[Music]
What are you doing? Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music]
[Music] [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music]
[Music] Welcome to the City of Miami Beach Commission Chambers. We're glad to have you with us today. If you require ADA assistance or accommodations, please notify the city
clerk or any staff member and we will be happy to assist you. As a courtesy to everyone present, please silence all cell phones and electronic devices at this time. Lobbyist disclosure reminder. If you are a lobbyist appearing before the city
commission or any city board, you must have registered with the city clerk prior to participating. If you have not yet registered, please do so immediately. Presentation reminder. If you submitted a presentation within the 24 hours prior to the start of today's meeting, please
check the computer located at the podium to ensure your file is properly loaded. When the floor opens for public comment, please step up to the podium. Speak clearly into the microphone and begin by stating your name and address for the record.
How to participate in public meetings via Zoom. Once you have joined the Zoom meeting, go to the bottom panel and click on the raise hand icon to notify the meeting host that you would like to speak. As soon as the host grants you permission to speak, a dialogue box will
pop up on your screen with two options. Select the unmute button to begin speaking. After you finish speaking, mute your microphone and click on the lower hand icon. If you are joining Zoom via phone, tap the keypad icon and press star 9 to
notify the meeting host that you have raised your hand to speak. A voice operator will prompt you to unmute your microphone by pressing star 6. Once unmuted, you may begin speaking. After you finish sharing your comments, be sure to press star 9 to lower your
hand and star six to mute yourself. We kindly ask everyone to conduct themselves in a respectful and professional manner throughout today's meeting. Thank you for your cooperation and thank you for participating in your local government here in the city of
Miami Beach. [Music] [Music]
[Music] [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music]
[Music] [Music] Yeah. [Music] [Music]
[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]
Don't like that. [Music] Do you feel [Music]
Please take your seats. The meeting is about to begin. Remember to speak into the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record. Please stand by. We are going on air in 5 4 3 2 1.
>> Good morning everyone. >> Welcome to the design review board meeting. Today is October 23rd, 2025. I think we need to start by swearing in any um presenter that will be speaking on
any of the items. >> Uh thank you. Um I I'll take over at this point. Good morning all. Um I'm going to let everyone know how the meeting is going to be held in the hybrid format and how you can um appear via the Zoom platform as well as uh
swear the folks in that are here and uh remind everyone about the city's lobbyist registration. Uh but before I begin, I think um we take attendance. >> Yes. Um so I'm going to do a do a roll call. We do have some some absences today. So, um, Myra Bakaboli
>> here. >> Scott Defender is currently absent. However, he has indicated that he will be here um, probably around 10:30. Um, Chair Giller Nelson is absent today. Um, and then I'll continue. Um, Mr. Lester
>> here, >> Miss Luen >> here, >> Mr. Meshberg >> here, >> Mr. Pis >> present. >> All right. So we have uh f five members present and we do have a quorum of the board and we can proceed with the meeting. Um because um Sarah Giller
Nelson, she's our chair, Scott Defender is the vice chair, um we will need a motion and a second and a vote to um to select the temporary chair for the meeting. Um Miss Pakabali has uh graciously volunteered in case anybody would like to nominate her uh to be the
temporary chair. Nominate pronounce it. I believe >> Myra nominate Myra. >> You have a second. >> I'll second that. >> Okay. All those in favor? >> I >> All right. Motion passes.
Congratulations, Miss Chairperson. >> Till 10:30 this morning. So, um the first thing we have is updates from the city attorney. >> Correct. Uh there's no updates. So with that, um I'll let everyone know how to attend virtually. Uh today's meeting of the design review board 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 applicant staff members and members of the public appearing either in person or virtually via the Zoom platform. Those wishing to participate in today's meeting via the
Zoom platform may dial 888-4754499 and enter the webinar ID which is 82273941924 or log into the Zoom app and enter the webinar ID which again is 82273941924. Any individual wishing to speak on an item must click the raise hand icon if
they are using the Zoom app or dial star9 if they are participating by phone. Before I swear in those that are testifying here today, I'm going to read into the record the city's notice regarding lobbyist registration. If you are appearing on behalf of a business, a corporation, or another person, you need
not register as a lobbyist with the city clerk's office. If you haven't registered yet, you should register before you speak to the board. You do not have to register as a lobbyist if you are testifying only on your behalf and not any other party or if you are testifying as an expert witness
providing only scientific, technical, or other specialized information or testimony in this public meeting. Or if you are appearing as a representative of a neighborhood association without any compensation or reimbursement for your appearance to express support of or
opposition to any item. Expert witnesses and representatives of neighborhood associations shall, prior to appearing, disclose in writing to the city clerk their name, address, and the principle on whose behalf they are communicating. If you are an architect, attorney, or
employee representing an applicant or objector, you must register as a lobbyist. These rules apply whether you're appearing in favor of or against an item or encouraging or arguing against its passage, defeat, modification, or continuence. Uh so for
those in chambers that will be testifying today, if you can please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. I do. >> Okay. And again, for those appearing,
please be seated. For those appearing uh virtually, I'll be swearing you in one by one before you address the board. Uh with that, I'll turn it back to you, Madam Chair. >> Okay. So, the first item we have is approval of the September 11th um agenda
and um or September 11th meeting. Um who wants to make a motion for approval of the September 11th minutes? >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> Second. >> Okay. All those in favor? I >> I
>> Next is approval of the after of the um afteraction for September 19th, 2025 meeting. >> Who wants to make a motion for that? >> Make a motion to approve. >> Okay. Second to defer. >> Approve.
>> To approve. Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Okay. Uh is there any other business uh Mr. Madan that we need to address. >> Um that's that's all for our standard
business. We can move on to the continuences if you'd like. >> Okay. So we have a continuence uh/withdrawal and that is for DRB24-1061. Location is 1414 Nelton Road. We have another continuence withdrawal for
DRB25-1000 located at 28 Venetian Way. right ofway. We have an open and we have four open and continued items and previously continued items. Um, and Mr. Madame, we're going to discuss these today or
we're just continuing them. >> The previously continued items will be discussed today. >> Today. Okay. So, the first item we will be hearing today is DRB25-1087, >> also known as >> they they're actually going to be requesting a continuence as well. They let us know yesterday.
>> They're also known as DRB24-1026 which is 94 Palm Avenue. >> First item to be heard then today is DRB25-112 50 West Alto Drive. >> Correct. Okay. So let let's um so the
first continuence is DRB 24 1061. That's 1414 Alton Road. The applicant is requesting a continuence to the January 8th, 2026 meeting in order to make some uh revisions to their plans. >> What was that address again?
>> Uh 1414 Alton Road. It's the Bank of America site on Alton Road. >> That one's continued. >> So, but we will we will need a motion and uh to continue. with the applicants there in case. >> Good morning everyone. Graham Penn 2000 South Biscane Boulevard. As as Raelio noted, the um this is the Bank of
America site. Um the bank wants to revisit the design that we had submitted. So we would ask for continuence of the matter to the January meeting. >> So who wants to make a motion to continue the item at 1414 Alton Road? >> I'll make a motion to continue.
>> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? I >> I >> Okay, >> thank you so much. We'll see you then. >> Thank you. Um, so we need to make a motion also for the Venetian Way right ofway. Yes. >> 28. Okay. Who wants to make a motion to
defer item for DRB25-1100 at 28 Venetian Way right ofway? >> There they are. This is a city project and they're requesting a continuence to the November 20th, 2025 meeting. They're also making some refinements to the plans. >> Okay. >> So moved.
Second. >> A second. >> In favor? >> I. >> Okay. >> Next is a motion to continue DRB25-1087, also known as DRB24-1026 located at 94 Palm Avenue. Who would
like >> The applicant here is requesting a continuence to November 20th? >> Like to make a motion >> to continue the item to November 20th. So moved. >> Second. >> Second.
>> All in favor? >> I I >> just for the record, is our next meeting on the 20th of November? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. And the first item to be heard today is DRB25-11250 West Leo Drive.
>> Okay. This application has been filed requesting a design review approval for the new construction of a two-story residence including one or more >> Michael Larkin I think is >> yes uh sorry Alejandro Michael Larkin 200 South Biscane Boulevard here representing the applicant. >> There are an objector in the audience to
our application. So we would strongly prefer to wait until their full board until Mr. Denderfer has arrived at 10:30. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> So you can table our application until then. >> Okay. So, we will wait to have um another member of the board join us,
which will be sometime after 10:30 this morning. We will go on to item number seven on the agenda, which is DRB 25-1080 located at 6788 Collins Avenue. >> Okay. This application has been filed
requesting design review approval for modifications to the facade of an existing commercial shopping center. Specifically, the applicant is requesting to renovate the facade by recladding with new materials. >> Okay. So, this is uh an application that has been continued a few times. Uh
originally, it went to the board on uh on May 15th, 2025. The board approved the reclatting of the facade. However, the board continued an item uh regarding the design of the um the design of the
parking lot lighting, landscaping uh and a few other issues. So, the board continued that item. Um on July 10th, that was continued to um um that was continued to the September 11th meeting. Uh at the September 11th meeting, the board discussed the revisions and
continued the item once more to the October 23rd meeting. The applicant has since uh submitted a lighting and landscape plan which includes adding a significant amount of landscaping along the perimeter of the existing parking lot. Uh the plans uh include the installation of new modern lighting
fixtures. Um the applicant has also provided some renderings including some nighttime renderings that show how the lighting uh will function along the facade. Um and uh and we believe that the the modifications that they have proposed are consistent with the design direction that was provided by the board
and staff recommends that the application be approved subject to the conditions in the draft order. >> Okay. You may proceed. >> Before we proceed, uh are there any disclosures from the board? >> That's correct. >> Any exarty communications >> disclosures? Okay, great. Thanks. I'll
set the clock at 10 minutes. >> Good morning. How are you? Uh I'm the lead uh for the family office, the company I work for that owns the property for this project. Uh this is uh our architect. >> Everyone uh my name is Yabra Wolf. I'm
uh the architect of records for the job with former architecture. >> Uh and Shimon should be our other architect should be on the zoom. Uh we hope that you uh appreciate the work we've made and the adjustments and I'll hand it off to our architect to take the
lead. Yes. Uh so uh picking up from the previous meeting comments, there was a comment about the uh the landscape that there wasn't sufficient information of uh uh like core scheme and renderings how it's going to look like. So in this
presentation we provided additional slides with renderings and a course scheme and uh our landscape architect uh uh revised uh their plans to show more of a native species uh in the site. And as you can see like in the presentation
like uh we have a dynamic uh setting of onecape that's uh uh making the significantly improving uh the site. I I'll just skip to towards the wall with a bunch of renderings that we have there. You see the the significant
improvement and uh the dynamics being created like on the site with different layers of one scape like a surface layer uh another layer which is bushes and then on top of that the the the palm trees. Uh uh regarding the other comment that we
had about the writing. Uh let me go back to the lighting scheme. I'm going too fast. I'm sorry. Yes. Uh regarding there was a comment about the wall packs on the facade. So we decided to remove the wall packs. In the current whiting strategy, we have uh
six uh poles around the site. three of them in the I1 to1 Collins Avenue and you can see the other uh three one is space on the southern side of the side the other is on the northern side like close to building one and one is the middle like in the peninsula that you
have by the ADA parking spots and uh each of these pole have like the two light fixtures all together will have 12 white fixtures and then another layer of lighting is that where we have the canopy over the pedestrian and uh uh
passageway uh by the main uh entry of the building. We have like soft lightings in there and uh as a feature like on the ground we have like this soft uh recess lighting uh and then the
uh the current tenants lights the their signage is all illuminated. So I think uh uh by removing the the wise that we have we we still like have a sufficient uh uh lighting for for the scheme and
without compromising the aesthetics. >> Do you have any other pictures that reflect the canopy with the lighting that you were referring to? >> You mean to the underside of the canopy the >> Yeah. Do are there any other pictures reflecting your proposed landscaping and
okay >> you can see here like uh on the store phones they lit from the sopet the lights itself it's recessed within the sit so we don't have like a rendering that's shown from below but like it's a typical recess light uh along the the
sidewalk uh in front of the buildings >> and you are currently replacing the hedge that exists that runs along the Collins Avenue sidewalk. Yes, we're replacing the hedge and you see it's like a significantly improved the one col like a barrier
>> adding palm trees on the front facing Collins and towards the north entrance as well or those are existing. >> Yeah, that's going to be uh additional >> additional. Okay, >> we have a slide that has the before and
after. There was a question I think last time and and you all may remember. Was there a question concerning signage? >> I I believe the the signage was part of the original approval of the facade. Okay. The concern was the the lighting
of the signage and the lighting of that facade. Um so with the rendering, you can see that it's a it's a glow behind the the front of the signage. So those those will be the typical sign types. Obviously, it's they don't reflect the actual businesses that will be located in the shopping center. So it's to give you an idea. Um, but the lighting that
they're showing has uh a channel letter with lighting located behind uh the channel letter. >> Okay. So, if you're finished with your presentation, we'll open it up to the board for any questions that they may have. >> Yes, I'm finished. >> Thank you. Questions from board members
who would like to begin. >> Public comments. >> Oh, public comments. Any anybody with their hand up virtually? We have um one person Shimon Zimbrovski on Zoom with the hand raised. I think he's architect
with your team. So if you'd like for him to say anything or >> then I would have to swear first. >> Hi everybody. This is Shiman Zabski with Wren Planning Design. >> Shimon, if you could just wait one second. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I swear. >> Okay, that I'll please proceed. Uh thank you. Yeah. So I did want to point out the fact that um in terms of the the questions of um lighting and
landscape. So we did make a very concerted effort to maintain a native landscape planting plan. Um so over 80% of the overall planting plan is is native. Um, and so we've we've created kind of um using the comments that we
received in the May 15th uh hearing, we're creating like a mounded effect between Collins Avenue and the parking lot um which was basically um orchestrated between uh ground covers, mounded uh shrubs, and then um palms
kind of filling in. So there's there's really an effort there to kind of create a very highly aesthetic area um very tolerant of the local climate um and very resilient. Um and then regarding the lighting, yes, so like Raelia was
saying that we do have the channel back lit lighting for the signage. Um and the we have the the 12T poles as was recommended within the site. Um, and the main kind of architectural gesture are those two um, kind of crown conditions. And really
the concept there is just to create a little bit of a soft light wash um, just to give a little bit more of an ambient kind of effect. Um so our design team really took the comments to heart that we received um in May and also in the subsequent meeting in September to
really come up with a with a sensitive and really a comprehensive approach to to to the landscape and this and the lighting of this of the space. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um board members who would like to begin? Does any board member
have any questions or comments to make? >> I appreciate the removing the wall packs and softening the lighting and lighting the crowns and giving this a nicer presence. Were there additional poles added or we always had six six poles in
in the in the lighting package? So, Shiman, is that something you can >> If I may. Yeah. Yeah. Um, may I speak? So, we actually did add um four poles to the site. Um, essentially so, so that we
don't have those wall packs. Um, initially the poles were only in the buffer planting between Collins and the the parking plaza. Now we have added um poles essentially on the south side of the site in the
planting area um and also in the me like kind of those um like parking I don't know what you would call those like kind of barriers um closer to the building. So So those are creating the proper foot candles for
the the site. Okay. >> Any other comments from board members? Okay. I Laura, I have one question which I will be asking every uh applicant that
comes before us today. Um and that is um do you know of any neighbor that has um approved or in consent with what you're doing or opposed to what you are doing?
Any of your neighbors? >> Not that I'm aware of. >> Not that you're aware of. And you have not made nor have you received any kind of um gift or re renumeration in exchange for any of them. Uh keeping
quiet because of their opposition or in favor >> again. We own the property also on the south of of this plaza. >> Okay. And you'll be bringing that property soon, I guess, to the DRB. >> Well, we hopefully with a beautiful
structure. >> Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Um, so we need a motion to approve this um, project. Who would like to make the motion? >> A motion to approve it. >> Second. >> I'll second that. >> All in favor?
>> I. >> I. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Appreciate it. >> Those against I. >> Okay. Okay. The next item is DRB25 1115 900 Southshore Drive, lot 10.
>> I apolog Thank you. >> Good morning, Nicholas Rodriguez. >> Nick, before before you start, uh, any disclosures from the board? Any exarty communications? >> No exarty communications. >> Um, just before we start this item there, this is, um, 900 Southshore
Drive, lot 10. We have item number 13 is 900 Southshore Drive, lot 9. They're both related. They're part of a lot split uh application. So, it may make sense if we hear the two, not necessarily together, but back to back, just so the information is fresh. >> Okay. Sure.
>> So, we'll hear after this one, we'll hear item 13, which is lot nine. >> Okay. >> Perfect. We're able to that. Good morning, Nicholas Rodriguez, 200 South Biscane Boulevard from the law firm. Ky del Fernandez Larkin and Tapenz. I'm here with Stephanie Halen, our
architect. And uh I don't know if staff wanted to present their recommendation on this one first. I don't know. >> Yes. And I wonder if you could read the title for >> Yeah. This application has been filed requesting design approval for the new construction of a two-story residence at a site that has that was subject to a
planning board lot split to replace an existing residence. >> Okay. So, this is uh an application for a new single family home. The home uh was the result of a lot split approved by the planning board in April of 2024.
Um this is the eastern most lot, lot 10. Um the only reason that the applicant is here is because of the lots split. The home, if it were not for the lot split, is a home that could have been approved administratively. Um the home is designed in a contemporary style uh highlighted by flat roofs, wide eaves,
and travertine clad walls that are broken up with floor to ceiling glazing and fluted wood composite panels. Um the uh the home um features a projecting singlestory volume in the front of the house where the garage is located and the rest of the two-story structure is
located behind that. Um and uh staff recommends that the application be approved subject to the conditions in the attached draft order. It's a pretty simple application. So, good morning again. Uh, Nicholas Rodriguez, 200 South Escape Boulevard. So, this application, as Roelio mentioned, was the result of a lot
split. Um, we started that process in 2024, and a lot of care was taken to design these homes given that it's a corner lot. So, it took a while for us to come from the lot split uh to this DRB meeting. As part of the lot split, we did uh do community outreach. We sent
letters and uh concept plans to all the neighbors surrounding the property. Um, and I'm not aware that we did it for the DRB application again, but the neighbors are generally aware of this application, uh, that this the lot was split. We had no opposition during our lot split
process, and we're not aware of any opposition to this application. So, I'll turn it over to Stephanie to walk you guys through the design, but generally speaking, this home, uh, this property, the lot split didn't impose any conditions on our unit size or our lot coverage. Uh we're in fully compliant
with the lots split order. So we have uh really just presenting an as of right home today. Uh and we're only here because of the where are the result of a lot split. Exactly. >> Hi. Good morning. How are you? Um why are you guys projecting the presentation? Sorry. Because I Oh, there
you go. Thank you. Uh okay. So this is one of the homes. Um this is a corner lot. And it's also important that both lots, just so you know. um even the lot that that were split but the size of the lots are equal to the other lots in the neighborhood. It's not that they're smaller or anything in particular. We
didn't ask for any variances or anything. We're not asking for anything. So this is the first project is a like I mentioned a corner lot which is interesting. It gives us the ability to have two facades um that are very very interesting. Of course we have the rear that it's towards the water and then we
have um of course the side that leads to our other property. Let me go one second. So over here you see the um the site plan where where it's located with within the neighborhood. It's in the Normandy waterway. Uh we're meeting
everything that has to do with lot coverage, um unit size, everything. Um and the homes are designed to to be uh used for a as a family home. So the owner of these lots are is going to live in one of the in this particular house.
Um, he wanted a very comfortable house with for his family. He loves the water. You can see here the the context, the street, the houses that are in front. In general, the neighborhood is being developed into a more contemporary style
um designs. Um, here you can see the full streetscape. Uh, it's very cohesive with all of the designs that are in the neighborhood. Our projects are done in a tropical modern style. And this project in particular, I'm going to I'll go back
to the floor plans, but I'm going to drive you to the take you to the sorry to the renderings. I don't know why they're last, but so we were using coral stone um to create those accents in the facade. We're using um this composite wood elements also highlights
throughout. Uh we have the eaves of the roof line in metal cladding. So again, it creates a nice contrast with the dark um lines of the roofs. It creates also, which is something that I like to do uh in being in in line with the neighbors.
So I'm going to go back. Sorry. I I hope I'm not um making you dizzy. But so I try al always to differentiate like the first floor from the second floor of the property. So that way it's being kinder also to the neighbors that are one-story houses still yet. So you can read the
volume as one uh bottom floor and one top floor. So those horizontal lines help you give scale to that first floor and then second floor. And then regarding the floor plan, um it's a very um I would say nice floor plan where you
enter uh you have a um a guest unit that it's right over there. Uh in the entrance we have a beautiful integrated uh area living space that accommodates the social areas. All of them of course in the kitchen have the view of the
water and then the staircase communicates to a more it's a private area towards the garage and uh family room staff room and on the second floor um we have five bedrooms. Um again master bedroom primary bedroom
looking at the water and then the other bedrooms are just um in the other side of the house. We created courtyards that really help accentuate the that indoor outdoor integration which we also try to emphasize in every one of our projects.
So I'm here to answer any questions you might have about the project happy to answer them. >> Thank you. Do we have any comments from the public? Anybody with their hands up? >> I see no one online with their hand raised.
>> Okay. So we turn it to the board. Does anyone have any questions, comments concerning the project? >> I I've got a few. I can start. >> Um, thank you for the presentation. I think the house looks uh really nice, beautiful. Um, I guess I have a
question. Why is is this continued? Because we reviewed this before or >> it was on the consent agenda at the September meeting and the item got pulled and because of the length of the agenda, it just never got heard. >> I see. Okay. So, we haven't seen this before. >> The last item I remember.
>> Okay. I just wanted to make sure we didn't need to like check. >> They and then they requested rather than going to the overflow meeting we had on the 19th because they had another item, they just requested that it just be brought to this agenda so they would only have to come once. >> I see. Okay, perfect. Um Okay. So, and then I guess that that was just a
logistical thing I had. Um the I was looking at this home next to the lot 10 home or excuse me the lot nine home because I think the purpose of the lot split. The reason we review the lot split is to ensure that the homes are kind of stand by themselves and they
don't look too similar. Um so I I just I want to emphasize that because they're both very beautiful homes but they are looking sort of similar to me. Um, and I I guess the use of materials looks >> identical, but the renderings are
different enough in color tone. So, like for instance with the travertine, it looks like one's lighter, one's darker. Is Is that the intent to use different types of >> Yeah, it's different stones actually. One and if if we can pull up the renderings again, um I'll show you. So,
this home uh in particular, we're using coral stone. We're not using travertine. We're using the other one. We are using travertine. Here we're using coral stone and we are we have all these wood elements that wrap around um the entire facade as well. The other big difference
is that this home has um the black uh eaves in the which is also different to the other one that it's white, it's thicker, this is thinner. Um and in general >> referring to the roof edge >> the roof edge. Correct. The roof edge. Um so that's also something that's that
differentiates the two homes. I understand they're both within the contemporary style, but the materials are different, the tones are different. This one is meant to have those very dark elements. Um, and the other one is doesn't. So, this one looks um, again,
it this one also has some planters in the in the facade. And uh, so let me see if I can have the there's an elevation that again, the elevation since it's small, you can >> Yeah, the side by side was helpful. I just wanted to it said like both said
travertine so I was I wasn't sure if it was just the color renderings and um but yeah I agree I mean if it's if it's going to be kind of as the color scheme and the stone type that you're showing here um I'm not as concerned but
>> that was something I I wanted to just ask and get a little more clarity on. No, no. The the idea is that they are um that the we make the difference between them with the tones and the colors and of course the again the edges of the roof lines are different how one
projects more than the other one. So if you again they took it out but when you see them side by side um one the garage actually has um like that glass on top then the slab of the second floor projects further. this one the volume of
the the corner lot the volume of the garage doesn't have anything on top. So again it's hard to make like a such a strong difference in these small scale drawings but >> they are different the tongs are different and and that's the idea. >> Okay. Okay. Yeah. So I think as long as
the materials are different and more closely to how the renderings are um I'm not as concerned but I wanted to just ensure >> Yeah. So through the chair, so there are conditions in the order that tie us to the specific colors in a manner to be reviewed and approved by staff. If we
want, we could tweak those conditions to address the concern to just, you know, have staff ensure that they're different colors and materials than yeah, different stone than what's being proposed at the neighboring lot. >> Um, if staff doesn't object to that, I would be fine with that. Following up on that question, what did
you use um and was it different the um material used for the driveways on each of the homes? So the driveways in general sometimes are done. So we are using pavers um and we
can use a different tone paper for each that can also be a condition. Um and pavers are used also again just to help with drainage. So we you can make it a condition that you can use different the driveways just so you know are not side by side. So they're because we enter so
on the street >> correct the other one one is on the um let's say southshore and the other one is towards that um alleys over here. So they're not side by side. You're never going to be able to see them right next to each other. >> Okay. >> Again if you want a slightly different tone of the of the paper that's fine as
well. I think that would be my recommendation that there be slightly different or different um that's absolutely >> style or different types of um color stones for each of the homes.
>> Any other questions, comments? No. Okay. Do we have a motion to approve this project? >> So, I apologize. So just to to clarify, so you you recommend adding a condition regarding uh ensuring that there are different colored uh paving materials, stones
>> as they did for the home. >> Okay. There's something different with the um pavers. >> Okay. We'll add a we'll add a condition in the order uh for that. >> If the rest of the board is in agreement, that's just me. >> Yes. So >> I'll support that and I'll move the
item. I'll >> second that. Okay. Okay. Thank you. >> Have a motion by Mr. P, second by Miss Leuen. >> Um, all those in favor? >> I opposed. Okay. Motion passes. Congratulations. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. So, now we will hear the next item in conjunction with that which is under new applications DRB 25114 900 Southshore Drive, lot 9. And again, this item is before us because there was
a lot split, not because they're requesting any variance or waiver or anything from this board. >> Again, I just have to ask for the record any disclosures or exarty communications. No. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Okay. This application have been filed requesting design review approval for the construction of a new two-story residence. The site was subject to a planning board lot split to replace an existing residence. Okay. So, again, similar similar um as we just described in the last home. This
was part of a lot split. Um this is a new application. The application was submitted um at the same time as the prior application. However, there was a zoning issue that we had to address and so the item got pushed back an additional month. That's why it's listed under new applications today. Um the
this resident, we worked with with the with the applicant to ensure that the homes were designed differently. That's as as you stated that is the goal of the of of the requirement for lots splits to come before the design review board is to ensure that they are different. Um so we worked with the applicant to make sure that the homes were were
distinguishable. Um and so this uh residence is also designed in a contemporary style highlighted by projecting stucco slabs. Also has contrasting glass and solid walls. Um at the front of the property there's an attached one-story garage structure that goes into the front yard. Um the second
sto the second floor front elevation accommodates smooth stucco and glass walls and the rear elevation maximizes on the on the water views that is on a the home is on a um off of a a canal. So overall the design
incorporates movement and uh lends to the architectural interest of the home. Um there is one condition in the order and it was actually in the last one too. Um the applicant was proposing a chain link fence between the two properties. The code prohibits chain link fences. So we're recommending that that be replaced
um with either pickets or something some other type of a fence that is that is allowable per the code. So that's the only condition that we do have in the in the order for a modification. And that's the fence between the two properties, not any fence visible from the exterior. Um so with that, staff recommends that
the application be approved subject to the conditions in the attached order. >> Okay. Any comments from the public virtually? We have nothing. >> We have >> Okay. >> No hands raised.
>> Okay. Um board members, would anyone like to begin? Anybody have any questions or comments? >> I I think we didn't get our chance to do the presentation. So >> that would be good, right? >> Sorry. I mean, if you guys want to move it quickly, we're fine. But >> thank you.
>> No, no problem. Good morning again. Nicholas Rodriguez 200 South this game boulevard. So uh again readopting our comments on the last one. We did outreach as part of the lot split and uh we took a while to kind of carefully think out these designs and uh Stephanie will quickly go through the design and
turn it over to Stephanie. >> Yeah. >> All right. So in this case and I'm I'm going to jump to the renderings right away so you can see it this house in more detail. Um all right. So here um we are using and
here you can see it better the travertine that it's a darker tone that the coral stone that we're using on the other house. Um in this case you know we that those two slabs the slab you know the roof slab and the second floor slab. It's what really live gives a lot of
character to this house in particular. It extends it projects. It makes the house feel like it's floating. Basically, that was the idea of it. So, having a stronger uh base and then the two slabs floating. You can see that they um hardly touch the ground
elements, the the um walls or anything in particular. So, again, these are very clean lines um highlighting the landscape that's around, highlighting the views. Um and that's what we tried to achieve in in this particular um design.
And the roof band here is lighter color than the other one, which is >> Yeah, the Exactly. The edges in this one are white and the other ones are um very very dark. They're bronze. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you.
>> No comments from public still. So far, >> so far, no comments from the public. >> That's good. Board members, >> we have one question for the uh second floor. the composite wood that you used on the uh rear portion of the elevation. Is
there reason why they didn't go more around the facade or just kept in >> in this one? We're not using composite wood. >> Not using composite wood at all. >> No, no, we're not using composite wood. The the dark elements that you see is paint in this one. >> Okay. >> Mhm. So again, because the concept was
that those two slabs, the white slabs are like completely independent from the rest of the structure. So, we have the glass and some dark um walls to basic basically try to make the feel that they're floating. >> So, we we and also differentiate the two houses which the other one does have the
wood. >> So, the roof looks like they're the two roof lines look like they're floating basically. >> Exactly. That that's the idea. >> Can you bring up that picture that he is referring to? So, >> page 23. >> So, that's the brown. It's not cladding, it's paint. >> That's not cladding. That's paint. Correct.
>> It kind of looks like wood. Yeah. I see that. >> Right. Okay. Other comments, questions? None. Um I have um comment that I'm making and a
question asking of every applicant today due to um um situation I incurred personally and my family this week. So, uh, have you tried or attempted to receive approval from any of your neighbors or neighbors
to these properties and has there been any kind of rem renumeration received or provided? >> No. >> No. Okay. Thank you. >> So, as part of the lots, we did send the concept plan and let everybody know that we were doing the lots split. Uh, I
don't believe we sent them an updated set of plans, but they are aware and they have the owner's contact information. And at that time there was no opposition or >> correct there was >> Thank you very much. >> Okay. Who would like to make a motion? >> I'll make a motion to approve with the
similar conditions to the other lot to just ensure that the uh stone materials on the structure and the um pavers are different >> contrasting. >> Contrasting. Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Okay. Second.
>> All in favor? I >> I >> thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you all very much. >> Thank you. >> Okay. So, the next project we have is DRB 241070
um and DRB 2208640 Abbott Avenue. This application has been filed requesting a modification to the previous design review approval for the construction of a new 10-story mixeduse building including waiverss. Specifically, the applicant is
requesting a variance of the front yard setback and one more waiverss. >> Um, I don't see the applicant in the audience. >> Do you want to move to the next one if they're not? >> Should we? Yes, maybe we should table it until
>> Okay. All right, we will do that. Is the applicant here for 18 I'm sorry for Yes. for 1824 Alton Road. >> Okay. So, we'll hear this item. It's DRB25-1085 and DRB16-0048 and DRB 23233.
address 1824 Alton Road. >> Yes, this application has been filed requesting a modification to preview design review approval for installation of a new signage design. Specifically, the applicant would like to modify the building identification signage
requirements to allow for signage for a new tenant. >> Okay. So, this is the project on Alton Road, formerly a Michael's um store. the the order that was approved at the time um that that building was approved uh
spec had conditions specific to the signage for Michaelels. Um the the order specifically u called for the sign to have the quote Michaelels font um with red brushed uh aluminum reverse channel letters. Um and
so the conditions in that order were very specific to the signage that Michaelels would be putting on the building. Um the tenant has since changed. It's currently a Ross. The Ross is already located at the site. They have signage at the street level. Um
which the order didn't regulate the the signage on the street level to that extent. It did have a sign package that had to be followed. Uh but it didn't call for the tenant and the colors the way it does for the building identification sign. Um so this is simply a modification to the order uh to
allow Ross to replace the the Michael signage and and put it put Ross signage. Um the order did have conditions um regarding there being no raceways, no exterior disconnect switches being visible, no um no intermittent moving or
revolving lighting. Um requires all electrical and power to be routed through the rear of the parapit and not visible from the right ofway. Um it requires um that the uh signage be uh shall the signage shall consist of
brush or analyzed aluminum reverse channel letters and backlit letters. So the standards that were put in place for Michaelels for to have a higherend highquality sign are still in the in the order. Um however, the order does allow for tenants to change in the future
without um having to come back to the board should should the tenant change, they'll be able to replace the signs. It'll still have the same standards that we would have required before. Um, however, they can change the colors and the and the tenant name on the building.
>> So, this will be ongoing for a future tenant. >> Should Ross change from Ross to >> Yeah. >> ABC. Okay. >> They're never going to leave. >> Um Um, and so with that, staff does recommend that the application be approved subject to the conditions in the attached order. >> And before we begin, just any
disclosures from the board? >> None. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Good morning everybody. Uh my name is Tina Arur. I live at 5374 Greg's Landing, uh North Charleston, South Carolina. Um yeah, Roelio said it better
than I could ever say it. Um Ross really just wants to have the same signage but with their branding um on the building. They're really not looking for anything more that Michaels wasn't allowed to have. Um and they will follow the same standards. Um, we had even discussed
during the whole application process, you know, Ross, their tagline is dress for less. We're removing that because that's not what the city of Miami Beach is about. So, it would just be a Ross sign and we would remove their actual uh
tagline of Ross dress for less to uh in order to kind of stay with uh the theme of Miami Beach. >> Do you have any pictures of what you are proposing? Um I don't personally I know they were in the in the presentation.
>> Okay. They're not on the >> or in the application. Sorry. >> Thank you. We see it on your application. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Um any comments from the public? >> I see no hands raised on the
application. >> Okay. Comments or questions from board members who would like to begin? I just have a question on the on it's probably for Relio honestly, but it's on the on it's on the ongoing or any future tenants. Uh is is the size of the sign
going to stay the same? Is that part of the requirements? >> The the co the sign code itself has restrictions on the area that can be used um for signage. So, they would have to follow that. Um let me pull up the code.
Um, however, the order I do not believe has any dimension limitations. It would just be per as required by the land development regulations. >> Okay. >> Trying to do like a side by side. >> I almost want to second blanket.
>> Yeah. You know, >> and Roelio will >> or to you will there still be another signage for Ross at street level? >> Yes. Okay. >> Yes, that that was already approved and that's that's already there. I mean,
it's obviously a much smaller sign, >> right? >> Um, but they just want the, you know, that like I said, they really just want to follow the same thing that Michaelels had on that building. Um, and have the sign along Alton Road and I believe on 18th.
>> So, Roelia, question to you concerning the code on signage. My understanding is that you can only have one signage per tenant. That was the um a code violation issued back when to Macallos because
they had one at street level, you know, in the >> post that was by Alton and uh date boulevard more or less and then they had another one at the storefront. >> Um does that code apply to this or is it
different because it has the signage not um at street level or at uh in a post? It's it's treated differently. This is this is a building identification sign. So buildings above a certain height are allowed to have a building identification sign. Um so that's what
this would be. Typically the building identification sign is related to the largest tenant in the building. There are other tenants in the building. Um but the largest tenant is typically allowed to have the the building identification sign and the code uh requires that that building identification sign not exceed 1% of the
facade area on which it is placed. Um so we would have to take the dimensions of that facade to come up with the maximum limits for for the building identification sign which has to be located um on the upper part of the building on the parapit. >> So I think I did actually provide that I
did those calculations >> and the Maluso sign just for clarification was in a building that was a one story >> right >> um versus this is two stories and that's why they're two signings. So, and then the the approval that's given today um
basically um will allow a future tenant, hopefully not, but a future tenant uh to come in and place a signage that stays within the size >> uh that is allowed, but it could be different color, it could be different
script, font, what have you. Okay. >> All right. But it would still have to be a a brushed aluminum or high-end uh channel letter sign. It couldn't just be a a plastic sign placed on the wall. >> Michaelels was a a lit sign. It looked
like glass. Uh but I and this will be similar. It will light up at night. Okay. >> Yeah. I saw the original they had provided me with the original uh approval package and that that package was just beautiful. That building look it looks Yeah. I actually just drove
past it on my way here. Okay. Thank you. >> The only difference I can see is that the the corner sign for Michaelels is is low and then you're proposing it probably mid building. >> The when I compare the the previous and
proposed the the signage for Michaelels is is low versus the the Ross is let's say three three glass bays up on the corner. Otherwise, everything looks the same.
I'm only making that note to the board so that they know the difference between what is there. >> I think the Michael sign faced Alton and this one is facing south. The one that you're proposing is more facing south. Am I correct? >> Yeah, I'm just talking about this corner one.
>> I think so. I I think it's Yeah, >> here it's down above the canopy and it's it's >> mid building for >> they they do have maybe you're referring to the they have an atrium. Oh, that's the area. >> There's a sign that says Ross inside the
building in an atrium. So, it's not an exterior sign. >> Okay. >> Um, we mentioned it because it is sort of part of the design, but it's it's really not uh part of we don't consider that a sign in the interior of the building. Well, and it's well recessed, >> but it will likely be visible from the street. >> Okay.
>> Um, there were no prohibitions on that in the in the prior order. Um, it's basically an interior atm where you walk in, it's an open glass column. Um, and so the Ross, they will be putting a sign inside of that recessed in the rear of that um, interior glass column. Maybe
that's what you're referring to. But the >> That's exactly how it building ID sign should be in the same exact spot. >> There is no raw sign on the on the the corner atrium outside anymore. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And it could be different differently positioned also because they
probably did interior work and redesigned that atrium probably. So where they had to place it might be different than where that Michael sign was. >> So just to be clear, the signage on the exterior is going to be facing Alton or facing south.
>> I think there's one on each. >> The the ID sign there's one on each one. >> Plus there's one at ground at street level. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Yeah. to what you're saying. >> Is the interior HM sign the same as the exterior in terms of in terms of plast
>> Pasco light optics LED LED light? >> I believe it's just a painted wall. >> It's actually just a painted sign. >> It's a painted sign, not >> it's not Yeah, it's not channel that is in there. No. >> Okay. >> It's just it's probably vinyl or you know, >> it's a it's a the wall. It's a wall that
has angles to it and they're they're just painting the basically painting the wall inside. >> There's no back lettering. No LEDs. Okay, >> quick question. How long is your lease commitment? >> That I don't know. >> That's a good question. >> Um
>> cuz if we're going through this and Michael's didn't last very long and Ross is not going to last very long, then >> Ross Ross is usually in for a long time. >> I know, but >> it's and that's why they go to this length to um do the signage that they
want. I mean, if it gives you any indication, I've been traveling every other week pro probably the last two months for for this client and um they they don't go to this much trouble if they're not going to stick around. You know, I'm sure it's a I'm sure it's a pretty long lease because they they
took all they also took the main tenant space there. So, I don't think that the property owners would have given them a short lease on on that type of a tenant space. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other comments or
questions from the board? None. Would anybody like to make a mo? Um, I do have one. I'm sorry. Um, and I'm asking this of everyone, not in um, specific to this project, but did you receive neighbor approval or request neighbor approval
for this signage? >> Um, there I mean, we sent out public notices. I know that. >> Did anybody approach you denying? >> No. speaking against this approval and you did not make nor did you receive any renumeration for this approval?
>> Okay, thank you. Um, who would like to make a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> A second. >> All in favor? >> I I >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Thank you.
>> Okay, next item. Um, should we go back and see if um 6940 Abbott Avenue is the representative here today? >> No. Okay. >> I don't see them and they and they reached out that they would be here. >> Okay. Well, we'll go on to item number
11. DRB25-116 FAK FKA DRB17-0147. Property address is 1664 Lennox Avenue. This application has been filed requesting modifications to a previously approved design review approval for a
variance to exceed the allowable hours of operation for an accessory outdoor outdoor bar counter associated with a new restaurant located within the interior courtyard of the property. Specifically, the applicant is requesting this interview approval for the change of ownership or operator and
approve some conditions that could be superseded by the planning board under conditional use permit approval. Okay, so this is um the building behind 11-1ven Lincoln Road. Um previously there was a restaurant there, Choto Mate, uh which was a a high-end Mexican
restaurant in case anybody went there. Um when this was approved by the board, um the site was the site was approved uh by the board, the building was approved by the board. Um however, the board implemented some operational conditions which are something that's more which is
something that's more typical of the planning board. Um, and the reason that happened is because this establishment did not rise to the level of a neighborhood impact establishment, um, which is what the planning board reviews. Um, so the board order at the time included several conditions regarding the operation of the site. One
of those conditions is that if the ownership changed more than 50%, the applicant would have to come back to the board um, for approval of the of the change of the name and and essentially a progress report. Um, this is something that's typical of planning board orders
and over time the planning board has been modifying that condition to allow tenants to change. However, what it would require is that there be a um an affidavit submitted to the planning department acknowledging all of the operational conditions that are in their order.
Um and then also it requires um that um um did we require did we include the condition on the on the on the um progress report as well to be scheduled?
>> No. No. It was it the Okay. So, it requires that the applicant uh submit an affidavit to the board um in order to to to planning department in order to um um ensure that they are aware of these conditions and that they will operate by those conditions because that was one of
the issues that sometimes the tenant would change and they didn't know that there were operational conditions on the site. Um so that's that's what this order would would require. So in the future it would allow the tenants to change but they would have to submit an affidavit acknowledging their acceptance of these conditions. Um the other the
other conditions in the in the order for operations um that they're requesting some changes to are that the applicant is seeking to replace the patron occupant load metric with a maximum seat count to limit the size of restaurant operations. So they're requesting that
there be a maximum of 218 seats. Um which that is consistent with the uh prior uh BTR that was approved on the site. Um, the reason for that is the condition prior had a an occupancy load
limit. Occupancy loads are set by the fire department. They can vary depending on where you locate furniture or where where several things are located. It's harder to regulate. So, they they requested that the um order be specific to seats rather than occupancy. Essentially, that's going to limit the
amount of customers they have on the site. um they requested that that limit be allowed to only to be exceeded only if approved by the planning board. So if they go to the planning board to seek a neighborhood uh conditional use permit for a neighborhood impact establishment,
that number would be allowed to go up. That's a that's a change that they're requesting to allow the planning board to authorize increases beyond what this board has set. Um that's typically what happens with uh neighborhood impact establishments. They get approval from the planning board. they have to do
traffic study, sound study, uh a whole slew of other things um which is the focus of of what the planning board is looking at. Um the next uh modification that they're requesting are to condition six and 8 um which would allow for modifications to the sound system only
if approved by the planning board as well. So the planning board is typically taking the sound into account. So in this order that that was approved by the planning board um they are it does have a recommendation it does have a requirement that the sound system and sound attenuation measures shall be
implemented as per the recommendations of the sound study. So at the time that this was originally approved there was a sound study that the board agreed with and and and um approved and so those are the limitations on the site. They're requesting that should the planning
board approve something different that they'll be allowed to proceed with with whatever the planning board grants them. Um so those are the changes that they're requesting. Uh the primary changes for the change of owner operator. Um and then these other two conditions that would allow them to seek a conditional use permit from the planning board which
would supersede the limitations in this order. with that staff uh recommends uh that the application be approved um because they as I said any any changes that they propose would have to go through a very thorough process um to allow them to to make any changes to their sound system
to their occupancy load limits to their uh seat limit and um and so staff is not a not opposed to that because they would have a process that would safeguard residents in the surrounding neighborhood. And before we start, just any disclosures from the board. Okay.
>> Good morning, Madam Chair, honorable board members, city staff, and attorney James Ralph with Green School Martyr Office of 600 Burkel Avenue. here today with uh our client Propellini who is the 100% owner of the applicant entity and
on Zoom is my associate Adrien Noto. Um Relio really gave you the full explanation of what this application is for. Uh the primary purpose of the application is for a change of owner operator because your prior order on the
granting of a variance to use the accessory bar for the restaurant was specific to a a a specific LLC, NZR LLC. Our client is now the tenant of the space and of course wants to utilize the existing bar counter that's uh an
accessory used to the restaurant. It's a structure, but there's essentially an opening at the top. That's the only reason it's considered open air. Um, in this case, uh, and I, our client is here, he can give you, uh, an
explanation of the concept that the board was would like, but, uh, this will be a luxury dining experience that blends Japanese precision and Italian passion. um a steakhouse type concept.
Uh really mentioned some of the other conditions. Uh the staff is updating the order with some of their standard conditions that they have uh added to u development board orders as of late. Uh just as a note also for the staff when
we filed this application, we hadn't had the fire department inspection yet on the occupancy. We've since had that inspection yesterday and uh it came in exactly at the same number 247. So we when we filed the application we we don't know exactly what number they
calculate but it came out exactly the same. So there is no with this application there is no change in the uh site. There's no increase in square footage, no increase in occupancy, no increase in seating. Uh no change in the use. It's a restaurant. Um and it will
continue to operate as such. uh the only change is the entity uh that is the tenant now and um pro's concept uh which he can give you a little bit more of an explanation of the only reason for the um
modifications regarding um potentially a conditional use permit is if if in the future um the applicant decided to apply for a conditional use permit um we didn't want there to be jurisdictional confusion between the boards
uh which we've had happen in the past. So, it just addresses that potential. That's not in process now. That's not planned right now, but in the event it was in the future, um it would address that. Um we're here to answer any questions that you may have. We've had
uh no interaction with uh any neighbors um or buildings with respect to this application. Uh we have a city parking lot to the north. Um also across the street uh across Lennox
and the majority of the site is owned by uh our client's landlord the 111 it's part essentially part of the 11-1ven Lincoln site and we ask for your approval. As I said Petro is here to answer any questions you may have. Wanted him to be here
introduce you to him to the board. Uh, of course, he acknowledges the conditions and is in agreement with all the staff's recommended conditions. >> Thank you. Do we have any comments or questions from the public? >> No hands are raised on Zoom.
>> Okay. Um, comments or questions from any board member who would like to begin. I'll I'll start. Um, this is about as clear as mud to me. Um so um I understand that the two proposed
modifications are to uh occupancy which is allowed by the fire department to be 247 seats b or 247 people and that's probably based on the number of exits and uh into the build uh out of the
building. Um they're proposing 218 seats. Um that doesn't mean that there won't be more people than seats. Um but the maximum still remains at 247. So why do we need to as a board approve this
condition if it is only being reduced um potentially? >> So the seat count and the occupancy count are two two different metrics. The seat count is something that's much easier to to visualize and and put a
stop on. The fire occupancy limit um can vary based on a slew of factors, number of exits, the location of the furniture, location of of plants of of different decorative materials, um changes to the fire code. If anything changes, the fire
occupancy limit can change. And so they um would rather the dist the the the limit be something that is more tangible, that is more fixed >> and easier to >> easier to implement, interpret, >> implement, and to confirm. Correct.
>> But at no time will they exceed the 247 occupants allowed under the fire department >> if unless the fire department determines otherwise. >> Determines otherwise >> or if they if they um well the fire department's limit is always is always
the the absolute limit. >> Yeah. But even then, if the fire department were to change it to 250, let's say, instead of 247, and they wanted to go to 250, it would still need to go back to the planning board. >> If they wanted to go to 250,
um the No, what would trigger them going to the planning board is an occup is increasing the seat count, >> okay, >> of two >> 18 >> 21. um if they want to become a neighborhood impact establishment, they would have to
go to the planning board. So what an what a neighborhood impact establishment entails is an establishment that has entertainment and more than and an occupancy higher than 199 seats. So I believe right now you don't have entertainment. You just have a DJ. I mean uh background music. Background
music. >> Correct. There's no entertainment. So actually and that statement is correct. If we went to the planning board, if we wanted to um if they wanted to add any entertainment component to it, which could be
something as simple as a violinist, um it would have to go to the planning board because the occupancy limit that triggers you going to the planning board is anything over 199. So, we already know it's over 199. So, that it would have to go to the planning board.
>> Okay. Um, and we just happened to have the fire inspection yesterday on the occupancy and it came in exactly 247. So, we now know that it's going to be there. We were just concerned what if the fire department inspection was 248 would have to come back for another
public hearing for one person. That's the only reason that we requested that modification. >> Okay. >> Um, but fortunately yesterday we found out fire inspector came in, determined it was 247. still same number.
>> And as far as the proposed modification to number six and 8, which pertain to the sound system requirements, I'm I'm assuming that's because you don't want that sound to bleed into the neighborhood, residential or multif family neighborhood that's there. Um,
are they changing anything there? >> No, they're not. They're not changing anything. >> So, why come here to this board? the board the the order had those conditions in effect prior >> that even if it had more than a 50% change of ownership it would have to come here and potentially to the
planning board as well >> right so if let's assume they wanted to add entertainment they would have to go to the planning board >> and they would have to come back to this board to modify the conditions in the order >> so they have to go to both boards >> if they are keeping things as is
presented here today they don't have to go to the planning Correct. They don't have to go to the planning board. But if let's let's say they wanted to change and seek a conditional use permit to allow for entertainment. The the design review board order had a restriction on sound.
So they would have had to do go to both boards. They would have to go to the planning board which is >> if they wanted to increase sound, >> right? Yeah. >> And then come here to have that condition modified again. So what they're requesting here is the conditions that are in effect by the design reward stay in effect unless the
planning board approves something different. The conditions of the planning board would supersede the restrictions in this order. I maybe this is something we can speak more as a board later on, but Roelio, it costs a lot of money to come to this board and it costs a lot of time for a
lot of people involved and to come for things such as this that basically remain the same. Um, I don't I'm I'm quite not sure why we should continue with this requirement and maybe there's some very good reasons and that's maybe
something we can discuss at a future meeting if you can put it on the >> agenda. I I would say it's not common. Um, it was probably done in this case because they were not seeking entertainment and so the board wanted there to be some restrictions because
they were not seeking a companion planning board item. Um, and so that's why I think this was done at the time. It was done several years ago. Um, and I think I think that was that was the issue because they were not going to the planning board. There would be no operational restrictions on the
establishment and the board wanted there to be something. And so this was done. It's not typical. Typically, somebody that's proposing a restaurant wants the entertainment, wants these other things and will go to the planning board. >> For whatever reason, they chose not to do that at the time. Um, and so that's
why we have these these conditions that we don't typically see in a board. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. Um, does anybody want to make a motion to approve 1664 Lennox Avenue?
>> I'll make a motion to approve. >> I'll second that. >> All in favor? >> I. >> I. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Yeah. >> And this is not going to be Italian. >> It's a Japanese Italian steak. >> Japanese Italian steak.
>> I didn't want to stop and take time to hear about it, but I I'll look it up. >> I have a restaurant in Connecticut. You can take a look. Teras. Uh, >> if it's Italian Japanese, you should do very well. >> Thank you. Good luck.
Okay. So, our next applicant is um I'll try again for anybody here for 6940 Abbott Avenue. >> I I heard he's he's almost here. He expected us to have a short board until 10:30, so he was not planning on arriving. So, that was the issue. >> Okay.
>> Um uh so the next the next items >> 945 Abbott Avenue is that in any way rel have a relationship? No, they are across the street. Two totally independent projects. >> Okay. Is someone here for 6945?
Okay. >> Can I just grab my team where >> Sure. >> Sure. >> 6. So, we are doing DRB25-1088 which is located at 6945 Abbott Avenue. Um, now I have a question. the one that we're hearing
later, which is 50 West Alto Drive. Again, they need a 57 vote in order for that item to pass. >> Um, >> and because we're only five at this point, >> there are no variances. That application only requires four.
>> Four. Okay. So, um, if once we get to >> Yes. >> the point, we may have to hear your item and >> I agree. >> And, um, okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Okay, thank you. >> Where's that report?
Ah, here it is. Too many. >> Okay. >> Okay. uh DRB 251088 6945 Award Avenue. This application has been filed requesting design review approval for the construction of a new six-story mixeduse hotel building including a
variance to remove the requirement for a dis designated loading space including one or more waivers. >> Okay, so this is a interesting project. It's a single lot project. Um the site
currently contains a two-story um hotel uh apartment hotel building. Um and the applicant is proposing to replace the structure. It is located in the North Peach North Beach Town Center central core district. That is a zoning district
um that in 2018 was um the the zoning regulations were modified. The the height restrictions were increased. there was an F uh increase that was approved by the voters for that area um as an area that the city wanted to see a significant amount of development in. Um
so this is a a singlestory site. Um on the south they are located next to the uh public storage a public storage facility uh warehouse building. Um and then to the north um there's another development that that uh will be taking place there that was approved by this
board. Um so this this site is interesting. It's located um on what is called the PO. So part of the town center regulations um are require that on what should have been platted as 69th Street, there was
never a 69th street. The the grid goes from 68 to 70 to 70 uh to 71 >> uh sorry 70. It goes from 69 to 70. There was no 70th street. I apologize. There should have been a 70th street. So, the code requires that the
properties that are fronting what would have been 70th Street are required to have a 10-ft setback to create a public pedestrian po to allow pedestrians to be able to cross that district because the blocks are very long and one of the goals of the town of the town center
regulations is to en encourage people to be able to walk and facilitate that. So, they are complying with that restriction. So, they have on the north side a pedestrian po. providing their segment. As other properties develop, they will be providing their segment. And the idea is that over time we will
have a complete pedestrian po that crosses the entirety of the of the North Beachtown Center uh from Indian Creek Drive all the way to Collins Avenue. Um so this um this application, it's a it's a 48 unit boutique hotel. Um they have a lobby on the ground floor and some small
commercial spaces. Um and then the upper levels contain uh hotel rooms ranging from 300 to 347 square feet. And then the top floor has a rooftop pool and a terrace. Um the footprint of the building because of the PO is shifted to the south of the site. It's not a very
big site. It's only uh the lot is 6,250 ft. Um and so they are proposing a floor area of 21,49 square ft. Um which is very close to the maximum allowed. Um the F limit here is 3.5 which is uh pretty much the highest
allowed in the city. Um so but it is a small site. Um and then the applicant um is proposing um the lobby have um again some commercial spaces, some double height glass volumes and so it's very nice at the pedestrian level. They're
proposing a uh a 10-ft setback landscaping and complying with all of the frontage requirements um that the code contains. Um the tower portion of the building rises from the second floor um with a patterned metal facade that has uh several undulating planes. So the
facade has a lot of movement um that follows uh um the curves and the balcony slab edges. Um the facade is perforated so it has openings that allow light to to filter into the recessed building walls. Um um and the building walls
consist of gray stucco and glass with that behind the behind the architectural screening. Um the rooftop level um is at uh the setback on Abbott Avenue. Um and it has a uh a concrete canopy above the above
the above the pool deck area. Um, so overall staff is supportive of the design, but uh we do recommend that the architect incorporate some additional architectural interest to the uh gray stucco wall that is located on the north elevation facing the pedestrian po. Um
staff also uh staff recommends that they incorporate a higher quality material um or a more natural solution such as landscape on that wall um in order to soften the soften the design there. Um the applicant is also requesting a variance of the off- streetet loading
requirement because of the narrowness of the site. It's very difficult for them to provide parking. It's very difficult for them to build a driveway given that they have to provide the setback for the po. Um so staff um is not opposed to the granting um of this variance for the
loading. The code would require them to have one loading space. Um so we are recommending that that be waved varied. There's another requirement that prohibits off- streetet loading on street loading spaces on class B frontages. So, Abbott Avenue is a class B frontage. Um, the applicant is seeking
a variance of that requirement in order to allow them to have some on street loading um in front of the site as they will need some operational loading to handle deliveries to the site and such. Um given the given the location away from 71st Street, which is the primary
focus of the of the North Beach Town Center District commercial regulations, um the the loading taking place on this street frontage, um should not impact the the retail operations that are expected along Abbott Avenue. So staff is not opposed to the granting of that
variance either. Um the the um the project is not required to provide parking. So the code uh the parking tier that is uh that applies to the town center does not require parking for hotels or for retail if there's parking within the vicinity. There are a few
public parking lots owned by the city in the surrounding area. Plus, there is a public parking garage that is being proposed for the um that is that should be built should be starting construction um and design work soon um for the parking lot located at 72nd Street um
which is about two blocks away from this site. Um so with that, staff recommends that the application be approved subject to the conditions in the attached draft order. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> And before we start, any disclosures from the board? >> None.
>> Okay. None. Thank you. >> Good morning. I Mishka Setut of Holland and Knight with offices at 701 Bickl Avenue. I'm joined today by my colleagues Sylvia and Juan of Matter Architecture and our principal floor. I also would like to take a brief moment
of personal privilege to express my deep gratitude to appear before this August body. This is my first time on the other side of it as I used to be a city attorney with the great Steve Rothstein over here. So, I'm a little nervous, but I'm super excited and I hope you guys
will appreciate this application as much as I do. And with that, we'll get started. >> So far, we agree with you. Steve Rosting is an awesome guy. >> Thank you all. I will have to swear your team in because I believe everyone came in late. >> So, let me just stop this for a moment.
Uh folks, do you uh please raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you so much. >> If we can get the presentation up. Excellent.
>> So, as um Roelio mentioned really succinctly and perfectly, this application is exactly what you are asking for in your code. It's exactly what the voters want to see in North Beach Town Center. And it's really a continuation of what's already happening at 6945 Abbott. M hotel as it exists
today is an 11 unit boutique hotel. So effectively we're upgrading it to match the neighborhood which has as you guys know supposed to be the centure core of the north beach. We're providing the pedestrian po as Roelio mentioned and
we're also looking to continue the use of two spots on street for loading which is an existing use under Abbott M hotel currently. As I mentioned, our zoning is town center central core and that is exactly
what you want to see here. pedestrian friendly, walkable, mixed use, something that's supposed to activate the public realm in line with the principles of new urbanism. As you see in your future land use map, this entire area is slated to
be within that same design. So, what we're proposing here is exactly within your code. We're not asking for extra height. We're not asking for extra density. We're not even asking for a variance from the PO or from the setbacks. The only thing we're asking to do is continue doing what's already been
on the site, but at a bigger, better level that's more in line with the future of Miami Beach. So, here are some photos of the existing hotel use. As you can see, we currently don't have parking. We currently don't have anything that is on that first floor. Now, we're going to have
something where if you're walking your dog down the street, you can pass through and be experiencing, you know, public life in a way that we all want to experience in Miami Beach. For context, this neighborhood is in transition. You guys have approved a
number of projects in the area and we see our design is complementing those and in line with the vision. As we mentioned, that's the ground floor activation. And I won't belabor the point. One other point I'll make is the bike room is supposed to house enough
bikes for our employees. We also plan to provide bus passes. So the idea really is to encourage people to use multiple modes of transportation. Here are some renderings of the pedestrian po which we've upgraded in line with Roelio and staff's me um recommendations to improve
the materials and to make it more interesting for the pedestrian level. I'm going to let the architects get into more of the details on design because I know when I'm out of my depth. But at this point, I want to transition now to one and Sylvia who will talk you through, you know, our materials and
other design features. >> Thank you very much, M. I'll um I'll go back one. So, um hi, how how's everybody doing? Thank you so much for uh receiving us. And we're very excited to show you this project because for us in
in our practice, it's about it's the fourth uh hotel project that we are working uh in in Miami Beach, especially the North Beach area. And we've seen one of them is about to open. It's on Harding Avenue. It's our historical renovation that became a beautiful
courtyard building. And we're seeing that a lot of these older structures have the potential to really revitalize the neighborhood in a very responsible way, very pedestrian oriented. And with these uh with the with this PO uh code
uh uh builtin uh definition built into the code, it gives us just that. So when you go to the ground floor of the project, you see how much of it it's dedicated to to um to public use and how open it is to the public. Um and from
what I understand, you know, the the owner wants to operate it with with also neighborhood friendly programs. So we back to the slide, we definitely agree that this this particular uh part of the site should be improved with natural
materials, with landscaping, with uh with with organic textures and and and transparency and light so that there is uh in a small site you can still get a lot of quality. you can still get some permeability from the street and
eventually when all the projects uh join forces, you would have a beautiful experience in walking through this neighborhood. Hopefully, this could be a bit of a model for the the ones to come um after. Um so, I'll run you a little bit through the through the through the
project. We have this ground floor. As you can see, the the there's some open open uh open to the to the streetscape. The building is a Like Roelio said, it's a six-story building. Um, we have a screen that is made of perforated metal
with undulating shapes to break up the the box factor that would otherwise be the the kind of natural extrusion of of the code and the and and the hotel room count. Um, so and again, it's a way of filtering light, of softening it up, of
adding some some some colors. In this case, we're looking at the color of the sky and and and the ground as the colors that are going to be in this in this facade. Um, this would be the back view. Um, this this is the the the wall that
because we are right side by side with a building that could be built to the same height, we're not allowed to have windows on this wall by code. So, there's the question as to what should it be. Um, what we're proposing with the skin of our building is a material that
has a natural gradient to it. So, instead of it being a big solid wall, you have something that has some some movement, some texture. And um, and again, it's not something that is in the realm of also of public art or an art mural, which would be a completely
different workflow to to to approve as well, and it would be problematic because it's too big for that. Um the let's see you want to go back to this. >> Yeah. So regarding parking, we have our traffic engineer here and he can answer
any specific questions, but Roelio actually succinctly mentioned exactly the situation. We're not required to provide parking, but we're in a good situation because there's a ton of parking on Abbott and we plan to, you know, abide by the code and requirements that are, you know, within there. That
pretty much concludes our presentation. I don't know if you all had specific questions and we'd like to turn over the rest of our time to the board and reserve our right for rebuttal. >> Thank you. Any comments uh Roelio or Steve from public?
>> We do have a hand raised. It's uh Carlos Barasa. >> Carlos, are you there? >> I'm here. >> Okay. Before you address the board, I just need to swear you in. Um, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll be giving in this proceeding is
the truth and the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> Uh, yes, I do. >> Okay. And I'm going to give you two minutes to address the board. >> Yes. Good morning, everyone. Um, I am a resident of 40169 Street at uh right uh
across street from this project uh about 50 ft away uh from the side of our building. um our association had sent a letter of strong opposition to this project to um to all the members of the
board. Um and I'm just going to address um some of the issues why uh we oppose uh the project. Um, in terms of of context, that 6900 block
of of Ababa Avenue has three um high-rise projects happening as we speak that are going to result in 400 units of apartments, condominiums, Airbnb,
um, and, uh, have created a massive amount of overdevelopment on the block. Um this particular proposal for this hotel um is proposing to go from 11 uh
rooms to 48 rooms which is a 400% increase on the number of rooms in a very small lot without a driveway to drop off and pick up guests to uh drop off uh supplies to
pick up trash and with no parking. Um we feel that that uh this presents a big safety issue for hotel guests, for uh pedestrians, for residents as you
will have um to use um AOT Avenue, which is one of the main or the main uh north south uh road um crossing the neighborhood and you will constantly be blocking the uh east side lane.
Um there's a there's a parking there's a bus stop right across street that doesn't have a bus line lane. Uh consequently the east side lane of um
Abot Avenue is taken up by the bus and the trolley on a regular basis. Real busy. So I uh we think that this is going to be create a big traffic problem and and a safety issue for people in the neighborhood and and and guests in general.
>> Madam Chair, we've seated two minutes. May I give the speaker more time? >> Yes. Yeah, you can go ahead. >> Another two minutes. >> Yes. >> I I I think uh I think that's the that's the um the the highlights of the reasons
why we oppose this development. Um, we just can't see how this could work on this block that is being so overdeveloped without any um uh without a driveway driveway and without parking. It's just it's just not doable um uh for
so many units. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> May we have the opportunity to rebut? >> Yes, >> we can do this. >> Yeah, go ahead. Thank you. Well, first I want to say thank you to Carlos. We had
the opportunity to meet with him and the president of 401 Blue yesterday and we are committed to being good neighbors. Ultimately, we understand his concerns and we empathize with him because it is a large impact to experience that transition firsthand. So, that's our
first response. Secondly, we would like to clarify on the record from our traffic engineer regarding some of the assertions made about traffic capacity, driveways, etc. Hi. Uh, good morning everyone. Um, Ariel Centurion with Kimley Horn offices at Tu
Lumber Plaza. Um, so I'll speak to some of the concerns that Carlos shared right now. Um, the first being the lack of a driveway for this site. Uh, given the narrow width of the site and the dedication to the 10-ft pedestrian po to the north side of the site, um, the site
ends up being too narrow to provide a driveway. vehicles wouldn't be able to uh make a U-turn within the site to enter and exit. Um in regards to the traffic being generated by the proposed hotel, the hotel is a relatively low uh trip generator. Uh based on our
calculations, the increase in trips would lead to one additional trip every 4 minutes in the AM peak hour and in the PM peak hour, uh we'd see an additional trip every 3 minutes. So despite the increase in the number of rooms, the number of uh vehicular trips being
generated by the site uh would not be uh as impactful. Um in regards to potential lane blockages on Abbott Avenue, um it's true that the uh bus stop on the west side of Abbott Avenue does not have a bus bay. Fortunately for the our site, uh we do
have that on street loading area that exists today. So both uh passenger vehicles and loading vehicles would be able to utilize that to avoid blocking that eastern most travel lane on Abbott. Um that loading area would be able to accommodate up to two passenger vehicles
or a loading vehicle and a passenger vehicle while still being within the loading area and avoid obstructing that travel lane. Thank you, [Applause] >> Madam Chair. Um I we we have some conditions of approval that were
provided to us by the transportation department. Unfortunately, we didn't get them into the draft order. We would like them incorporated. And if if you don't mind uh for me to read them into the record. >> Um so the conditions of approval. Number one, all delivery, loading, and pickup
drop off operations must utilize the loading area and may not obstruct the public rideway at any time. Per the City of Miami Beach transportation and mobility department director and parking department director, the applicant must provide an off-site parking agreement
stating parking spaces are available with a private parking entity in North Beach to serve the proposed development and provide the agreement for review and approval to the city of Miami Beach transportation and mobility and parking departments. And number three, uh, the applicant shall coordinate with the city
of Miami Beach Transportation and Mobility Department to implement an acceptable transportation demand management implementation plan per the TDM strategies outlined in the most recent traffic impact analysis dated June 19th, 2025 prior to the issuance of a building permit.
So those are three um conditions provided to to us by by the transportation department. >> Permission to >> excuse me. So the first one is loading must be used at all times. They cannot block the street. The second is they have to enter into a parking agreement
>> uh for off-site parking by their guests. And what was the third one again? >> The coordinate with the city um to establish a transportation demand management implementation plan that would be um op opportunities to reduce
traffic impact. So um encourage employees to bike to the facility rather than drive and then provide maybe showers where they can wash up and then go to work. Uh provide opport options where employees get bus passes to encourage them to use public transportation rather than drive to the
site. Things like that are what typically go into a TDM strategy plan. >> Thank you. >> Permission to address the board. Uh so we have been working with Grant and the transportation department since 2023. Um we objected to condition two when it was
proposed uh relatively recently be on the basis that TCC does not require parking. So to require us to execute an off-site parking agreement when we are not required to provide parking goes against this purpose and the spirit of the regulations. It also imposes an
additional burden on us to you know then go to this person draft this agreement additional costs and we really felt like it was inappropriate given how low our vehicle demand and trip generation is. I have our traffic engineer here who can speak more to the inappropriateness of
the off-site parking agreement and where it's typically used in our experience with private development, but that is something that we were not able to hash out with the transportation department because they were away from office when we reached out to them. We did register our objection to condition number two in
writing at the time that it was proposed. Um, Roelio, in reference to this parking agreement, where are their public parking lots where they can enter into an agreement with the city? There may be some private parking lots, but where are
they in relationship to this location at 6945 Abbott? >> There's a diagram. >> Um, >> there's a small one on there are small 71st uh next to Prima Pasta. There's one next
to Prima Pasta. I believe there's one next to there's a city bank site on um >> on um >> on 69th. >> I believe there's a public lot there. Um the the lot on 72nd Street will be undergoing construction soon, so I'm
sure that's going to go offline. Uh but then it'll come back online. Um so I I think the intent of this requirement is not that they provide a significant amount. I think it's primarily intended for um employee parking. So, it it's not rigid in terms of the number of spaces
that they need to provide. Um, it's flexible in that manner, but I think the the transportation department wants there to be some availability of parking, not necessarily the full amount that a hotel would typically require. Um, so just food for thought.
>> Let me just open it up. Uh, is there any comments other from the public or just the one gentleman that spoke? >> Just the one gentleman that spoke. His hand is still raised. I don't know if he has more to say. if you want to speak or >> Yes, let him. >> Uh, Mr. PZA, if you want to speak again.
>> Oh, we do have another hand raised uh as well. >> Yeah, I just I >> I wanted to um I wanted to address uh the responses from from um from the engineer, I guess. Um I understand that
that this is a small lot and that's precisely why uh hotel should not be in a small lot. I understand that the frontage of the lot is about 50 ft and um I we feel strongly that there if
there is no way to put a driveway there then the a hotel this size should not be there. Um the proposed PL although it was part of the of the um I guess the
the vision of the um town center neighborhood um is basically an alleyway that dead ends uh at 100 ft because there is no um there's no no exit on the on Harding
Avenue which is the next street and and this proposed pel as I see it is going to become um how they get the trash out of the back of the hotel to um Abu Avenue and
it actually may become more of a nuisance than than anything else. So maybe maybe one option is to eliminate this PO so you actually put a driveway and not um and not create more traffic
and safety issues. Um, also those two those two uh loading spots are not they don't come as a right to to this proposed development. They they've been there for an 11 unit room hotel which
works fine for 11 rooms, but it will never ever be enough for 48 rooms plus employees plus trash plus supplies plus coffee shop or restaurant or whatever they put in there. It's just they're just not enough. So that those are a
couple of thoughts here. Important, I think. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> Miss Miss Herman lowered her hands. >> So there's no more public. >> No more. Okay. Um I'll open it now to
the board. Um >> Oh, it came back. >> Came back. Okay. Uh Beatatric Herman is Herman. >> You're you're muted. If you could unmute, please. >> Okay, >> there we go. Okay. >> Good morning. Um
>> Miss Herman, before you start, I need to sway you in before you address the board. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> Okay. Okay, I'm going to set the clock for 2 minutes for you to address the board. >> Okay. Okay. I agree 100% with the
previous speaker said. I live half a less than half a block from the pro the this hotel. The amount of traffic that they're going to add to Abot will be insane. And I don't think you should allow them
to do that. There is no way. There is only two parking spaces in front of in this in Abot for anybody to park. There is no park private parking that they can use
on 69 street like the person from the hotel say. No, there is no parking in 69 street at all. And if they going to park in the public parking, they better have um somebody to take them there. some some people from the hotel or whatever,
but still just if you I don't know if you guys have ever been there. Please, I urge you to go and see what they're asking. You I'm a I'm a I'm a person who's going to come to that hotel and
the and the Uber or the taxi or I'm driving the car. I'm going to stop in front of there because I can't there is no way to go inside to get my luggage out or to me to to get out. In the meantime, the people that
are driving on Abot have to stop and it's going to create more traffic than we have. So, I urge you please do not accept this proposal. We have sent you a letter uh to the on that behalf. Our
president send you a letter on on on the on our behalf. We have 200 day units in this apartment in this building that we oppose to that 100% and you you and we have also constructions three
constructions around to add to the to the traffic in here will be same. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, now we can start with comments from the board. No more
>> no more public comment. Okay. Um, while our chair gets ready for this meeting, we will continue. We will open. Um, does any board member have any comments or questions concerning the project? Who
would like to begin? Okay, go ahead. >> Just in regards to the design itself, a question about the preferated middle. >> Uh, >> if you can all put up the design again and the location of the proposed hotel
in relationship to the entire city, that would also be good for later on. Okay. >> Seems to have or whoever Dr. Um, it seems to have a very industrial look to it. Is that the reason why you
chose to have that industrial look for >> the hotel in this location? >> Industrial the you mean the >> preferred metal. [Applause] >> Hi. Um, no, it's not industrial. We we think that with with the colors and the
articulation and the shapes, it's I mean it's a it's a there's a metal material that gets used all the time on on on on high quality facads like >> but so it's it's it's meant to be a material that is a little bit uh lively.
>> I see. That's >> so it's easy to shape. Other materials are difficult are harder to make like undulations out of or round corners or softer shapes. So if you to make that out of say like masonry or or concrete is a lot more uh cost ineffective and
also a lot harder. So that's the reason why the >> Can you put up the uh um photograph for the public and for the board of the entire facade the front facade of the building? >> Yeah, >> that this one.
>> So this is all metal clad in the front. >> It's like a perforated It's like a perforated metal cladding. So it would be it would be like translucent. So it's like a a seethrough material. So it's if you have uh you know uh imagine a sheet
of paper that's perforated that you can see partially through that the light goes through that it's a little bit uh it creates the softness to it. So again the idea is to make what would be an angular shape be a little bit softer with colors with perforations with
light. So that's that's >> that's the intent of it. >> And is it painted? Is it patina? And is there a curtain wall behind it? How is it? >> It's typically like uh the way that it's it's printed. So it would be it would be printed like a like a t-shirt. So it
it's a material that gets shaped in a shop. It would then it it goes to a to a to another machine that would paint the piece of the pattern that you are assigning to it with a computer and so on. on each piece gets done the same way. They get numbered so they get
placed in the right order. >> It's like a pattern. >> And is it is it a regular diameter hole perforation that that's No, I understand the material. I'm wondering is there a do we have a picture of the the image that's applied to it or is it just a pattern? >> Um we can give you a sample if if you need
>> uh if you would like to see that at some point. >> I'm just trying to record what it is. And then you have a curtain wall behind or do you have a a stucco with with >> Yeah, it would be like uh maybe S you're going to address. >> No. Yeah, there there's a it's all glazed behind it. So it's the idea is that has quite a bit of dimension. So we
have the balconies and then behind that is the curtain walls, the windows that open up into the units. >> Right? Because it's a small site, if you had your hard surfaces pressed up against the limits, you have a heart shape. So what we're trying to create is
almost like a you know when you have like a number of curtains in front of a window you have your sheer curtain you have your blackout you have your there's a layered uh thing so you create a little bit more movement in what is otherwise a harder shape. So the intent
is to soften the the shape. >> So this perforated metal facade would be in front of the balconies as well as reflected here. Do you have samples of the >> U facades that you're proposing the materials?
>> Maybe we can bring I I think maybe uh to help everybody, we could probably bring like a like a 3D print like scaled version of it so that you can see the the layering and the >> and the the things. Also, it would do away with reflection because this would
be a matte uh thing. So you wouldn't see reflections from glass or from from things. Uh but we could probably provide you a a much more detailed technical uh version of what we're proposing.
>> Okay. And then one more question on the north elevation in the PO. >> Yes. >> Walk through. >> Did you say that there's going to be a mural stuckle or is it more detailed than just the stuckle finish or is it just >> in the PO itself? >> Yeah. Um so what what we're proposing in
the pel itself and we can look at this be more um it's more like again we because we have um it would be what you see in in these walls that get either it could either be planted or or again they could be surfaces that are a little bit
more organic like like like stone >> stone. So it would be a stone pitch stuck up. >> Yeah. The stone that we see here to the left. >> Right. So it could be like a like a type of coral stone or or something. >> So it'll be like an organic irregular natural texture.
>> Okay. >> And then and then above on the on the units above it's also balconies onto the PO. >> So >> have you >> the same treatment as the there's balconies onto the PO? >> Yes. This doesn't show it. >> It just shows
>> in the package there should be uh north elevation. >> Do you have that in your presentation? >> Yeah, we'll find it. the the cork the perforated metal wraps around the three sides that there's there's balconies I assume on the on the basic as well >> if you go back one
>> I had to see in the plans >> go back to >> you were just at the other one the other side sorry >> other one >> yeah go there >> yeah so you could see there's the po facade there with the cutouts of the balconies on um the side
>> on that okay thank Thank you. >> So, >> last question. You can go back one more. >> One more. Back or back? >> Yeah, that one. >> This one, >> the top right photo. Okay. >> Since there's been a lot of concerns about traffic and car queueing. >> Yeah.
>> Is there a way you could have you looked into creating that pedestrian walkway into a car loading zone for >> Oh, we're not allowed. the the code would pro the code the code prohibits the the PO to be used for purposes
>> anything other than pedestrian walkways >> okay >> and like the you know like like Ner uh traffic engineer from Kimley Horn said it's it would be like a way in and backing out >> yeah there won't be no turn around for it
>> where does the po lead to it starts on Abbott and where does it end >> I think the idea of the PO for from the city's perspective is that if there's a future development on the Harding side, then they would have to also provide >> continue it. >> So we're we're in a dead end situation
based on development. >> Mhm. >> So all the pass link up all the way to Collins. So the idea is that all the sites get interlin by these pedestrian uh courtyards, open courtyards and and and uh public facing like pedestrian amenities like
>> how wide is the pale >> 10 ft. >> Each each property is supposed to give 10 feet. So the property to the north will have to give a 10 ft as well for so it'll be a total >> but they're giving 10 ft. >> Right. >> And that's why they get reduced to 55 ft in width. >> Mhm. >> Okay. >> Right. So we have 10 ft but also as you
can see in the site plan we've carved more of the ground floor as well to connect to it. So that exterior plaza that that facade that folds in kind of adds to that 10 ft. So since we're that's what we're allowed to do, um we
try to maximize the pedestrian side of it as much as we could. >> Yeah, we were the the block adjacent between Abbott and Byron already has the full PO approved. Um so we're so we'll have a block and a half complete um once
the once both sides are built. >> Mhm. >> Okay. Who else would like to speak? Madam Chair, >> um where where I have difficulties understanding is that you're going from 11 rooms to 48 and parking isn't even taking into
consideration and you want us to wave it and >> the parking is not required. >> It's not required and that's a problem because as you live there and you drive through there and then you're going to have now all this more action happening in that it's just going to create more
havoc. Um, >> and I'm not done yet. >> Okay, no problem. >> Please. Thank you. With that, do with that said, right now there is traffic galore in that area. And what you're going to
create is more havoc because you're not even considering doing a little driveway because you can't do it because it can't create a U-turner. So, my concern is really parking or really a loading area for you guys. That's my concern. We don't need
more traffic in North Beach. We already have plenty and we're going to get plenty more in the future with all these future developments. So, this is not more of a of a question or anything. It's really more of a a voicing my concern in this area. Miami Beach only
worries about building, building, building, and parking. Nothing. You guys don't want, you know, Metro Rail to come over here. You don't want this. You don't want that. You want buses and you want Oh, this creates more traffic. I'm telling you, you should have a lane at
least for your for your um offloading or your your your >> your guest arrival. >> Yes. Because at this point, I'm going to know. >> Thank you.
Next person, next board member would like to speak. >> Um, can you talk to us about the program on the the ground level? I know it says hotel lobby and commercial. It's all shown as all open space. Are you planning to program that as third party
separate? Um, and where the hotel facilities for uh maintenance and things like that are located in the building. I I just was curious on how that is only because of the in and out and what we're discussing
here mostly. >> Take the maintenance part first. >> Um yeah, the maintenance I mean on every floor we do have a uh maid's room sort of um that would accommodate for the units and my understanding is that there
would be offsite laundry um in those facilities. The ground floor is meant to have a cafe. Um, something small, not nothing that's going to go into the night. No, not no restaurant. More of a cafe, a daytime cafe that the local
residents can use. >> And trash looks like it's going to go through the PO, not through the other. Well, I guess it's not your your lot there. So, it does have to go through the PO, >> correct? And if some pedestrian is using the po for what it is, they have to move
out so that the trash can come in. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> The the the town center regulations do have restrictions built in on hours for loading and trash pickups. Let me let me go to that just
so that you're aware. >> Right. >> Which are early morning, late evening. Let's it's it's intended to keep um trucks out of rush hour and loading to not happen during rush hour. So, let me
I'm going to the code section. >> Been a few years since we worked on them. Um >> what is adjacent to the PO where the loading is occurring? >> Adjacent is a property. >> What kind of property? >> Twotory residential property.
>> Twostory. >> Residential. >> Yeah, it's an apartment. uh >> apartment multif family. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> And this outside is the storage. >> Yeah. >> So, this is this is a this is previously reszoned and now coming to us where
we've got a a tall building and and a lower rise with other tall buildings coming up and and a lot of limitations that are >> coming forth to us where you can't really have a drop off. >> Please speak into the microphone.
offer micro is your microphone should be doesn't look like we can have a curb cut like you can't have that you can't use the po >> I will give my I think our chair is now able to take over so I'll speak as a regular board member now and express my
concern and my questions um one I have a concern going from 11 units to 48 units I understand the limit limitations that are in that area from visiting that area weekly. Um, and limitations as far as um
capacity for us to park uh ability for us to park as residents. Um, forget even guests that are coming or tourists that are coming, but also the ability to even get from one street to the next um during regular time and during um
traffic. um time. So, I have a concern with that. I understand that you all have the ability under the code to go from 11 to 48 units, but I think in our haste of improving the North Beach area as a city and as residents, we ended up
approving something that maybe not all of us that voted understood how massive of an increase to traffic and congestion this was going to bring. Um especially when you now you're not
required to have parking. You have 48 units that could potentially bring a vehicle and there really is nowhere to park. You also have employees where like Mr. Madan said, you know, the parking department is asking transportation that
you enter into an agreement which you all are not in agreement with. It's not something that you feel you need to do. But the fact is there's nowhere for those employees to park because taking over the public parking lot that's next
to Prima Pasta then creates another problem not just for Prima Pasta but for the people that are patrons of Prima Pasta um who are currently now sometimes parking two blocks away to get to that restaurant. So parking is a problem.
You're increasing from 11 to 48 with no parking, no driveway to be able to accept and pick up your guests. Where are they going to get picked up? In the loading dock. Um, if that's where they're going to get picked up, cars are
going to back up as they bring a guest if there's loading occurring on that site at on those two spaces at the moment. And I have a question. Are those two loading dock spaces um currently parking spaces or are they
currently loading dock I think is what I heard. >> Currently loading. >> So in order for them to continue using them as loading dock, they have to pay into the parking department. >> Okay. And that's something that they will do. Um the bus stop without a lane
to be able to drive into to pick up and drop off um is only going to block traffic even further. Um the site is narrow to begin with and it becomes even more narrow when we as a
city ask that there be a po. And is it more important to have a p or more important to have a driveway to pick up and drop off guests so that they get off the street and we can have transportation actually cars actually
moving and not backing up and queuing on Abid Avenue. That's a question that's beyond I think this board. It's a question more of the planning department and maybe the planning board taking a look at this because it does not work
and we've only started and right now this as it as it is presented while they're meeting all the codes that we provided I can tell you as a person going there a resident of only 65 years and that's not my age but 65 years uh I
will tell you that we can't get through the street we can't find parking Um, so are we making it worse with projects like this? And I think we need to stop and think. We need to stop and do a proper planning uh to enter into a
parking agreement for employees where where are they going to park? We can't find parking as residents. So again, we take parking away from the residents that are patrons to stores and restaurants in the area. so that
employees can park. Yes, employees have the right to park, but not at the expense of a resident. Um so, and and I don't know that it's worked yet anywhere. Maybe Scott being in the um
transportation committee can speak to this, but I don't know of any parking agreement where employees are um we tried to do it for the Eden Rock in the Fountain Blue where we said look we will um provide parking on the other side of
by Biscane which is now Midtown. This is how far back it goes. and you can then be busted in by Eden Rock and and uh the Font Blue. It didn't work. It didn't happen. So, in essence, the parking lot
next to the Eden Rock that is there for residents to go to the beach and tourists to go to the beach is taken up in the most part by the Eden Rock res uh guests and employees. The residents don't have a place to
park. So, um I I have a problem with the project as is for all the reasons I've stated. Parking, um the ability to get from one street to the other, the increase in units, the fact that there
is no driveway to drop off, um gas and pickup gas, the fact that PO is also used as the road for garbage pickup. I think we're trying to squeeze too much into a very small spot. and not giving it the accessory uses
that it needs to be able to function properly. Thank you. >> You know, I'll just say I I was on the transportation committee for eight years and it's always frustrated me with the lack of requirements and then to do something like this where you don't even
have a driveway. I know people that have put in inadequate loading zones and the trucks just stop in the middle of 17th Street or Collins Avenue and I I can hear the frustration. We're building something that is just not user friendly for a regular day-to-day basis. It's
shoving something too big into something too small with no accessory uses. I just that's where I feel. I'm I'm the residents are frustrated and I I think the city I don't think it should have gotten to this point where the city leads you on to think that this is this
is okay. I don't think it's okay either. I have to say I just think it's too much. >> Yeah. I Oh >> yeah. I mean I don't want to keep harping on it. I I mean I think I philosophically like am all for the
pedestrian experience and more often than not like I'm you know trying to promote that over parking spaces. Um but I'm still I'm just it just doesn't seem to make sense that you're making such a large scale hotel and there's no
there's not even like a valet drop off situation. I mean that like at a minimum I think needs to be for a hotel of this size like that and I and I understand that the site is not conducive to that but it's it just it's just not making
sense. And then so I'm like looking at Google Street Map and I'm like where's the closest parking lot if I'm visiting this hotel and it's it's granted it is adjacent to the site but it's not to t to walk with the suitcased. It looks like you have to walk like blocks blocks
around to get to the hotel, which is going to mean that you're getting dropped off right in front of the site on on Abbott, which is a very busy street. I it's just it I mean I I won't keep harping on it because I I'm just echoing what everyone's saying, but it just it doesn't it doesn't seem to make
sense. There needs to be some means of designated drop off pickup. Um, I'm less concerned about the parking, but I mean it's I I it's a valid point. Um, and you know, separately, I just wanted
to ask with the wall mural. So, that's that's an that would be separately approved um later if that was or do we do we just like if we approved this today, would they they could do whatever mural they wanted or >> murals murals require approval of the
design review board up to 100 square feet. If it goes beyond that, it actually has to go to the city commission on top of the deal. >> Oh, okay. Okay. So, I just wanted to make sure there was some approval. >> I think they've expressed um placing the rock uh facade that is in the front of the building
um >> that they're proposing. Would you be painting a mural or you're doing the rock facade? >> No, on the on the property line it was the textured paint. >> Okay. I just wanted to check on
>> Yeah, I'm I'm sorry. I don't Yeah, it's I I acknowledge that the site is is tight, but it's it's just squeezing a lot into what it is. >> Um there was a question on the loading before, and so I just wanted to read the hours. So, the the code provides that loading for commercial and hotel uses
and trash pickups with vehicles of more than two axles may only commence between the hours of 6:00 and 7:00 a.m. 9:00 a.m. and 3 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. So, they're not allowed to um have loading during um rush hours. This is
during the week. Um for two act for for loading of commercial and hotel uses for vehicles with two axles or less, this is more likely to be Amazon or UPS if they're delivering anything. They are allowed to uh deliver between 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. on weekdays.
>> Okay. >> And I just like to say if one of those >> trucks gets stuck on the MacArthur because of a pile up and shows up at 10:00 a.m., they're going to stop in the middle of Abbott whenever they want to. It's just not It's never enforced.
>> Yeah. >> And they stop wherever they do it on Collins Avenue all the time. And I think um also as a city we forget to check uh traffic concurrency as it extends beyond the one street around the
building. So how is that truck coming in from Miami get to this um uh proposed project? Is it coming through I assume Julia Tuttle? Is it coming down Collins or is it coming down
residential streets? uh because that's what's happening. A lot of them are coming down residential streets and it causes a problem of traffic congestion and speeding. sort of like I guess one question or
controversial not controversial but so I know the city of Miami Beach is continue to get denser and more urban but isn't this type of project like this should be championed because there's no parking involved because if we keep requiring parking and more car usage it would add
to the traffic of the city but them not having any parking requirements >> I I tend to I tend to agree with you but I think that when the project is this small and it's located on such a busy street, you at least need to have some off-site drop off, right? Like to Yeah.
Just like maybe not the parking, but this is that's that's where I'm really struggling because the the street is it's going to just block. >> I mean, and I'm all for the PO. I love that idea, but >> I don't know. >> And I'm all for modernism. I'm all for
walking. I am I use Metro I use bus system. I use public transportation. I know the pain. But this area, you're you're not even giving it a valet, like a little exit. So, and and for trash,
like we were saying, here comes 9:00 traffic, 10:00, it's going to cause more traffic. So, it's not about parking, say, it's more about the flow of the traffic. as a board, do we if this project came
to us smaller, how would how would we feel? Because I think because we've got a drastic increase in number of units, obviously we're not talking about parking. We're talking about logistics and hotel operation.
Um, I'm just asking that because they're going they're building the building to what they're allowed to build, >> right? >> So, it puts us in this position again. And it's like, okay, >> if this were to come back to me to respond to your question, I wouldn't
just look at a smaller um unit facility, boutique hotel, less than 48 units. I would also look at the drop off and pick up of gas. I would look at the bus lane. That should have been corrected.
uh not by them, but it should be taken into account now that we're doing this major overhaul of North Beach. Let's do it properly. Let's plan. This is our opportunity. We can't have a bus lane occupying the driving lane um because
that adds to the congestion of traffic. People looking for parking adds to the congestion of traffic because there's no parking to be had. So to respond to your question, it isn't just the number of units for me. It's the parking. It's the
um loading and unloading. It's the trash pickup on PO, which is supposed to be a PO, not a trash pickup. You know, that's not the meaning of a PO. Po is I'm going to walk and stroll down this street. I
can't. There's a garbage truck there. And that garbage truck is going to show up regardless of what our requirements are when it can get there based on its delay getting into the beach. >> Sorry, the the garbage truck is not going on the PO. It's the the trash will
be wheeled out to the street. >> Okay. I thank you. >> Sorry. >> Okay. Thank you. Um >> how how do we how do we >> And that garbage truck is going to park, I guess, in the >> in the loading >> loading dock. Okay. >> Which which it'll be on the street.
>> That's a good thing. >> Uh but it's just it's it's too much for too little of a spot. And for me, >> I'm just try I'm just asking these questions like how do we approach this where we're we're they're as of right
allowed to do something but logistically it doesn't work. What can we in in a drop off or a loading zone or a place for a truck to back in or a van or something which barely doesn't fit? Is that something that
>> we can suggest and approve that? But we can't because it is not our job, I believe, as this board to take a look at this whole North Beach concept that was approved by voters and massage it to see
if it's actually working because it isn't just this one unit. You know, we're seeing uh you go through that area now and you feel like these buildings are going to come on top of you and not even 25% of them are built. So, I think it's something that the city needs to go
back and look at. I don't think it's us saying, "Oh, why don't you put a driveway here? Put a driveway there." There are too many problems with for me with this one site and this one project for us to be able to
for me to be able to say, "Okay, this will work." It isn't just the number of units. You know, if we we're looking at concurrency not just uh for for utilities but also for transportation, for parking, let's look at it
holistically because there is only so much traffic that can be that can occur in this area and it's bleeding into residential areas and into other streets that are at a max.
building. >> So I I just >> Oh, you can start building, but maybe, you know, they don't want to use 71st Street, 79th Street as a way to get to the mainland or as a way to get from the mainland to the beach. They don't want to use that. Nobody wants to use it. And
if you do Google Drive or any of the other, it tells you take Collins Avenue, take Alton Road, take Lagoris Drive, take Pineree Drive. permission to I'm sorry I don't want to interrupt if you all if there are any board members who are so I want to first
say that I really love Miami Beach um you guys the way you're thinking about this is so invigorating for me as somebody who's really into land use and urban planning and I really appreciate the tension that I think you're really putting their finger on which is how do we design something that is both for the
future and addresses the challenges of the present the present is that we have a car dominant society and most of our people will be dropped off in a car. But the future that North Beach is designed towards is one where it's pedestrian dominated and the reality is that we
cannot design this building to be both pedestrian and car friendly. But there is a balance that we have to strike. Another thing that I want to say, so that's just my personal side. We are willing to do the off-site parking agreement. As a Zeal advocate, I'd have to just point out that the code doesn't
require it. So, we have the right to object, but I spoke with our client and we're willing to execute the off-site parking agreement. We previously requested a sample of this parking agreement for the Department of Transportation and we're still willing and ready to work with them on executing what it is exactly that they're looking
for there. Thirdly, we have a hotel operational plan in draft form here, which we're happy to submit to you all where we would be willing to dedicate and commit to all of our employees signing something that says that they are either going to take the bus or use
the bike room or if you all want them to have parking, a specific allocation of parking in specific spots. We're also willing to provide a valet. transportation, who we've been working with since 2023, told us that they don't want a valet in line with the town
center code. So, we took it out, but we are willing to do all those things. The last thing that I'll say is the one net trip per 4 minutes is more than accommodated by the loading spaces which are already built into this project. So,
we are not asking for new loading spaces. We're not taking anything away from Abbott. This already is occurring. We are simply legalizing this use because this is what they've been doing. If you go to the site right now, there's a sign that says loading only that has this space quartered off and that is the
same space that we would be using. So, we are not imposing or removing parking from this area. I think that might have covered it. Ariel, did I miss anything? I I wanted him to speak to the Uber situation because I think that there is a um conception that lots of people are
coming to Miami Beach and driving rental cars, but I live in city of Miami and I Uber to Miami Beach because I don't want to park. So, I just wanted to talk a little bit about how we expect people to flow in and out of the property to give you guys a sense of what we're thinking. >> Yeah. Uh so, thank you, Mitch, and thank
you everyone for voicing your concerns so far. Um, speaking to the uh the parking issue and providing on-site parking or this off-site parking agreement, if we were to uh find an area where we could reserve parking spaces for this use, would be encouraging vehic
uh employees and guests to be parking uh within the area of this site and taking up these uh parking spaces that are being used by residents and other uh visitors to the area. um by not providing uh a reserved parking area. Instead, we're encouraging the use of
either ride share uh bicycling uh walking or using transit to get to and from this site uh reducing the impact on the adjacent parking areas. Um also I wanted to speak again to uh the uh concern of a lack of driveway uh
provided on the site. Um, again, the site is too narrow for vehicles to perform a U-turn within the site. Even if we were to provide a driveway that vehicles would drive into and reverse out of, we would be generating a a very unsafe condition for not only drivers
visiting the hotel, not only for pedestrians as well, but also for vehicles traveling along Abbott that have to deal with vehicles blindly reversing out of this driveway onto Abbott Avenue when they would leave this unsafe driveway. and I'm willing to answer any other concerns you may have
regarding uh traffic or maneuverability. Thank you. >> I I appreciate what you mentioned about not everybody renting a vehicle or coming in a vehicle using Uber Lift or what what have you. Um but there are
some people that may want a car. Um, and right now you also are bringing employees into the area to manage that 48 unit facility that requires parking. And whereas we cannot know what the future is going to bring, we do know
what the past has brought. And in the past, there have been buildings built on Miami Beach, two stories such as this one, um, that were built without parking. South Beach is a perfect example of it as well. not just North
Beach where we built these um four units, sometimes 11 unit multif family buildings with no parking. And today there's no parking on the street to be had for those people that own or rent in those facilities. So we have to learn
from the past because we don't really know what the future is going to end up being. Hopefully it will be a carfree. >> Um I I completely understand what you mean. I do live in one of those 12 unit on Meridian, no parking and I have a car
and I don't have a problem other than the city once towed my car when shouldn't have. Um but um I I've always found parking and I'm on Meridian which is as everyone knows a special street. Um I also used to live at 69th in Collins. I lived at the Collins for four
years just four years ago. So, I really know this area really well. And I just think I mean I'm maybe biased because I come from Toronto, which has the worst traffic in the world, and then lived in New York and London. And I maybe am
biased because I don't find the part the traffic that bad in Miami Beach, but um you know and I lived in North Beach and we often have projects up there and we're driving through and it might be 10
minutes longer than normal um when there's traffic. So, I I think that the concern I think it does need we do need to have a lot more public transportation initiatives. That's obviously beyond our
scope here in this room. But, um that's just my concern as a resident of Miami Beach that it's um you know to in my perspective maybe not as as a big issue. And I think the other
thing that we would say is in the event I I hear your um concern and we would love the opportunity to meet with you all individually and really look at the plans and get into it. I know and respect you all as professionals with design backgrounds and architect degrees. I know that our team would be willing to meet with the neighbors who
we've already met with. If there was a situation where you could not support the variance today, we would much rather our item be continued so we can continue to work with you all and with the neighbors on what the city wants to see here. Like I started this presentation,
I really was earnest in saying this is exactly what you want because I thought this is exactly what you wanted. I'm hearing otherwise and I can count I I see the nose on the faces. So, we would much rather talk with you about what it is that you want so that we can bring
this project home than um you know continue to turn this wheel. Roelio, I I think to continue this I you know I also hear the concerns but uh from the bo other board members but I I
think this is something that really needs to go back to planning and whether through the planning board I don't know how far back to the city commission but this is going to be a problem if we were to approve it today in my opinion and
tomorrow there's going to be another project like this and then another project like this and instead of doing what our goal was initially was to improve North Beach, we're putting it down into the in in a approving a
situation that is not functional. So I don't know that we can do anything here as a board. I if they want to continue the project that's fine but needs to go back to all of you um where it can be discussed at length. So I I will just
the the >> and I understand why you all recommend uh the project. You have no choice because you're given the parameters based on you know the the zoning that was changed for this area. >> So so the code requires parking for
residential uses and it requires loading and most of the projects that are in the North Beachtown Center are larger and they do have parking. They have their loading internalized and the loading is intended to not impact traffic as much as to the extent possible,
but the code does make accommodations for small lots such as this where it is impossible. There was a there was a project approved by the board um 2018 2019 where Las Vegas Cuban Cuisine is on Collins Avenue that's a similar layout. It's a one lot project and it's simply
impossible on Collins Avenue to provide um the driveway that uh that would be required of a much larger lot. It's it's just it just cannot happen there. There's no no way to fit it in and it would be a disruption to the pedestrian
flow that the town center is trying to encourage if you have that driveway and cutting cutting across the the the sidewalks that the that the town center is really calling for. The goal of the town center was to encourage people to walk as much as possible. We understand that that's not going to be possible for every trip. People will still have to
drive to their office, but the goal is that if they're going to a restaurant, if they're going shopping at the grocery store, if they're going um going out to a bar at night, that they'll be able to do that walking um and not have to get in the car and make that happen. So, that was the intent of the town center
regulations. There is still going to be a lot of new parking built in the larger projects. They all are providing their parking requirements for all the residential buildings 100%. Some of the retail projects, the larger retail projects have parking for the retail. Um, so we do expect for there to be a
lot of additional parking in the town center, but for these smaller lots, it's just it's just not um it's not going to be possible for them to >> maybe you all need to go back and take a look at these smaller lots because it cannot be the same treatment as the
bigger lots that do provide parking, do provide loading. Um because some of what you've said that you know we thought would be the case of people walking to all these places is wishful thinking. Um during certain times of the year it's
just isn't going to happen. And with certain people it isn't going to happen. And today and age it happens more so than it did 10 20 years ago. But it's not there yet. And we cannot do it at the expense of people that are currently living in that area and that own
property in that area. >> So does that mean we're doing a mortorium moratorium approval for any pro >> I just size project like that comes at this point. >> I get the parking waiver. What bothers me most of this is it's a hotel and there's nowhere to drop passengers off.
>> Listen to me for a minute because this is not your fault. The city does this everywhere. They put bumpouts in. There's no there's no legal place for a FedEx truck or a taxi or somebody moving to stop. So now instead of pulling where
the bumpouts were, they stop in the middle of traffic because they have no choice. And when you have a hotel with that many rooms, forget the employees, that's a whole disaster on its own, but it's code and I get it. And if they know that going in, but when you have people
being dropped off from an airport with luggage and they forget something in the room and they don't move and someone else comes, they're going to just stop in the streets. And we we just keep doing this. We keep doing this. We keep saying the po, it's pedestrian. But then we don't give any room for practical
realistic functions of a hotel. I mean, where do you see a hotel on a main street without something to pull off on? I I mean that's just it's not your fault and I get what you're doing and you know I just I don't know I I don't know how we
>> keep doing this. >> They do have there is today on the site there are two loading spaces as was as was indicated perhaps in the approval of the conditions for the variance. Uh we put in a condition that that drop offs would be allowed to take place in that space as well.
Yes, >> that would be >> Can I bring up the >> image on the screen again because I do think that I'm sensing there might be some confusion. We are not loading on Abbott. We're loading in a additional lane that is adjacent to our property
that is currently all parking spots. So, this is not going to disrupt the flow of traffic because to the left of our loading spot is Avid. And that entire lane behind us is all public street parking and it's a one-way road. So, in
theory, anybody driving down Abbott could drive either park there on Abbott down the street all the way from 71st. It's all public parking. Or they could stop in the loading zone. Now, as I mentioned, our hotel operational plan, which we're voluntarily profering, would
limit and restrict loading and drop offs to specifically our loading zone during specific hours. One of the things to keep in mind is that a hotel is not a 24/7 use. Check-in only happens at 3 p.m., which is not a rush hour time. So,
most of our people are coming in and we can also, you know, work with you guys to change that, but most of our people are not coming in at 9:00 a.m. or most of our people are not leaving at 5:00 p.m. So, in terms of traffic flow, our traffic engineers already said it's only one net new trip. In terms of where
these people will be dropped off, they won't be dropped off on Abbott. They'll be dropped off in the loading zone, which is not the public street. And in terms of the number of trips, they would be happening minimally during times that are not peak hours, 12 pm and 3 pm. So
in terms of the delivery and loading, we also have in our hotel operational plan voluntary profers to limit and mandate deliveries to occur again not during rush hour. And the other thing to keep in mind is that it seems like a big jump
from 11 to 48 for the hotel rooms, but you have to keep in mind that this is not a traditional hotel. This is not like >> a Marriott. This is a boutique hotel. So, we're expecting a specific type of patron who might not be necessarily
willing to struggle for parking on Miami Beach, if that makes sense. they are most likely going to feel more comfortable being dropped off in the loading zone or if we were allowed to a valet area, but that would still be the same area. So, the loading and the valet could be in those same two spots or if
the city wanted us to, we could expand upon it. Right now, what we are proposing is effectively an identical upgrade of what exists on the site. we are taking what you already have and basically elevating it to what the North Beach Town Center says that it wants to
be. Now, I understand that there's tensions, but in terms of the data and the evidence, there is nothing to support the assertion that we would be creating traffic on Abbott Avenue. Our net new trips and the times that they're coming in just don't support that
conclusion. And I want that to be >> Can you confirm? You said u patrons or guests of the hotel will only be coming in at 300 p.m. >> Uh check-in time. Yeah. So >> check, >> right? So check-in can't be before 300 p.m. But they can certainly come in with
their luggage, drop it off with the front desk, and go about their way because their flight may come in at 9:00 a.m. in the morning, 10:00 a.m. in the morning. Um, where do you expect your patrons to come from? Out of out of town
people. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Planes come in at different times. So, yeah, they can drop off their luggage before it'll be held at the front desk, but they still have to be able to bring their luggage. They're certainly not going to go around Miami
Beach, you know, with their luggage in their hand until 300 p.m. >> Yes. But I I I guess what our traffic engineer data is indicating is that most people are going to try to get there around the time of check-in, which is
well after. So we're worried about Miami Beach incoming traffic for people coming in from work. The people coming from the mainland are not going to be coming in at that time. So that is what I'm trying to point out. >> Okay. Quick,
>> do you realize that Miami International Airport has the highest incoming planes after 3 p.m. inbound? >> Both international, right? But that's opposite of our traffic flow, right? That's exactly the point. They're coming in at the but by the time they get out
through customs, 2 hours in customs, an hour getting your bag and then going to get your car, that's 4 hours. So at 3, you're at 7. 3:00 in the afternoon, you arrive. 7:00, you're on Miami Beach. So that's going to cause traffic, but it's opposite of
the traffic that we're worried about. So we're worried about mainland traffic coming into the beach. That's worst from morning commuters between like 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. And then we're worried about Miami Beach traffic going back to the mainland. And >> I'm not but I'm not concerned about main
traffic going in and out of Miami Beach. I'm concerned about traffic residents going from here to Publix from uh you know to going up. Trust me, I avoid North Beach right now. What do you think is going to happen in 3 years >> and I'm a resident?
>> Absolutely. I don't want to marginalize or contradict your experience. I'm just I'll going to turn it over to the traffic engineer because maybe I'm misspeaking. >> Yeah. Um Mish covered it pretty well. Um the hotel is a relatively low trip generator compared to other uses and the
trips arriving and leaving the hotel um generally occur during off peak hours. Some trips may occur during your peak rush hours but there's no uh for example like a work schedule 9 to5 that the hotel guests have to follow. They'll be
leaving and entering the hotel throughout the day. It'll be a dispersed pattern of traffic. There won't necessarily be a a hard peak. If this was a school or a restaurant, you'd expect not only much higher traffic, but much higher peak, much higher cues uh that would probably uh extend onto
Abbott Avenue. Uh compared to those uses, this hotel uh will have less of a impact on certain uh times of the day where traffic on Abbott Avenue and on the external roadway network are are at
their worst. >> Okay. So, what are we going to do? I think >> I think there I think there's two choices. One, you can ask for a continuance, go back and work with planning. I see so many problems with
this project that I I don't know that but but you know, you have to be positive and think that there's ways of fixing things. Um the other option is we take a vote, we don't approve it, they have the right to appeal to the city commission. Am I right?
The design could be appealed to the city commission. The variances would have to be appealed to circuit court. >> Okay, that's option two. Uh but I think the bigger issue here is an issue that needs to be discussed by committee
commission. um because it's an issue of what we've approved um to occur in this area and how it really is starting to come about and the impact that it's having on the community and it's not just the community of North
Beach, it's the Mid Beach community as well. So um it's your choice what what what would you like to do askments or >> can I ask this board a question as a as a designer because we have the challenge always to make all these things work and
in this project for example we have a project that is up to code that is taking again like like Mitch said uh an existing condition and while we're adding rooms we're adding a number of things is still within the parameters of of how it works but as It has been
mentioned as a small site. It's a very different situation than a big site where you can solve a lot of your problems on site. And this is a typology that by code does not require parking. So parking in my opinion should I mean aside from the agreements and the and the logistics of drop off should be a
discussion reserved for things that generate parking like apartment buildings without on-site parking. That's really your main and which is a typology that you see many years going into the back into the past which I think is part of a big a big part of the issue in this neighborhood which again
is something that we have to address um in and then we have another city uh ambition which is the Po uh pedestrian scape and again turning a what was a neighborhood of a certain kind into one
that is more pedestrian friendly. If the DRB sends this this project out the door by saying, you know, we can't solve these problems because these are bigger problems than than what a code complying project
coming in front of you can do. Then what we end up with is a city that has where these small sites with twotory buildings will be there for the next 30 years or however many years until the city finds a way to solve these things or until an
owner accumulates three lots again. >> Right. >> So that's an option. An owner accumulating. >> They're going to request the continuence. Thank you. >> No, I know. But but I want I want to ask them >> we should just take the continuence. Thank you. >> Your points are valid. No, we've
>> valid points and we understand you're you're in a tough situation as is the planning department. They've been given this envelope of where to approve and not approve or where to recommend and not recommend. The reality is it's not
working and this is an example of something not working. And I I would just my recommendation continuence would be good and coming back with the plans that you've discussed about mitigating the logistics of the hotel and and operations when the
the linens are coming in every day and there's somebody double parked and absolutely things that we're concerned with here and and addressing those and you know >> do we have design issues because I missed that part. So, >> yeah, I I mean, even design issues, I didn't even personally get into them,
but all this metal facade >> that is being proposed, I'd like to see what it looks like. I'd like to see samples of it. >> I think that would be helpful. >> Absolutely. I have one question that I'm asking everybody today and you didn't other than the two residents um um that
spoke up against the project. Are there any other re neighbors that you were in contact with that were not willing to um recommend the project um that reneumeration
was offered or accepted? Did you have any other neighbors that did not? >> I'm not familiar with renumeration. Can you >> payment? >> Oh, no. >> For recommendation? >> Absolutely not. >> Okay. >> Um, so we did meet with Bruce Fish, the president of the condo association at 401.
>> Well, >> um, and so >> did not speak with him. >> Sorry, >> did not speak with him. >> Okay. I was just going to say for our record, we met with him upon receiving his letter and we also met with the neighbor Carlos Sparza. We articulated to them many of the same points that we
articulated today. No need to rehash those. Um, so that's basically >> so other than Bruce Fish from 401 Blue and then the two residents that spoke today, there's been no other contact with any other neighbors >> from >> Yeah. From my experience, no. And my principal's confirmation.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. So, any other design issues that we want uh discussed and brought back if he continues this? Yeah, >> I just think the sample is a little bit more renderings would be good. >> Yes, that would be helpful. >> Especially the metal.
>> Yeah, absolutely. I will say um since we're all here in the sunshine, we will be reaching out to each of you individually and I know typically some board members don't like to speak on an item prior to and we receive some of those responses, but it would be really helpful to us if we could actually get some time on your busy calendar. So
after this we will definitely reach out and see if we can have individual conversations with you all and individual conversations. >> And I for one please do not take this as a form of disrespect but I will not speak to any can any presenter before the meeting. Absolutely. If somebody calls me and I pick up the phone because
it's somebody I know and by mistake I talk to them. But I usually will respond. I will read whatever is sent and I will respond saying thank you for the input. And I will do everything in front of this board. And I usually, like all the other board members, receive the
agenda virtually or by email the week before the meeting and in paper form the week of the meeting. But I want everything I say and everything I hear to be in front of the board members that sit here with me.
>> No, not right now. >> You will relate to the matter. Oh, I think when your item comes up, >> public comment was >> related to the ethical issues that >> so you can't speak. >> I think we Let's finish this item.
>> You're actually touching the point right now. I've been waiting since the morning. >> We We can't There's this We >> You have to be sworn in. We >> ask on the agenda and he hasn't responded. So there's difficult problems is about
this 6945. >> No, that's not before the board right now and we're in middle of another item. So, we'll deal with that. >> I need to make my point. No, that had nothing to do with >> Lor. Basically, this is not about this ethical issues and how the board members
are actually intertwined and not making disclosures and basically I'm getting hurt by that and there are multiple conflicts of interest that has not. >> Let me let me stop you right here. In
order for me to listen to the Lagorse item at the last meeting, it was first reviewed by the state ethics attorney, county ethics attorney, and city ethics attorney. So there was no conflict for me or or or any other member, I think.
Okay. But this item of Loris is not before us today. What is before us today are the items on the agenda and out of um precaution because it's happened in other neighborhoods um I am asking have you had interaction
with any other neighbor so we need to finish this item that we have before us today Abbott Avenue and then proceed with the other two items I think sir if you want to speak with Roelio we do so at this end of this meeting with Mr.
Steve Frosting, but this item of Lagor is not on the item today. And I hope that you do appeal and that you do come before this board later on. So, let's take a vote. You asked for a continuence. >> Yes, please. >> Okay. >> Do we have a motion for a continuance?
>> I can make a motion now since I'm no longer chair. >> Okay. >> And >> do we need to set a date for the continuence or not? >> We'd like the next meeting if possible. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> November meeting. And you're clear with we we'd like to see >> the samples. You'd like have
conversations about what we can do to make sure the hotel >> printed on the metal on the facility. >> Wait, I didn't hear that. >> Sample of the perforation metal and what's printed on that the color palette >> and then and maybe what's on the north side of the building. What is that? >> The textured paint sample.
>> Yeah. Or if it there's a gradient or something going on there. >> Yeah. Does anybody have any other >> in addition to the hotel operational plan which will address the um concerns that we've raised? Very valid concerns. >> Are there any other illustrations of the PO too you could provide? >> Yes. Uh those were done in response to
the recommendation. So we really put those together because we wanted to be proactive about giving you what you want. We are happy to take more time and in these conversations really work on something that the city wants to see in conversation with our neighbors as well. >> Great. Okay. >> Do we have a second?
>> Yeah, I'll second. >> Second. >> Second. All in favor continuous. I This will be continued to the November meeting then. >> Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> Who got the Who made the second? >> Laura. Laura. >> Laura. >> Laura.
>> I made the motion for the second. >> Can we take a fivem minute break, please? Five minute break. Yep. Minute break. Please reach me. 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. >> Okay. The next item is DRB25 111250 West Deido Drive. This application has been
filed requesting design review approval for the new construction of a two-story residence in touring one or more waiverss to replace an existing house. >> Okay. So, this is uh an application for the construction of a new two-story home
on West Alto Drive. Um the home uh is requesting uh a waiver and that's why they're before the design review board. The waiver is for an additional uh 3 ft in height. Um the site is a large site. It is a 21,973
ft site. The home is adjacent to um an easement um on the north side, I believe, on the north side of the island. Um so it really doesn't have a neighbor abuing to the north. Um, this easement is an is a just an open grassy
area that the the city is putting a seaw wall there and is redoing the site. >> Is that a utility easement? >> I believe it's for utilities. Uh, yes. It it almost feels like a street end, but it's it's it's not a street end. Um, and so that um so they don't have a
neighbor to the north. Um, as a result, the site has the building, the home has been pushed as close as possible to that area um, in order to provide for a larger setback on the south side of the property um, where they do have a where
there where they are adjacent to a home. Um, the home is being designed in a contemporary style. Um the facade has um um highlights materiality and texture. Has modern architectural features. It's
clad in it in a travertine and board form concrete. Um the home has um walls that are broken broken up by bands of windows and vertical wood louver accents. Um and then it has projecting eaves, floor slabs, and trelluses that
are edged with a black aluminum um black aluminum uh metal. Um it has very lush landscaping um on the property. Um staff did meet with the applicant um a few weeks ago. Um and um as a result of
concerns that were raised due to an adjacent pro to the adjacent property, the applicant has agreed to incorporate some enhanced landscaping in order to minimize the potential impacts as a result of this waiver. um the um and so as a result of that we included a
condition in the draft order regarding require a requirement for the enhanced landscaping um along that along that edge to further screen the property. Um I would say with the with the waiver being granted the home is still lower than what they could have done if they
were proposing an understory home. Um so even though they are getting a three-foot waiver this is a conventional home the height limit for convent conventional homes is lower than with a with an understory home. Um, so the height that is actually being requested is lower than what they could otherwise do as of right. Um, but because they're
requesting the three-foot waiver, um, they have to come before the DRB. Um, the um, other than that, staff is um, >> I'm sorry. So, it's three foot higher than a conventional home, but yet lower than an understory. >> Correct.
>> Okay. >> Correct. Um, so with that, staff recommends that the application be approved subject to the conditions in the attached draft order. >> Okay. And before we start, are there any disclosures from the board? >> No. Okay. Uh, >> I heard I heard from a neighbor and I
heard from the applicant's attorney briefly >> and I received numerous communications um from um residents, I guess neighbors and a phone call from a a friend who's also a neighbor saying that this was a good
project and that this easement utility easement was important for the neighborhood. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, board member of staff. Michael Larkin here representing the applicant. With me today is Sanjay Javi. He is the owner of
the property. Codyman is our architect, Bart Reigns, our general contractor. Karolia Montierro is our landscape architect. And I'm also here with my partner Matt Amster. And my colleague Mark Royo. Uh PJ, can you pull up the slide, please?
Thank you. Next slide, Matt. Next slide. So the property is located on the southern half of Toledo Island on the western side. It's about a half acre in size which is a very large property for the Venetian Isles where the typical lot size about 10,000 11,500 square ft. Next
slide. The property has RS3 zoning. It is actually a larger much larger lot than what RS3 zoning typically is. It's more akin to RS2 zoning. It exceeds the minimum lot size of RS2 zoning. RS2 zoning is our estate zoning. It's mostly
found on Lagorse Island, upper section of North A Road and certain sections of Pine Tree Drive. Next slide. Staff is recommending approval of the application along with all of our requests. We're not seeking to modify any of the conditions of approval set forth in the staff recommendation. Next
slide. The staff recommendation is substantial competent evidence. This is meaningful because we're in a quas judicial hearing and you all are sitting as judges. You need evidence to support your decision. What the courts have said is that the recommendations of the local government
are substantial competent evidence. Here what staff did, they applied the design view criteria to our proposed home and they asked one question. Is it compatible with the surrounding neighborhood? Is it compatible with the adjacent neighbors? And staff has answered that question with a resounding yes, it is. So you also should take
comfort of the fact if you're going to recommend and favor and approve our application today, you're doing so on a sound basis because the staff recommendation is substantial competent evidence. Next slide. We're asking for two waivers or Helia described. The first one which is
advertised seeking waivers. So the first one as a general rule in the RS3 zone is 24 ft for a flat roof. We're asking for an additional 3 ft. The city commission could have charged you all with a 10-ft waiver, which would be an additional story, even five feet. But they decided
that three feet was modest. It's not perceptible from the street, but is incredibly meaningful to the owner. With regard to the second waiver request, the way it works with walls along the interior property lines is that they can be 7 ft in height, but the first four feet must be solid. After that, there
must be aluminum picket fence. Based upon the concerns we heard from a neighbor to the south, we went ahead and asked for a completely solid wall at 7T from future adjusted grade. That's significant height. He had actually asked for 8 ft which would required a variance. I think 8 ft is a little bit
unreasonable. A 7 ft solid wall from future adjusted grade should address his concerns. Next slide. For 30 years, the prior owner uh blocked access to the water for the interior lot owners. the original developer of the
Venetian Isisles on included in every Venetian Isisle these I call them street ends or Helio might disagree with me but they're street ends so the interior lot owners can have waterfront access and have vistas of Biscane Bay the prior owner disagreed with that approach and
he erected a fence and he blocked access for over 30 years this was a constant source of concern and consternation for the interior lot owners on Toledo Island as you can see from the survey here this is how it used to look with the pavers. He used it as a driveway. Then the
smaller line indicates the the picket fence. Next slide. This is how it looked before. Note the pavers. Note the black aluminum picket fence in the rear. So completely blocking access for the interior lot owners to the water. Next
slide. When Sanjay purchased the property, he called me and said, "Michael, I don't know what really to do about this situation. Um, there's a fence on the street end. I don't own the street end. I'm not sure. And before I
had a chance to answer him, he went ahead and instructed Bart to remove the fence and pick up the pavers because he believes like he's the new kid on the block and he wants to get along well with the neighbors. It did not sit well with him that he would be a continuing source of controversy for the neighborhood. So now it's completely
open for all the interior lot owners to traverse this street in and enjoy the views of Biscane Bay. Next slide. This is a survey that proves what I'm showing. It's a recent survey that shows the removal of the pavers and the removal of the picket fence. Next slide.
Some interior law owners asked that we profer a condition that said this will never happen again. We're happy to do so. It's obvious. You can read the condition. We won't erect a fence again. Um, and if you include this condition in the order, it runs with the land. It doesn't depend upon the ownership. So,
we're very happy to profit this condition at the request of some of the interior lot owners. Next slide. Neighborhood outreach is very important to Sanjay. He asked us to do it. He did some himself. We're happy to give you eight letter support. But I think there are probably others in the digital
hearing file. But we really tried very hard to get as much support as we could from the owners on the southern half of Toledo Island. With regard to Mr. Kger, our neighbor to the south, who was objecting, I reached out to him at the end of July, and I had a first meeting
with him. He expressed some concerns, but I thought I would be able to address those concerns. The next day, he informed me he hired Bob Deuente to represent him. He was going to fight the application. I thought that was abrupt, but I think Bob's a good guy. I could have worked with him. Couple of days
later, I was informed that Bob was not going to represent Mr. Kger. Some weeks passed. Um, Mr. Riley then became the attorney for Mr. Kger. I also knew Mr. Riley. I asked Matt to discuss the matter of Mr. Riley. They met no less
than six times over Zoom talking about different uh ways to accommodate Mr. Kger. Uh, I intentionally pushed this application from the September agenda to October to give us more room to try to reach an agreement. Based on those
discussions, we again agreed to enhance the landscape involuntarily without the benefit of an agreement and we agreed to seek the waiver with regard to the materials used on the wall. Uh, Mr. Kger had an additional concern about where our summer kitchen is situated closer to
his property. He asked me whether Sanjay was a single man. kind of said yes and then he understood that Sanjay was a man of some means and he was worried that Sanjay would throw wild parties and disrupt his peace and quiet. I tried to convey to him that Sanjay is a very serious and somber guy as you will see
with his testimony today but I wasn't able to make much headway but it's important to note that Sanjay actually for the last two years lived on the southside of Mr. Kger. He rented a home there and I don't think Mr. Kger's aware of that and there was never any noise issue. I asked Sanjay, did code
enforcement ever come to your front door and ask you to turn down the music? And Sanjay is like, what music? I don't have any parties. This is not the way I am. So, we believe that that condition is unreasonable. There was another request made of us that is linked to a theory that Mr. Kger has with regard to a
devaluation of his property based upon the approval of our project. We don't buy into the devaluation theory at all. Therefore, we did not entertain that request. With that, I'd like to turn it over to Cody. He's going to walk you all through the rest of the presentation.
>> I think you'll need more than more than two minutes. >> I think so, Mr. Chair. >> Before we start, how much? >> Yeah. How much time do you need? >> Uh, probably 8 to 10 would be ideal. >> Okay, let's give them eight. Eight more and see if we can get a 10.
>> All right. Cody Thamman, Thamman Architecture and Design, 2414 Coral Way, Miami, Florida. We have put an extensive amount of work into this project. This is the owner's dream home and we've really worked to meticulously craft this home into something that's going to be really special for him and his family.
As you can see here, we have some existing images of the lot. As Michael mentioned, that street end has been demoed, rebought to the public. From the aerial views with the demolished lot, there's now a uh a vacant lot, which we intend to build this beautiful home. On either side of
the north and south, there exists very dense landscaping on both adjacent properties. We've worked a lot to go through the neighborhood context and make sure that what we're proposing is fitting within the neighborhood. So, I'll get through a little bit more of that in a moment, but we've been very diligent about analyzing
the neighborhood and the relationship to the neighborhood. From a site planning perspective, we've really taken great care to make sure that this lot and this home is is formulated on the lot in a very cohesive manner. Uh, as Michael mentioned, we've and Roelio mentioned, we've really pushed the house as far to
the north as as possible. So we've utilized a 10% side setback on the north side which abuts the street end. Um so we have a 12t setback on that side which ultimately grew our southside setback. So now we have 18 ft on the south side. In addition to this, the mass of the
home is really configured centralized on this lot. And you'll see here at the front of the home is a a a garage and a gym, both of which are lower one-story structures. So the idea is that this home from the street is really a minimized in scale with those one-story
elements. Additionally, at the north side is where we've proposed a good mass of the home. So on the south side, that massing of that two-story structure is is way less significant than we what we proposed at the north. Here you can see at the second floor we
that mass on the north side is where we have the bulk of the mass of the home. Additionally, that second floor setback, I think we have 78 feet from the street on the north side and close to 75 feet on the south. So, we are significantly
set back from code required second floor setback. Um, so we really wanted to do that to make sure the mass of the home is really centralized on the on the lot and not overbearing on the street. At the roof deck, we're proposing a roof deck which again is centralized on the lot. Uh we are code compliant with
making sure that we're at least 10 ft away from the sides and we are actually more than that. Uh elevator core is also centralized as well. The design of the home it's um it's very very special. Um to me to the owner we've really worked to reduce the
perceived scale of the home with these thinner eve elements which were proposing in a black aluminum. Uh we have tastefully input feature walls in board form concrete which will be a much more textural organic feeling material that serves as a beautiful canvas for the dense vegetation. You can also see
here from the street how we have those lower slung one-story portions of the garage and the gym that are closer to the street with the second floor significantly set back. Uh we're also propo proposing epay wood sophets uh to really warm up the architecture as well as privacy screening with the louvers uh
and then ample glazing to bring in a lot of light into the home. You can see here as well once you step into the property we've really worked uh along with the landscape architect to have the the water features the landscape really bleed into the home. So
there's a lot of articulation the massing within the facade. We really want this home to feel indoor and outdoor. So, we actually have landscape elements, water features that seemingly bleed into the home and really disrupt that the mass of the home. From the rear, obviously, the main
component of this residence is a beautiful view to downtown. You can see there at the north side, we have that two-story portion, which is larger. And then at the south side, uh, that has been mitigated and reduced quite a bit. So, similar motif to the front of the home, which is the the black aluminum
thinned out edges, which we've made thinner and dropped down a little bit from our maximum height in order to reduce the perceived scale of the home. And then a lot of glazing to take advantage of the views as well as the the pool and the landscape that bleeds into the residence materiality I touched on. We're using
the epay wood for the sophets to really warm that up as well as the the privacy screening with the louvers, the board form concrete which is very beautiful material with the veining and the grain of the wood once that's stripped. Again, just that beautiful canvas for the landscape to really steal the show on that.
As Michael mentioned, we are proposing the 3-foot height waiver. Here's a diagram that depicts that 3-foot additional space on this elevation. You can see how we've worked to articulate the side facades, making sure that we have ample fistration, courtyards, dense
landscaping. It's going to be uh every every facade of this home has been really thought out from a section perspective. This depicts our proposed ceiling heights, which we're showing as 11 ft at the ground floor and 10 ft at the second floor. Uh we're also popping up in choice
locations to provide some accent lighting, some warmer materials at the interior. So, we really feel that this additional 3 ft in height is going to allow the the structure to breathe quite a bit more, provide enough space for our mechanical, make sure there's a very resilient home, make sure that we have proper insulation, a very a very
wellthoughtout design. You can see from the street here, this is the uh proposed context rendering. So you can see at the north we have quite a bit of landscape with the street end as well as the existing dense landscape to the south property that's already existing which we've gone through with
our landscape architect and identified and proposed additional landscaping along that that um that property line. And then from the rear you can see how this home will really fit and nestle into the neighborhood. Um, obviously a
smaller uh existing home at the north, but we have that large buffer with the street end at the north as well as the dense landscaping at the south side. As I mentioned, we've spent a lot of time on the the context and the relationship of Toledo. So, we went
through and this is an elevation of our home and then quite a few homes to the north. And if you track that red line of our proposed height datim, you'll see that a great majority of the homes either approved or construct or under construction are all proposed at a similar height datim of what we are
proposing. And here's to the south and same same thing that we have these existing and new homes that are being constructed that are similar to our height data in red. This is an elevation of our two adjacent neighbors. So to the north we have the
street end which is going to be the landscaping. Uh we're proposing the 39 ft height in GVD. Um as well as that sign significant separation. You can see how we have on the south side 18 ft because we grew that setback as well as additional feet between the two properties the buildings themselves. So
at the smallest portion we've got 26t 8 between the two properties as which will be very densely landscaped. Here is a an exhibit that shows if we went to base flood elevation plus five and stayed at the 24 foot height. You will see here that we can build a home
that's only 1 ft lower than what we're proposing. And this could be done by right. And here's an exhibit. If we were to build an understory home by right, we would be 6 feet taller than what we're proposing. So effectively with a lot greater than 18,000 ft in RS3, we would
be granted 31 ft in height to build an understory home. As such, we would be 6 ft higher than what we're proposing now, which gives us 7 additional feet from the 24 ft minimum. We've spoken at length about this with the client. They want a resilient home, so we've opted to go to base flood elevation plus three,
not so high that it becomes overbearing, but something that's resilient um good for him over the long term. but he did not want to build an understory home that would be perceived as so massive and gigantic. And then here is just an exhibit of an RS2 zoned property. We're in RS3, but
our lot size is commensurate with RS2. And you can see here that if we were in an RS2, we'd be given 28 ft in height, which would be 1 ft taller uh than what we are proposing. The sideyard open space, you can see how we've got a lot of green space between
there. We really wanted to highlight the the sheer amount of space we have between our property and the property to the south. So that's all going to be densely landscaped. We have a great separation between the two buildings. And then we have our landscape plan which we have Carolina from our
landscape team here. This is our originally proposed landscape plan. After discussions with the neighbor, we've opted to enhance that landscape along the south. So here's our new proposed landscape plan. And then here is highlighted in dark green all the additional landscape we've added to to
propose and help with the buffer between the two properties. So you can see where we have our twotory mass of our structure abuing the southern neighbor. We've really planted that very dense so they don't perceive that our home is next to them really at all. And then also they were very careful in making sure to analyze the existing landscape
on the south property and infilling any kind of gaps that exist there. So that's that's been done with this new proposed landscape plan. As Michael mentioned, we are requesting a waiver for the the wall height. So you can see that there the three feet the
final three feet we're proposing as the uh solid wall in lie of the pickets. So that's depicted here. And we've also as I mentioned went through and analyzed this landscape. So this is a section taken at the front of the property. There's existing bamboo and fishtail palms on the property to
the south that are very dense and tall. So, we are adding some landscape at the front in order to um enhance that. This section is taken at the middle of the property right where our two-story structure is. Again, existing dense landscape on the south lot and then all the additional landscape that we're
adding to our property. So, there will be a very dense landscape buffer between the two homes. And this is a section taken at the rear looking back towards the front. Can I have a couple more minutes? I'm sorry. >> Two more minutes. >> Two more minutes. We're getting close. So, this looks back towards the street
from the water. Uh, and you'll note that there were some landscape b um gaps on the south property. As such, we've gone through and made sure to add additional planting to cover all those spaces between the massing of the home. As I mentioned,
really the two-story massing, the larger bulk is at the north side of the property, far far away from uh the neighbor to the south. as well as we looked into their program of the existing plans that we have. They do not have a lot of finestration or impactful moments on the inside of the home that
look directly north to our house. As such, we've also worked to mitigate and make that smaller portion of twotory abutdding that property. Here you can see the separations between the property. At the smallest, I believe we're 26t
um with some as high as 31'7 separation between the two. We were also very cognizant of all of our mechanical equipment and utilities. So all any noise making equipment, any equipment that needs active service has all been put to the north side of our
property. The only piece of equipment we have on the southside yard is simply electrical panels that won't make noise, don't have maintenance, will be lower on the wall, won't be perceived. Um, as such, our generator, condensing units are all pushed significantly further to the north side of the property as well.
And that completes our presentation. We've put a lot of time and effort into this wonderful home and uh I hope you appreciate the amount of time we spent to be a good neighbor. >> Thank you, Cody. Mr. Chairman, would you like to reserve some time for rebuttal right now? >> Okay. >> Members of the public wish to speak.
>> We have a hand raised. Guo, >> good afternoon, GMO. >> There we go. Can you hear me now? >> Yes. Uh before you address the board, I need to swear you in. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do.
>> Okay. I'm going to set the clock for 2 minutes for you to address the board. >> Okay. It shouldn't take me that long, but um I am My name is G Moramos at 400 East Alto Drive. I'm on that south side
of the island for um I've met Mr. Sanjay and we and uh it seems like he's moving ahead with a lot of good faith. This this easement access on the ends of street or um has always been an issue
and he openly addressed it and opened it up right away which was wonderful something that the city had such a problem with due to politics but I don't want to I don't want to go all the way back. So I thank Mr. Sanjay, it's been a pleasure. Based on what I've seen and
the plans that I just saw, I think it is consistent with our neighborhood and um matter of fact, in a few more years, I'll be building my own house. And um so I just highly recommend the project and I've talked to other neighbors on this
side of the island, some of them which are on that list and some others that are not. And we all are very grateful to Mr. Sanjay to resolve the easement access issue. So that's all. Thank you very much. >> Thank you.
>> Is anybody else online? No other hands are raised online. >> Do we have anybody in p in person? >> Oh, go ahead. Go ahead. >> Okay. >> Melissa, have you been sworn in before? >> I have not. >> Okay. Uh do you swear affirm the testimony you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth. >> I swear. Thank you. >> Um, sorry I'm cutting in here because I am running late and I need to make it for a flight. So, I just wanted to be first uh to speak. Um, so hello everyone and um introduce myself as Melissa Bey. I was the past president of the HOA for
the Venetian Islands. Uh, I'm also vice chair of the planning board. Um, so Laura, I know why you're wearing a sweater. Um, I'm here today to show my support for the project uh from Mr. Sanjay. Um, as um the gentleman who just spoke right
now, I got to meet uh our our new neighbor when uh he bought the property. Um, and he was nothing but cooperative and to making sure he was a good neighbor in the neighborhood by uh releasing basically the easement and taking care of clearing it up for us at
at his cost and even offering to landscape it. So, I'm really under the faith that um uh Mr. Sanjay is trying his best to be getting along with his neighbors. Uh for the most part, everyone who I spoke to in the neighborhood were very supportive. A lot of people got to see the renderings.
It's a beautiful project. Um it's um in line with the last six um houses that you've approved in the neighborhood as far as size and height. Uh most of them have turned out to be spectacular beautiful homes. And even though they're overwhelming at first when they start building, uh, by the end of the project,
thanks to the landscaping, a lot of these projects blend in really well. And you guys get credit for pushing for these projects to have, um, decent amount of landscaping so that it blends in and looks good. Um, and so and and and I tend to always favor projects that
are done uh for the homeowner, for their own use over spec projects. So when we see the spec projects, they tend to be a lot less considerate of their impact on their neighborhood and their relationships with them. And beyond that, some of these houses that get built and don't even ask for variances.
Uh they're often done on the cheap, uh they tend to take a couple years to build, uh they're kind of cold looking and then they take a while to sell and by the time they get on to um uh get bought and we go through a whole new round of construction that happens because they're, you know, cheaply done.
So prefer having a good project well done where there's money put into it into looking spectacularly good and blending in with the neighborhood. Can I get one more minute, Mr. Vice Chair? >> Um, you have one. >> All right. Um, >> one more minute. >> All right. So, um, I understand that there's going to be a couple of
neighbors complaining about this new project. Um, and I know it's unpleasant to go through construction. I've been living 21 years in our house in the Venetian Island. 16 years of the 21 I've been dealing with construction on either side of our home. Um,
it's part of living in a neighborhood. I don't think there's too many neighborhoods here in in in Miami Beach that are not going through all this construction. So, I do have some empathy for people who are living next door these construction projects, but it's part of the reality of an evolving city. Um, as far as for the height that's
being contested, um, it doesn't take any way of the, you know, that the the the the new construction going on next door is bothersome, but the height as far as is is in line with a lot of the projects that you guys have already approved. So, um, I just want to again reinforce that
my um, in full support of this project and full support I've got from many of the neighbors who I've spoken to as well. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Do we have a next person? [Music]
Next person, step up to the podium, please. >> Hi, my name is uh Curtis Williams. I live at 109 First San Marino Terrace. Um >> have you been sworn in yet? >> Oh, no. I'm sorry. >> Yeah. Do you swear affirm the testimony you be given in this proceeding is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth? >> Yes. >> Okay, I'll set the clock at two minutes. Um yeah, I just want to express my support for this development that there are a lot of projects that happen on our islands um that are not as thoughtful uh as this one. And um one of the things I think makes us different is that the
developer is actual neighbor. So he's been approaching this as a neighbor, not just a developer, which makes a big difference. Um I am a just want to for full disclosure, I am a member current member of the uh neighborhood association board, but I'm not speaking on behalf of the board. I'm speaking as a neighbor. I'm not
expressing the views of the board at all. Um uh but I will say that um even seeing these renderings for the first time, I'm impressed with how Sanjay's managed to give a massive home kind of a very low profile which is difficult to do um by use of architecture and the
color and material choices and the landscaping he's chosen. So I think it's very respectful. Um I think he's been um demonstrated his uh commitment to being a good neighbor uh in that uh he has treated the waterway access which has been a sore point for the neighborhood for some time uh with great care and uh
respect. So we appreciate that of course. Um, and look, I I I understand that a lot of people who have lived in the neighborhood a long time um have some uh issue with some of the size of the homes that are being put up, but there's nothing in this waiver that's out of the ordinary for what's been
approved before. Um, I mean, I myself uh I live in a 1936 Spanish style home, which is now uh been the it's going to be the only home that's uh on that section uh that's uh that's more than uh 50 years old, I'd say. So, I'm facing
construction on both sides of me as well. Uh, and um I think as long as it's done responsibly, uh I think that um uh it it enhances the neighborhood. I know one of the issues that the um one of the grievances I've heard is that uh these
homes will diminish the value of uh uh a Michael's house, but I I don't see any evidence of that. I'm a realtor. Um, and I do not see that uh building uh um uh homes that meet market demands and consumer taste will do anything um to uh
the detriment of the neighborhood and quite quite the opposite. Um it will only enhance uh the value of his home. So, thank you. >> Thank you. Next person. >> Good morning, sir. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you'll be? >> I was sworn in.
>> Oh, you were? Okay, perfect. Thank you. >> Um, I'm Richard Kger. I live at 101 East Alita, which is next door to the easement on the east side of the island. And it's my understanding that the the easement was never um owned by that
property anyway. It's it's public um public property, a utility easement, and belonged to either the city and or the Venetian Islands Homeowners Association. and it was sort of fenced in and taken over improperly and nobody really um did
anything about it legally until now. The new owner um the the appraisal would show that that's not part of his property anyway. But it's I'm also very grateful um and glad to hear all the good comments about uh the new our new neighbor that he's a kind and
considerate person. Um, but having lived there now for uh 14 years, um, and I built my home, rebuilt my home, I followed all the the rules and did not really ask for any adjustments to the to the, um, limitations, height, etc. So,
the only thing I would object to is that I do feel even though it's been approved and there's all these new homes being built, that it is making a a big difference in the feeling and the look of the neighborhood. And just because it's been done before, I just feel that
it's um harmful and not good to continue to be um giving variances and increasing the heights and making them even bigger and bigger. So, it's sort of destroyed the original feeling of the islands. Even though many of these homes are beautiful, some of them do look like a
gigantic office building. So, I just wanted to make my comments. Thank you. >> Thank you. If we have other people, if you can come up and take two podiums at once, so we can move along, please. >> If you do need to be sworn in, I don't know if everyone was here earlier.
>> No. So, I need to be sworn. >> Okay. Do you swear affirm the testimony you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> Thank you. >> So, I'll be I'll be very short. Um, I mean, I'm in support of the of the project. I think it's beautiful. The house is amazing. I'm not going to
repeat everything that was said already, but the one thing I would say is on um on Rival Alto, there was this uh sorry if the owner is here, but this understory home, which is absolutely horrible. And um I think that going with this waiver of the height of this
project is much better idea than going with like a bigger home. That would be another story. And apparently they could do this if they were to. So, if I had to choose between two things, I would definitely go for the waiver and I'm in big support of it. >> And for the record, could you just tell us your name?
>> Sorry. I'm Anton Roy. I live on 803 East Drive. So, I'm one of the neighbors. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Anybody else come up? Sure. >> Well, we've had a lot of people speak about neighbors. I'm actually a neighbor uh alongside Mr. Kger.
>> Have you been sworn in, sir? >> I have. Okay. Thank you. My name is Michael Carpenter. My wife and I are owners of 118 West Alto, which is not the next house, but the one next to that. Um, north of 50 West. Um, I did
write a letter to the board uh describing my objection uh to the height waiver and I'll just talk about that very briefly. Um, first, the revised code for RS3 makes it clear that the maximum height for a flat
roof home is 24 ft. The request for number 50 is 27 ft. As I understand it, the recently updated code of 24 ft was to allow for the ceiling heights of preferred modern story homes. uh these
days the arguments that are made in the letter of intent uh in favor of the higher footage to me are specious. The first one is well if if this were in RS2 and not RS3 we'd be allowed 27 ft. Well
if I was 6'4 and was strong I'd be a basketball player right? If an understory home was was was being built then we could build much higher. Well, it's not an understory home. They're not asking for an understory home. And by
the way, the landscaping is going to be fantastic. Well, I assume that's true anyway. And by the way, with regard to the size of the lot, size of lot is most relevant if you are looking at a distance. So, the higher you're going to go, the more your setback should be from
the front. And I don't see any evidence of that. And I kind of look at it and say, why is it that every time somebody comes forward to Miami Beach and presumes that they can uh beat the rules? Why does
that happen every time? Why do they ignore? They assume they can negotiate. I I don't think it's right. Uh and I think the rules are the rules. Well, I'm sorry. I'm going to continue for a little bit. >> And give you one more minute, sir.
>> Thank you. Uh this house at 50 DO will be 5 ft higher than our house. Um when we built our house, we were asked by this board to cut back the height from what we were allowed by right to shrink
the size of our roof deck and to reduce the height of our entry into our roof deck. Why? Because of the neighbors objections to increased height. This is a neighborhood that is sensitive to increased height. And so that would be
my second argument. And my third argument is very spe to be a canyon. That's not what we want. The third argument is that my wife and I have a very specific concern as relation
to president. If if this the house next to us at 108 is basically a tear down. If this is allowed to go forward, then the person that comes to buy 108 is going to say, "Well, I want the 3 ft as well." And then if you add that to the
resiliency, I'm going to have somebody who's potentially between five and 10 feet above where we are. So on their roof deck looking down onto my roof. And so in short, the required three-foot waiver is unnecessary
to build an attractive modern two-story home is detrimental to the neighborhood look and feel because the people have commented on neighbors. >> To wrap it up now, please >> and creates a very concerning precedent. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Okay, next person. >> Uh good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. For the record, my name is Bill Riley. I'm an attorney with offices located at 16343 Southwest 256th Street. I'm here uh this afternoon representing Mr. Michael Kger, the only uh budding uh
neighbor to the subject property. And as I structure my presentation, I had a PowerPoint presentation, but I wanted to see how much time the chairman is going to give me. This is our only opportunity uh to create our record. Um so uh it's
the way that the law provides. So, I'd ask for five to eight minutes if that's acceptable. Um, >> I can give you five. It's pushing it. >> Okay. Well, then I will I'll speed through it some. And what I'm going to do is I'm going to move now to ask that
our materials, which I provided a handout booklet to try to truncate the presentation, that that be incorporated into the record today and the PowerPoint presentation uh that's before um the board uh also be incorporated into the record and that
allow me to speed up a little bit. Now, we've heard a lot of information today with regard to uh whether or not uh the applicant is a good neighbor. I've never met the applicant. I've spoken to Mr. Amster uh several times. Uh Matt and I have a good relationship, go back a long
way. Um I have nothing but great things to say about Matt. Um and uh him and I were working probably for about 60 days on potentially a settlement for our client's good. Agree. Um unfortunately, we didn't reach that settlement. I was hoping not to be here today.
Unfortunately, I am. And I'm here because I don't think that there's any uh I think that the attorneys representing the applicant are phenomenal. I don't think the applicants being a good neighbor. And I've I've probably in my entire career have
appeared before a board opposing a project maybe three or four times. This is one of those times. Um I thought I would be able to get an agreement with a neighbor. Like I said, wasn't able to do so. But the facts are the facts. I want to present the facts to you because there's been a lot of narrative going on
the past few days that I think is skewing uh this whole discussion. Now before I do that I want to run really quickly into the slide presentation. Now this board has a charge and that charge is to apply uh 2.5.3.1
design re review criteria. There's 20 criteria that the board has to apply in order to discern determine whether or not a project deserves a waiver, a variance, whatever the case may be. Um, it's not whether or not it's permissible
and it's wanted, it's whether or not it's appropriate. And when it's talking about appropriate in the very beginning of the section of the code, it talks about in relation to the site and adjacent structures and the surrounding community. Now, it talks about that I've
highlighted in red. It talks about the surrounding community and the neighboring property owner at least eight times because that is the biggest question whether or not the project is being sensitive and compatible to the neighboring property. In this case, the
answer is no. But in addition to our argument thea answer is no, we have a legal objection today that we don't think that this item can be voted on today. We think that this item is prematurely before the board. And I'll explain to you why. It says, if you can
see right there in the middle of the paragraph, it says lighting shall be reviewed. Now staff, city staff, I work throughout South Florida. CMIB staff is probably the best staff, professional staff of any local government jurisdiction I've
ever worked in. They are uh topnotch. Um but they're understaffed, they're overwhelmed, and in this one case, I think that they made um an oversight. And even though they recommended approval, some of the things that the
applicant has created this narrative to obtain their approval, it's just not accurate. the subject property. The uh right here on this uh PowerPoint slide, the applicant begins this letter of intent by saying that the subject property is an irregularly shaped waterfront lot. Now, I'm not going to
belabor the point, but this is one of the largest lots on Dolo Island. It's not irregularly shaped. It's two full lots. It's a double lot. It also abuts a city uh easement as you've heard. Um it's a half an acre of waterfront site.
I mean, it's almost unheard of in most areas of Miami Beach. This easement be talking about that he took out the fence. Now, I didn't know he agreed to landscape it, but that is very nice. But he agreed he had took out the fence. Well, just because I come in, I say,
"Look, the guy before me violated the law, but I'm not going to violate the law." That's not a feather in my hat. The per the other person should not have been violating the law. They should never have that that gate up. Just to say that I'm not going to continue that I don't think is
>> they gave you way more time. >> They gave you way more. They gave you eight minutes. I said five. So you're really you got to >> Oh, I didn't see. Okay, I'll move. >> You got to move up a little quicker. >> Okay, I'll go a little bit quicker. Anyways, um I wanted to address that. Now, Mr. Kger's home, um his family has
owned this in 1987. Um they lived there. They've improved it. It's a modest 5,400 ft. Give it plus or minus. um associated with the next door property. Now, I'm going to speed it up fast, but I need to put this into the record. Um the staff
recommendation, it determines uh that the RS zoning code uh permits only 24 ft that you heard. That section right below there where it's underlined, what I put in there is a section in the criteria that it
doesn't meet. Now, the criteria says it has to determine compliance with the requirements of the underlying zoning code. The city spent millions of dollars st pro uh hiring professionals to study and adopt your new zoning regulations. And then applicants come in and without
a substantial justification should not obtain a variance or a waiver from the requirements of that of that zoning code that the city spent so many resources putting together and studying. So it fails that section. It fails these
other ones. But I'm going to move forward really quickly because I know the chairman asked me to move forward. Uh so so I got to um Okay. So on an overall uh perspective, it talks about compatibility. Now our
property is in a canyon. We've heard the word canyon before. The house with a double lot that's proposed on the property will be the largest house that we have been able to identify on Toledo Island. Um it will tower above our house. Now whether or not they can build
higher, you've heard that the uh the applicant is a single family man. Um he doesn't have parties. He doesn't come outside his house. He doesn't make noise. All sort of stuff. But he wants his maximum AC square footage. That's the reason he hasn't gone for the understory. Um, so he's asking for not
what he needs, he's asking for the most possible, which is the point that we wanted to make. Now, again, I wanted to go through this, but it doesn't seem like I'm going to have time, but I incorporated into the record. The criteria continued to be to be failed,
okay? Because it it's not sensitive to the home. But I wanted to move forward because I want to make two points, Mr. Chairman, and then I'll I'll I'll step aside. You have 15 seconds, so make them quick. >> So, here's the one that they completely ignored. The lighting shall be reviewed.
Staff recommendation says not satisfied. A lighting plan has not been submitted. The the criteria says shall this shouldn't be heard today. There's no lighting plan and a lighting is going to affect our property. >> Okay, >> I will turn it over to Mr. Kger now. Um,
he has some m when they're talking about the devaluation. I just wanted to say we have an opinion from Burkhal Hathaway. Burk Birkshshire Hathaway. I have it on the uh the screen for you. You can read it. It's the devaluation that we had professionally studied by one of the
top-notch real estate agents out there. So, I'll leave that up there. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. Speaker. Were you sworn in earlier today? >> Excuse me. >> Were you sworn in already? >> No. >> No. Please uh raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you'll be giving in this proceeding is the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> Thank you, sir. >> Uh, good afternoon or good morning, chairman, commissioners, members of the board. I'm going to have to look at some notes. I'm not a lawyer and I'm an introvert, so I'll have to read this.
Uh, my name is Michael Kger. I live at 34 West Leo. I've lived peacefully on this island for I'll be 39 years coming up. I rebuilt my home in
uh 2010. I went before I took a historic 1937 home with gorgeous architecture. Uh I went before Tom Mooney. Tom Mooney said, "You're not tearing down this house." He said, "You're going to rebuild it." I said, "Okay." I took a
2700 foot house. I built 5200 ft. I'm single. I use two bedrooms in that house. The k two rooms, the kitchen, the bedroom. The rest of the house I don't even use. This is a >> we need to talk about because I couldn't get to the entertainment area.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, the Yeah. I I I I'm surprised my attorney was given five minutes when others were given eight. It's not right. I've lived there. I own the Marlin Hotel in Miami Beach. I I I stand before you
not as a developer, an attorney. I'm not an attorney. but is the only adjacent homeowner who will be directly and permanently affected by this proposed project. I recognize I recognize clearly the applicant has retained a highly experienced and well-connected zoning attorney
with personal ties members of our homeowners association and others involved in this process. There's a lot of bias going on here. I raise this not to accuse anyone, but to stress that when relationships run deep, the appearances of fairness matters as much
as the outcome itself. Over recent weeks, there's been a coordinated effort to rally testimony from people who aren't directly impacted by this construction to create the impression of broad support, but the reality is simple. The impacts fall on me, not on them. This project pushes beyond the
intent of zoning code, including height and major entertainment areas placed directly beside my home when there's ample space on the opposite side of the lot. I'll ask for a fair and unbiased hearing. That's all I ask for where longtime residents are given the same
weight as those with more influence in this community. Thank you for your time to hear me. I will make a statement here. There there was a falsity stator here. That's a fact that when this home was rented by Mr. Sanjay, I had to call
code enforcement over six times. It'll be on record with the city. There was unlimited SUVs with the engines running 24 hours a day, three of them at a time at this house to the south of me. This is for a 2-year period. Each time code
enforcement came, there's no doorbell on 28 West Alita, the rental house. I would get a notice from code enforcement says there's nothing we can do. The parties for ball game events and in the entertainment area would echo
straight into my courtyard like a like a amphitheater. I'd scream. I'd turn up my own music to fight back. Nothing I could do. I'd drive to my home. There'd be SUV Rolls-Royces blocking my own driveway.
the arrogance and nobody I could even speak to. I've always in physical confrontations outside. Move your cars. Who are you people? That's how I'm treated. 38 years here, multiple businesses on Miami Beach. >> I understand, sir. We're dealing with
>> It's not right. It's not It's It's a misstatement that was made. I asked for the entertainment area to be moved to the other side of the property. You've got an easement on the other side of the property. He should move it there. >> Okay. >> Okay. That's a reasonable request. I don't know why everyone in this board
allows continuous height over the code. The code is the code. >> You build to the code. I built to the code. I know who you favor in this hearing. >> I know. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> They waited intentionally for you to arrive. So, I understand how this works.
>> This is rigged system. >> So, now you're accusing somebody of doing something that >> didn't say who. I'm just saying I know what's taking place here. I have my rights, okay? >> And I'm not going to stop fighting this case. >> Okay. >> I just wanted to to clean it up a little bit if I could. I don't want to have ask
any more time, Mr. Chairman. I just want to answer the board member's question and then I won't speak anymore. >> She's asked before whether or not there's been enumeration, rem remediation or from neighbors. We we've asked we asked for five things, just so you know. We asked for a height increase
in the wall. We asked for additional landscaping. We asked for the entertain the the outdoor entertainment area to be relocated from against our property to the easement property where there is no neighbor. We asked for less than 5% of
what the real estate agent from Burkow said our devaluation would be and we asked for a >> wait a second 5% of a devaluation. What is >> 5% >> what does that >> what does that equate to? >> About how $500,000. Okay. >> $500,000.
>> All right. That's that's all I have. >> Okay, that's all I need. >> So, and it's it's it's it's med um mitigation from the devaluation, but the last thing we asked for is because the other time that there was a development
next to Mr. Kger's house. That development damaged his property. So, we asked for $250,000 to be held in escrow in case there is >> Okay, that's not how things work in the city with construction. I'm sorry to say. I'm telling you five things about >> I'm just telling you right now you do
not ask for somebody doing construction to put money in escrow for a neighbor. That's not how it works here. >> I'm asking I'm I'm making a disclosure. >> Okay. I'm just >> I thank you for disclosing it. So you asked for half a million because of the devaluation. You asked for the fence height. You asked for the entertainment
to be moved >> adjacent to the vacant lot. You asked for money to be placed in escrow for what purpose? in case there was any damage to Mr. Creger's house during the construction. >> How much in escrow? >> 250,000 that would be held by what was the fifth thing you asked for? >> Those are the five.
>> Oh, the five are the five. We can >> So, I want to I want to make sure because I want to make it clear on the public record. Um, that out of those items, um, we got a maybe on the on the height of the fence and a few additional uh, landscaping treatments. >> We're going to clarify all we're going
to clarify that when we have time to speak. So, thank you. >> I have one comment I'd like to make, if you'll permit me. Uh, on the previous construction to the south of me, when they battered over 50 concrete pilings into the coral bed next to me, they cracked my pool and they killed about
$100,000 of the koi in my ponds. They destroyed and they had damage. They put cracks in my house itself that were that were not they were not horizontal. They were vertical, which was the worst. >> That's out of our purview, though. It's out of your curve, but I'm telling you that there's when you drive.
>> I understand, sir. I am going We're all going through construction with neighbors. >> There's real damages. >> I I understand. That's all I'm saying. >> I understand. >> And ask grow for damages is not unreasonable. >> Do we have any other members who would any other public members who wish to speak
>> about the owner or whatever his name is? >> Kevin. >> We have no more members of the public to Is the owner of the project here today to speak? >> Yes. Would you like to hear from him first? >> If he has something to say. Yes.
>> Yes. Okay. Mr. Chairman, with your permission. >> What is the owner's name again? >> Sanjay Javari. >> Okay. Property appraisal records show a different ownership. >> It's a land trust and a trustee is authorized and signed for a land trust, but he's the beneficiary. >> Okay. >> Okay. No problem.
>> All right. I'm going to invite Sanjay up and then I'd like to have uh another type of rebuttal as well. >> Yeah. Okay, thank you. >> Uh, thank you all for hearing my testimony. My name is Sanjay Jerry and I'm the homeowner at 50 West Toledo Drive. This is my first DRB hearing, so
forgive me if this is a little personal, but I thought I'd share a bit about my background. I was born in the US to two immigrant parents, which meant we had no relatives or longtime friends around. Our neighbors were our support system. Our neighbors looked out for us, helped
us find our footing in America. And so from an early age, I was taught being a good neighbor was not just important, it was required of you. When I bought this property, it soon became clear to me that the street end was a highly emotional issue. For 30 years, the
previous owner in the neighborhood had been fighting about it. I had multiple land use attorneys tell me because it had been part of my property for so long, I could fight to legally claim that land. I immediately said no. I wasn't going to fight with my neighbors.
And as valuable as the land was, the respect and goodwill of the neighborhood was much more important. In the same spirit, I wanted the neighborhood to see in me they had a friend and an ally, someone who would give back to the Venetian Islands.
We have painstakingly taken our neighbors interests at heart while we designed this home. It would have been a lot easier to build an understory home. I would have saved myself all of this. But when you drive down Toledo today and you see those homes, they feel more like
apartment buildings than houses. Instead, we built we designed a house. Even with the extra height, feels very soft and subtle from the street. As I hope you can see from the renderings, we thought about our neighbors every step of the way from the placement of the equipment to each setback. And at
great financial cost to me, satisfied Mr. Kger's request of more landscaping and a taller wall. But as we be went back and forth, it became clear to me that his main issue had nothing to do with the design of my home. He wanted compensation and he
threatened to object at this hearing unless I gave it to him. >> I I object to that. >> We're not in a trial, sir. You cannot object. And it is a record. It is I have to be able to >> Sir, you've had your time. >> I have to be able to make a record. I have to be able to object. I just say >> you're not recognized right now. >> That's fine. I'm still going to object.
>> You're not recognized right now. >> I'm still making the objection for the record. >> He did it to this southern neighbor a few years ago and now he was looking to do it for me. It felt deeply wrong and I said I couldn't take part in a world where
neighbors use their leverage to exploit each other. There should be trust and decency between neighbors, not extortion. I want to end on a positive note. So I will say it has always been a dream of mine to design a home. I've thrown myself into creating a design inspired
by my favorite architect, Olsen Kundig, but with a Miami Beach character and soul. There's been a lot of blood, sweat, and tears, but in the end, we've designed a home I'm very proud of, a home that I plan on living in and raising my family in for a very long time. The extra height will improve my quality
of life for years to come. So, I hope you will grant it. Thank you very much for hearing my testimony today. I'd also like to correct the record. When I was living in that home, I never threw one party. I never entertained outside. The instances he's talking about were during
short-term rentals over the summer months when I was not in the home. He specifically came over one day to complain to my assistant about it and she cleared the air and said that was not us. I had an outdoor entertainment area bordering his property at 28 West Alto. I never used it. I never played
loud music. I never disturbed him. and you can go look at the noise complaints to see that. Thank you very much. >> I'd like to set the record that I was just accused of being an extortionist and I want to have that clear on the record in this hearing.
>> Michael. >> Yes. So, Mr. Chairman and board members, I have two other elements of the rebuttal I'd like to make. I'd like to offer some testimony and then we have an appraiser here to discuss the valuation issue. Okay, finish with what you are saying.
>> Yes, sir. So, with regard to Mr. Carpenters's testimony, I happen to know Mr. Carpenter, I think a great deal of him. He was my former client. I actually obtained the approval for the home where he now lives. What I will say about president is when you it really does not
neatly apply to a development review board. When you all grant any type of request, it's based upon a set of facts that's unique to that application. It is helpful to know that there are multiple height waiverss that have been granted on Dolito Island. So, we're not some revolutionary fire brand asking for
something for the first time, but I would never suggest to you all that you're bound by president. You are not an appellet court. The doctrine he's referring to is really star decisis. That's when an appellet court is bound by prior decisions of that same court.
That doesn't really neatly apply to a development review board. And in fact, Justice Barrett, who's now in Supreme Court, in her recent book said, "Sary decisis is good until we decide that the decision was wrong." So she has a very narrow opinion of sorry decisis as well
as as I do. With regard to his assumptions, Mr. Carpenter assumes that his neighbor to the south will pass soon. She's an elderly lady, so that is sadly true. Then his second assumption is also correct that it'll be redeveloped at some point in the very
near future. But the third assumption is somewhat faulty. His third assumption is that someone will come in and ask for a similar height waiver. The wave of development I'm seeing on the Venetian aisle suggests to me that that's not correct. It's going to be more or less an understory home. That is really where the mo majority of homes are going. That
jurisdiction was taken from you all a few months ago unfortunately. But I think it'll be understory home which is entirely administrative process. >> The other alternative would be a lot split which would divide this larger property to the south of Mr. carpenter to two lots. You all have jurisdiction
over that. Seeking a height waiver for a home that's on a 10,500 foot lot is a bit much, but you all ultimately be the judge of that. So, I don't think that Mr. Carpenters's fear is wellounded. With regard to uh what Bill Riley has
said, if an appellet court should look at the evidence that you all are considering today, they don't weigh competing bodies of evidence. They look at what staff has said and they look at whether it's factual and relevant. And I just have a couple of questions for Mr. Madan. Mr. Madan, um, what was your
undergraduate degree? >> I have an undergraduate degree in public administration with a minor in urban and regional planning. >> Okay. And how long have you collectively worked as a public employee as a planner? >> Um, and just to follow, I have a master's degree in urban and regional planning as well. Um I have uh worked as
a planner since I was an intern at Orange County in 2006. Um so that would be 18 19 years. >> Okay. So you're much more of an expert than what you really like to talk about >> perhaps maybe.
>> Thank you very much for that. >> So I've now qualified Mr. Madan as an expert witness. He is the one he is the author of the staff recommendation that you all are considering today. With regard to our efforts to accommodate Mr. Kger, no, we did not compensate him $500,000. But what we did do is we
enhanced the landscaping along our southern property line. We asked for a waiver with regard to the materials for the wall to make it 7 ft solid. We increased the setback to 18 ft along this property line. We pushed our mechanical equipment far to the north. We are not seeking understory. We made
sure the garage on the north side next to the street end, not in his side. With regard to our rear yard cabana, we made sure there's a solid wall facing south that to inhibit any noise that might otherwise issue south. And the massing of the home, as Cody showed you all, is heavily weighted toward the street end.
So, with that, I'd like to turn it over to our appraiser. He's just going to talk a few minutes about the the valuation. >> I just need you know what? I think the appraisal thing is superfluous on both sides. I I don't think it's relevant. And >> I respect that, Mr. Chairman. We're
going to stop them. We're just going to submit his letter into the record. >> Okay. I was >> chairman. I I just have to do my job. I'm not trying to be difficult. I really am not. But if a if a if a witness is questioned, I have to be able to question him, too. It's just my job. Otherwise, it's malpractice. Just like he presents an expert witness, I got to
be able to question him. >> So, I know that you don't want me to. And that's it. Okay. Please. >> All right. So, um sir, I just want to ask you two questions. And I do think you're a phenomenal uh planner. Um but first um does the code require a
lighting plan and the criteria when it says lighting plan shall be provided is that a requirement >> the the criteria calls for let me read it exactly. Lighting plan shall be reviewed to
ensure safe movement of persons and vehicles and reflection on public property for security purposes to minimize glare and reflection on adjacent properties. Lighting shall be reviewed to asssure that it enhances the appearance of structures at night. So, um I would say that lighting plans are
required as part of a building permit process. Generally, they are not ready at this phase of the of the design process. Um we're looking at the architecture of the site. Um for some larger projects, we do request that the lighting plan be submitted to the design
review board. Generally for single family homes, um we leave that as a as a condition that can be addressed as part of the building permit process. >> And I appreciate you defending the staff recommendation. Again, I have um no issues with regard I'm just wondering
what this what the requirement is and that section where it says the lighting plan that you just read. >> Mhm. >> Is that related to the design review board's criteria or is that related to the building official? >> It can, but the design review board does have the ability to delegate certain things to staff. Last question. Okay.
Well, last question. >> No, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to address some of this. I just last question. >> We will address the lighting plan among ourselves when we talk about it. >> What was your last question? One more question. That's it. I'm giving you one more and that's it.
>> That's all I'm asking for is just one more. I just got >> Go ahead. My la My last question is um was the lighting plan submitted? >> The lighting plan was not submitted as part of this application. >> Okay. So these design review criteria,
they are sometimes satisfied, they're sometimes not satisfied. You see that in every single staff recommendation. It doesn't preclude us from presenting to you all. And as Raelio told you, the lighting plan is typically submitted at time of building permit, but we're willing to discuss it during board member discussion. I can invite Cody up.
We already know exactly what type of lighting is going to be in our rear yard. >> Okay. Thank you. >> That's it, Mr. Chairman. >> Geez. Does that conclude comments from the public? Okay. Now,
board members, who would like to start this one? >> I'll go. Thank you everyone for speaking. I know that that was uh this is a lot of time to take out of your day. So, just appreciate everyone uh coming out. Um, I mean, I I'll say I
think recently more too, we've we've come across this three-foot height waiver issue and multiple projects with multiple applicants and and like somebody said, I mean, we have to treat this on a case- by case basis and and how sensitive the applicants being to
the surroundings. Um, it's it's a waiver. It's not a variant. So, there's different standards to apply. Um, I think that the code gives us discretion there to more obviously more than a variance. Um, and I mean I think some of the issues
that were brought up um may be outside of our jurisdiction here as a board. Unfort a a a waiver request. Um, so I'm going to speak just to that. Um I I think in
this context the the home design is beautiful. I'm I'm very I'm very impressed by it and I think that there was a lot of sensitivity given to to the surroundings. I think that the this this lot is a large lot. I think that this is
the instance when if we're going to give a height waiver, this is typically when I think this would be appropriate. Um, and I I think that the house really sits nicely within the landscaping that you're proposing here. So, as long as,
you know, there are conditions here that that landscaping will mature very quickly or already will be matured, I'm I'm I'm in in support of the home. Um, >> yeah, >> that yeah, I'll let somebody else. The
three-foot wa the three-foot waiver is more than accom accommodated by the landscape and being that dense and not being viewable by the joint properties. So, >> and the wall the wall is a request of the neighbor that it is adjacent to. >> Yes.
>> The other the other way or variants we're talking about here, right? >> Yeah. I >> mean, it's a beautiful house. I have no nothing ne negative to say about it. >> Thank you. All right. >> Uh yeah, so I'll speak. Um
so there's been some accommodations given to the adjacent property owner by moving the media room um media entertainment area and by complying with their request to build a wall higher um
than it the code requires. I would not be in favor of building that wall higher. That is a code requirement. and there is no reason to build it higher um especially with all the landscaping that's going in. So I think that that
request um should stay within the code as far as the height of the wall and I think that the neighbor is in agreement with it just to be able to move forward and that should never be the reason for something to come to us. As far as the
um height of the home by an additional 3 ft, there was a project brought before us at the last meeting. Also in the Venetian Islands where they wanted additional height um it was your firm
that brought it. it was the um anyway uh and the only reason for wanting this additional height was to have higher ceilings and I am opposed to that. I there obviously
um I don't feel that that is a reason to approve an additional height. That being said and I said the same thing before I'm being consistent. I don't see the reason even though at the last meeting the reason given for the additional
height of the roof of the ceiling and the roof was to be able to camouflage the mechanical equipment which in a lot of that size could have been placed elsewhere. Um that being said I do not
see the reason and this goes to um really something brought up today. We sort of favor as a city homes being built with an understory that then provide an additional height and whether
the house has an understory or the house here's the understory or the house is elevated. We're as as residents, we are complying with a base flood elevation plus one and in
some cases plus more than one foot of freeboard. So what's the difference if we put a understory or we raise it with earth to come up with that elevation? That's where I think the fallacy is. And I don't think there should be an
encouragement given um to those homes with an understory because I don't I don't think it's necessary. I I think if you give it to one, you need to give it to the other to both. Um so that I think is working against the current property
owner. um you know because he's if he would have built with an understory he'd be even much higher than what's uh proposed right now. Um so I would request that we look at that and discuss it as a board or you know the planning
department look at it um because I don't think that that should be the case um that that should be allowed. So those are my my thoughts on the um on the project. I think it's a beautiful project. Um, I think that the
landscaping once it matures and even when it comes in is going to be gorgeous. I do not like understories myself. So, I appreciate and I understand your feelings on it. Um I do I I want to make one comment that really
is not part of this board uh uh purview, but unfortunately it has happened with other projects on other places of Venetian Causeway um where property owners are requesting money in
exchange for granting of a favor and approval for a project. Um I find that to be incorrect to say the least and um I don't find that it should continue to
happen. Um that's uh whether you use the word extortion illegal or unheard of. Unfortunately, it's not unheard of unfortunately. But it is not right. um nor is it right to request uh monies
to be put in uh um what's the word in uh escrow in case there's damage. If there is damage, you need to prove it and you need to go to court and you file for that. Um you put a lean on the property
if they don't pay you for the damages, but we don't do that. That's not right. It's not right as a city and it's not right as neighbors. And I hope that these type of things and I will continue to ask every project that comes before this board because
apparently it is happening quite often. Um where people are asking for money in exchange for agreeing on a project. I will be asking at every project until the city attorney tells me that I can't ask for it. And even then, I may question him telling me that I can't ask
for it, cuz I've done that before, too. So, I thank you for the presentation. I thank you for saying um and and divulging that you actually asked for this money. Thank you.
>> So, to finish this up, this is I've sat on this board now for six years. I'm about to be turned out. And one of the things I'd like to say is that unfortunately I've sat here and watched people lie to our faces about who they were and what they plan to do with their
homes. And so I find all the background information a little superfluous. It shouldn't matter for our perview of why they're building what they're building. Um I don't even know where to start with this stuff. So, first of all, I think
the design is beautiful and I think that I'm also frustrated with again the city, the code. I don't know why they give us these waiverss and they create this conflict and it should be one thing or it should be the other. In this case,
this is such a large lot that it is equivalent to the other size lots that allow this height without a waiver. So, again, I don't know. I think code needs to be adjusted to that. so that that doesn't need to come in front of us. And when you have a lot that's the same size
lot as the other one, there shouldn't need to be a waiver for it. I also It's It's ironic that you you guys both had realtors do give you appraisals of property devaluation, which I find crazy. Um I I will say that
the ceilings in this home are 10 and 11 ft from what you said. >> Correct. That's not an egregious ceiling height for a a house of this size on this size lot. Um, I will say I heard from the neighbors and and mostly
support and I think that you've done everything that a normal person can do to try to accommodate the neighbor. Um, I find the request for money insane and I think that that needs to stop. It should be illegal and it should be not discussed
anymore in a in a situation like this. It's it's really we we should Anyway, um what else did I want to say? Um I I think you made a lot of accommodations. I think the design is beautiful and I
think that um I I would support the waiver based on the size of the lot and the the ceiling height um and basically what else has been built there. So, um, that's all I got.
Anybody else? Anything else? Do we want to make a motion? >> I think so. >> I'm sorry. Did you? >> No. No. >> We need to take the waiver separately. The wall height and the height. >> So, Oh, yeah. I didn't even talk about the wall height. Again, back to the
accommodations. Um, you know, I think I would give this waiver because he's trying to do something to help the neighbor. It's a big lot. I think the landscaping is enough. I I don't have a problem with the wall height. I mean, this is a this
is a situation where I think a higher, you know, they what do they say? Good fences make good neighbors. These are not friendly neighbors. I think I'd put I'd give a waiver for a 12ft wall there. Call it a day. >> Yeah. and and some bullet in it. But the
reality is is that the code says 4 feet and the only reason we're going higher is because one neighbor is requesting it. So tomorrow another neighbor is going to request a 7 foot high wall and the person presenting before us is going to request a waiver to be able to
appease and and if it's good for one then it's then let's change the code and let's allow 17, >> right? But but to just appease a neighbor who by the way is asking for all these other things that are are unheard of doesn't make sense.
>> So I can clarify the the fence heights. So the code on fence heights is is tricky. It's it's actually one of the most difficult things we have to review when we're getting a building permit. >> Um the code requires allows for a 7 foot tall wall. However, you have to you have
to measure it from the sidewalk elevation. In many cases, the in in most cases, the home is required to raise the yard. We still have to measure the fence from whatever the sidewalk is. If you want to go to 7 ft. If you want to
measure your fence height from the adjusted grade, which is what you're raising your yard to, the code allows you to have a 4 foot wall and three-foot pickets above that >> unless waved by the DRB. Um, so that's that's the question before you is do you
want to allow them to replace the pickets with a solid wall? Um, so they can have seven feet, but it has to be open pickets above four. So, I swear that I've seen in new construction on 30th Street a house that has a retainer
wall that it's got to be 9 or 10 ft. Is that because it's from seven feet from the crown of the street >> or because they've raised their lot so much that >> if they've raised the yard in order to have the fence be measured from that
raised elevation. What would be allowed as of right would only be a solid wall up to 4T and then it would have to be pickets above. So if they did something else then something will have to unless they came to the board and got a waiver. >> Okay. All right. Well, so we'll have to look into that >> for that. >> We had a previous project um
>> that came because you said it needed to be um >> it could not be chain link on the side, but yet all these new projects have a chain link above the retaining wall to be able to contain the elevation of the
property. And then they buffer it with porticarpus or clucia or whatever landscaping. >> But it's not always a picket. You know, it could be a chainlink fence on the side, not necessarily on the front or back >> on the side. We the
>> the code used to unless it's changed allows chain link as long as it's not visible from the street. >> Right. These are all >> Let me let me look up that regulation. Yeah, I think yeah, >> let's stick to the task at hand. So,
>> so, so this one basically is 4T to contain the earth and they can put additional landscaping on top and they can put a picket fence above that to make it a solid wall above the 4T.
>> Okay. So, do we have a motion though because we want to move forward. We have two var two waivers, correct? We have the height waiver of three feet. make one statement that was misconstrued. They did not agree to move the entertainment area to the other side, which is a big thing because landscaping
does not stop noise. >> My apologies >> for that to be done. >> Okay. >> And and they didn't agree to that. >> Thank you. >> So, do we have a motion? We'll we'll start with the design, I guess.
>> A motion to approve the design. >> Okay. >> Second. >> Okay. We have a second. All in favor? >> I >> I >> Okay. And now we have the waivers. Does anybody want to make a motion? >> Motion to approve both waivers. >> Both waivers.
>> I think you need to take a >> motion to approve the height variance. >> The height variance of 3T height of three feet. >> Yes. I'll second that. >> We have a second. Laura. >> All in favor? >> I I
>> You Any You're You're in favor? I'm okay with it because it's, you know, the guy didn't do an understory and he would have been a lot higher. >> Second waiver is for the >> and I think I'm sorry. I think Roelio, we do need we do need to discuss the
differences in heights between understory properties and and properties that are elevated to base flood elevation plus one and some are going as high as base flood elevation plus five. >> Okay. If you'd like would you like us to schedule that as a discussion item on the next agenda? Yeah. When you're
ready, you know, >> we when we we had to prepare a lot of >> discussion items that I would like to review and and have before >> Yes. >> terms. >> Okay. >> Um Okay. Fence waiver. >> Second waiver for the fence. >> A motion waiver for the fence.
>> And you have a motion. Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Second. Okay. All in favor? >> I >> I >> No. >> So, we have >> one. No. You have five. >> Motion passes. Okay. >> Thank you all very much for your time.
Appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Next item. We have one more. Can we get through? >> It's freezing. Can we turn the air up a little bit? >> It's you. No, it sometimes is.
[Music] >> Apparently Um Scott >> yeah that's our last no >> then we have the discussion >> I don't know we have lunch >> so what do you want to
>> No we can do I'm >> quick. You remember me? You were the assistant secret before I was. >> Joe Himenez. >> I was here 10 years. >> Are we ready to hear the next item, please? >> Joe Himenez. >> Joe Himenez.
>> I I came over with Jimmy when Jimmy first came. >> Oh, when Jimmy was here. Okay. >> But I still >> I remember the name. >> I remember. >> So you are here for 69 40, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Yes.
>> All right. as the absence of people proves. I think this one is a little less controversial than the previous surprise. >> I What surprised me is how how much prettier the room is from when I left. I haven't been in here in 10 years. So, I was like, I spruceed it up.
>> Just renovated. >> Yeah, I saw the plaque outside. >> All right, we're going to go to the next item on the agenda. DRB25-1088 6945 Abbott Avenue. >> No,
>> 6940. >> Am I wrong? >> 69. >> No, it's 24 1070 >> for there's two that are across the street from each other. So, you might be looking at the other one. >> We went backwards. Okay. >> DRV 24-1070.
>> Okay. 6940 hour Avenue and applica. This application has been filed requesting a modification to a previously designed review approval for the construction of a new 10story mixeduse building including waiverss. Specifically, the applicant is requesting a variance of the front yard setback and one more
waivers. Okay. So, this is um this is an application that was approved originally on March 8th, 2024. Um it's for a 10-story mixeduse building including some waiverss um for the combined loading parkways and driveways. Um this
is a a building that um will be residential uh primarily and there's some a hotel component to to the building. Um it does have parking. It has its loading internalized. None of that is changing. Um what happened here is um a couple issues. First, when the
applicant was in for permitting, FDOT advised the applicant of the future raising of Abbott Avenue, which is part of State Road A1A. Um, it is the southbound lanes of State Road A1A. Collins forms the northbound roads lanes of State A18. State Road A1A. Um, as a
result of that, they have some issues with the differentiation between the elevation of their ground level and the elevation of the sidewalk. um that was not contemplated at the time that this originally came in for the building permit. We thought the building was
going to be lower and so they were going to be able to have their um um sloping and ramping organized in a different way than what is ultimately expected. Um so as a result, excuse me, they are requesting a waiver of the um clear
pedestrian uh path um to allow for that pedestrian path to be split between the lower sidewalk level and then they'll have a portion that's on their property temporarily. Once the road and then as and then they'll have a ramp in between that. Once the road is eventually raised, they will be able to remove the
ramp and everything should be at the same elevation and we will have um the wider sidewalks as is intended by the code. Um so staff is not opposed to the granting of the waiver. It does appear to be temporary. We have included a condition in the draft order that requires that the applicant work with
the city and the Florida Department of Transportation to facilitate the harmonization between future road raising projectsffect affecting the subject parcel. Um and then the applicant shall ensure that the clear pedestrian path requirement is met upon the completion of the harmonization. So um they guarantee that they will be
working with FDOT once and the city once that happens um in a >> have fun with that >> in a in a fun way. There shouldn't be too many issues because there's no driveways there. The driveways is really where we run into issues with harmonization projects like this. So there shouldn't be any issues. Their driveways are all on the other side of
the block. This this property spans the entire uh width of the block. They're providing the entire PO on the north end of the block. So, this is a >> citizen. >> One more issue is a variance that they're requesting. >> Um the property the the the code
requires a 10-ft setback. When we looked at the plans originally, and when we got the first survey, the plans did not take into account a two-foot dedication that had been made in 1949 by the owner, the original owner of the land. I believe it was Mr. Abbott who
Abbott. Um, and so eventually the survey was updated. It showed a two-foot area. We thought it was an easement that it would have counted as part of that 10- foot setback. Um, um, but it turns out that it actually was a dedic dedication. So, it's not part of the property.
Therefore, it doesn't count as the setback. So, they are requesting um an eight a variance of 2 feet to account for that dedication. So, technically, their setback will only be 8 ft. Doesn't really affect the way the property will look. That twoft dedication is for the
sidewalk. It will function for sidewalk. It doesn't change the the functioning of the property. Given how advanced uh they are in terms of the design and and starting construction, um staff is not opposed to the granting of the variance. So with that, staff recommends that the application be approved. And before we
start, just any disclosures from the board. >> Nope. >> Thank you, Roelio. Uh, for the record, Joe Himenez, JMZ Group, offices at 2020's Salado Street in Coral Gables. On behalf of 6940 North Beach, LLC, the applicant here, joined by Jose Bashetti,
the developer, and my colleague, Lisa Palamino. Um, I will make every effort to make this incredibly brief. I think the Royelio explained everything everything well. Um, this unfortunately
was two miscommunications. one was the and if we can put up the presentation I would appreciate it. >> This was previously item 13. >> It's only about five five or six. >> Oh no, sorry. Item nine. Item nine. I I apologize. Item nine.
>> Item nine. There we go. >> So, as Raelio said, the only correction I'll make, this was approved on March 8th, 2023, uh, unanimously by the by the members of the DRB back then. Next slide, please. >> You control it there.
>> Oh, better. Where? >> There's a computer somewhere in front of you. So, as Raelia said, the the two requests are waiver of the clear pedestrian path and a setback variance. The pedestrian path waiver, which is highlighted here
in red and zoomed in here, um is based on section 7.2 two and all those letters that I'm not going to bore you with, but the specific jurisdiction that this board has is found in the code section that says should there be a conflict with the elevations and FDOT roadway
projects, the DRB may wave the requirement for a continuous level elevation. The good thing about this, as Roelio said, this is a temporary situation. We anticipate this road being raised 5 years, 7 years. We hope that it's sooner. The good thing also is that
the condition placed by staff, unlike when properties are lower and you're going to harmonize and you got to work with them to be lower than the road, we're already working with it by raising the building now. So, it's actually going to be a pretty easy harmonization. We went through several possibilities.
At one point, public works said, "Well, maybe a maybe a wall like leave it where you are, but that you know, raise it, but a wall down Abbott." It just didn't work. And we thought this was sort of the best solution to get people into the building >> and and also continue some form of
pedestrian experience. >> The plans, as you can see, both have the stairs, the steps on the bottom, and the ramp in the middle, all covered there in red or by the dotted line. All are labeled will be demolished after Abbott Avenue is is raised.
This is a preliminary rendering of what this would look like. Um, again, this would have easily been asked for back in March 8th of 2023. We just didn't know. We didn't know we needed to ask for it. This didn't really come up until public works and DOT told us while we were
applying for a building permit. So, we've had to come back and that hence the revision. The variance again, Rael explained it perfectly. It was a 1949 deed that read like a it read like an easement. It read like a sidewalk, like a rightaway easement. Um, and it wasn't until we
started foundation work with a foundation permit in hand that I got a call that said, "We just figured out that this isn't our property." Immediately went to the city. I called Rael. I called Carmen. We have a hold harmless cuz we had to keep going. Um, and we are doing it at our own risk. I'm
not presuming in any way that this is fade out complete. But given the story that I will tell you and and that Roelia will confirm, it is something that if it weren't for the waiver, it wouldn't change the design. This board approved 40 already. There's nothing. Now we're
just calling it a variance. And again, it would have been something that was very askable for as many of my predecessors today asked you for them. Um, but most importantly, this is not something caused by the applicant. This is something this ride ofway for
whatever reason this two feet moved away from the original platted lot, the original intention of Abbott. The property line just moved two feet. We're keeping it a sidewalk. It's exact same. Had it not been moved, it would still look exactly the way it does today. This
does not increase the F. We didn't just because there's 200 less feet of the property. We don't go over F. We're still below the the which was my biggest worry when I when I heard because I know what that is here. Um, and the only thing is that now instead of being a 10-ft setback, it's it's an eight foot
setback with acknowledging that it is a variance that it is not ours. Um, but other than that, that's that's the hardship. It is not the original intention. It's obviously compatible with the land development regulations. It goes back to the original property line. It's being used even for what the
1949 deed was meant was meant for. So, with that, um, I can go through the other criteria. I don't want to belabor the point. These are the facts as I as I just described them to you. This presentation is obviously a part of the record. And
just to put it on the record, special conditions exist. Obviously, the deed not caused by the applicant. This doesn't give us any special privilege. It just let's just use the original street. This is the absolute minimum variance requested. It's a twoft dedication. It's a two-foot ask. um the
general intent of the LDRs as I said and it's completely consistent with the comprehensive plan and with that I will say thank you and obviously offer to answer any of your questions. >> Okay >> and I don't anticipate needing time for rebuttal but let me just in case >> we'll take any public comment if there is
>> we do have a hand raised Carlos Pasa >> Carlos was sworn in earlier I believe >> with the other applicant across the street. >> Yeah. Good afternoon. Yeah, I spoke earlier. Um I um 40169 Street. So we're the neighboring
building to this new uh construction project. Um what would be the distance between the lowest uh step um at the entrance of this new building and um and the curve and the and the street? What
would be the the distance the width of the sidewalk? Ultimately at this point >> it'd be as left it would be 5 ft we're going into we're using we're using half of the clear pedestrian path. So it
would it would leave 5t and then the 5 ft ramp and steps would be taken out actually I'm sorry and when they're taken out it would be wider. We're using five feet of the clear pedestrian path, but some of it is actually on private property. So, it winds up at 11 feet
once removed, but we're six feet six feet, one on ours, five on the clear, and then five on pure rightway. >> I I I I'm I'm concerned about ADA requirements. I'm concerned about
wheelchair access for people. Um um as it is, you know, a lot of the sidewalks around this neighborhood are really narrow and and it was it was nice to see that we were going to have wider sidewalks and that were consistent with the plan for the neighborhood. And and
I'm also I guess a little concerned that that that you've gotten this far with the construction of the building. You have all the foundation. You have you're building columns and you're building the ramp for the parking garage and all of a
sudden like 6 months is into construction this this comes up like so late. Um, is there any other way to deal with this like like starting the steps
at at the 10-ft line so that so that the steps on the ramp go farther into the building or underneath the building underneath the first floor instead of putting it on the sidewalk? No, there isn't. Um, and the sidewalk
that we're leaving is actually wider than the one next to 401 Blue. um it does widen up a little bit and I didn't have that in my presentation but I was looking at it today. Um I didn't want to mention another property because it is temporary in nature. Um there is no way
because of the elevation from where we are to where we're going. There just isn't enough space. Um I do not have the background to discuss the geometry of architecture but I have been assured that there is there was no way to do it especially given that it was temporary. only other way that the city even
suggested was as I said a wall >> leaving the sidewalk down there and then just putting putting a wall down >> um Abbott which >> I I was here when we raised Sunset Harbor >> and I would rather build up now >> and harmonize later. >> That's what you the city and F dot works
with. I mean that's kind of dictated everywhere else. I know where this there's a lot of this around the city right now. So >> yes, >> I'm sure that Yeah, you don't really have control over it. It's a problem facing. >> Thank you. >> Your sidewalk width during the temporary stage
>> which nothing with F dot is temporary but >> um the sidewalk width is going to be X and after the temporary is done. What is the sidewalk width going to be? >> 11. >> Before and after
>> before five >> five and after >> after 11 >> 11. Okay. And when did FD do say that they were going to be doing Abbott? >> We anticipate the project to be done any started. Um we've been told like 3 to
seven years, but that's the best that I can >> and they have money for it >> supposedly. Wow. They have a plan. >> Is there street trees planting along that narrow area? the street trees would likely have to wait to be planted until
after because um I I don't remember his last name because it was just Carlos um the gentleman that was there ADA is not an option. So it's it's not I might not I have to. So the trees the trees in 5t will cannot go in. So we we've got some
we're thinking of how to maybe do something on our side to beautify, but with respect to street trees, there's no way they'll fit and accommodate >> F. see them in the plan that it wouldn't work. >> No. Yeah. And that's why I didn't show them in the rendering. Um I didn't there's just there's no way we would be
responsible for the street trees >> after. >> Yeah. Okay. >> We are our success or whoever. >> Uh you said that it it would take anywhere to seven years to build >> uh when do you see them >> completing the whole process? Like
>> 10 more years. >> I I I wouldn't even be able to say. I mean, this is I'm always I'm always loaded to say I don't want to put you on the spot. >> They work at night. They work at night. They work day and night. And I don't know how what stretch of alt of um abbot
they're doing, but if you know, >> it also depends how >> it also depends how unfinished they leave. >> Yeah. >> Uh so sometimes they don't finish a block and then move on to the next block. just economies of scale dictate just tearing up and then doing it in a
longer stretch. That'll all depend. The good thing is in this city, I've always seen them work at night. When we did Alden back in 13, they were working round the clock. So here, they tend to work a little faster than in some other communities where they don't like them to work at night. So unless that's changed, I'm just saying in my
experience. >> So I I agree. >> The existing sidewalks are awful anyway. >> Mhm. >> Okay. Great. Anybody else? >> Like to make a motion that we approve the variance to reduce the minimum
required setback along Abbott Avenue from 10 ft to 8 ft. >> Have a second. >> Second >> the the the you mean the waiver? >> The waiver. I'm sorry. No. >> No, you're talking about the Okay. Sorry. I apologize. Okay. >> Yeah. Variance. >> You can actually consider them both
together if you'd like. It's up to you. >> Okay. and and that we approve the waiver for the minimum 10- foot wide clear pedestrian path requirement to address conflicts between FDOT roadway project and um the elevation of the existing
project. >> Okay. Do we have a second? Second. Any discussion? All in favor? >> I. >> Okay. Pass unanimously. >> Thank you very much. I appreciate you. Um,
next do we have the final item? Then we have discussion of >> the U >> permeability requirements. >> Yeah. >> Yes. This was a discussion item requested by the board.
Um the discussion item came about as a result of um types of variances that we seem to be getting on understory homes that are on very very very very large lots. Um the code um in order to improve
the permeability of these understory areas to allow for water to drain better uh requires that in the understory areas um that you have no uh concrete, asphalt or similar material which is t typically
impervious. The code requires that in understory areas that are not airond conditioned that you have uh porous or semi-por uh pvious or semi-pervious materials such as wood deck, gravel or paver set in stand. In some of these larger properties, we're seeing that
because the areas are so long and you tend to have sagging, you tend to have some other issues, they are requesting variances of this board in order to be able to have concrete. um that we're now seeing some more innovative solutions as a result of that where they're not using a full slab of
concrete, but they're using a grid of concrete in order to support the pavers, but it still has a significant amount of open space. However, because the code has a strict prohibition on concrete, those do at this point in time require that uh that they seek a variance in
order to allow those. So that was just a quick is >> yeah can they can they do um u xfiltration systems underneath that understory to capture the water in different areas and then move it out. >> Absolutely.
>> So they can do that. They can have instead of big pavement pieces or big cement pieces, you're saying have smaller pieces that are pvious and that are on sand and that are >> is there a measure of permeability.
>> The so in this so depends on what you're defining. We have some definitions for um uh pvious driveways that do have a measure that they have to have 20% voids or openings. In terms of the understory area, we just say that you have to have
pavers set in sand, but we don't have a standard on what >> the standard of water per >> percolation uh um there's a there's a term um how how fast the water can percolate >> for the understory area. We don't have a set >> number. So, so I mean a pretty quick
solution would be to just take out concrete and make put a grid system in or something that >> is there a way to is there a technical >> which is no different than what we what the city requires on a driveway.
>> Um it has to be permeable. They have to have an exfiltration system. No properties, no no homes. >> They have to have an exfiltration system in the back, on the sides, in the front. they have to have permeable pavers. Um
so why not request the same? Is it a problem with requesting the same for the understory >> there? They there um so there are engineering standards that we could use for for how much water can permeate through a material and how water can percolate through a material. Um the
only issue that I see is just a lot of times for these larger homes, they're they're willing to spend the money on the engineers. it's not a problem for the smaller homes. >> They just want to put pavers down or do something and and they don't necessarily want to spend the money on having these engineering studies done.
>> So, is there a simple >> but they they have to have a soil and percolation test done anyways for the rest of the house. >> So, it can it it uh you know it does exist for the understory. It would be the same percolation and and uh soil
test. Um, and even on the smaller homes, you're, you know, you're talking about the bigger homes, but even the smaller homes, one lot, you know, small regular lot, you're required to have a civil engineer come in um and do Xfiltration
system, which, you know, I I will say, you know, some of them so far, if you talk to the our city engineer, they say they're not really working because the, you know, once the water goes in, where's it going to go? The only way is if you add a well to the property which
is then really expensive which is required for a pool anyways. Um if you put a pool you got to put in a well. So what is the recommendation of staff >> there? Well there's this is a discussion item so we don't have a formal recommendation here. Is there a there's
alternate you can you can use permanent surfaces like a bio swale that >> acts as a retention pond to >> the civil engineer actually spoke to me about having swailes instead of xfiltration systems in the front of a home.
>> Right. The problem is that even with the swailes >> in an understory >> I I don't know how that would work. I'm just >> I mean usually it's ornamental like a rain garden that looks like a local uh >> type
capture the water and retains it. >> The the as far as I can tell like the the idea is that there is to not create an imperous >> area underneath a home because it's not counted in the rest of
the lot drainage calculation. So, this is what I'm assuming is so it's like, "All right, don't don't make this whole concrete area that that can be a pond underneath underneath the house." >> So, we've had since I've been here, we've had a couple come. The small lot came to us and they wanted to do
concrete because it was it's easier and it's not going to move. And then there were the big houses wanted to do the same thing. And the big houses had linear drains that went into I think what you're calling the Xfiltration system, right? French drains that would then go to the nyoplast that would get
water would move out like it was on on the on the perimeter of the site. So are we do we want to give people the freedom to put what they want down there or what what what is our objective
>> that we want here? >> I think the objective the whole thing this came up was because the areas were too big to just do sand and pavers, right? And that makes sense. And people doing these gigantic houses, it's going to continue to be a problem. And somebody else had a a drainage system,
pumps installed and whatever that wanted a waiver for that. And we were like, it was beyond our comprehension to deal with that. So I mean, the grid concrete grid system, I think, taking the word concrete out as a as a prohibition
>> 4 in uh coral stone p. I mean, but that makes if if it's a concrete grid, it leaves open space within the concrete, >> right? So, I think you shouldn't limit between the concrete, right? Like, so if it's a grid, they can put the pavers on
it. Same principle. It just gives it stabil. It gives it structure. >> And I think that makes sense. I mean, I I I don't know how I don't want to make it difficult. I don't want to make it even harder and more costly for someone, but it does this. the grid that they were using underneath.
>> It's a perimeter grid that will support the the edges of the of the material. But >> just as you have to do uh pilings for a house to support the house, you have to do this grid system. >> But the truth is that the water is not really draining.
>> This was like pooling and there's one as it rises up. >> I just want to >> you want to keep it down. >> It doesn't even make sense. Right. So, this is almost like a stupid >> the the >> the code was just so black and white on it, which is why I was like worried like
we should have this conversation about there's no concrete allowed and people are bringing in concrete. So, I I think as long as the like intent here was to just at least offset the runoff maybe from the minimal concrete and they do that through a a swale or a internal
system that works. I guess we should make sure that their internal systems in the water then I I I agree. I don't think we should take issue with granting >> they can make the choice because the the the underground piping and the swells it's it's expensive. So if you want if
you want >> to have it all finished and hardcape underneath, then you might have to pay to to drain the water and to keep it on your site. And if you don't want to pay for it, then you can do permeable. >> But the requirement, a requirement right now
from the city is that you're building on a single lot and the driveway in front of the property. Um, not only does it have to have permeable uh pavers, but you also have to have an exfiltration system. So, if that's
required of a of a single lot, why are we going to apply or should we apply a different standard for the area of the understory which is meant to be open space? Um, >> in in the driveway, you are permitted to
have solid concrete driveways. We don't we don't have a prohibition on that. What the code provides for for driveways is you either have to have a a per a pvious pavement or a high albo pavement which is as a result of our urban heat island effect. So it's a light color
driveway that will reflect the heat so that you're not heating. >> Roelio, >> I don't ever disagree with you because you're the expert, but I will tell you >> and it's possible. So I'm I'm just talking about zoning. >> The building department comes in and says it has to be permeable. public
works comes in and says it has to be permeable pavers and then public works comes in and says and you have to have an exfiltration system you have to have soil test you have to have percolation test so maybe
I'm not an engineer I don't feel comfortable in saying in giving a recommendation I think that public works needs to get involved in this with planning and building, you know, three of you get together >> and come up with a solution or a
recommendation um to because I do not believe that the driveway of a home should be treated any differently than the understory which becomes the driveway the parking area
for that home. You know, it's my thought. They just the whole issue this came up was because of the vastness of the size of these. So it's not like a driveway. It's like >> I think it was their pool field. >> It was their pool deck primarily.
>> Then maybe they need to put a grid in order to give it stability >> so that it doesn't um >> um >> yeah change in levels. But even if you put a concrete slab, a concrete slab according to former commissioner
pearlson is uh a slab waiting to crack, you know. So even that is going to, you know, be a problem unless you have the proper foundation underneath. So if they want to do pavers then they have to have a grid or they have to have some sort of
>> I mean back to can can they can can the engineers and come up with a the option of having a grid using concrete but in a pvious way. So the way the way the code is worded right now, not without a variance. Can we change the code to reflect?
>> They can use concrete, but it's got to have >> a permeability factor to it >> and maybe there's still like a percentage that they can't be. >> Explain the issue that like they need structure, they need support for these larger areas and it's not feasible to
not allow concrete. >> But there should be like an offset. Yeah, >> for the whatever use they use, >> however they want to deal with the water, give them options to deal with the water, the pviousness of it, >> permeability of it. Um,
>> because that's what what we approved was the grid, the P on the big house was the grid and the approved it. >> I don't think did we approve a grid? >> I was pretty vocal about not approving it because I wasn't sure. >> But there was there was one that it was approved >> one that was >> Yeah. But but they had the drainage.
They were accounting for whatever frog was there. Yeah. >> Yeah. They did like Yeah, they had like sisters >> because the level the grade underneath there should you should be able to pull the water off to your perimeter or wherever. It can go into a well. It's not going to get pumped in. If the
tide's high, it's going to pump. >> Yeah. We have a few we have the the understory regulations also have an understory edge where you have to have a 5-ft area on the perimeter of the understory um which is intended to be used for drainage almost like a swale landscaping and other things for
drainage. Um and then um and then yeah that's that's that's not a bad suggestion. Um the one that did get get it approved was last month it was five and seven five through seven Star Island. >> Um they're the ones that came up with the concept of the grid. >> Mhm. Um,
>> and they were smart enough to use it, right? Coral stone, which is technically a per somewhat impervious even though if when it rains it's not it's not really, >> right? >> So, the material is important to use. If we're if we're saying a grid,
>> we're allowing concrete grids, then the material that they use is important to >> uh be specific about because if you're like, "All right, I've got a concrete grid and I'm putting concrete papers on it." You're just making a concrete path. >> Exactly.
>> Yeah. >> So, I think Yeah. I mean, the the offsetting of drainage is one. >> Yeah. Just like let's look at it that way of offsetting the drainage versus prohibiting certain materials and see if there's ways they can come up with >> trenching. I think you trenching
>> or just a big drain, >> whatever. >> Yeah. The rain. >> So that we don't Yeah. Good. >> Okay. Um, so do you want this to be transmitted to the city commission as a as an LTC as a recommendation to amend
the code? >> No, I think I don't know what was discussed while I went to the restroom, but >> or is this is this guidance for variances? >> We need to get um, you know, planning and public works, >> city engineer, because what we may be
recommending may not be a doable thing. It may not resolve the issue. And I think there's a lot of other things that could be done where the person has, you know, the option, the owner has the option of trenching, exfiltration, the grid, you know, what actually works. I
don't know. >> Do we want to send this to whoever the >> So, so the way So, our code says concrete is prohibited to allow for concrete in a limited form. We'd have to amend the code. So, what the what the board can do is provide and and for us to work on amendments, we need a
referral from the city commission. we can't just uni unilaterally start >> working on an amendment. >> Um so what you could do is transmit an LTC to the city city commission recommending that uh the administration explore options. >> Okay. >> Um to allow for
>> Can we say why we're doing this? Because >> and and explain why we're doing it. Absolutely. Like low use of concrete >> so they understand for that. >> Yes. So we would need a motion and a second. How much motion? >> Second. >> Okay. >> Prepare an LTC,
>> right? >> Um and on the other issues that um we all have problems with like I brought one up today where we have a different height for understory properties versus
properties that elevate and don't have understories. Um, is it does it make sense and and each one of us may have different issues that concern us? Should we email you what we would like to discuss such as this that Laura did
because it was of concern to her? Should we email them to you and then, you know, you circulate it to see if it's of interest to be discussed by the member as a whole, by the board as a whole, and if it is, then you put it on some future agenda for us to discuss.
So, do you see any issues with the email? >> No, no issues with that. >> Well, I would just email you, >> right? It's just back and forth at that point. >> So, in other words, don't hit reply all or you just mail it directly. >> Just mailing it to Could I ask the rest of the board
members, >> do you want to discuss this or >> Well, how did this get on this calendar? >> The board requested it as part of a discussion item during another a separate item. Well, I think the request now in front of everyone is to have this as a discussion item.
>> We're talking about the differences that you've got >> the height the height you've got for for base plus one. >> That's my issue, but it may be that all of you have other issues. >> I know, but >> I have a whole height issue. I mean, I really think that >> so if we each
>> they're all asking for variances. It's what they do. And then this stupid negotiation of one foot, we want three, we'll give you one and a like it's stupid. Nobody's winning. And if a lot is a certain size, it should be allowed to go to this height. And this is this
doesn't happen in the Gables or Palm Beach. I mean, this is just begging to be, >> you know, give >> Here's another issue. People um properties built uh homes being
developed, right? Being built. Here are the plans. And what finally gets built is this something different and it has violations within the planning code, right? Uh but planning doesn't catch it
until the very end because that's when you do your inspection at the very end. Mhm. >> And I've spoken with Tom Mooney about this and I said maybe you need to do an inspection the moment that you know the platform uh there's another word for it but that you know the property is is
marked >> you know um so that the >> if there is a problem it it's brought it it's corrected at the beginning and not at the end and at the end I don't see that project coming back to DRB. So, here's a project that would have had to
come to DRB because they don't have the required side setbacks or the front or the rear and yet it never came back to DRB. They went ahead and built it. I don't know if they had to pay double the permit fee or double the planning fee. I don't know. I don't know what's
happening with these projects, but I know of two that don't comply and I've never seen them here. >> Okay. >> And that's and that's not helpful. That's not fair to the rest of the properties coming to this board. >> Expensive and time consuming to come
here. >> Yeah, I'll I'll I'll we'll look into that. I know we had one come about two months ago, maybe last month. Um that was an after the fact because the home the foundation was shifted over. >> Yeah, that's that was different. >> And we had another one that they had an extra 100 feet and they have to come
before after. So they they do come and we're getting a lot to the board of adjustment that are after the fact >> um where we're finding issues. Um it's something that we're going to definitely have to address. >> Maybe they're going to the board of adjustment. I don't know. >> Some of them do go to the board of adjustment >> out of turn here, but
>> yeah, we had two two at the last board of adjustment after the fact variances. >> Yeah. >> Well, I was going to ask in like December. I want I'm making a list of things because I've done this six years. I'm off. I want to I want to like it's silly because these some of these things they keep coming up and it's it's frustr
It's just nothing but frustrating and people are hiring attorneys to and it they shouldn't we shouldn't be like that. We shouldn't be coming to this every time. >> So I guess to answer Myra's question, email Roelio individually. >> Okay. All right. So if you email me, we
can place it on the agenda and we'll start to work work on it as we can >> and if the you know if I have an issue but the rest of the board is not concerned with it, we don't have to discuss it. You know, >> the discussion will be short. >> Yeah, the discussion will be short. >> Great. All right. Um Oh, I don't think
we took a I had a motion in a second. All um all those in favor >> on the LTC transmitting an LTC >> I I >> All right. And then motion to adjurnn. And the next meeting is >> next meeting is November 20th.
>> I can't. So it's the Friday. >> Thursday. Thank you. >> Oh my god. >> That was