feel. Yeah. Yeah. Heat. Heat. N. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Baby, you baby. Heat. Heat. N.
Please take your seats. The meeting is about to begin. Remember to speak into the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record. >> Please stand by. We are going on air in 5 4 3 2 1.
>> Good morning everyone and welcome to the May 1st zoning and board of adjustments meeting. I hope everyone is doing well. I'd like to take a minute and welcome our newest member, Mandel Felic, a longtime Miami Beach resident. And I think I'll do a great job on the board.
And with that, let's get started with attendance. >> Good morning everybody. I'm going to do a roll call. Uh, Miss Mlly >> here. >> Miss Silverman >> here. >> Mr. Fellig >> here. >> Mr. Krennic >> present. >> Mr. Nagler
>> here. Uh, >> Mr. Silvers >> here. All right, we have six of seven members present. We do have a quorum. Uh for anybody in the audience, please note that you will need five affirmative votes in order for any variances to be approved. Um we do expect uh the city
commission to appoint a new member to fill the board completely at the next meeting uh later this uh later this month. >> Okay, great. Uh let's continue with any city updates. >> Thank you. Good morning. Today's meeting of the board of adjustment has been scheduled in a hybrid format with a
quorum of the board physically present in the commission chambers at Miami Beach City Hall and applicants, staff, and members of the public appearing either in person or virtually via Zoom. Those wishing to participate in today's meeting via Zoom may dial the toll-free
number which is 877-853-5257 and enter the webinar ID which is 828-6961-5309 pound or log into the Zoom app and enter the webinar ID which again is 828-6961-5309. Any individual wishing to speak on an
item must click the click the raise hand icon if they are using the Zoom app or dial star9 if participating by phone. Before I swear in those who are testifying, I'm going to read into the record the city's notice regarding lobbyist registration. If you are appearing on behalf of a business, corporation, or another person, uh you
need to register as a lobbyist with the city clerk's office. You do not have to register as a lobbyist if you are speaking only on behalf of yourself. If you are testifying as an expert witness providing only scientific, technical, or other specialized information or testimony in this public meeting, or you are appearing as a representative of a
neighborhood association without any compensation or reimbursement for your appearance to express support for or opposition to any item, expert witnesses and representatives of neighborhood associations shall, prior to appearing, disclose in writing to the city clerk their name, address, and the principle
on whose behalf they are communicating. Uh these rules apply whether you are appearing in favor of or against an item or encouraging or arguing against its passage, defeat, modification or continuence. Um I will now swear in those who are testifying uh and who are physically
present in the commission chambers uh those wishing to to participate via Zoom will have to be sworn in one by one uh before speaking to the board. So please raise your right hand if you will be speaking. Do you swear that the testimony you'll be giving is the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you. >> Back to you. >> I hope everyone had a chance to review the minutes from our April 10th meeting. Um, if you need a minute to review, let me know. I noticed that it said you were absent, Janet, and I think you were
here. >> I was here. >> So, I just noticed it said absent. That's all I had >> on the minutes. Yeah, I thought so. >> Yeah, and and actually Steven Davis is listed there and he wasn't He's no >> Yeah, I did. >> So, I apologize for that.
>> How could you mix me up again? >> No, he was just as >> it was from the template and I I just forgot to update it. I I will correct that. I apologize. >> Motion to approve the minutes with those two changes. >> Have a second.
>> I'll second it. >> Any opposed? All in favor? >> I. >> Minutes pass. >> Thank you. >> Um, next I see we have two requests for continuences.
>> Yes. Um, so these are the um the two appeals that we've had on the agenda. Um the applicants in both situations think that they can come to an agreement on on the appeals and that there will be no need to proceed. Um so for the first
item um the applicant is requesting a continuence. We have um issues with the date for the June meeting. The comm the f committee is taking over the date of the June uh BOA meeting. So we can
either the the best situation would be that we move it to the July meeting. I don't think there's any opposition to move it to the July meeting which would be July 10th. Alternatively, there are al alternative dates that we can look at, but if everyone's okay moving it to July 10th, that would probably be the easiest
option. >> Oh, for me, that's best. I'm not going to be able to change it to the June meeting. Does anyone else have an issue? >> I won't be here July 10th. >> I may not be here July 10th. I'm not sure yet. >> But it's still no issue moving it there.
>> There's no issue moving. I'm just >> We may not have a form on it. we go to September. >> Um, let me see what the date are. The dates are for June. >> The June dates that he um mentioned doesn't work for me, but you can
step up. >> You can't give me the gabble. >> The 10th and the 12th. Let me just double check that. >> Are they going to even come or is it going to be continue? I mean, they've been >> We have no new applications on the June agenda. So, it would just be any items that are continued today.
>> But they continued the Collins for like a year almost. >> So, I don't know that that they're urgent to get on the agenda. >> Yeah. and and like they're likely going to settle, so it probably won't even be
heard um according to the according to what we hear. Um, why is this email not >> I apologize for the delay. Okay. So, the options are um June 10. Yeah. 10th and 12th, the
dates that I mentioned. So, I don't know if those dates work for everybody for any for most members. Otherwise, we can continue to July and and if we need to keep continuing. >> Okay. So, >> 10th 10th works for May. 12th doesn't.
Both work for me. >> Both. >> They work for me. >> They work for you. >> Yeah. I just Not me, but >> Mr. Do those dates work for you, Mr. Silver? June 10th or Yeah. So, it's up to the board, but we can we can move it to either June 10th or 12th. So, June 10th, it seems like would be the
preferable one or we can move it to the July meeting. >> And at the present, there's nothing else on the June. So, if they continue it again, we just wanted a meeting. >> Okay. >> Now, that's the 605 Lincoln Road. Or do we have to then vote to continue it at we have to come to the meeting just to vote to continue it or we just put it on the next agenda?
>> Um if the meet we can if the meeting gets cancelled then it would automatically move to the next agenda. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Okay. So motion >> that's a motion to continue to June 10th. >> Second.
>> Any oppose? All in favor? to agend. >> Okay. >> Sorry. Sorry. I have a question on that. So, do we just in effect move the June meeting? >> Yep. >> In addition to continuing, we just did two things at once.
>> We we will publish that the June 10th that the June meeting was moved to June 10th. Um given that there's no new applications, there's no mail notice that went out with an incorrect date. These are continued items. So anybody who was interested in these items would be listening today and would would know that they were moved to June 10th.
>> I'm just saying I can cancel I can cross off of my calendar June 5th. >> That's June 5th. Thank you. >> Yep. >> The next continued item is 605 Lincoln Road. >> Okay. This is another item that was
continued also an appeal. Um, in this case, the um the applicant pre the one of the tenants of the building previously wanted the item heard. However, we were informed that both are okay with a continuence at this point. They think that they can come to an
agreement to to provide a use that doesn't require an appeal. So, they are um also requesting that the item be continued. And so, we can do that also to the June 10th meeting. Okay. Motion to approve.
>> I'll make a motion. >> Second. >> Second. >> Second by Mr. Krennic. >> Any oppose? All in favor? >> I. >> Uh, we have a previously continued application
ZBA2501773010 Alton Road. >> Okay. This application have been filed requesting after the fact variances for lot coverage, unit size, interior sideyard setbacks, open space, and artificial grass requirements in order to legalize modifications to an existing
two-story home. >> I see. >> Hi guys. Um, >> please state your name and address. >> Board of adjustment. Uh, my name is Carlos Maritch. I'm with the offices of Bret Albert Fernandez Loganz. Uh, office is at 200 South Biscane Boulevard. Um we're here asking for continuance. Um we
just got retained this week uh on this matter. Uh we're looking into the file. Staff has also requested uh a continuance as part of their uh staff recommendation. Um so with that being said, we're going to be asked to get continued. Uh July 10th seems fine. So we're okay with that. We were listening
to the discussion earlier. So >> June 10th, >> June 10th, >> June 10th, >> July, June, whichever. >> So, but the more time the better for us. We we literally just got retained this week. Okay, I see there's some other people at the podium. I think we're going to hear from
them as well. Are you together? >> Um, yes. My name is Aussie Sleman. I'm the owner of the property. I came because I wanted to take five minutes to shed some light into why this is really going on. I know that I wasn't present in the last meeting. Um the neighbors
who are present here today who spoke in the last meeting are actually providing you with a lot of false information. Um including a letter that was sent to Roelio Alejandro uh Gabido and Mr. Rostine uh stating
that we were uh trying to intimidate them, asking them to drop um anything that they uh have filed with the city um and they copied you guys for with our citizen deceased and remove part of the letter where we specifically asked them
to come to the city for their complaints. Um this whole situation has started for a personal reason. Mr. Bugini here um has made sexual passes at me since the beginning of my move there. We actually moved out of a property for
the amount of harassment. You have several affidavits there from once I move, they harassed the tenants. They have made false allegations of um short-term rentals. Um we have all the tenants information. So, he has not only
had issues with me, he has had issues with a tenant. He has had issues with racism. Anytime a black person comes, they take pictures of um now we are renting the house cuz we canled the lease with the prior tenant due to the
issues. Um they have allegedly said this is a nhood because they had a black guest. They have constantly uh accused us of short-term rental while I was living there. They came, I saw my ID, my cousin showed her ID and proved
that we were both owner and cousin of the owner living there. So, this has come to a situation where this is no longer a variance hearing. It's become a personal situation. So, I have actually taken the time to come down here, explain. I've sent a letter to all those
people who were copied in their false allegations saying we're trying to intimidate them into not um filing anything with the city, but removing the part of the letter where we specifically asked them to contact the city and stop
contacting people in our property. Um, they have taken pictures of the realtor. They have approached the realtor asking if there were short-term rentals. They have approached guests of the tenant prior to me being involved. Um, they approached my sister. They approached my
property manager every single time accusing them of short-term rental. This is uh improper use of my privacy of my property. They cannot be taking pictures. They cannot be harassing people. They can come and make complaints to you guys, but they cannot
continue actually coming after every single person that steps on that property. This has been a long ongoing situation since 2022. We do plan on return to the property, but they are the primary reason why I moved out of my property.
Uh we do have a medical condition. You have plenty of documentation there and we can provide plenty more for over 20 years. Both the children living in the house are allergic to grass to the point that you will see brain swelling for over two months. You have all the
documentation there and the only reason we did the turf is for that reason. It's not because of an aesthetic reason and my medical needs and that of my children cannot be superseded by a desire of a
city to have a certain percentage of a certain amount of nature. We did donate a hefty amount of money to the um green space was it >> uh for the tree replacement >> for tree replacements. We have done
everything in our power to fix the issue, but this has become a personal harassment at this point. And it we were going to file a civil lawsuit. We were waiting for this to get resolved. So, this didn't become a circus because this
is a variance hearing, not a personal hearing. But the personal matters here are continuing to affect the variance. They're asking for things that are not correct. We have provided you guys with everything from the turf company and a
secondary company that has confirmed everything that the turf company actually installed correctly. U Mr. and Mrs. Bghini have actually gone to the extent of threatening the people that are maintaining the the turf to call ICE. We have affidavit for that. So the
amount of harassment in my property when now now I've cancelled the lease. I've lost plenty of money of income from that lease cuz I'm paying for a mortgage that a house that is empty. And now we have gotten a new lease in and Mr. M. Bini
actually went ahead and harassed the the realtor accusing him of being a short-term rental and went and took pictures of the prospective tenants and their cars. We have all the documentation and affidavit signed by
those people and we can get you about 40 more if necessary. So that being said, I do want you to understand that um them saying that there's cement under it is not correct. We have plenty of proof from two different companies and we were
actually we're happy to go with one of you guys at any point and pull whatever area you would like. So you could see there's no cement underneath. um everything was done correctly, but they are actually also accusing us of falsely
having homestead, which I've never homesteaded any of my houses, so that's illogical. So, they're attacking on various different aspects, not just the building department. We're doing everything in our power for 2 years to have solved the issue because we didn't make
a mistake and we did do something we weren't supposed to do. That being said, we have done everything in our power, everything that you have requested to solve such issues. But the personal issues here are causing a different side of this that is not being seen. So I
wanted to shed some light into that. Um, you guys have been provided the actual season and disease where we asked them not to approach anybody in the house, including me, because it's been to an aggressive an aggression point where they called short-term rentals and in
the video of the person that in the chest I have requested public records for you guys. He got so aggressive towards me that I actually ended up telling the person issuing the complaint to meet me at my other property so we
can finish discussing because I was uncomfortable. This is where it's gotten. So, I just want you guys to have some light into what's really going on. We will be filing a harassment and sexual harassment lawsuit and this is going to another another level at this
point. Thank you. Oh, thank you. Anyone else? >> My name is Laura Shar. I'm the permit runner and we do have all the documentation that we brought to you guys. We are requesting the continuence just because the attorneys have just been um brought on board because of the
additional matters that came up within the last meeting because it's just to be supposed to be variance and the only thing really having to do with the variance in regards to this that the neighbors did complain about was the turf. We have provided you guys within the documents that we brought with proper documentation showing that the
turf was installed correctly and like uh the owner said more than willing to you know have somebody come out and just check that if that's an issue. But our main the main concern with one of the complaints that has to do with this variance is the turf that that's what
we're putting that's one of the things that we're requesting as far as this variance. And then obviously, excuse me, there are a couple of others such as new plans, revised plans for um spiral staircase and things like that that do have to do with this particular um part
of the process. >> Okay. Um anyone else are there any disclosures on this application before we move into public comment? >> No. >> Thank you.
You don't speak this stuff open. Oh well, open to public comment. Sorry. >> Hi, I'm Steve Steven Bonjini. I am the next door neighbor. I agree the personal issues having nothing to do with this variance request. And I think if you look at the uh if you look at the uh
objection we filed at the end, you can see her history of uh false statements in in all her dealings with the city and how she's dealt with the city should show you how much credence to put into what she says. I'm not even going to address the ridiculous statements she's
made. And I'd like to heard and I'd like you to ask her on uh on on under oath if she would say they've never heard short-term rentals. They had at least three before the one-year long-term tenant and they've had at least three different groups in there that were there during spring break for um less
all for less than a week. One having a big party and the other one and they were cited the the time the code enforcement person came, they were cited for having a for for listing it as being on the Venetian Islands so they wouldn't be caught trying to find a short-term
rental. They were they were listing it on the under the Venetian Islands and they were caught finally by code by code compliance and cited for for doing a short-term rental and it was stopped and and um um I'll let her address what
happened with the realer but anyway um and uh coming to the uh and also our problem is not just with the artificial turf it's with all the variances the lot size these are large variances and 18% % increase in lot size and almost 17%
increase in square footage and to put a sevenbedroom sixb house in on a typical size lot in that neighborhood is totally out of character would definitely put special privilege would uh is not available to anyone else there. There was a simple solution if if some it's
just a desire and a want to have a house that big. If she wants or needs a house that big, there's a simple solution. Buy a lot big enough where you can build a house like that. Then there's no problems. If if it if all you have to do is build whatever, however, whenever you want and then come in here and say ask
for the can I have two more minutes, please. Um if if you can just come in here, come in build whatever, however, whoever you want. And then when we did not turn them in, we we we did not call code enforcement on them originally. And if there's and if you can just do that
and then the board rubber stamps it, I don't see any any purpose in having even what what's the point in having square footage and lot coverage limits. Um and the only other thing I'd like to address is the staff report. Um we don't understand the staff report because the
staff report concluded that the applicant the application has not satisfied article one section two of the special act related special acts. And additionally, the application does not comply with the following hardship criteria unless that all eight
criteria, those criteria are not factors to be weighed by the board to determine whether or not there's hardship. Those are eight mandatory criteria that all must be met to find hardship. And the staff found that none of the criteria were met. They listed all eight, but then for some reason they
concluded that they're not opposed in concept to the requested variances. We don't we don't see how you cannot be opposed to the variances when they haven't met any of the criteria. And also we would they're asking for a continuence, but I'll leave it at that.
>> If I may, >> please state your name. >> My name is Iana Cruz. That was my husband, Steve. I don't know if he introduced himself, but we are the neighbors. We live at 3000 Alton Road. We filed a a 20page objection. All of it to the extent I suffer one paragraph.
Nothing is personal. It's all about the fact that there's been no evidence that's legally sufficient to to support you guys actually granting this variance. I I I hope that y'all are aware I I assume that you are that in
February an appeals court in the Sager case um you know kind of told you guys that every factor if you're going to approve of a variance every factor needs to have some kind of a factual support
right um for example special conditions um what does it look like uh does it match the property uh the the comprehensive plan all of those eight factors What are some of the conditions self-created? Is is you know those kind
like the setback that they talked about that was a self-created condition. Uh if they go to you you guys if you say yes to this then you know it will be appealed and there's not going to be sufficient uh factual information in something like the staff draft order that we looked at last night um to
support you guys. So that's why we're here. We're here to give you guys more information because we want you to make the right decision. Right. You just heard some shocking testimony. Let's all agree, right? It was shocking. Shocking us. We We never heard of any of that. That was I mean, I I'm I'm still a little bit in
shock. Uh uh just the number of complete fabrications. Um I work full-time. There's no way on earth that I can go and do all of the things that this person just fabricated for you. Um, so I object to all of that testimony, but I'm
not going to give it credence by addressing any of the points it's fabricated. Um, I will just leave you with it's been four years. These people came in in in May of 2022. >> Is that another minute enough? >> May I have two more minutes, please?
They came in in May of 2022. I'm telling you this because this is for your benefit, right? I'm an actual witness and I can help you see what actually happened that's not written in the papers that you're being given. We saw in May of 2022, the house was purchased. By July, they had already
knocked it down. I remember telling my husband because, by the way, this is at my kitchen window. So, when I'm washing the dishes, I'm looking out and there's the house. And they knocked that house down in like two months. And we were shocked. >> Gutted it. They gutted it. And we can
see straight through because one of the things they did was they knocked down the exterior wall so that they could put up window walls. So, we s we got to see everything that was happening in there. And I've never seen a house be built so fast that by October or November, that
entire house was rebuilt. And guess what? None of your inspectors had the benefit of looking inside any of those walls, the plumbing, the electrical. Who knows what's really in there, right? And is that bad for me? Yeah, of course. Because if something happens, catches
fire, now the setbacks are so close, that house is right up on my house. So if it catches fire, my house catches fire. All right? Same thing with plumbing. We don't know in a regular building situation, right? You have an inspector routinely coming in. Let me
see how the progress is going. Oh, this is good. This is not good. None of that happened. Now, we just have to take their word. Be very careful taking their word for things. you know, have you gone in, ripped open the walls, and see what they did? We actually don't know. It's
very dangerous for us. And now, as far as hardcore real evidential uh harm that has been caused since this house was built, I think it was completed like before January 2023. Um, flooding.
Now, I'm going to work. I have to put my feet in two inches of water for two days because my house as opposed to like my other neighbor, not these folks, >> uh, well, they're the owners of the property, >> uh, my property. One more, two minute, please. Um,
>> I >> my property is the only one that gets flooded and it stays flooded. Just two seconds more. It just stays flooded for two days whereas everybody else is dry. That's because they built that stuff. Now, we've been at the house 22 years before they moved in. We never had a
problem with the neighbors. You want affidavit? All of my neighbors like us. We never had a problem for two decades till they came in. Anyway, we asked that you deny this variance. It's legally insufficient. There's not facts. They gave you no reason. The only reason that
they gave you a medical >> we got the point. I appreciate >> Please refer, please refer to our objection. And if there's any other way that we can help you get the information that you need in order to do an informed decision, please let us know. >> All right. Thank you. One question. Does
does all the members of the board get a copy of our objection? >> Because we brought copies. >> If not, we have them. If you don't have them, >> can we give them to you? >> Do you need it? >> It cost us money. >> They're copies of the email that was sent this morning. >> No, no, no. Our written objection. >> A written objection. Oh, it's it's in
the file so they have access to see it and um but it's not in there. >> May we may we give it out because we made copies for all of you. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> The other email that was handed out this morning was one that um staff and uh the
city attorney's office received from the property owner. So that's also part of the record. >> Yeah, give it to them first and then if you feel any left. Are we going to read this now? We're going to read this now. >> Is anyone else here on
>> to speak on public comment on 3010 Alton Road? Is there anyone on Zoom? >> On Zoom. >> There are no hands raised on Zoom. >> Okay. Well, close to public comment and open to questions from the board.
>> Just a procedural. I mean, right now we're we're deciding on the continuence. >> So, that was correct. Unless, you know, and then if we decide not to continue, then we decide on the the merits. >> Correct. >> Yeah. Yeah, because we we haven't given our recommendations or or you know any of that.
>> One one more thing. >> Public the public comment portion is closed. CL sorry >> also a procedural question I guess. Oh, it's procedural. Um, when a applicant is represented by council as is the case
here today, what's the how does it work as far as speaking through council as opposed to council speaking and also the applicant themselves speaking? How does that work? >> Like do we listen to everybody? >> Um, you aren't bound by formal rules of
procedure. Um, and it's not a, you know, strict appeal where it would normally be handled solely by council. So the um the board can decide whether to hear testimony from from both the applicant themselves and the um council or to
limit or so. >> Thank you. >> No, sorry. >> May I ask a question? So there's obviously a lot of animosity that's going on here which you know is interesting but not gerine to what we're talking about. So it when we actually hear this matter, can we instruct the
witnesses or the people who are going to speak to stick to the subject matter and not all the ancillary stuff and to stick to their time limits? Thank you. >> Uh yes, through the chair, you would uh ask to limit the testimony to the relevant facts on the application and
the p the grounds for the variance that are the variances that are being sought. So yes, it can be narrowed if and when we do get to the merits of the case. >> And if I can chime in if possible. >> We're close.
>> So public comment. So >> and so as far as the city concerned, you think that this will be you'll be ready to make recommendation at the June 10th. >> So we we have a recommendation now and our recommendation is to continue because we want to work with the applicant to make further changes. Um
but so we we do hope that we will come to an agreement that we're comfortable with in in order to be able to support it in June. Um but that's ultimately up to uh the applicant in their ability to to respond to our recommendations. >> I have another question. So the basis
for the hardship criteria and it being a precondition to zoning variances. Can the lawyers here explain to us how that fits into making a decision like this? Like you know if
there are no hardship criteria, should it just be rejected out of hand if they're not met? I mean, I'm just I don't know what legally is um necessary for us to consider these things. >> So, so just for for our for the planning department, when we reviewed this application, we just put that it does
not comply with the hardship criteria in general. even go individually one by one until we feel comfortable um that the entire application meets the hardship criteria that they've that the that the hardship uh that the variance is the minimum necessary to address um their
concern which we feel is not met with one of the situations that they're requesting the variance for, we will not change that recommendation. So once once we feel that we're comfortable, we may change that and and indicate that it does comply with the hardship criteria. But at this point it does not. >> Okay. But if it if if on one criteria,
for example, it does not comply with hardship, you would say we should reject it because because it needs to comply with hardship in order to be even something that we can approve. >> Most likely there's two criteria. There's the hardship criteria and the practical difficulty criteria. So it
it's possible that in some situations we we think it might meet a practical difficulty that we may recommend that it be approved even though it may not meet the full Yeah. Anyone else on the board have any questions? Mr. Vley,
>> I think last meeting we discussed like how many times are we going to continue this? Can we do only one more? How long does this go on? So, we're now a month later. We're now being asked to continue
it again with no certainty, including the what I understand to be that even if staff comes to some conclusion, it still sits in the hands of the applicant to see if they're decide that they're ready or not, um, they just retain new counsel, which
in theory could set things back a little bit. So, sort of the same question as last time, which is where are we going with this and how many more times do we continue this? Is there is there a is there an end to this that we can
foresee reasonably? Um so it's ultimately the decision is up to the board. I think I think we can come to an agreement if they're willing to make changes. I hope I hope they're willing to make changes because we're not the alternative is we just recommend denial of of some of the variances. Um,
but we think we can come to an agreement that that works for everybody and addresses the the staff's concerns, addresses the applicant's needs, um, and and ultimately resolves the issues related to flooding um, that we've heard about. So, that's that's our goal. Um,
but it's it's up to the board. I mean, the alternative is to just deny. >> Anyone else have anything? >> Um, I agree with Mr. Naggler. Um, we're going to vote on this, but it's got to come to some sort of ending soon. This
is ridiculous. Um, do I have a motion to approve the continuence for 3010 alternative? >> A motion to continue to the June 10th meeting. >> Second. >> There's a second. Any oppose?
All in favor? >> I Continuence passes. Next is our new application ZBA26 01996300 Allison Road.
This application has been filed requesting variances to increase the allowable height of a wall fence on a sideyard facing the street and rear yard and to reduce the required rear yard and side facing the street setback and to reduce the rear the required permeable
open space requirement in the rear yard in order to allow for the construction of an accessory building on a lot with an existing two two-story home. >> Any disclosures? Oh, >> okay. >> Disclosure. Okay. No disclosures. All
right. Um Okay. So, this is um this is an application for a variance for a single family home located on Allison Island. Um the property is the southernmost home on Allison Island and it has a side facing the street directly
on 63rd Street, which as you know, 63rd Street is a major roadway. Um it's um the access to Indian Creek Drive. Um and so there's a lot of traffic, a lot of noise. Um and and there's a lot of issues there, especially when the bridge opens and and traffic backs up and they
have noise. Additionally, to the south, um you have uh the Aqua Condominium uh project development uh to the south, formerly St. Francis Hospital site. um the um they that that causes there to be views into their backyard. So they have
a high-rise across the street and so that that that limits their privacy. So, the applicant is requesting variances in order to improve the privacy of their rear yard given the the site constraints given the um um the the the situation they have with the traffic on the south
and 63rd Street and the the condominiums even further south of 63rd Street which which does create a hardship for the applicant that limits their ability to to enjoy their property. So, they're requesting a couple variances in order to improve that situation. The first
variance is to allow for that uh the wall that they have to be taller. Um so the code allows for side facing a fence or a wall on the side facing a street to be 5 ft in height. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow for that wall to be able to go
up to 8 ft in height. Um and so that's uh part of the wall is within the side facing the street and part of the wall is within the rear yard. Um and so the the variance would be for both segments of this wall to allow it to go up to 8 ft. Um the um next variance is to allow
for a sideyard uh setback reduction for an accessory structure. So they're proposing to build a a trellis structure in the rear yard. um the re to be able to have uh some additional privacy coming from above from the buildings to the south and also to create an
additional noise barrier uh for the traffic coming in from 63rd Street. Since it's a waterfront lot, the the the setback for um for accessory structures is quite large. This is a very long lot um uh relatively narrow lot, but it is a
long lot. And so the the side the the rear yard setback is half half of the rear yard setback which is pretty large in this case. Um it's 16.2 ft. So they're requesting to reduce that to 10 ft. So it's modest since it's a
waterfront lot. There's no neighbor to the rear that's going to be affected by this. Since it's on 63rd Street, there's no neighbor to the south that's going to be affected by this. Um so it's so it's minimal and it does allow for them to uh increase their privacy a little bit. Related to that is a a variance of the
rear yard open space. Um so this yard already has a non-conforming uh paved area in the rear yard. The home predates any of our current uh pavement standards. And um additionally their pool is located below the adjusted grade
whereas in today's code if your pool was located above adjusted grade only half of the pool would count towards the paved area. So they have a few uh non-conformances already. Um that results in them having a a need for a variance in order to build that
accessory structure. Um and so staff is supportive of the granting of these variances. They are the minimal necessary to provide them with some additional privacy in their rear yard that is that is needed in this area. Um, we looked at some other lots that also have the similar situation and they have
uh legally non-conforming fences that are built at a higher elevation that they were probably built in a prior code. Um, and so there's there's no negative impacts expected from this and staff is supportive of the granting of the variances. >> Okay. Thanks. Um, can you please state your name?
>> Okay. I have one question first with this. If I want to change the pages, I just >> You should be able to click through there. Yeah. I'm not seeing it change though. Would it change now? >> Maybe on the lap. Maybe try on the
laptop the It used to work. >> The forward and back arrows. >> Which one? I'm used to using a Mac. >> Oh. Uh, the space bar should work. Let me see. >> I think I need a little help. I'm sorry. >> I would help you if I knew how.
>> Okay, it is on the next one. Okay, that's where I wanted it to start. All right. Hi, everyone. My name is Adrienne Partardo. I'm the owner of the property. I'm here today with my husband, Steven Partardo. And our architect, Adrien Hyde
with Based Architects, is on Zoom because he had to attend a um conference, so he wasn't able to be here today, but he is available to answer any technical questions that you have. So, we are the owner of this property
and we had moved into the property in uh 2014. Um, and so, okay, so the property's located, it's on Allison Island. You can see where it's located on the context location.
And we're the first house on the left. And we front the sideyard and the backyard front the 63rd Street. So we have the 63rd Street Bridge is to the east of us. And what's happened over the
years is that we have a lot more traffic on that 63rd Street Bridge. So it's gotten quite noisy in the backyard. And also we've had more pedestrian traffic. And anyways, between all the noise and
the security and the privacy, that's why we are here today requesting these variances. We have the recommendations of staff. It says with conditions, but those conditions are just the general conditions they attach to every variance
um every application that you know we need to have our plans compliant and anything like that. So there's no specific um recommendations. I mean, there's no specific conditions for this variance. Um, let's see if this works
for me now. Okay. No, it's not going to the next one. Can anybody else do it? Oh, yeah. Okay. Here's a closer up picture of the um of the existing conditions. We're not seeking to do anything to the house
itself. We just want to put do the Okay, these are You could see the wall here and we do have hedges. We've put in hedges and we've we had that that whitefly hedge originally and that wasn't working. So, we got rid of that. We've put a lot of money into these hedges and we keep
adding more hedges and for whatever reason sometimes they die. You can see the picture on the right. That's the backyard um where we put in some more hedges and we keep trying to put in more and more and make it deeper and deeper, but it's still not um sufficient. So,
that's why we're requesting to add the additional 3 ft on the wall as you can see in the picture here on the um on the whatever it's called anyways in the center. Okay. There's also a
picture. All right. That's the backyard with the pool. And then to the right of it, you can see Aqua across the street. And I think what also happens is I think the the noise from Aqua might also echo off of the tall buildings because we
have them looking down on the house and the backyard. And also, there's also an issue with the road on 63rd Street. I don't know if it's the joint between where the road ends and then where the bridge is that's right behind us, but
every time a car or a truck goes over the road in that area, it makes a very loud noise. And the bigger the trucks are, the louder the noise is. So when you're in the backyard, you hear that, you really hear that traffic going over it. As my husband and
I were discussing this case, I mentioned to him about that noise and he says, you know, you're absolutely right. So, we're going to look into public works as well to see, you know, I don't know if there's anything they're going to be able to do about that. But my point of bringing it up is that it adds to this
noise that we're we're experiencing. And the more I'm not even changing this and it's and it's moving along. >> Our communications team, I believe, might be >> Okay. Um, anyways, now I can go to the next one. It still doesn't want to work
for me. Okay, here. This is just a a picture, a site plan of the house. You can see the front of it. The length of the house is 215 ft. So, it makes it for a very um long lot, which is affecting some of the reasons for the variances.
What makes this property unique with regards to these variances is we've got because we're on 63rd Street, we have a larger setback. And then in the rear, because we're on the water, you have a larger setback. Um, you can see the
structure in the center is where we're looking to put the pergola. And we're hoping that this pergola, it's an open air pergola. Well, the back of it will be a wall, but the other sides are open air. So, we're hoping that will give us more um more of a protection with the noise
and the security as well as privacy. So, I have a lot more I can say about this. Um if you want, I can go through each variance. There's five of them. Or I could I'm happy to answer any questions that the board may have.
You tell me. You want me to keep going? I think that we could uh ask questions if they come up and you can stop where you are. >> Okay. >> Is there anyone else in the >> I don't see the architect um on there. >> Oh, he told me he was on.
>> So, Adrien Hyde, you said? >> Yes. Adrien Hyde. >> Yeah, >> his name is Adrien, if you can raise your hand if you'd like to speak. >> His hand is raising. He's there. >> Yes. Um I'm here. Adrien, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
>> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Just just so he's available here. >> Is Do you have anything to tell us or should we move on? And if we have questions, we can address them with you. >> I think you should move on. I think Adrianne did a great job at explaining
um everything. So, I think we Yeah, we can answer any questions. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, we're going to close the public comment and open to >> Did we actually open the public? >> Yeah. >> Oh, open to public comment. >> Thought I said that before. >> Anybody online? If you'd like to speak,
raise your hand. Nobody online. >> Okay, now we're going to close the public comment and I'll entertain questions from the board. >> Can you just elaborate on the security concerns or is it just that there's so many cars coming back that >> Yes. So, the security concern is if
you're walking along the sidewalk, the wall is low enough that you can hop that you could climb over the the wall very easily. >> Are there a lot of people that walk that >> Oh, yeah. You get a lot of people that walk to the beach and you know, there's so many people who are walking, you
know, >> doing the whole pedestrian thing now. So, >> anyone else have any questions? >> Sure. >> Um, hi. I I'm I agree with your recommendation, but I do have a question because I was looking up the property and I pass it all the time. You do have
the property for sale now and I'm curious if that >> if you get this approved, which I think anyone would have the similar issue, so I'm not objecting the approval, >> but what's the intention with the sale? Are you planning to sell it or do this? >> Yeah. So, so we have three grown
children. Um, so my husband and I, we moved into a condo and um, we are looking to sell the property. Uh, this has been a big issue with um, selling it where everybody comes to the house and so our realators or realer or we've had
several realators have told us that when they come to the property, they love the house. Um, but when they go in the backyard area, it's just they say it's just too noisy. and you know all the reasons that I've just said as well that
we had lived with. But when we moved in it was 14 years ago. So it was different in Miami Beach particularly with regards to the traffic. So this has become a a big issue um that we haven't been able to. So that was part of the reason that
we then decided to you know we need to do something about this. >> Yeah. Uh >> yeah, go ahead. >> Are there some some type of soundproofing material or design in that fencing? Because just from from visually it looks like,
>> you know, there's like spaces in between and may not do that great at stopping the sound. So, >> um we believe that it will it will help it. Um you know, if we could go higher, the higher you could go, the better the um the soundproofing would be. Um but
this is the limit that we can reach. But but I mean like is that it doesn't look solid the fence. Is that just for aesthetics? Just >> No. No. It it will help with the soundproofing as well. >> Okay. >> And we're trying to keep it aesthetically pleasing.
>> Okay. Is there any? >> Yeah. I mean I unfortunately uh drive on 63rd Street all the time and I have a lot of sympathy for the situation. I don't I'm not an architect. I don't know how that really does a whole lot for sound proofing or security
because almost seems like easier. But anyway, I certainly have I certainly, you know, uh I'm good with that. But I do have a question about um I saw something in the packet about and I think it's in regard to the non-conforming paved area. >> Mhm.
>> Um is that legal non-conforming? >> Yes, they have they had permits for their pool and for for that deck. Um they predate our current requirements. So currently the code requires that 70% of the rear yard beous landscaped area. That was not a regulation in effect at
the time that this home was built. Um the code also provides that if the pool is raised to the future adjusted grade, which is an older home that predates those raising the yard regulations that we currently have, um that 50% of the water area of the pool could be discounted from the previous open space.
So it it would um it would count as it would basically count as the landscaped area even though it's water. Um and so they predate all that. So they have more pavement than what is currently allowed uh by the code. >> But it's legal. >> It's legal. Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. Cuz that's for me like that's
always sort of a a thing for me. I feel like in this city we need water to be able to go away in different ways and that always concerns me. But if it's already legal non-conforming, I appreciate that information. Thank you. >> You're welcome. If anybody has a question with regard to that particular
variance, if we could go to page 16, you can see that our backyard has a lot of green space and they only count though that first a first portion of it in the back, but you're not seeing the whole backyard. So, there's a lot of green space back there as well. >> That's that's a good clarifi. So, the
rear yard is because of the depth of the lot. The rear yard is um I apologize. The rear yard is uh 32 >> 32 ft.
>> 32 feet, but they do have functional rear yard that goes beyond the 32 feet. >> We probably have another 40t that goes behind that or 38. Any other questions? Janet, nothing. >> I don't have a question. I have a
suggestion, but it's I can tell I I know Stephen, so I could tell him after. >> Okay. So, I have no question. I bike by by your house all the time, so I understand your hardship. >> Thank you. >> Um, >> I hope you approve it.
>> Do I have to disclose that that I know one of the applicants? I'm sorry, but I mean is that something? >> Not unless you had exarty communications regarding this particular applicant. >> You talk about anything under the sun other than this pending application. That's fine. >> The motion to
>> I'll make a motion to approve the uh request for variances, the two variances. >> I'll second that. >> Any oppose? All in favor? >> I a question. Um I have five variances and I think the motion was
>> that >> I'll correct that. >> Is it are there five? >> Yes, there are five. >> So I just want a motion to approve the five variances. >> I will second that motion. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Any oppose?
>> No. Motion passes. >> Thank you all very much. Appreciate it. >> Congratulations. >> Have a good day. >> Thanks. You too. Um, do I have modifications to previously a board orders?
>> We have no modifications to previously approved application. >> Any discussion items and progress reports? >> No discussion items or progress reports. >> And the future meeting date is now moved to June 10th. >> June 10th. >> And we don't know what's going to be on
that email. Do we have >> a motion, I guess, to >> adjourn? Make a motion. >> Motion to adjurnn. Second, >> that concludes our meeting. >> You did a great job. >> Thank you.
>> You did do a great job.