Welcome to the city of Miami Beach Commission Chamber. 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. Hey, hey, hey. fire. Hold on. Hey. Hey. Hey. Honey.
Hey. Hey. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. N. Make it. My back again. How do you feel? Heat. Heat. N. Hey, hey, hey.
Wonder. I'm a kid. Feel well feel well. Hollywood All night long.
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 one.
Good morning everyone and uh welcome to the December 16th meeting of the historic preservation board of the city of Miami Beach. Um happy holidays everyone and um with that I'm going to uh ask um Michael Belalouch to start the
meeting. Uh so first we do have presently five members present. U Mr. Hollingsworth um will not be here today. We do expect um Mr. Mayor to be here shortly. Without turn over to um Nick who can let members of the public know how they may participate in today's proceedings.
>> Thank you Michael and good morning Mr. Chairman and members of the board. Today's meeting of the historic preservation board will be conducted in a hybrid format with the board physically present in the commission chambers at Miami Beach City Hall and applicant staff and members of the public beering either in person or virtually via Zoom. To participate
virtually in today's meeting, the public may dial 1888-475-4499, and enter the webinar ID, which is 817-48347488, or log in to the Zoom app and enter the webinar ID, which again is 817-48347488. Anyone wishing to speak on an item must
click the raise hand icon if you're using the Zoom app, or dial star9 if you're participating by phone. If you're appearing on behalf of a business, a corporation, or another person, you need to register as a lobbyist with the city clerk's office. If you haven't registered yet, you should register before you speak to the board. You don't
have to register as a lobbyist if you're speaking only on behalf of yourself and not any other party, or if you're testifying as an expert witness providing only scientific, technical, or other specialized information or testimony in this public meeting, or if you're appearing as a representative of a neighborhood association without any
compensation or reimbursement for your appearance. to express support of opposition 20 item. Expert witnesses and representatives of neighborhood associations shall prior to appearing disclose in writing to city clerk their name, address, and the principal on whose behalf they're communicating. If
you're an architect, attorney, or employee rep representing an applicant or an objector, you must register as a lobbyist. These rules apply whether you're appearing in favor of or against an item or encouraging or arguing against its passage, defeat, modification, or continuence. Um, lastly, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to swear
in uh any members of staff and any members of the public who will be testifying today. Please rise, raise your right hands. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> Thank you.
Well, that will go to the approval of the minutes from the November 18th meeting. I'll make a motion. >> Second. >> All in favor? I. >> Any opposed? Motion passes. I'll begin with the regular agenda items. The first item we have on the
agenda is for applications that were previously approved and this is um HPV file number 25677 formerly known as HPB file number 7245 for um 1545 Collins Avenue. Um this is
an application requesting modifications to the order that was previously approved back in in 2011. Back in 2011, the board approved um a certificate of appropriateness for modifications to the entire site. That um set of plans included numerous operational conditions
for the property. Um at the time there was a related um planning board file. Um the planning board file referenced the operational conditions back in in this file. Um since that time the application, some of you may be aware to the board for further modification to the site. that were approved by the
board back in um um 2024 u October 8th of last year. So what this um proposal is to eliminate the operational conditions that were sort of stuck on the 2011 order. That order really is no longer applicable since the board reviewed modifications back in um
last year. So all this all this application is to remove the operational conditions that have now been incorporated into the planning board order which were which was reviewed and approved by the planning board actually I think was last week. So, this just cleans up this order so those those former operational conditions are no longer applied to the property because
we have updated um conditions as part of the planning board order and sort of just eliminates confusion confusion having to go back and look at that prior order to make sure there's no conditions that apply to the property. Turn it over to the applicant for their presentation. >> Good morning board members. >> Just one second. Um is there any
question are there any questions for the staff? I I had a question for you and and you do too. No, no, please you first. >> So just to clarify because one of the letters of opposition we received was that the changing the timing of
operation would open a precedent in the neighborhood. So I'm just trying to understand we are not changing anything. You are just removing from an obsolete HPB approval so that the planning approval takes over. >> Exactly. So the planning board the planning board approval takes over. any
modifications then would go to the planning board because otherwise they'd have to go back they'd have to come to both boards right both the HPB to modify the conditions as well as the planning board and really since um since that time back in 2011 the the boards have basically um um been more in terms of
looking at their their their purview of the application for so preservation board is looking at design especially when you have an application that's also going to planning board the planning board is looking at you know operational conditions regarding trash and loading noise, hours of operation, especially for an application that includes um um a
neighborhood impact establishment. If there is no application that was associated for an NIE and there's no there's no associated application that would go to the planning board, then it may be appropriate for the for this board to place, you know, certain conditions regarding operations. But in this case, there are there is a
companion um certificate of um um I'm sorry, uh condition use permit for the property. So it doesn't make sense to have conflicting conditions. Okay. >> In the historic preservation board report um order versus the the planning board. >> Thank you. >> And and Michael and so just um so any
any perception that this might be an applicant kind of choosing a board to for the best outcome. >> Just just like you would you wouldn't want to have the planning board make um decisions on a certificate of appropriateness. I think in this case it's it's more appropriate for the planning board to weigh in on conditions
regarding operations. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. I'm sorry about that. Thank you very much. >> Good morning. Nick Notto, the law firm of Bills and Sunberg here on behalf of the >> I'm sorry. I I have to You had You had a question. >> You were doing much better without me
last last meeting. I I'm so sorry. >> No, you're fine. >> So, I just wanted to know the um proposed order that we have here and then we have this like supplement that goes with it. >> Um so, we're going So, Nick Nick is going to provide a comment. This is this is just to clarify that the order that's
from 2011 is more for historical record now. It's not to be looked at in terms of conditions that are ongoing for the property and we're going to have some revised um um clarification of what was passed out. >> Okay. Um I just wanted to know if the proposed order references the planning
board order at all and incorporates that. No, because it's it's basically this is going to be um for historical record that no long no longer would apply for someone to have to look at in terms of the conditions. So the the new order um
applies and the idea being that the HPV order should really be limited um to the approval of the design of the project and the planning board order will stand on its own uh and the operational conditions are all as approved by the planning board last week.
>> Right. I was just asking for some sort of reference between the orders saying, you know, incorporating by reference the operational conditions in the planning board order. >> No, because we we basically want to close out this order. So, this is like for historical record. There's no need for anybody to look at this order to then have a reference of a future order
in the in the file. So, the the I think that the historical preservation order back in 2024 does have a um we'll check. I think that should have a link to the planning board case file. If not, we'll take a look at that. Okay, >> Elizabeth. >> Oh, I'm sorry. So, this application has
no design changes at all because we have a completely package design. So, >> this is um these design modifications or the design was all approved back in 2011. That's no longer applicable since we have a new a new order from this board from October of last year. That's
the that's the um order that applies and controls for this property without having so so just in quick summary if the board did not modify these conditions today in then those those operational conditions still apply to the property. So, for example, when you
get approval from the board to do a new project, a new building, um, once the building is constructed, you've closed out basically the historic preservation board order. The project is complete. They have their TCO, it's operational, but the but that could that order has operational conditions. Those run for
the life of the property unless they're modified. This basically removes all those operational conditions and applies them and those are now applied as part of the planning board view rather than the historic preservation board view. So there's no need to then look at this order just like if we have you know um
over the course of a building's lifespan you may see numerous orders on a property and for us to have to go through in permitting to look at every prior order to see what applies it can be very cumbersome. This just clarifies that this order is no longer applicable towards any sort of new um review of the
design of the property. >> So then all these design changes were just for reference. There was not have nothing to do with the process. >> Yeah. this all all the all the other design information as part of this order is just for historical record based upon the plans approved back in 2011 um
because we have a new a new application that was approved by this board back in October that's that's the new order that applies >> okay >> and so this board will not see moving forward any of those kind of conditions uh come before it is that is
>> no so if there's if there's no associated planning board approval >> okay >> then you may see operational conditions as part of the order. >> Um, but if there is an associated plan order, just I'll give you an example. There's one of the conditions in here that says that if there's a violation regarding noise that they come back to
this board for a um like a progress report, >> right? >> That's now in the planning board order. So, if there's a violation regarding noise, it goes to the planning board as part of the progress report versus this board. >> Okay. And would what would kick in that um the planning board having the noise
be part of its ordinance versus HPB having noise like in a new application for example. >> So if there if there's a if there's a um um conditional use permit >> then there then basically the operational conditions are um subject to the perview of the planning board. We
wouldn't have those conditions in the in the HPB order. If there was no planning board um order then it would be appropriate or for example this board also reviews um say variances for um outdoor bar counters. So in that case we may have operational conditions regarding that variance that would be
subject to the perview of the HPB. >> So why didn't we deal with this last year? >> I'll ask I I can answer that question if if I may. >> Okay. Wait one just one second. Anybody else have any other questions? Yeah. >> Why don't we do this? Uh, I I'm trying
to wrap my head around this. The planning board last week, what did they approve uh in a nutshell regarding noise? That would be my concern. >> I Okay, if if we're really you'd rather
defer to them. Okay, >> please. Now we're ready. I think we're good and ready for your presentation. >> Excellent. Nick Notto from the law firm Bills and Sunberg. office is located at 1450 Bickl Avenue here on behalf of the applicant. Um just to answer your question, Mr. Chair, I have um on my
presentation if they could pull it up. This is the condition that you were just discussing as approved in the modified cup that was approved by the planning board last week. This is essentially I I think just a matter of of housekeeping to to answer board member level's
question. What happened was we we came to you last year for a a massive renovation of the Royal Palm Hotel. Um I can kind of flip through some of these to refresh your memory. Um of the modifications we did a lot of um improvements in the lobby, uh the
outdoor terrace space, the three meal restaurant, and this um second floor roof deck. You guys may remember this project. It was approved in October of 2024. Now that we have begun the permitting
process, we had to go back and modify our conditional use permit with the planning board because occupancies have changed. We've asked for additional um we had asked for an additional right because of that. If you remember, the lobby bar was modified to be kind of inside outside. So that required us to
go back to the planning board and modify our CV. It wasn't until we were in that process that we even recognized that there was this old 2011 HPB order that had operational conditions in it because typically, as Mr. Blush has explained, the planning board would regulate
conditional use permits and operational conditions relating to the operation of a neighborhood impact establishment. So, it wasn't until we were going through that CUP process that we even knew that this 2011 order had these operational conditions in it. And they were
transferred to the to the conditional use permit in 2011. They're kept in there in 2019. Um, they're still in there as I as I showed. And I have a couple examples of this was one of the provisions that we're asking to be um
stricken for clarification purposes and what was improve approved last week essentially just strengthens it adds more clarification clarifying language and strengthens these conditions. A lot of that is still in there. The the the
planning board order is 13 pages of conditions that was approved last week. There there's a lot in there. We're just trying to make sure that when in the future if there was a redesign of this hotel again, we would come to you for the design approval on the certificate of appropriateness, if we had to modify
our operational conditions or conditional use permit, that would go to the planning board so we're not caught in this kind of catch22 where now we're appearing before you for a second time because these operational conditions are in here. Although we already went to the planning board to kind of go through the an extended discussion about the
operations and all of these 13 pages worth of conditions that are now in the the modified cup. Does that does that make sense? >> So >> yeah. Is is that the end of your presentation?
>> I'm I'm happy to answer any questions. I have one I have one other thing I'd like to bring up and I think I'll work with Nick Clair just on on this language just to clarify because you know one thing we're always worried about when we get to permitting >> is we want to make sure that the project that you approved in 2024 is what
everyone's looking at for purposes of permitting and in that renovation. So, this is truly just clarifying that just because we're here modifying this 2011 order as a matter of cleanup so it doesn't conflict with the CUP that it's
the 2024 project you approve is what we're building and not this old 2011 order. >> Okay. Um, so is that the end of your presentation? >> Answer questions. Absolutely. >> Okay. Perfect. >> Mitch, you have a question? >> Yeah, you go ahead. I'd like to
understand the uh the proposed order uh versus uh what was uh approved by this board in 2011 regarding noise. What has changed? If it's the same uh I I don't
see that there would be any problem. uh if I may approach and hand you guys a copy of the I'm going to hand out a copy of the the proposed draft order from last week's hearing. It was it was tweaked a little bit and I'll explain that, but this is essentially
>> the draft order that was approved by the planning board with the the changes at all. >> Okay. And you have the 2011 then on your slide. He's asking about the difference specifically between 2011 and last week. I think it'll make sense when I show you how this is is drafted.
>> Okay. Thanks. Thank you. >> And and PJ, can you promote me as a panelist on Zoom? So, if I can turn your attention to page seven of 13 of the order that I just handed out to you. I'll give everyone a minute to flip.
Okay, you can see condition 18 in this order actually references this this old HPB file 7245 and below it are stricken ABC sub conditions that are now listed
as 18 through 24. These are the conditions that were the operational conditions that were in the planning board order as copied into the CUP. And you can see the modifications that were made and approved by the
planning board last week. The only thing in here that would be um a modification to kind of everything strengthens the operational conditions with the exception of D. And one thing that we were asking for and we withdrew
at last week's hearing was the ability to have outdoor entertainment on our new event space on the second floor. Um that was withdrawn. So this was presented this was Debbie's draft order prior to the hearing. So obviously in a week we
haven't got the modified um approved version with incorporating all the discussion with the planning board. Um but we withdrew that request. There will be no outdoor entertainment on that second floor terrace. um as defined by the city. So the rest of these conditions are as you see here.
>> So D is is now is is included in the in the order. >> I don't know exactly how it's going to come through after the city attorney's office handles it. What I can tell you is there's we we withdraw our quest for outdoor entertainment whether it just says second floor event terrace outdoor entertainment. No, cuz if you Debbie did
a really good job of kind of making these easier to follow along or if this is inserted back in the specific language in either in either circumstance, the end result is the same, which is there is no >> entertainment on that second floor terrace. And you can kind of see how the rest of these operational conditions
were um really only strengthened. >> Mitch, >> is there any outdoor uh event space that will have entertainment? So the ground floor pool like the pool area has
always had that right. It's since 2011 that was not modified. That's a that's a condition that remains. And then the only other >> a condition that allows for noise. Uh >> it allows for allows for outdoor entertainment.
>> Okay. >> And the in the in the pool and three meal restaurant area. There's a lot of restrictions in here about noise levels and compliance with the city's noise ordinance and the fact that we have to have a distributed sound system that staff will actually go out before we can
get our C or CU and BTR. They will go onto the property. They will test the system. They will lock the system at a particular sound level that doesn't interfere with normal background conver uh conversation at ambient levels. There's a lot of stuff in there in terms
of protections as to noise and that's all still in there. >> Has there been any noise complaints for the pool area? >> No. If you if you were to go through um the staff report, Debbie actually did a
um like a narrative summary of of noise complaints. The last one was in 2023 that was associated with a special event permit. The complaint came before the special event permit was
the special event permit allowed this event. It was for the white party. It was it was allowed to operate till 8:00 p.m. Code came out before 8:00 p.m. >> The operator apologized profusely to all right >> to the to the hotel management. It was
resolved. Nothing else has happened since 2012. >> Okay. How many uh previously how many noise complaints uh were issued since 2011 on the pool area? >> I'm not aware >> of exactly I
>> so let's just so the idea here is to let the planning board control the operational issues not to have the HPB. So I think this discussion is sort of irrelevant because they're not they're not here with an argument to modify the conditions regarding entertainment for this board. They've already done that at the planning board. We don't want to
have a conflicting condition where the where the where the HPB is reviewing the the entertainment outdoors or any entertainment or any noise. That's the perview of the planning board. The planning board already reviewed that last week and already approved um what they asked for last week. So >> So it's it's approved. It's not
proposed. It's >> this is what what he's what Nick is stating has been approved by the planning board um last week. Exactly. >> Okay. But regarding the pool area >> that would that was approved as with the conditions that he specified. Basically entertainment that's allowed is going to
be at background level. So if you have a DJ so a DJ is considered entertainment regardless of the noise levels. So but this I think their conditions state that if they do have that which is entertainment it can't exceed what would be allowed um um to interfere with normal conversation. So um that's that
sort of a protection that was put in place. But we're not we're not the purpose of this modification is not to talk about um entertainment or talk about operations or hours. This is to remove all those conditions from this order so that the the current orders which is the current planning board approved last week and the current HPV
order from um last year. >> I get that Michael. >> What we don't want to do is have one condition in here that applies and we have to go back and look at look at all the prior orders and see oh there's one condition here that applies versus everything else. to clean it up. All these conditions should be removed under
the purview of planning board and then any sort of violations like if they if they get a violation, we put them on the board. We put them on the planning board for a progress report. The planning board can then actually revoke the CUP or modify the CUP and they've done that. Um I I came from the planning board most recently and the planning board has on
their agenda almost every month um revocation modification proceedings for um applicants with just one violation. So um code notifies us. We do send out a there's a procedure for that um revocation or modification process >> and the planning board has been diligent in terms of um in doing that.
>> So does the CUP reference the pool area? Is it part of CUP? >> Did you um >> I just received this. >> Yeah. Yeah. I'm sure it does. I mean but but still it's still a moot point that there's there's no need for that to be reviewed by this board. This is not the
planning board. This board should be reviewing, you know, issues regarding historic preservation design. We have an associated planning board order that that's what controls. We don't want to have them coming to both boards to modify. >> I I I I get that. But this was presented as uh entertainment on the second level.
>> No, that that's been removed. That's been removed. So, >> yeah, I I I hear that. But there's entertainment at the pool level. And my I guess my question is, did the planning board address that issue as well? >> They did. Yeah, they they address they
address Yes. Yes. Exactly. So, basically once you have a planning board order like that, they're going to address any sort of outdoor entertainment, any entertainment on the property is all going to be addressed by the planning board. It's not going to be something that they can sneak in, you know, because um once once you have any sort of outdoor entertainment that does
require a cop if it's allowed, it does require a CP. >> All right. So, so Michael, again, for those who are kind of concerned that this might be a demunition of the historic preservation board, >> I went through Yeah, I went I went through all the I went through every single condition, every condition that
was in that was removed here. I went through and looked at to see is this in the planning board? Yes. >> Right. >> And did you did the staff did you do that in your report? Did you go through that to see? >> I went I went through the um conditions of this of this planning of this this order to see if those operational
conditions were were included and plan and yes they are. I didn't go through and look at all the new conditions. I just went through to see if all the all the effective conditions here all the information here was included in planning board order and yes it was. >> And it's your opinion it was. Okay. Perfect. Thank you. So I >> Mr. Elizabeth had just one second. Sure.
Sorry. >> Is there a mechanism in place? So let's say a project comes to us for historic preservation purposes but the board decides to put an operation condition on that. So we have the right to do that. Correct. So then our order would have
the design and the operation. So what prevents an applicant in the future? Oh I didn't like that. It's too restrictive to apply them to the planning board for a different >> No. Because so the planning board if you have if you if you have to obtain a conditional use permit only the planning
board can approve that. So for example if you have outdoor entertainment only the planning board so you can't come here for that. >> No I understand but let's say there is no operational condition pre-existing one. So there was a case like a couple months ago there was the bar and we mentioned that the bar should not
operate past whatever else >> but that's because so in that case they're asking for variance regarding the um >> Okay. So that's >> yeah but let's say so so then what what prevents that applicant for instance next year say I want to extend my hours so let me apply to the planning >> no because in that case there's an
associated variance so only the only the historic preservation board can approve the variance for um extending the hours of operation now I do think that that's an error in the code because really that should be something that the planning board should review in terms of operations I don't know why we require a
variance for hours of operation for outdoor bar counter to come to here that really should be um the planning board. I think that was done because back years ago, remember all variances were reviewed by the board of adjustment. So we tried to consolidate them and so that if an applicant was coming to the store preservation board, they could just come
to one board instead of having an application for example um um design, another application for variances, another application for a um a cup. So we try to consolidate it for the for um the applicants. >> Thank you, >> Lindsay. No, you're
>> No, I was going to say that that is my understanding exactly why we changed it in order to make it arguably easier on the applicant that they're not having to be before three different boards to get one project approved in theory. >> Exactly. >> Um >> I think probably looking, you know, um
in the future, probably a condition in the in the 2024 order that said this order supersedes, you know, prior orders in terms of um any previous um um operational conditions that were placed on the on the property previously, right? I mean, because I think right now otherwise, you're right, you'd have to
go through and look at um all the prior orders in a property to see what applies if you don't have a condition like that in in a in a new order, >> right? And and that's kind of why I was asking why this wasn't discussed in 24. I mean so I remember this this application I remember largely the
discussion about traffic but I the circular flow but nonetheless I remember this application and um and you know typically the history of the I I haven't gone back to look at it but typically the history of the project and what has come before us and this that and the other would have been presented
um so those conditions would have been there and so then you know now that it's gone back to the planning board and just shifted things around to me it would have made more sense just uh to have said the 2024 order at that time supersedes all other you know
>> orders prior to this which naturally follows as far as I'm concerned right um and so to the extent that needs to be made explicit >> but I'm struggling a little bit with going back and modifying a 2011 order now that's what I'm struggling with right because when I go look at the
statute I can look at every version that ever existed I know that there's a new version now but I can still go look at the old version and so now you're you're coming to us asking us to go back and change a 2011 order. That that's the that's the struggle that I'm having. Right. It's the procedure, not
necessarily the outcome. How's that? >> Um, sorry, that was more of a question, more comment than a question. But >> I think so, the board did something similar. Remember the um the Leslie Hotel in Ocean Drive? Mhm. >> The board did this exact same thing um I think in the summer because we had we had some of the most restrictive um
operational conditions on the Leslie >> um and then we had an associated planning board order come at the same time. So we removed all those conditions from the Leslie and put them on on the planning board. I do think that alternative to what they're doing here would have been to modify the 2024 order. But but I think this this is
actually probably stronger because we're actually looking at all those conditions in 2011 versus the 2024 order could just you know we're not looking at the prior conditions. So I think this is more maybe more transparent because we're clearly going through and removing those conditions now were part of the 2021. Um
>> yeah, >> in the end basically it should be that when we have a an associated um planning board order for a property the the HPB or DRB should not be reviewing the operational conditions. So, just so I'm clear,
the outcome, and not the outcome practically speaking, but the outcome on paper, the 2011 order that was issued in 2011 will no longer exist. Is there any sort of historic record of it or >> it'll exist? It'll exist. It'll be modified in the public record. We'll
have the original order. We'll have this modified order. Um, so it's all going to be in the public records. >> Okay. I'm just I don't know what we're trying to achieve here. >> Just clarify. So, for example, so get the lawyer. I'm the lawyer. >> This is clean up. It really is just clean up. >> So, right right now, if if I'm a permit reviewer and I'm giving this this new
application for the building permit, I'm going to go ahead and look and see all the orders that I can see on the property. I'm going to go ahead and find this 2011 order. And without this modification, I'm going to say, "Oh, all these conditions apply." That's why we're doing this so that when someone looks at this in the future, they can see that this was modified. These
conditions were there for historical record. They're not going to be deleted the cross through the strike through that brought that strike through exists. So it's not like we're removing the text. That text will be there with a strike through, not like we're eliminating. So it's all going to be there for for historic record. and and um Lindsay, if it would give the board
comfort um that we could include just a reference to say not incorporating the planning board order because we're trying to get away from that, but a reference to say that um that on December, you know, >> 9th, 2025, that these that these conditions were addressed by the
planning board and that order >> that the planning board approved a a separate conditional use permit which addressed operational issues. I I hope the applicant would not object to that. just just for reference purposes so that if someone came across this order, they could follow the paper trail. >> Yeah. Cuz otherwise, you know, somebody
looks at this and says, "Why did we delete all of this?" >> Especially when you're talking about a lay person looking at this as opposed to a permit, right? I I want to make sure that the people who are concerned about why did the HPV delete these noise restrictions, >> right?
>> They can see that this is where they need to be go. They need to go look as well. >> Absolutely. In terms of outcome, really where we land here is the the 2024 HB order controls the design of the project that you approved and the 2025 CP order will control the operational conditions
for that for that redesign >> with the reference back to the 2011. >> Yeah. I mean, so I I would >> I think that's important. >> I don't know if I'm jumping ahead. We've got >> Well, let's do let's um >> Yeah, go ahead. >> We we do have to finish at noon today. So, >> we need to move quicker on these
applications. Yes. Um but let me take public comment before we um >> we first do um board disclosures and then um are there any disclosures on this item? No. Okay. Seeing none, uh public open public hearing.
>> There's any public comments. >> Hi, Roger Goldad MDPL 1000 Ocean Drive. Uh we do not support the applicant's request to remove operational conditions from the 2011 historic preservation board order. As I've observed the past
half hour, this application lacks sufficient clarity regarding what is actually changing. We requested comparison showing the existing HPB conditions versus what was approved by the planning board, including any modifications made during that hearing.
Without this information, we cannot adequately evaluate the true impact of the changes. We're also concerned about the president discet for we call board chopping where applicants can seek approval from multiple boards and select
the least restrictive outcome. The 2011 operational conditions were thoroughly considered and adopted for valid reasons. We request a deferral to allow adequate time for analysis and to ensure all parties understand the implications
of removing these long-standing protections. >> Thank you. >> Anyone any other member of the public understand? >> There's nobody with their hand raised on Zoom. >> Nobody on Zoom. Okay. Well, with that, we'll um thank you. Uh we'll go to board
member comment or um if you prefer to say something or make a motion once we have determined that nobody has anything left to say. Anything I'm looking at Thank you. >> You're welcome. Um so I think my thought
process and I appreciate the comments made by MDPL. Um, I was skimming through this and I will say I was skimming, but I also have in front of me testimony from two sworn witnesses, both our staff and the applicant, saying that they have gone through it one by one to ensure that the
conditions are there. And and I, aside from the one that was discussed, I haven't seen anything that I can't identify that didn't cross over. Um, admittedly, I don't love the fact that I got handed this this morning um while I'm sitting here. um in order to kind of
go through this um cuz it wasn't part of my packet. Um but taking as far as I'm concerned, taking the testimony into consideration and the fact that I've I have two witnesses who've testified that the conditions have in fact transferred over
from the 2011 order to the cup that is approved by the planning board. Um, and therefore the practical outcome is no different than if it stayed in place. But for the cleanup, um, I I think I can support this application as it stands.
>> And we will include a reference in this order to the 2025 approval from last week. >> Yes, I I with that uh one addition. >> Anybody else want to comment on this before a motion? Making a motion? No.
See, do you want to make a a motion then see to your >> Yeah. Um, so I will move that we approve the application. Um, I approve the uh uh approve the application and the draft order as
presented by staff with the addition of a reference to the cup that was approved December 9, 2025 and then how are we dealing with this? >> So, so there would be I understand your
motion there'd be two changes. One would be a reference to the December 9, 2025 um planning board approval of a modified conditional use permit. >> Correct. >> And and the purpose of that reference is to say that all operational conditions in effect for this application are set
forth and have been consolidated in that modified conditional use permit. >> Correct. And then your um your second condition would be to >> the 24 order would supersede >> to say that in the event of a conflict between this order meaning the modified
2011 order and the 2024 order >> that the 2024 order >> that the 2024 order will control and that and that's as to the design of the the design of the project. >> Yes. Okay. So let me see if I can restate that if necessary for clarity.
So, approve the draft order with the addition of a reference to the December 9, 2025 planning board cup, um, uh, and a reference that in the event of
a conflict between the revised 2011 order that we're approving today in theory, um, and the 2024 order that we issued last year that the 2024 order will control as to design. That's right. >> Great.
>> Okay, that is my motion. >> Thank you. Do I have a second? >> Do you have >> I have a question. Question. >> The planning board order doesn't take effect for 30 days. Uh Nick, >> uh the planning board order takes effect
once it's rendered. Um you may be alluding to the appeal period that an appeal appeal could be followed could be filed w um within 30 days of rendition of the planning board order.
>> Okay. So what what I would add as a friendly amendment if there should be an appeal that uh our uh uh tenative approval today would be uh uh rescended and it would come back to us.
>> Is that possible? >> I would not recommend including that language. I think the planning board just held a hearing last week. Um, >> but the actual, >> if I if I if I may, the the planning board just held a hearing last week and approved modifications to the
conditional use permit, which included a number of operational conditions that relate to noise and entertainment. Um, if that order is appealed, then the operational issues are going to have to be resolved in the, you know, in the course of that appeal. Um ultimately
the if if an application requires if a project requires conditional use approval from the planning board, the planning board controls on matters of operations. Um it's it's you know in in instances where there is is no planning
board approval required that this board may have the authority to impose operational conditions. Um, but I think for clarity of the of the record and um and in light of the fact that the planning board just approved modifications to the CUP last week, I
would I would not recommend having a like a springing condition like that in this order. >> Okay. >> I was going to ask, could we delay the effective date of ours like approve it effective 60 days from now?
>> Is that a possibility? >> Why would you? >> Oh, sorry. >> Why would you do that, Lindsay? What what was the reason? >> Well, I'm not I'm not going to probably sign the order for within like a month anyway, so it's it's probably not going to happen for a month. >> I I I took Mitch's concern to be that because the planning board order is not
final, meaning that it could be appealed. He's concerned that the conditions drop off. I don't think that's realistic necessarily, but I understand where he's coming from. And so to guard against that, I was asking if that's a possibility. I honestly I don't know.
So, that's why I directed it back that way. But then, um, our lovely staff said that they're not going to sign it for a while anyhow. So, >> all right. Great. >> I will second Lindsay's original.
>> Okay. Thank you. All right. Well, that's closing discussion. So, um, or no, it opens discussion. Any further discussion? >> All right. Seeing none, um, do you want to take a vote or >> All in favor? I I >> Any opposed?
It passes 56 to zero. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Happy holidays everybody. >> Thank you. You too. >> Um Michael, can I just ask about the continuence and um 1600 Washington? Do we do we need a vote on that or do you
want to >> Oh, I'm sorry. I >> You're right. I I completely skipped that one. Um actually on >> Well, yeah. This is um HB25-0656. This was officially continued to today's meeting. The applicant is requesting a continuence now to the um the January um
13th meeting. We have already advertised it for January 13th. Just so you know, um I have not been able to meet up with the applicant. I think I'm meeting with them next week to go over design changes. At this point, they're probably going to be asking for another continuence, but um unless they're here, I'd recommend the board um approve a
continuence to the January 13th meeting, and if needed in January, they may ask for another continuence to the um to the um the February meeting. >> Okay. So, what once again, uh Michael, this is 1651 Washington. >> This is I'm sorry, HB25656,
>> 1600 Washington Avenue. Okay. 425 16th Street at 161. So just procedurally, I'd like the board members to um vote on this. We have fully advertised it for January 13th. So the board does not really need to take any action today, but just for transparency, if someone's looking at this agenda, I'd like for
them to see that this is going to be on the January general meeting. So I'd ask the board to um approve a motion to continue this to the January 13th meeting. >> Mr. Chair, >> yes. >> Do do we have an applicant here? Um no one's standing. I'm guessing. Okay. Then then I will move that we continue.
>> Okay. Second. All in favor? >> I. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Thanks for catching that. I totally forgot about it. So, our next application is um HPB25-0678.
This is Slow Streets 2.0 includes Jefferson Avenue from 6th Street to 11th Street and 13th Street from Reunion Avenue to Washington Avenue. We have the city's transportation partner here for the presentation and we are recommending approval. Now turn over to second Alex.
>> Thank you Michael. Good morning Mr. Chair. >> Just one second. I'm sorry. Did were there any questions for staff about about this? Is did you present it as you're going to be as much as you're going to present it? >> No questions. All right. Okay. Please. >> Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chair,
members of the board. Jose Gonzalez, transportation and mobility director. And I am joined this morning by our senior transportation engineer, Gassan Shweri. and um Grant Webster who is the project manager. He's our transportation planner and project manager for this
project. Uh we're also joined by our um consultant u Alta Planning. So we have a brief presentation >> and street >> and street plans I'm sorry and street plans collaborative. We have a a
presentation. It's about 18 slides give or take but I'll go through it uh pretty quickly. Okay. So, let's go to the next slide. So, what what are slow streets? So, slow streets, also called open streets, are road roads streets usually
in residential neighborhoods that are um a safe environment for bicyclists and for pedestrians. the the concept of slow streets really took off during the pandemic when as we all know a lot of us
were indoors and so there was this need to be outside and enjoy the streets in a in a different way and have a different experience um in a way that is actually safe for pedestrians and for bicyclists. As you may remember, during that time,
there were very few vehicles on the streets and so vehicular speeds increased and so slow streets was a way to make our residential streets safer for pedestrians and bicyclists. Um, also
streets where multimo mobility uh modes of transportation are encouraged. Um during the pandemic uh several metropolitan cities including San Francisco, Nashville, Denver, LA, Milwaukee, and New York City experimented with slow streets and many
of those cities have kept slow streets in one form or another. So slow the slow streets in the Flamingo Park neighborhood has evolved over the years. It started as an experiment um uh
on actually led by the late Commissioner Mark S. Samuel uh back in 2020 2021. And um as part of that pilot program, we designated several streets as slow streets with very temporary
um materials and interventions. Here you see a couple photos of what's slow streets, what we're dubbing as 1.0, looked like back in 2020 or 2021. So very, as you can see, very rustic materials, barricades, construction type
barricades that say construction uh that say local traffic only. We then tried to make it a little more attractive and created, you know, some unique signage uh bilingual actually uh throughout the neighborhoods telling people to slow down, that the speed was 20 m an hour
and that these were streets that were safe intended to be safe for pedestrians and bicyclists. Um, and the the goal was really to test out the these interventions to see if there was an opportunity to make them
permanent uh in the long term. So, there were several lessons that were learned as part of that uh 1.0 pilot program. Um, the first one that I want to mention is that the concept in and of itself was embraced by the community. Making
streets safer. It's motherhood and apple pie. Who can who can argue with that? However, you know, there were some some uh concerns that were identified. Uh among them, the the need for the materials to be more aesthetic and more
durable. Um if any of you uh were here during that time or lived in the neighborhood, you may remember that some of those signs were frequently knocked down. Even on a windy day, they were knocked down and then required a lot of maintenance. It was also this this uh
test was done with a very low budget. So these were not very durable aesthetic materials. So we learned, you know, we learned that if we wanted this to be implemented on a long-term VA basis, for it to be viable and an asset to the
community, it it u uh the the long-term maintenance issues needed to be addressed. And because it was a pilot, we collected data both before the pilot and after. And um the data actually showed that these very temporary
interventions were very effective in reducing speeds particularly on the very wide streets. There's some streets in in the neighborhood that are extremely wide, easy to speed through. So uh these interventions uh you know located in the middle of the street sometimes, as you
can see, were effective in that regard. So let's fast forward to Flamingo Streets uh 2.0. So the goals of the of the 2.0 project are initially the same as the 1.0. The
idea is to create friendly streets. Um however the the um the method is very different. It's it's a little more permanent in nature and we actually brought some materials uh for you to see here. and they'll also be on the u on on
the PowerPoint presentation for those viewing from from home. So, uh one of the first things we did with 2.0 was to engage the community. We worked very closely with the Flamingo Park Neighborhood Association community
uh activists and and leaders uh to try to uh first and foremost identify the streets where these interventions should occur. We wish that we could do them on more streets. Uh however u the budget
was was simply not there. So, the consensus was to focus on streets that provide direct connectivity to Flamingo uh Park, probably the uh you know, the most valuable asset in the Flamingo Park neighborhood. And so, as a result of
that, the streets um of Jefferson Avenue and 13th Street were identified as the streets to to focus on as part of this slow streets 2.0 effort. Um so some of the key features that we are proposing
as part of uh slow streets 2.0 on along Jefferson Avenue and along 13th Street uh include a parking protected two-way green cycle track along Jefferson Avenue from 6th Street to 11th Street. Traffic
calming features along 13th Street from Meridian Avenue to Washington Avenue. and painted and delineated curb extensions along both streets. So why these streets and why this design? As I mentioned um these streets
provide the main ingress and egress uh for Flamingo Park. Um also um particular to the cycle track. Why a cycle track? A a lot of people may ask, why not just a conventional uh bike bike bike lane? You
know, one on each side of the street, one going north and one going south. Well, Jefferson Avenue just simply isn't wide enough to provide a two-foot buffer. And it's that's a required two-foot buffer um for the bike lane on
both sides of the streets. By co by consolidating both bike lanes as one facility on one side of the street, we actually there's there's actually economies of scale uh and cost savings for the project because we save on the
number of protection devices. We save in terms of the uh the buffer areas uh that are needed and um and striping and paint. So basically it's it's it's a cost savings as well as a um feasibility
uh issue uh in terms of uh moving forward with a cycle track rather than two-way separated bike lanes on each side of the street. Also want to mention that a cycle track reduces the number of conflicts between
pedestrians and vehicles and vehicles entering and exiting driveways, for example, if you if they're if they're consolidated on one side of the street rather than on both sides. So, these are some excerpts from our 100% sign and
sealed permit drawings um from October of 2024. Uh this shows Jefferson Avenue partic specifically between 7th Street and 8th Street. It shows the cycle track along the west side of Jefferson Avenue. And
uh here you see two intersections, but along Jefferson Avenue will have six intersections with painted curb extensions uh between 6th Street and 11th Street. And I'll uh get into a little bit of detail on the painted curb extensions in a second.
This is an excerpt of 13th Street between Uklid and Pennsylvania avenues. Uh what this shows is uh the speed cushions that we're proposing along 13th Street to uh calm traffic. It shows the painted medians.
>> Can you use your cursor to point that out, please? >> Oh, well the sure if I if someone can direct me as to where the cursor is. >> Oh, no. It's on your computer. Oh, just your the little things. So, because you're pointing out tiny things, I'm not sure we can see them.
>> Okay. So, um the speed the speed cushions are these little green rectangular symbols that I'm pointing. >> I don't see your cursor. Oh, is your hand is the cursor there? >> I'm seeing the cursor here. >> You are. Oh, usually we see it with you.
Um Okay. >> So, they're these right? >> No, right here. Okay. So, first let me make sure I N to point. >> Do you know how to point on this thing
so that they see it? >> Oh, maybe if you do it like that. Yeah, we can see it there. Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Okay. Perfect. There's your arrow. >> All right. So, um >> go ahead and use your use the cursor uh Jose with your finger and use the trackpad and then you'll be able There
you go. >> Yeah. There you go. >> So, you see that? Okay. Good. Good. Okay. So, the the speed cushions are actually these white boxes. >> It's not showing >> here. Is it showing? >> No, it's not showing on this one. It's
right there. >> Can you point to it? >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, there's the This is Gassan. So, the the speed bump is basically right here is the uh pavement marking. The speed bump is between the two bumps. I do not know why it's showing this. There you go.
>> Where the two bumps? It's I need to see if I can draw something in here. >> Oh, it's okay. You can just show >> between the two. It's in between the two bumps where it says bumps. >> Mhm. >> Right. And there's one bump right here, one bump right here, but there's one in
the in between. I do not know what it is. >> We'll we'll try to get a a better picture maybe. >> Yes. >> Um Okay. So, and apologies for that. All right. So the elements under this board's uh purview and really the reason
that we're here today are to discuss two items. The K bless you the K71 ballards and the curb extension paint. So, the K71 Ballards, which we're proposing to be white in color,
uh are more aesthetically appealing than the the typical very thin white plastic delineators that we see along some of the roadways that are used more for um construction type projects and uh
temporary applications. They also provide more enhanced protection because they're, as you can see, they're wider, they're more robust, they have more reflectivity uh to them. And so the idea is to place these uh ballards at the
edges of the curb extensions at the intersections at all four points of of the intersections um to to dedicate the area that curb extension as a safe pedestrian refuge area. And then we're also proposing to
install these devices at the entrances and of at the ends of each block on the bike lane to deter vehicles from entering and driving along the bike lane. They um and then the the the third
location where we're proposing to install them is along the painted medians on 13th Street. So 13th Street will have some painted medians to visually narrow the road for drivers um because the lanes are currently very wide. So by narrowing the travel lanes,
it gives drivers that visual um feel that the road is more narrow and it reduces vehicular speeds. And by adding these uh K71 ballards, it further delineates the travel lane and um really
uh slows traffic down. These are some images not on um not along 13th Street or along Jefferson Avenue, just you know other places. You see what they look uh during the daytime and the nighttime re reflectivity as
well. Um here you see some examples from Los Angeles and California. Uh on the right you see them in green. They come in in different colors. Again just used to to
delineate uh areas and they they are drivable. If if a car, you know, where there's a wheel, there's a way. If a car goes over it, they um you know, depending on on the speed, uh they they may either pop back up or if they don't,
then um you know, they will need to be um maintained. Here's an example of the K71 ballards installed in the painted median. Here they're, you know, very on the left you see them uh very closely spaced. On the
right, you see them, you know, further further spaced. And I'll get into the spacing of these in a second. So, um, these are some of the technical specifications for the K71 Ballard. As I mentioned, we're proposing them to be
white to be spaced at 8 ft center to center. And they they actually they attach to the asphalt through a rubber base and a bolt. So, if they do fall down, they are uh very easy to just reerect or to replace.
The second element um that we're uh discussing for the board's consideration are the painted uh curb extensions. Specifically, the paint which um is the the the brand is Street Bond SB150 and
the color that was selected is Rose Dust. Rose dust. So, >> sample pass. Okay. Yes, sure. Thank you. And we have a sample which uh Grant will share with you all.
So uh this particular um paint color that you're seeing was chosen from a test of several colors um with the goal of resembling the Miami Beach red that we have in our sidewalks as much as possible. And this was the closest uh
that we came to that. Um, you know, as I mentioned, curb extensions, um, create a designated area, expanded area for pedestrians, and they also shorten the distance that pedestrians are exposed to traffic when crossing the
streets at intersections. Uh, it's a visual message to drivers that this area is not intended to be driven on. It is dedicated for pedestrians. And um with regard to the maintenance, I know that that's a key issue uh for the board as
well as for the community. It's something we've been hearing uh from the very first meeting we had. Uh the idea is to uh clean the the uh curb extensions on a regular basis. Uh as it is, the sanitation department sweeps and
hand uh cleans the the area pretty frequently. So that will continue. And then um in terms of the paint, we do expect that this paint will last uh probably about a couple years. Keep in
mind that um no vehicular traffic will be driving on this paint. So we expect that you know it will last but um we will maintain it as needed. Uh again always provided that the funding is available but we will make sure that in
advance the funding is budgeted for so that they could be maintained um as needed. So here you see on the left is an image um of the of the uh the paint that we
selected that most resembles the Miami Beach red. It's the It's the paint that's within the green square that you see on the left side of the image. And this is the same paint that's used for transit lanes that we've seen in, you know, other metropolitan cities in the
US. Uh so it's very it's very durable. It is it is actually meant for for uh vehicular traffic. Uh however, you know, in in in our case, it will not be exposed to vehicular traffic. And um these are some of the
specifications for the street bond uh paint. Uh, I just want to, you know, point out that it's it's it's water-based. Uh, and it's it's expected to be durable even under, you know, very wet conditions. And as I mentioned, it
is expected to last uh over 2 years without uh repainting. But we're going to be closely monitoring that uh to maintain as needed. And it will be applied professionally using several coats and an industry grade sealant.
And with that, that is our presentation and we welcome any questions the board may have. >> Okay. Uh, thank you very much. Uh, Rey, we'll we'll go down the we'll go up the line here. >> Jose, question for you. I've been to many different cities and they all
handle bicycles and pedestrians differently. Um, do you have a model that you followed here or is this just something that you've come up with just strictly for Miami Beach or did you actually go out and look and see at other areas of how they've handled this
type of uh situation? So, it's a blend of both. It's a blend of the two. You may recall that back in 2015 2016 we adopted a bicycle pedestrian master plan. Actually, it was developed by Street Plans Collaborative, the same
firm that's involved with with this project. And the master plan did look at other cities, not just within the continental US, but uh Europe and abroad to see what they were doing in terms of safe bicycle facilities at that time.
So, our our our bicycle pedestrian master plan is is sort of the blueprint. However, over the years, because that was 2015, over the years, other cities have experimented with different types of of um applications of bicycle facilities, including here in Miami
Beach as well. During the pandemic, we had an experimental bicycle lane on on Washington Avenue. It was the first parking protected bicycle lane in Miami date county. Uh Ocean Drive has a cycle track, a two-way cycle track as well. So, we've done a cycle track
>> and you're going to be doing one on 22nd Street, too. >> And, uh, and on 22nd Street in construction. Yes. So, um, so yeah, cycle tracks are are are >> I think specifically the Ballards. Are those Ballards ones that have been used other places? Um, or is this something
that you have decided to try here um for the first time? >> So, it it would be something that's being tested in Miami Beach for the first time. I'm not aware of K71 >> other cities or anything else that >> certainly not in Miami date county. I'm not sure about you know all over the
world but but not in not in Miami date county. >> Thank you. >> Um wait I just have a quick question regarding transition back from a cycle track to unidirectional. Where do you where does that transition
occur? How do you account for that? So that would the cycle track will extend from sixth street on the south to 13th street on the north. So and I'm going to ask um >> in other words when it reverts sorry when it reverts back to unidirectional
how do you transition from a cycle track where does that occur? specific way to transition. I'm going to uh >> We shared some plans. This is good. >> Can you uh put it up? Put the Maybe you have the presentation. >> Well, I don't have them on the presentation, but I can I can share the
plans and I put it up on the page and share it with you guys. >> So, on the north side, this is Gassan. So, on the north side, it goes to like you guys. >> We have to see this. We have to see something. We can't be maybe you can can you put it up on the screen somehow or
>> we can email it >> or is it >> we public has to see it too. Maybe >> is it in the plans that we're looking at? >> Can is there a camera that can can pick this up? >> The is it in was it in the hard copy of the planans or actually copy? >> Correct. So what page
>> that is P that is sorry striping plan. Uh >> yep. Oh my I'm testing my glasses. Uh, S S01. Is that right? No. >> There's number 34.
>> Oh, okay. >> 10 out of 34. >> And then on the south side, it's sheet 13 out of 34. Let me see. 10 out of 34. And then USB. >> Okay. So, let's do
>> USB. Did you get that? Sorry. Um, it's uh sheet 10 out of 34 down here. Or >> I'm looking at the bottom right. >> S EO4. >> Uh, S >> S1
Q1. >> And then it looks like ST4 is where it transitions. >> Yes. At the south side. Okay. STO4. >> So basically it's at the sidewalk where you cross the trunk.
>> The transition is is at the intersection itself. So cyclists would use the crosswalk to transition from the cycle track to the conventional two-way bike lanes. >> Okay. >> Thank you.
>> Showing landscaping in this plan. Is there like trees that are there that are being removed or anything? Cuz it's just just showing very hardcape. >> No trees will be removed as part of this project. >> It'll
all right. So, um, you you finished. Okay. Thank you. You had a question. That was the question I was going to ask, too. But, >> hi, Jose. I I I have many questions. The plans call for a quantity of 521
ballards. I'm looking at page VO4, which is 6th in Jefferson, and I'm counting 53 ballards on that intersection. 12, 13, 14, and 14. That's the
northeast, north, northwest, southeast, southwest intersection. I'm just uh very concerned about the visual impact uh these ballards are going to have. It
seems excessive. Uh and moreover uh you said the plans were signed and sealed. Uh the reason this is here today is because of uh my communication with
your department which my colleagues uh received today. The email thread. Uh this by all means uh should have come to us uh for review before the plans were signed and sealed. Uh I I do have a
small uh presentation uh that PJ has uh just a handful or 10 10 or so slides. Uh I've been following uh this uh slow streets 1.0 since its incept inception.
Mark and I uh often had a a colorful dialogue on this project. It began with uh aside from the beautiful uh Egret uh these MOT construction signs. I raised the issue,
what's going on here? What kind of uh public works project is happening? And I was told it's a slow streets project. And uh more complaints followed from residents and uh you see the signs and
then these uh blue signs appeared uh that explained what was happening. Uh PJ next next slide. Uh so this is the evolution of slow streets one po.0. uh these signs and delineators uh as
they're called these uh ballards in the street. Uh next next next slide. Uh then all of a sudden came these plants in a bag all uh $20,000 worth. Uh really
cluttered up the the neighborhood. Uh next slide. Uh uh again plant in a bag sign and ballards uh next next slide please. Uh these things were often hit uh
regularly. I've seen them uh I've seen a fire truck uh hit these things. Uh next next slide. Okay, these are the plants in a bag. Uh I like this photo. They were all smashed regularly. uh uh this
entire uh initiative has been plagued with uh you know just uh blunder after blunder. Next slide. Uh this is the cost of uh what is it 1.0
uh $150,000. Okay. Uh next next slide. Uh again this is uh one of the corners showing or uh intersections showing 50 plus
of ballards uh at you know this is something more appropriate for uh 395 or I95 in a construction zone not for a residential area uh in a especially in a
historic district. Uh, I really wish you would have uh had this uh brought to us before you had your signed and sealed plants. Next, uh image. Uh this is recent cars driving over these uh what
do they call tri curbs. Uh that was uh when they were first uh put in. I guess people need to get used to them. Uh next slide. uh this budget uh million plus uh you know on this design which uh I
believe has decimated the the entire neighborhood. Let me let me be clear. I'm a cyclist. I'm a pedestrian. I occasionally drive my vehicle. Uh right now the vehicular traffic of a delivery truck should be making a stop. It it's
turned into gridlock. You know, I I don't understand why you couldn't have recreated what was done on Uklid in Pennsylvania. Uh I use those lanes. No drama. What you created there is uh very
disruptive uh as a property owner as well. Next slide. Okay. That there's a a 14 second video. Uh PJ, are you able to put that on? uh got clearance from staff. Okay, this was
from 2021. Uh you see these delineators uh on each corner. I believe it was Meridian and 10th. I saw this. I took the video raised the question, what's going on here? They were immediately removed. So
basically it's this mockup which is uh the precipitous of the of the plan in front of us. These things are uh again I'm just Nothing against green bike lanes. It's these delineators. They don't belong in in this community. One
or two, but certainly not 50 at an intersection. Uh uh at the fire station. Again, poor planning. You you put the green bike lane and you remove parking. every block
has uh h has had a net loss of parking, but especially those people by fire station one. It's the whole corridor. Uh blunder after blunder. >> So Mitch, can you summarize your um your
statement with a question to the applicant? >> Um why don't you have a rendering of what our intersections are going to look like? you know, not everybody uh especially from the public can uh read and understand these plans.
Okay. >> Do you do you want to address that or do you >> I would love to see one of our intersections uh with a rendering showing what these ballards uh would look like. >> And then and then we'll go to the other other colleagues have questions too. But
do you want to answer the question about the rendering if that's possible? I will I will see if we have something that we can show >> um readily available to show now ideally. Uh if not then uh we would need
to send that separately uh to you. Uh fair point. What will it look like at the intersections? Yeah, understood. >> Jose, you all these interventions you referred to them. I live uh in in in the entertainment district. Uh there was a a
period when the buses were relocated to Collins Avenue. Uh the uh parking spaces were moved into the middle uh lane uh along Washington. And moreover, Ocean
Drive uh was closed off to pedestrian traffic via a block party permit uh creating Ocean Court uh complete traffic gridlock and it uh regularly there were shootings and stampedes.
You guys are not making the city safer with w with this with what you did on Sixth Street. Uh uh I I think I'm wondering how many people have been hit. I know I was almost hit driving in the bike lane the other
night. Uh and I don't want to see this uh the this corridor plagued with stop signs everywhere. Uh I I I think that there's a lot of work that needs to be done a and addressed. Uh I want to say
my email thread, it needs to be part of the record. the uh >> uh the staff received it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mitch. And uh my colleagues do not have further comments on this. So uh further questions uh well there's
there are questions embedded in comments um which often happens here. And um so next would be uh board disclosures. Um are there any disclosures of communications with the team? No. Now we will open it to the public hearing if
there's anybody online or in the room. >> We have several online. We can start with the members in here in chambers. >> Of course. Roger. Yes. >> Hi. >> If you could if you could just uh yeah we step away. So we'll have the public hearing and then we'll invite you back up to uh for the um comment.
>> Great. Roger at MDPL. Uh we support this project subject to staff recommendations. The slow streets are already halfway implemented and the remaining elements, the painted curb extensions and protective ballards are critical public safety features designed
by license engineers and approved by the county transportation department. The project continues the success of many public hearings, community workshops, and neighborhood work through neighborhood walkthroughs. The curb extensions will improve visibility and shorten crossing distances for
pedestrians while the ballards prevent drivers from parking or blocking the bulb outs. We believe the project will enhance the livability and workability that make Miami Beach special especially in the Flamingo Park neighborhood which has among the highest number of people
biking and walking in the city. We believe protecting and enhancing the pedestrian and cyclist experience is very much within the scope of historic preservation. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Should I press a button or anything?
>> Uh, no. You're you're on just to say your name and address. >> Sure. My name is Jake Kern and I live at 610 Jefferson Avenue. I actually have the privilege of living in Mitch's building. Um, I've lived in Miami Date County about 18 19 years, of which I've lived on the beach in Mitch's building
and three different apartments. Um, for probably 12, 13, 14 years. I'm actually the assistant zoning director of the city of Miami. Um, and so I've got an urban planning degree and a masters in architecture. That's how I ended up down here. I went to University of Miami. I studied new urbanism, smart growth, and
I actually fell in love with South Florida. And that's how I ended up moving to Miami Beach itself. I lived in Coral Gables. lived in downtown and ultimately chose to live in Miami Beach for the community that we have about walkability and bikeability. I'm also somebody who does not own a car. I when I first moved to the beach, I did have a
car. I had a Jeep and after a few years, I sold it because this is one of the few places in Miami Date County where you can live a carless lifestyle. I lived on the beach before we had City Bike or Deco Bike, before we had Uber and Carigo. So, I'm a big huge supporter of the slow streets initiative that you guys are pushing for. I think that's a
great initiative and I know that there's been fits and starts. I've seen it too. You know, I said before I'm the assistant zoning director of city Miami. We have fits and starts over there, too. Government's not an easy process. I see it live it, breathe it every single day. But I do support the bike lane and I specifically support the cycle track
concept. You know, I just went for my 40th birthday to Amsterdam and Paris and wow, wow, we have almost a similar population density as Amsterdam, but we don't have the capacity, the infrastructure they have. So, I support initiatives like this. I think this is very important. It's going to be great
for tourism. It's great for safety. There's so many kids who bike on Jefferson Avenue because people are coming through Flamingo Park down to South Point Elementary. I saw my I actually biked using the cycle track today to come here before the meeting and I saw a father with a young child on front on an electric scooter on the
cycle track. So, we need to shift the culture and I think this is a good step in the right direction. I support the um curb extensions. I think that is important to neck down the intersection. It lowers the curb rad. It slows the traffic. However, I'm not sure if I would necessarily support the Bullards.
Again, I think we should look at what they've done in Amsterdam, right? They have cycle tracks all over Amsterdam. They got canals. It goes up, it goes down. They got cobblestone streets. They do it with a lot less ballards. I do think we need the the intersections neck down. I know that's later phase that'll probably become a raised curb. And so,
in the interim, they're trying to paint it and put some ballards. I get that. I don't know if that's the right selection. But I to conclude, I support the efforts of the slow street movement. I think this is a good project. Maybe we need to consider some of the details alternatively. Um maybe there shouldn't be some on street parking in front of
the fire station so it can make the turns, but I think this is a great project for the city and we should continue efforts like this going forward. Thank you. Thank you for being here. >> Anybody else? Yes. >> Good morning. Good morning, uh HP HP
board members. My name is Matthew Ganoff and I live at 125 Jefferson Avenue. This morning I'm speaking as a private resident. I respectfully ask that you approve the certificate of appropriateness for the remaining portions of the slow street slow streets
project so that it can reach its full potential and be a safe passageway for everyone. The project started a few years ago community dri driven and championed by the late commissioner Mark Samuel. The objective is to slow traffic and provide
safe places for people biking and rolling to get to, from, and through Flamingo Park. Through numerous public meetings, community workshops, and neighborhood walkthroughs, the project involved into the proposal in front of you. It was designed and engineered by
licensed professionals, and it was approved and permitted by the county transportation department. This is a showcase of new and innovative strategies and treatments for Miami Beach, but tried and trueue best practices around the country. For
example, Hoboken, New Jersey, just across the river from Manhattan, is a dense urban city of nearly 60,000 people. They utilize similar treatments at intersections including ballards and they've not had a traffic related fatality that includes pedestrians,
bicyclists and drivers for nearly 9 years. The last one was January 2017. I'd also like to disclose that Mitch Nov Mr. Novik has mentioned to me his concerns and his objectives and he has promised to approach this hearing with
an open mind and to review it objectively. Now that was prepared. I think we can all uh agree that perhaps he's he's already made up his mind. But that all being said, I ask you to approve the certificate of appropriateness because it meets the criteria that you all are reviewing and
it is recommended for approval by the city's professional and planning st. Could I have one more minute, please, Mr. Chair? >> Um can you please wrap it up quickly because I think you you got your point. >> All right. In a city where people routinely ride bikes um uh routinely ride bikes as part of the regular
routine, it's important that steady progress be made in implementing uh the bicycle pedestrian master plan in a network of safe, comfortable, and low stress networks. Thank you for your time and I hope that you approve this today. >> Good to see you. Thank you.
>> We'll move we'll move now to the online um um comment. First is Johan Moore. Johan, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> Thank you. You have two minutes. >> Morning board members and staff. Uh
Johan Moore, 717 Jefferson Avenue. Uh I have the privilege of living across the street uh from these bike lanes. Um there are a couple of issues that I feel haven't been uh really fully addressed here today. The one is a practical
concern. Uh according to uh city staff communication of yesterday, these bike lanes are not yet officially open. Um uh the ballards have been removed though. Excuse me. The the orange barrels have been removed though. I gather by
well-intentioned but misguided members of the community. Um because in the absence of certain finalized details, it is unsafe and were someone to be injured or heaven forbid killed, uh there might be liability. Although the city has not
yet declared the bike lanes officially open, according to yesterday's communication, uh people are using them and a lawsuit could be based uh in an allegation of negligence on the part of the city for not maintaining those closures. Um, I'm not suggesting it's a
good use of police officers time to sit at each of the intersections, but you get my point. I would implore you to make a decision today so that these currently open, if not officially, and unsafe conditions, and I would point specifically to a gap across from the
fire station, wide enough for a vehicle to back up into the let us imagine, uh, two adults and three little children on tiny bikes and one of them gets creamed by the vehicle. uh making a U-turn from that south facing position in an attempt
to get to 11th Street. Um I would also uh in principle agree with Mitch's objections, but this is really a financial question. As uh Jose Gonzalez pointed out to us, if we had twice as much money, well, we could address the other concern that one member of the
community has raised and in fact put a bike lane on each side. But we don't. We also don't have the money in order to put cement curb protectors at the intersections. So we based with going forward with what we have. >> Thank you very much. >> You're generally supportive. Thank you. >> Appreciate it. Thank you. Our next
caller is Jane Crup. >> Jane, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> Thank you. You have two minutes. >> Okay. Jane Crup, 1390 Ocean Drive. Um, I'm a regular biker. I don't have a car. One of the reasons I'm here surviving in
Miami Beach for 20 years is my bicycle. And I regularly go through Flamingo Park uh via 13th Street. I enter the park and then I exit at 11 Street basically to go to Whole Foods and do errands on Alton Road. So I'm very familiar with the
safety issues. And um one of the things that is kind of to me is the elephant in the room is how unsafe 11th Street is where they have optional stop signs that cars blow through. They travel very fast in the east west direction. That's not
being addressed at all. The other thing is since this is a historic preservation and we're talking about aesthetics, um I just think this plant is complete overkill. As I agree with Mitch, it belongs on a highway. We don't need ballards. We need something subtle and
aesthetic and um two two suggestions I have. One, lower the speed limit. Why can't a simple solution and put speed bumps? Those are two things that are unobtrusive that are low-key and do not interfere with the historic nature of
the neighborhood. This is complete overkill, unnecessary, and the budget is ridiculous. Come up with a better design is my opinion. Thank you. Thank you, Jane. Next caller is Daniel. >> Daniel, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth? >> Yes. Thank you, Daniel Seraldo. Uh, good morning board members. I'm calling today as a resident of Flamingo Park neighborhood and my address 7:30 10th Street. I was also there with Mark Samuel when this all got started. But
before that, in high school in the early 2000s, one of my best friends car was totaled on Uclid Avenue, shortly after um they added many more stop signs in Flamingo Park, which was very important.
And I was sort of shocked to hear a member of the board say there shouldn't be more stop signs. Uh this is all about safety, whether you use a bike, whether you use car. Uh but we're in a walkable neighborhood. Parking is a nice to have,
but more and more of the people moving into my building, my neighborhood, don't have a car, and I think that's a great thing. Um, also I want to mention that the video shown was actually my intersection 10th of Meridian of the uh
delineators that Mitch didn't like. And shortly after they were removed, one of my relatives cars was totaled when another car sped through. Uh so in conclusion, please rely on the competent staff and move this project forward.
Thank you. Thank >> you. Next caller is um Allison Carter. >> Allison, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. Hi, I'm Allison Carter, 900 L Avenue. Been uh living in Miami Beach
over 30 years. I've made it my priority to use this bike. Sorry, I thought it was open already. Um, I use it every single day and two things have occurred. One, the uh people who were
putting the groceries out from shopping put it right in the bike lane. So, that's become a huge problem and that's the only thing they can do. It's not their fault. Um the other I've also driven down the street every single day
testing this out and I found that when you have um like the Amazon truck stops. I was going south, the Amazon truck was parked going south. We all had to have one lane and it's it took a wide street and it made it small and then the
traffic backed up because there was no room for everybody to get by. Um, in my opinion, it needs to be a better plan because when you take a street and you basically have it go down to one lane and this I
kept writing it and this kept happening all day long and for the last two weeks that I think it's the wrong plan. So, I'd like to address that. >> Okay. Thank you. Our next caller is um Eve Khan.
>> Eve, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh Eve Khan, resident of 1050 Jefferson Avenue, directly across the street from fire station number one. Um I have to concur with the statements
made by Mitch and supported by Jane that have already been shared this morning. These lanes on Jefferson Avenue are have been completely muddled. uh the fact that they've taken up, you know, valuable parking in the Flamingo Park
neighborhood uh and have completely disregarded where the residents are supposed to park uh including across from the fire station where, you know, many people in my building who do have cars and we don't have parking associated had parked for, you know, the
whole history of the building. Um, I think the fact that, you know, the the access to the fire station by the ambulances and the fire trucks was not taken into consideration while planning this project. And that is abundantly
clear in the short turning radius for all of those important vehicles in the neighborhood. Um, let alone the access for residents, for drivers, for delivery drivers, uh, etc. in especially in that uh section that is right adjacent to
11th Street and to the park itself. Um I think further the fact that the bike lanes were completed what over a month ago but are not officially open yet is just ludicrous. If they're going to be
used, they should be used immediately. The orange barrels that are dotting the center of the the bike lanes uh need to be removed. I've seen countless people while walking around the neighborhood uh people on bikes whether they're motorized or uh you know human-driven uh
are not even using the bike lanes and just going down the already like extremely narrow street that have been implemented. I think this project was uh not planned well and I think it hasn't been implemented well as either and I think anything that we can do to modify
the project to be more in line with uh what has been done on Uklid and Meridian would be the best uh outcome for the neighborhood. >> Thank you for your time. >> Y that concludes our public comment.
>> All right. Um, so would you like to respond to any of that? >> If I may. Yes. >> Go ahead. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, couple points I want to make. First, the opening of the bike lane. Um, yes, it's currently
not officially open because federal requirements require that the bike lanes be protected at the end points so that vehicles can't easily just drive on them. And that's part of the situation
that we're in with the K71 ballards which are being proposed to fulfill that function until there is um some some sort of protection for the bike lanes at each end. We cannot officially open the
bike lane. So that that's something I want to clarify. Um secondly with the fire station the issue has been resolved addressed um so that the the largest vehicle that the fire department has which is the ladder truck can now make a
smooth turn out of the fire station and uh and into the the travel lane. So that that has been addressed and I want to clarify that for the record. >> Jose wait >> go ahead please.
>> Okay. So then the the issue of the K71 Ballards um again just want to add a little bit more information for context. The federal requirements don't dictate that it has to be that device. That is the device that was selected as part of
the design process, vetted with the community and is being proposed. But it doesn't necessarily have to be that device. there are alternative devices that could uh fulfill the same function and also be acceptable. Um the advantage
of a K71 ballard is the height. It's more easily visible by drivers. There are other devices that could potentially also be used in its place which are shorter. Um you may be familiar for example with the Zcla armadillos that
are used uh along bike lanes. That's a form of protection very low to the ground uh but nevertheless a form of protection that could potentially also be uh applied. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Uh now we'll
close the um did you want No, you're you're okay. You're good. >> We'll probably have a little bit more back and forth. Uh would anybody like to um make any comments? Should I start at this end? Any any any comments? You'll
wait. Okay, Elizabeth, any comments? >> No, I can ask. >> Yeah. Yeah, for sure. Yeah. >> So, um Jose, >> I was just wondering if um following up on the what the last um person spoke about the bike lanes on Meridian and I
can't remember the other street you mentioned. Did you have like the chance to examine the ones that exist and check like lessons learned and what didn't work before designing this? So what um what problems did you see with the one
in Meridian that the speaker had mentioned to that you're trying to avoid repeating the same mistakes implementing a different design? >> Sure. Good question. So there's there's nothing wrong with the bike bicycle lanes on Meridian. There are just
different types of bicycle lanes applications. The cycle track, as I mentioned previously, has advantages that are a good fit for Jefferson Avenue. U a big part of selecting the right bike lane for a roadway is the
space that's available and and and how much parking will be lost as a result. There's actually less parking lost through a cycle track than through two-way conventional bike lanes on both sides of the road. then you're losing
parking on both sides. So that was something, you know, clearly uh parking uh demand is high in the Flamingo Park neighborhood, something that I'm intimately familiar with. I was interim parking director for over a year as well as transportation director, so very
familiar with it and uh heard it loud and clear from the community. We tried to be as sensitive as possible to parking loss. There's some parking loss which is required because of sight lines from driveways and from intersections.
There's got to be clear areas and as a result of that uh and that happens with any project, not just a bike lane. It could be a, you know, a a new roadway project. We've seen it with other projects in the city, capital improvement projects where parking is lost as a result of a new project coming
in because there are new standards um um dictating sightelines that have been adopted over the years and some of these roads have not been improved in many years. So that these are factors that we're sensitive to um when designing the
you know the cycle track and the slow streets. And just something that I want to clarify um with the K71 Ballards, I was speaking in terms of the bike lane. They're not necessary at the um ends of the bike lane. There are other treatments. However, for the curb
extensions, my understanding is that the federal requirements do require uh something vertical >> like protection, >> a protection, but low protection or high protection. Go ahead.
>> So sorry, Gassan again, senior transportation engineer. So the main thing in regards to the curb extensions, we have to have protection for pedestrians too. It's not just only for bicycles. So >> can can you put the image up and show us
what you're talking about? Like just you have a plan in your presentation. Just use the cursor to uh to just uh show us exactly the moment that you say you need these vertical alerts. All right, I'm gonna show you.
>> You had a plan with the intersection. Just because you're talking about a certain part of the intersection. Can you go to your plan? >> Uh, they did not show it in here. >> Oh, it's not in there. All right. >> V4. >> Okay. >> It's in there. >> I'm not sure he has everything in that,
but in the in Jose's presentation, I'm sure I know there was a plan. Um we were looking at it with >> difficult to see >> to >> Yeah but even even >> so I've shared it right now. >> Yeah like this. So where are you talking about these? >> So
>> yeah perfect. I can see your cursor. >> Let me move to the other one. >> You could see your cursor for a second. >> So right at where the crosswalk is. >> Uh I can't see the cursor. >> It was there a second ago. Maybe you can just take it out. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Perfect. Yeah. So at the crossbar if
>> if I may maybe you can zoom in on that slide >> in the bottom right hand corner. >> Yeah. >> So that we can see what you're pointing at. >> There you go. Let me see. >> There you go. >> Yeah. You can just pull that up a little. >> There we go. >> Perfect. >> And then scroll so you can show us.
Exactly. >> Thank you. >> Okay. So at the curb extension, this pink pink color ones. >> Mhm. They have to be also protected for pedestrians whenever they are crossing. So the main thing in regards to this is that whenever you're crossing you are
shortening the distance of a person in the street. So we want to protect them from being hit and they are more visible. That's also another thing that we have this a little bit of spacing between the parking spot and the
crosswalk. This is a federal regulation also that we have to be at least 30 ft on the approach, 20 ft on the departure. So that's why we wanted to block them off so that way a car does not park in the crosswalk.
A car does not get in trying to it's at the stop sign and trying to move on the right hand and trying to make a right in in the crosswalk of a pedestrian with the K71 Ballards. I've actually I can say that I've actually used them at city
of Los Angeles on Main Street and the Spring Street, Figaroa Street. I've installed them. They have been used since 2017, 2018. >> Mhm. >> Um they have been very useful and uh
they are very >> on that plan. Where would the Ballards be? Can you just put your arrow? I don't see them on the plan. >> Yes. So they are at the edges. They're there. Yeah. But they are not shown on this one. >> Okay. >> John, they're shown on um
VE 01, which is sheet 17 to 34. >> But for a public uh >> I don't think they have that up there is the problem. >> It's okay. It's okay. This shows where they would be. So >> the ballers would need to be along that the edge of that beige,
>> the pink, the dusty rose. Sorry. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Yes. They will be at the edges and spaced 8 ft apart. >> 8 ft apart or 12 in off center. >> Well, >> it's showing as foot apart on on my pl.
>> There are two different things. the 12 in on center is between there are >> I think what Mitch originally asked for was like a a rendering of that intersection would be much easier for all of us to see because now we're all looking at this and and I think his
original request um is something that would be helpful to all of us. >> Okay. Um I don't have a rendering at the moment but I >> Okay. Yes. No, we understand there's no rendering at the moment. Go ahead. >> Sorry. Could you please clarify the
spacing of the ballards along the uh radius? >> Okay, so on sheet 20 or V-04, it has the spacing on them and the circles, the red circle. >> What sheet again, please?
>> How far apart? >> V04 20 or 34. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Th those plans are showing 53 ballots that page. >> Correct. That's crazy. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Wait. Wait. Wait.
>> How far apart are those? >> 8 ft apart. Lindsay is next, please. >> So, this discussion here came up and I've got other comments, but this particular piece of the discussion came up. Uh, Jose, you called up I for I'm
sorry, I forgot your name, sir. >> Gassan Gassan. >> Kasan. Um, saying that I'm understanding that federal regulations require XYZ. So I I would like to get some clarity because at least the way that I understand it. So the background for
those on the board and anybody so I sat on parking and transportation committee for I don't know three, four, five, I don't however many years when Jose was transportation and then he was interim parking and anyways um so I was there for the iterations of slow street 1 2 3 however many we've been through. Um my
understanding is another way that this could be done is to actually extend the curb. Am I wrong? >> Through concrete, correct? Paint. >> It could. Yes. >> Okay. So, my question there is that's
only the height of a sidewalk or a curb. Would that also to have to have some sort of or does the curb resolve that? My question is, is the delineator at that height required? Because my understanding is that a curb would be sufficient. So, if a curb is sufficient,
why does I just want some explanation there please? >> Okay. Go ahead. Go ahead. So no whenever you have a curb extension the concrete is a permanent condition. >> It is built differently than whenever you have something >> I would call I would not say specifically
temporary is an intermediate section in between the like the bike lane right now and the future projects that might come in on Flamingo Park or Jefferson Avenue. There might be some uh future projects that are going to be redoing
undergrounding that will require uh the curbs and sidewalks to be rebuilt and that's whenever those will be switched with a full curb extension. >> Right. I understand why we're not doing the curb extension. Now what I'm asking
is if the curb extension at curb height is enough per department of transportation, >> can you please explain to us? It seems unclear as to whether or not the height is is or is not required. And that's what I'm trying to like drill down on. >> You don't need to have that that height
at the moment. We chose these ones because they are more visible. The Zlas that we mentioned before or the armadillos are something uh new technology that was coming out and we chose it because it's a historic
neighborhood. Historically, we have used these over the years in not in Miami Beach but in different areas and this is why we chose K71s and I can also ask our designers street plans and alter
planning they can also uh talk more about these why we chose these ones but uh in regards to the curb extensions you don't need additional height more than 6 in that is >> so with a curb extension you do not need more height other than 6 in. Without a
curb extension, do you or do you not need more height? That's my question. >> With the >> No, >> with a painted extensions, you need something physical to block it. It can be it has to be more than 6 in for sure. >> But whenever you do have a curb that is
a concrete, which physical thing that you can, it's a little bit different. you don't need additional uh physical things to to add physical height to add it on to that if that makes sense. >> Okay. It sounds like you don't need the
we don't need the ballards. >> We don't I mean that's what that's and that's and that's really why I'm asking and Jose I mean I think you guys know I'm generally in support of the project. I'm trying to understand what we have to do versus what we want to do and the reasons why so that the board here can make a decision based on all that
information. And and when it was like, hold on, I'm being told F dot or not F dot, you know, Department of Transportation says we have to do this. I said, well, wait a second. I know a curb is enough. >> So, I'm just trying to get some clarity there. >> I'm Tony Garcia. I'm one of the designers of the project. Um, you don't
need to have it be vertical. It's better for visibility. That's all it is. It could be very well. Zigla, the where we do need the verticality is at the driveways, at the entrances to the bike lane to address what was said on the call, >> right? So that someone can't drive straight in. Yeah, we need the
verticality at the curb extensions. We do not need the verticality, but I thought that was going to be prettier than the Zcla for the historic district. The Zla looks more trafficicky. I think we can disagree on that, but >> those are the armadillos. >> The armadillos are the Zlas. Yes.
>> Thank you. Thanks. Okay. >> Yeah. No, thank you. >> We got clarity. >> Um Okay. Yes, Ray, please. And >> this is a slow traffic neighborhood. Yeah, >> it's not like the corner of of Fifth and Washington. And it just seems to me what
I'm looking at here is very much overkill um for a residential neighborhood. Um and maybe seeing a a rendering would would make me feel differently about it, but um right now uh it just seems to me like it's too
much. It's really too much. And the people that are driving in that neighborhood are the ones that drive every day. there's probably very few people that would be cutting through that neighborhood to get someplace else. Uh, and I think that you need to really think about how you've designed that.
>> Lindsay. >> Yes. So, >> and I I know we don't love cross talk here, but I I want to counter that. >> This is our >> I want to counter that because living in that neighborhood, especially when we have busy weekends, for sure people cut through the neighborhood, especially now that we no longer have the green zone,
that's their quickest way to get through. And um you know Uber drivers especially um someone mentioned on one of the calls the the fake stop signs. They're not fake stop signs. They are pedestrian crosswalks that have lights flashing that says stop for pedestrian when they're ready. Right. I personally
get frustrated when people stop at every single one of those because they're not a stop sign unless someone's there. But my point is is that there are tons of people within the neighborhood driving through it that aren't there full-time. And I mean, I certainly think that traffic calming um is a plus in this
neighborhood. And so, like I said earlier, generally I'm in support of this. I'm trying to drill down on some of the details to understand um what we what is best practice, what is a must-have and what is a nice to have and
how we balance that with our purview, which is whether or not it is in keeping with the historic character of the neighborhood. And so that I'm trying to understand those things so that we can balance that. But I just want to say that I mean when I'm walking around there it's it's you're taking your life in
your own hands often times. >> All right. Okay. >> I just thought that was a lot of ballards. >> Yeah. Haskell did you No, you're >> No. Okay. Um Mitch, did you have anything you wanted to add? I know you >> Yeah. Yeah. A few things. Uh Jose, you mentioned that the issue on uh 10th
between 10th and 11th by the fire station was resolved. Uh ask the residents uh in that neighborhood who can no longer park in those spots uh as they have for for generations. Uh
again, the quantity specified on the plans is 521 of these ballards. Uh on average that's about 50 per intersection uh uh 25 uh uh or 12 between 12 and 14
at each corner. It's excessive and it's uh inappropriate. I'm s surprised staff uh uh is going along with this. that to me just states that it's a that's more of a
directive. >> I think we really see that like I think that ideal solution here is of course to have the permanent um extension of the sidewalks and curbs that that I think is the ideal situation to avoid the ballard to the corner like Lindsay was saying. So I we view this as like a interim
solution for um pedestrian safety. I do and bicycle safety. I know for myself, I will not ride on a on a on a um street that doesn't have a bicycle lane or um is a protected area that that's because the drivers here are so are so bad. I don't feel safe driving and unless it's
like on a on a protected area. So, we're trying to balance, you know, on public safety and to encourage more people to to bicycle and also relying on the expertise of our transportation department. So, that's why recommend recommending in favor of this. I do agree that maybe the the solution for the armadillos would work, you know, as
well. So I I I'd be amendable to that. Uh but if uh uh the uh transportation and mobility department wants to bring a rendering uh we can uh uh certainly >> I also think that we do have images of
other intersections from another country. So we don't think if the board wants to see um an image we felt that you know you can see you can see the plans with the numbers. We can look at images from other cities to get an idea. So I think I don't I don't know if having an image is going to change your mind for the intersection. So I think
probably rather rather have a solution for the Ballers versus having to come back in another month with another image. I'll leave it up to you know Michael. This entire uh package or at least item uh for for this item was very
sloppy. Nothing was stapled pages loose. Uh I have a question regarding the uh labels. Do you have a uh an affidav affidavit uh certifying that uh the the the labels uh are uh were uh mailed to
everybody within uh >> it's not required to be in >> the area. But the labels we don't have >> that's not required to be in our packet. It is required. Is it is a requirement? We've >> Have you looked at the labels? There's no addresses on there.
Uh and and what what do you mean it's it's not required? Our first item >> there's there's an affidavit RDR Miami we're not we are not sending the board members the mailing labels or the affidavit. That's part of the
application package. We're not going to go ahead and ask applicants to produce the mailing labels and that for the board members. The point is the city should be held up to at least the same standard anyone who appears before. >> Yes, the label the >> even a higher standard
>> mail notices were prepared. They were sent out. >> Okay, Haskell, you want to jump in? >> Quick question, please. Go ahead. >> I see a lot of correspondence taking place since October where it was asked for a 3D rendering by I think my colleague for two months. Why have we why has the
board not uh received a 3D rendering of this intersection in two months? >> So we are in the final design process as part of final design. The product are the sign and sealed set of drawings that
are you know these are engineering drawings. Um there were some photos I'm sure and images showed initially probably several years ago, a couple years ago at Flamingo Park neighborhood associations, but we don't we don't have those now. But Mr. Mr. Chair, if I may
make a suggestion actually in lie of uh a rendering, uh it may actually be better to do an infield demonstration at one of these inter two of these intersections where we do one u quadrant with uh the K71 Ballard and we do
another one with an armadillo as an alternative device and then um you know somehow do some outreach and then select the preferred device. Um, okay. I I think that's a Go ahead. Go ahead.
>> I I didn't understand your explanation uh in terms of the signed and sealed plans. >> Should not have the um rendering been presented prior to signing and sealing these documents? >> Not necessarily. It's it's not a requirement.
>> No, I know it's not a requirement, but it's being asked for over two months. >> Correct. Correct. But it was it was it's not something that we have available readily available at this moment. Um so what I'm suggesting in lie of a
rendering is an in the field uh test or demonstration. There's nothing like seeing it, touching it, experiencing it uh better than on a piece of paper. I appreciate what you're saying, but I'm not really completely satisfied when
someone asks when a concerned citizen, a member of the board is asking for a piece of information for over two months. I think that's a readily available with, you know, today's software, you can develop something rather quickly within two months that you could present it for a visual.
>> But be that as it may at this point. All right. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm going to uh just weigh in a little bit here. I was um you know what I heard from the open um from the public forum was really uh a lot of encouragement for this to happen and
that it really has to happen the sooner something safe happens uh the better. Um, which is why I appreciate the, you know, the profer of, you know, setting two up, but I know like buying the ballards, getting them in, getting them installed, getting setting up a date
after which they're installed for everybody to look and blah blah blah. It's going to push us back a long time. And I I you know, I looked at the um ballards in LA. I just did a quick Google search. Everybody complains about them. That's the only thing you read. Like, what are these things in our
streets? So, I would say uh given how given the LA you just Google it, LA Ballards, it's like they're the first things like Tik Tok. What is this? Um with a picture closeup of it. Um so, I would just say if we I would recommend
that we try this if it is interim that we try it with um with um the armadillos. Uh something we know um it may not be enough. When it's not enough, we change it to ballards when we need more protection. Mhm.
>> Um just to keep this moving forward. Um and you know I understand Tony thinks they're too in too trafficicky or industrial. What do you say? Uh I don't know. I didn't write it down. I almost did. But um anyway, um I just think we
should this is such a good and important effort and >> I appreciate the staff the city doing this. I am, you know, I I'm not happy with I I have a whole other set of questions about per porous pavement that was satisfied. I'm not sure why staff
satisfied that. I'm not sure how the um >> that should not the island effect is satisfied. >> I'm sorry that that's really not applicable. So, >> okay. But it was just again, you know, things weren't really consistent um in terms of of that. So, um I I would
recommend we move to move to approve the plan without the ballards but with the armadillos that we already know and have in the city. And and when we're thinking about, you know, we're always talking about trees and landscape and how you
want to see the city and you want to be able to understand the visual fabric of the street, especially in historic districts. And I think the ballers would just really interrupt these ballards that you're proposing. Um would interrupt that. And if we do need them, we will revisit this obviously, but I
would I I would ask my colleagues for that. Um and >> I'm I'm open to that idea, but I think the applicant had one comment direct. There was some there was some discussion. So if we can get that and then >> Yeah, go ahead. Go for it. >> Thank you. just because there there's been some ambiguity regarding the
verticality elements when they're required versus when they're desired. >> So, um the the not necessarily a K71 ballard, but a vertical device is required by federal regulations at each
end of the bike lane, at each end of the street. >> We need the verticality at the driveways and at the beginning and and the end. >> That makes sense. So that no one can enter the bike lane with a That's right. That's right. When you say verticality, armadillo is vertical. >> Armadillos are not going to cut
vertical enough. Yeah. >> Okay. Well, people drive over these things. >> Yeah. So, if if I'm understanding this correctly, if I may, so >> at the end at each end of a bike lane center, you know, between north south flow, if we're talking about Jefferson,
right, there will be a vertical element like a K71. Is that right? K71 Ballard. Um, but outside of that, we could use the Zlas, the armadillos for the curb bumpouts. I'm I'm getting headshakes
from the from from the community in the background. But I want to make sure from the applicant. >> That's right. And and at the driveway. So, everywhere there's a there's a a cut in the in the bike lane. You want one >> That's fair. That's what I mean. at each end of it anytime >> wrapping around the edge of the curb extension. You can do uh so
>> I want to make sure that it's clear because you're seeing driveways and there were multiple driveways along the bike lane. That's right. >> So, right. So, so any so anywhere that traffic would would cross >> Can you put the plan up back up, please? Let's just put the plan back up because
when we're not talking about speaking to something like this, >> so we're talking at the crosswalk and then where it says let's say those arrows 6 SWL 6 yellow 3T 9 foot skip. Let's say that was a driveway. There would be one on either side of that driveway. Correct. >> That's right. That's right. That's
right. There there's not any driveways on >> I know there's not. I'm just >> But you can pull out a little bit and you can find the driveways. >> Right here and right here. Yeah. on on this sheet actually it's the it's a whole like >> yeah there's there's >> there's no drive lane
>> but but imagine there's a bike lane on this side there would be one right here and one here >> so >> so it cuts down on the verticality clutter a lot >> what's the smallest ball what's the smallest vertical you haven't told me what the federal statute is on that verticality how high does it have to be
>> well it's about visibility I mean >> okay what's the what's the statute say just read >> the statute doesn't talk about the the height necessarily. It just needs to be height. There just needs to be something >> something higher than a armadillo. Is that what you're saying? Yes. >> Could I if I may be Aliyah Aad um
engineer of record consultant for this pro project. So there is no specity like very they're not being very specific about the height. The benchmark using a half you know half a foot, you know, similar to a curb. That's a good
benchmark. So there's no specifics to the height. However, I do want to point out specific to the armadillos, we actually worked with Zikla, the maker of um these armadillos who are based in Spain to install them out in Bocaraton
at a intersection and they were very transparent with the fact that they are not meant to last very long and of course we already said that this is supposed to be an interim project. However, I just want to clarify that from a safety perspective, like Tony
said, they're not going to cut it. Armadillos may not be the ideal treatment. But of course, that's also not saying that K71 is the only. So, I just wanted to clarify that from a safety and technical perspective, if we
are going to put those extended curb extensions out there where pedestrians may be just standing in the paint and K71s are being rejected, then my recommendation is to see what other treatments out there that are more resilient and also um you know, maybe
more reflective, a little bit higher just for the perspective of safety. But um but it doesn't this is a temporary solution. We're considering this a temporary solution anyway. So why would we look for something that's more resilient? >> Because armadillos for example are meant
to last let's say a year or two. But even in this context >> correct but other interim treatments are meant like are manufactured to last at least 5 years for example. So I would just take that into consideration. So, even a curb uh to go back to Lindsay's
question, even a curb, a concrete curb would not work in this case, right? It would not be enough of a a concrete 6-in curb would not be enough of a vertical. >> It it would if it's uh basically made of the right grade of concrete and bolted
and installed in the right way, then absolutely it would last longer. >> It would last longer, but it wouldn't be it wouldn't provide the verticality that you're arguing for. I think we're talking about two different things to a degree, right? So, one is the
delineation of the curb cut out into what is currently street, right? Um, and that's where you have, if you look at the plans, you know, 5 10 of right now proposed ballards at each one of those, right? And then we also have the
uh the the Ballard proposed at any end of a bike lane where traffic crosses it essentially whether that's a street, whether it's a crosswalk, whether that is a driveway, etc. Um and so I think your question, John, maybe was
do we have to have the the height of the ballard at the correct me if I'm wrong, John, the entry and exit of the bike lane? That's what I'm going to call them. Injury and exit of the bike lane. Um, is that what you're asking? I'm just trying to understand. >> I'm asking. Yes. Because we seem to be I
I'm wondering what the solutions are instead of this. I I think these ballards are too big and intrusive for our community. I think we have other solutions that are vertical that are thinner um that we might be able to start with. um if it's not AR if you
really say that armadillos aren't aren't safe enough um you know certainly don't want to compromise safety but I want to I I think we need to kind of have a some kind of we have to we have to have something that's contextual within our community that people that are the comm
community members like us are used to seeing and that we are testing out for um and we have a quick implementation so we're not waiting for a long time we're not testing something that's new. So, if it's just those very thin uh vertical um
ballers that we see every day, >> the delineators, >> the delineators between, would those work in in those situations when you're right at the at the at the intersection where you need verticality? >> They would. >> They would, but satisfy
>> the aesthetics and the spacing would be worse. Yeah. >> So, that's I just wanted to clarify, but they would work. They are often placed at all kinds of curb extensions >> to to my board members here here's here and I'm sorry Haskell um so here's my
thought process what I would be amunable to approving today which is a shift from what they've proposed is the K71 Ballards at the entrance and exit to the bike lane right to have a a large physical presence to keep a car I
mean because you think about it it's a double wide bike lane right that's a parking. I I don't know the exact dimension, but it's not it's enough room for a car to drive through. So, something that is substantial enough so that I'm not saying it's going to stop a car, but to draw attention to the fact that this is not a place for cars to
drive. Okay. And then as far as the curb cuts, I'm with uh you know, our chair John Stewart here. Something lower along the lines of a Zikla. I'm okay with the Zikla. I understand that they are short-term. The idea here would be
short-term. Um, I know there's a cost associated with them. Um, that's kind of my thought process. And the armadillos, the ziklas, that is the alternative proposal, if you will, that
I I think I might be willing to support. I'm curious if there's anybody else in this board that would be willing to support. And I think it sounds like transportation is amunable to that and that it would satisfy requirements. That's the big concern. Okay. >> Yes. >> I I would like to suggest that we
continue it to next month. Let them bring in a a rendering. Let them bring in a ballard so we can actually look at a ballard. >> There's a ballard right there. >> There's a ballard right there. >> It's sitting right here this whole time. >> I haven't seen one. No one can. >> Oh, no. You on top of the thing.
>> Now you also What different height? You mean you talk about different heights. >> Put it right up on your can see. This is this is the K71 Ballard that they as proposed want to put around the curb cuts and at the entrances to everything every bike lane. What I'm saying and I
think what collectively we're seeing is that around the curb cuts is a lot of verticality and visual clutter. >> How's that? >> And so thank you. And so having those just at the bike lanes front and back or
you know each end which again at a cross street at a driveway etc. Anytime where a car could in theory turn into it that's where you want it to be where there's a break in the protected curb lanes that are outside. And then at the curb cuts I'm sorry Haskell
>> and then at the curb cuts having something lower profile. Allah the ziklas the armadillos is what we're suggesting. Um, so that's where I was. >> What goes on top of that? >> There's a hole. >> Nothing.
>> There's a cap. There's like a plastic. >> Is there a top? I mean, otherwise it just fills up with water. >> They have ones that have a little ball on it, but it just >> Okay. >> And they could be shorter. >> And they could be shorter. They could be shorter. The thing is that it's got to be a deterrent enough so that people don't drive in the bike lane,
>> right? That's the thing. So, >> but didn't you show didn't you show a picture of them being run over by a truck? >> Like, and they you said they pop back up or they pop off. I'm afraid that they're going to be a huge obstacle on the road, but >> times they won't. They just >> Yeah.
>> But it's plastic, you know, it's got a hole in the middle. >> Yeah. >> And it'll it'll do this. >> Please speak on the mic. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. That's it. It it is flexible but and it'll take a hit but it will not survive multiple beatings over and over.
>> Right. >> Okay. >> And it comes in different sizes. So 12 24 this is 36. It'll >> Okay. Pascal. >> I just want to talk about what Lindsay had said. I like your idea number one. >> And I agree with also Ray that we continue this and you come back with a
rendering as was requested two months ago. And I'm looking up the the armadillos are 8 and a half inches tall. Substantially taller than a regular curb. So what's the issue? Is it longevity? >> Yes, exactly. It's the way they're
bolted and how many times they get hit. >> Fair enough. So if this is a pilot program, why don't we just test out the armadillos and see if it works and and actually see what their longevity is in practice? >> Absolutely. It's a possibility. I just wanted to caveat from a technical perspective that they are not meant to
last too long. So either but that's not a very specific response. Not meant to last too long. What does that mean? Under what conditions? >> We have harsh environment here. I understand. But >> somebody's got to warranty this to last x number of months or years or whatever.
>> Yes, there is a warranty on them. Absolutely. That so >> and how long is that? I I don't have the exact number, but I can tell you generally have that information. >> The the product itself is going to last. It's not going to fall apart. It'll be it'll be removed from its spot. So, if
it gets hit every day, multiple times a day by the UPS truck or the fire truck, then it'll it'll get disloded. >> Why would it move? >> Because uh >> because of what? The shear on the bolt. >> Yeah, that's it. >> The the depth of penetration. >> No, no, no, no. the shear the
>> Okay, so that's a function of the depth of penetration of the fastener. >> The fasteners, there's going to be three fasteners. They're chemically and mechanically applied, right? So, there's an epoxy that's put in and also it's hammer drilled into the ground. They're very durable. They can take a hit. >> So, >> I think Aliyah said she's just being
very cautious. >> They're going to they're going to take a lot of beatings and at a certain point they're going to come they're going to just >> I hear you. I I understand that. From a technical standpoint, what I'm saying to you is if the unit itself can take a lateral impact,
>> it's a function of the fastener holding it in place that you're saying would would yield. Sure. >> Correct. >> That's right. >> So, if you change the fastener go first, >> the attachment to the to the substrate, then the item is going to last indefinitely.
>> It'll last a long time and it can be re it can be reinstalled. That's >> So, let's just do that. Let's let's let's take a look at that alternative, >> okay? >> And and go from there. >> Wait, just one second. Elizabeth has ne the floor next. And then >> if I may, I'd like to kind of summarize
the suggestions and hopefully come to a consensus here. So I think what I hear my colleagues here saying is that we would we would live comfortably with the proposal of having the ballards where they are mandatory for visibility like
the curb cuts and whatever else they need to be and other areas like in the where the extended uh sidewalks and etc to have the lower a lower device that could be an armadillo or an alternative one and since we are proposing to
continue to next month then at that point you could bring alternative ones to be considered and the board can decide if it's the which one we prefer. >> So, do you guys want to have would you guys want to have an approval today or do you want to come back next month with
other options? >> An approval would be great because right now people are able to drive. >> They're using right now. >> The only thing that's stopping you from opening the bike lanes today is because you don't have the high ballards where they're mandatory. So we are approving
the high balls where they are mandatory. We are just going to discuss further where they are not. >> I think I think the board could approve what was mentioned earlier and then continue the application to explore alternatives if you know subject to later um installation or um yes. So
basically we're the board could be approving now the taller ballards at the um entrances and exits to the bike lanes approving armadillos at the um at the um curb extensions. right >> right today and then um have the transportation department come back next
month to explore other changes in the future. So, right now the board is approving that, but if the board wants to if the board wants to review other changes in the future, um transportation come back next month, >> but they're not really going to be they're going to implement they're going to implement what we approved today,
which I encourage us to do, by the way. Um but we are but you're saying I don't know why they'd come back until there's actually either a new project or a new location or or we've had time to test it or things like this. >> Ray, is there a world in which we could
approve this today? Yeah, I'm just you originally suggested continuence, but I'm curious >> just to clarify the uh armadillos. Everybody's talking about lifespan. Lifespan depends on where it's located. Look at on uh right now on Meridian, you have the ar and then look at the
armadillos that are on the Venetian causeway. I mean, they're going to have a different lifespan just based on the fact of people running over them all the time. So, I can understand why you can't come up with a a figure of how long it's going to last because it's it's It kind of depends.
>> One more thing about the paint. If we can also include the paint in the approval. >> Paint on the dust. Yeah. >> Yes. Yes. >> Please. Thank you. >> That was part of the order, isn't it? The >> Yes. >> I I' I'd like to put forth a motion and we'll see where we stand. >> Okay.
>> Okay. So, my motion would be approval um as drafted by staff. However, with the modifications that we're only using the ballards at the entry and exit of the bike lane, whether that is a cross street, curb cut, driveway, etc. And
that all of the bulbouts would be a lower modality. Um, all the Zikla's armadillos, Zika's armadillos are approved. And I I guess if there's something else, I'm okay with you working with staff so long
as it is 10 in or shorter. >> The idea >> reasonable >> and the idea would be to minimize the use of these ballards. I think these are really horrible ballards. >> Um and that we should if even if we could use thinner ballards, but I
understand the spacing is different. So we'll try these. >> Okay. >> And we'll see if we get what we get. So to reiterate or for clarification, we'll have two Ballards per corner. >> Yes. >> A total of eight >> ends of the bike lane.
>> So a total of eight per intersection >> plus any driveways. >> Yeah. Yeah. But that's uh along the corridor of the street. >> Yes. >> Okay. Uh staff uh I don't know if it's planning. I I I I I would like a uh
certificate uh regarding or an affidavit regarding the uh mailing labels. Uh can you forward that to the board? >> Would that be you, Jose? >> I got the mail, >> but we'll give you the So, when the city does the labels themselves, we don't
have an affidavit. Um we have we generate the labels based upon the um their GIS system. >> I got the mailink. >> You got one? >> I got one. >> Okay. Neither myself, my neighbors. >> Uh, >> well, are you within the 250?
>> I didn't find my name. >> I'll check I'll check I'll check the labels, Mitch. I'll check. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. Do we have a second on Lindsay's um recommendation? >> I'll second it. >> Okay. Thank you, Ray.
>> Um, so what do we need a five or four? Four. Okay. Do you want to um turn to a roll call? >> Call a roll. Yep. >> All in favor? >> I I >> Any opposed? >> Motion passes.
>> Thank you all. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Ask for anything. Don't forget. >> Our next application is HPB25-0673. This is 407 Lincoln Road. This is an
application requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the installation of decorative lighting fixtures on the existing building. Um staff is recommending approval. We are recommending that the um the intensity of the lighting be able to be controlled and that the um the hours of operation of the lighting also be set um with the
intensity reduced um after um 10 p.m. and the lighting turned off after midnight. Now turn over to the applicant for the presentation. >> Uh hi, good morning. My name is Javier Barrera. I'm uh the principal of former studio 5555 Piscan Boulevard and I'm
here with uh Angel Torres who's the local director for uh your American Group. They are the um the building's owner. So, um, in the past, uh, I would say about 6 months, 7 months, this building's been undergoing through some
internal and exterior renovations, and those include lobby renovations, actually complete lobby renovations, uh, new entry canopies on the front and the back, so Lincoln Road and Lincoln Lane, uh, new lobby storefronts, general cleaning and polishing of the
exterior cladding of the building, and, uh, also the replacement of the roof. rooftop clock. Uh so we're here today because we want to enhance the building uh the appearance of the building at night really if I can switch to the
PowerPoint. Yeah. So um we'll start with some images. These are some pictures of the building at daytime. Uh we have some from Lincoln Lane on the top left. Uh bottom left, Lincoln Road, Washington Avenue north, and Washington Avenue south. And here
are some images at night. Um again, different angles, different streets, but I think it's really clear from these images that the building is really lost at night. And um and again, that's that's what we're trying to to work on uh with this presentation.
Here are some um elevations of the building. We have the east and north elevations. So, Washington Avenue and Lincoln Lane. And here we have the south elevation for the building. Um, we can see here that there's there's a strong
vertical element um that's comprised of uh I would say metal frames with the um glazing in the middle. Um and those are divided by the black lines which is the the the building cladding the stone cladding there. So, our proposed plan is
to highlight these vertical uh um grooves that go all the way up the building by adding small LED linear lights. These would be black. Uh and these would be attached to the metal frame. Um they're they're very small. They're about half
an inch by half an inch. And uh and they just would light up the building at night. Um here is an image of what um the building would look like. Um you know we feel that it highlights the architecture of the building but it also
you know I guess becomes a beacon of the entrance into Lincoln Road from uh I guess the pedestrian um portion of Lincoln Road. And then we have another image here. This is more of a frontal image um from
Washington Avenue looking at the building. We can see the bank uh at at the bottom and the way the building would be lit up above that. Um that's that's pretty much uh the presentation. We'll take any questions if if you have
any. >> Yes, thank you. Um Mitch, >> yeah, did you say uh if you're repairing the clock? >> Yeah, temperature. The clock has been repaired actually. >> That's good. Good to hear. >> It doesn't tell time. >> It it doesn't tell time yet,
>> but it's being >> it's uh it's being programmed. Yeah. >> All right. Great. That's good to hear. >> But but all the panels have been replaced. Um everything is brand new. >> All right. The concern I have uh do you know the Kelvin temperature of the light? >> These lights are going to be somewhere
between 3,000 and 4,000. >> You want it between 2700 and 3,000. I would approve that. I think when you get into the 4,000 range. >> Okay. >> It's >> I'm I'm good with the 3,000. Yeah.
>> 3,000 or less. And will they be dimmable if in case it's too bright? >> They will be dimmable. These are dimmable fixtures. Yes. >> Okay. We do have that as a condition as well. They have to be dimmable. >> Okay. You understand about the 2700?
That's uh critical. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Because you want to make it even warmer. >> You want it warm. >> Warmer. Yeah. >> So, when will the clock be up and running? >> I'm going to defer that question to Angel Torres.
>> Hi, my name my name is Angel Torres. I'm with your American Group, the owners of the building. The clock is up and it's really everything's brand new. We're waiting for the programmers to come. I believe they're scheduled for the week of January 5th. So everything should be operational if
they hold to that date. >> Question. >> Go ahead. >> I love the elevators in that building. Have you changed or modernized the cab with the uh >> uh the uh cop in the elevator, the
stainless steel with the old 19 early7s? Uh >> well the elevator the elevators haven't been touched. I would ask you >> the only thing that's done and keep them in good repair. >> The the only thing that's been done to the elevators and it was approved by the HPV. >> It's the flooring.
>> When when we did was the flooring and there's some panels back there with little chicklets. That's going to be >> I'm talking about the numbers that you >> No, that's going to be stay the same. >> Yeah, that's a throwback to my youth. >> No, that's that's had that hasn't been changed at all.
>> Great. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Yes. >> Just out of curiosity, since we asked about the temperature, um, are they solely white or can they be technology has to be be colors? I'm just curious the ones that you're installing.
>> We have them just white. >> Okay. >> But I mean, it's very easy to change um if if that's what you're looking for >> and just wanted to know. >> Yeah, they're white. >> Okay. All right. Um, thank you very much. Uh, board disclosures.
Any disclosures? No. Then we open to public hearing. Roger >> again. >> Roger. Roger. MDPL. We support this project. Uh subject to the staff recommendations.
The decorative lighting really beautifully highlights the building's distinctive architecture, verticality, and we commend the owners for restoring the somewhat restoring the clock. I actually see it every night. >> Brand new. Oh, really?
>> But it's it's it's great the way I I can see the minutes and seconds now and I kind of guessed the hour, so it's close. Um, but anyway, thank you. I think it's going to look really nice in the entrance and uh it's it's nice when you
have people that try to keep things proper. Thank you. >> All right. Anybody else? Anybody online? No, >> there's nobody else online. >> Okay, perfect. Then um anybody uh board
board member review? Okay. >> Do you have what? >> I have a comment. >> Have a comment. Please go for it, Elizabeth. Yes. >> So uh I am very happy that the caucus will be back and running and thank you so much for um bringing new life to the
building with the lighting. Uh my only comment would be I think it's a little timid gesture. Um, I like especially on the corner of the building. It's in the dark. I don't know if there are any opportunities to have a vertical element to highlight because the corner is an
indented corner. So, the the corner of the corner that would be a great opportunity to put some lighting, especially because you you mentioned that it's marking the entrance to Lincoln Road and then the corner that's actually the corner of Lincoln Road and um I'm Lincoln Road and Washington is in
the dark. So, I think if you could put some more light in there or maybe also on the top of the building so it doesn't get lost in the night sky, I think that would be a great addition to it. >> Okay. May maybe we can add one right in the inner corner there um of the image.
>> If you could bring back the the photograph of the the presentation again on the presentation. Yeah, it's here. >> The L8 PJ, can we pull pull up the presentation again? >> Yeah, there you go.
>> So, maybe in that inner corner there. Yeah, maybe we can we can put another another strip. >> No, I know. >> Um, we we would be open to that. Yeah, >> maybe study it. >> Yeah.
Okay. Um, so do I. Um, >> I'll make a motion. You have a motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve uh incorporating the comments uh study the corner lighting uh 30,000 Kelvin temperature or less. Uh, was there
anything else? >> Yeah, with with the conditions enumerated in the staff report. Do I hear a second? >> I'll second that. >> Okay, we have a motion second. Do all in
favor? >> I I Any opposed? >> Nope. >> Okay, motion passed. >> Thank you. >> Happy holidays. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Our last application on the agenda is HP25-0675 for 1651 Washington Avenue. This is an
application requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the installation of two electronic murals on the rooftop of the existing building. Um both of these are um electronic murals on the top of top of the structure. The code does require that these murals cannot be visible from the street. So they have constructed or proposing these um
landscape planters around the perimeter of the rooftop. Um, they also have a requirement that they be dimmed to no more than 250 nits or turned off between um 12 a.m. and 7 a.m. and also if they exceed um 100 square feet, they also
require review um by the city commission. We are recommending approval subject to the conditions enumerated in the draft final order. And with that, turn over to the applicant for their presentation. >> Thank you and good morning. Uh, thank you so much, Michael Belaluch. My name
is Paul Savage. We have lices at 200 South Biscane, uh, Miami, Florida. I'm here on agenda number six, the last item, uh, on your agenda today on behalf of the applicant. And, uh, given the time, I'm going to move very quickly,
uh, so that we make it on time. Uh I'm here together with Rob Alvarez of our office. Um our architect of record, Jose Gomez and Elvis Penton uh are here available online. I'm proud to represent
my client, the owner of Jamage at 1651 uh 1651 Washington, owner of the Gem, and this concerns the rooftop. Uh we have a new uh rooftop uh restaurant that will be there. And this application
concerns only electronic murals that will be projected. Uh and my client is Carlos Enuanados. Uh and he is the owner again of Jamage and also 2050 which is the the name of
the new um the new proposed restaurant. So again uh given the time we're going to go nice and spritly through here. These are our uh consultants and u architects of record that I mentioned as well as our landscape architect who
worked on this shielding. Uh this is the site here 1651 Washington. I was excited to watch the immediately uh previous item because we will be looking across the street at one another and it sounds like a perfectly tasteful lighting um
configuration that you just approved. So, we're here at 1651. Again, we have the Jamage um location in that building. This concerns the improvements on the rooftop. Uh this is in the commercial highintensity CD3 zoning district. And
of course, we're in the historic Flamingo Park historic district. We are, as uh Michael explained, we are uh respectfully requesting this board's approval of certain non-commercial electronic murals that have moving
images. Of course, these can can only be artistic in nature. Uh they cannot be in any way an advertisement, anything like that. And of course, we are not doing that. This is going to be part of a very uh refined experience on the rooftop,
very artistic, very appropriate for Art Basle. Uh the subject matter of the projections will invoke the Everglades, organic greenery, uh things like that, very slow moving. And we worked with
staff. Um this uh this has this uh drawing right here shows the the two murals in question. one uh projecting all this is interior by the way shielded from the right of way which is mandatory under the code. Um this would only be
visible on the rooftop itself. Uh one goes towards the south on a wall and the other one goes um uh I'm sorry toward the south on a tower wall. The other one goes in a northerly direction also on an interior wall. Uh we uh put together
renders. Uh this this is the one um uh looking toward the north. Uh again there will be organic shapes invoking natural scenes very tasteful and also shielded from the right of way as required. This
is the one looking toward the south again towards the tower that's there in our 1951 structure um commercial office building that we have. a little bit closer uh there with the tower. Again, uh worked very carefully
with staff. You will note that the the height of the projection is quite limited. It does not go up the length of that tower, which is part of the prohibition against being visual v uh being able to be seen from the right of
way. So, it's very low. It's very constrained. um a as we went back and forth with staff to make sure we were in conformity with the code. Um important for this is the shielding which we went with a vegetative shielding. Uh this is
the uh um I believe it's called a port poraicopus porticopus macrofilis um uh and or a Japanese u or Japanese plum. Uh and we are planting uh white
planters and then these um these uh species are required to be at least 6 feet in height per the requirements and the approval so that they will serve as a vegetative buffer and shielding to make sure that none of the visuals can
be viewed from the right of way. Uh this is a cross-section of the uh planting system together with the vegetation and of course we allow for um um irrigation and what's needed up there
for to take care of these plants. Uh we have additional um renderings. This is from uh the building on the Lincoln Road. Uh from that visual you will be able to see it from that um from that location.
Uh this is uh from 47 407 the applicant in the last item. Uh so you can see the uh shielding there. Um we don't have any projections to the eastbound in any way. So you really can't see anything there.
And this is um showing um from the Lincoln Road street level pedestrian experience. You will not be able to see it due to the angles and the low requirement for the projection combined with the vegetative screening means that
you cannot see it from the street. Uh also again from Washington. Uh here from the corner you can see that iconic tower there. Uh and you cannot see any of the projections. Um we are happy to come before you with
a favorable staff recommendation. Again uh uh many meetings uh with Michael and his staff and uh they have enumerated certain conditions. One of which is that we have to go to the city commission. Um and he also wrote in there a sentence a
uh you know requiring us to go back to staff as we change these so that staff has empowered to make sure that we don't put anything distasteful or they can double check. Um couple more rooftop renderings. With that um I will promptly
given the time conclude and I thank this board. It's my pleasure to see you as always and uh I appreciate your uh your favorable consideration. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Are there questions for the applicant? >> Just a quick question. I mean, this is for a new restaurant on the rooftop.
Where is the entrance going to be for that? Um I I' I've been to the building and you go there's a there's a stairwell and an elevator that is on the uh southern end of the building for the very >> So it's on it's on Lincoln and not
Washington. >> I believe the front of the building is on Washington. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> So that's where the entrance would be. >> Yes, sir. >> Somewhere near Raising Kane. >> Yeah, it's right by Raising Kane. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Any other questions for the applicant?
>> Questions? Yes, >> we have two questions regarding the irrigation system. So, how are the planters drained and if I'm not sure exactly what how they are planning to irrigate? And the second question is what's the technology for the electronic
screens? It's like a projection. Is it any >> Yeah, it's it's a it's a relatively simple technology of the of projection. Um, it's not a lighted screen, if you will, like a television or LED or
anything. It's a projection. Uh, so I can answer that question. I do have my um landscape architect um on the line if we're able to activate him. Uh, >> his name is Keel Semler. >> Yes, Keel has his hand raised. And also,
we do do have a condition in the order um requiring irrigation, >> right? You know the pension there will be irrigation but my concern is like when you put the water and if it drains it drains to where there should be like an exit of that if it's not some kind of control.
>> Um K are you there? >> I'm here. Can you hear me? >> Hi. Before you start speaking, do you swear or affirm uh that the testimony you'll be giving is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you. You have two minutes. >> Okay. Um so, yeah, the irrigation is a
permanent system. It's a drip lines and micro emitters and the planters. Um we're connecting to the irrigation system that is currently on the roof. Uh you know, it's new and there's new existing uh built-in planters and we're just sort of piggybacking off of that. And we have automatic controllers and
the drainage is coordinated with roof drainage. So um from the planters to that existing roof drainage. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um seeing no more uh questions for the applicant, let's uh
board disclosures. Any disclosures on this? No. No. No. Okay. Um public hearing. Roger. Oh, I wonder what happened to my pen. There it is. Um, project at NDPL.
We we support this project provided it complies with the city of Miami Beach's local light pollution regulations and dark sky standards. We appreciate that the output will be reduced to 250 nits is it uh after midnight and that the
insulation is not visible from the street. We encourage the Historic Preservation Board to ensure this project adheres to these important environmental standards. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Anybody else? >> And there's nobody online with their hand raised.
>> Okay. Um so board member comment or um or motion. If no comments, >> I'll second. Ray was about to >> I knew he was going to >> Yeah, he said I'll
>> to approve the certificate appropriateness with the conditions of staff. >> Second. >> All right. All in favor? >> Yes. >> Yes. Yes. Any opposed? >> No. Seeing none. Congratulations. Thank you for the speedy delivery.
>> Meeting adjourned. >> Thank you so much, Mr. >> Yes. You've got >> new business. >> New business. We got six minutes. I have uh something to >> Oh, you do actually do have something you want to say. Okay. >> Uh had a big preservation victory that that I realized during Art Basle has to
do with a uh Tea Hunter Henderson structure that you may have seen along Collins Avenue in Surfside 9340 Bogenv Apartments. Way back in 2013, I served on the county's board and the count uh
the board at that time was about to approve its uh movement, its relocation and I objected uh concerned of course with the oops factor. uh the developer at the time agreed to retain it and
about four years ago I was told that the new board uh approved its demolition and reconstruction. Uh since that time the Kushner uh uh family or entity had purchased the property and they have
shorted up and it's uh being showcased as the centerpiece of their development uh happening today. >> So uh >> I'm proud of that. >> Congratulations. Thank you for your for your service. >> Oh, thank you.
>> And uh thank you all. We'll see you all on January 13th. >> Yes.