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] [Music]
Come on. [Music] Come on.
[Music] Down. [Music]
Hey. Hey. Feel [Music] [Music] [Music] well feel [Music]
All right. [Music] Feel [Music]
Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]
Heat. [Music] Heat.
[Music] Heat. Heat. N. [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music]
Let's [Music] go. [Music] [Music] [Music]
[Music] I'm standing. [Music] [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
2 1 made >> me laugh. >> Okay. Good morning. Happy election day to everybody. Welcome to the November 4 planning board meeting. Um we will have a full panel, but Elizabeth's a little late, but we're going to get started. Um if I could get a motion to approve the
minutes from the October 16 meeting. >> Motion to approve. >> Okay. Can I get a second? >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I. >> Anyone opposed? Okay, those are approved. Now we'll turn it over to Mr. Collis. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 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, and members of the public appearing either in person or virtually via Zoom. To participate virtually in today's meeting, the public
can dial 1-877-853-52-57 and enter the webinar ID which is 861-43426327 pound or log into the Zoom app and enter the webinar ID which again is 861-43426327. If you wish to speak on an item, you can 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. >> Good. >> 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. Lastly, I'd like to swear in anyone who will be testifying today, including staff.
Please raise your right hands. Do you swear the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Thank you. >> Thanks, Nick. Okay. The first item on the agenda of requests for continuence of the withdrawals. The first is planning board file 25765,600
Washington Avenue. Deb. >> Um, thank you, Mr. Chair. And there's a a companion application as well, which is planning board 25765. Um, so this is a comprehensive plan and a text amendment for the uh
>> 766 is the companion. Yeah, >> correct. 766 and 765 are the two items. Um, the applicant is requesting a continuence to the December 9th meeting. Um, we do need a little bit more time to schedule the uh public workshop which is
a requirement. So because November uh October and and November are busy months, um we're we're asking for a continuence to December. >> Anyone in chambers speaking on this here? No. Anyone on Zoom? >> Okay. Uh closed public hearing. Any n
>> I'm just here uh cas here on behalf of the applicant concurring with what Debbie has said. >> Okay. >> Um any discussion? I want to move it. >> I'll move it. Okay. >> All right. So yield seconded. >> Elizabeth moved it. >> I moved it.
>> Oh, Melissa moved it. Okay. All in favor? >> I. >> Anyone opposed? Okay. Moved to December. Next is planning board file 25779 for uh 1545 Collins Avenue. >> And this application um is requesting a continuence as well to the December 9th
meeting. the applicant has expressed a desire to um reach out to their neighbors and have more substantive meetings with them as they have expressed concerns um prior to coming back to the planning board. So, at this point, uh staff has no objection to the
December 9th uh request for continuance. >> Okay. Anyone in chamber to speak on this? >> Sure. Just introduce yourself and your affiliation would be great. Thank you. >> Sure. Good morning, Nick Notto. On behalf of the applicant, office of 1450 Brick Avenue. Um we are meeting with our neighbors. We've had several meet
productive meetings with them. We're continuing to do so. So, we request continuence of December 9th. >> Okay. Anyone on Zoom? >> No. >> No. Okay. Close public hearing. Any questions or motions from the board?
>> Motion to approve. Second it. >> All right. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? All right. Thank you. See you in December. Okay. Progress reports planning board file 240715 um 1810 and 1818 Michigan Avenue single
family home split. >> Um thank you Mr. Chair. Yes. This is a progress report due to uh code compi code compliance violations and non-compliance with the conditions of the lotslit approval. I'm going to turn it over to Jake to provide uh a staff
summary. >> Thank you Debbie. Um, to recap, last year the board approved a lot split for the site. And earlier this year, the applicant received two violations for fencing and property maintenance for the property located at 1800 Michigan
Avenue, which contains an existing home. In August, the planning department sent a cure letter to the applicant and scheduled a progress report for the September meeting. At that meeting, the applicant indicated that they had a pending HPB application for the home and the board continued the progress report
to today pending the outcome at the HPB. The project was approved at the September 16th HPB meeting, including the retention and restoration of the garage portion of the existing home and the construction of an attached two-story addition. As part of the approval, the HPB included a condition
requiring a building permit for fencing to be issued within 90 calendar days of the approval and installation no later than 120 days, meaning that a building permit for the fencing and landscaping must be issued by December 15th and installation by January 14th next year.
Staff is recommending that the board hear updates from the applicant and from members of the public and continue the progress report to the January 6th meeting at which time staff can report back regarding the applicant's progress. Mickey. >> Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the
board. Mickey Morero, 200 South Biscane Boulevard here on behalf of the property owner. As Jake said when we were here last time, we had a pending HPB item that was approved and subsequent to that they have retained a contractor. Quality Construction Performance Inc. is a contractor. Not only are they going to
do the fencing, which is the subject of this progress report, they're also going to do the seaw wall construction, which won't be done in a couple months, but is a major project that we've been working with multiple jurisdictions on. Um, we agree with staff's recommendation. We expect the the contractors already working on getting the fence permit. We
expect that to be done by the deadline. Uh, so we're everything's underway. We got our approval. We've got contractor on board uh to do the fence which will be done by December 15th and the seaw wall which is not discussed in this report but also a major project that we're doing that will be done by
sometime next year. >> So again we're okay with staff's recommendation to come back in January and by then hopefully we'll be able to tell you the fence is up and and we're compliance >> and they've cured the problems that are the subject of the violation. >> Okay. >> You do have the permit right? >> They've hired the we got the HB approval
about a month ago. We have a contractor. They don't have a permit yet, but they're in the process of getting a permit. >> Okay. >> And once and defense permits aren't the most complicated. So, we expect it to be issued in the next few weeks and up in by December. >> It's just a mess. >> I aware, believe me. >> All right. Anybody in chambers on this
item? Anybody else are speaking on this? Anybody on Zoom? >> Yes, we do have one member of the public on Zoom. Uh, John Courtourtney. Good morning, John. Hello. Can you all hear me? >> Yes, now we can. Thank you. >> Yes, I can. Wonderful. Thank you so
much. Thanks for uh thanks to Mickey for uh making some progress here. U I will point out to the board that um these four adjacent properties are up for sale um and priced for a larger project. So, this is going to be a very long extended
process and they're going to continue to sit vacant uh for for quite a long time. And so I would just hope that uh that there's sort of continued oversight and that these properties continue to be maintained in a safe um a safe manner for the community. Uh but I appreciate
the progress being made. Thank you. >> What what's your address? Are you in proximity there? >> I live across the street, 10261 18th Street. Thank you. >> Okay. Anything else? >> Guess not. Anyone else on Zoom? Okay. Close the public hearing. Any questions
from the board? Someone want to move it? So the motion would be to continue it to the January tw January 6 hearing. >> I'll make a motion to continue. Okay. Second, >> Elizabeth. Okay. All in favor? >> I. >> All right. Any oppos? All right. We'll see you in uh January. >> Thank you. Enjoy the rest of your day.
>> Sure. We'll see you before then. >> Okay. Uh new applications planning board file 25784120 MacArthur Causeway. Okay. >> I have some documentation that you need to that every I'm having passed out.
>> Okay. Yeah. And before Deb starts, uh any disclosures on this one? >> I've talked to I had a phone call from these. >> Okay. Scott, no. Jonathan, >> I had a phone call with uh Mr. Kston. >> Michelle, >> not >> I had a phone call Mr. Ken.
>> Same. >> Same. >> Okay. >> Okay. Uh thank you. Uh so this is uh 120 MacArthur Causeway. There is an application that has been filed requesting a conditional use permit for a neighborhood impact lot. So this is
within located within the I1 zoning district uh within this district. Any development that is located on a property um that exceeds 20,000 square ft is required to obtain a conditional use permit. So it's somewhat unique to the I1 zoning district. Um the applicant
is currently proposing to to construct um four buildings and nine boat slips as part of a privatelyowned non-commercialized marina um which will al also have offices. Um but again private office not
open to the public. Um access to the site is proposed along Terminal Island uh the Terminal Island access road. Uh a traffic impact statement did conclude that there would be no increase in the number of vehicular trips due to the
fact that the previously existing use was quite similar. It had eight boat slips was the city approved use plus office space. Um so there is really no >> office space at the time. >> Correct. So there's really no anticipated net increase for the
day-to-day operations than what the previous use um was of for the property. Um they they are providing up to nine um mooring locations for vessels, but they have uh indicated that they anticipate
approximately 3 to six to be uh mored on the site. uh most of the time. Um their hours of operation anticipated are 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. They are proposing up to a maximum of 10 permanent staff members per shift. Those staff members
will occupy the gate house and the marina operations building. There is a marina pavilion um that is for the sole use of the uh of the yacht crew uh during their time off. There's also an owner's pavilion uh
which is for the exclusive use of the owner and and his guests. Um deliveries are proposed between 10:00 a.m. and 4 pm and uh refuse collection is proposed for at least 2 days per week. Um staff is generally supportive of this. We do not
anticipate any increase in intensity. In fact, um there was a previously approved project that had a much more intense use in terms of uh impact on the city's level of service. Um so we don't anticipate the day-to-day operations of this property
having any significant impact on the operations at Terminal Island or or traffic. Um we are concerned however about special events. uh the applicant has indicated in their operational plan that they would like to host special
events on the on the property with up to 300 people. Um that is a concern primarily because this is an already very challenged intersection during high impact periods. I think we've probably all been been stuck um in this area um
during Art Basil and and other um large events. So we are requesting that at this point that the planning board not authorize the special events. Um so we have a condition in in the recommended draft
order to that effect and that the applicant return to this board with additional information including um the p you know about how many events they will have, how many events will be during special um high impact periods. uh security plan, queuing plan for
vehicles. If if people are going to be arriving here in, you know, 300 people in vehicles uh during an a high impact time, that could cause a a backup. Um and we're >> Can I interrupt you one second, Deborah? So, when when people apply for a special events permit, do they not go through
that process with the city? >> They do. Um that is a process. Um, but I think when when we evaluated the impact of this, particularly given the the very difficult congested intersection that it's located at, we thought that the
planning board should have more information to understand and perhaps place limit limits on the number of special events per per calendar year or the times of the year where where the special events could could be happening. Um because the planning board I believe
has done that in other situations. Um not you know necessarily prohibiting special events and staff is supportive of allowing special events here but just restricting it to a certain extent um at least initially to see. >> Okay. Keep going. Sorry I interrupted
you. Are you finished? Okay. Nissan. >> Good morning Mr. Chair, members of the planning board. Nissan Casden and Cecilia Torres Toedo of Acreman LLP representing the applicant. With me here as well today is Dan Moore who the
owner's representative for the marina, Gabrielle Compuzzano, the project architect, Christopher Collie the landscape architect, and Corey Dorman our trans our transportation consultant engineer.
Um, let me tee this up here if I can. There we go. I think most of you are probably familiar with Terminal Island where this project is located. Uh the uh
inhabitants of that island are two fairies for Fischer Island. One on the west end which is used for uh residents and guests. Another on the east end which is their service and commercial ferry with their parking garage. Our
property is also bound on the other side by the city of Miami Beach's maintenance yard and uh repair facility. Then there's a Florida Power and Light substation on the island. This island has always been an industrial use. Just
to refresh people's memory of what has been proposed and used on this particular site that we're talking about for decades. It was a container port uh for freight being freighted in from around the Caribbean and elsewhere. Hundreds of containers would be
deposited there, taken off, etc. There was then a proposal to put residential uses there uh including a height increase of significant height increase that was not wellreceived and was opposed by the coast guard. And then finally there was
a proposal which was ultimately approved by this board and by the uh design review board of an office complex there with 160,000 square ft of office plus a restaurant as well. I would note and we'll deal more with this a little bit
later that the cha traffic generation from that one use that was already approved peak traffic was approximately 250 or so trips per hour that this proposed use has about one to two trips
peak trips per hour. So even if we were to have an event the number of vehicles are less than the peak trips what was all of what was already approved for this site. And the reason I bring this also to your attention is of all the proposals for this site that have been
come forward. This is the least intense the most secure. It will not be having hundreds of outsiders and guests and visitors. It will not be having ships coming in and out. It's certainly the most secure for
the Coast Guard base and it interferes the least with what's happening on the island. Let me pull out a little bit. You can see not only is Terminal Island uh an industrial area, but the property itself is bordered across the canal by
across the uh channel by Port Miami and stands some 1500 or so feet from Star Island, over 2,000 ft from South Point. There are no nearby residential uses for this facility. Let me take you to the
existing This is the site as it exists today. It's an irregular uhly shaped site with a lot of waterfront obviously and a long drive that goes from Terminal Island Drive into the center of the property. The proposed site plan, which we'll go
through in more detail, is to develop a private marina facility. I think you're aware that the principal owner of this is Ken Griffin and his family interest. It's important to note as well that Mr. Griffin is building his residence on
Star Island. Uh and also that uh that Star Island cannot accommodate vessels of the draft that are required. And so therefore this is almost becomes an extension of the residence where his larger boats can be birthed.
It also goes without saying that Mr. Griffin has been singularly an extraordinary investor in the city of Miami and the leading philanthropist in this community. The facility uh Gabriel will take you through it has four small buildings. One
an entrance building, another a pavilion that will be used per principally by the crew and then the owner's pavilion and then a service building. We'll take you through that in a minute. I'd like to go through briefly the marine operations summary. Debbie reviewed it. It's a
247-hour operation with the peak between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. The marina staff, there will be a maximum 10 permanent marina employees per shift. Uh the crew will depend upon the vessels, but the crews
will live aboard the vessels uh when they are docked there. Five parking spaces are required. When you say vessels, how many will this how many boats or vessels it's going to accommodate? >> Uh it can accommodate up to nine and but I think at this time we're contemplating
four vessels to be docked there. >> Okay. >> Uh parking five spaces are required. We are providing 11 parking spaces. We have made provisions of course for trash collection and deliveries. And there will be 247 security, which by the way
will be the probably to the benefit of the city's facility next door as well as as the Coast Guard as well as the Fischer Island Community garage because there will be 247 security on this site. Uh there are a couple of conditions that
I would like to address after uh we have the presentation uh that I would like to tweak in terms of the board's uh uh the staff's recommendations. But at this time, I'll hand it over to Gabriel Campusano to take you through the uh plan itself.
>> Thank you, N. Uh good morning. I'm Gabriel Campusano. I represent BMA Architects. We are the architects of records for this project. Um so as Nissan was saying this campus h sorry this project was conceived as a campus with four different structures um
that are organized in a way that as you can see it is a very low impact and very low footprint project the open area is way bigger than what is required uh and starting with this I don't know if I can
point but uh as you will see there is a main drive that uh organizes all the project. Uh and the intention here is that along that main drive, there's always a view to the to the ocean. The the the views to the ocean are never
blocked. And there is a central element, landscaping element on that triangle that you see that is going to organize how all the buildings are uh relate to each other. Uh the the the first building that we will encounter as we enter the the the facility is uh the
gate house which is the one on the top left over there. That uh building is the purpose of that building is to host security uh personnel. All the trash uh recollection and uh and and uh disposition is over there with
refrigerated trash as well. There is a generator generator room for that will work for the entire site if if needed and there are some guest uh parking spots that are required that we are placing over there. Uh as as you oh and
also that that is a one-story uh building as well. Uh and as you go along that main drive you will encounter what we call two pavilions. One pavilion is for the staff, the crews uh the crew from the boats that are going to be here
uh when they're off and and then they will be able to enjoy this space. Uh the program that it hosts is basically amenities for the staff. In in the first floor is a lounge area with some uh bathrooms and kitchenet. And then on the
second level we have a gym for the for the crew as well. And on the third level, there is a rooftop with a pool and some lounge areas as well. Uh this is a section through that building. As you can see, it's the tallest building.
It's uh 46 ft high and it's sitting on a podium that is sharing with the other pavilion. The other pavilion is uh for the owner's use and his families for his private use. It it also has a private pool and uh it is a two-story building
uh that uh in the in the ground floor. It has lounge areas as well that are being going to be connected with expansive glazing towards the pool and towards that uh main courtyard that is located between the two pavilions. In this case, you can see it on the on the
north north of the page. On the second level, there is an office space and and and gall uh an art gallery uh for his use. This is a section through that building. Um and then the final uh building, the fourth building is an operations
building is it is devoted mainly for uh the operations of the marina. In the ground floor there are there are some loading areas, some work uh some shops so so they can uh for maintenance and then in the second level some offices
for uh the crew sorry for the the people that are going to be working specifically on them on the marina. It is a twole uh uh building as well. Here's a landscape uh plan. I don't know
if we have our our landscape architect here that could uh go a little bit deeper here, but I guess the the main the main um idea here is to to have that main road with tall trees that are going to to be lining up on both sides of the
of the of the road. And then there are some very open areas for landscaping. And uh as I said the um the open area uh is is much bigger than than it than it is required. This is the way uh this is how the the
the buildings look. Uh they are there is a an architectural language that tie the four buildings. Uh they are made of stone of a very contemporary and yet timeless architecture I would say with
expansive roofs that are going to protect the the buildings from the elements from the sun and the rain. And this is a view that we can see from the side of the coast guard. As you can see it is a very low impact um project uh
where landscaping takes mostly the lead role here. This is a view uh from the water uh to into the the um main pavilion, the the owner's pavilion. You can see the pool there and how the three
buildings are related to each other and are connected through the landscaping. Um I think that's it unless there are some questions. Thank you, Gabriel. Uh Mr. Chair, we have a few more minutes. I'd like to just deal with some of the conditions. I
briefly go through them and spend a couple of minutes on the special events. Um, number one, condition 2D of the proposed order prohibits outdoor speakers and TVs. Obviously, we request that that be eliminated as it is
unnecessarily restrictive and we would be bound by any uh noise ordinances or regulations. There is, as I say, there is no residential district within probably 1500 feet or more of this site. Uh, and in fact, when this board
recommended approval of the Fiser Island Community Association garage, uh, the, uh, condition was that it could not be heard, sounds could not be heard in a residential zone, which would be South Point or >> or, um, or or
>> or Star Island. So we'd like to eliminate that condition. Number one, that's two data technique. Um Deb, can you tell us what the basis was for complete prohibition there? >> So while there's um there's not a uh residential district in in the immediate
area um and not necessarily a traditional residential use, but there are people living at the Coast Guard station. There are people that have >> sleep there and live there um in the facilities at the Coast Guard station. um entertainment level sound is not
permitted in the I1 at all. Um and I think we just didn't want to have a situation where, you know, they were playing loud music outside um or what about ambient or or >> it's not permitted. >> Yeah. I mean, I'm I don't I don't necessarily have a problem.
>> Entertainment is not permitted, but ambient music would be. >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. I just want to make sure I understood your basis. Okay. >> You're asking for ambient speakers. >> Yes. to we will be code compliant. >> So >> I didn't know >> even on a special event, you're not
>> going to ask us to authorize Marshall amps and a band. >> We don't approve that. >> Well, we'll talk about special events uh later, but no, this is just for regular use. In other words, he must have an outdoor TV or speaker at ambient level at ambient level. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Should not be prohibited. That's
condition one, >> right? But but we I need to make clear what you're asking for. So you would want the ability to have the speakers and television at ambient levels. >> Yes. Because ambient is >> would you in 2D? I mean we can talk about this after but in in terms of the
sizing of the the TVs. I mean I've seen, you know, there's one house on Starland that has this huge screen. I guess it's sort of inside the house, but it's, you know, very noticeable or apparent to people passing by and to the buildings on Bell Ale. And so I guess one question
is are they planning is it just normal size TVs or >> well I don't think they've gotten that far >> in the design but understand it's this is just you know be the owner's private marina. He'll want you know probably a TV. He may want some speakers. Uh maybe
want to watch a football game. Things of that sort. Uh the truth of the matter is where all the buildings are there basically completely secreted from any public view. remember they're deep into the property and the border to the south is the city's maintenance yard uh and
facility and the border to to that is to the west rather and to the to the east is the Fiser Island community garage. So uh you know even if you had a large TV it wouldn't bother anybody. uh if I may
then the uh the other the next condition that we'd want to deal with is an outright prohibition on entertainment. We believe that entertainment is allowed uh uh through a special event permit
only. And in fact, if you look at section 12-5, special events permits of the city code. >> Wait, wait, which condition are we talking about right now? So followg Oh, got it. Go ahead. Sorry.
So in other words, just so I understand, you want that to be eliminated so that you can at least obtain it through a special event. >> 2 H 2 H is the special event condition. We want to right uh uh and that is a a condition we're going to want to have
modified as well. But entertainment, there's a separate condition 2G which says prohibits entertainment. So all we're saying is that it should be permitted as allowed by code. If it's allowed, fine. If it's not allowed,
fine. But I would point out be that >> But sorry, you're saying as allowed per code in conjunction with a special event. >> Yes. Exactly. >> Okay. >> Exactly. And you know and we believe uh the city code that's why you have a special event
permit as the city code itself says >> a special event is defined as a temporary use on public or private property that would not be permitted generally or without restriction throughout a particular zoning district but would be permitted if controlled
with special review in accordance with this section. That's the city code. So, we're saying we should be permitted to have entertainment in connection with a special event permit approved by the city. >> What you read didn't say entertainment. You just said it has to be approved. Are
you limiting entertainment to inside only? Are these grassy null areas with 300 people, you could have a party outside? >> Well, for special I I can't say as to >> because that's a problem. >> Yeah. I can't say as to special events. Mr. Marks. Well, then you're not ready
to narrow this down because what you're doing is opening it completely up full throttle. >> You're saying you can have we'll we'll just let special events determine if it's outside inside midnight playing with a band outside and and 300
people like it's a party. That's not a that's >> but that if I mean but the the purpose of the special event process >> is to we have to go to the city and get approvals for all of these things. We're >> they get greenlighted. So where's the
residents left then? >> Well, the here's the other thing. uh we can't and and we're happy to have a condition that there can be no sound emanating from the entertainment that would be audible in a residentially
zoned district because they're so far away that that is something that I know would be a condition that we could always live with. >> What about what the Coast Guard hits? >> Coast Guard. Have you talked to the comed? Does he want to party at 10 a.m. >> our Let him finish. You know, we have
been in communication with the Coast Guard. I would say the Coast Guard received notice of this. The Coast Guard has had no objection to this. Obviously, they could have been here. And and I would say this, of all the uses that have been proposed for this site,
>> this is actually clearly the best for the Coast Guard. >> So, so Nan, >> go ahead, Liz. I I I I have some questions and I'm I'm going to just So 13 years ago and I and I appreciate all this. I don't have an objection to the
use whatsoever. Um 13 years ago um the Coast Guard had concerns about um there was a building that was there was a building I think it was parking garage and then became offices and things like that and the Coast Guard weighed in on that. Um, five years ago, uh, the Coast
Guard had concerns about office and then you know how that went. Um, so we have I'm going to give deference always to the Coast Guard and our government is shut down right now and I would like to
know a few things. Have you had any communication other than notice with the commonant or the commander of any member of the Coast Guard? You have who? >> Dan, would you like >> Yeah, Captain.
>> You have to come up. >> Hello. Uh Dan Moore. I'm the owner's representative for the marina. Um we've had pretty significant dialogue with Captain Clay McKini, who's the commanding officer of the base, and other uh high ranking officers above him.
>> Have you seen the plan? Have they seen the plan? >> Yes, they have. >> Okay. Um can you Where's the letter from them? Have they they've not offered an opinion? We've not heard anything. >> Yeah, we requested a letter so that we could provide it today and uh as you can
imagine, it was a very short fuse since we got the request for a no objection letter um which we sent through to the Coast Guard and have been in discussions with them on and uh got an email last night from Clay that uh >> Do you can you provide that email to us?
>> Pardon me. >> Can you provide that email to us? >> Sure, please. that it's going through uh the normal process at a high level and that he wouldn't be able to provide the letter for this morning's meeting. >> So, um so um
there's but you know when they talk about uh having special events with 300 people and things like that, music and all of that. Um the Coast Guard hasn't vetted any of the people. They they have a security they have security control issues. There is,
I don't know if you're even aware, but the Coast Guard stores munitions. It is an active military base. They store munitions on site and it is a blast zone. So my my concern is I I know that
the Coast Guard has um the ability to either offer an opinion or not offer an opinion, but I um and I'm comfortable without hearing or reading an opinion from them. Um and and and also it says
the city will provide commanding officer or his or her designy an opportunity to review and submit comments on the proposed changes regarding the impact of proposed changes may have on the min excuse me have on the mission of the US
Coast Guard station. Um these are in our codes that is policy RLU3.42 42. And then it also says um the city will cooperate the city will cooperate with the US Coast Guard station located within its jurisdiction by exchanging
and providing information to prevent encroachment of incompatible land uses in order to facilitate its continued presence in the city. It is an active military base. So the city has not been able to accommodate those in our code.
Um, it also says that anything that we will transmit, the city will transmit, not me, uh, to the commanding officer, information relating to proposed changes to comprehensive plans, plan amendments, proposed changes to the LDRs, if
approved, would affect the intensity, density, or use of the land adjacent to or in close proximity to the US Coast Guard station. M >> I am going to ask the chair to continue this until January until we have been
able to confirm from the Coast Guard that they will either offer an opinion. We the city has not done anything except offer uh a 375 foot notice. The city has not given them plans and I am very
uncomfortable with this right now. M >> Mr. Mr. Chair, may I address that? >> Uh, >> well, the only reason I'm surprised is that they were very actively involved when there was a proposed condo because I was on the board. >> Sure. >> Um, I'm surprised they haven't, you know, I mean, they're obviously aware of
this. I'm just surprised. All right. Go ahead, N. >> No. And I, uh, let let me say two things. First to Miss Leon's comment. I'm willing to if the Coast Guard has an objection, we will bring this back to this board. We that you're missing the
point though. The the city hasn't fulfilled its obligation to cooperate with the military and that's on the city. So until the city is able to cooperate with the military installation
and that's in our um RLU 3.4 and and we haven't we have not fulfilled our obligation. I do not have a problem with the use whatsoever. I want to hear from I'm always going to defer to our military. That's all. >> If if if I may.
>> Hold on. Hold on. Staff, do you have any com response to that? I mean, >> yeah, I'm happy to respond. So, the um RLU 3.4.1 is not applicable in the situation. We're not asking to change
any of the um the comprehensive plan or the proposed uses uh via a tech text amendment for this RLU3.4.2. We have given we have sent a mail notice to the Coast Guard base which has
>> letter finished going to I'm just going to say >> which has all of the instructions to contact us regarding how you can view all of the plans. The plans are online. Um, and you know, we certainly do hear from members of the public that receive these mail notices asking to view the
plans. We have not heard from the Coast Guard. >> By the way, we have an open public. Is there Can you tell if anyone on Zoom is from the Coast Guard? >> No one has their hand raised. Um, I don't see anything that jumps out at me. >> I'm assuming nobody in here is with the Coast Guard. No one in here. Okay, keep going. Sorry, D.
>> Um, and our policy RLU 3.4.3. Of course, we would take into consideration any comments uh received. We have not received any comments, >> but we haven't provided plans. When I specifically asked the questions of you um I asked what has been transmitted to
the Coast Guard and it you said 375 ft notice. This says specifically that we will give them plans and we have not done that. >> But it it doesn't. It says we will provide them an opportunity to review and submit comments on the proposed
changes >> and we have shown them the plans ourselves. >> We have sent the mail notice that outlines the process for them to contact us to >> Oh, hold on. Well, this is important. So, you're saying obviously as an attorney >> under not quite under oath, but you're representing that you've shared your
plans with the Coast Guard. >> Yes, we have shared we have shared our plans with the Coast Guard. I mean, in addition to the fact, >> but I'm assuming you didn't share your desire to have entertainment. Just be candid. Yeah. Entertainment. >> Hold on. Hold on. >> G and H. >> Amazing question. >> No, we did actually. >> Is there clearly they're going to be
happy with the >> Dan is the one who had the content? >> No. No, we did actually. Um, we shared all the plans. We shared our traffic study. We shared the city's comments to our traffic study. We shared all our special event loading. Um, which we
haven't gone through here yet. And >> which when you say we shared with them, who's them? >> With with the Coast Guard. I know in particular the commanding officer, his assistant >> and a bunch and a number of officers above him >> and open air entertainments. You went
through that. You talked about time frames. >> We just talked about special events and how it's not deep enough and how we were limiting guys one at a time. I just want to understand what was shared with them at this point. So you've shared all the plans with them. Yes. >> And the fact that you're going to seek
special event permit, but not nothing about entertainment, anything like that. >> No. Okay. And then I appreciate I don't know if there we don't know if there will be any entertainment at special events quite frankly you're asking >> can you provide that email? Are you willing to provide that email right now? >> Well, Elizabeth, he's under oath. He's
not >> I mean I'm saying >> he's under oath. He's not going to say they shared plans if they didn't. >> But but but but Brian, Mr. Chair, >> this is a blast zone. We have not gotten anything from the Coast Guard and I feel
like we should at least be given the they we've heard this. >> Okay. Well, here's what I'm asking you because they were very active when it was going to be a condo. I'm just letting you know. I mean, they came every day and opposed it. If he's telling you under oath they shared all their plans with them and they know they have the right to be here, I don't
understand what the concern >> because they because the government is shut down and they are not I can >> All right. All right. your listen I mean >> can I your opinion if they told me they had plans I'd be concerned >> what's the why would we not wait no
>> to see >> well I mean >> Brian can I ask staff a question >> sure >> 2G and 2 H >> can you give me a little history of the fact that they are proposing changes so the there was no entertainment there was
no special permits zoned there before right I mean We're saying the Coast Guard was really cool about it being no entertainment, no special events at that location. Is that a true statement? Is that the history of this? And now
they're asking for a change. >> There's actually going to be a restaurant there on the the previously approved and currently approved application continuously operating restaurant. >> But was it ever >> authorized for entertainment A or
special events B? >> No. Not that I'm aware of. And I I would like to point out um that for regarding a special events, I believe it is the policy of the city that when a special event permit is submitted and reviewed
by the tourism and cultural affairs department that they would not permit entertainment in an underlying zoning district that prohibits entertainment even as part of a special event permit. Um >> Yeah. And currently it doesn't allow it.
Correct. >> And how long has this been in effect? I mean, we're talking a very long time. Lots of projects. It's never been changed to entertainment. >> Correct. >> Okay. We can't take that lightly. >> Well, if I if I may,
>> without a writing, if I may, Mr. Marks, the special special events by their nature include entertainment. They are, it has prohibited entertainment in a number of zoning districts, but the city's own code says a special event is
defined as temporary use on public or private property that would not be permitted. >> But she said to G in this particular area did not allow entertainment. So it would be like it would be like uh catch. They had a special event permit. We
allowed it, but they couldn't have entertainment. I would I I would propose this because it seems that we're in a a a back and forth. If I would say that we would be allowed >> entertainment and special events as permitted by the code. If the city
determines that it's not permitted, then it's not permitted. If the city determines it's permitted, then it's permitted. We'll go by the code. >> Okay. But isn't the code currently saying it's not permitted? We believe that under special events that's
>> an interpretation but I I am happy to this is kind of no good deed goes unpunished. >> We're not pl we're not building this to have any special events. There may be an occasional one and we wanted to be forthright >> and say that we may have an occasional special event there. Hold on.
>> We are happy to be there abide by the code. >> Deborah, is there anyone on Zoom that wants to talk on this? >> Um anyone on Zoom please raise your hand if you would like to comment. I just want to make I want to get the public hearing out of the way. Is anybody else in J? >> No, Mr. Chair, I don't see anyone on Zoom. >> Okay. Andreas,
>> how you doing? Andre, 1000 South Point Drive. I just wanted to say that for the past 10 years, we've been listening to people whether they wanted to build a high-rise or an office building and many people did not want to see this uh especially people living south of Fifth obstructing the views this structure.
>> Leandre, just identify your address so people >> 1000 South Point. >> I'm sorry you said that. Great. Sorry. Go ahead. >> Um, and this is basically going to be camouflaged amongst what's currently there. So, this is the best case scenario obviously for the majority of
the people that are ever going to look at this um and for the intended use, the traffic and whatnot. Obviously, it it is a concern regarding uh special events and obviously I'm sure that you would like to get a a blessing from the Coast Guard. Yes. um on on something like this
to make sure that um that they're okay with it and I'm sure that they probably will be okay with it. Um but overall this is the best case scenario that we could possibly have on this site bar none. >> Right. And I think everyone agrees with that. I think the concern is we're just
talking about special Anderson. >> All right. Thanks for your comment. Anybody else on chambers speak on this? All right. So we're going to close public hearing. N it's obviously clear everyone agrees. There's no question the project is great. it's the best possible use for anyone in the area. Um, you
know, I was confident in the in the in the city's event planning permit process, but obviously Keith and Elizabeth are not. And so >> the question is um is we either approve this the way it is um
or and then you come back if you want to try to amend it or we de or we postpone it because I'm here unless the other members don't agree with that. I'm fine with it going but I you know with all difference to their concerns you know question is do you want to continue and
show us I mean obviously testified under the only thing that he you haven't shared with them is what your special events would look like >> and and what I'd like to do if I may I was I hadn't completed my presentation >> okay >> is bring up Corey Dorman from Kimley
Horn to walk you through uh how these events which are would not be large we're talking about 300 00 people. There is probably no location in the city that has a greater capacity to handle these
without any impact whatsoever on streets and neighboring properties. And I'd like to have Corey. >> Well, all right. Let me ask you one other question. So, >> if obviously if if if we had the provision that said entertainment is not
allowed unless approved by a special permit, you don't want to come back to us. Would you be if we gave you that, would you be willing to come back to us for that? Cuz I know you'd rather not, but maybe that's the compromise that we allow you to to have entertainment if there's a special events so long as you
come back to planning board so we can govern that. >> I thought we were talking about special events at the ne at the it was continued. This was this said we weren't talking about that today. I >> I if I may, if I may, Mr. Chair, let me just so everyone has a full
understanding of what we're talking about. Remember the office building that was approved here on a daily basis. >> Oh no no there's no questions that's not even an issue traffic. >> So this is this is >> no question about that. On rare occasion
there might be an event. We none particularly planned >> which will have actually less impact than the daily use of the office building there. If I could just have ahead sir come to your pres. >> I could have Cy take you through that. microphone. >> I think it's not. Yeah, you can see the
uh uh good morning. Corey Dorman with Kinley Horn, offices at 2 Al Hhamra Plaza, sweet 500 Coral Gables, Florida 33134. Um thanks for your time this morning. Um yeah, just to walk you through the board in front of you should show uh the circulation routes. Let me
actually get just a point of that. Um so hopefully you all can see uh what we're planning for for these special events in terms of uh vehicular circulation during those events. This area in orange represents the actual valet drop off pickup. That's where the exchange between uh you know guests and
valet attendants would occur. About five vehicles can be processed at any given time. Um and what you should also notice too is that this area is pushed significantly into the private property. Um, a maximum of 39 vehicles can queue and stack behind the valet area at any
given time. Um, so guests will come in off of the MacArthur Causeway. They will circulate through the internal drive aisle again and 39 vehicles um can stack up to that valet area at which point valet attendants will then take vehicles um off the site um and park vehicles in
the Fiser Island garage. Um, so in terms of in terms of >> just to pause there, is there an agreement right now where Fisher Island garage can house those cars? >> So that you would have to >> that is something that would need to be handled as part of the special event permit. Um, but the idea is is that the
Fischer Island garage is most active 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Um, and so special events would be anticipated to happen outside of those high impact areas or times rather. Um, and when the garage is is most fully utilized. Um but certainly a key detail that would
need to be ironed out in the special events uh permit application. Um in terms of trips, I mean Nissan mentioned it. Uh the previously approved application was contributing up to 274 vehicles during the weekday PM peak hour. So a higher trip generator do
during a higher impact time as compared to even a special event um at this property. >> Thank you. I I thought that was important because there's an enormous amount of stacking and queuing uh parking without interfering. This will
have no impact whatsoever on any of the areas nearby. One thing I would like to propose that maybe would give some level of comfort to some board members as well is that we we we would like of course the ability to have the special events as permit with a special event permit.
But we would agree to a condition that the Coast Guard we would notify the Coast Guard as when we apply for a special event so they would have the ability to comment and if necessary object. We feel I these uses should be
in keeping with the the owner's whole way of doing things should very should be very subdued and uh and and and and amanable for them. But we would be happy to include as a condition that for special events we would uh have to
notify the Coast Guard when we apply for that so they could comment on any special events. >> You have to be notified anyway. N I don't understand why I don't understand why you wouldn't be willing to I I don't have a problem with the use at all.
>> I just don't understand why you wouldn't be willing to wait until the Coast Guard has been given a full opportunity to give the be have a full review of the plans. I'm sure they know that there's something going on, but we would like to
hear from someone at the Coast Guard that they know what's going on and and I just don't understand. >> Just so I understand your concern, Elizabeth, you the concern with the Coast Guard is just you wanting to hear back the not that they've got notification, understand the project, or
are you directly uh uh targeting the special events with this the Coast Guard? I want to hear from the Coast Guard that they understand that they could be impacted by anything. Okay. They are an active military base. >> So, which I think is an important part of this. Absolutely. Um, if this was the
first time a project was being brought forth about this, >> they had concerns over other projects, >> but they've objected before. >> But that's what's odd though because they they they were very active in prior projects. So, it's odd to me that they have notice and no one's here for that. So they must but they're shut down right
now. That's why >> they are. >> You know what we're going to do? Hold on. >> Guard is guard is operating. >> I'm going to do some more here. Let's I'm going to start with Keith. >> Okay. >> And we're going to go down the road. >> Nie and I support the project. I like
the project. I agree that the neighborhood likes the project. And my concern is Elizabeth's and that we don't have a one rewritten piece of paper that says that you can have 300 people during
an activity time frame that the Coast Guard may not like 300 random people there with no definition of time frames. It could be 3:00 in the morning. It could be 8 a.m. It could be very loud or
not very loud. The you would think an active military base would have an interest in in advance stating their position and whether we should change something that obviously was in code, no entertainment, no special events and in
an area that's facing them. So logic tells me that I would feel I would like to hear in writing see in writing not even hear see in writing that they know this plan exists with no time frames and
no volume controls currently because you don't know what you're going to do and whether they'd like 300 people in a band. >> Why do you say no volume controls? >> Well, clearly audible to wear. He's he's not saying 100 feet. He's saying clearly
audible. Well, >> okay. But you said volume controls. >> Yeah, I mean clearly audible to to the base. Are we going to do that now? That's not our property, >> right? But there will be some volume. That's okay. I misunderstood your question. >> Yeah. Yeah. No. And so
I would personally either like to to pass it with the current status and you give us a letter coming back uh that says they're they're you're better defined it and they're good with it. 300 people and entertainment in the
in areas and times you do or you know uh without it or delay it till you tell us. And if I we would be fine with getting that letter, passing it. Yeah. Allowing it, but passing it with getting a letter back from the Coast Guard saying that they are okay.
>> Before one question for Seth, has there ever been a special event on this this area that you're aware of? >> Not that I'm there's no history. >> Okay. >> Well, it's been an industrial. >> It's industrial. >> That's what I thought, but I didn't know if maybe someone rented it for that. >> There may have been. I mean, it was a,
you know, there was a commercial marina operating there. I think they may have had events. >> But is your concern with the noise for the Coast Guard or the residents or both? >> Actually, it could be both. But right now, it's it's just the Coast Guard. I mean,
>> you think because you live closer to the island in Sunset Harbor, but you think with volume control that people south of Fifth could still be exposed to inconvenience >> outdoors with with no volume? >> No, with volume controls. >> Well, yeah. >> Okay. You still think they could be
impacted that far away? I I don't know the area as well as you. >> Oh, I don't know what you mean by volume control, >> but there's a noise ordinance that limits with the the volume whether it's a special event or a daily event. There's another >> You mean if you can hear an audible more than 100 ft, >> right?
>> That that true then they'll never hear it off the fifth. >> That applies. >> Well, that's fine. So that Yeah. >> Then the real issue is the Coast Guard. Yes. Is the people that sleep there and live there. Yeah. How >> how many how many I know it's how many how many do you anticipate special events in a year?
>> We really don't know. Uh and it's not I mean this is uh uh certainly the tail wagging the dog in the sense that probably for things like Art Basel or maybe something or F1. Uh you know there'll be occasional right
>> uh special events. This is this is his personal marina and and and I must reiterate I know it's been said but this is the least intense the most secure use again this is all about special everything is great it's all about
special events um and again I'm puzzled that the Coast Guard is not here because they've been so active in the past >> Mr. Mr. Chair, you heard the testimony. I heard it testimony that not only did they of course they received the plans from the personally shown the plans. >> Is is there a precedent where if there
and it's not my comments I know we're going to go down the road but is there any precedent where if this was approved and let's say the applicant has 30 days to provide a letter from Coast Guard in the absence of such letter they have to come back before the planning board. Is there anything like that? I >> would not recommend doing that. Um why?
because the decisions made today and if you're concerned about an affected party's um potential input or objections um >> I'm I'm not concerned but because I mean they've said sworn testimony that they have heard favorable feedback from the
Coast Guard. So I'm not concerned but for those that are concerned maybe that could be a middle ground >> but that letter could take any number of forms. >> Let me ask you this um and then I'm going to go to to to back to Keith or Scott. Um, in the special events process for the city, will the Coast Guard be
given notice of that if they apply for a special events permit? >> I don't know if they are required to they're not required to consent. Now, are they are they required to receive notice? >> Could there be condition in that that
they receive agree to be offered that? >> Well, we would we will agree to give them notice when we apply for any special event. >> And what if they object? What what if they object? I think the city would take that. >> Hold on. That stop. That's my next question. If you if we agree in a
condition that they will get notice and they have problems, you all obviously listen to those concerns and or whoever who by the way who who approves a special event in the city? >> The tourism director. >> Huh? >> The tourism director. The tourism department >> individually as a group are there
committee? Is it one person? Is it >> it it's the the tourism department oversees special events. What the special event guidelines provide is that um that that staff can take into account a um uh a neighbor's concerns or
objections in the conditions they impose on a special event permit approval. >> They can not shall, >> right? Not sh but I'm assuming the city would give deference to the Coast Guard's concerns. Is that a good assumption? I would I would think so.
>> There's no way of us like firmly making you know including that if there's any objection from the uh specifically from the Coast Guard that this would be um a no-go. >> So no go but they'd have to accommodate their concerns, >> right? Well, I mean yeah giving it more
weight than just the >> right if the board has you know the board has authority to to as part of your approval prohibit any special event. >> Uh but that's not what we want to do. No, I understand that. But I'm saying I think it would follow that you could um
require the Coast Guard you I mean you could require the city to take into account the Coast Guard's objections. You could require I think you could require their consent. >> We can condition that the person who decides on special events require to take into account the Coast Guard's
concerns and address them accordingly. That could be condition. We can oppose that on the city. >> I think you could include that condition. I also think if you wanted to, you could require consent. >> I think required consent might be more important, >> right? Because that way if you require Coastgard consent, if they have
concerns, they will have to address them to the point where they'll then agree to it. >> That's right. >> Okay. All right. >> We're fine with that. >> I'm going to go back to uh who's next, Scott. Go ahead, Scott. >> Yeah, I think we pretty much just in that last discussion um go through it again resolved a lot of the questions,
at least things I would have brought up. Look, I don't have a problem with the project. um with what you're asking for the special events and the entertainment. Um what you what you profered I think is will help to get consent from the Coast
Guard for special events. Um the only thing is I I do want to wait though till we hear from the Coast Guard before we approve it. Um as you um I'm sorry I forgot your name. What what you mentioned that Coast Guard has this and you're waiting for a letter from them.
Well, >> um, he's, you know, I guess it goes up the chain and then a bunch of people have to review it. I would just like to hear back from them that they're okay with this. >> I and I would like to conclude my >> I'm sorry. I thought you were >> I don't think we're giving enough weight to the staff recommendation that
actually thought of all this and they said approve everything but the special um, >> you know, the special events. That's what we're concerned about hearing from the Coast Guard. I don't think we can prospectively come up with a solution. I
think we get that in front of us once we have that letter hopefully that outlines the Coast Guard's position and we approve everything but the special events and entertainment change until we hear from them January 6.
>> Well, are you saying approve but as the bifurcate the special >> bifurcate? Well, that's the recommendation. Prove everything >> except except the two the the the gh with a letter or the Coast Guard
comedant and we'll be cool. >> Understood. Mr. Chair, if I may briefly address this, I I also want to put a little bit of context onto this. We have been working Dan Moore and his team closely with the Coast Guard. In fact, the Coast Guard used our space to land
helicopters. There's a very close working relationship. Uh, and this is actually the, as I've said more than once, this is the best use the Coast Guard can have and is beneficial actually to the Coast Guard. I think we can get around the issue by saying, and
we are willing to do this, that they as to any special event, they will receive notice and uh and if they object that the city can uh deny the special event. I think I don't know what more we can we
could we could offer in that regard because we will we are working closely with them. We will work closely >> is I mean Keith Elizabeth any what what is not okay with that? >> I don't >> if they're getting notice and they have the right to object anything that will not be granted.
>> Mr. Chair, >> Mr. Chair, if I may add um our ownership's goal is to support the mission of the Coast Guard. Mhm. >> We've worked with the Coast Guard hand in hand on a number of different a variety of issues.
>> We have a great relationship with them >> and we wouldn't want to have any event that the Coast Guard had any issue with. >> Right. So that I don't hear you. They're concern. >> I'm okay with that. >> Okay. Except I think it's reasonable. >> I I don't have it in front of me
anymore, but you were saying allow entertainment. I would change that to say allow it under special events only. That's what the language is. In fact, we may even host as a special event the Coast Guard ball. >> Okay. >> No, I listen, I appreciate everything
you're saying and I and I'm fine with it. Obviously, I have to respect two of my board members and you know, to me, if if they get notice and the city has to listen to them and if they object, you guys work it out until they consent. >> Yeah, we're fine. I'm fine with that. Okay, >> we're fine.
>> All right, Scott. Let's go back to order. Scott, any other >> I'm okay with that. Um I I it's not as much the approval from the Coast Guard that bothers me. It's the potential for noise emanating emanating
from speakers and entertainment uh special events to the the people who are living on the Coast Guard station. Additionally, the lighting impact and and uh and speaker potentially music impacted South Fifth residents. We don't
know. It's too early to tell. There's and one of the issues that staff had was the the lack of specificity or lack of clarity in terms of what specifically is planned. And until the city is is comfortable with it, I don't think I'm
comfortable with it. Um, one of the questions I have is I mean, do you have do you plan on having preconstruction special events like this season before any buildings are done? Um >> I don't think there's any plan uh yet any plan special events
>> is that that's one of the things I would say you know when there's no supporting structures that puts an even more bigger burden on the neighboring you know area and the traffic and so I mean I'm definitely against any special events
until it's done you know the project is done and able to support that many people there um but uh you know with 10 events especially events uh you know or a year a year that's almost monthly events you know I'm not saying he's
planning on that but he has the option to and you know he's a very philanthropic person he could be you know saying to different organizations yeah host your event here and it ends up being once a month other than the summer months uh the other thing that we really haven't discussed is traffic in the area
so assuming even five of them only limited to five is uh are during during peak season, you know, during our Bosler, you could do three backto back. And I mean, we all know that juncture right there on MacArthur
is just brutal. Um, I understand that there previously was an office building there and and we we look I remember looking at the traffic study and that was a concern of everybody's. Um, but I think that more attention needs to be given to the what's what's planned for
these special events. There's a clearly a dispute or a disagreement between the city as to whether entertainment's allowed there as part of a special event or not. The applicant feels that there is entertainment allowed with the special event. The city has indicated
right now that they don't believe that entertainment would be allowed even with a special event permit. I think now is the time to address that while we have oversight of this project instead of waiting until it's too late because once it's too late then we have the south of
fifth south of fifth residents up in arms saying we hear all this we see the the lights coming from it it's it's monthly or it's it's causing chaos uh you know the backup of traffic and at that point there's really nothing we can
do about it. Um the uh and and so and the other thing I wanted more I think we need more specificity in terms of traffic uh I'm sorry parking. I understand that garages there but I there are they're still renovating they're going to be I know we approved
the renovation to it. So I don't know um whether that means they're taking some parking out of service for the for two years or or whatever it may be. >> May I address that? >> Sure. >> Okay. So a couple of things and first of all I did again uh that's why Corey Dorman went there. There is an
extraordinary amount of stacking and queuing space allowed so that for any event of 300 people there will never be any spillover onto the causeway. It's just you can look at the geometry of the property the length of the driveway and
you can see that that will can literally can never be a problem. In terms of the parking, we are also working very closely with the Fiser Island Community Association because the intention is that we will be using their garage if
and when uh on a rare occasion there is a special event which should usually be a weekend or evening. We are trying to as well coordinate with the fact that any expansion to their garage will be completed in time for when this marina facility is built.
>> Right. I but it's tentative, right? So there's no specific there's no real a you know firm agreement with I know you're working with them and I appreciate that and I'm sure it might work to their benefit because they would love the extra you know revenue.
>> Um but I I'm just you know it's all sort of and and I don't know is there anything limiting you to 300 people for a special event? >> Well what we put in the our proposed the proposed condition would say that. >> Okay. Um
>> but you know again it's uh among other things as well this board in your order retains jurisdiction for when after this project is completed to bring us back and I do have to I I do have to give
some perspective. Mr. Griffin has now been lived in this community for three or four years. Uh I can he is does not have a reputation as someone who is regularly throws wild large parties. We have to understand who we're dealing
with. This is a private marina for a person who has been frankly a model citizen and and and is now to soon to be a resident of Miami Beach with his main home on the closest residential neighborhood to this site. I mean I think we have to take this into account.
The problem with that is and I I we we I think we all acknowledge that in his contributions to the community. The problem is is we've seen this property trade like three times in the last 10 years >> and you can put a condition if it's if it if there's a different owner you come back. We have to come back.
>> That's already in that's already in the the >> No, it's just that we would have to >> it's saying if there's 50% or more ownership >> my turn >> the change. >> Okay. And that's you know obviously he's not buying this to to flip property. this is >> this is a long-term but if it you know
if you're concerned that someone else is going to come in and buy it we'll come back to the board. >> All right, Jonathan you >> um I think the comments from everyone on the board have definitely been helpful and I think we could get this to a place where all the concerns are hopefully
alleviated. If we were to get to a point where uh you know we we made a motion, some of the things that I would look for which hopefully the applicant would agree to is a few things. Number one, a progress report. This is obviously a very specific use with something that might
impact not just residents but also you know government organizations. So what I would say is that there's a progress report that has to happen let's call it every six months for the first two years. Um, that's something that I would look for so that a the Coast Guard has
another chance to speak throughout that time period as well as the residents of >> problem with that. I'm sorry to interrupt you, is that if the concern is special events, then bringing them back for progress reports on a regular basis. >> Well, it's not regular. It' be every six months. So, you would have a window
>> once every six months. >> Once every six months, the first two years. >> Uh, that's first of all. Second of all, I would I would say that something has to be included in here where parking has to be self-contained on terminal aisle. So, you know, whether kind of to your
concern, whether Fisher Island garage happens or not, whatever it is, that's now the problem of the applicant where they have to figure out how everything is self-contained. You don't have runners running to who knows where. Um, which would obviously create even more congestion. Mhm. >> I think uh that you know kind of what's
been discussed beforehand where Coast Guard has to be sent notice of any and all special events and they have you know an opportunity to either you know give their comments or object and there should be something in there where you know the city has to take their consideration or or I'd say we need the
Coast Guard's >> approval. approval. >> Yes. Would you be able would you what do you think about um and and Nan also what what if it's I don't know if this is able to be done but I would feel more comfortable if it were sent to the
commander of the Coast Guard so that they would be able to weigh in because I mean what you're saying the notice of special events. >> Yeah. I think wait that that's who I think should get >> because when we when when I see notices
for special events um you know we get an email and it'll say North Beach, South Beach. >> Not like I'm saying it should be specifically addressed to the common to the commander whoever is Yes. >> and and that's kind of how it it should proceed. Um, in terms of the special
events, kind of my biggest concern in seeing this was the 10 because to your point, if you have 10, you could really do one a month, whatever it is. I mean, Mr. Griffin has only been here for what, four years. It's usually at the fifth year that they take on the Miami mantra of loving those raers. But assuming that
doesn't happen to Mr. Griffin. I mean, I would love to see it that'll happen. >> Eight or or whatever it is cuz that kind of makes sure that he can't, you know, have one a month or something that might be totally problematic for the nearby um areas. So, I mean that that's kind of
how I view it. I think that's a compromise that really incorporates all the different concerns and if there was consensus, I mean, that's the motion that I would make. Can can I ask uh the city the what are number one is when
they do special events do they do traffic studies like is that part of it? >> It is if depending on the magnitude of the event. So they take that into consideration and typically a large event 300 people would be considered a large event would be have a circulation
parking plan uh required as part of that. And then in terms of your recommendation not to approve the special events section at this juncture, what other than like things that we've discussed, were there any other things that you felt that you were missing that
normally would be part of this sort of application? Yeah, we would have liked to have seen the hours of operation for for a special event if this is going to be a 2 a.m. 5:00 a.m. Um, I think, you know, for this type of very unique facility, I think a security plan would
be important, not only for the Coast Guard, but the marina itself is going to be very high security, and there's going to be a lot of people probably wanting to go to these parties. So my, you know, I had questions about, well, is the SEC, are they really going to allow vehicles that far into the site? Are they going
to stop them much closer to the gate and do a security check? I mean, that could cause a backup of traffic, right? They're not just going to let cars drive in. They're going to have a a checkpoint where either they're going to inspect the vehicle or, you know, get everyone's identities in the car confirmed before
they left. >> When when an when an applicant applies for a special permit, do they apply kind of all at once or it's one at a time? >> One time. Okay. So, I mean, assuming that's the case then and there were issues with, you know, that one event, then they would come back again for the
next approval and it would either be approved or denied based on whatever experience was originally had. Correct. >> Correct. The the special events permit are discretionary by the city. >> Right. But everything you just concerned everything you express is a concern. Wouldn't that be right
>> of al also the concern of the person who grants the permit? >> Exactly. >> Potentially. >> Hold on. >> And Mr. Chair, we have we've also showed you showed you that there's a 21 stacking and queuing spaces behind the security checkpoint. I mean, this is look at the geography of this location.
we have more than ample room to accommodate events of the size we're talking about. No place in the city I can think of that is better suited for that. >> Okay. So I just want to ask staff something because my view is um if they agree to the 100 ft audible plainly
audible and they require Coast Guard consent I'm fine with the whole thing. Are you fine with that? Yeah, I think >> and when I say Coastg Guard consent that that that they have to consent. So if they have objections, they're going to have to communicate with the Coast
Guard, figure out what their objections are and come to an agreement. And if they do, and the Coast Guard says we're good with this, then we're good. And if they say, "No, we're not," then they they won't issue it. >> Your co are you good with I I find that >> particularly with Coastg Guard consent that that definitely takes care of the impact. You
>> okay with that? We're fine with that. >> All right, then. I'm going to pass it on to Melissa then. I think what about the other things I >> and all of the other conditions you mentioned, Mr. Cement, we are agreeable to. >> Okay. >> Okay. Melissa, >> what about precomp completion project completion of special events?
>> Yeah, I I'll include that. >> Not until it's done. That's fine. >> So So you would need a TCO on the project in order to start having or to be eligible to apply for a special >> That's fine. It's going to be a construction site. We're not going to want to have people having uh >> Yeah. You're not going to have security
ready and operations. So you need a TCO. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Just out of curiosity, a question to the city um to the staff here, sorry. The when a project is approved like this and and there is um um some of the concerns here that they would be able to do an
event while the construction is not totally finished. When we approve a project, isn't it under the condition that the everything is laid out, the architecture is laid out, that the landscaping is laid out? >> Yeah. I mean, I don't know if anything would technically prohibit them from
trying to apply for a special events permit notwithstanding this this approval, but I think, you know, that special events are also review by the fire department and um life safety codes are required to be complied with and I don't think we I don't to my knowledge
an active construction site would not be eligible. >> It's going to be a construction site. So, >> yeah, Mr. Chair, if I may, um there's no plan for any preconstruction activity. Um we're doing a a major port seaw wall job. We're actually
we have we're all permanent and just waiting for the city of Miami Beach building permit. We have Durm Army Corps. >> Okay. I agree. We're going to add that as a condition. >> So then like to me it's like what's the if that's going to it's going to take at least you know a year and a half, two years. contractors mobilizing into the
site on November 15th, >> right? And that's great. I just What's the rush to to push through these special events approvals now before the final >> Well, hold on. I mean, did you hear all the conditions we're putting on them? >> I I did I I still like they haven't
been, you know, that analysis hasn't really been done by the the city. Not to mention these plans can change, right? So, like construction plans change. We haven't seen a security plan, a queuing plan. I'm just saying, >> well, there is a queuing plan and there
will be there will be 24-hour security on this site all the time. >> You know what? We've heard enough. We're going to go and we're going to vote and if it doesn't pass, it doesn't pass. >> So, so I I'm um I I'm I'm in line with most what she has pointed out that we want as conditions. Um, one thing that
is a concern is what uh, staff has mentioned is, yeah, there's going to be some security checkpoints. And so I would like a condition also in there that, you know, is framed in a way where we know that this is not going to be an issue of queuing again um, due to security checkpoints. Um, and and in
regards to parking, same thing. On-site parking is an important part so that we're not uh, creating any issues. And I'm assuming there's other ways of dealing with it. Uh, you guys have a big dock. I mean maybe there's a external at another port where people are are are
moved from from one parking space to to the property. I don't know but it has to be definitely a uh part of the plan like a clarity that there won't be any backup whether it's for the security point or the traffic for the parking. So um so I would like for us to make sure if we're going to move forward that this is like
super clear that we're not going to be dealing with that. Um I am not concerned with with with with the type of parties are going to happen there from from knowing uh um indirectly. Um my kids go to school with Mr. Griffin. We would he's a member at the same golf course. We've he's respectful. So I don't think
we're we're dealing here with noisy parties. Um but again um as to as the rest of the board is is is speaking of we just got to make sure that this is not affecting their direct neighbor which is um you know the the main concern. So, um I I there's a balance
for us to be approving uh so that you guys can be moving forward at the same time addressing our concerns. I think uh the Coast Guard is a big one that you guys feel not showing up with some some of the support that we needed to see. I think with all the conditions we're we're putting in today, it addresses
some of our concerns and it puts an at least a slowdown to um uh should we have should we have some should they have any concerns that they have a chance to be uh showing up or or or um addressing. So um >> what do you think about hours? We
haven't even talked about that. >> We have not talked about the hours. >> That would be subject to this to the special event. >> Correct. Correct. Correct. >> That the Coast Guard would have to approve. And truly again at this point the hours, you know, this is not a residential neighbor. This is an isolated. So the only direct neighbor is
the Coast Guard which are we're putting in the condition that they get to review it anyway. So I think we address that and we we're passing that on to them to make sure that they're comfortable with it. So to me it's pretty straightforward. I think we should be moving it forward with the conditions um because there's no point in bringing
people back over and over again when we were going to be doing the same discussion back then. The only concern was with the Coast Guard and I think we're addressing it and and what we're putting as conditions in here. >> So, can you guys let's let's lay out what the conditions are before we vote. Can we do that? >> If if >> who wants to do that?
>> If I were to make If I were to make the motion, uh the motion would be for the approval of the project as well as the special events provided that the following takes place. Number one, the applicant has to come back before the board every 6 months for two years
following following issuance of CO. Number two, instead of 10 permitted special events, I would suggest eight special events. Number three, all parking has to be self-contained on terminal aisle.
Number four, no special events until receipt of TCO. Number three, the Coast Guard has to provide approval. >> Number five, actually, >> sorry, number five, for all for all special events, >> each and every
>> number six, um any future owner has to come back before the board regardless of whatever percentage ownership is transferred. And then the last one would be uh there shall be no queuing on the causeway as a
result of the special events or any type of special events uh plan. We agreed to all of that. Mr. Sam, there's one typo uh in the U order number 2 where it says about no parking
may occur between the gate house and the edge of the roadway. It says all parking that exceeds six allotted guest parking spaces are required to park in the interior. >> That should be 11. There are >> not six. >> Right. >> Right.
>> That's my motion. >> Can I can we say for the um so for the 2D for the fire build for the speakers and televisions direct the speakers away from the Coast Guard station. >> Mhm. Um, ambient
>> and also that any and all sound shall be ambient. Yes. Any sound. >> Oh, that was gonna be my ad. >> Oh, yeah. >> Accepted. >> All right. I would second that. >> Accepted. All conditions accepted. >> Okay. And >> by the way, to be honest, I I think even if we were to continue this, I think we're in a way better position today
than we would have been if this was continued. >> All right. So, we have a second. I'd like you to do roll call on this one. So, >> Okay. If I if I could just um >> add a condition for your consideration. So in the transportation memo,
>> they had uh the transportation department had a recommended condition. It's um on page three of the transportation memo. It's condition number two that a special events permit will be required for private events. Um this is basically a standard uh
condition that the operational plan must be provided to the transportation department as part of the special events process. Um that wasn't put in because we were recommending that the special events be continued. >> But if the board is inclined to approve special events, we would like that
condition to be included. >> Okay. >> Um and if I could just make one clarification. Um, condition I where it says six, those six spaces, that was a condition from transportation and I believe they're referring to the
specific six spaces that are located pretty much adjacent to the street, right? Yes. >> They're saying there are 11 spaces in front though. >> There are 11 guest spaces, >> but right there the six the six >> but as long as we understand clearly that that refers to the six spaces in front. >> Yes. That condition is specific to only
those six spaces. >> Yeah. >> Okay. There's the motion. >> You satisfy my my Coast Guard. >> Yeah, they have to approve. All right. Oh, is it set? We're voting. Yes. >> Okay. Yes. >> Yes. >> Cut.
>> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Thank you very much. We I can assure you this we will be the best neighbor the Coast Guard has ever had. >> You earned your money. >> Thanks for all your presentations. It helps. and glad we could come to a fair
resolution. So, >> yeah. >> Okay, we're on to uh comprehensive plan code amendments. First is planning board file 25805, temporary conditional use regulations and commercial districts. >> Okay,
>> it's on page um >> it's not numbered. >> It's not numbered anyway. >> Not numbers this time. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, this is a legislation that was is sponsored by Commissioner Alex Fernandez pertaining
to um temporary regulations specifically targeting the vacant vacancies in our um commercial corridors. So, what this ordinance would do would it would allow um if a project meets certain thresholds and is located in one of the um targeted
commercial corridors, a staff review and approval of what would normally be a CUP in front of this planning board in terms of uh you know the occupancy of an alcoholic beverage establishment. Um we discussed this ordinance at the October
meeting uh if the board members recall and we were tasked with coming back um with some modifications um to address some of the the concerns expressed by the board members. Um we also have been in communication with the with the item
sponsor um for some some of these changes. So, if I'm just going to really quickly go through the differences between last month and and what is before you today, the first change is that the 41st Street um corridor between Alton Road and Pine Drive has now been
included as one of the eligible areas. Um the criteria has been modified to include the following. So number one um that existing businesses with a previously approved or an existing cup
are not eligible for this administrative approval. Our concern was that we have um existing cups that maybe some of the property owners would not like certain conditions that are in their existing cup. So they say you know what we're going to abandon our cup and we're going to go for administrative approval. So
this would help avoid that. Um, the ordinance has also been amended to include a prohibition on rooftop activation. So, rooftop activation would not be eligible for an administrative approval. The maximum occupancy
associated with a neighborhood impact application uh has been limited to a maximum of 750 persons. Again, this is for the administrative approval. Um the administrative review approval procedures were clarified to indicate
that a BTR for this the NIE um would be required. And finally, we modified the enforcement and penalty section um to make the enforcement and penalties subject to revocation by the city
manager consistent to the provisions that allow the city manager to revoke a BTR. So that you know what would people do that causes a revocation of the BTR would be consistent with revoking the neighborhood impact establishment approval.
>> Um sorry that would be the same thing. In other words, if this the city manager would technically technically would he revoke revoke the BTR or would it be the cup? >> Well, it wouldn't be a CUP. It would be an what we're calling a neighbor an
administrative neighborhood impact approval. could be revoked in accordance with the same criteria that currently allow the city manager to revoke a BTR. This is a new process. So, we don't have revocation standards and what we're
recommending is to make those standards for revocation the same as the current >> BTR understood >> criteria. >> Yeah. >> My question was who who actually made all these changes because it was everything we spoke about and I assume there's no push back. I mean, that's great. um the planning department made the
changes in consultation with the city attorney's office and with the commission commissioner uh Fernandez. >> So I I wasn't uh privy to this last meeting. Um but just a couple of questions. Um is this citywide?
Can we make it citywide? >> I think so. We spoke about that last meeting. The reason >> no meaning we we asked the same thing last meeting. The reason why it was ultimately determined not is because the goal is to try and energize these specific areas.
>> Can we do the same thing on 71st Street? >> I I think 71st Street was included in it. >> I I don't know. >> I'm I'm pretty sure it was included. >> It's one of It's one of the areas in the ordinance. >> Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Um Look, I missed this meeting. So, >> no, we asked the same thing. >> Um Okay. So, there's one other thing
that I've um you've got in here, and this is something that's been bothering me for quite a while. Um other cities have signs posted that are at least this I don't even know what are those the sizes of of they're huge. um what kind
of sign >> these what we see as posted signage and and everything are these little stakes in the ground with 11 by4 pieces of paper that are that you can't read. You you basically have to get out of your
car to get to go read them. I'd like to see those in >> the notices. >> The notices it Yeah. Right here. Um, I'd like to have those where it says uh the applicant should mount a laminated posting in the form of prescribed by the planning director in the front of the property in a manner and location
clearly visible from the public right that needs to be enlarged. >> What I would suggest the board consider is um this is an this is going to be an administrative approval. Um, so that any notice, any notice that's required as
part of this ordinance is really going to be in the nature of a courtesy notice. Um, if you would like to consider amending the the the size of the posted notice for applications that do require land use board approval, then maybe maybe um maybe you could make that
as a separate recommendation that the commission consider because I think if you make this notice larger than all the other notices, it might give a false impression that this one's going to a public hearing when it's not. >> So, I guess that you know what? I'll take
that up with a I'll deal with that in a different >> and you could bring that up a as a separate recommendation if you'd like. >> A separate item. >> That's what I'm going to Okay. So So and I'm sorry if you can just indulge me for a minute. >> Um >> are all of the are all of the fines and
everything has been they've been >> everything if they've had more than three violations or something like that. I mean are those every all that's taken care of? So, um, the ordinance been has been revised
since the planning board's first hearing on this item, um, to provide that a BTR shall be subject to suspension or modification by the city manager. That is our enforcement process for uh for
these types of establishments that do not require board approval since they wouldn't have like the modification or revocation process that that conditional use permits are subject to. Um and there's a a a list of reasons
>> for which public nuisances and things like that >> a um a BTR could be suspended or revoked. It's it's the first page right after the staff report and at the top it says section 102-381. >> That's what I'm reading. >> Yeah. So these are the different bases for which um the BTR could be suspended
or revoked. >> Okay. So is there a way So we we see nuisance businesses that have been constantly cited and they're constantly being allowed to operate,
continue to operate. Is there something that we can put in that says >> have to have it revoked? I mean, I know it's at the city manager's discretion now, but I've never seen one revoked by this administration. So, what what can
we do to strengthen that a little bit? Well, this is not going to When you say nuisance used, do you mean >> I'm just saying things we're >> I'm trying to >> because this is this is really only relates to um restaurants,
>> uh bars, >> um and and smaller entertainment establishments, indoor only, >> right? Right. So the the only entertainment that is allowed as part of this process would be if the
entertainment was associated with a supper club venue. >> Okay. >> So a bar with entertainment for example would not be allowed under this process. >> Um >> okay.
>> Can I ask a question? um grandfather and came up as a a caller last time. Since this is temporary and this goes away after a year, but the NIE I guess once you get this it it continues on. Is
there a repealer or something that says that the next person that takes over that spot has to come back through a CUP process that they cannot inherit >> as a right? >> I like that a lot. >> Special permit. >> The challenge with that would be with a
project that is approved administratively is we don't you know we don't we don't necessarily know if there's a change in ownership. Right. >> That's a serious concern. Well, no, but but I mean it's a it's a reality is is if a if if a if an interest in a
business um sells um >> under this process there's no vetting then it could it could be run really well two years from now ownership changes and they change the entire concept they can still run on the NIE
and not come before this board not come through any administrative review. Is that what that mean? Is that the danger of this? >> All of the same um conditions in the ordinance, all the same requirements would apply to any new owner. Um, so
they're inheriting the NIE and we can't say you this is a temporary program which Alex is trying to drive for a year and we say that if anyone who gets this changes materially 51% of
ownership then then you have to the new owners have to apply for a cup. What I think you could do is if there's a change of of owner or operator, similarly to what you do in your in your board orders that that for projects that do require conditional use permit
approval, >> is you could require that the new owner or operator submit um a written affidavit to the planning director that they agree to comply with all the same restrictions. Um that that will be binding on them. First of all, the the conditions of approval, all the
requirements in the code would be binding on a new owner anyway, but we could um amend this to additionally require an affidavit. What I don't think we could say is a new owner has to come before the planning board because I mean this isn't this >> even though this goes away, this is a
sunset, right? the this has a sunset. But once you if you if you get administrative approval during the one-year incentive program, you're you you know you you're vested in that approval. >> You're you're done. But it could be a
different restaurant, a different owner. >> I mean, it's it's a grandfather for you're grandfathering in a program. >> All he's saying is that they would be bound by the same restrictions. Just >> well, let me before we continue this, is there anybody on Zoom to speak on that? I want I want to open the public
hearing. >> Um, we have Amy Mayhew. >> Amy, good morning. >> Hi. Good morning. Amy Mayhew with the 41st Street Business Improvement District. I'm calling in support of the item. We are excited by the opportunity
to be able to offer um the ability for some type of inside live ambient entertainment um on the street. It'd be a great offering. Um and I know other commercial districts in the in the area also similarly would benefit from it as
well because it's something that's being offered just outside the causeway. Um so we are supportive of being able to um shorten the process. this as a temporary time. Um, and just as a point of qu question and clarification, the BTR
revocation, was that a requirement for the revocation of this per permit or no? It would just be those would be the the conditions by which this permit would then be revoked because that's the one thing I'm I'm
just curious about for our own um >> efforts with it. Nick, >> the um the the enforcement mechanism that uh that that Debbie and I have outlined to the board would apply to
whatever use is being administratively approved right under under the program. So, we're not it's not a conditional use permit because this doesn't require planning board approval. It would instead be um we would call it an administrative NIE approval. So yes, that is the enforcement process for
violations of the administrative NAE approval. >> Got it. Perfect. Then love it. And we're supportive and we don't anticipate um and hope there wouldn't be any types of violations, but we definitely wouldn't
want to see anything more dire happen if there were a violation. Just be able to suspend that right to ability to do that. So, thank you so much and we hope you all consider it. Thank you. >> Thanks, Amy. Anything any any other public comment? >> I have one question. >> Yeah, just let Oh,
>> um I'm reading this right now and it's saying that if the application is located in commercially zones within Collins Avenue between 65th and 75th Street, that's an that is um what if it's within 100 ft of
what if it's within 100 ft of a residential building as in Maybe somebody you know lives next door. >> I'm just trying to ask the question because this is that this is saying it
shall not require C conditional use from the planning board if it's located on a commercially zone within >> Fifth and Lincoln Collins and Alton 65th to 75th. That's neighborhoods. Those are
literally neighborhoods like I live in. So all residents like that's that's tell me how that would work. No rooftops, no nothing. Is that right? >> So no rooftops, no outdoor
entertainment. >> Okay. >> Um indoor entertainment only when associated with a supper club. So a bonafide real. >> Okay. Um, >> I'm just ensuring I wasn't here last time. So, >> I think you said there's somebody else
on Zoom. You said >> yes, we have uh Troy Troy Wright. >> Hi, Troy. >> Troy. >> Hello, everyone. Good morning, chair and members of the planning board. Happy voting day. Um, my name is Troy Wright,
executive director of the Washington Avenue Business Improvement District. um representing over 100 property owners and 300 businesses along the corridor. So, we would like to express our strong support for the proposed temporary conditional use regulations. Um for
years, small businesses and entrepreneurs in Washington Avenue um have faced long delays and high costs just to open a restaurant, cafe, or music venue. This ordinance provides a sensible timeline solution. um limited
um it removes unnecessary barriers while keeping strong safeguards in place for safety and quality of life. So by allowing administrative review for qualified establishments, uh this measure will activate vacant storefronts
and bring back what we believe jobs and revitalize our commercial corridor uh turning the dark spaces into vibrant destinations. Um, therefore, on behalf of Washington Avenue business community, we urge your favorable recommendation. So, thank you
for your time and continued dedication to a better Washington Avenue and Miami Beach. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else? >> I'll make a motion to >> Hold on. Anybody else on Zoom? >> I'm sorry. >> Anybody in chambers on this? Okay. Close public hearing. Go ahead.
>> I'll make a motion to >> send it favorably. >> Send it favorably. >> I'll second that. >> Okay. All in favor? I anyone opposed? >> Okay. >> If I could just get one clarification. Um is that sending it favorably with the um notice provision >> or without?
>> Yes, >> with the notice with the recommendation of the notice provision. >> I think it has to be a recommendation, right? Yeah. >> Correct. Okay. >> Correct. >> All right. The last are it looks like companion uh code amendments planning board file 02 I'm sorry 2550794 and
02795 the fin district overlay comprehensive plan amendment and F preservation incentive. >> Okay. Uh thank you Mr. Chair. So this is for a a very minor uh F increase within the Fina overlay district. Um the
district was established in 2015 to allow greater flexibility of uses, height, and setbacks as well as to acknowledge um the historic components of the of the neighborhood. So the applicant who is the property owner of 3425
Collins Avenue, which is the Versailles, soon to be hopefully soon to be the Aman uh development, is seeking to amend the land development regulations to allow for a bonus F. The bonus F that they are requesting is up to 5,000 square feet.
Um, and they the way the ordinance is drafted, it would be applicable to properties within the overlay district that also have a lot area equal to or greater than 65,000 square ft. So from staff's analysis, that would be two prop two separate properties that would be
eligible for this. That would be the Versailles property as well as the Saxony property which is the Fina Hotel property. Um both of those also contain a contributing building which is a requirement of this bonus that impact
those two buildings. There's no other building would fall in. >> Correct. >> And when you say Versail that's the new Aman project. It was a historic Versailles. Um, which is really, if you've seen it lately, it's really kind of a feat of engineering that it's still there.
>> They're saving a little >> Yeah, it's really something else. But, um, notwithstanding that, staff has no objection to this request. um at least for the the Versailles property or the Aman project, we have met with the architects um and their plan is to
convert what is double height space within the shell of the existing contributing building to mechanical area. The conversion of a double height space would increase the F. >> And how soon can they do it? >> I mean we we're waiting >> we've been waiting. I've been, you know,
working with not only through the planning board side, but also the HPV side with the applicant um and and trying to be as supportive as possible moving everything along. Yeah. >> By the way, is this still Bvatnik and Vlad doing the project? It is. Okay.
>> Can I May I just ask what what is the time frame we're looking at now? >> Uh >> I see some some rebar. >> It is. I I'll we're going to give you a progress report. It's moving forward now at a rapid pace. >> Good. >> Uh but Beahul Patel who is the director
of development will give you a brief report on that. >> Okay. >> And that whole lawsuit with finding that was all everything settled done. We're moving forward. >> Oh, you mean the the height issue that was resolved a long >> back in the day. Yeah. >> Resolved a long time ago. >> Long time ago. Okay. >> Go ahead. >> Uh uh thank you. If we put the
presentation up, please. Uh good morning again. Nissan Casden and Chris Penellis of Acrement LLP representing the uh applicant and uh that this is a pretty uh uh uh unique but simple situation. The code
provides that you can have F modifications of under 5,000 square ft uh and that you can wave the extended extensive process for other F changes because they're so minimal. In this instance here, we're talking about a
total of an additional 2.5%. One of the things that is very important uh to I I think you're all familiar with the site. Probably everyone's been to the FA Hotel more than once. Uh and then the Aman property, the former
Versailles, which is in construction now. Uh the text is quite simple. Debbie explained it as well that in the FAO overlay district on a lot that has over 65,000 square feet with a contributing historic building, you can get an F
bonus of up to 5%. Let me explain why this really is important and if we are serious in this city about incentivizing historic preservation, why this is particularly important. If they were to have demolished and
rebuilt the Versailles and the same with the frankly the Saxony Hotel, they could have saved particularly with the Versailles tens of millions of dollars to retain these the outside shell the superructure. It's extraordinarily expensive.
Uh and so uh the other thing that happens though is you're working within the context of the existing buildings envelope. These buildings were first built and designed in 1939, 1940 or the 1950 the Saxony. They weren't designed
to contemporary standards. So what you find when you're in the process of designing the retrofit of these buildings, there's space that you can't that you lose. You can't use and it count but it counts against you as F if you try to utilize it. And we're going
to show you this particularly with respect to Versailles. So this very minor amendment gives you some flexibility as you're working through how do you bring life back to these buildings and be able to utilize the space without it being counted against
you as F. That's what's driving this amendment and Mahul will will will go through it. I'd like to introduce Mahul now and take you through what's happening with respect to the Aman project itself. >> Thank you Nissan. Um good morning. Um
actually almost good afternoon. Oh, good morning still. Um very nice to meet you. Thank to the staff and to the planning board for the time. Um we are excited to be back here. >> Your name and affiliation. >> Exactly. My name is Mabel Patel. Um I'm the managing director at OKO Group. Um and serve as a project lead for 3425
Collins Avenue which will become the Aman Hotel and Residences by the end of 2027. Uh to answer the question, thank you. >> Um it's been a long road as many of you know to get this site to where it is today. Um construction is progressing rapidly at this point. Um if you've been by the site, you'll see the residential
tower is starting to become come above ground. Um we're going to be pouring the fifth floor um before Thanksgiving. Um and then it will continue to top out into the new year. And then the hotel structure which you can see here um the old Versailles hotel that we're going to restore um magnificently to what will
become um really just this terrific you know building coming up Collins um and restoring it to the original Versailles um is challenging to say the least to be able to preserve that building um and we've done extraordinary efforts as um Debbie had mentioned um to put up this
you know extraordinary exos steel skeleton um it's about 80 tons um to you know just as hurricane force winds and maintain that facade while we then now start the excavation work there. Um, which is also very challenging to go down, you know, 40 feet below um, grade um, you know, alongside the ocean. Um,
and then build up the, you know, existing, you know, new building, if you will, the new hotel, um, that will then attach to that facade. Um, so again, numerous challenges to be able to accomplish this. We're very proud though of the work that we've done. Um it's been an incredible partnership with HPB
um and the city of Miami Beach to be able to do all the things we need to do to make the progress project possible. Um and so why we're here of course as Nissan mentioned um is really to you know kind of talk about um utilizing additional F um that's kind of captured
within the building essentially. Um there's an example that you'll see here in a moment. Um, for example, we have, you know, restaurant space and that needs mechanical space, um, to be accommodated somewhere within that, you know, historic fabric. Um, we're talking about using some of that space that's above the lobby, that's a void space
today, putting the mechanical into that space. Um, and looking at other places where we can do that, um, as we try to figure out, you know, kind of the ins and outs of actually finishing the building. >> Please have that next slide. >> Yes, indeed. In fact, that shows right there. Exactly. I'll let you talk to this Nissan if you would. Um, but I I think I'll just, you know, end really
quickly to say that, you know, our objective is to use utilize that F um to recapture and make productive use of the dead or unused spaces within the historic structure. So, >> before you sit, I since you're with OK, I have a non Miami Beach question. When is UNA going to be ready? >> Um, Una is actually, you know,
imminently, you know, we're having TCO by the end of the year, if not this year. >> Yeah. Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. >> Okay. Asking for a client. >> Yeah, indeed. >> There we go. >> Please be sure. Please be sure to build a client for that. Exactly. >> Uh then that really mul summarized it
all. As I said, there are these spaces that are in the buildings that uh if you utilize them as in this instance, we'd like to use them for mechanical these voids would otherwise count as F. So you're penalized. Uh this is actually a very necessary tool to incentivize
preservation of existing structures because I said tearing it down and rebuilding from scratch would be a hell of a lot cheaper. Uh, and I would also like I'd be remiss in saying I know that she doesn't do this for the praise, but Debbie has been uh almost a godmother
for this project from the beginning as she has seen it through every iteration. >> You don't say grandmother. You're good. >> I wouldn't say grandmother. >> No, that's that's right. Um I you know
if if we continued to have a fight about special events I might have said that but no and uh but I really look let me say this this is a very ambitious project and uh a project like this can't happen without a hand glove working relationship with
the city staff and they've been truly magnificent on this as they are with other special projects. when it comes to projects that are this important to the city, they really turn on the afterburners and do a great job. So, I wanted to just mention that.
>> Okay. Anyone else? And I'm assuming no. Anyone on Zoom on this? >> We Yeah, we have some other images of the hotels historically. I think you don't need to see them. >> No one. >> Okay, we'll close the public hearing. >> Any questions or comments and want to move it? >> I'll move it. >> I'll second that. Okay, it's being moved
favorably. two items >> and that's that's both the comprehensive plan and >> I guess we got to do one by one, right? Let's do the first one >> which is planning board file 2570794 the comprehensive plan amendment. So we have a motion by Melissa and second by
she all in favor. >> Anyone opposed? Okay. And then the second one is planning board file 0795 the F preservation incentive. >> So I'm moving that one. >> Same motion, same second. Okay. All in favor? >> I. Anyone opposed? All right.
>> Thank you very much. >> Congrats. Beautiful project. >> Una's insane as well. I got to tell you, >> my goodness, >> he seems to be a fan. >> All right. With that, we will close the meeting. Thank you.
Sit this building up for