e e e e e e e e e e
e e Mr chair whenever you want to start the meeting I'm going to go ahead and call roll if I may I haveo oh through the chair I'm going to call roll yeah call R okay uh
board member Cruz here board member Julia present board member deia present Vice chair senra present and chair leonio present okay you have
Quorum allegiance to the flag of the United States of America to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible liberty and justice for all I'd like to make a motion to approve the
minutes I'll second the motion okay uh calling roll for the approval of the minutes board member Julia yes board member Cruz yes board member DEA Sierra yes Vice chair senra yes chairman leonio
yes okay minutes have been approved motion passes Mr chair next would be to open it for public comments not related to any of the items items next would be to open up for public comments not related to the
items we are now to open the um discussion for a public comment and whoever is going to uh speak please stand and take the oath no one okay public comments is closed um at before we enter to the
quaza judicial public hearings uh it's important um I'm going to read uh first the this disclaimer uh and then I'm going to ask all of you if you have uh had any ex party communication uh to please disclose that at this time please be advised that the following items of
the board's agenda are Quasi judicial nature and opportunity for persons to speak on each item will be made after the applicant and staff have made their presentation on each item all testimony including public testimony and evidence will be made under oath or affirmation additionally each person who gives testimony may be subject to
cross-examination if you do not wish to be either cross-examined or sworn your testimony will be given its due weight the general public will not be permitted to cross-examine Witnesses but the public May request the board to ask questions of Staff or Witnesses on their behalf persons representing organizations must present evidence of
their authority to speak for that organization any person presenting documents to the board should provide the town clerk with a minimum of 10 copies further details of the quasa judicial procedure may be obtained from the clerk uh at this time uh if any of you have um the I'm going to call the
first item and as I call the first item if you have any exp party communication you may disclose it at that time uh but before I do I think it would be uh prudent to swear in anybody who's going to be giving testimony for any of the items today okay for those of you providing public testimony regarding the items
presented I will be swearing you in As You Are already standing please raise your right hand to be sworn in do you swear to tell the truth nothing but the truth so help you God okay thank you you may be seated perfect the first matter uh
before you for consideration uh is V 202 24489 uh this is the applicant is Isabel Maria Fernandez and the address is 16520 it's Northwest 83rd Court Miami lak Florida 33016 at this time if any of you have had any uh exp party communication
uh please disclose that I have not R I have none I have not either I haveone okay um in order for us to move forward the U
Town will present its uh case first uh and then afterwards we will hear from the applicant and then we can hear from anybody uh from the public uh who wishes to present uh evidence or testimony hello hello good evening everyone so
this is vh22 24489 um applicant's name is Isabelle Maria Fernandez this is located at 16520 Northwest 83rd Court Miami Lakes 33016
this is a residential district this was originally deferred from the January meeting because they updated the survey from it was it was listed as two 2 fo 6 in from the property line um but it was
updated to 3 foot 3ot setback from the property line where 5T are required U and the second variance was to allow the after the fact gazebo with a 3ot 6 in setback from the residence where 10 ft are
required this after the fact gazebo uh is 17 by 11 it's in the northwest corner of the rear yard that was built without permits the Gazebo is 187 Square ft where the maximum is 350 square
ft and staff recommends denial of The Proposal as shown in the attached plans that's all board you may have you may ask any questions that you wish of Staff or if not we can hear from the applicant um to the Sher you say that this was presented in the January
meeting before correct and what is the difference between the general meeting petition and this one here so the if you look at the first variance in the January meeting it said 2 feet 6 in but now it says 3 feet they they gave us an
updated survey for this one so if you recall in the January meeting uh there was a gentleman that uh testified that he had um looked at the condition and that he felt that it was larger than the two
foot6 that was um on the current survey on the survey that was presented at the time and that therefore we couldn't go forward with the considering the application because it seemed like it was incorrect so they they obtained the new survey and um and they're coming in
with the corrected survey and we can ask um cuz she's looking at me and maybe she wants to tell her story um maybe maybe we we can ask the applicants as to the situation with the surveys yeah through the chair it was he said it in Spanish
the gentleman that was talking oh yeah he was speaking in Spanish so we understood and we gave him the chance right right right you know bring it up again with the correct uh survey so I through the chair though
um right now I guess the survey is showing that the Gazebo is 3 ft from the sepac instead of before it was 2. six on one end I think on the other end um I'm looking at the agenda item back in January it appears that that lot is kind
of like on a it's not completely a straight line so like the back part may be a little bit further from the setback yeah we were going off of the point that was nearest that would infringe upon the upon the setback um the most that
that corner that's closest to the so at at its closest point it's 3T from the side yeah and then okay ch do you want to bring the applicant up I make a motion to uh bring the applicant
up motion to bring the applicant up to bring the applicant yesing be able to speak to us is the you know can the applicant come up you have to give your names and address okay good evening my name is Anna AIA this is Isabelle Fernandez and
we're the property owners of 16520 Northwest 83rd court and we have Roberto here with us he's our general contractor yeah I'm hi everyone I'm Rober yanis I'm a general contractor who will get engage on any corrections or or legalization of
the uh violations uh if I may I would like to add that the uh the geography of the of the lot it's kind of unique and from the the the beginning of the property line
to the to the actual house in in one point point is actually less than 2 fet uh so at the end towards towards the end where the gaso is sitting it kind of expands and it's kind of a unique
situation because in some sections if you look at the survey you do meet the 10 ft from the back property and some others you don't because it's it's it's an angle there property goes in the proper line goes in an angle it goes from very narrow to
expanding up and if if there are to meet the the the the requirement there there's no point the Theo will be on top of the pool like literally on top of the pool uh through the chair how much uh
space do you have from the Gazebo to the pool um I would say about 3 feet 3 and 1/2 ft from the gbo to the pool looks like to me like about 11 11 yeah from here that's what it says a survey no I I'm looking at the survey and there's no
Dimension from how far the uh gazebos from the pool but the width of the the Gazebo is 11 ft and I look at the next space and it looks to be about 11 ft maybe between 9 6 and 11 ft so how much
space do you have from the edge of the Gazebo the to the from The Edge to the gaso to the pool it'll be roughly I would say no more than five feet I it can't be according to the survey if I could be mistaken because I
mean I don't I'm looking at the surve the survey the survey shows it to be about I I I would trust the survey yeah from the survey looks like it's at least more than 12 ft yeah if you were to
scale that if if it's drawn to scale so it could be are we talking from the there's an overhang that's the overhang is what I think is cuz I'm looking at the survey of the January meeting and it appears that that has like a twoot overhang yeah it does to the front yes
to the front yeah all the way around right there no in the back I don't no to the back it's a little less than two feet but it's there's more overhang on the front than the back yeah cuz I'm looking at the survey from here yeah oh that thing it's basically four aluminum
columns with the alum umum roof that's basically it the the fixed structure yeah and and the it seems on from the pictures that there's an outdoor kitchen built there is under gazebo right yes there is at the edge of the the uh and
that outo kitchen is if it's mainly the frame is aluminum and it's PVC all the walls are PVC and and the countertop it's it's a granite gran are there uh pads at the uh column
points are they what pads concrete pads at the column points do you know no no just sitting on the no it's just yeah no sitting on the 6 in or 4 Ines of concrete correct so there's no Foundation no Oh you mean on the columns correct yeah yeah the columns have a 2
by two by two uh um foundation on H column did you drill there to see it or how do you yes yes it's I I was witness when they when they did it when they did a drilling to see what was there and I believe they have photographs of it um I
don't know if they have submitted it but no I didn't see any photographs of it yeah yeah it was it was the foundation was I'm asking you because you said you're the contractor so I mean I wasn't the contractor who did that no I understand but but I'm also a personal friend and I was pressing there one
understand they did understand that part I'm trying to they a hole on column all 2x two by two and there's rebar Framing and everything yeah it's done it's done properly we and then on top of that you have the 6 in uh uh concrete slab that
they did all around the yard on if I may just interrupt a second I'm looking again unfortunately I'm looking at the January and in the January it does have what you're saying the 2 by two column as part of the plans that were sub it shows a pad with a 2 by two column there okay no cuz I'm looking at the one for
right now yeah I know me too but I I brought both of them to the survey now um I can look it up too yeah because when they when you know when they submit plans to uh to legalize it they're going to have to uh subm with that you should also have plans from the engineer that
we engage alme agular they should be part of your records should be no so you no what we can see right now is a survey it's basically a survey I can see and and uh two photographs yeah that's a
revised survey they did because uh uh we we believe that they didn't do it correctly and we contacted the surveyor company and they went out to the field again and they redo it and that's the new measurements that you see which is
not really much if we're taking in consideration the the 5T uh uh setback but it's it's something uh to the share I I have a question but it's actually a question to
the staff on your recommendation um is it okay to ask that right now or not is okay um what is the uh the concern that could pose problems to the
surrend residents what kind of problems uh are we referring to what are we what is the question exactly like what well it says here on your on the statement on the background it says
um the size of the uh of the U of the Gazebo is less than what U what is allowed but however its location could pose problems for surrounding residents right it's too close to the property line basically too close is what's
considered the right happy medium of of location for a structure of this type okay what I see that they have um um approval letters from U suround yeah if I may I was going to add to that that the even the neighbors came to the
previous hearing yes and they they they have no issues with the gaso being there and who lives who lives on that side where the gazu is is that Omar Samora no that's huh and then and she she's one of the ones that
signed off yeah Elsie Marquez she's right in the back of the Gazebo she doesn't have a problem with the way the was didn't I mean they you know they they're well buffered she was here in
the previous hearing and there's a letter there also she didn't realize the Gazo was there until you know in the back the the Hedge that's there now um that that shows in the picture that is still there it's still
there yes yeah actually due to the Hedge she she won't be able to see the Gazo because it's not really like a like a huge structure it's just the aluminum columns and the roof and the the kitchen uh countertop set on the on the on on
the back line of the Kazo it's actually below the concrete wall that's there because there is a concrete wall there and then the Hedge I normally don't like to give my opinion whether I like it or not but I so this looks nice but no it is very nice actually to the conversation very ni they hate to get
into that no it's it's it's you know it's it's done in Good Taste but what nice what really you know what really bothers me is the amount of concrete that that that's and and this is not a not a neutral barel not a that's a question that's a question that I had to
the concrete coverage around the whole house mhm it's uh where's the water going it well it looks like it's almost 70% all the way it goes in the swimming pool the only place that goes looks like they have almost 70% coverage around the whole property mhm yeah that was a
separate issue yes and we're aware of it um at the front we have a lot of uh they have a lot of land a lot of yard as you could see on the on the survey but in the back again due to the nature of of the whole lot the it's they they cover a
lot of it with uh that that concrete that it's that has the little patches of of artificial grass Turf in between was very trendy now that everybody's doing like the slabs of concrete it's not one solid pce but it it's it's in
slabs rectangle slabs all around yeah I have a question to staff now if if let's say the board were to approve uh a variance they would still require an after Thea permit yes correct so yes the issue of
lot coverage may still be an issue uh like I said I'm I'm I'm here to to help help him correct any violations and pull permits do whatever needs to be corrected and and we'll do so I'm here
to engage in that but the the lot coverage um pertains to the um structures of the roof not not the uh the amount of concrete that they have on the on the this is the you know
per area that would have to be yeah that's permitting yes yes that's what I yeah we will definitely bring everything to to the proper code whatever it needs to be done yeah I mean the the architect will have to do the the the calculations on on you know what's per I believe we
do have calculations already from the engineer Al uh Al Aguilar and you should have that on records because that was submitted probably in the previous thing is all those plans were in the January agenda probably is in the previous hearing I
think it's just the what they had there was the struct the structural stuff I see all those other calculations that will be required once you obtain an after I do have electronic files here that I could submit and yeah to the chair here the property should not have
concrete to the very edge of the property and it does all along that North Side pretty much all the way down they have concrete right to the edge of the property there's like a foot it's not all the way to the edge it's like a a fo foot and a half almost see 4 in one
place I see uh6 yeah6 at another one16 at another spot you know so yeah towards the front of the property the property line and the actual uh wall of the property there's there's like 2 and
1/2 ft cuz it goes in an angle no I I can see that it's it's a parabolic lot I can tell and if and if I may remind uh everybody that it's not a variance or request therefore it would be a condition of any approval that they would have to remove all
concrete within 5T of the property line all concrete within 5 ft of the proper the the concrete is a SE it would be a separate variance that has not been requested that has not been that was the question that I had there because I mean there's a lot of coverage theair and and if you have to
by the way and according to suzan Alonzo if you have to remove the 5et that you're supposed to have away from the edge of the property then you have to move the Gazebo not only that but we we probably even have to somehow move the pool closer to the house too there's no
there's no 5 ft from from the edge of the pool to to the property line 7.44 I see I see 7.44 so it' be 2 feet you you're going to have to come back to us which is the requirement for the pool and get the requirements for the pool to
correct it because you pool I believe has been there since they built build the property from from I understand I understand I understand uh but okay they say you have to remove the concrete then you'll have to come for a variance to keep it right
if you didn't do a variance at the beginning uh I I thought that we were doing the whole thing n we're only dealing with the with a I guess okay I'm getting the information from the pool was built in
2005 according to Miami date Miami date so we were Incorporated by 2005 correct or right around 2000 we got uh we became town but the building department was given been issued by we should have that in in our
town records the pool permit 2000 yeah that was a previous owners they acquired the property in 2013 when they acquired the property the pool was in through the share I have a question was the gazebo in no the Gazebo
was not no so they could have pulled the permit for that yes they could okay they could have yes through the shair I have a question I know this has come up before I think last time we had something similar have you taken this plans to the Royal Oaks homeowners association can be
approved by them I believe they have have they been approved that I that answer I do not have she believe to to make sure please yes cuz uh again the town the position of the town is uh the town requirements
are different than the HOA like the town allows more square footage on the Gaz the h is a lot less so you might be in compliance with the town but then you'll be in non compliance with the HOA yeah I believe that since January they
submitted all the documentation to but make sure that you get a letter from from all the plants get something stamp that uh and like uh Mr Sierra says biggest issue is with the Landscaping you got to have 30% Landscaping right and I know that the ARB in Royal LS are
very strict on that with the 30% more District than the town when it comes to make sure that you comply with the 30% okay we'll do whatever it needs to be done to comply yeah the thing is to become com in a in a legal matter with the association which is a civil matter
doesn't involve us that's what right what's what he's talking about okay does anybody else have any more questions or I don't I I don't you want to close the
meeting CL anybody else want to speak on behalf or or against okay we close the public uh meeting thank you so through the chair I'd like to hear what the rest of you have to say
I'm perplexed myself so I can't I have I have um I really don't have that much of a problem on the setback on the on on the north but I do have a I do have a concern with the how close it is to the
house that's for looks like they have through the chair here 3 fo6 away from the if you look in the picture because that's I don't have access to the other drawings looks like it's 3 fo six more
or less away from the uh wall of the residents and maybe a foot away from the which makes it about a foot from the overhang from the overhang right what is that from um a safety thing that you're concerned or
just CU I I I was a little bit concerned with the neighbor but the neighbor is okay with it and I was thinking if as long as I don't know can we condition anything of these things to maintaining that hedge or the landscaping or something like that is that something that we could do
put you can put it into the uh you can you can into the motion I never had how close they make it to the house with the uh 5T of uh green area well they're not going to have 5T of green area here because they're 3 ft away so they would probably
have to remove the concrete as much of the concrete as they can in the back because they probably can't now you guys are the contractors if that thing has a two by two footing obviously it has to have concrete right so because now we could say you can't have any
concrete from the whatever we approve we have to maintain the thought that they're going to be asked to be 5et away from the property line with the concrete they may have to come back to us for
hearing another uh hearing another lost word I mean for anything else that's not covered here they we need to have a separate application have to have a separate application unless we cover
that area there where the foundations are to allow them to maintain thebo and then bring the rest of the property to the five foot setback because we'll have to rip up that gazebo they're within the 5 fo set back with it with the foundation that's
my question here can we in a motion include maintaining that area there suam you can um sort of w it um in a way to say all other concrete except that
directly underneath the gaso and or necessary for footer for the Gazo shall be uh cut back to 5 ft right cu going through all all this now and then we approve it and then right they got to move so we would leave like a little bit of a indentation for the gaso and those
those Footers should be deep right the footer should be deep but he has to be 5 feet and it's three feet and you're going to hit the column so you're going to have to leave concrete around these columns and in that little area for them to be able to
operate Theo otherwise you got to pull the off you got to rip everything out of there so we have to give them some leway to allow that area to be encroaching into the uh 5 foot setback if we do it you know we
just what do you think Mr Cruz on what I was bringing up my biggest concern again is uh the the landscape area the 30% uh it's a nice Kaz it's beautiful I hate to see it go you
know and let's see how can we well we would have to allow them to encroach in the setback only in the area where the Gazebo is and where they have the kitchen area of the EO into that green area and then they would have to
meet the uh setback in the green area everywhere's house uh through the town we'd have to make a motion including that whenever the motion is made so they they would they would have they would have to cut um uh slab on the
North and on on the um on the south side right yeah but that will we don't have a say on that since they that's the building department when they take the plants over there yeah because they're still
going to have to get an after the fact perit correct so we don't have to make a decision on that but but what m theer is saying is true that in uh I think we should include the fact that there's two footings there on the Gazebo that
technically encroach within the 5 ft so and so we should add that so is the back of the kitchen all the way look at it the whole back of the kitchen is rolling through there that's right so you can ask them to hold 2 feet away remove the concrete and hold the rest to be able to
keep the kitchen area there so for clarification sake the request for the Gazo includes the concrete underneath the gaso as part of the variants that they're requesting it does not however include the rest of the concrete on the property so it includes whatever is
underneath the C correct including the foundation correct yeah whatever's underneath the kitchen shown there now how far because it's understood to be part of the Gazebo construction how far into the into the line would would that go to the edge of the
kitchen does it go to the very edge of the kitchen that they're uh asking to have approved or does it go all the way to the property line where they have it leaving the concrete in that area all the way to the property 5T from the property the footprint of the Gazebo just the
footprint of the Gazebo correct okay I'm going to say that the three feet is to the column yeah 3 ft is to the color on the front in the back there's a little bit more room than that because it's at an angle yeah in the back
37 yeah yeah those lot in Royal logs they're all none of them are 90° they're 87 LEL when he rest in peace back in the days he did that because he will gain War more lot per subdivision by doing that oh my God so and that creates a lot
of issues when you're designing because people think and assume that it's a 90° lot and it's not it's 87 so it's a lot of uh issues with the setbacks when it comes to that yeah I didn't know that yeah they
did that since day one I'm going to go ahead and for discussion purposes and make a motion to approve the variance with the condition that the landscape uh a landscape hedge has to be
maintained in the um rear of the Gazebo and that we are um acknowledging the concrete underneath
as not you know variance for that or including that it is included right including that only as to that area because that's the only thing that's in front of us basically we everything else is going to be addressed when they do the after the fact permit in terms of landscaping
requirements and uh perious and impervious and all those things right we can touch that um I'm I they have to apply they have to apply for and that they have to apply for an after the permit where all those other things will be addressed and if
there's any any variant they would have to come back right they want a variance for the rest of it will have to come back to us basically though when once you do the five foot all around um set back plus the pool cuz remember the pool doesn't count as um the pool counts as
open right open green area right so when you do that most they're mostly probably okay with the with their calculations but there may be a little off but it's not going to be by much uh it's uh it's when you start expanding the concrete to the edges is when things start getting very
silly so that's where they're at right now but once they cut back all that concrete it's very likely that they're okay my my intento on this would be uh this variance approval strictly for the area of the Gazebo not the entire site right I'm at least that's my let me read
how I wrot how I wrote what I think is your intention and you may feel free to to go ahead go ahead um I've written down two conditions of approval uh number one is a landscape hedge barrier to be maintained at all times MH uh
between behind the I'm going to specify behind and all concrete except the concrete directly under the gaso shall be cut back to meet the required 5 foot setep back are you good with that yeah now structurally how about the two foot
column in the back don't they have two by two yeah that that will be included that will be includ it's directly under the okay yeah I'll second that motion okay calling rooll with the conditions stated board member
deerra yes board member Cruz yes board member Julia yes Vice chair senra yes and chairman leonio yes okay motion passes with the condition stated Mr chair with your permission I'm
going to call the next item yes uh you were approved condition conditioning yes the next matter um is variance 2025
0046 uh this is for GT homes Miami Lakes um and as stated before if any of you have uh any uh exp party Comm have had any ex party communication with the applicant now would be the time to
disclose I have not I have not no I have not okay good evening Justin Taria planning and transportation we're hearing e 2025-the this the two variances they are
requesting are one variance from section 13 - 426 to allow a rear setback of 17 ft on the property where 25 ft is typically required and the second variance is to allow a lot coverage of
42.4% or 36.5% where 35% is the maximum permitted that's it through the chair I have question I see that they have a couple of different layouts is that why the difference in the lot coverage it
looks like they have two different houses that they would be able to put on the lot is that the reason yes okay want to make sure thank you my apologies the the town uh the
town is recommending approval of the first request and denial of the second request the second request is the lot coverage coverage correct that's it okay I have one more question for the staff
uh there's a line that goes through the house is that the tie line there's a dotted line here that goes through the house there's one for the end of the property showing the uh no that is the line where the setback
would be if they we're meeting the setback uh it is a parallel line to the curve of the lake indicating the 25 ft setback line and and what would be basically cut out of the home if they were to meet the 25ft setback but if you
can see that they mostly trans transgress through the open courtyard or the open um yeah so it's just a little corner that is actually intruding into yeah yes is there a tieline on this
property the property line is not in the same you you can see that they don't meet the top of bank which would be the ti line in this case is in a different location than the actual property line um these two properties are the most the
smallest of these uh in the area because they're the ones that have been impacted the most by erosion so the top of bank doesn't exist there correct it's kind of fictional at this point it's a fictional I think they they have reconstructed parts of that top of Bank yeah I saw I
saw but the property line is not in the same location as the top of bank so that's why we're measuring to the property line and not to the top of bank I saw on the survey that they were looking at filling in on the lot in a couple places correct there was a
prior variance granted to some properties not to these two particular properties to reconstruct the top of Bank mhm um these two did not need that but am I correct I am I correct yeah so these two did not need that but these
are still very eroded properties that that are much shorter in length than their than their neighbors yeah I Al I seen on a on the surveys thank you Mr chairman do you want to hear from the applicant
do you want to hear from the applicant uh yes my name is Melissa tapz thank you uh my name is Melissa tapenz with offices at 200 South bis G Boulevard Miami we do have a presentation for you and I'm hopeful
they'll bring it up there it is excellent all right um so um I'm here representing GT homes and my colleague Ben Sher is here as well um we're here before you to respectfully request these two variances uh they'll allow the lot
to be developed uh consistent with the surrounding uh subdivision that was approved uh by the Town Council um last year um let me just go through this presentation so you can see a little bit of the background so this is just a
refresher because we were here a while ago uh discussing that top of bank issue and as you may remember this Pama the logo subdivision is 16.76% Avenue it consists of 37 individually platted Lots the land use
is low density residential and it's zoned ru1 um this is the Subdivision plat that was approved back in 2008 it is part of the Royal Oaks um special taxing district as it relates to um the uh
security measures um the 37 Lots vary in size from 7,740 Square ft to 18,446 square ft um as I mentioned this is the site plan that was approved back in two in
2023 um and what it did was approve these 37 lots and to an earlier question there were five different models uh with 10 distinct floor plans and four custom Built Homes uh they're proposing Lush Landscaping as well as lak fronts for
all Lots except one lot uh this is the rendering of the project will look like once it's complete um you'll see that lot 18 which is the subject of this presentation is um highlighted in red uh the project
takes advantage of these this Premiere and highly unique location within the town providing high-end estate style residences all on waterfronts as you can see the home proposed for this property is significantly and the actual lot is
significantly smaller than the rest of the community and in fact is the smallest of these Lots as we're here because um we've had incredible success um as it relates to the marketing of this development um the
need and demand for new high-end homes in the town of Miami Lakes is of course uh very strong uh we're here because many of our stakeholders and uh potential clients have asked for us to
come to the council uh to ask for these two homes on these two lots which really bring us here today um this is lot 18 and um it was part of that approved site plan within the Dunhill aisle subdivision it's located on the portion
of the lake that does in fact have significant erosion and the property's rear lot line is not um actually you know a perfect uh line um and you can see it's quite unique um so there is this practical difficulty um as we move
forward to develop the property with these two elegantly designed estate style residences uh that are similar and proportionate to the remaining um single family homes in the area um so the two designs that we'll be speaking about is
Casa soul and Casa Dorado um the end purchaser is interested in these two homes and you can see those renderings uh before you um so first we'll talk about uh Casa Dorado and what you could see is that this is an elevation of the
property this is the L the variance that is the greatest variance and we're willing to of course withdraw variant but we wanted to show you what these two homes look like because they'll be the subject of Lot 19 which is a larger lot
uh but of course we recognize that uh Casa Dorado may not have a place in this lot but because it has been requested uh for many potential purchasers we did want to bring it uh to you so this is the Kasa soul that I
mentioned earlier and this is your Santa Barbara style um estate and this traditional style um so this is the cohesive neighborhood that we're intending to build and as we deal with varying lot sizes it's important for the streetscape
and the front setbacks to be aligned as well as the caliber of homes um for this lot in specific uh you'll see that the rear yard of the property has significant erosion by the lake and this unique condition results
in a lot depth of only 99.38 ft at the shortest Point uh where on average the lot depth within this subdivision is over 115 ft as you can imagine dealing with the rear setback with this significantly decreased depth
um is a practical difficulty we mentioned earlier that this is the smallest of the Lots within the community at 7,740 Square ft the average lot size is over 11,000 square ft and again this
decreased lot size adds for this practical difficulty of allowing A Home of this caliber on the site um when I say A Home of this caliber what we find is that uh there is a significant demand for a three car garage many people
although they have two cars they like to have golf carts uh for recreational use within the community and that is why what we're suggesting as far as um our requests go um so we do have these two variants quest uh rear setback as well
as lot coverage first uh dealing with the rear setback um we're requesting this rear setback for both of the Home Designs um the setback itself is at 17 ft where 25
ft is required and as it relates to the lock coverage uh we're asking for a lock coverage of the highest one is 42.2% % and the other one is 36.5% again the one with the higher lock
coverage the Dorado uh we're willing of course to withdraw that request so back to um how the actual Pro the actual models uh sit on the actual lot it was asked what was that um line
going through it and you can see what we've highlighted in red on the screen is in fact uh the area of the variance and this is the actual setback variance notably this setback variance is only
for a um a um terazza um it has a covered roof uh but it and it only includes a very small portion of the actual built structure while it's covered there's not a second story above it um so we feel that this is because no
one else is impacted uh by this rear uh setback back we believe that it is a fair request uh to ask for this covered logia uh as well as a small portion of the rear bathroom that encroaches um to be the subject of this variant request
as it relates to uh Casa Dorado uh you can see that a portion of the covered logia is also uh within that setback as well as a small portion of the dining room uh the portion of the dining room does have a second story above but the
loia is not covered uh so as it relates to the Practical difficulty criteria um the adjoining properties are all owned by the applicant and of course new purchasers will all have notice of this
proposal um so there's not any um adjoining property owners that would be negatively impacted by our requests uh the variances are compatible with the development patterns within this area where all these lots are dealing with um
different depths sizes as well as Lake erosion um the adjoining lots are all owned by the applicant and will benefit from these properties and these models um providing a home that is compatible um and uniform in Frontage um as well as
with the same caliber of rear yards within this area uh the plight of the applicant is unique um it's simply due to the unique nature of this property and the lake erosions that have occurred over years um because of the um actual
um configuration of these Lots um they're not able to be um actually um taking care of that submerged land in the same way that we were able to do along 100 the homes that were fronting 1602 Street um finally these existing
conditions requiring a variance um are the result of Simply the the unique shape of the lake and not any result of the applicant um to summarize uh we would like to move forward with these two variances again setback and lock
coverage at least for the um Kasa Soul property um where those variances are um smaller and more reasonable um and again willing to uh withdraw the Dorado um model from uh your consideration if
that's the will of this board um we believe that constructing um a home of this caliber is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood as well as this subdivision uh furthermore the previous approval of Pama Delo identifies the
much smaller lots and the demand for the smaller home was not there we thought that there would be um a demand especially for um empty nesters um as well as individuals who would want a one-story residence instead of a
two-story residence but um what we've learned is that that demand is not there um Along on these lakefront properties so with that um I'm available for any questions that you may have and I thank you for your time I have a question uh when these Lots
were platted were in the models uh already um in place no to fit on the on the Lots the the pl property was platted in 2008 um so it was subdivided without any um
actual models or subdivision um we had the site plan approved in 2023 and more recently uh we came back uh to deal with the actual um tie in of
the um the lakefront and deal with the erosion through the chair I have a question and filling in the area I see in in a couple places is showing there's a crosshatch this is uh area to be filled yep and that's the only area
they're allowing you to fill yes and that is by who de uh Miami D County Durham Durham is the one that decided that yes in the uh the pro the lots that are 162nd we were able to construct um a a
system exactly a rip wrap system but here we're not able to do that so we would have to use the typical slope for for through the chair does anybody else have uh questions for her I don't have any more questions for
her no no you want to close it so we can discuss it or close discussion public I don't think the public there's any public is there anybody there's no one online as well through the chair I'd like to ask
the staff a question I see that on the recommendations you recommended one but not two on staff recommendations corre is first variance request one is uh you recommend but the second one the denial
correct so the setback uh the reason being so I know so the setback seems like an easy variance it's an irregular lot obviously it's going to be hard getting a good 25t setback in there the most of the portion that is encroaching
on the setback is an open um is an open Terrace with the exception of that tiny little corner it's there's plenty of room to put in a pool and putting amenities without additional variances so the the setback one gives me very
little heartburn it just doesn't really um when you start talking about increasing the loot coverage that's where I start getting more because technically the the Builder could choose to offer a home that would meet the lot coverage
the 35 ft correct so that's that's why that one technically doesn't meet the conditions of the Varian for the strict requirements of of Staff being able to recommend in favor of it yeah it's like 1.5 that's where the hair gets split right so that's why one correct one of
them meets the conditions of the variance because it's obviously an irregular lot it's obviously an a weird situation going on there that needs to be accommodated the other one is is more of a choice of what kind of home model they're choosing to offer um
so my question for sale on the lot right would the town uh be all right with the 36.5% coverage which is 1.5% more 1.5 over over right that would be better
than the 42 yes question yeah I have a a real problem with a 42% load coverage no correct real real I mean I'm I'm do too I'm against it I mean the the 30 the 36 it's it's you know it's it's it's okay
but the 42 to I I will not I will not and through the share we do have a precedent for the 36.5 to allow it uh the last Lake uh that LEL did uh homes were allowed to have 38% in the last section of Royal LS versus the original
that was only 35% right that was obtained back in the days when it was day County I'll make a motion and for discussion basis so that we can discuss it completely that uh we approve based uh number one as requested and number
two only the 36.5% uh for discussion so and I will second that motion okay I mean that that was the the reason that I asked the applicant you know if if the
uh if the design of the of the houses was done prior to the uh correct the plotting correct so at the time of site plan approval the Builder came in with several models I think it was up to six at one point some of them were removed
um there was a chart that was created to see which model homes fit on which particular Lots um as of right now I think some of those models have been removed out of maybe because they I I don't really know why that that be for
Demand right yeah just demand uh but it seems like of the array of models that were being offered at the time of sine approval some of them are no longer being requested demanded the price per square foot is
the thing the smaller the model the less income they have so I understand that part that has less square footage than in reality they were they've been offered they just have not been we haven't had a purchaser there hasn't been the interest so with that you know
I would respectfully Happ you have more square footage to sell people want more square footage people want a third car garage a three car garage people want a lot of things what I would like is to move forward with the Kasa soul and withdraw
the Dorado I think we're basically there at this moment man with the with the staff Commendation yeah I think you I think you can call a r motion is on the floor well the motion
is on the floor I already made the motion and it's been seconded by you so we could just vote on it at this I'll go ahead and second the motion yeah okay so calling roll on the did need to call the rule for motion for a discussion correct this is now the
actual yeah it's Clos discussion is closed discussion is closed and we're calling uh L yeah so motion by uh and then second by L correct okay let's go ahead and vote uh board member
Cruz yes board member Julia yes board member De Sierra yes Vice chair senra yes and chairman Lono yes okay the motion passes Mr chair the next matter and the final quasa judicial matter is variance
2025 0047 uh this is uh for uh property located 8441 Northwest 160th Street Miami Lakes Florida 33016 and the applicant is also uh GT homes Miami Lakes LP we will hear from
Staff first if any of you have any expart Communications you've already said stated no but if you Chang your mind want to put anything else you can I don't have any exp party Communications haven't had any contact I haven't had any contact
either okay Justin teria planning and transportation this is variance request VH 2025 d47 um like was said this is the address we have here is 8441 Northwest 160th
Street and this will be Lot 19 of the um of the sub subdivision that was previously mentioned the first request is to allow a rear setback of 20 fet where 25 ft is typically required and
then the second request is to allow for a lot coverage of 37.2% where 35% is the maximum permited staff recommends approval of the first and denial of the second that's it through the chair so I guess here
again we have two different models and then if if it's the smaller version they're okay with maximum lock coverage 37 they they are up to 37 on the smaller model on this one 37.2 yeah on the smaller or on the
bigger model on the bigger could be on the bigger model no they're just showing 137 the 37.2 they're not because this lot looks to be substantially bigger than the other one hold on let me get the V the
variance on on this one is for 37.2% only they're just seeking they're just seeking a variance for the model that would require 37.2% not the other one right and but the setback would be still for both the
setback yeah okay of 20 yes so which one would be CAD Del Soul would be the one that would be the would the 37% not Casa Dorado Casa Dorado would be U let
me the cad dado would be withdrawn I believe what I'm looking at yeah I believe CAD Del Soul CAD be the one would be used yeah so uh Miss tapanes if you can if I
may if you remove the casa Dorado then you no longer need a lot coverage variants for this one am I correct would be for this lot but I think she removed it for the first one for lot 18 not for lot well I'm speaking
for you but I I understood that yes through the chair Melissa tapen as 200 South BC Boulevard Miami the reason why we are asking for here and we think that the variant for Kasa Dorado is important is so that we don't have the same model we don't have the possibility of the
same model next to each other so because it's a lot coverage of 37.2 there's precedent up to 38 I personally am less you know I'm I'm comfortable requesting this with a straight face um the lot is is larger I
can Dorado is would be 37% correct for the so we would not require any lock coverage variants we only need the setback variants the caado is the one with the three car garage correct a little bit more square footage yes so this is the uh this is the location is
just east of lot 18 you can see that it's has the same configuration that concave of the lake but it's not as severe um this is the Kasa Soul model this is the Dorado model
this model is the one that requires the um variance of lock coverage to from 35% to 37.2% um again the goal is to have a cohesive neighborhood but not it be like Cookie Cutter next to each other so that's why I thought it was worth
requesting this variance uh for this slot um you can see that the lot depth is a similar situation as the other lot and that's really the reason why we need these variances the lot depth is under 100 ft uh the lot size is 8800 Square ft
larger than the than the lot 18 um we're asking for the setback variances on both um to 20 feet and a little bit over 20 feet but the lock coverage is only for the Dorado at 37.2 feet and again the
goal is so that you don't you don't have the possibility of both models being next to one another uh this is the way Lot 19 looks like as it relates to the rear setback variant you can see it in red it's only the logia that has that
configuration and the same thing goes with the casa Dorado as well it's a very small encroachment um but it is it's a small encroachment but it is only that 20 feet um again we believe the Practical difficulty um is satisfied here this is a unique
configuration um there is significant uh erosion to these Lots um no one uh there are no neighbors or issues uh with the community uh they're intended to be compatible both from the street side as well as the rear um when you're enjoying
your view your lake views um so with that available for any questions that you may have and thank you for your time uh you you say the Lu coverage is um 37% is it 36.5 or is it 37 it's
37.2% the the one for the original lot n the lot 18 was the 36.5 okay so this is incorrect it's not 36.5 no it doesn't show 36.5 in that one you got to go to the other one they look
the same because it's lot 18 and 19 but no it's lot 18 is 37% for the Dorado 37.2 37.2 right and I apologize if there's a typo somewhere I try really
hard I'm getting it I'm getting it I actually had a nightmare that I switched the the files and I said the wrong numbers right these are the nightmares of lawyers only Lorenzo would understand I was trying to get you the
page yeah page 67 shows it yeah y 64 the lot is actually uh over 1,00 square foot bigger than 18 yeah it's in both page 64 and then
page 67 shows the 37.2 to the chair I have a question for staff whenever she's done where she's finished is she finished you have to close you finished no yeah okay so we're
close we close the uh the public uh discussion and to the chair I question for staff the 37.2% would sta again if you already if you're comfortable with with going in the other
one obviously this is also a small increase you know this is is a small enough amount when it was brought up that they approved 38% coverage so remember that
um my recommendation is always going to be much more conservative because my recommendation only hinges on every one of those seven conditions being met right makes sense so that's why my recommendation is always going to be a lot more
conservative than anything you guys can have leadway for and that's why they're here right right but we respect your time I I appreciate that I I that's why I love you all but so no 37.2 is not horrible it's not
horrible it's not horrible thank you I would like to make a motion I'd like to make a motion to approve uh the 20 foot uh setback from uh from 25 ft and I I'd like to make a motion for approval for for the 37.2%
lot coverage I'll second that and the 20 foot set back as well the 20 foot back yes okay so both mhm okay calling roll with the motion by
avalino and seconded by senra board member Julia yes board member De Sierra yes board member Cruz yes Vice chair senra yes and chairman leonio yes okay the motion
passes have a good evening good evening moving along all right um Mr chair yes if I may there's one final item for you and for your consideration um this was an item that was deferred from the last meeting uh this is an
ordinance that the uh Town Council will be considering next week in second reading it is making uh changes to short-term rental ordinance uh that we have you have it before you uh and you know we're we're willing and uh to listen to any um
suggestions you might have to make this a better ordinance uh your recommendations uh part of your role is not only to act in a quasi judicial role which you just did in making U uh in acting as as a Judiciary you know uh and
making these rulings but it's also acting as the uh Town's local planning agency and that function uh as a local planning agency you need to review these uh ordinance and and uh either make recommendations or approve them make the recommendation to approve them
as is or denial you also have the ability to to do that and it's uh your your decision in in making that is given uh weight uh by by the council so that's my Spiel um if you have any questions
with regards to this uh particular ordinance um both suzan and myself are willing to uh listen and answer them in the best way possible through the chair I have go ahead no can I gu through the chair I have a couple of questions I've
discussed this with several uh I guess community members back and forth and the biggest question that I've been asked is for what period are they going to allow the airbnbs to to
operate two days three days what's going to be the minimum amount of time because the concern is people coming in throwing parties and uh disrupting the neighborhood and upsetting the neighbors yeah in order for them to make money on a three-day
rental I understand and the problem is hurting the community I I understand part of the problem and the challenge that we face as as a as a town is that we are very much preempted by the state in what we can do and what we can you
can't tell a homeowner necessarily that once to run through Airbnb you're limited to two days stre days I mean I myself uh and I'm sure many of you maybe have have gone to when I've gone up to Tallahassee for day days I'll rent an Airbnb and I'll stay there for a couple
days two three days correct uh so it's we don't have really a lot of uh teeth to be able to do that what we do have is in regulating how uh they they advertise how they keep their property uh to make sure that they follow our ordinances
that we have so if they want to rent for one day they can they they can that's that was a question I've been asked a lot and I said I had no idea what I read there some suggestions that they
have to um advise the town um as to how long they're going to be there there's there's there's here that that there's things that we can do that is correct Mr chair there's things that we can do to make
them more compliant uh or make sure that we put their feet to the fire in a better way uh to follow our our Municipal Code they that we can do can reference to what said about you know about you know loud parties
or things like that that yep Prejudice the my neighbors correct right that's that's the one of the biggest things that questions that I've been asked is uh the shorttime party that comes in and uh
creates a nuisance for the Neighbors I'm sure it creates a nuisance enough times that they license will be taken away so I I'll mention to you also that as part of you know and some of the the underlined parts are the the sections that were increasing were were
improving uh for instance in increasing the fines for $250 and $500 for repeat violations correct in requiring that uh they obtain uh certain uh inspections by the fire uh Department and one of the things is that if if this
moves forward there will be a resolution right it's it's for Council consideration that is going to assist the the town in monitoring the registrations of these um short-term rentals where they're located in the
town and to ensure that they're being regulated if they're not it will assist us in sending our um Code Compliance officers to those particular areas so that's something else that the council is going to be considering it's not part of this ordinance but just to let you
all make you all aware that's something that's going to be brought for to the share why why couldn't we adopt uh something like um let's say Monroe County has in place Moro county has um
in place uh the uh the license to to uh like I think they call it the hotel license that you can rent your home or your apartment whatever it is uh for as many days as you want I they have
no minimum they have a minimum 30 days well no not if you if you that is if you don't have the hotel license so there are two different types if you don't have the hotel license license you can only rent for 30 days and above your
property but if you do have the the hotel license then you can rent for for a weekend or whatever you want why couldn't we adopt something like that the the problem is is that and then they have to pay a fee obviously for uh and your question is excellent and there's there are several reasons why that
happens um number one is that Monroe County had established a lot of these rules a lot of these ordinances prior to short the the the Florida uh I'm sorry the Florida legislature adopting short-term rentals so there is a carve
out for certain counties and certain municipalities IES that had adopted some of these rules prior in in certain cases they're grandfathered in in certain cases with regards to hotels and even Hotel taxes those even go further back and there's
further carve outs like in Miami Beach there's other additional rules that they have there that other cities in in Miami date County even if they adopted certain ordinances prior to the short-term rental they can enforce and we can um we were we're very new municipality we're
very young young uh so a lot of these things are things that happened prior some of them are happened prior to our incorporations other happen afterwards but we we did not have any uh ordinance in place so we're kind of behind the aall sort of speak so that's why Monroe county is able to do it we can't we're
preempted I see I see how about taxes are taxes imposed it's the same issue and that goes even further back hotel tax hotel tax exactly so in in Miami day in Miami day County Miami Beach is one of the few ones that can
impose a hotel tax I think the city of Miami might be able to and that's about it on uh number 11 there's a scribers error it's uh it says to the fullest ex Ted right here I have it yellowed out here exad
describers error there and I suggest in uh section 13633 item one English and Spanish you may want to do French because of the the creal community but I mean that's just a
suggestion and number four it says that uh the person that's responsible for the unit has to be available 24 hours a day seven days a week does that mean that they have to respond immediately when you call them or is there a
response lag there that was we're not creating response I mean are you allow number five it has a two hour there exactly when they call to answer a phone call answer not at the
property in the town right I just want to make sure that that that was the intent there that was the intent there but right but four and five are contradictory yeah no not on the property but um register over the town
the person that can be contacted responsible party that can respond right I just want to make that person has according to two hours to respond with two hours you know I'm sorry mrul was what I'm I just I think that the person may be available 247 but
as long as they're they're able to respond within two hours so I I can't I I don't think it's like you call them at 3:00 in the morning and they have to pick up the phone no there's a lag time that's the that's the question how much that was the question that they were asking so I believe it's two hours two hours I I wrote it down wondering what
it would be it doesn't say that I think it does yeah number five it says uh be situate close enough to the property as to be able to and uh shall respond to emergency calls within two hours of notification does it number five number five now I will say that uh in the
ordinance in the town of uh in Hollywood it has 60 Minutes I don't know what 6al if you want to make that suggestion for the council to consider I have suggestions sure please that so in the city of Hollywood they actually require
that the owner install something called the noise monitor okay um just if we want to um they do have that and there are companies noise aware that actually install and monitor because it's a
monitored it's kind of like an alarm okay inside the residence inside the house okay it's required in the in the town of Hollywood that you install a noise monitor but a house is house is not a hotel I know this is just I'm the ordinance in Hollywood right right okay
yeah no you're you're throwing a uh suggestions no yeah it's it's it's not the most convenient thing for a homeowner but I you they're doing it so I'm assuming no it's not a bad idea right
your toilet 2:00 we are not going to all right the the town of Hollywood also requires that the person that's designated as the responsible party is supposed to conduct an on-site inspection of the vacation rental at the
age at the end of each rental period to assure that they're in compliance with the requirements okay and to maintain a log for three years of all guests as well as uh these inspect that has to be available for
inspection the other thing um is that in Hollywood that and then this would refer to our 13 631 we're we're doing a number nine we're requesting
um the licensing from Florida Department of Business Professional Regulation I am not sure if my immedate county has a license I can tell you that Brower County does have a license so in Hollywood you have to do Florida Department of Business as well as
Broward County miam day may have one I'm not sure but that's not bad to to add it that you know my County if applicable we would I would suggest that we add it at 13 6319 and also uh when you have the standards and requirements for vacation
rentals at 1316 34-2 there's again the Florida Department the minimum requirements that I would add there Miami day County as well okay I know haia has licenses for leasing warehouses that they're require
now so I'm sure it could be implemented I have to have a license for every Warehouse that I leave Warehouse is a little different than this I know but it's still yeah but Warehouse is meant for more like business space or you know storage space where these are meant more
for like you know kind of Hotel type use but so you know me as the leas S uhhuh are required to have a license just to lease besides the license that they have to pull to operate correct like a BTR right right yes that's true Len do we have
a account of how many properties are we talking about that are involved in this uh kind of uh transactions I mean we've defined I think in the hundreds in the town in the hundreds yeah wow yeah there there there's there's quite a few are there mostly
apartments or no homes homes yeah I I got a call about this today in their garage room yes call yeah so he brings up a great point you know about garages being leased and so that's one
of the reasons why once this moves forward too the second part is what we just discussed people are are making a room in a garage and leasing it yeah having a company that can go out there and and basically assist us and identifying where all these shortterm
rentals are occurring so that way we can enforce our our laws a little bit more can we include because I unfortunately I'm the recipient of a couple violations that also have a daily fine is there a reason why we not including a daily fine after because I know it says 250 for the
first time and 500 but unfortunately sometimes in our County you get the first one and then they want to ACW a daily fine of 100 bucks or 200 bucks or whatever it is well that's and I'm reading it because it should it should say that there's a
daily fine because most of our Code Compliance does you know right but I'm reading 13635 the administration penalties enforcement yeah I'm seeing the 250 on item C which I think is a new edition it
is I don't know if there's another I don't think no no I think you're I think you're right we can add I don't think I saw a daily fine anywhere else I don't see could be there was another question that I had um so
on 13631 number 10 it seems to indicate the homeowners association part is is there basically we can't require because I'm 99% sure
that most homeowner associations are not going to approve of short-term rentals in their Community ours doesn't but they still render but they're still render I mean the lake Patricia our home asso that's where I was going to go there's no way to require that you have
to if you are in a homeowner association that you because that's kind of something that comes up right with Royal Oaks and other as a town we can't require that even with the even with Royal Oaks we'll ask them to S an affidavit that they've they're seeking approval or they're aware but we can't
force that I mean no our laws are our laws and own associations that's PR so so really there's really no no difference uh in in in in certain way no difference than what haia has that they
have a home and then they have a room they open a door through the outside and then they rent it well so let's let's talk about that let's talk about that I mean one thing is one thing is short-term rentals the
other thing is our code the reason that you have this document here this law is to a be able to somewhat regulate and make sure that it's habitable B make sure that whoever is the operator
understands that they have to abide by the town of Miami Lakes by creating a registry program I I mean we have a pretty I think robust and strict code enforcement as compared to I don't want to name any cities as compared to other municipalities so the idea is that once we is besides having the code the
policing arm or the policing assistance so that we can identify those homes and be able to site them accordingly and if I may remind the board um you all participated in passing our community residential guidelines which any
situation like that would fall under as well that so by renting just a room they would probably trigger a community residents um trigger on the residential guidelines
again they exist correct the problem is that the the issue that we have right now is identifying which properties are doing this and which is why we're trying to tighten up the code in a way that allows us to identify these properties and and certainly uh make sure that
they're compant with both this section of the code and other sections of the code including residential guidelines for for Community residences I have one more question on this is the sexual predator
which uh in my neighborhood we had one for a while and I assisted by doing work for the people and they got rid of the sexual predator that kept showing up over there in Lake pish area but my question is how are we
going to enforce sexual predators how how can they prove that okay the people that are coming in none of them is a sexual predator are you going to require well I mean again they're not living
there it's short term so it's got to be for less than a certain period of time can you completely 100% I think what's the the law is 48 hours is it 48 hours or 72 I not 100% but I'm not 100% sure they
can come and visit but if they're found there and they've been there more than so many hours yes they go to jail correct if they are within a certain uh boundary of of a school or or or school park or a place where a child is picked up by a school bus we've had incidences
before in in the town's history where that's happened you know where we where we found somebody and and it can happen so take a look at Bob Graham there's a couple hotels around Bob Graham so it could happen there you know where that that happens so forget about short-term
rentals we have hotel properties where that can happen so that's that's something for our Police Department really to be able to investigate and look into and you know monitor it's a little hardside it's a little harder for someone to be a sexual predator and drag somebody into a hotel as opposed to
dragging them into a house or whatever you the only thing I see you know if you house next door the kids are there next door and yeah you know that would be the only concern understood so I mean I've listened to
your uh suggest sus if you want to pass a motion for us to bring these suggestions to the council we can if you have any additional ones we can listen to those as well we'll let you make the motion yeah I I'll make the motion to uh move forward with the revisions to the ordinance with uh some of the items that
we've discussed and so to what I'll do is I I've I've written them down and I'm emailing them to you too um that include noise monitor the possibility of installing noise monitor I have wherever it says English
and Spanish to add Creole uh to add in the sections that it refers to uh obtaining a license to make sure that they also obtain one from Miami day County if applicable because I'm not sure if it is uh the installation of a noise monitor uh the um the response
time uh from 2 hours to 60 minutes minutes um to at the end of each rental period uh to have an inspe an inspection of the property uh and for a log of visitors to be maintained and available
for inspection at uh any time that this the town desires to see it um and then as far as the daily fine uh as far as the fine for there to be a daily fine provision uh added would be the owner do the
inspection the respons party basically is the way it's defined yeah for them to call for inspection from the city right no actually what it is is it's kind of your own you police yourself yeah and you have to maintain a record of that I don't pay for a city employee to come
yeah yeah okay the way that they do it in in or the way that they say that you're supposed to do it is you have to keep record and then make responsible the person you know kind of self-monitoring thing but you know the other item that I saw that I I'll send
that to you here is that said that um you have to advertise in your advertising that the venue is not available for any commercial purpose including any party blah blah you know okay that is part of the required
advertising which that's what they put in the Hollywood thing and that could be something that we could police just from looking at I'm assuming that's the way we're going to be policing this because that's the way I found out about this thing I had a unit in in Hollywood that
I did advertise in vbo I had no idea we had to get these licenses and that's how I got a I got a really nice letter with a snapshot of my unit okay on the vbo that first you know normally if you go to vbo it has like this P first picture that's always like the nicest one right
they screenshotted that and they attached it to the violation going like hey do you know you have to register at least the first one was a courtesy warning right with the snapshot of VB also so it was not a question as to whether I was yeah or it wasn't and then I it's when I
inquired about this whole thing when I saw those thing I went like forget it I just rented a year round and the heck with this but um got it that's how I became aware of the regulations in Hollywood several years ago okay leasing these things for a wedding
well that's why they have the provision that you technically if it's a venue it's a considered a commercial event and therefore you can't do it at least in Hollywood so commercial space that you would rent for a would have to be a commercial space you would have to have bathrooms that are rated for parking
parking um and many other things that a single family home would not mean would not have you're just curious I'm not going to go get 50 years in all right so if and there's no other
U just a motion second and I'll second a motion he made the motion Julia second the motion okay so roll call per item 5D with the suggestions made motion by Julia and seconded by De
Sierra board member Cruz yes board member Julia yes board member DEA Sierra yes Vice chair senra yes and chairman leonio yes okay the motion passes the now we just need a motion to adjourn
the meeting got the motion to adjourn the meeting is there a second all in favor I I get the hell out make a motion that
next time there's no there's no meeting enough for this U make sure everybody signed the X party communication paperwork the X party communication she just sign it and leave it in front of you oh signed it
offal you wait you called me the other day right