat, right? what do we do? Um Brian Limbbeck approached me about um
opportunities for affordable housing and his original plan was is there any area on the property on top of the horse pins that could actually be used for affordable housing. So Jennifer and I discussed it and Jennifer's advice um was hire a biologist and let's go ground
truth the property and see what's actually out there beyond the disturbed area for the horse pins. So we did that and unfortunately really the area that could be appropriately redeveloped is the area where we have the horse pins
right now. So that plan kind of went by the wayside. So what you're looking at now is the the eitheror. There are no plans to get rid of the horse pins, but if the horse pins go away, what can go there? And right now under conservation,
nothing could go there. So, as we all know, affordable housing has been um an issue for us since the inception of the village. High land cost, high construction cost equals not a lot of affordable housing. Uh in fact, the the
last comprehensive study we did in 2007, which would have been the second or third study that the village did on affordable housing. At that point, that flash in time, we were about 1,200 units below what we needed. And in a community
of 75 thou 7,500 people, that's a that's a big chunk. Um, and that if you've looked and Jennifer, I've talked about it. I've talked with folks that have been on the affordable housing committee trying to get a handle on actually what's the number now the
number may be less than 100 um apartments type of of uses um in the village. So we get kind of down to this central question which came up a few times in my conversations this afternoon.
Do we really want affordable housing? I it if we don't let's be intellectually honest and remove it from the comp plan and devise strategies where we're going to rely on a workforce that comes from um Homestead and Florida City
because there are very very few opportunities to put affordable housing into the already built environment that we have in Isa Marada because if you try to put it somewhere where we have hammock then we have a clear clash
between comprehensive plan policies. You know, policies that say we need affordable housing and policies that say that we need to preserve our hammock and and there's no there's no winner in that argument other than usually the status quo, which would be to retain the the
hammock and not put the affordable in. So the next strategy is to find opportunities for redevelopment where somebody is actually willing um to to make the investment into affordable housing versus some other type of use of
the property. And for the Lindbacks, they have businesses here. They have Laureli, they have island disposal. So for them, even a modest few affordable units helps them to keep and retain
qualified folks to work at Laurelai and to work at Island Disposal. So even though horse pins would remain if horse pins went away, there's a there's a game plan going forward into the future. And having plans that are multigenerational
is not such a bad idea. And for anybody to say, well, you know, you'll never have this problem. The horse pins will be fine. Alls I do is I point to the tennis center. And I said, that's what they said about the tennis center until CO happened and tennis center went belly
up. So we have that same issue. So at one level, this conversation is about affordable housing in general. Do we want it? and if we don't, let's come up with pivot to a different strategy and do something. It doesn't
resolve the second question is what are we going to do with these properties that had a zoning that allowed them to use the property and then we took that ability away and gave them nothing. Because what we did is we either turned things into conservation or residential
conservation which required a minimum of four acres and they put that on a bunch of three acre parcels. So in either case, you've made something by a regulation unusable. And when you deprive someone of all reasonable um
investmentbacked expectations or all economic um ability to use their property, you you expose the village to some interesting lawsuits under either Burch Harris or just a straight up um inverse condemnation. And then our good friends at Weiss Serota get paid more
money to defend the village and fight these these cases. and we spend more of our treasure fighting rather than solving problems. So, I ask that we have this conversation. LPA is the place to have this
conversation. And if we're going to be serious about having affordable housing, even if it's in modest amounts, then we should move this application forward um with the understanding that what we have is a sub area policy. So
the only two things you can do on this property are horse pins or affordable housing and uh with a recommendation that a conservation easement go over the part of the property that is not developed and after we have the biological survey back should not be
developed. Um and that's what I'm asking for you to have that have both those conversations. Um but if the if the choice is that we still want to have affordable housing even if it's in small amounts that we move this this forward with that condition on it that we put
the conservation easement and we and we recommend the sub area policy. And with that I'm here to answer any questions that I can answer. I have um Jonathan Lind back here as well who can um who's signed up for public comment, but if we
need to put him on the hot seat to ask him any questions, um he's he's willing to do it. >> He's not smiling. >> Darn it. He ran. There he is. So, um well, he is the president-elect for the chamber, so you might as well get used to public speaking and
answering questions. So, this is a good place to start. But I thank you for your time and for your consideration of this application. >> Thank you. >> How about if we start on your end, Roger? Do you have any comments? >> Yeah. Um, so on the affordable side, I I've kind
of agreeing with them. This this affordable as it is is no good. We're not we're not getting anywhere. Nobody wants to build it. I've built some myself and it wasn't worth the effort. And I believe Habitat and a few have a bunch of open right now, do they not?
>> They're having a hard time. Yeah. >> So, I mean, I don't want the horse tank go away. It's been there as long as I can remember, too. >> But I understand both sides of that. And whatever's legal and lawful for the property owner, >> but my question, Ty had mentioned a
modest amount. Well, how many could you put on there? >> 12. >> It was he had in there. It was like >> Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't three acres. They could do 18. >> I'm sorry. I didn't realize it was three. I thought it was two. >> Oh, that was Yeah, but if they But if they did,
>> let's see what T says more, right? >> That was in the packet. >> That That's based on the density. That's not a real number. Yeah, we all we all we all >> What's the real number? >> I I think the real number is more like six, honestly. Yeah, because once you
put in the the buffers and you've got to put in parking, you're really I've been on the site and I've walked enough sites to know that you're you're looking at a very few amount. And the thing that gives them the opportunity to do it is because they already own the land. Now,
you're just dealing with construction costs because you've you've overcome one of the two obstacles. High land cost, high construction cost. So, you you've taken care of one. >> Their family does anyway. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Any any other comments, Roger?
>> I got to think about for >> All right. >> I just wanted to clarify. So, what they're talking about is the only area that would be developable developable would be where the horse pins are now. >> Scar already scarified. Right. The rest of it would be under a conservation easement.
>> Continue because you have to add in, as he just said, you have to add in the buffers, the driveways, the parking spaces, and everything else. And that limit should land very quickly. So we don't have to worry about all the high the really nice hammock being torn down and and a market rates being built there later. >> I thought that they looked cute on top of the barn myself.
>> Right. Right. >> But okay. >> So Ty, I have a question for you. So why was the why was the the recommendation or the request to go from to highway commercial versus
multifamily? when you really that's what because because when you when you get right down to it, that's what you're talking about right now is when you're talking affordable housing units, you're talking multif family. So with highway commercial, it offers, you know, a a broader range, but you're talking about
housing. So why did you choose highway commercial versus multifamily? >> To me, it it doesn't matter once you do the sub area policy, whether we do highway commercial or multif family. I don't see a difference. And if you want
us to amend the application to >> But there really is a difference, isn't there? Because there's a there's a different amount of type of of >> not if we put the restriction in. They're talking about >> But we got to get away from doing all these restrictions and let's just simply place them in the categories, you know.
>> Yeah. I mean, Ty, my understanding is it's just a scarified area, right, >> that they're currently using now. And um everything else would be conservation and it would only be limited to either continuing to be a a horse stable or or affordable housing, workforce housing.
>> Right. And I I guess it's maybe me being gunshy about putting anything where I ask for for any type of housing classification because we're out of units. And then so that's the first thing I hear is well why are you asking for this dummy? We're
out of units. And I'm like, and then they then it gets into the well, how do we know you don't want to be a condo? How do you want to I mean, pick your poison, right? That's kind of why we've started to go with the sub area policies where you literally you're putting your money where your mouth is because if you have the sub area policy, you don't have
a deed restriction that could fall off in 30 years where then you do something else. And so if the sub area policy is kind of controlling the the application, then it's saying one, it's either affordable housing or um or horse pins.
>> Can I ask Jonathan to clarify a point? >> Sure. >> Were you planning on the I'm assuming you were planning on these being rental units. >> Sorry, what's that? >> Are you planning on I assume you were planning on these being rental units, not individual ownership. >> Um from my understanding, correct. So
I'm here to represent as uh my dad, Brian Lindbeck. He's up in Georgia with my grandma, or else he would be here right now. Um, but yeah, this is something that their their rental units. It's for our um, you know, really our
workforce housing that we're having a major issue with. Um, and it's going to help the village out as well, just through our property taxes. Obviously, right now being what it is, aren't much. um those themselves are going to go up a lot helping the village out um on top of helping the village with the workforce
housing. Um I mean past that, I know I've heard a few different things. Um my dad said that, you know, people were thinking that we just bought this property and we're trying to develop it and resell it. This has been in the family for 50 years now. Um it is in my
grandma's trust to go to the grandkids. So this property goes to all 10 grandkids. Um, if it's just raw property that costs money, it's going to turn into nothing. Nobody wants to hold on to that. If it can be something that can help the community and, you know, help
essentially our family keep it in the family. Uh, obviously, as Tai said, we live down here. We have many businesses down here. I pick up your garbage. Um, so we aren't, you know, just trying to make a profit on this. It's it's a
property that I think anybody who grew up down here, if you grew up down here and you got to learn how to ride horses, that's where it was at. Um, and it's, you know, there's a lot of history there, so it'd be great to >> keep it in the family if at all possible. >> Okay. Thank you. That's a good plan. I'd
like to hear that. I know the Limbex. >> I just want to clarify a couple things to for Lori. Um, so they're requesting neighborhood commercial, not highway commercial, first of all, but also multif family zoning doesn't allow for affordable housing and it doesn't allow for riding stables. So I that's probably why Tai didn't go that route.
>> Okay, thank you for clarifying that. >> Okay, anything else that we need to clarify on? Okay, there's all kinds of subjects floating around. I'm trying to diagram everything into my head. Cory, anything else, >> Mr. Ryan? sir.
>> Um I'm just I read through obviously our communication and um there was a couple uh items that I guess it's not um it's not consistent with our our comp plan for um I'm not trying to put Jennifer not trying to put you on the spot but
can you elaborate that on those a little bit for us? >> I'm sorry I was being asked another question. >> No worries. some of the items on our comp plan that's kind of like a ABCD portion of our report I guess we're not consistent with. >> Um can we elaborate on some of those or
at least this I would like to discuss some of those and see how we came to those because there is no recommendation for us either. >> Do you have one in particular you want me to elaborate? >> Um I guess well I think the environmental impact one is big. Um but I think with the conservation easement
maybe that addresses those two. I think it's B and C or maybe it's C and D. >> Oh, are you are you talking about the compatibility for principles for guiding development in the area of social state concern? >> Yeah. So when I read through those I see like okay we're consistent we're consistent. Oh, we're not consistent now. So those are things that kind of
throw up I guess where like talking points for us as the LPA to look at. >> Sure. Uh we can you want to go through them all? Is that what you want to do or how? >> I just want to go through the ones we're not consistent. >> Not consistent with Okay. So I identified um B as protecting shoreline
and re resources including mangroves, coral ree formation, sea seaggrass beds, wetlands, fish, wildlife and their habitat as not being consistent as there could be a negative impact on shoreline marine resources including um because it referenced wetlands, mangroves and
habitats because the property does include a significant amount of mangroves and that it is a habitat for many species um significant to the Florida Keys. So that's why I identified that as not being consistent. Um then uh letter C protecting upland
resources, tropical biological communities, freshwater wetlands, native tropical vegetation, for example, hard water hammocks and pinelands, dune ridges, beaches, wildlife and their habitat. Identified that as being not consistent for the same reasons that um not only the wet the wetland and
mangrove impacts, but also there are upland resources that could also be impacted. Um then >> I think there's one >> let's see is that I think that were the only the
uh no K limiting the adverse impacts of public investments on the environmental resources of the Florida Keys. Um obviously for those same reasons it could have impacts on the environmental resources of the Florida Keys. Um, and then I think that's it.
>> So, so I guess then I go to Ty and Jonathan. Is there a way we could revise or you could we could adjust the application so we are consistent with these items that that are concern >> either either or. >> I was just looking up something kind of interesting when you were making those
comments. So, I I would I would say that by putting the conservation easement over um the unbuilt area that we've resolved both of those comp plan policy issues. And I also thought you might find this kind of interesting. Um I don't know how many horses are out
there, but this isn't my first rodeo and I know that a cow generates five times the waste of a human. So right now there are no regulations on a out there as to how waste is disposed. And when you talk about impacts on your on your nearshore
and on on your non-source pollution, which means runoff into the wetland area, you're going to get more I can tell you this cuz I represent farms. You're going to get more from the farms than anything that requires a controlled
um storm water um mitigation plan. that there's not even an argument about that. So, I think I think we've addressed both those policy issues with the with the conservation easement. >> Thank you. Um, I'm going to yield for a little bit,
>> Ron. Sorry, Mand. >> Okay, >> Mr. Hammond, sir. >> Yeah, it is. You're right. It's a dilemma and Tai is absolutely right. We either need to address the affordable
housing, workforce housing issue honestly and head on or we need to take it off the agenda and just say we're happy to let people come down for Florida City and fight the traffic all the way. And that's a I I tongue and cheek uh have mentioned to a couple couple of people that I'm going to type
up a letter that I'm going to send to the council that basically says uh let's see a couple of things. Uh it'll increase traffic flow. It will devalue the property uh the value of our properties nearby. It will and a whole
list that goes on and on and on because we hear that argument about every single issue. Um which wastes a whole lot of time because it's not germanine to the to the real issue that we're dealing with. Um if we're protecting the mangroves, we're
protecting the hammocks. Um I'm not opposed to this. I'm vehemently opposed to anything that's going to allow us to remove hammock area or mangrove community. Um, you know, I mean, that's just goes against everything that we are hearing and that
we represent. And so, there's got to be a compromise in this. I'm for the affordable housing. I also don't want affordable housing to become the the standard. Uh, and we've seen it several times in LPA over the years. Let's throw
the magic word affordable housing >> and that'll give us a ticket to do anything. >> I want I want some kind of guarantee that this is actually going to be affordable housing, not to become, you know, a condo or a
commercial business after we've made the allowance for that. >> We have the ability to do that, but we have to have it added in. And Mr. Debbasard is quite familiar with it. I found the language. There's language all over the state. It should be in the new comp plan on what has to happen
>> and we have the ability to do it. I have to find somebody with the will. But there's very easy way to do it. >> But Julie, sir, I'm sorry. >> I'm sorry, Mr. Were you finished? >> I'm done. I'm all through. >> Uh I agree with Tony. Um so I serve if
you don't know on the affordable housing and workforce housing committee. Uh we are in desperate need of affordable housing. I mean, we're thousand plus units behind what we should be. >> Um, I'm also a big proponent of our conservation. I also am chairman of the land acquisition committee. So, you know, we typically look for parcels that
we can we can do conservation. Um, they're not asking to impose anything that's already been scarified and been used. Um, I'm also very against taking people's property rights away. So, they've been using this since 1976 and I think they have the right to do
something with it. Um, and the fact that it's already scarified. I'm not a biologist. >> Sorry about that. >> Are you okay? >> I'm not a biologist. >> Whatever you said, don't say it again. >> Yeah.
>> Don't say that again. >> Wow. I'm not a biologist or uh or have any experience in in in farms, but I would think that the uh Tai is probably right that there's going to have less of an
environmental impact by putting a planned affordable housing on there as opposed to just farm animals that can >> It's not a great place for a pig farm. >> No, I got the I I got the numbers. >> Dairy farm. >> I got the numbers. So the average for 15
horses, which is what's out there, is 525 pounds of feces a day. >> The same number of humans generate 22.5 if I take the average. I I know it's going into the into the sewer system, but I know that 525 isn't.
>> I don't even want to know how you get the horse to poop in the sewer system. >> Oh, no. >> Can't ride the humorous either. >> Mr. Douly, anything else? No, that's it. >> Okay. >> I I think I'm pretty much in agreement with everything that has been said
before um by my fellow chairpeople here. Uh you know, our problem with workforce housing is that yes, there is a need. The problem is is that people who own the workforce housing are charging
rental rates that are higher than what these people can afford. So that's why I think we see some that are not being rented because they're they're being rented at the highest uh price point that is allowed under their category and yet we still have people who just can't
afford that as a monthly um rental rate. So I think we could need to figure out a way how to put some lower caps on it or figure how we can can >> that's determined by the state and the feds, >> right? But maybe the with workforce housing can come up with a subsidy
aspect, right, where they're subsidizing some of these people's monthly rents. >> We've been talking about presenting to council um something regards to maybe some tax incentives and things like that because unfortunately the way it is today, by the time you acquire land, of course, this is a different situation. They purchased a long time ago. You
acquire land and then you pay for the cost of building there's no it doesn't make it doesn't pencil at all. I mean even if we said listen um you know we I think uh Mr. Horton had suggested that we um you know give them a portion of a
grant based on loss income for 20 years. I mean it would literally even in 20 years they won't recoup the loss of the construction and the land costs. Um so we're we're going to present to council at some point uh in the near future, forget the date, asking them if maybe we
could do some type of tax subsidies and things like that. So, I agree with you. Um, and unfortunately, we don't set the the amounts for what they rented for, >> right? We don't we don't. But we we're seeing onebedroom, oneb units renting
for for, you know, $2,400. That's >> it's insane. I know. >> It's insane. >> Well, you can thank the state for that because of the windstorm insurance. >> Yeah. So, >> any of that. >> Any further unsolvable problems?
Yes, since we have a member of the the workforce, I mean the affordable housing. The one I had I had one one on a neighborhood commercial building. There was I was given a sheet of paper when I seeded that said maximum amount for it
was a 21. And I can tell you I had that building for 10 years and absolutely no one ever checked on it. Well, wait. So >> my thinking would be if you have affordable, you have affordable. If
you're going to call it workforce housing, I don't think tax breaks or any of that's going to work. If you have true workforce housing, like they have Limbbecks have a lot of employees. Then you you and you make it for everybody else that wants to build too. The caveat
is if it's workforce, even if the property sells, someone has to be responsible for the lower rents. So if it's workforce, I pay for my guys some months to live in apartments. I pay for part of their rent. I pay for gas. I pay maybe you put
that on to get true workforce housing and it has to stay in perpetuity. Like >> it's in perpetuity. >> But workforce is workforce affordable is affordable. >> They're still part of the same part of the law. >> I understand that. maybe need to change that where you can put affordable could
have a certain number on it. So maybe it makes a little more palatable for a builder >> workforce is hey >> these are your employees you're going to kick the difference in so they can live there and work there if that's where we're really going. Does that make any sense? >> I chair the original work affordable
housing committee here. I currently chair the Middle Keys Community Land Trust for which Woods Corner, which is ownership, is built, but we have four rental units in Marathon. I also help make sure that the wet neck got built, which is rental. Thank you, God. We had
to bring in somebody from out of town, but they do a good job because they have that and they have blue whatever it is up here at in Tavanir that >> the blue water not blue water whatever the thing is at the corner on Burton Drive before
>> the adobe looking buildings. >> No, it's Dutch colonial. >> Did you if you've been to Aruba that's Dutch colonial buildings my whole life >> doesn't look thing like Taco Bell. It is like blue. It is blue waters or blue >> blue something. Yeah. Okay. Anyway, part
of the part of the issue we found when we started doing the research on it was most counties have a dedicated person who they either bring it in from Southside or they have somebody in the community that does this every year on
each in January for our units, the land trust. We have to send a letter back to Tallahassee letting them know who the people are that are in there, what we have on incomes. There's an income sheet that we got and they have each tenant has to fill that out. I can't. Now, let me tell you, rentals are totally
different than affordable. But I have to have each person sign it has to go back to Tallahassee. We tell them what their income is. They meet that. And if they don't meet that, we evict them. It's that simple. Rarely do I have anybody that's living
there high on the hog. It just doesn't happen. I can tell you in affordable once somebody owns something, if they win the lottery, you're not kicking them out. But they can't sell it to anybody above the rate either. That's the hardest part we found is there was nobody in the village for a long time to check on it.
>> We did. No. Well, it could be that way. Now, Jennifer, as I understand, we finally are using um uh the outside committee from Okay. than we're supposed to be. >> We, if I can interject, we were um we fired them because they weren't really doing a good job.
>> Um and what we've come to learn is so we send out letters. The cities, the village sends out letters. Um there's that the affordable people are supposed to comply. >> Um if they don't, we send them a nasty letter. Um but that's about all we can do. >> Actually, there's this thing called
eviction. >> There's no Well, I don't think we have the legal It's something you might want to talk to John. I don't think my understanding is we don't have the legal authority. We tried getting uh maybe making a code violation out of it that but so essentially we have no teeth to enforce it on the >> what happens is you have to put it and
this is where the problems come in because we as a community in Coral Gables in all the communities across Dade County you're required if this is built on the affordable permit you cannot get the deed out until this clause goes in the deed that such time
that you're compliant and that if you do not comply with this they will remove you from the property. This the county is going this is it's very simple just like they do with any other county owned property. If you are not compliant they come in and they have three days to evict you.
>> Um is that for people newly deeded though once they're in I guess >> once they're in there's nothing you can do but they can't sell it. >> That's what I was saying. >> I'm just saying affordable ownership is totally different. >> Can I just redirect a little bit? So we do do income verification on rentals. We
it is in the deeds for all the rental properties. The village is limited in quote the teeth that we have. So we do send multiple letters since we've took taken it over from Cordino Group who was doing it and when they were doing it we
had about a 10% return of uh responses which was not good. We've gotten back about 40%. So since we've been doing it we've we've had an increase in responses which I feel is is pretty decent. It's not the best, but it's better than 10%. Um, but we are looking at ways that we
can um make it more um something that we can require more legal have more legal teeth to. I've been working with Serotaa and right now the only thing we can do is bring them to court and spend village money to take them to court and I don't know that that's a wise uh use of
village. >> You only have to do it once. >> Well, I mean, it's not my decision to make. It would be council's decision to make. So we we would have to have that conversation, but we are working on that. I I feel like this conversation has taken a a turn away from what we're supposed to be talking. So I don't know if we want to get back to that. We still
have some public comment and some things to to work on. >> We can move on, but I'm just telling you what we did in 2008, we presented it to the council at the time on what the deed restriction was. It goes with if you get the affordable permit, this deed restriction goes with it and it allows
the community requires verification. If you fail to verify, they will move to evict if it's a rental. >> I mean, I don't know that we can evict on private property, but that's >> I will find the three deeds restrictions that I was using at that time. I still
have that on a hard drive somewhere. Okay. Anyway, we're dabbling in things that aren't gerine to the subject at hand. Um, I for one would be perfectly happy to have with lead the horse farms forever, but I know good and well that that's probably not possible. It's not grand for the horses hooves to be moving
around on the coral here, but I've I used to ride down there, too, so I know how wonderful it is, but the traffic's too bad for riding now. But we need to let people be able to utilize their property. I think the consistency of having scarified land, use six units
that will be rental rental restricted um makes more sense. It's already scarified. Something needs to sit there. And one thing I will make very clear right now that I don't want to hear about any nimiism. For those that don't know what nimiism is, it means not in my
backyard. That's utter nonsense. We lost seven units we could have put at the wet net because people across the street went, "Oh my god, somebody that makes less money than I will ride down the highway." That's a public road, people. So yes, I'm I'm in favor of this with
the restrictions that are going on it, but I will is there any public comment that'd like to come forward now? >> First public comment, we have Bill Deweiler. >> Hello, my name is Bill Deweiler. I live at 80450
Overseas Highway, right next to the Pens, and Jonathan and I are neighbors. Um, when I read the the ordinance uh today, it to to me it appeared uh a little broad a little more broad
than what I think we would all want to see. And and listening to Tai earlier today, he he explained uh the the um changes that occurred from the original zoning to what what it was changed to and eliminated the A and now we're at
the point where we're at. Um and I believe I don't remember the exact number. What was the total number in the um ordinance or the description was it 41 or higher units? >> That's based on the density, >> right? >> 49.
>> 49. Okay. 49 is not ever been >> well and and see when you when you read it and you see 49 that seems like a high number to put on the the the scarified area of that that property. So coming back with a
different number of six, I think that's a reasonable number to to to develop in that spot. So I'm a civil engineer. I'm licensed in Florida in various other states. So I understand these issues. I've been on this type of board in other areas. Um and I I again when I came in,
I was not in favor of this, but I think if we if we tweak it, I would be in favor of it. >> You would be comfortable with the six? >> Well, I I don't know. I don't want to call a number. >> Okay. But I'm just saying that's a comfortable level for you if we reduce it to those numbers. That type of number.
>> I don't want to commit to a number. >> Okay. >> I I I think it needs to be engineered. >> Okay. >> Based on what the code allows and how much area has been disturbed. If you're going to keep it within that area, >> that's fair. >> Okay. >> Because they deserve the ability to
devel develop that property to them. >> You have the same concerns that I think you're hearing up here. Thanks, Bill. >> Yeah. >> Next, we have Jonathan Lindbeck. >> Hello again, Jonathan Lindach. Alamrada,
Bill's neighbor. Um, a lot of what I was going to say was said earlier, but I think I can also answer a few questions, um, or concerns that have been brought up. To start with, workforce housing or affordable housing, whatever you want to call it. Uh outside of the fact that we all know it's a major problem, it hits
me personally as well. Um and my fiance, we both work 40hour jobs. We also have a side business doing microgreens. We do have a little farm down here. Um and we're still talking about like trying to pick up some serving shifts at the lower lie or whatever we can do cuz we're
we're still renting one of grandma's condos because it's all we can afford down here. Um, are we going to have it affordable housing and jack the rates up? Ridiculous. Like that's not the intention at all. It's uh that would go against me and what I'm trying to do
just living down here trying to make a living. Um, and Jimmy, you know, a lot of people that we grew up with are having this issue across the board. So, no, we're here for the community. Um, I think we've proven that across the board in the many different businesses we do, but we are here for the community and
we're not looking to just make a profit off of this. That's not at all the intent. Um, secondly, if you haven't been to the property or seen the property, I know one of the violations uh you mentioned was it being mangroves, wetlands. Ideally, when you look at the property
itself, there's US1, there's some woods, and then obviously the horse pins, and then it slopes down from there that goes pretty far back before you get to any mangroves, uh, wetlands. Of course, the very front between the horse pins and the road,
there's undisturbed um, hammock there. Uh, well, I guess it'd be disturbed hammock. Um, but that is essentially the best place if we're talking about, you know, runoff or I know there's a lot of people concerned about the horse pins and where they're going to go. I know
you said you rode there, too. It is an iconic spot and in the Keys and when people hear that there's horse pins there or the kids that are learning how to ride horses there. I mean, that it it does mean a lot and it's tough. I mean, I learned how to ride there. Everybody in the Keys did. So, it would be great
to be able to put these units closer to the road and still have some sort of um I guess it's not agriculture zoning because that was thrown out. But, uh obviously like personally looking at it as a a legacy in the Keys, but also it's
been in the family. it's a part of the community to have some for the horse owners that there are 15 20 horses there um and families who rely on that you know to go show a lot of the families too or the people that ride there they
show professionally or competitively um you know I think if you really look at the property and you see that the front is not something that's going to be disturbing uh the environment in the sense of messing up our mangroves or wetlands and I would not be up here making this as a public comment when my
fiance is the chair for Surf Rider. If you haven't heard of them, they're they advocate they're a nonprofit that advocates for environmental um you can say it much better than I can. Protects our waves, waters, and beaches. We protect public access to water um and
just environmental uh policies in general. Uh we wouldn't be a garbage company if we didn't care about what was going on and trying to do things better than it was being done before when Waste had the contract. Um heard it across the board. We love this environment. We love
this community. We aren't looking to turn some major profit or destroy a whole bunch of land for our own benefit. Um but again, if nothing's done with this, like Tai said, it just then we just lose any chance of housing. Now, I know this goes like way backwards. It's it's a lot more than what we're talking
about when I'm saying it would be great to somehow allow for some horses back there too so that we're not putting people out completely. Um especially like if you guys know Lynn and Ashley who their their whole family their whole lives they've helped run the horse pins
and train kids how to ride there and um yeah it'd be a pretty pretty disturbing effect uh depending on which way this goes. And again, when grandma when uh my grandmother passes, um it's going to go
to the grandkids and uh if there's nothing there, it's going to be nothing. Um so I just wanted on a personal level let you know everything affects me here majorly and I do appreciate you guys taking the time to look at this >> and thank you for your comments.
>> Thank you. Okay, >> any other public comment? No. >> All right. Any further discussion among the members? >> Anybody got anything else they want to add?
>> Do I hear a motion? >> Well, um just remember we just a reminder we have two ordinances. So motion um it would just specify which one. I'd recommend doing it on the one on the uh the flume um doing that one first, but you you guys can go in whichever order you want.
>> Okay. So, ordinance number one would be the uh Flume future land use map. Okay. Do I hear a motion to approve or disapprove of ordinance number one? >> Can we can we specify something because
there's there's a couple things that were brought up before we have the motion. I mean, you can make the motion and then we can discuss. I don't care. go ahead and discuss it and we'll >> what the what they said a couple things about not disturbing the hammock and then potentially disturbing I just I'm >> no one else heard that
>> I did >> um so I think I mean is there an opportunity for both these things to exist I think then we can't do the conservation easement right >> well I think he's only discussing from the highway to the um to the horse pens >> but that would be part of the
conservation easement wouldn't it >> I was thinking the conservation ement wouldn't start until After the horse, >> there would just be the wetlands, >> just be the wetlands behind. So, everything from the horse pens. >> I can tell you that in 1981 when I got here, there was nothing planted along the highway except a couple of scrub pieces and most of it was Florida holly.
Now, it's gone to more like Buttonwood and other natives. Most of the Florida holly had disappeared. >> So, the whole hammock area from the road to the to the mangroves could be ripped. >> It's just it's just Google. >> It's disturbed hammock at at best, but
excuse me, Mr. Harris, sir. I just I just also want to note that um because this property was developed prior to 1986, they are not allowed to clear any additional land under our code. So what is clear now is the maximum clearing that is allowed. >> Okay. All right.
>> That's the way I just want to be clear. >> Sorry, Jonathan. >> So we're not adding or subtracting. We are >> taking it stat if it status quo. >> And you're not considering cohabitating with the with the horses either. You're you're thinking that like if the horse pins go away then you're going to build
or are you thinking about building before the horse pins go away? Thanks >> cuz that's kind of like if you know I'm sorry to bring it up. I just >> No, no, it's okay. It's a it's a good question because we've been talking about that internally. Is there a way to keep the horse pins some level of the
horse pins and provide a modest amount of of affordable housing? And the pins are spread out. So you've got the area that you have to work with. Can you make it work? That's what you got to figure out. But if you don't get past this
stage, there is no sight plan stage where you go, okay, we can do horse pins here and we can be more efficient with the use of the property and there's an opportunity for four to six affordable units up at the front. That that's kind of what they have to figure out or do one or the other.
>> Can they coex? So the question is, can they coexist within the code? >> Can they with a sub area policy? Yes, >> they'd have to do the change. We They'd have to have this though. But I've seen I've seen I've seen site plans with on a conservation land before. I mean
>> where the easement just is around. >> No, I mean I' I mean there's properties I deal with all the time that are zoned, you know, conservation and then they come in and they say, "Hey, I want to put 24 units." And then that's proposed as the change. But I don't think they're there yet. >> Right. >> But this would be I guess this could be
the first step or step a one. Well, we have to get to this step before they can to create a sight plan at which point >> you don't plan on messing up the hammock close to the road. I guess you called it disturbed. I would say high density or >> No, I apologize. >> 10 different words for it. >> Yeah, I was saying if you drive in, >> you're talking about where we used to
dump the horse manure right there to the right. >> Well, I mean to the right. Yeah, there's there's the parking and then there's just a whole bunch of empty space and even right before that there's even the road that goes through the property. >> So, I apologize not talking about like the entire hammock going up to it. I'm just saying in front of where the horse
pins are when you get back to the horses, there's so much already cleared land um that you know I and again I apologize maybe I was speaking out of turn saying that I would love to be able to keep the horses as well because I know how it's going to affect not only another local family but well a lot of
local families. Um but no, I'm talking specifically about the already cleared area that is like you said where they used to put all the horse manure and where the parking is. Um, everything can be compacted. If you've been there, it's very spread out right now. Uh, there's places that used to be horse stalls.
There's not horse stalls anymore. It it could be moved around. Um, again, I'm working with limited knowledge. I was is a very last minute thing. Me being here, my dad being out of town, he would be able to be giving you much better information. Um, but again, this is uh coming from me personally and also
from what I've heard. So, so the conservation easement would be for that back three and a half wetlands or three point whatever wetlands. Then the front half if it's already scarified, we can do what we can with it. >> Yeah. >> But Jennifer says we can't take out the highdensity hammock anyway. So, okay.
>> Even if it's in the front >> in the front. Jen just said that. >> Yeah. Yeah. Jenny, so it's already protected. >> And that was one of the things the we're at our clearing ratio now, right? Like so what you got is what you got >> and you can't take out any more. I I had
that conversation with Daniel a few months ago to see even if the even if the environmental study came back favorable to some of the stuff up front, where were we? And he's like, you're at your max now anyway. So now you're just reconfiguring things in a way that that
worked the best. And you're if you're trying to still get both uses on there, then that's a site plan issue. Um, can you can you put four or six affordables and and increase your efficiencies with a horse pen? I don't I think that's kind of the conversation that's happening
internally, but nobody knows cuz until we change colors on a map, what's the point of having the conversation >> and Jennifer, we allow like mitigation on things as well, like in that area, I guess. I don't know if we want to call it disturbed or undisturbed, but that high density hammock is there. We allow
I guess removal of things but then we'd have to do mitigation. There's efforts there. >> We would normally but again they've reached their clearing limit so they would they reach their clearing limit. >> They can't clear anything. >> How how how do we determine they reach their clearing limit? >> So under our code um I can pull up the
section. There's a section that um give me one second. >> I'm sorry. You don't need to quote. >> No, it's okay. 30-16 uh14 F4 that um major development sites prior to September 15, 1986 shall not be permitted to clear additional habitat
along the clearing originally approved. >> And we can follow aerial photos back through 1985 that this was previously cleared at 1985. >> Okay. >> Sorry, Jonathan. I'm just I'm I'm learning here too. So, >> yeah. No, I mean that's interesting
about the uh clearing of the property or reaching our clearing limit. So I don't know fully what is um involved or included in that, but I know in 2019 maybe 2020 uh you know the property after the horse pins then there's also a kind of open pasture that slopes down
and then another one that goes off to the right which was used for I believe training uh training sheep dogs uh back when Lynn said that there used to be someone that came seasonally. Um but yeah, so it it's cleared down and cleared off to the side. Uh there's even
>> Yeah. For like hurting. >> Yeah. I remember the lady. She had super curly hair. >> Yeah. And uh I mean there's even the stalls back there for the for the sheep and the other animals. Um >> you know, so that area now is completely overgrown. I mean, there's still fencing
that lines the whole area, but you probably couldn't even walk through it. So then you know what? since that has been now overgrown I guess open just leave that there because you know that was included in the clearing limit
uh I don't know when that was taken or when the survey was done but parts of the property haven't been used the way they used to kind of like you said it used to be up front was just shrubs there was nothing up front by the road um there's other parts of the property that have also gotten overgrown in
similar ways so Mr. Ryan, sir, question for you when you're looking at this. And did did that answer your question as to what could and could not be done? >> Yes. No, I just I wanted some clarity. Yeah. >> Okay. Well, I don't blame you. Um, it's there something that would make you more comfortable on a restriction on it?
>> No, I I'm I don't really like the the spot zoning as much, you know. I think that's a lot of work. I mean, my profession obviously is engineering as well >> as some people here, but uh the spot zone that having specific uh restrictions on specific properties is is is a lot of work. I think if we can
find a way to to make it work within our existing code, that's the best thing to do. >> I I what's being proposed? >> Well, I I this is a this is a this is a sub area policy. So, you know, is it spot zoning or is it I mean, I'm
>> sub area. You understand what I'm saying? I know exactly what it's a specific we're making a specific item for a specific parcel. >> But I take do we even want to do is that is that the best route forward? I mean, I think it protects the homeowners, but
it's a lot more work for our I think it'll help protect the environment or what we want to see there. If >> it takes an hour and a half for us to make sure they get what they want and we don't see it, I think it's worth >> You're the one who asked me the question. >> I know. I'm just answering the question you just posed. But um
>> I guess >> you know one of the unfortunate things about or fortunate depending on how you look at it being in an area critical state concern a bunch of the typical planning tools that would be available in the rest of Florida we do not have
access to what we have is a sub area policy which is our only ability to really tailor this like we don't have planned unit developments anywhere else in Florida you use a PUD to kind figuring all this out and you can actually create even a landscaping plan
that's tailored to just this area and you avoid the the the spot zoning issue. Um the only thing that the state left for us is a sub area policy and that's how we avoid legally the um either contract zoning or a or a spot zoning
issue um by offering voluntary conditions and doing it through a sub area policy. >> Okay. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you, Ty. I'm good now. >> Okay. Um, now that it looks like we're not going to jail for it. >> Hope not. I volunteer.
>> Okay, let's let's get You were going to make a motion, then you had a S question. Did you still wish to make a motion? >> Nope. >> Okay, Miss Ael. Motion. Oh, did I didn't mean to have my light on, but as long as it's on. Um, for the
we're working on the flum at this point and for the first one, as long as you know the conservation easement and all that, I'm willing to accept it as it's been described. Yes, I'll make a motion to accept it as it's been described. >> Do I hear a second? >> I'll second that. >> Thank you, Mr. Douly. Would you call the role, please, ma'am? Excuse me. Any
further discussion? Speak now forever. Hold your peace. >> Is there any tweaking to that for the density? But maybe as Tai was saying to me earlier that it's a matter of you got to get the the color change from the map before you can discuss >> and also the conservation easement
because you know takes care of a lot of that too. >> They're going to be limited based on the fact of they're only able to use what they've already cleared. >> Exactly. Yes. >> May I have a roll call please? >> Roger Young. >> Yes. >> James Ryan.
>> Yes. >> Tony Hammond. >> Yes. >> Cheryl Cersonson. >> Yes. Lori Lelon, >> yes. >> Gregory Daly, >> yes. >> And Corey Ael, >> yes. >> Motion pass 70.
>> Thank you. >> Having approved that on the flum, do I hear a motion to approve? Make sure I'm doing this correct, please, Greg. Um to amend the amendment to the zoning map from conservation to neighborhood commercial.
Is that correct? Okay. So, it's still neighborhood commercial, not affordable. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> So, that way they can see the affordable. >> I got you. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Do we have a motion >> to approve this? >> I motion. >> Yes.
>> To approve. I'm sorry. >> Whatever I said. >> To approve. >> Yes. I believe Roger has made a motion to approve the ordinance >> to amend the official zoning map from conservation to neighborhood commercial is presented in our paperwork.
>> Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. Do I hear a second? >> I'm still worried about the horse. >> Excuse me. >> Do we have any discussion further on this motion? Seeing none, please ma'am, would you call the role? >> Gregory Deli.
>> Yes. >> Cory Ael. Yes. >> Tony Hammond. >> Yes. >> Cheryl Culverson. >> Yes. >> Lori Leland. >> Yes. >> James Ryan. >> Yes. >> Roger Young. >> Yes. >> Motion pass 7 to zero.
>> Thank you. Um any comment u from any of the other members on any subject at hand, including future agenda items that anybody would like to see >> that pertains to us. damage. >> I know. That's why I'm looking over here
so I don't hit anybody. >> I can't remember that area. >> Hearing none. Um >> I have I have a >> madam miss Jennifer. >> Yeah. Uh so I just wanted to talk a little bit about upcoming scheduling. Um so November we have nothing scheduled so
that meeting will be cancelled. Um December 1st would be our next meeting. Um, right now we have nothing scheduled, but we'll keep that on the agenda um because there's still a little bit of time. So, we'll see what happens um between now and then. I'll be in touch.
Um I also wanted to talk a little bit about 2026. I'm putting together your um yearly um agenda or schedule for 2026. Um, so recently, prior to most of you joining this committee, we moved our
meetings to the first Monday of the month to avoid the same week as council meetings. >> Since then, um, Mr. Quick has, um, gotten a conflict with the first Monday of the month. So, um, is there another
is Monday still the best day for everybody? Is there a different day that works for anybody or a different week that we like the third the third Monday? I don't know if that works for people. We're just trying to avoid the second week of the month because that's council meeting week and for John and I that's
difficult to do three meetings in a in a week. So >> third Monday is fine with me. >> Yeah, me too. I'm looking through most of them and I don't see any major holidays or anything. Do you? >> I'm good. Third Monday. >> Third Monday.
>> All right. >> We can always vote to have a unique moment and go somewhere else. >> Does that work for >> But we still have that one for you. >> So December 1st is still we're good >> after football season. >> All right. I'll put I'll put that together. If there's holidays, I'll adjust accordingly. Um and make it work.
Um I'll probably skip next July because it tends to be a a vacation month. Um John and I take vacations in July. So I'll probably skip July alto together. So, >> did we set up July and August? >> Huh? >> So, I'll put that together and send it
out and you guys can provide me comments. So, where did he go? >> Okay. >> And that was all that I had. >> Okay. Mr. Quick, do you have anything for us, sir? >> John, do you have anything for us, sir? >> Sorry. No. >> Speak now for >> We were just talking about the calendar. Sorry. >> Okay. Do we have any other motions to be
brought before us from this group? Move >> to adjurnn. >> Everybody vote by leaving.