Hey, hey, hey. [Music] [Music]
[Music] Hey, hey, hey.
[Music] [Music]
[Music]
[Music] Welcome to the City of Miami Beach Commission Chambers. We're glad to have you with us today. If you require ADA assistance or accommodations, please notify the city
clerk or any staff member and we will be happy to assist you. As a courtesy to everyone present, please silence all cell phones and electronic devices at this time. Lobbyist disclosure reminder. If you are a lobbyist appearing before the city
commission or any city board, you must have registered with the city clerk prior to participating. If you have not yet registered, please do so immediately. Presentation reminder. If you submitted a presentation within the 24 hours prior to the start of today's meeting, please
check the computer located at the podium to ensure your file is properly loaded. When the floor opens for public comment, please step up to the podium. Speak clearly into the microphone and begin by stating your name and address for the record.
How to participate in public meetings via Zoom. Once you have joined the Zoom meeting, go to the bottom panel and click on the raise hand icon to notify the meeting host that you would like to speak. As soon as the host grants you permission to speak, a dialogue box will
pop up on your screen with two options. Select the unmute button to begin speaking. After you finish speaking, mute your microphone and click on the lower hand icon. If you are joining Zoom via phone, tap the keypad icon and press star 9 to
notify the meeting host that you have raised your hand to speak. A voice operator will prompt you to unmute your microphone by pressing star 6. Once unmuted, you may begin speaking. After you finish sharing your comments, be sure to press star 9 to lower your
hand and star six to mute yourself. We kindly ask everyone to conduct themselves in a respectful and professional manner throughout today's meeting. Thank you for your cooperation and thank you for participating in your local government here in the city of Miami Beach.
[Music] [Applause] [Music] Down. My Can you [Music]
feel? [Music] I'll be [Music]
[Music] Hey, hey, hey. [Music] [Music]
fig. [Music] Don't let it
[Music] fire. [Music] I want to
[Music] Everything.
[Music] [Music]
down. Heat. [Music]
[Music] [Music] [Music]
Please take your seats. The meeting is about to begin. Remember to speak into the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record. Please stand by. We are going on air in 5 4 3 2 1.
>> Okay. Good morning everybody. Welcome to this month's planning board meeting which is on a Thursday for a change. Um first I want to welcome our new liaison Deborah Tacket and Jake support. Happy to have them. [Applause]
>> Very exciting. Um, and uh, we're going to start. Nick, I'll get to you in one second. If I could just get a motion to approve the minutes from the September meeting. >> Motion to approve. >> Can I get a second? Scott second. All in favor? Hi. Anyone
oppose? Okay, Mr. Collis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning, members of the board. Today's meeting of the planning board will be conducted in a hybrid format with the board physically present in the commission chambers at Miami Beach City Hall and applicants, staff, members of
the public appearing either in person or virtually via Zoom. To participate via Zoom, the public may dial 1-877-853-52-57 and enter the webinar ID, which is 861-43426327 pound or log in to the Zoom app and enter the webinar ID, which again is
861-43426327. Anyone wishing to speak on an item must click the raise hand icon in 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 or opposition to any item. Expert witnesses and representatives of neighborhood associations shall prior to appearing disclose in writing to the city clerk their name, address, and the principal
on whose behalf they are communicating. If you're an architect, attorney, or employee 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. And
lastly, I'd like to swear in uh any members of the public or staff will be testifying today. Please raise your right hands. Do you swear the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth, whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Nick. And and as far as attendance, it's probably obvious, but
Elizabeth Leona is not present. Everyone else is. All right. The first is a progress report planning by planning board file PB2104412038 Collins Avenue. >> Um, thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a progress report for a change of owner operator as required by the conditional
use permit for a neighborhood impact establishment with entertainment and an occupant content in excess of 200 persons. Um, this particular property has a long history. Um, initially it goes back to a conditional use permit for the entire building which is a
parking garage with retail on the ground floor that was approved in uh 2001. Um, this particular space as there are multiple uh tenants within the ground floor of the building. Uh is located at uh 2038 Collins Avenue. Uh the initial
cup was approved by the board in December of 2015. That was for Bagotel uh restaurant. Um and then subsequent a change in operator to Rasputin was approved in June of 2021. Uh the current
operator uh CAD Hospitality LLC has uh submitted the required affidavit uh which was approved by the planning department and they are currently uh requesting uh this progress report in order to change the operator and to acknowledge
all of the conditions that are uh existing in the cup. There are no other changes to this up other than the operator at this time. Uh I would like to point out that at the time we we drafted this report, no complaints uh
have been received and no violations have been issued for this particular space. Um therefore we are uh recommending the planning board um conclude the progress report. I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. >> Okay, sir. Uh good morning members of
the board. Samuel Rubert, Samuel A. Rubert, PA on behalf of the applicant cat hospitality LLC. I can't summarize it any better than Miss Tacket did, but I am here. Flattery will get you everywhere. You have my client is also here. The principal of my client is also here in case you have any questions for
the operator. Other than that, we hope you close out the progress report. >> Okay. Anyone in chambers speak on this? Anyone on Zoom? Nobody on Zoom. We'll close public hearing. Any questions? So, I want to move it.
>> Motion to conclude the progress report. >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I. >> Anyone opposed? >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. That was easy. >> All right. The next items are previously continued applications. The first one is
planning board file 25773784 West Avenue, which I believe is the pasta bar. >> That is correct, Mr. Chair. Um, this is an application. It was filed requesting a conditional use approval for a restaurant with more than 100 seats and
an occupancy content in excess of 125 seats pursuant to sections 2.5.2 and 7.2.23 of the Miami Beach Resiliency Code. And I'm going to turn it over to Jake for our recommendation.
>> Thank you, Debbie. This is the former Sushi Garage location at West Avenue and 18th Street. As Debbie said, in the Sunset Harbor neighborhood, a restaurant that serves alcohol with more than 100 seats or an occupancy in excess of 125 persons requires a conditional use
permit. The proposed restaurant includes a total of 122 seats indoors and a patron occupant content of 195 persons. The applicant is proposing indoor ambient background music played at a level that does not interfere with normal conversation as entertainment is
not permitted in this area of the city. The applicant initially proposed hours of operation from 5:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday and noon to midnight Friday through Sunday. However, the applicant has notified staff that they will be presenting modified hours
of operation closing at midnight Monday through Thursday and 2:00 a.m. Friday through Sunday and on state and federal holidays. A valet service will be provided by the applicant and the city's transportation and mobility department has reviewed the valet plan and is recommending several conditions that
have been included in the draft cup. In summary, the request is for a cup for 122 seat restaurant with no entertainment and staff is recommending approval of the application. >> Um, thank you Jake. If I could just um the applicant has also uh contacted
staff um and discussed with the transportation department a proposed modification of um the nine valet uh requirement that is uh part of the draft order. Um they are now proposing not to
keep the nine but to re-evaluate with transportation uh within 6 months um to provide an updated valet analysis to determine if nine is the appropriate number if it needs to be more or less. Um
transportation has notified us just uh on yesterday uh that they don't have any objection with that modification and um staff does not either. Okay. And when you present um to me, I live in Sunset Harbor and and my issue
is always traffic and can you just be uh very specific about the valley operation where it's located and you know focus on that? >> I've got some slides on that. Sure. Absolutely. >> So good morning Nicholas Rodriguez 200 South Biscane Boulevard from the law firm Brook Cal Fernandez Larkin and
Taffanz. I'm joined by Andrea Pedroi the principal of Apasta Bar and Fuville Rotini our architect. uh if we could call up the presentation. So this application is for a restaurant called A Pasta Bar in Sunset Harbor. Um Apasta Bar is an existing restaurant in
New York. They have one location that's been very successful in Soho. Um and their concept is really an more casual but still a sit down Italian restaurant. And it's uh centered around a central kitchen where they make fresh pasta and handmade pasta kind of in front of you
in an interactive setting. And just a note on outreach, we did meet with Sarah and Marilyn from the Sunset Harbor Neighborhood Association and they were comfortable with the application and our requested hours. Um they're actually very excited about the concept coming to Sunset Harbor. Um so as to the
location, this is 1784 West Avenue. It's the former Sushi Garage location as uh Jake had mentioned and this this spot has been vacant for the last like 2 years. Uh, and it's in need of a refresh and an update from Austa Bar who's coming in with a full interior remodel.
We're right across the street from Fresh Market and Office Depot. Uh, our floor plan uh is 122 indoor seats. We would like to request a sidewalk cafe permit in the future for up to 28 seats on that depressed sidewalk uh beneath the street
that's in front of the the restaurant, but that is outside of the scope of this up. We just want to be abundantly clear that we do intend to request some outdoor seating in the future. No music outside is as prohibited in Sunset Harbor. Um, so 122 indoor seats and the
occupancy as Jake mentioned is 195. Uh, it's a a different number there that is just a typo. So this is an interior rendering of kind of what the restaurant would look like. That's the central pasta bar where they would make the pasta, the fresh pasta, and serve it at the bar seats. And then you have the the
seats flanking the sides. uh you know for the more formal dining setting. Uh and these are the proposed modifications before we adjusted them. So the handout is the correct proposed modifications. Um and just to get to the valet questions. Sorry, I have a couple more
slides and backup since uh Mr. Chair Brian Elias would like us to cover this. So, the two valet spaces are located on the east side of the property uh between Office Depot. And the reason we chose that area is because there's only one
parking space that's actually on 18th Street, and we need two for a proper valet loading ramp. So, we worked with the parking department and the transportation department to use the one space that's in front of the loading dock. And there's kind of a striped out
area between our property and the extra space storage next door that would serve as our second space so that we have enough space to not block traffic. And uh we you know we thought it would be less disruptive on West Avenue which is a little bit wider than 18th Street which is affected by the the road
raising which made the sidewalk wider and it's a little bit of a pinch point that you see in the aerial. Um our valet storage location is at the Chase Bank uh next to Walgreens. And here's the the route that they would take. They would take Dade Boulevard to drop off the car and then Alton Road and come back and
loop around to bring the car back to the the valet stand. >> Can you repeat which where where is the parking? >> So the valet parking location is at the Chase Bank. It's the building that's right next to Walgreens and Publix and it has like a very large surface parking lot that's underutilized. So it's been
recently approved to be an underutilized valet storage lot. Uh and I think we're one of the first that's actually um patronizing with the valet company to use that lot. Uh it's the closest lot that we could identify uh for a valet storage in the neighborhood that's
actually available. And so we're we're working with Elite Park. >> Do you know where the Ucho Ballet Parks? >> I'm not sure where Uchico Valley Parks. I'm sorry. I don't know. Um I I believe it's the same. >> You know, I'm not sure. I believe it's
the same valet operator. Um but I didn't ask him. They may end up actually parking in the same location cuz I think >> But it's the same operator. It's I >> But you're gonna have a set a stand set up in a separate place. >> Yes. Because we're in a completely different location than >> right around the corner. Yeah.
>> Yeah. >> So, um our stand would be on on West. >> Is that I'm just trying to visualize that's the same street that Tmont and Beach are on in the in the >> Right. Tmont and Beach are a little bit down the ways, but yeah, we're on um >> Actually, is this
>> No, it's one street. It's one street >> to the east of that. This is where >> Okay. >> This is where Office Depot is. >> Where there's a light and Yeah. There's a light at that intersection >> before you get to it. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Which is better than having it on on 18th Street because that's where most of
the traffic is, >> right? That's what I was concerned with. >> Yeah. Yeah. That there used to be parking spaces all here, which we would have served as a good valet ramp, but when they did the road raising in Sunset Harbor, they widened the sidewalk and took away some of the parallel parking
spaces. So, it just wouldn't work well right in front of the restaurant. Um, the main entrance will actually be here. So, it actually works out the valley >> right now. What is in those spaces? Because it doesn't leave it looks like I mean, if there's cars coming the other
way, there's parking spaces on the other side. the I guess how much space is there for cars to pass by when valet has two or three cars parked there? >> So that it's sufficiently wide. There's
actually if you see here, this is our our loading dock. So there's enough space for a car. You can see actually in this very small image, there are cars in the travel lane >> here and there's plenty of space here between the curb where cars can pull in. And then
>> and so that ramp there that's kind of are they going to be able to pull into there? >> We don't want them to pull into the ramp because then they would have to back out and that takes longer and that would cause traffic backup. So we just want them to parallel next to that ramp. And that's our loading dock. So we have a
condition that prohibits us from operating the valet at the same time that we would be loading. Uh so there's no conflicts there. But we're we're only open in the evenings for dinner 5:00 p.m. till 11 or 2 a.m. on weekends. So loading would happen during the day anyways. >> And then are you planning on having like
a golf cart or something to take the valet back? >> Right now I think there would just be walking running um across the street >> across the Alton and Date Boulevard uh signal the crosswalk there. >> Yes.
>> Um and but it's not a very far distance. And in the valet analysis what they do is they calculate you know how long it would take for that that person to walk there. And that's why we have nine valet attendants required. What ends up happening is in practice there's much
less people driving and valeting than what's predicted in the analysis. So that's why we'd like to come back and see how many people are actually driving to this restaurant and potentially revise up or revise down based on 6 months of operations. >> My goodies, you'll revise down.
>> I'm just saying there's garages in the area. There's the whole the whole garage where the all the other restaurants are south park and a lot of people at Uber and walk. Anyway, >> just just one thing for me. So, what was the reason that you didn't want to stage the valet cars on 18th?
>> So, we we can't because there's only one >> cuz you have that cutout there. >> Yeah, we have a cutout here. This is one parking space and then these are motorcycle parking spaces. We can't commandeer those spaces because they're too close to this stop sign. Got it. And there's a Florida statute that prohibits
us from putting a parking space there. So, we tried that at first, but it just couldn't work. Um, and we came to this compromise with the parking department and the transportation department all working together. Um, it took a little bit of coordination, but we made it happen. >> Tell the public here. I know there's
someone here for the chambers. Miss Sunset Harbor. No, >> I'm going to be as an individual since we, you know, we have this issue with the the neighborhood ordinance. But anyway, as an individual, Sarah de los Reyes, 1800 Suns Harbor Drive. We did
speak to the vendor um and we support them and they support every single of our ordinance that we have out there. So, we're very happy. I can't wait until they open. We need another Italian restaurant since we lost Sardinia. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else in chambers?
Anyone on Zoom? All right. Uh, we'll close public hearing. Any other questions or someone want to move it? >> Well, can I can I ask about the hours? Of >> course. Just so the So I understand Well, because in the your proposed modifications or conditions, Monday
through Thursday 5 to 11 uh indoor and Friday to Sunday 5 to 2, but then you say outdoor 12:00 a.m. nightly. I assume you're talking about only on the weekend on Friday to Sunday because you have indoor to 11,
>> right? Yeah, we could close the outdoor at 11. So that the ordinance allows us to open till midnight, but we can do outdoor mirror what we're doing with the the indoor weekdays. >> Um, how many outdoor seats are there compared to I guess what Uchi not um
Sushi Garage had? So, Sushi Garage actually didn't have any approval for outdoor seats. I have no idea how many outdoor seats they had. Um, whatever they had was just they kind of just put them >> um uh and and there's I know there's no
entertainment, but there's no Is there going to be ambient music outside or No, >> no, no music allowed outside in Sunset Harbor. Yeah. >> Um the >> um in terms of the valet, so when is this planning and opening and
>> like May, June, we're working through permitting right now. Um they this actually came up while they were already substantially through their permitting, but since Sunset Harbor has a lower threshold, they didn't realize they needed the CUP. And so they kind of had
to deviate from permitting, come here. but they're already kind of 80% 90% through the permitting process. >> So I guess I guess from past experience with doing these like six months from issuance if it's issued in May, you know, you're it's the dead of summer and
the valet is going to obviously be much lighter at during that period. And so we need to I think we need to come up with you know I think I'm totally fine. I don't want to make you guys spend extra money that you don't need to like to hire lawyers and come back and everything like that, but I want to make
sure that the the valet analysis is, you know, accurate. I mean, you've seen Sunset Harbor and that, you know, Dade Boulevard, you know, in December and January. I mean, it's insane. I mean, we have to have police on every intersection and it's backed up and, you
know, with the construction on Pery and and the Uchico Valley. Yeah. I mean, it's just >> you want you want to analyze during the peak season. >> Yeah. >> Like a minimum of six months, but it has to include a period of what? December. >> Well, I would say maybe maybe nine nine months. Um because if you do open up
Well, I guess you could do six months to include December through February. Does that make sense? >> Okay. >> Is that would that be okay? And >> yeah, that's fine. It's reasonable. We very fair. We understand summer it's dead and winter it's not. Yeah, >> as we're finding out as the last couple
of weeks, the traffic has just increased >> suddenly. >> Okay. Anything else, Scott? >> Yeah, just one quick question. Mainly for staff. Uh when the other when Sushi Garage was there, were there any are you aware of any issues they had that that
maybe we need to >> look at for this uh application? >> Um any kind of issues? Sushi Grass didn't actually have to get a cup. So they were just operating as >> code violate anything that >> not that I'm aware of.
>> Okay. >> All right. Someone move it. >> I'll move it. >> Okay. Second. >> Second. >> With It's with the >> correct suggestion. Yeah. >> And minimum of 6 months, but has to include a period of December to February. >> All right.
>> Got that guys. Just to clarify, that is a 11:00 p.m. closing outdoors. >> Outdoors. Yeah. >> Okay. >> On Monday through Thursday. >> Monday through Thursday. Right. >> Right. And we just want their valley analysis to include uh months of November and December. >> Yes.
>> Okay. All right. Um all in favor? I. >> Anyone opposed? All right. Thank you. Congratulations. Good luck. >> Thank you very much. Look forward to it. >> See you there. >> Wish it was kosher. Hope your pass. >> All right, the next one is planning
board file 2550775 801 South Point Drive. And I think there was a flurry of activity this morning with an agreement with a neighbor and I think Nick has a new condition that >> I don't know the rest of us have. Is >> I'll think we should let the applicant
present their proposed condition and um >> Okay, Debbie, do you need to do an intro? >> And ultimately, it's up to the board whether whether to accept that. >> Sure. Let me just read um the application into the record. It an application has been filed requesting modifications to a previously approved
conditional use permit for a neighborhood impact establishment. Specifically, the applicant is requesting to modify conditions of approval related to the required sound mitigation measures. Um this application was heard by the planning board at the September meeting. Um, since that time
we staff has been advised that the applicant continues to work with the Maria Condominium Association to come to an agreement. Um, and I'm going to turn it over to the applicant to um, go through that in more detail. Um, but staff's recommendation remains uh,
consistent with what was presented at September. >> Right. Subject to this new Okay. >> proposal. Okay. >> Hi again. Nicholas Rodriguez, 200 South Piscane Boulevard, Burke Cal Fernandez Larkin and Tapenz. If we could call up
the slides. Uh, so I just passed out a set of conditions. You guys may remember we were here last month. Uh, we're proposing a modification to our proposed sound insulation in the restaurant. Uh, we got some push back from the condominium. I think we were a little uh
there was some misunderstanding between what we were proposing and what was uh actually being done. Uh so we clarified with them what we were doing and we made some compromises and some concessions. Uh in general what we're doing is that
the main dining room hours of operation are being reduced from 2 am to midnight and then the alternative uh sound installation process will be used in the main dining room, the larger space, the VIP dining room uh which is 42 seats at
the east side of the property that will will follow the originally agreed upon sound insulation which is two layers of sound insulation. So, which which sorry, which area has the >> the VIP dining area, and I'll pull up the floor plan here so you guys can see it. So, the VIP dining area on the right
side of the screen that will be insulated because it's staying open till 2:00 a.m. Um, but the main dining, it's going to close at 12:00 a.m. and we've been able to work with the association sound consultant and our sound consultant to show them that uh these
the sound from the restaurant won't be audible. Um but to give them extra assurance uh we've proposed a condition, we've worked with them. That's kind of the what if scenario. What if residents hear it? Then we'll follow a process in order to make sure that we address it. And of course, the answer has always
been whether there's a condition or not, Gaia is going to work with the residents in Maria to make sure that any noise that they're hearing is going to be addressed. Um this just kind of puts it in writing and gives us an ironclad agreement that if they do hear noise, we're going to address it right away. If
noise becomes a chronic problem, um, then we're going to hire a sound an independent sound consultant and they're going to come identify the source, we're going to pay for it and we're going to implement the recommendations in order to eliminate any impacts. Um, what this boils down to to this board is that the
noise can't be plainly audible in any residential unit within the building and that's completely enforceable. So, there's any noise complaints coming from residents of the building, we'll be back before you to modify the cup for progress reports and then eventually uh potentially modifications if we can't
resolve these noise concerns. But based on the studies and the extensive investigation, studying, and investment that's being put into insulating the sound in the restaurant, we're really confident that this they're not going to hear anything from this restaurant. Um there's soundproofing going in on every
ceiling to some extent. It's just the VIP dining is getting a little bit more insulation cuz they're opening till 2:00 a.m. The main dining room is getting a little bit less um but with some other techniques that also help to mitigate any sound impact from the restaurant. And if they do hear something, we're going to address it. Uh I do believe
that the association's council will be on Zoom to corroborate the agreement that we've reached just last night. >> So I understand so all these proposed conditions were the result of of this negotiation and agreement with Maria. >> Yes. Okay. mostly this one on the first page. Um, these conditions with the
construction specifics are really just one of them is what was already in the original CUP. It's just clarifying it's only in the VIP dining room. And the other one was our proposed modification to that >> uh sound insulation condition. >> It's a shame their consultant isn't
here. It would have been enjoyable. >> You guys were looking forward to fireworks today? >> Yeah. >> No. Okay. So, are are you finished? >> Yes, I'm finished. >> Is the So, anybody in chambers on this? >> Okay. So, I'm assuming there's someone on Zoom, the council for the
association. >> And before we um before we hear from from the public, I would ask the board if you have any disclosures to make any new information since the last year. >> Yes. I had uh exparte uh email just to
make sure because we were pushing for them to get along. >> Uh that it was proceeding and if they needed any um help from mediators uh and it seems they did wonderful on their own. Uh I want to
clarify that my mind was not determinative either before or now till I come into this place. But blessed be the peacemakers and you know uh the the neighborhood association had nothing to
do with it. Nobody on that board was involved or talked to and uh the determination lies solely with the planning board. And when you say exparte, you mean you were sending emails back and forth to the app? Okay, got it. Okay, Scott, anybody else haven't disclosed your
anybody? Okay, >> ready for public hearing. >> Um, if you're if you're willing wishing to speak on this item, please raise your hand if you're on Zoom. >> Okay. Yes, Justin Smith. >> Good morning, Justin.
just maybe you're on mute you there. >> My name is I'm council for Maria Condominium Association. So I was just joined to corroborate the fact that um the parties did discuss the conditions here and and came to an agreement.
>> So you're in agreement with all these proposed conditions. >> Correct. >> Okay. if >> okay I just want to >> I I just want to say this is a perfect example of
why it was delayed and I want to commend both you and the board for working together in a situation that was not viable on the first pass. Uh and that's the determination. I mean, it's it's it's not up to sound engineers
ultimately to just come in and say staff approves. We have to have buyin, particularly when there's multiple residents living above. So, fantastic job. And uh that was the appropriate outcome. Thank you.
>> And Nick, do you have any uh staff have comments on the proposed condition? >> Um so, so I think the proposed condition is um is okay. Um, at the end of the day, this is a voluntary profer by the
applicant as to to reflect a private agreement that the applicant reached with the association for the for the building. Um, I would just want to make clear what, you know, which parts of of this paragraph the city can enforce and
which parts are really a a private dispute resolution process that they've come up with >> um to to govern their own relationship. I think the first part that noise from the restaurant including but not limited to music kitchen operations and equipment and patrons shall not be
plainly audible from the residential units within the Maria condominium. That is something that that the city's code compliance department could enforce. Correct. Um then there's a detailed uh uh dispute resolution process where complaints can be made uh directly to
restaurant management staff and the applicant is required to designate a contact person. Um the last part of the the the very last sentence I think is the second part of this that the city can directly enforce which is that the operator shall be required to implement
the commercial commercially reasonable recommendations of the sound consultant or if the independent sound consultant deems a remedial measure is ne necessary the operator shall be required to undertake such remedial actions. So, I think, you know, it's it's okay to
include this in the board's order if the board between the two parties, too. >> You're saying there's the middle part, there's no way the city can enforce that. >> Correct. The the everything but the the first and the and the last sentence is really a a dispute resolution process
that the that the applicant. >> Right. But if it's a condition of the cup and they violate it, then the Maria would come to us and tell us they violated this provision. Correct. >> Exactly. Right. >> That's that's correct. Yeah. I just want to point out for the board I mean I think >> whether >> but we would have jurisdiction because it's still a condition.
>> It's a it's a conditional use permit issued by this board. So you would have jurisdiction. Yes. >> Okay. And even I mean I to me I the most important part of it is the first sentence which is you so nothing in here precludes a normal like them also
calling code enforcement or code compliance and >> if it if they come and visit this you know that that you know apartment or condo and they can hear the music you know that's a violation in and of itself even though >> they didn't f there's nothing requiring
them to first go to management and all Correct. >> So, but I do think it I mean I applaud both sides for being creative. This is probably the most creative uh condition that I've seen in my years on the planning board. So, you know, kudos. Um,
one of the things I was actually thinking is for future uh, projects like this where there might be a building or or residences nearby, can we always include it as a standard condition for the operator to designate,
you know, a contact person so that neighbors, you know, have that, you know, they will >> a registered agent, >> a registered agent, so to speak, so that like during operating hours there's a phone number, not like the norm the recept, you know, the the reservations phone number, but
>> that there's an actual phone number >> for a manager uh for residents to call because you know, so that you it's just another way of encouraging working relationships with the neighbors and also um you know you know not have you
know not forcing residents to have to call code compliance. So, I'm just thinking I think it's a good idea to have that for when we're talking about entertainment and loud music in in residential areas. So, >> cool. >> All right. Any other questions? Somebody
want to move it? >> I'll move it. >> Okay. >> Favorably, I assume. >> Yes. Very favorable. >> Wait. >> Thrilled. >> Let me just ask. Um, so you're also proposing the VIP dining room to 2:00 a.m. And the neighbor are the neighbors
okay with that? The the building? >> Yeah, we've we've talked about all these conditions. >> How how many seats are there? >> 42 in in the plan >> in each one or in both like 22 and one because there's two. >> So there's just one VIP dining room. If
we pull up the floor plan, we can >> it's main. So, there's a a VIP dining area here. Um, there's 42 seats. It's not necessarily just one or two rooms. There is a chef's table up here, but that's that's not really
>> Yeah, that's just a chef's table for like tastings and that sort of thing. >> Um, I love a chef's table. Uh, >> I'd love to go be >> I've never been invited to one, but I've never been a VIP. >> And so, and there's no entertainment in the VIP area. >> No, there's no entertainment at all.
It's just south of you. Um and then the the conditions the modified conditions in terms of the actual like you know construction of the ceiling those are the same that were recommended. Are those the same that were recommended? >> Yeah. So the the VIP dining room are the
same as as what's in the current cup. So it's it's really not changing. It's just changing its location in the cup. Um like the way it's organized. And then the main dining is what we had proposed at the last meeting. um we have a little bit more details in there uh to just clarify exactly what's going to happen.
Um and that's what ultimately we were able to satisfy the association and their sound consultant that you know the the modeling and the studies that we had done were based on real data um and and would prevent sound impacts just like the city's peer reviewer had reviewed and agreed as well. >> Okay.
>> All right. Great. Thanks. >> All right. So we had a first and >> I move second. >> Second. >> Jonathan second. All in favor? I I >> Anyone opposed? Okay. >> Thanks and good luck. >> Thank you very much. >> All right. Next one. Uh previously continued application planning broad
file 257631600 Washington. And so before we start, any disclosures on this one? >> No. >> Nothing. >> Okay. >> Nonsense. Nonsense. Deb. >> Hey. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Ambassador, how are you? Distinguish
distinguished guest. Go. How are you? Go ahead, Deb. >> Um good morning. Uh, okay. This is an application uh that has been filed requesting a conditional use approval for a neighborhood impact structure for the construction of a new 15-story mixeduse building exceeding 50,000
square ft pursuant to sections 2.5.2 and 7.2.12 of the Miami Beach Resiliency Code. Uh this particular application has been filed in accordance with the uh pending legislation for the Washington Avenue residential incentives plan. Um
this particular uh text amendment and comprehensive plan amendment was uh transmitted by the planning board in November of 2024. The amendment um specifically does uh contemplate an increase in F.2
to 3.25 25 and a maximum height of 150 ft. Um this particular ordinance um is pending first reading at city commission at their December meeting. Um but the applicant was eligible to submit this
application and a companion application to the historic preservation board uh pursuant to a a hold harmless agreement. If for certain reason the ordinance is not adopted, this project would not be able to move forward um because it does
exceed the currently allowed F and height. Um also we noted in the background section there the applicant submitted a private application for essentially the same development regulations that are contained within the Washington Avenue incentives
ordinance. However, um their particular private application, which I believe was reviewed by the board last month, um is a much more limited area and they did so to avoid any potential delays with the larger area. Um so we we um will be
holding a public workshop for that particular ordinance. Again, it's similar ordinance, but just a much reduced boundary area. >> Right. I'm just confused. But the ordinance is currently before commission. If that doesn't pass, this all becomes moot.
>> If that doesn't pass and the um current private ordinance doesn't move through. >> Okay. So that can go through even if the other doesn't. That's all. >> Correct. Okay. That's all. >> Correct. Okay. >> Um and so that is going to that private ordinance application will be coming
back to the planning board in in December as well. So I know it's it's confusing. >> No, I get I follow you. >> Um the applicant is proposing um let me see
um the existing site contains uh three buildings. There's one a one-story commercial building located at 1600 Washington Avenue, a vacant two-story multif family building located at 42316th Street, and an existing six-level parking garage with ground
level uh restaurant located at 1601 Drexel. Uh the applicant is proposing the demolition of the buildings, two of the buildings located at 1600 Washington and 42316th Street to be replaced with a 15-story 210 unit multif family residential
building with groundf flooror retail. Um the existing parking garage is proposed to be retained and incorporated into this new mixeduse development. Um the uh access to residential units will be provided uh via a ground level
lobby. Um a pedestrian bridge has been provided connecting the parking garage to the new residential building. And while parking is not required as part of the pending uh LDR amendments, they have outlined the applicant has outlined that
they will be providing parking within the existing garage for the residential units. Um they have also proposed loading spaces within the existing garage as well as um additional loading spaces for a total of seven. Um
so five are proposed to be located within the service alley between the garage and the new building and two within the existing uh garage. The applicant is proposing to limit residential move in and move outs to weekdays between the hours of 10:00 a.m.
and 400 p.m. Uh residential and commercial deliveries should be able to be easily accommodated within the uh proposed loading spaces. Um trash collection will be accessed directly from the on-site service alley. This is a a not a public alley, but a
private alley. um and that will occur between the hours of 10 a.m. and 4 pm. Uh staff has included some uh recommended conditions to minimize any adverse impacts on nearby properties. Um but generally speaking, we are very
supportive of the uh of the proposed project which will substantially increase um reasonable housing units within this particular neighborhood. This is one of the highest zone neighborhoods currently within the city. It's it's part of that city center area.
Um and we do believe that um a high density multif family residential building is appropriate for this location. It there's uh access to public transit. Um and again the scale of the construction in the immediate area is much larger than than most areas of the
city. Uh the city's transportation department has also reviewed um this project and has recommended uh a couple conditions that have been incorporated in the draft order. Um additionally, the applicant has agreed to provide a micromobility station. This is like the
the city bike or the deco bike um with 20 spaces. Uh they have also agreed to provide city bike passes to res to retail employees and to provide bike share information uh into communication materials for retail patrons. So with
that I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> I see Matthew smiling. Anyway, >> good morning chair, members of the board, Nissan Casden and uh Cecilia Torres Toed of Acre representing the applicant. Uh my pleasure as well to be
here today with Ambassador Seahas uh who is the owner of the property uh the 400 block uh as well as Enrique Norton the uh lead architect who is from Mexico City who is here and has done some spectacular work here and around the
world of course and Jose Gomez as well who is the architect of record. Uh you have already of course at a prior presentation seen the minor modifications to the zoning to enable this project. This of course is just the
conditional use which would be required merely based on the size of the project being over 50,000 square feet in the CD2 district. uh I want to briefly take you through this but also share with you although this is not a forum in which you will pass on the architecture and
design I think it's important for you to see the work and understand it as well uh let me we can tee up this presentation there we go uh I think everybody is familiar with the site I don't want to spend too much time on that to repeat a theme which we
mentioned before which was this is Miami Beach's this historic urban core. When I was a child, this was called Miami Beach's downtown. It was where there was greatest concentration of offices, retail, and activity centers as well as
even the hotels were located. And so being the urban core, it can fulfill and needs the housing to support all the workers and activities within that center. These are some more historic pictures. I would also point out that
Ambassador Seahas has owned this property I think for at least 30 years or so and uh he bought it at a time when this was not such a good neighborhood when people weren't investing in South Beach and he has tended this property with loving care put lots of money in to
renovate it to attract new tenants including the soontobe expanded the Zara flagship store and so Ambassador Seahas has really been a true anchor of this part of the neighborhood. Back to the theme of the urban core, as you see, in
addition to historically what this has served as, the most important activities and largest facilities are located within blocks of where we are. Across the street, of course, from where we are is the new convention center hotel that is coming in. Uh the Lowe's Hotel sits
on uh on 16th Street uh on Collins Avenue. This gives you a perspective of the neighborhood in which this property lies. You see the 407 building on the right, the u the 16006001 Washington Avenue building on the left.
Uh this is another perspective looking from the south. You see the 1601 Washington Avenue building 407 looking out towards the convention center. You see the corner piece there, which is where the apartments will be going, is right now sandwiched in between the historic 407 building and the garage
which Ambassador Seas built and was designed by Enrique Norton. This gives you a little bit further perspective on the uh site and the buildings in the immediate area. And this is what's coming. Of course, you have the convention center hotel. So
this is fits in very well contextually with the neighborhood. But as Debbie also pointed out and the most important thing about this project is the city's comprehensive plan as well as the initiative for Washington Avenue specifically call for increasing
residential in this corridor to service the people who work on Miami Beach so they don't have to commute and to provide life and 24-hour vitality for the neighborhoods. This project is fulfilling that goal of the city's
comprehensive plan. What I'd like to now do is turn this over to Enrique Norton to take you through the design. Uh we agree with I would like to say in advance the conditions and the order. There's one I'd like to tweak which I'll mention at the end. Enrique.
>> Thank you. Thank you. >> Good morning everybody. Well, it's it's a >> just introduce yourself and your affiliation. >> Oh, yes, sure, sure. I am Enrique Norton. I'm an architect based in Mexico City, New York, and
Miami. And I've been working within this community also for over 25 years. So, I'm sure you're aware of some of the buildings we have the huge privilege to to do here. And therefore I'm very excited to be back in these chambers. I
haven't been here for a while. So it's very it's it's great to be here and I'm very honored to present to you this project for several reasons. First and foremost the huge honor
to work with Ambassador Seas who's not only a friend but he's one of the pillars of this community and has already Nissan said he's been committed and supported supportive of Miami Beach for many many
many years. The second is because I do know very well this area. I happen to spend also time here. I own an apartment nearby and I'm very lucky to be able to be part of this community when I'm not
working that much. So, it's also great to be here and I've seen the transformation of this area for many years and I believe it's the time to bring in new energy to this part of the city and I think this is one of the
first projects of many that will probably be coming and will bring new life to a very much needed area of Miami Beach. and and the third one it's obviously
because I love the content the content of the project you know I am being asked obviously by Mr. has commitment and as Nissan already explained not to design a building for the very rich and for the
very wealthy but really for the workers of that this community really needs and that obviously entitles or or proceeds to a very different kind of design that I'm sure you will
understand we have studied extensively you know the architecture of Miami and Miami Beach. And I think this project is about celebrating the history of Miami and very especially the modern history
of this these last almost 100 years or 80 years of building in Miami and Miami Beach. It's a very easy and simple project and we've done our best to make it not only obviously a very
sophisticated and elegant project but also a very light project. A project that will enhance the community and will enhance the area. It is not all architecture is about doing big jumps or big gymnastics in architecture in in the
city. This is a project that is more about reinforcing the structure of the city, the public spaces of the city, of understanding what the streets are, what the scale of the neighborhood is, what the neighbors are in in having a little
bit of a quieter architecture that will and of course very elegant that will enhance the whole environment. It's important to understand that the project it's part of a system, you know, it's it
it's not an isolated project. It's a project that it's part of a of a block as as it has been said owned by Mr. Seas for many years that it needs to keep on surviving and working like basically
needs deliveries, needs services, needs everything. So the project needs to adapt and complement the rest of the of the block and the rest of the neighborhood and should not be seen as an isolated condition.
I'll go very fast about the project. The project has a full ground floor of retail spaces and we're hoping also to bring back some of the very needed I would say simple services to the
neighborhood, the bakery, the cafe, the hopefully would be the shoe repair which doesn't exist anymore, but bring back you know the the life of the real city in a in a real neighborhood. This this project is about creating back a
neighborhood that maybe doesn't exist that strongly anymore in this area. It's two 210 apartments of different sizes. The apartments are dedicated to as as we have said before to workers and to young
families in the city. I should say and sorry to deviate. You know, I was very touched because a couple years a few years ago, my son got a first job after college here in Miami and he was moving here and it was impossible for him to
find an apartment in Miami. You know, he had to find an apartment about an hour ago away, had to commute to Miami. And this was a financial job. It was not a waiter job. It was not a everyday store
job. And so I have absolutely no doubt that the necessity is here and that we need to work towards suffi being brings trying to help bringing back that opportunity to the young people
and the young families and the workers that support the life of this city. It's a project that will be completely committed as Mr. has has been and support his commitment both to social and to environmental sustainability.
We are considering and taking and being very careful about all of the rules and regulations and going beyond that because we understand the how fragile the the condition is against the
changing environment that we're all sort of sustaining here. It's a I would consider a very modern expression that really reflects to the conditions of the
the area the area the I would say you know the this area is changing it's been changing for 30 40 years it's not the art deco beautiful area which I have huge respect for in Miami Beach but it
goes way beyond and obviously the scale of the future projects deserve a sort of different expression. I think and and last but not least I should say that although it's a a simple project
reinforcing the structure of the city and and I need to quote a sentence from one of the big architects of the 20th century Mia Vander Mas Vander sorry a big master
which said less is more and that's what we're trying to do here. Do less in gymnastics but more in using better materials, better detailing, better techniques and bring this project to be
a real example for the 20th century and for the beginning of this change of Miami Beach. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Uh thank you, Enrique. And just to conclude, if you would, I'd like to bring Ambassador Seahas up to say a few
words. Also note you have received uh support for this from both the Washington Avenue Association and the Lincoln Road Association. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, members of the staff. Uh thank
you for uh hearing this. Uh and I wanted to tell you that I'm the proud owner. Before that, I tell you I'm Paul Seas. I live at 3315 uh Collins Avenue, buying a house, penthouse D. Uh that's my home. I live
on a beach uh most of my life. I've been here 65 years. I've owned this property close to 30 years and I've always dreamed of it be for my children and grandchildren. I've seen it high. I saw I saw it in the 60s when Lincoln Road
was great and vibrant and then Ball Harbor came and Lincoln Road went down and we went through it and then Lincoln Road came back and now Lincoln Road needs help and it needs help because we need to bring people here. Lincoln Road
has to be the pride of Miami Beach. And unfortunately, uh, some things had happened that the city on the other side has provided incentives, has provided a lot of opportunities for development there that we u have have not been able
to do. But now looking at that situation and looking at the need and being someone who it's involved with the city, my wife is involved with the Bass Museum. Uh we are the second largest contributor to the Bass, second to the
city. Uh and we we love the city. I'm I'm only saying this this things to tell you how much we are committed to this city and how much we love Miami Beach and how much we like it to thrive and we
see a need and that need is housing. We could have gone with the state and said okay the state we are going to go and force it down the throat and that's not my style. I live here. I love the city.
I love to work with the staff and we've been working with the staff and listening to their recommendations and we have incorporated their recommendations into the final design so that it would be more palatable for you
to make a decision. And so one thing that I got to tell you about and then that I'm very proud of. When I bought the building, we did a little research and it was the second building in the United States built with central air
condition. There was one in uh uh Park Avenue and ours was the second one central air. So that's something that we have and it is the largest commercial non-residential
non hospitality uh commercial building in Miami Beach and certainly Lincoln Road. So I'm proud to to do it in a way that is a compromise with the city that I love with the staff that has been great and with a commission that
hopefully will eventually approve it. uh we didn't want to go to the city and have 20 stories uh or 25 stories based on on state law. We wanted to be citizens of Miami Beach. So, we compromise and I brought a great
architect to do something for the people of Miami Beach. With that, I thank you for your question. >> And the residential units are apartments or condos? >> Apartments. >> Rentals. Okay. And I'm assuming since you're trying to allow workers, it's they're going to be a decent price point.
>> It's it's a rent a rental apartment building. And if you see even the sizing of the units are such that this is this is geared towards working people. Uh it's not >> No, I think that's great. That's accurate. That's great. >> Mr. Mr. chairman uh as as you know
>> I'm also a businessman >> and uh you you can do well by doing good and uh >> listen your contributions and reputation need no uh >> thank you but but I have to tell you there could be other opportunities that
would be greater if I went with the state I decided this is my city I have to work with you to come to a compromise so that you will support what I done I brought a great architect that I have brought for the garage to do to do a
great thing for the people of Miami Beach, but it is a business and and I will have market rates. Market rates is what the market will bear, >> right? >> Okay, >> that that concludes our presentation. >> Yeah, let's open the public.
>> At the point in time you get to the uh vote, there is one small tweak I'd like to be >> We'll get to that. Are anybody in chambers to speak on this item, >> Mr. Chair, quick question. You did you ask for um disclosures? >> I did. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I missed. >> Sorry. Go ahead. >> They they presented to the Flamingo Park
uh Neighborhood Association last week. >> Okay. Anybody else? No. Okay. Nobody in chambers on this. Okay. Anybody on Zoom? >> Um yes, on Zoom we have Johan Moore. >> Hi, Johan. Do you swear the testimony
you'll give in this proceeding is the truth. All truth, nothing but the truth. Yes, I do. Johan Moore for Meridian Court community. Uh, I have to say that the community still hears an implied
threat that if this doesn't go forward that the developer will choose to build even higher under state law. Um, we are offended by that. Uh, I also want to push back on a couple of the assertions,
namely that the neighborhood is well, what not what it once was. Um, that may or may not be true, but those of us who live in the neighborhood uh have some concerns about this building. And I would uh remind that uh though the
Washington Avenue bid and the Lincoln uh Road Business Association seem supportive of this project in its current form, Flamingo Park Neighborhood Association, I believe, still has a motion pending that will be considered at the next
meeting to withhold its support uh pending clarification of certain details. Now, I want to push back on uh a couple of things, but begin by saying that the obvious objection from the neighborhood is the excess height. Um I
will also parenthetically say that as MCC has argued in the past that such a higher building at the north end of the neighborhood is less intrusive, less disruptive in terms of the shadows it casts than one on the east, south, or
west side of the neighborhood. That is about the only positive comment that I will make in acknowledgement of this project. Uh the push back revolves around the apparent rents uh for a studio apartment. $2,300
a month is the amount that has been reported in the press uh as a market rate for a studio. uh contrasted to a onebedroom for slightly under 2,000 a month in the contributing building in
which I happen to live. Workingass families will not be able to either cram into a studio or pay $2,300 a month. Now, we understand that that may still be cheaper than luxury housing, but we also fear that without any kind of price
controls, rental controls, which we are prohibited from doing, that those rents will in fact rise over time. Studio apartments with a view of the ocean inevitably will rise in value from the point of view of the developer. That
being said, we do not want to oppose this project as a whole, but we do think that it is a bit premature and I had in fact anticipated that this would be continued today given that neither the
commission uh has approved commissioner Suadis uh proposal for higherrise development on Washington Avenue and exactly how high is precisely the point. mention. Uh I will leave it at that. Uh
thank you very much. I hope you continue the item and do not uh express support as a as a as a board for this today. Thank >> anybody else? >> That's it. And nobody in chambers. All right, we'll close the public hearing
questions. >> Um I think this is incredible. As a planning board, we've been trying to get I I'd say more affordable housing. Not within the affordable category, but I'd say attainably priced rentals that
people can actually live in so that they don't have to go off the beach. I think this is an incredible first step. I wish there was more of it. Um, and I applaud you all. Just a great team. Someone spending money on top-notch design talent, programming in a prime location,
what's called the urban core. This should really be, in my opinion, the model for future development that can hopefully help us solve the issues that the city as a whole is going through. So, >> and what what are the proposed modifications? >> Excuse me. >> Didn't you say you had a proposed
modification >> to the to the zoning? >> Oh, to the condition. I'm sorry. Yes. Thank you for bringing that. >> Before I speak, let's hear it doesn't matter. >> Okay. Yeah. I I think you'll be okay with this. This is condition three
uh I uh G which is the um transportation and traffic condition and we agree with the condition except with respect to and if you I'll I'll direct you to the second page of the of that item. It says, "The department's director has
confirmed that signalization plans must be reviewed and approved by the transportation and mobility department and submitted to Miami Day County for review before a pass can be issued for the building permit." We're fine with that. The next sentence though uh needs
to be modified some. It says, "Note, these signalization plans should demonstrate that the proposed optimization maintains acceptable levels of service and does not degrade corerwide operations. That's a bit of a of a black hole. We
don't know what that what what that that what will be deemed at that time acceptable. So what we would prefer is to take out the clause maintains acceptable levels of services and does not degrade corridor wide operations
remove that and put instead mitigates impacts on service related to the project. So in other words we're going to have to show in our traffic that anything anything we do will mitigate we will do whatever signalization or changes are necessary to mitigate our
impacts. But I think more broadly, we don't control uh Washington Avenue's levels of service and what else is going on there. And that was it's a standard that I think could be uh potentially even unattainable.
>> So what you think this is too nebulous that I'm trying to >> Yes. >> And it should just say that we will mitigate the impacts on service related to our project. >> Staff have comments on that. I'm I'm taking a look at that. I think the
important part of the condition is really before the sentence that starts with note. >> Agreed. >> I think that that was just transportation explaining to a certain extent, but I think the important part of the trans the the condition is prior to that. So, I'm I'm
okay with a clarification on the note. >> Yeah. And it's interesting because when Mr. Morris spoke, he said, "We'd like more details." I don't know what the concern is or what I wish he had articulated what details they're still missing, but um I don't know if you're aware of what what
I I you know, it's hard to it's hard to respond frankly to his comments. Uh this is uh I I almost have to characterize this as uh no good deed shall go unpunished, right? >> Ambassador Seahas has come in with uh overall both the zoning change and the
project. He's asking for only a 50- foot height increase. He's asking for a minimal 0.5 >> F increase >> in order to make a feasible project as a market rate project. >> Yeah. >> You know, uh I I you know, this is and this is what the city's comprehensive
plan wants and calls for. So I'm I'm not quite sure how to answer the questions. >> Um and and just real quick and Deb, so just so I understand, so one of two either the the comm the the ordinance for the commission has to pass or they're private. So this is kind of the carp for the
horse, >> correct? >> But if we approve it, it still has to be subject to one of those applications being or one of those uh ordinances being approved. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> And that's this is Mr. Chair. So we can continue moving this process. >> Not to delay it. Okay. Got it. All right. Um
>> uh you have the trash collection. So, I know it says that all loading activity operation shall be on site, but I don't I want to make sure that the waste collections included in that. I know in the plan and the drawing there's a garbage truck on site, but I want to
make sure that that space is big enough for them to do what they need to do. And I don't I want to make sure there's not, you know, the bins aren't rolled out to cuz I the trash trucks are definitely going to want to just pull up on Washington A and so >> Well, but all the service is going to be
from the alley. Fortunately, we have the service alley, >> right? And I guess I'm just making sure. So I would I would just add in waste collection shall only occur between 10 and 4 daily and shall occur on on site. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> That's in the operation. Okay. it is. Um, okay. >> So, but I just, you know, operations change over time. So, maybe let's just add that in. Um, and then in terms of the uh
the So, am I correct that the traffic from that loading area spits out onto Washington? >> No, >> it it spits out on >> it's onto 16th Street. >> Okay. Um, I just I just want to make sure there's adequate protections for pedestrians.
>> Yeah, there is no uh vehicular movement onto Washington Avenue. >> Okay, I was looking >> just lined uh there will be re retail on the ground floor and I guess a lobby for the building. >> I'm curious, is there going to be uh
security provided? I assume you're going to have uh a manager, but uh what type of process will you have with the lobby and access to the elevators and to floors? >> Absolutely. We'll have security and uh in the lobby.
>> I see. I saw that in the operation plan it said like regular rounds and stuff. I guess one of the concerns obviously is the steps outside are going to be great to sit on and hang out at. I would just stress the importance of security out there doing around at night, you know, >> you know, and and actually I'm glad you
mentioned that. This is actually another one of the great reasons for doing this project. Right now at night, >> it's a closed corner, a dark corner, >> sketching. Now you will have eyes on the street. You'll have 24-hour uh personnel there. Uh and so that
actually should promote safety in that area. >> All the retailers should thank them. Also, all the retailers on Lincoln Road will now have hopefully somewhat of a little bit more of a critical mass to support those businesses as well. >> Was this the property that you thought about doing a grocery high-end grocery
store? Is it different? >> No. No. This was we that was being looked at in the 420 building uh and not not this particular property. >> Got it. >> This is a question for my wife. Did you say Zara is going to be there? Well, I
you know, if you venture north of Sixth Street, uh you'll see that u Zara has been there for many years. >> Yeah. >> But they have undergone I don't know if it's completed already. >> They're remodeling. They're making a major expansion. >> Fantastic. >> So that this is going to be not just a
Zara store, but a Zara flagship store right on the corner. >> Be pleased. Thank you. >> Lincoln, Washington. Let her know. Let me I'm going to jump in because I just want to address some of the things that were brought up at the neighborhood association and some pertain to the cup, but others are
they may. Um, one thing we talked about um at the presentation um it was mentioned that any parking any people that have cars that are going to live there would be able to park in the adjacent garage. So what we've done previously for for certain applications
is is restrict the ability of any resident there to apply for a parking decal from the city. Other words, what what we don't want to see is people living in that building if they have parking available on site parking in the neighborhood and competing with other
residents in the neighborhood. Um that was something that I think that um you guys agreed to do. Right. We're so we're not in a zone where the residents would be able to apply for
>> that. That could be changed by the, you know, moving forward. Um the city, they can expand the zone. So I guess we'd like I'd like to see something in the cup that says any resident of the building cannot apply for a city parking decal in in
the adjacent zone. >> Adjacent zone. >> How many how many I mean point will take I guess. How many spaces do you plan on and is it going to be like $200 of space per, you know, a month? >> Um, I can speak. The parking has 400.
>> Sorry, just if you don't mind. The parking has appro, the parking garage has approximately 492 parking spaces. We have 210 residential units. In the plans, we're allocating specifically, I believe it's 184 plans for the residences. But in if you look
at our zoning data sheet, there's also a reservation for parking spaces for the New World Symphony of 175. That exists on paper, but in reality, those parking spaces are not utilized. So, our our 210 units are going to be able to park in the garage. In terms of operations, if
it's going to be included in your rent or an extra charge, I'm not sure the team really knows that yet. It would have to depend on what the numbers look like at that time. But we do have the capacity to park every single unit within the garage.
>> Then there shouldn't be a a um an objection to to um that condition of the cup. Uh you know, Mr. Needleman. I think if it I it's something maybe we would be willing to revisit if and if at
such time this area is included in the zone, but I think it's premature now to be precluding us. Uh >> I I don't know. I I this is something we've done previously in some applications. >> What if we're So I get it. So what
they're saying though is that right now there's no residential parking permits to be had in that area because there's there's not enough space. I mean it's not one of >> we're not in the zone that qualifies for permits, >> right? So I think maybe something we could add in you know if they become in
the zone or there becomes that issue arises in the future the there will be a some sort of impact study or or study about how many resident the survey of how many resident and kind of make a determination in the future. Right now,
there's nothing to We're doing it based on what possibly could happen in the future. I agree that we should include some sort of consideration because if there is a zone opened up and 200 residents realize it's way cheaper to do
it there than in >> I I would then I would make a motion. If if that zone or that location becomes available, you would need to come back to the planning board. That's fine. >> Okay. which is right >> in zone. Yeah. >> Mhm. >> Well, that is
>> Yeah, I would say a Well, I think that's the only >> that's the residential the residential zone. So, it would be zone two or its successor as it's designated. >> Yeah. If you come back here and then we can discuss it again, I'd be okay with that. >> That's certainly fair. I >> I'm suspecting if we're based on the proposal from Commissioner Suada is if
we're converting most of Washington into something residential, there's going to be a big movement to be trying to study, you know, the parking issues for for that area. So, I think this will be part of a bigger plan. >> Mhm. Um, another thing, um, I know on the in
the LDR amendments, it does say, um, no short-term rentals. I don't see it in this order. Um, I know again, it's going to be part of the LDRs. I assume the LDRs for this application have that in.
I I don't recall, but again, on a lot of applications that come to us for for CUPS, we've included that in the order as well that there are no no short-term rentals are allowed. >> I mean, the LDRs do are crystal clear.
We can't do we can't get the zoning without >> Can I ask that? I mean, could is that something that we could add to the CUP >> that condition? >> Both are true. the the LD both LDR text amendments have a provision that in
order to avail themselves of the F and the height, no short-term rentals are permitted. Um, if the applicant agrees, I think that putting a condition in is just kind of double securing the fact.
>> I think we've done that before though. >> It's in the belt and suspenders approach. It's okay if it's in this order as well. >> Okay. Okay. >> Um and the last thing that I mentioned last time and it came up at the meeting, we've seen um you know on some of the
larger F increases um public benefits being a part of the the the um the project you know that came up at the neighborhood association. I mean there wasn't any specific things mentioned. We were just asking something for the
neighborhood. Um the the I and the reason I'm I'm bringing it up now is because we've heard that the city, you know, I guess impact fees developers have been paying have been haven't been increased in 30 years. The idea is, you know, any type
of increase in F height, whatever. Um that maybe the developers should give back something to the city, the surrounding neighborhood. um when it was brought up at the neighborhood association, I I know Cecilia said we can, you know, think about it, talk about it.
>> I don't know if you've come up with anything, but again, that's I know that's not part of the cup. It would be something at commission level at the LDRs, but I'm just bringing that up now because I guess the LDR amendments are going to come back to us and I'm going to bring it up again. >> It it is it it isn't part of the CUP.
That's correct. And I understood it's conveyed to us. I do want to express something. And this we may have this discussion again when it comes back for the planning board for final adoption. This is Ambassador Seahas is doing the minimum necessary to
what do what he believes is create a viable project. So it's a minimal height increase minimal F increase. This is not the two to two and a half times F increase and two times height increase the other projects that you're talking
about that paid public benefits. And this is what the city's comprehensive plan calls for. The win for the city is that we will develop market rate rental housing in in the areas where it's needed. So, you know,
we may have this discussion again, but I think people have to change their thinking a little bit about this that when you come in with something like this, where you're doing the minimal necessary to achieve what the city's comprehensive plan seeks, that we shouldn't be tagged with, you got to pay
for it. And so, well, it's not I guess the benefit the way I envision it something commensurate with with the scale of the project. I'm not talking about what some of these other larger FD increases um what they propose, but it could be something like, you know, we
talked about transportation traffic. I know there's, you know, you're going to I guess study and maybe re reignal or whatever the term is for the for the intersections there. Perhaps there's something more that can be done for traffic, things like that. Um I just
think it's something to to consider. Um >> I'm I'm sure we'll have more discussion. Yeah, it'll it'll come up again, but I just wanted to bring I know again it's not part of the CP of taking off my hat as representing Ambassador Seas and putting on my hat as a lifetime citizen
and former mayor. We have to, you know, when people come in and ask uh for modest things which are needed to make projects happen that are good projects. You know, we have to be careful about not always trying to ask for something to make it that much more difficult to
achieve that project. you know and if it is within the vision of the city and this is within the vision the vision is we need to have more market rate >> well I mean there I mean we can go back and forth but there are other visions in the city that we need to alleviate traffic congestion and pay for our
infrastructure and a lot of things like that so again it's I mean we don't want to keep going back and forth here but I I think it may come up again we'll see >> anybody else I'd like to comment well for some of the concern concerns were
addressed. Um I'm I think this is a fantastic first project for us to been going the right direction here on Washington and I do hear the concerns of some of my co-workers and some of the residents that called um but we're not going to get a perfect solution either way. I mean there's going to be stuff to
be addressed through it but this is as good as it gets. And um if we don't move forward with something like that, what's the alternative? And so it's a do nothing at this point because we do need projects that are viable and um and not putting not having a first sort of
project that's showing an investment into this neighborhood is not helping us move forward. So um again not trying to be insensitive to some of the comments. I do understand some of the concerns and we need to be making sure we're keeping a close watch on on on representing the residents and the city's interests, but
um I think this is a fantastic first move into um revitalizing that area. So congratulations. >> Agree. >> Yeah. And I just want to make a positive comment too that you know in an area that I live in where uh height is very
sensitive. Uh I think it is reasonable at 150 I think that the fact that you're moving this area toward multif family apartments is brilliant. Uh and is much needed you know. So I I find no big
fault. I think it's a great project. Thank you. >> With that, why don't you move it? >> Yeah, I'll move it. Thank you. with with the the proposed modification condition also with requiring uh waste
uh whatever disposal on site >> and what was the other >> the other was in the event that it is included in the flamingo park parking district number two that that will be reviewed at that time for with respect to inclusion in that district. Mhm.
>> Um, was that for the parking district condition? Was that to bring back to the planning board to review? >> That's Yeah, >> that was >> And also, we talked about uh in the CP no short-term rentals, even though that's in the LDRs, but
I'll be in the order as well. >> Okay. With those amendments, can I get a second? >> Second. >> Okay, all in favor? I. >> Anyone opposed? All right. Thanks for your presentation. >> Thank you very much, everyone. >> Thank you, ambassador. Always great to see you. >> All right. Next is a new application
planning board file 24066020 Drexel. And before we start, any disclosures on this one? Keith Scott, any disclosures on this one? No. >> Okay. Melissa? >> Nope. >> Okay. Dev, >> an application has been filed requesting
a conditional use permit for a neighborhood impact establishment, >> including an alcoholic beverage establishment or a restaurant located on the top floor of a building. Um whether fully enclosed, partially open, or open to the sky, including all open air
portions above the roof on a property which is located within 200 ft of a property containing a residential unit. Um the applicant is proposing to construct um as part of a yettobe constructed building a restaurant um
within the addition to the uh community church property at the southwest corner of Lincoln Road and Drexel Avenue. Um the new restaurant is part of a unified development site that does contain the the community church. Um the applicant
has submitted this application pursuant to section 1.2.2 2.4 um which is the neighborhood impact. Um as they are an alcoholic beverage establishment or restaurant that is also operating as an entertainment establishment or dance hall with an
occupant contact of of 200 or more persons. Um and the conditional use for the open air portion within 200 ft of a property containing a residential unit. Um the restaurant includes a total of
460 seats. 254 of those seats are indoor and 206 are located at the roof level. Uh the total occupant uh content is 727 persons. Um the patron occupant contact
is 683 persons. Um, the applicant is proposing the following hours of operation, Monday through Friday, 400 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. and Saturday and Sunday, 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. Um, indoor entertainment is proposed. Um,
that is located at the ground level indoor entertainment. Um, however, there is no outdoor entertainment proposed. Only ambient background level music is is proposed at the roof level. Um given the fact that all of the
entertainment level sound will be contained within the existing building um staff did not uh require a sound study. I know the applicant has provided um some information with regard to that. Um, also given the intervening community
church property that is located between the restaurant and the multif family residential district to the south, um, we do not expect any adverse impacts um, with regard to sound. We have however included um, a couple conditions in the
draft CUP um, just to further emphasize that the sound shall not be plainly audible from anywhere on the exterior of the property. Um, we will we also have a condition that prior to the issuance of a CU um we will require an on-site
testing with their sound consultant to confirm uh the appropriate music levels. Um there is no parking uh provided on site. Um all the valet operations will be through the city's exclusive Lincoln Road valet operator um with a ramp
located on Drexal Avenue. Um the applicant is proposing as part of the um construction plans a double door vestibule which should contain um noise. They have provided a security and crowd control um plan. Um deliveries will take
place between 9:00 a.m. and 400 p.m. They are proposing to utilize the city's uh designated commercial and freight loading zones. Um staff has no objection to this application. Again, we did include some uh conditions uh just to ensure that
there is no sound spillage outside of the restaurant toward the residential um properties. Now, I did speak with the applicant recently regarding one condition that we have as part of our our sound regulations. Um, and I'm going
to let the applicant speak to that, but uh, one of the conditions contained in the draft order prohibits the use of subwoofers on the roof. That's a relatively standard condition. Um, you know, to be honest, it may be a somewhat antiquated condition because the
technology of of speakers and sound has evolved. There are much smaller type uh amplifiers these days. And we have received information from the applicant sound consultant that would like to slightly modify that condition to allow
very small subwoofer type speakers at the roof level placed at a low level which apparently have a better um efficiency of keeping sound within the space and not not having it spill. So I
will let them uh get into that. But with that we are recommending approval. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> Okay, >> great. Um, thank you, Debbie. Uh, good morning, Mr. Chairman, Vort Staff, Michael Lark, and Tun South Boulevard. Here represent the applicant. With me today is Mikey Tanha from Noble 33, Todd
Tragash from S. Oh, PJ, can you pull up the presentation? Thank you. Um, Todd Dragash from STA architectural group, Adrienne Dowski from Kimley Horn, and Andy Swllo from Criterion Acoustics. Uh, next slide.
So, the property is located at the southwest corner of Lincoln Road and Drexel Avenue. As you all know, this is the first clear evidence that the James Corner plan is actually real and taking place because they're constructing the improvements right now in this particular area of Drexel Island. It's
kind of exciting to watch it finally come to fruition after a decade. Next slide. Property is currently a vacant site surrounded by a construction fence with mesh. Next slide. This is what it will look like. It's a twostory uh restaurant space with
rooftop dining. The Tuesday firm actually did the exteriors here. They did a beautiful job. This was approved uh a long time ago. And now I'm excited to also see this come to fruition. Next slide. This uh property is a part of a larger
property, unified development site, all owned by the Miami Beach Community Church. As you see on the right hand side, the sanctuary was restored about five years ago and is spectacular now through Debbie's guidance. Next slide. Tosh Burman is a well-known restaurant
real estate developer, prominent figure in this luxury hospitality industry. He founded Noble 33 and we are very grateful that he is our client and we're working with him to bring this particular high concept restaurant to you all on Lincoln Road. Next slide.
Noble 33 is has restaurants throughout the United States. If you look at the third bullet with uh they're partnering with global icons including Patrick Mahomez and Travis Kelce on the upcoming 1587 prime. Next slide. >> Travis Kelsey. That's funny.
>> I just had to include that. >> Might as well throw in Taylor Swift. >> Celeb celeb power. Um Castle Madiraa. They operate that in West Hollywood. West Holly is one of the toughest jurisdictions operating in the whole United States. Yet, they operate there immediately adjacent to residential uses
and have done so successfully without any complaint since its opening. Next slide. There you have Medusa, Mediterranean, and New York City as a meat packing district. It was just y named Yelp's number one best new restaurant for 2024. Next slide.
And you can get their lamb chops or the Garden of Eden and Spritz. I've had a long week, so that Spritz is looking particularly good right now. Mhm. >> Next slide. This is the main dining room in that same location. Next slide. This is just
across the bay, Sparrow Italia in Winwood. Next slide. This is the one in Mayfair, London. Next slide. So, I just wanted to press upon you because there's been a lot of talk always critical of Lincoln Road, how
it's dying, how it's not there anymore. But I thankfully based upon what I do I operate from a different perspective and I see link road being resurgent right now. This is the western end. Note that infinity group just bought Michael Schro's assemblage. So that's moving forward quickly. Citizen M hotel has
come to Lincoln Road. Anatomy is injecting muchneeded life into this block of Lincoln Road. Then you all approved the superhuman museum just last month. Alan Ducas, one of the most famous chefs in the restaurant is going to occupy the Banana Republic building. The nice guy is Hwood Group. They have
delay and bickl city center. Next slide. Then you have Oro Miami and Mila Miami always just knocks it out of the park. You have Ostero de Forata. And then the city commission just approved paddle ball courts on the rooftop of the Lincoln Road garage. Next slide.
You have Andre's Carne Dez, my favorite Colombian restaurant. You have our restaurant which will be located at Caddyy Corner. Jamage is right now a gym but we represent them as well. And I know that there's a restaurant coming on the rooftop there. Um, and then of course you all Paul Sehouse is a wonderful guy and he has this vision
that just came to fruition today with the apartments that you all just approved a few minutes ago. Next slide. So we're seeking a conditional use permit for a neighborhood impact establishment with entertainment established component. The rooftop, as Debbie mentioned, will not have any
entertainment. Entertainment will be uh within the interior space and know that they are not some type of club restaurant. They value service, the ambiance and the food. They don't value the beating music. While there is room for that, it's just a part of what they
are. It's not that does not define who they are. Next slide. And of course, staff is recommending approval. We we agree with 99% of the staff recommendation. As Debbie mentioned, there's that one slight modification to the prohibition on subwoofers and the rooftop dining area.
My partner Paul pass out to you all our proposed language. I'm happy to go through it toward the end of the presentation. Next slide. Of course, this is the most intense zoning district. It's the CD3 zoning district. We're located within the Flingo Park Local Historic District. That gives the Historic Preservation Board jurisdiction
over this property. We're going to appear before them next Tuesday. Next slide. This is the ground floor. You see that we're going to be entering from Drexel Avenue. There's a double door vestable to capture any noise so it doesn't spill outside. Moving north from there,
there's a spiral staircase going to the second floor. And you have seating all along the Lincoln Road facade to promote that type of pedestrian interaction with the interior space. And then fully 50% of this ground floor is back house. Next slide.
Second story mostly dining area. The private dining rooms to the west and again about 50% is back house. Next slide. Here you have our rooftop dining area. many many many uh chairs up there. You'll see the area that's bracketed in
red is our back of house area that's really solid. This was done with intention so no sound from any of the crowd noise would be transmitted to the south. This is a very solid services all through that area. Next slide. This is the back of house solid
structures. Um, that's what we're trying to tell you all that there's really very little opportunity for any noise to escape the rooftop dining area and be transmitted south. Next slide. And as you can tell, we are a great distance away from the nearest
residential use over 100 ft. This is like putting a 10-story building, laying it on its side. And as Debbie mentioned, there is also the church fellowship hall that's right there. Um, so as in addition to the solid services that are already on our rooftop dining area. Next
slide. This is Casmader. As I described earlier, note the adjacency of the residential uses. Case Madera is bordered in red. There's a a residential use immediately adjacent. And then a little bit to the right. Uh, they've
never had a single complaint because Noble 33 prides itself on getting along with all of its neighbors. Next slide. >> Does Sorry. >> Go ahead. Does that restaurant have outdoor dining? >> Rooftop dining. >> Which one? Kasmadera. >> Kasmada. >> They had one in Windwood, I think.
Didn't they? >> They have Sparrow in Windwood, >> right? But upstairs, I think they custom, but I don't think I think they >> Windwood's got a lesser residue population. I point out West Hollywood because I know how tough they are out there and it's immediately adjacent. >> What's the restaurant group called? >> Novel 33.
>> Okay. >> And now I'm going to turn over to Andy Swerllo. Debbie is correct. They did not require a a noise study, but we always try to go above and beyond the basic requirements to give you all the greatest comfort. And I'm going to have a is Andy somewhere hanging out there in
the Zoom universe. >> Yes. >> Promote him to be a panelist. >> Andy. >> Hi, Andy. Do you swear the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth, all truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you.
>> Go ahead, Andy. So, we did a an environmental model where we modeled the sound from the speakers on the roof
and we modeled the sound from patrons. Uh, I believe we did 100 people screaming and that will not be louder than the ambient noise that we
measured in the neighborhoods in the specifically the residential areas south of the property which would be most likely to be impact if there were very loud activity on a
roof. Um what we are proposing for the roof are uh the AV designer is in the process of designing small satellite speakers that will be
mounted at around 8 ft close to patrons on the roof and then a small woofer which would be mounted under the seats. Um, and as Debbie was mentioning before,
I'm not sure I would even call this a subwoofer. Either the 6 1/2 in driver can go up at 8 ft with the satellite speaker or it can go down below. Uh, in terms of sound egress, it actually works better to have it below. So that's
something that we would like to actually see more of and we can manage that with the digital sound processor to limit the amount of sound and have it be more effective on the roof and while also
obtaining less sound egress. So those uh the last slide are the preliminary sound level limits that we're imagining or that we modeled. Um you know site conditions could vary
by plus or minus 3 dB but um during commissioning that would be measured on site and then measured in the neighborhood so that there is no impact and then the limiters would be set. Next slide.
So here is the results from the environmental acoustic model with the uh music noise and the receiver locations which the red arrow is pointing to are all
10 dB below the ambient noise level more than 10 dB below. Um, and this we anticipate based on other similar properties that we're not going to have audible music at
100 ft. Next slide. This is the patron noise model results. Here we have 90 patrons talking at a normal sound level.
So they're Okay. Okay. So, this this is using the loud level according to ANC3.5. So, this is an unlikely sound level to be achieved by patrons on the roof. There
would have to be a soccer game going on and everybody cheering after a score or something. Normal conversation does not get this loud. So with everyone yelling at the same time, we are not breaching the ambient sound levels in the
surrounding area. >> But what if Travis and Taylor show up? >> What if Travis visits? >> Sorry, go ahead. >> That would be trouble. >> Well, then people should probably keep it down because they would be dining and >> Sorry, go ahead.
>> That wouldn't be so nice to be screaming at them. So, in a highly unusual event, it is possible that you could hear patron sound beyond 100 ft. I would say it is extremely unlikely. I'm being
very scientific right now. Um, in normal pace with dining patrons up there, it's going to be even quieter than the music level. So, the music is more likely to disturb the neighborhood than this in
practice. >> Okay. Thank you, Andy. Anything else? >> No, we're good. All right. We're just going to wrap it up, Mr. Chairman. Just a couple more minutes. Um, next slide. So, I'm just going to show you a series
of renderings of the rooftop. This is looking south. Next slide. Just point this out so there's no ambiguity. It looks like you're looking all the way through, but in fact, those those are mirrors, and so it's reflecting the landscaping that's to the
north of it. Uh, next slide. Again, just looking south, the opposite side of the rooftop dining area. Next slide. >> Just think about looking at these best. >> Another shot. Next slide. >> I've been to all their recipes. They're great. >> And we we approached the Lincoln Road bid. We made a presentation of them and
we are very happy to say we have their support. They're very much excited about another highquality restaurant coming to the road. Next slide. And that's it. Um, one what I'd like uh, Mr. Chairman, if Mikey Tanha from Noble 33 could just give you all a couple of
minutes. Uh, >> yeah, for what it's worth, I've been to a lot of your restaurants. They're fantastic. >> Thank you. Uh, good morning. >> Just can't get into them, but >> Thank you. Thank you. By the way, Taylor and Patrick and Travis probably will show up. We'll just ban them from the
rooftop. My name is Mike Tana, co-founder uh and CEO of Noble 33. Our group builds high-end restaurants that pair thoughtful design with great culinary and beverage programs. Our other brands include Tokadera, which is our flagship
Mexican steakhouse. Sparrow Italia, which launched in London, but we brought to Windwood, that's our Italian steakhouse. uh Kasa Madera that you saw a slide that's our mine Rivieran concept has indoor outdoor dining and 1587 prime 15 for Patrick 87 for Travis uh we
brought them in as partners on our new American steakhouse uh and Taylor did visit for the opening and the uh the tasting she's she's been pretty actively involved uh with Medusa we're bringing that same standard uh to South Beach uh it's a place where locals can come in
and dine with their families and friends but also visitors will seek out. Um, it's it was inspired by Toshimai's travel to the Mediterranean. We go to Europe all the time and we love Mediterranean food. So, it pulls from all the different countries and and regions of the Mediterranean, and it's
going to be very high-end. We're excited about it. I moved to South Beach uh two years ago, and I've been waiting for this restaurant to open. So, we want to bring that to to the community and hopefully to all of you. Thanks.
>> That's all, Mr. Chairman. We're all available for your questions. >> Yeah. Well, let's open it to public comment. >> What did I tell you? Just identify yourself and your affiliation. Go ahead, sir. >> Sure. Thank you. Uh, my name's Adam
Shedro. I live at 526th Street, one block away from the proposed restaurant. Um, I'm concerned about the rooftop sound. There have been problems with rooftop uh music and rooftop noise at
other locations. Uh when there are problems, we can hear any number of restaurants on Miami Beach. Uh I'm sorry, on Lincoln Road. Uh I'm concerned about if there can be any restrictions uh on the noise or any temporary
restrictions put on or any possibility for reviewing in case there are issues. Also, one of the issues we have with noise from Lincoln Road is when the restaurants close, um they'll sometimes turn the music louder so that uh it will be a nice environment for the people
cleaning up and so forth. So, I'd like to request that the music be turned off at closing time. And also, I'm concerned about the hours. 2:00 in the morning on weekdays seems uh extreme. Uh, and I'm
not sure that it's appropriate to give an extension for this restaurant. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anybody else in chambers? >> Anybody on Zoom? >> Yes, on Zoom we have Johan Moore. >> Yes. Good morning again. Um, I can only
echo uh the immediate neighbors concerns. Uh thank you to Adam uh as a a long involved member of the neighborhood and neighborhood association for those. But I will say uh I'll make some positive comments about this. I think the neighborhood really appreciates uh
even though uh there are concerns about the noise uh the sound study that you did. Uh it it gives us a basis uh for on which to discuss uh potential issues. Um I would ask that uh the developer and
the the restorator remain extremely uh sensitive to that but not just from the point of view of decibels but also from the point of view of the impact of any base uh that could possibly be transmitted from inside uh the interior. Unlike the
previous project, uh this project is contextually appropriate in terms of its height. And uh while that may not have been possible, I don't know. Uh we certainly appreciate that that there that the proposal does not include 20 stories of some sort of residential uh
above it. Um unlike uh some other projects um sound mitigation really is I think key in this case and we would ask that you remain very cognizant of that and that this board uh if appropriate impose conditions. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Anybody else on Zoom? Okay. Uh close the public hearing. I'm just going to tell you I, as I mentioned before, I've been to a lot of their establishments, especially Sparrow, and they're really, really wellrun, and their entertainment is fantastic, and they're uh very aware of neighborhood
noise because every time I go, there's a door in that makes me go back inside until my car is there. So, just want to commend you. Really, it's I think you've been a great addition to Windwood and I welcome it to Miami Beach. With that, questions, Keith, Scott, John? >> No. >> Anybody have any questions or someone
want to move? Okay, Jonathan. Um, so doesn't won't the the cup expire if it's not if you guys don't open like with I mean it's not the construction has it started. >> Well, the way it would work, we have a
year and a half to obtain a full building permit and we can extend that by a year. >> Okay. >> But what you're thinking about is once it's in operation, if it stops for a period of time that exceeds 6 months, then you're out of luck. >> Okay. All right. I wasn't sure if it was
from the issuance. Okay. So, um is is there anything I mean is there a way we I think I mean the the resident's concerns are you know well well founded I guess. Uh, is it can we do a sound
study pro once it's built and we have the property there and and the the engineers can actually go up there and do a sound study because I think that's the better way of protecting the residents to make sure it's really not audible to the residents. Is that part of
>> I think Debbie drafted it like that. >> Yeah, I think that is part of it. >> Yeah, correct. Um and then um given that there's no entertainment on the roof, are there going to is it are they allowed to have special events with entertainment
with special with a permit? >> Usually you could have a special event with entertainment. >> Okay. Is there a limit? Is there a number per year maybe staff know that they're allowed? because I I maybe limit that because I mean
>> the code is confusing when it comes to the number of special events as you have a certain number of special events as a private property owner and then you can piggyback on the city special events that could be closer to 20 but I don't think we need 20 at all. >> Well, that's what I'm saying. Let's come
up with it because then that can just be 20 nights, you know, in a row. I mean, I know you won't do that, but but to limit the number of special events with entertainment. I don't mind special events, but with like extra people or whatever, but it's the entertainment.
>> I think 12 would be the maximum we could ever possibly do. >> Okay. >> So, >> um >> we can agree to that limitation. >> That's a good question. is is special events can they with entertainment on the rooftop?
>> They could >> till 2 in the morning >> with music like a band >> in theory. I don't think that would happen. >> I mean, it just blows everything you just presented in your sound. >> Well, with a special event, you can have
entertainment, but you can't violate the noise regulations. So, it's like a >> Yeah. I mean, you're almost guaranteed if you have live music. >> Yeah. Well, what I'm saying is like, yes, it seems like it's being permissive, but at 11 p.m. the noise regulation kicks in that says noise
cannot be plainly audible within 100 ft of your property. >> Correct. >> And 100 ft is basically two apartment buildings south from us. >> Well, don't special event permit. They still have to be approved by the city, right? >> Correct. >> And they can be conditioned >> and the neighborhood. >> Yes.
>> Okay. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Well, I mean that was part that the neighbor neighbors didn't, you know, have any part in this process and they're sort of just stamped. It was like a rubber stamp approval >> that that was but I think it's you know
12 event they're limiting it to 12 and I think that's fair. Um and then you're I assume you're good with the music off at closing. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um >> no music after they close. >> Yeah. And I guess this this came up I
thought with uh the Andreas restaurant where the music was plainly audible outside the doors in the vestibule and that was part of like one of their first say package of violations >> which they've all cured so it's good for
them. Um, but I just want to make and I know you're going to have the double vestibule, but is that part of this that you can't hear, you shouldn't be able to hear any music outside of the Debbie, I don't want to steal her thunder. She came up with a very good condition that
we agreed to. Go ahead, Debbie. >> Right. That that no sound from anywhere on the exterior of the property could be plainly audible. and and we have a condition not only that that's a requirement of the CUP, but that we um prior to issuing the CU that we actually go out and test their sound system to
confirm that. >> Okay. Um plus I think I think with um with that other restaurant, they misinterpreted their cup, remember? They didn't understand it. >> Yeah. Yeah. But um >> in spite of my best efforts, yes, they did. >> I'm not blaming them. I'm just saying
I'm just I remembered it. But I see it here in the last sentence. That's why. All right. Thank you. >> All right. Anybody else? So want to move it. >> So moved with those uh limitations and new conditions. >> Second. >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor?
>> I oppose. >> And then oh wait, wait, wait. >> With our subwoofer modification. Oh, well let's Well, let's Is city is the city okay with like what is staff? >> Yeah, I just wanted to clarify. I'm okay with their sound um condition
considering the other conditions we have I believe are safeguarding um any sound uh spillage. But the I wanted a clarification. Did the special the limitation on special events with entertainment get into your motion? >> Yeah. Okay.
>> Okay. So, that was a limit of 12 per calendar year. special events with entertainment. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Okay. And I have no objection to the the additional modification to this. >> Can we add uh the new idea of having that that you shall that the restaurant
the operators will provide a point of contact and a phone number to nearby residents. >> Figured that wouldn't be a problem for you guys, but give Mike's number. >> All right. So with that all in favor I opposed. Okay. Good luck.
>> Thank you all very much. Appreciate your time. >> Thanks for the presentation. >> Okay. We are on to code amendments. Planning board file 25798 sideyard open space requirements in single family districts.
>> Okay. Thank you. This is an ordinance of the mayor and city commission 7. Sorry. Go ahead. Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, amending the code of the city of Miami Beach, subp part B, entitled Miami Beach Resiliency Code by amending chapter 7 entitled zoning districts and
regulations, article 2 entitled district regulations, section 7.2.2 2 entitled RS1, RS2, RS3, RS4 single family residential districts by modifying the twostory house standard specific to open space requirements for side elevations
of single family homes. Um, so this is a somewhat of a a clarification ordinance. Um, the current regulations for single family homes require that any twostory elevation along the side of the property
that exceeds 60 ft in length be broken up basically by providing additional kind of setbacks or notches um to a certain percentage. That's to protect the neighbors, the light and air, not having a a runon sentence solid
wall that that creates that uh adverse impact on the neighbors. Um, we've clarified a lot of the language in the in the ordinance. Substantively, we are recommending that we modify the language
to allow uh multiple portions of that elevation to count toward that additional open space. Currently, they have to provide one area that's at least 8 ft in depth um along that elevation that that meets the additional open
space. We're recommending it be modified so that along that elevation in multiple areas they can provide um those open space as long as the aggregate equals the minimum. Um so it's a relatively simple ordinance. We do believe this
will um streamline kind of the review process as well because we've clarified some of the language um in terms of how it's measured, what can be in this open space. For example, it was not clear previously if water features were eligible to be in this open space or if
mechanical equipment could be in some of these locations. So, we've clarified that and are recommending the planning board transmit this with a favorable recommendation. >> Okay. Anybody in chambers to speak on this? No. Anyone on Zoom?
>> No one on Zoom. >> Not surprising. Okay. >> Quick question. >> Sure. So just just to clarify, this was already in the code, but this is just I guess what reiterating or >> it's clarifying and um basically
revising it to be a little bit more flexible for architects to provide this open space in multiple locations along the side. But yes, the the current regulation is already um within our regulations for single and this is applicable to single family only. This
is making it less ownorous because now there's some flexibility to the design team. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> All right. Motion. >> Yep. >> Move a favor. >> Second. >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I. Anyone oppose? Okay.
>> Favorable recommendation. Next is planning board file 25799 bicycle ride share station incentives. Uh this is an ordinance of the mayor and city commission of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending the city of Miami Beach code subp part B entitled Miami Beach Resiliency Code by amending
chapter 1 entitled general provisions article 2 entitled definitions section 1.2.1 2.1 entitled general definitions by creating a definition for a bicycle rides share station by amending chapter 5 entitled off- streetet parking article
2 entitled vehicle parking bicycle parking and off- streetet loading requirements section 5.2.14 2.14 entitled alternate parking incentives by modifying the alternate parking incentives to include a provision for a bicycle ride share station by amending
chapter 7 entitled zoning districts and regulations article one entitled general to all zoning districts section 7.1.11 entitled residential use incentives uh to include a provision for requiring bicycle ride share stations uh by
amending article 5 entitled supplementary district regulations. Section 7.5.3 entitled supplementary yard regulations by amending the allowable setback encroachments to include bicycle rid share stations. So
basically this ordinance does a few things. Number one, we uh create a definition of what a bicycle ride share station is. Um, and that would be uh a designated location featuring docks, racks, or similar devices where bicycles
are secured when not in use and which is part of a network of stations allowing users to pick up and return bicycles from one station to another for short-term use. So, what this um changes in terms of the off- streetet parking requirements is that we currently have
alternate parking strategies. that can be used to reduce your vehicular parking requirement. Things like bike racks and scooters. This would actually allow someone on private property to introduce one of these ride share stations within their private property that would also
be able to reduce their vehicular parking requirement. This also um >> but then who actually effectuates that? >> So the because it has to be part of a network. I think that's where it gets a little bit tricky for a private property
owner. Um, but they could um, you know, work with the existing uh, network uh, City Bike or I'm not sure if there's other companies out there. >> I was going to say does do we have an exclusive vendor relationship on that the beach >> for the public portions of the
properties? We do. Um, this would be applicable, this provision to reduce your vehicular parking requirement would be for to put this on your private property, >> right? But but would it have to be with the whatever vendor we currently work? >> No, it wouldn't. It could be with there's some other service that um that
that exists that you know particular building set up uh for its residents, for example, the building could participate in that service. Doesn't have to be the city's provider. >> Okay. I just didn't know if that would be chaotic. But
>> yeah, you have too many different >> I mean, imagine there could be um a residential building that contracts with a specific company to do bicycle sharing for its residents where you know they have to be returned to the one location. I think this is >> Yeah, I was just going to say because if they're different vendors then they
couldn't be returned to different locations, right? they'd have to be stuck with their only >> well even if they even if even if a private property owner uses the same company that the city has a relationship with um they would need to work that out
with the city's vendor to to allow um you know bikes from the private property to be >> returned to um the >> right but I'm just saying if it's the same company and the same bikes that probably won't be an issue. I just find it, you know, odd that if they have their own private vendor, then they'd
have one station and that would be it. Right. >> Right. >> Yeah. >> The the motivation behind this amendment is to just have more of these stations. Is is that the reason why we're introducing the private properties as part of the uh >> I think the idea is that to the extent
properties offer micro mobility, the understanding is that it gives their residents or you know or patrons a chance to reduce their need for spots. Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. The intent is clear and it's a good >> get cars off the street because we're offering some other type of options.
>> How how what is the utilization of city bike been very good? >> Yeah. Yes. Yeah. I mean, I know Jake takes it almost every day and there are there are times where there aren't bikes available, >> right? Okay. >> So, I think, you know, this would not only expand potentially the amount of of
bikes available. It also gets them off of the rightway, which I think could be helpful um for our, you know, we have some areas that are very congested um in terms of sidewalk width and things like that. So, >> all right. And you all don't see it would be voluntary for obviously for
property. >> Yeah. But you don't see any logistical issues with with having different private rides share companies. >> But but sorry to your point this isn't open to the this is just for the project. This is just private use. This has nothing to do with the city >> right
>> kind of ride sharing options. Correct. >> It would this would just be kind of the insular network of whatever this project is trying to do. So I don't think you you deal with the confusion that that you're talking about. >> Well, no. What I'm saying is they would
if they took advantage of the incentive, they would have a ride share within their property, >> right? >> So they would No, not about competition. I'm saying logistics >> like you you wouldn't be able to take that bike and go somewhere and drop it off at another location because they only have one location. >> Right. I think what is that you know you
want to go to >> I think but I do think the intent was that you could right on private property have I mean realistically uh it's probably going to be an existing vendor we can't mandate that I get it
>> but someone could for example contract with city bike to to operate this correct and it would be on private property but it would be used in the same manner >> because it would be part of their network >> correct >> I got it okay you can't mandate it but I'm assuming assuming that would any property owner would want to use an
existing vendor that's been here and done that, right? Okay. All right. >> Motion to approve. >> Well, anyone here? Did I ask anyone? You're not here for this, are you? Is there anyone on Zoom? >> I see no one on Zoom. I >> I just want to understand this is only
applicable for new projects, right? I mean, you this has nothing to do with an existing condo or commercial property to reduce their requirements. >> Correct. And I don't think it's mandated if they want the incentive >> and if they want it. It's so like this gentleman building he could
>> if this passed and he had a that new building and he put that he it would reduce his requirement for parking. >> Correct. >> Mhm. >> Okay. >> We we've done this in in different states. >> Makes sense. Yeah. New York. >> They've actually provided additional height for it. >> Uhhuh. >> Uh but this isn't this isn't an easy one
here. All right. You moved it. Can I get a second? >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor? I >> anyone opposed? Okay. Passes unanimously. And the last code amendment planning board file 25805 temporary conditional use regulations in
commercial districts. >> Okay. This is an ordinance amending um code of the city of Miami Beach subp part B entitled Miami Beach Resiliency Code by amending chapter 2 entitled administration and review procedures. Article 5 entitled reasonzonings and
development approvals section 2.5.2 entitled conditional use by creating an exceptions provision for conditional use regulations in designated commercial districts. Um this uh particular uh item
was um requested by commissioner Fernandez. It was discussed at the land use committee um and referred to the um planning board. the land use committee did recommend uh favorably. So, what this would do is create a a window um
whereby certain certain uh businesses that would qualify for a neighborhood impact establishment could be approved administratively. So, they would not require a conditional use permit to be reviewed by this this
planning board. The areas are limited to Washington Avenue between Fifth Street and Lincoln Road, Lincoln Road between Collins Avenue and Alton Road, Collins Avenue between 65th and 75th Streets, 71st Street or Normandy Drive between
Collins Avenue and Run Notream. It would be for a limited time. So, any potential business would be required to either obtain a building permit or a a a certificate of use no later than December 31st, 2026, so about a year
from now. Um, it's important to note that entertainment would not be permitted as part of this this administrative review process. Um so entertainment would not be part of any type of administrative uh cup process.
Um the intent behind it was really to try and cut some of the process for businesses in very specific commercial quarters, commercial quarters where we're seeing a lot of vacancies. Um and really trying to encourage reactivation
um of of these storefronts. Um staff is supportive of this and is recommending that the planning board transmit with a favorable recommendation. >> Okay, thank you. Are you here for this? Okay, anyone on Zoom?
>> Yes, we have KHR. >> Hello, this is Kent Robbins. How you doing today? >> Can you hear me? >> Yep. How you doing, Kent? >> Hi. Um, as you all know, I'm a land use attorney and I have had a lot of activity in Miami Beach. Um, the concern
I have, and I just want to make certain it's crystal clear in the actual ordinance, that the granting of a temporary conditional use permit does not provide any vested rights to the
recipients of those permits. The reason why I'm concerned about that is in the past and it's been litigated by the city. The city has been ends up becoming stuck with certain permits
that have been approved where those activities are no longer compatible with the builtout environment, but the courts have determined that those permits are vested. So given that this is going to be a uh
intended to be only temporary, it I think that the language in the actual ordinance has to be actually state that there putting the recipients on notice that there are no vested
rights created by this permit other than for and any any rights that are created are clearly uh sunset and without specifically addressing the vested rights, there may
be a waiver by the city as to um the enforcability of the sunset provisions with respect to what might be perceived as vested rights. So, I'm just asking that there be one sentence included in the eventual legislation
that makes that specifies that there are no vested rights created by this conditional use permit. And if there is any determination that there is any rights, those rights are sunsetted. As it's presently worded, that is not
crystal clear. Thank you. So, I guess for Nick, >> yeah, I can respond to that, Mr. Chairman. So, um, what is what is temporary in this ordinance is the
one-year window to come in for for an applicant to submit uh an application um for for approval. The approval itself is not temporary. This would be um this
would be an approval like any other. Um what is unique about this ordinance and and again this ordinance is intended to stimulate economic activity along the the you know the the four identified um corridors. So what's unique about this
is that upon a a violation of certain ordinances of the code, including a violation of this ordinance, that the use would be subject to revocation by the city manager. Um and then if
ultimately the use were revoked by the city manager, then the applicant the applicant's um alternative would be to either appeal the revocation or submit an application for conditional use approval and come before this board like
every other applicant uh for an NIE would would have to do now. >> So the city manager would have that discretion just the city manager. >> Correct. and then that that decision would be reviewable by by the by the board of adjustment. Or alternatively, if you if you get, you know, if you get
a violation of this ordinance and you're required to shut down your NIE use, you could submit a conditional use permit application like, you know, again, like the applications we've seen today. >> But if if the city manager were to revoke the CUP, that happens within what
type of time frame? Well, it wouldn't be a So, what this ordinance does is it relaxes the conditional use permit requirement for that one-year period to again to try to stimulate economic activity along these four corridors. Um,
so so it, you know, it's if you you know, if you take advantage of this incentive, but then you violate you're adjudicated to have violated um one of the identified ordinances in the code in the ordinance, um you would be required to shut down. And the and the ordinances
are um the special events ordinance, the noise ordinance um or the the requirements of this section. >> And how do they take advantage of the initiative? Like what do they have to do? >> They would submit an application uh to the planning department. Um and the
planning department would review it for compliance with all the restrictions in in in this draft ordinance that's before you and any other uh regulations that would apply under the code. Well, at that time would the staff just like when a project and an application
comes in front of us now they have a proposed um final order I guess it would they would do the same thing they would have or or at least word it put those in their their approval maybe it's not a final order but >> so in in this the way the ordinance is
drafted the application and approval process would be the same as a building permit application and process and or a an application if a building permit's not required a a certificate of use application. We would, you know, staff
would review it and and create conditions andor notes that this is a neighborhood impact establishment approved pursuant, you know, if this is adopted pursuant to this. Um, but there wouldn't be um the same level of review. I mean, the the point of this is to to
remove that. >> That's what I'm getting at level. I like the idea of streamlining the process. Um, and and that you would basically provide the same conditions that would be part of their review. Um, I just
Yeah, I'm just a little leery because number one, I you know, I think, you know, it would take the city manager quite a I mean, it's taken the planning board. I when I first got on there have been a lot of there were a lot of projects that keep coming back with violation after violation after
violation. >> Took us a while to do something. I don't know if the city manager would would act the same way or if you know right if there's a one violation I you know >> it has to come to >> you're you're you're going to revoke it
the the approval. So I'm a little leerary about that. But also, you know, there are so many I'm thinking along Washington Avenue on the west side next to the residential neighborhood and so many times that applications have come in front of the planning board and
we've talked about noise, we've talked about traffic, parking, things like that. And I just, you know, a lot of times good ideas came from from the project being hashed out at the board, at the planning board. Um, I'm not saying I don't have faith in staff,
>> but I'm just concerned about some of those projects. For instance, years ago, the the um I forget if it's called the Supper Club now, but Queen on six in Washington. >> Under this ordinance, that would not come in front of the planning board.
>> Is that correct? >> That's correct. And if I could if I could just make one clarification to what I said previously about the entertainment component of this administrative review process. So like Queen there is one exception where
entertainment could be included as part of the administrative NIE and that's if it is if if the business meets the strict definition that we have for restaurant supper club. So that's with a
percentage of sales to food etc. So the indoor entertainment outdoor entertainment is not part of this but indoor entertainment for businesses only that satisfy the restaurant supper club but so that's correct. I believe queen
does satisfy that restaurant supper club definition >> and they do have entertainment. Um, so something a business that that is going into an existing building that say Queen wasn't there and they wanted to come in, that would be a an administrative review
under this um this proposed temporary uh NIE ordinance. >> I I'd say even though I'm a little leer, I mean I I I'd like to hear what everyone else thinks. I mean, I'd be okay with maybe trying it for a year or
or passing this, but um one thing I would want to add if we do pass this, and I'd like to add something that if the city manager deems it necessary to to revoke the approval, I know they can come back to us, but I
would say put a a um a one-year um time frame. They can't come back and reapply for a year. In other words, if it gets to that point where the city manager actually has to shut them down, I I'm assuming it's it's really bad, they can't re they can't come back and reapply to the planning board for a C
for a year. >> Can you do that? >> I get what you're saying. I I mean, my my concern is the residents don't have a voice in this. >> Correct. Yeah. And so there's no, you know, it can get approved
administratively, but the residents are up in arms. They don't want >> You mean in the approval process? >> During the approval process, >> what would result in a revocation by the manager, I assume, would be >> would be reset community feedback. I mean, they're still playing very loud.
>> At that point, you have the operators, lawyers in here saying, "We, you know, we have investments. you know, we made we invested a million dollars. We're doing our best. You know, we don't want to deter businesses from coming here. And then at that point, it's too late. The burden ends up being on the
residents and and obviously, you know, nobody wants to shut a place down for one violation. But you I but maybe I'm confused then because if I understand this correctly, planning staff will review and approve, right? >> Yeah. And they're going, I'm assuming
you will impose some type of protections to the residents, right? >> We would we we could. Yes, we would impose conditions like we can with any >> I'm just trying to think of our board does it >> to me. >> Our board solicits input. We had
residents, >> correct? >> Uh, in a restaurant that we just approved on A10, even though it's not, it would assume that restaurant in in the uh off of South Point was in this zone. >> Correct.
>> What would happen to all those people that unanimously had a problem and finally they got resolution? Let me ask another hypothetical. If this restaurant that was just proposed by that gentleman uh and he has to build
the building, does this include rooftop? If the building was already there and it had a rooftop, could they get this? >> Yes. As long as there was no rooftop entertainment. >> It's that's horrible. I I the fact that you could we have been trying as a city
to regulate noise out of rooftops and to just >> But they would not be able to get it. They would not be able to get the approval. Oh, I'm sorry. Did you say if it was a building with a rooftop, they could not apply for this? >> A rooftop alcoholic beverage establishment is
defined as a neighborhood impact establishment if it's within 200 ft of a um resident a property with a residential building. So, this that could be included as part of this as long as there was no entertainment level. >> Yeah, but it could be speakers just like
this. And there is absolutely I can't tell you how many times I've been on this board a little bit and you guys say, "Yeah, it's okay." And we ask questions and we have residents asking questions. You are totally bypassing the concern of sound and I find that totally
unacceptable. I could not. So maybe maybe that's something to to consider to include because I think you know there's some good initiative and doesn't try to bypass and just promote but at the same time we're narrowing down right so some of the things that we know issues you can say one time one at a time right so
I think you know if we can sort of pinpoint the stuff that we know always come up that are are more sensitive and we can try to get that included in there so that doesn't get a fast pass >> and I'm assuming there's no public input in this procedure to to case concern.
>> This would be an administrative procedure, right? So, it would be your applications would be reviewed for strict compliance with the code. Um, but it's not a public hearing, >> right? >> So, so I I mean I I I understand the purpose behind this and I I um I I I
commend Commissioner Fernandez coming up with creative ways of of doing these. What I would I think we all sort of agree with wanting to encourage you know properties to open up you know businesses to open up in these specific
areas. I think but I think that it needs to be modified with specific you know to address our specific concerns and there should be carveouts. there should be, you know, some version of notice to the residents that they've applied for an
administrative, you know, proceed process and there's a way for residents to object or whatever it may be. Um, or be at least have a meeting with the city, you know, staff. Um the other thing you know the sunset provision maybe it should be a temporary permit
for only one that's valid for only one year instead of you know this ordinance you know uh expiring in a year. Maybe it shouldn't apply to spaces that are the size of Queen for example. >> Yeah. Should apply to establishments with
rooftop um you know seating. And so I just think I think there are ways that I the good things about this. I just think that maybe we should, you know, and I defer to everybody if we vote it down or whether we continue it
um and maybe have staff provide some proposals of recommendations to address sort of these concerns and then next uh month we can you know come up with uh you know have them spelled out as exceptions to this for
what we would approve, but I don't know what everybody else >> Well, I think that's a good idea. I mean, just I think the perfect example is a 728 person restaurant that we said was good,
but it went through our review and it had a rooftop and they could apply for just an administrative. We we can't do that. that's just cutting out all the residents input to large. So there needs to be a size whether that's 200 seats or
150 seats or and and I agree you know and limited so no rooftops that that kind of stuff might be >> applicable to this already says no outdoor um use correct >> entertainment >> no outdoor entertainment
>> entertainment you could have you can have an outdoor with >> considering these spaces then couldn't we say because we're also just providing recommendations whether it's favor able or not. We could say you make a motion to approve the favorable recommendation provided that there is no rooftop use.
There is no >> no out no outdoor speakers. >> Yeah. Because then the neighbors need >> determine the size of the >> and the size limit. It has to be under and I'm not a restaurant tour because at the end of the day no larger than 250 or
200. I mean you don't want a big place. >> No. the smallest the smaller business are the one who will benefit the most from this and should the process when it's long it's it's harder on the small businesses open up right >> target a small >> restaurant could last >> was something like this already done for
the 41st street corridor >> I'm just curious why they selected against seems like all the main thorough affairs except for 41st >> which is also plagued by vacancy issues >> yeah to my knowledge There's there's no
existing regulations that streamline 41st Street to be able to >> if I wanted to make a motion, I could >> add it >> add that as part of >> that could be a part of your >> You could add it. Yeah. >> Something else to consider um trans or traffic perhaps um a a maximum number of
expected um the expected number of increase in trips. In other words, it's going to cause 50 more trip. I I know we're getting very specific, but but I mean, you know, >> to your to your point though, maybe what we could do is that and I don't know if this really messes everything up from
the city, but we could say favorable recommendation maybe after a year they have to come up with a progress report and if there are any adverse impacts, I don't know. One thing I would just advise the board is um there are there's
a major difference between a permitted use even a permitted use subject to strict conditions like what this proposes and a conditional use um that is you know is required uh following a required to hold a public hearing and um and come before the board and and the
board can impose conditions. So I think if I if I could guide the board, I would say hue closer to the kinds of things that could be um enforced administratively in your recommendations. >> So meaning that's the music, the outdoor use, things like that. Size,
>> right? Right. Those kinds of measurable. >> So that's what I'm saying is, you know, we're not in a position today to say numbers of people per, >> you know, square foot or whatever. So >> I guess if we if the board has the
appetite to explore a way of passing this version of this then we need the guidance of staff of what are some of the things that we would need to do like limiting the hours limiting like and
what are those in the different areas uh because we don't know off the top of our head and then and same thing with the occupancy you know number of chairs in the restaurants, you know, how is that? We you guys know best how that's calculated. >> But again, that's I mean, it seems like
a lot of work. Um, you know, so if the board doesn't >> want to do this, then you know, there's no >> I don't know. >> And the city manager is on board with this. >> Just curious. >> The the administration is recommending
approval of this. we talk about streamlining like what's what's the difference for a business who's who's going to be bypassing the the board like what are we talking about timewise? >> Well, the the cup process for an NIE is
I I tell people it's at least four months, right? So it does help um you know someone who's moving into a new building on Washington Avenue or Lincoln Road um they would be going through a building permit and you know can
certificate of use process which is you know part of the normal process. I think what happens when when an applicant comes to us and they require a a CUP is they start with that process. So it it frontloads about four months on to their
timeline. Um so you know it's it's really and I understand this is the board that reviews them and and it's I I completely understand you guys do an incredible job and I know that the residents of this of
this community really depend on you. um this was was crafted to be very limited to jumpstart economic activity in these very critical corridors. I think um you know I've heard some really great suggestions about notice noticing to
neighbors. There are some administrative processes that we carry out as the planning department that we do notice the neighbors. Um I think that that is interesting. Um, I think maybe looking at the proximity of these particular,
you know, each case by case proximity to a residential building. There may be some that have no residential buildings within 500 ft of them. Um, you know, then then maybe but there may be someone who's, you know, just across the alley is a residential building. So maybe
those are treated differently. Um but I I do think you know there is some some opportunity to maybe create more safeguards in the existing ordinance while still trying to achieve you know the same goal of really jumpstarting uh
these types of businesses. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> Try. So, I I'd like to make a motion to approve with a favorable recommendation provided that uh the commission includes no rooftop use, no outdoor music, no outdoor use.
>> No outdoor use. >> No outdoor use. And also that there be resident notification if and when an applicant is approved. >> And also that the 41st quarter is approved. >> No, not when they're approved. >> When they apply. Sorry. Are you saying
outdoor rooftop or outdoor seating at all? Because >> outdoor. >> But then here here's the question though that if the public's notified, what is that going to do? >> So what what I was going to add to that is you could do something like public notice, you know, notice shall be given
to the nearby neighborhood or whatever. And within, you know, the 30-day period, if a resident uh objects to the administrative process, >> then Why? >> Well, there needs to be some, right?
What what happens when they get the notice? What are their what are their options? If they object, then they can kick it to a the you know, I I hate to give one resident like the ability to to >> Well, why can't they just part like why couldn't the the resident send you
emails and just participate in the process? >> A resident can always do that, right? So, this would a resident can always do that. So if if notice >> if they're noticed, would they be noticed under this procedure? >> The board is considering amending the ordinance to require notice. So yeah,
and it would it would function very similarly to the understory process where the understory homes are now approved administratively. That's correct. >> And there's, you know, some type of notice to the nearby residents and they can at least meet with the city to see what's going on, how it's going to happen.
>> Yes. >> So I would I would vote for including that type of notification upon application. >> What about um hours of operation? >> I mean, I think that's made by I mean, we got to rely on you all to
some extent. >> I also I mean, I have concerns about the Lincoln Road between Collins and Alton. I mean, that's a big stretch of big spaces. And every time we
have one of those applications, there's neighbors that are present and there's things we change from staff's recommendation. I I I frankly I'm not as familiar with the um you know, and Washington Avenue
between Fifth and Lincoln Road, but I'm not as familiar with the Collins Avenue and the 71st Street um area. But I just know how many applications we see from Lincoln Road as they're you know um
I don't know. I just say that I I you know at this point I mean I like some of the ideas. I could see myself voting for this but I'd like to hash out a little bit more. maybe staff can come back with with some of these, you know, spell out some of these um or or or put some of
these ideas in writing so we can kind of see them all together. One thing that I would say I the only way I'd vote for it um is if that idea that if the city manager does revoke one of these approvals that they cannot reapply for a
year. Without that, I I wouldn't vote for it. Um, so, um, you know, let's leave it to staff to come back with a little bit more. Um, >> so you want to continue it from >> I would I would vote to continue it. >> I mean, is there any urgency to this
one? >> Not that I'm aware of. >> Okay. >> Um, >> any problem with >> it's not coming to first reading? >> Yeah, because I don't Yeah, the first reading wouldn't occur till December at the earliest. >> Any problem with this moving into November and you guys coming back? I mean, you hear the concerns and maybe
there's some guard rails that could be contemplated by staff and >> I have no problem with that at all. I think that's a good idea. >> Rooftops, outside >> sizing, maximums, that kind of stuff. Take a look at those parameters.
>> So, I'd move to continue it to November. >> I second. >> Okay. All in favor of that. >> Anyone opposed? Okay. Move that to November. November 4th and we're adjourned. And again, Debbie Jake, great to have you. >> Thank you so much. Thank you.
>> You of course always >> No, no, it was a little