not signed up we do have a sign-in sheet at the black and the front of the room if you're here to speak on any item We're like to speak during public remarks. Please add your name to the list. Thank you the We will now call to order the City of South Miami Commission meeting. If you can please silence or turn off your cell phones, we greatly appreciate it. Madam Clerk, if you could call the roll, please. Yes, Mayor Fernandez. Present. Vice Mayor Cory. Present. Commissionable niche. Here. Commissioner Cahier. Here. Commission Rodriguez. here. Thank you Madam Clerk if we can please stand for a brief prayer followed by the the pledge of California. Here commissioner Cahier. Here commissioner Rodriguez. Here you have a floor. Thank you Madam Clerk. If we could please stand for a brief prayer followed by the pledge of allegiance led by vice mayor Cory. And I would ask this evening that we keep in our prayer briefly former city Miami commissioner, Manuel Reyes, who left this last month and also Pope Francis. with that at ask us to say a brief Hail Mary, Hail Mary, full of grace. The Lord is with thee. Blessed are thou among swimming, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners. Come at the hour of our death, amen. Amen. Vice Mayor Cory. Thank you. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, individual, liberty and justice for all. Thank you, please be seated. Madam Clerk, we have no presentations this evening. No. Are there any add-on items, please? Yes. One community we developed my agency discussion. Thank you. Colleagues, any objection to adding on item F1? No, Mayor. No. Seeing no objection, we will consider that item added on to tonight's agenda. Madam clerk, are there minutes to be approved? No. Okay. Mr. Manager, your report please. Yes sir. Madam Deputy is going to provide the report. Madam Deputy Manager, you're recognized. Thank you. Good evening. We have some new and exciting programs in our parks department. First we have a music production workshop that's going to be hosted in the mobility building on Tuesday and Thursday nights. And that's absolutely free for South Miami teens, ages 13 to 17. We also have a junior lifeguard program for any kids who are interested in learning lifeguard skills and water safety. They can get their CPR in first aid. That's $50 for residents and 125 for non-residents. Ages 11 to 16. Our summer camp kicks off at the community center on June 9th, so that's daily activities includes lunch, South Miami residents benefit for $50 a week. On the event side tomorrow on partnership with Miami-Dade Fire Rescue, we have warning with the medics. So that's going to be hosted by our friends at Kitchen 57. It's from 8 to 9 30. It's an opportunity for the community to meet our Miami-Dade County Fire Department that services our city. We also have the Mother's Day party at the senior center from 10 to 1230 on Thursday. That's in partnership with Commissioner Regalella's office. She's donating some treats. Finally this weekend is our second community cleanup event. We'll be meeting at Fuchs Park. 9am volunteers are are gonna be split into different groups whether it's clean up South Miami Dog Park, Fuchs Park, Van Smith, and it's gonna be followed by an informational session about recycling. Kids are able to get volunteer hours for that, so there's a registration on our website and they can also sign in that day to receive their hours. That's the manager's report. Thank you, any questions, colleagues? Seeing no one move on, thank you again. Thank you. Mr. City Attorney, your report please. Just want to give me an update on the Mandelstam discussions. We've had productive discussions, spoke with him just last week. We, he has the application materials. Mr. Lightfoot provided those to him for the plan development application that he intends to submit. Just kind of walked into the process and just trying to respond to what he needs. I have also made it clear to him that we need this easement very soon, or it doesn't have the value that it would otherwise have to us. So he's aware and we're trying to push forward but he has not signed the settlement again. Are we are we having these conversations with your telephone or in person? Sir. This was a the last one was a the telephone. Okay. If I could ask you to organize another follow-up meeting. Absolutely. We're not going to tell it with him and our counsel. Okay. I think we just need to kind of have another face-to-face conversation. They kind of put him at ease because they know he's a little bit concerned about terms changing. And this is not necessarily the easiest subject matter for a layperson to understand. So if we can do that next week, I'd appreciate it. Okay. Okay. Colleagues, any questions about that? Okay. Moving on. We'll move to public remarks at this time. On the list this evening, I starting off, Mr. Levi Kelly, you recognize sir, please come forward. move on. We'll move to public remarks at this time. On the list this evening I'm starting off with you. I can't recognize sir please go forward. Good afternoon. Levi Kelly, 6257, 611U. I'm here to speak on our annual June team activities that we have every year. This year we hosted again at the Duffa Gibson Center in the 21st of June and this is from 2 to 5. Everyone is welcome. There's limited seating, so get there early, have a good time. Learn a little history and have some good food. Secondly, I was asked to announce that the Community Action Agency meeting is gonna be held on the 21st of this month at the senior building. For those who are in a rest, I think the sub-eval continue about the proposed Marsha Williams project, so everyone is welcome to attend that meeting. Thank you. Six PM. Six PM. Thank you. Boomer. Yes, sir. Can we also have the date that we have for the community meeting on that? Is that public already? Talk about the follow-up. Can we make a loss? Yes. Follow-up. We don't have a date yet. I suggested that 22nd. Okay. 22nd of May. Okay. Let's take that up after we close public remarks and we can't. Okay, just a quick today. Next on the list, Mr. Davien Stevens, please come forward. Good evening. Good evening, Mayor of the City Commission. I am here to, I just found out about this. I'm a trainer over at Bethel Gibson Community Center. And it was brought to my attention, say about two hours ago, that there is an amendment that wants to increase the fees in which we pay to provide our services at the gym by 600%. So I felt the need to show up here and voice my opinion about the fee schedule going up to 600%. Now I did see a piece of paper. I don't have much information about it. I just have the total dollar amount. Regarding the fee schedule and justification for it. Now I've worked at the Bethel Gibson for a couple of years, a number of years where I'm a trainer. I taught the seniors class. I taught water aerobics as well. And it's a really great place to work. It's not a big commercial gym. It's very intimate. And recently we did have several other trainers come over and join us over there. And I think that is probably the catalyst for why we're having this discussion or someone brought to the attention of, hey, what are they paying in fees? And the fee schedule was being compared to a lot of the public gyms in the area, which it's not a municipality, it's not run a municipality. Speaking for myself, I work maybe two hours there. So that fee schedule probably is not gonna work for me. And I know everyone's in a little bit different position over there with regards to how many people they're training, who's working for them, et cetera, et cetera. So everyone's got their own unique situation. But speaking for myself, I work in the middle of the day from 10 to 12 maybe, working with special populations, Parkinson's, seniors, with its grand total of five people. Now taking my training fees from 600 to 3,600 is a little bit high. Now I passing that along to these folks is not really a viable solution for me. So, and especially with everything that's going on in the world, going up by 600%, especially now, I think it's a little bit high. So, I just going to ask that you guys reconsider maybe taking a look at other ways, maybe based upon usage or things like that to come up with another viable solution to this, but going up 600% I don't think it's a really viable solution. Thank you sir. Mr. Phillips, I've got you next on the list. I'm happy. Thank you. Mr. Phillips, I've got you next on the list. I'm happy to recognize you now, but I think it might be more valuable to our conversation about this. I'll take up your item towards the top of the agenda and maybe let you speak when we call the item up. So your comments happen and Mr. and Mr. Stevens, I'll recognize you again if you like to add something to the conversation. Just so it happens contemporaneously, it's a little bit more fresh in our minds. Is that okay? Okay. I also have Mr. Lopez and Mr. Truby on the list for the rezoning, which is at him 500 agenda. I'll also move that up. You're welcome to speak now or I can call you up when we have the public hearing on the item. Okay, Mr. Lopez, you're fine, Mr. Trooby. Good, okay. Okay, anyone else in public remarks that fine, Mr. Trooby. Good, okay. Okay, anyone else in public remarks that has not signed on the list? And clerk is there anyone online? Mr. McKenzie recognized? Anyone on the Zoom please raise your virtual hand. Good evening everybody. 62 of 10, Southland 63rd Terrace. I was trying to understand able to get a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of about the date that you just said about the 22nd and following up on the Madison Square property. Is that what I just heard? We haven't fixed the date yet so I think the clerk had adjusted possibly May 22nd as a date for the follow-up community meeting that we discussed. Okay, just put this out there because we're meeting on the 21st already and is it possible just to combine those meetings so you can get a little more participation from folks from the community? I have no this is so what you're saying is piggyback on the existing CA meeting. Yeah. And have the status agenda. I don't have any objection colleagues. Do you Mr. Manager, any thoughts? You do? No objection. No objection. The clerk were just trying to get availability from all you. I think that that's what she was working on. So I would just say it's not our forum. Yeah. I know it's but if there's no objection from the chair, if Dr. Price wants to have us here. This is already on board with, we discussed it. Okay. Mr. Keller's device chair, so. So, Madam Clerk, if Dr. Price wants to have us here. The process is already on board with, we discussed it. Okay. Mr. Keller's device chair, so. So Madam Clerk, if you can confirm with Dr. Price, she has no objection to having that added onto their agenda, you can certainly do the public outreach on that day. Okay. Okay. And one more thing, I wanna thank Commissioner Steve for putting us in touch with the Metro wheel underline. You still can't see my listening. It's calm. I want to thank our Commissioner Steve for putting us in touch with the Metro will underline Just calm just calm street. I'm fine. What do you say calm Commissioner street? That's right Listen, thank you for goodness in contact with the subcontractors you two mayor you piggybacked on this so they started hiring This this week as a matter of fact. Excellent. So we got a couple of people from the community. So thank you. Danny thank you for getting the the the truck drivers, the food vendors. The pastors are very appreciative you're going to get some more calls for that. Thank you all for voting on that issue that. Thank you sir. We appreciate your comments. Okay Anyone else in public remarks you're welcome to come forward this time on any topic whether it's on the agenda or not Okay, seeing no one the chamber madam clerk again anyone online anyone on zoom please raise your virtual hand Okay, seeing no one on zoom will go ahead and close public remarks colleagues, I think the manager wanted us to defer item four, which is the interlocal on recycling. Mr. Managers, are you like to refer to? May 20th, they're probably given off time. May 20th? Can I get a motion to defer item four to May 20th? I'll move the motion there. Is there a second? Second. OK. With that objection, surely item deferred to May 20th. Okay. Can I get a quick motion? If you can, Madam Clerk, if you can read items N1 and N2 and N3, which are the board appointments? Yes. What do you vote for on these as well? You do need votes on them? Yes. Can they be taken together or do they have to be voted on separately? We could do one. One by one. Okay. No problem. and read item in one then please. Yes, planning board. John J. Miller has been recommended by Commissioner Rodriguez to be real. We can do one one by one. Okay, no problem. If you can read item N1 then please. Yes, planning board. John J Miller has been recommended by Commissioner Rodriguez to read to be real planning to serve a large on the planning board. Okay, can I get a motion on N1? Motion. Will by Commissioner Rodriguez be seconded by Vice Mayor Boone? Yes, I so I can get my microphone to turn on. No problem. Madame Clerk, if you can call the role please. Yes, Commissioner Cahill. Yeah. Commissioner Booneesh. Yes. Commissioner Rodriguez. Yes. Vice Mayor Cory. Yes. Mayor Fernandez. Yes. OK. He's a reappointed. Thank you. You can read item in too, please. And to design review board, Mariana Correll has been recommended to be a reappointing to serve at large as a landscape architect on the design review board. Commissioner Rodriguez would like to move that as well? Move it. Is there a second again by the... Oh, a second. Okay. And a motion by Commissioner Rodriguez would like to move that as well. Move it. Is there a second again by the... Oh, a second. Okay. An emotion by Commissioner Rodriguez and a second by Commissioner Street. Madam Clerk, if you can call the roll please. Commissioner Street. Commissioner Street. Oh God. I love it. She's jumping on board. Commissioner Moniz. Yes. Commissioner Rodriguez. Yes. Yes, me or Corin? Yes, commission of Rodriguez. Yes, vice mayor Cory. Yes, mayor Fernandes. Yes. I'm zero. If you can read item and three please. Desire review board. Yeah, Bayanna has been recommended to be reappointed to serve at large as they for the register architect on a desire review board. Ready to serve motion on item and three please. I'm a promotion. Second. I'll second. Emotion by Commissioner Caille and a second by Commissioner Boniich. Bad and clerk if you can call a roll once again please. Commissioner Caille. Yes. motion. Second. Second. Second. Emotion by Commissioner Coye and a second by Commissioner Boniic. Madam Clerk, if you can call a role once again, please. Commissioner Coye. Yes. Commissioner Boniic. Yes. Commissioner Rodriguez. Yes. Vice Mayor Cory. Yes. Mayor Fernandez. Yes. That's his five-zero. Okay. Colleagues, I'm going to propose the following waters. I do see people in the audience on virus items. So we can take M3, which is discussion item, which is on trailers and RVs that was added by Commissioner Rodriguez, and we'll move on to item five, which is the rezoning. And then I'll take up the Jim Fee change as a third item. Okay, any objection to that sequence? No, Mayor. Okay, if you can read item M3s for the record, please. Yes, Commissioner Rodriguez. Reviewing how the City County of Dallas for trailers and backyards of residents, I'm going to have a look at the city of Toronto. I'm going to have a look at the city of Toronto. I'm going to have a look at the city of Toronto. I'm going to have a look at the city of Toronto. I'm going to have a look at the city of Toronto. I'm going to have a look at the city. State attorney or Madam City attorney, could you give us a quick overview on the rules we have in place at Regulate, I guess the storage of recreation vehicles on single-family residential lots? Yes, I good evening, everyone. So the rules are in 20-3.6 subsection S, accessory storage of recreational vehicles. The vehicles are defined for what they are. And essentially, they're storage regulations. And none of them can be used for an abode or dwelling place well parked within the city. It cannot be used as a temporary living quarter. It may be parked on site subject to certain conditions which are laid out in the code. Only one per site. It has to be within certain setback areas in the rear and on the side. And it has to be maintained in a clean, clean condition. Most importantly, sub section seven of those conditions. attached any service connections. conditions, the RV shall not be used for living or sleeping quarters or for housekeeping or storage purposes and shall not have attached any service connections except as periodically required to maintain the RV and appliances there on. And there's certain other limitations but essentially the code allows for storage of the RV with these conditions that are laid out. Do you, any questions about the current rules? No. Okay. You've got questions? No, no. Okay. Good. Sorry. I'll give them the side. Great. Okay. So, are you reckon as if you want to go ahead and make some comments? Okay. So, the reason that I bring this up at this discussion item is, you know, recently we've, You know, it's come to our attention that, you know, there are neighbors that are having RVs in their backyards and there are neighbors that don't appreciate having to see the RVs from their house, understandably. The problem begins when the RV is hard to monitor whether it's being lived in or not because obviously our code enforcement does not work at night. So if during the day nobody's in the RV and at night there's someone sleeping there, obviously it becomes an issue. So I wanted to bring this up as a discussion. I don't think I don't believe that it's something that anybody would want to see from from their backyard to have, you know, an RV plus there are people that probably do it for good reasons, but then as you know there's probably other people that can use it for the wrong reasons, rent, you know, the RV and having people living in that back in that RV when you're not supposed to. So I bring this up as a discussion item to discuss amongst the commission whether do we want RVs or maybe we find a happy medium where basically if you want to have an RV in your backyard you would have to pull a permit. That permit would be for a certain time frame. Why? Because that gives the person if they're using the RV for if they're doing an addition, or they have a family member that's living with them for a little bit, they can use the RV. And then for the other resident that has to see it in their backyard,'ll understand that there's a time frame that it's not going to be there indefinitely. So that can be an option where you pull a permit and then you could be limited to certain amount of times where you can either extend it or pull a new permit because the way around it would be you permit expires or your permit's over and you just pull another one and then you just pull another one and then pull another one and it never ends. So you would be limited to a certain amount of time and how many times you can pull that that permit is a suggestion that I have but I wanted to discuss it amongst the commission and see how you all felt. Colleagues who who wants to go next? You okay? Yeah, absolutely. You recognize the commission of one each. Thank you. First, I want to tell you something that actually happened to my sister. My sister lives in an unincorporated date, and she had her camper on the side of her house. She had had it there forever. When she did her driveway, the county came and said, by the way, you can't have that there, you have to do this, you have to do it. At the end of the day, come to learn that the county is actually cracking down on any of these in any property because of exactly what Commissioner Rodriguez just said. The economy, obviously, not great. People are using these to live in. I don't think that that's something that we should be having in our city. I don't, if it was my next-door neighbor, I would not be happy having an RV that I can see from my backyard. I think we're doing so many things to push us toward the direction of having a more beautiful city, having something, you know, the city of pleasant living has to be pleasant in the front yard and in the backyard. And for the neighbors all around you, and I think that when you have an RV in your backyard, that's not pleasant for anybody, except maybe the person that owns it. There are places where you can store these, and I don't think that our backyards should be one of them. For the comments, Kibzhar Kaye, Vice Mayor, mostly good ex. You wanna know? So I come from a family that has RVs. So I'm on the complete opposite side of the spectrum. So my family, they have, there are Vs in the back. They use them, my parents are currently traveling North America right now in an RV, right? They're in Toronto, say, how do my parents? We've also had this problem before when we talked about boats. Right? So we left the boats not in the front, but we let them in the back for storage. I come from the agreement that if you want to have a toy and you want to put it on your house, it's okay. Right, that's why we live here, right? Because we have the abilities to have boats. We have the abilities to have RVs or whatever toys that we want. It's in your backyard, it's enclosed. So I'm on the opposite side of that. So I'm okay the way the legislation's been written. I'm not a big fan of changing it, but that's just my opinion and that's where I come from. So I can't be hypocritical go about it because we do it in our family. So that's that's my point. It's advice mayor. You want to say something? Sure. Yeah I think a similar to Commissioner Chi as a matter of principle I would say that like having in in the backyard does seem like something that people should have as a right. I do think that it does make sense to regulate them at least similar to how we do with boats from an aesthetic point of view. I do get that they're very difficult to regulate to know if somebody's living there. Obviously, we could catch it if somebody was potentially advertising it as a rental and an Airbnb site or something like that. Hopefully, we would potentially be able to find it, but yes, it is very difficult to regulate, but I think I would be uncomfortable saying that you couldn't have something like that in your backyard. I do think that it might make sense to regulate it very similar to how we do with boats from an aesthetics point of view though. Okay, so my two cents, I appreciate the suggestion regarding allowing people to permit living there, but I think that opens up in the worst box. Although it's from a very good place of good intentions. I like the rule that we have that doesn't allow people to use it for living at all. I'm not an RV guy. I have a slightly different perspective on this which is, and I've shared it with a couple of the neighbors who call me about it. I get concerned we go to ban things that we're inviting telehazzy to come in and preemptive, right, which is something they've been doing with a lot of regularity and RVs. Well, I'm not a fan. Commissioner guys family is it they're very popular across the state And so I just be careful we don't invite you know Industry to go to the legislature as they do and say you know don't allow jurisdictions put reasonable rules around around, around where these things can be stored, right? I think from our consistency perspective, we should begin at least treating this like it's about should not be in the front yard. I think the screening standards that we have are probably a little bit too lax because these things are a little bit taller than the average boat. So I would say, right now I think they're required to have a six foot wall or fence. Probably if we should require landscaping for at least 10 feet, so it masks the majority of the RV. Yeah, a head or something. In the rear yard where it can be stored. I think we should start by requiring the new registered, right? We talked about the difficulty in enforcing whether people are living there. Part of that is we don't know where they are. So I think as a matter of course, if you have a toy in your backyard or your front yard or wherever we allow it, we should require you to register it. So we can actually give code enforcement a list and they can on occasions spot check these locations, unannounced and make sure that people aren't using these, you know, a boat can have a cabin that can be lived in as well, It's connected to power. And so I think, you know, it allows, it lends itself to the same kind of abuse. I certainly think in the one case that we've all been made aware of to me very obvious if the RV's open, side panels are extended, it's being used for living. I think Prima-Facia that should be in our code. An indicator there should be a Tony Help me here. Uh, legal standard. What's the it should be a precedent? Not a precedent. It should be a Tony help me here. Legal standard, what's the, it should be a precedent? That a precedent and it should be, gosh. I was trying to beat you guys at legal. To be a rebuttable presumption, that if the RV is open and not closed, right, that it's being used for living. And it's on the burden becomes, the burden's on the property owner to rebut that presumption. So I think that would might be way to strengthen our standards so that it's on the property owner then, if it's open, which should indicate that it's being used for living and not just being stored on the property, that they've got to present it as to the contrary. Otherwise, it's a violation. Yes, ma'am? If we're gonna do this, then I think in fairness, we need to say they cannot emit noise because my sister is trying to be literally having to get rid of her. They cannot emit, they should not be able to emit noise or run the air conditioning other than for, you know, five minutes or maintenance, right? Which they need to just kind of keep the systems running, but it should not be a condition where the, whether it's trailer or motorized recreational vehicle should not be running. It's simply all we're doing is along storage. And we can take it a step further. I would say given the lesson we all learned from the boat conversation, if we wanna move towards banning it, I wouldn't say we do it right away. I say we give the owners that have them today, the same protections we gave gave boat owners which is we've allowed here for generations people to store boats in their front yards. We grandfathered those people in. And I don't I don't think I've ever seen an RV in the front yard here. I have I just I saw one recently in Dragon Ground to save this weekend right there's one that's visible to the street on an neighbor's property in my area of South Miami. I saw another condition near the one that we all get an email about that frankly was more concerning to me than the one we got the email about frankly. So I reported to co-enforcement. I would say we should think about if we're going to move towards, you know, it being a more pleasant condition to use our language. If we're going to go that far, we should give people that own one, or the registered owner of the house and the vehicle, the chance to continue to own it for the duration of their time to the own the home as we do with boats. I mean, with boats, we've a lot of people to keep them their backyard. So we are treating toys to use Commissioner Guy as term slightly differently here. Again, so policy decision on the part of this board. I asked the deputy manager for what our violation history is on these issues. We've had five violations that we've identified in the last three years. Four, we're proactive on our part. One was reactive. One actually got to the notice of violation stage. So I would tell you, we're in the situation to highly have found itself in recently where the people were actually living rampantly in our reason backyards for all the reasons you mentioned because of the rising cost of housing. I don't know that our situation rises to level where we banned them and highly did the opposite. They legalized all the illegal units that they had as a kind of the strike of balance in the market there. But my suggestion was that we should definitely start with registration so that we know where they are and then we can go from there. And certainly I would say registration and hand screening would be the two things I like to see in the short term if you want to get a step in the direction. So, so you can come and show how do you get here. I'll go back around the horn. So, through the mail. So, pulling a permit actually is a form of registration. So, if someone pulls a permit for it, they know we know that it's there. Yeah, I just don't want to pull a permit so they can live there. So, that's why I was disagreeing with that. Well, the reason I'm saying live there, and the reason I'm giving this option, or I suggested this option is because there are people as the current one that we know that needs it temporarily, as it was mentioned, there are other people who do additions to their homes that can afford another apartment or another house. So they, and there is someone in the city who lives in a RV in their backyard. That's why I said it, we limit the time frame. So it's a finite time that they're allowed to have it and only have it for and only be able to do that a certain amount of times. That's the reason I said the permit. I'm okay with the registration, but there are people that might need it for other reasons and just and then you do get the special instances like we had on 64th that the guy had four RVs and he was renting them out to four different people and he had basically a trader park is back in his backyard and that's what we're trying to avoid because I don't think any of the residents in our city would appreciate that so the permit just lets us know that it's there we know what they're using it for and at the end of the day, it gets inspected by our building department to make sure that it's up to code. And it's only for a finite time. The person who has it knows that it's limited and the neighbor also knows that it's limited. Not there for a- So you say it's got to be, you can only hit the use authorized if it's in conjunction with a building permit for the remodeling of the principal residence. For that, yeah, that could be one, yeah. Okay. Thoughts on that, colleagues. So, so, Mary. Yes, sir, you're recognized. Currently, and Tony, maybe you can help me with this. Do we currently have the boats being registered if it's in their backyard? I don't think so, right? No. No. It's only for front yard. But I'm using the model the same. If we can do it with boats, we can do it with RVs in the back so you don't need a permit. You don't need a registered. The only reason I would suggest there's a difference is that this particular toy lends itself more easily for people to live in it than about those. Yeah, right. And our code already states you cannot. The only reason I would suggest there's a difference is that this particular toy lends itself more easily for people to live in it than it does. Right, and our code already states you cannot live in it. So if they're violating code, they're liable to get, you know, a fine on it. No, I understand, but I think it's also harder for, look, I want to be practical in what we do. I think if code enforcement has a list, right, and there's 12 of these registered across the city. Code enforcement once every couple of weeks can do spot checks, all those addresses, and just see whether those recreation people are being misused. That's the only reason I suggest the registration, you know, but that's whatever the province of the board is. Mayor, I just struggle with that because I mean, if we have that and we have a consistent government is consistently going in there and doing checks on it And you have you have a family that is in need of it the the neighbors don't really care if they have an RV in there, right? Why why is it up to us to go decide if it's liable or not like? The neighbors can go work on it if then it doesn't bother the neighbors why should it bother us? Right if a Family needs it for a couple of months and they're living on it. What what is that matter for us? I don't think we should intervene in that that's what that's my okay Sir wait, let's go back around that vice mayor. It'll get you to close. I think I'm very clear. I actually like your suggestions, Mr. Mayor, because it lends itself to some form of not only personal responsibility, but responsibility towards your neighbors. We are supposing that you are a good neighbor and not everybody is. And so if we have guardrails for this, I think it helps us be better. And so if it was up to me, you all know how I feel about them. Not having that, then having what you are suggesting is a good idea in conjunction with having something that goes higher, things that you can't see and having it where you don't turn it on, you know, because- Oh, this is for maintenance, right? Exactly, unless it's for maintenance, then you don't have it on. No, okay. What's your best measure? On a special instance, like you're saying, when you're building your house. I just want to say for in this particular instance I am also in support of the registration just because to to what was already previously mentioned This is a situation that even if the neighbors aren't reporting it could multiply multiply multiply under Conditions that that are currently existing Okay, mr. Rodriguez. I'll let you close No, I just wanted to say that, you know, just to enter Commissioner guys, for RV, you can have a very little RV and live in it. You need a pretty good size boat to be able to live in it. I mean, you need to get up to a 30 foot, you know, 36 foot boat to live in it. And even then, that's very, very, very small quarters where if you get a 10 foot trailer, you can have a kitchen, you can have a bathroom, you can have everything in that. So I just wanted to clarify that. And there are people, there are neighbors complaining. So you said, why would we get involved? The no neighbors are complaining. The whole issue this came up is because there are concerned residents about this issue. And I'm just trying, we're hoping that we can come to a solution where, you know, we don't just completely ignore one side or the other, but try to come up with something that helps both sides, but also doesn't leave it there permanently. That's really a registration. I'm good with the registration, because at least we know it's there. So I think if there's consensus, I'd like to give the state attorney direction to bring back a revision to this code section. It requires any owner that has an RV to register with the. At no cost, just so we know where it is. And I would, I think the one standard that go to like to modify is the screening. I think to right now it's too low. It's like less than half the size of the maximum height of the unit. I would say maybe landscaping that's at least 10 feet tall, on the edges where the setback closest to where it's going to be screened, or the two setbacks closest to where it's going to be located on a lot, so that the budding neighbors have some visual protection from the storage of the recreational vehicle. Those would be my two suggestions. I'm open to any others. Yes, sir. Did you also want a grandfather in the ones that are currently? Well, I think I would only do that if we're going to move to ban them in any particular location. Right now, they're only allowed in the rear yard, which is consistent with where we allow our boats. So if we're going to go to, I thought I heard Commissioner Woonies say maybe that we should not allow them at all to be stored on properties. I would say if we're going to do that, then we should give the current owner's the ability to keep it. But if the title changes to either the RV or the property is inconsistent with either one, as with the boats, you'd lose the right to keep it there. I would say let's take in the steps. I don't think we have a condition. Obviously that we're all aware of. We should try to course correct for it. I really don't want to over regulate in this space for all the reasons I mentioned. Because we might invite people to come in and stay and take away that authority. I think if the registration and the landscaping don't get us further into a posture of compliance, and we see a proliferation of the issue, more people buying RVs to basically rent them in their vacuards or to use them as additional living space, that we can take further steps. That's my suggestion. So any further add-ons or? Where are you with that direction? I'm okay with that direction. I just also wanna mention that, when we to regulate it, that means that our code enforcement would have to go out there at night, or very early in the morning, I guess, would would be so just keep that in mind that the regulations regulating part of this is difficult. Yeah I would say though that if we and I think I mentioned this right we should have a rebuttable presumption in the standard that you bring forward. Like to include that. Where because you know Commissioner Rodriguez and one of the things that's obvious the circumstance we're all aware of is when you look at the RV, it's open. So the sides, right? Not every time. Not every time, but if you're typically living in it, you're going to, you're going to open it up, you're not going to keep it collapsed like you would be weren't driving. So I think that should be an assumption that is being used improperly, right? and you put the burden on the property owners, so that happens less frequently. And again, it's such that only in power is our code enforcement, but any neighbor. in properly, right? And you put the burden on the property under so that happens less frequently. And again, it's such, this not only empowers our code enforcement, but any neighbor, as was the case with Stunner for those of us who are on the board at the time, can send this video of what's happening after hours to document the condition and with that we can bring forward a code enforcement action. So if I'm speaking Madam City Attorney, Mr. City Attorney please let me know. but I think that should give us more tools to help clamp down the problem and not have to necessarily be enforcing overnight. Okay, so with that I would say direction three things, registration requiring a landscaping hedge of 10 feet and then you sir. I'm sorry, I'm doing the matter. Instead of limited 10 feet, can we just put four coverage? Is that the positive or the warning? Because let's say 10 feet and you still see the RV, I mean, what's the purpose of the 10 feet? Might as well just do four coverage. So require some kind of hedge material? A hedge material that would fully cover the RV at minimum. 10 feet. But right, I only suggest to to to to to I think of the sight line from an Abers, you know, CIV are to reyard. They're not necessarily going to be, you know, if you're standing right up against the up against the property line, you're probably not going to see over the edge. 10 feet. Yeah, I mean, let's work on the standard. Let's fully screen it and we can discuss it when we bring it back on first reading. OK. Right? OK. OK, let's move on. So thank you for that. We will bring up, let's go to item five, please. Item five in ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South America. For many of the zoning map of the City of South Miami to change the zoning district of the property located at 6540 men and lady from Duplex residential R.T.6 to townhouse residential R.T.18. Great Mr. City Attorney, this is a closet. don't matter. Do you need to give any warnings? Thank you Mayor. Application number five on this evening's agenda is the clause I do to show the nature. The clerk has read the title of the resolution before the public hearing, which will start shortly. The public hearing will include presentations by staff and the applicant and public comment. The commission may ask any questions either before or after public comment is closed. Following public comment, the commission may deliberate on the item. The quasi-judicial procedures require this commission to consider the evidence presented to it, and base your decision on the applicable law, and primarily on the evidence presented, whether by the applicant staff or members of the public. This is the first of two readings of an ordinance to consider the applicant's request to rezone the property. The criteria to consider is in section 20-5.7, and general law, which requires the proposed zoning be consistent with a comprehensive plan and compatible with the surrounding area. The evidence considered must be substantial competent evidence. That means testimony or other evidence based on personal observation or relevant expert testimony that a reasonable mind would accept as adequate to support a conclusion. It is not a popularity contest. It cannot be based solely on non-expert opinions, no matter how fervent those opinions might be. Anyone who seeks to speak on an item should be given an opportunity to speak during the public comment portion for the hearing. If you intend to provide testimony as to the application, you will be sworn in before your testimony is taken. We'll do that shortly. Please know if you speak, you may be subject to cross-examination. If you refuse, there should be cross-examined or to be sworn, your testimony will be considered in that context and given its due weight. The general public will not be permitted to cross examine witnesses, but the public may request the commission to direct questions on their behalf to either staff or the applicant. At this time, anyone who wishes to speak should be sworn in. I'd ask that you please stand and raise your right hands if you plan on speaking. Mr. Chair, we get us. Thank sp- thank you. Do you- thank this everyone that's registered? That's everybody. Okay. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. Madam Clerk, please confirm compliance with the advertising and notice requirements for tonight's hearing. Yes. Thank you, Madam Clerk. And then last thing, Mayor Vice-Mayer Commissioners, have any of you had had any x-part take communications With the applicant or any members of the public on this item just with staff. I have not Everyone else said no I smoke to one of them earlier before the meeting to one of the the residents. Yeah got it Okay, thank you about about the application. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Thank you for that disclosure. All right Okay Thank you, staff, who's making the residents. Yeah. Got it. Okay. Thank you about about the application. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Thank you for that disclosure. All right. Okay. Thank you. Uh, staff who's making the presentation, Mr. Manager. Good evening again. If I get just asked you to, um, for purposes of presentation, unless we want to start from beginning. Can we focus on the modifications since the last time we saw this a month ago? And yeah, that would be helpful. Thank you. No problem. Good evening mayor, vice mayor and commissioners. My name is Craig last month, senior planner with Calvin, junior download and associate consultant for the city. So as we know, this item was heard last month on April 1st and the applicant has made some changes to the site plan. And we are going to speak about that a little bit today. The item before you is to reason the parking from Duplex Residential RT6 to Tom Hous, Channel's Residential RT18. So some of the changes that the applicant made, first of all, the applicant reduced the total number of units from six units to a total of five units. Another change that was made, each unit now has its own parking garage, and each parking garage will be able to house two vehicles. Another change that the applicant made to the site plan is that there are no advisory parking spaces proposed any longer. And a big one that I think the applicant proposed is to split the mass of the building into two separate buildings which helps to reduce the visual scale or visual appearance of the building. Those are the main changes to the application. The resuming is still consistent with the city's code and staff still recommends approval by the city commission. If you have any questions, staff is available. Colleagues, any questions on the site plan? Any application? Shikai? Nope. No, I'm good. Are you sure? Okay. Mayor, if I could add one thing, please, I've distributed copies of the covenant that the applicant has submitted to try to address some of the concerns that were raised last time. He has limited the proposed height of the town homes to two stories or 35 feet from finished grade. He will provide a minute of two parking spaces on site, whether in garage or in open air parking spaces. He's limited the number of units to five town homes. So you're turning on 2.2, which is the garage? Yes. That's one of my short understanding what I saw in the package. Yes. The garage spaces are all designed to be under cover, correct? The garage spaces are. So that's, but there, it's two spaces in each garage. Am I? It's. No, he has, I believe it's one space per garage. And the applicant is here to address it. OK. OK. Mr. Fond, you want to answer that question for the mayor? Let's do this. Let's let's let's let you summarize. And the applicant is here to address it. Okay. Okay. Mr. Fond, you want it to, you want to answer that question for the mayor? Let's do this. Let's, let's, let's, let's let you summarize and we'll bring you up and make a presentation. You can clarify these issues for. All right. Okay. So, the, so he's limiting the, the number of units to five town home units based on the plans that you have there. If the units developed are rented, the rental agreements cannot be for a period of less than 30 days, and any new trees that are required to mitigate the removal of the existing trees on site, and which cannot be accommodated on the property, will be planted on either city land to be agreed upon or the underlying property. Okay, those are the commitments he's made. Okay. And Mr. Attorney, in terms of the enforcement rights under the declaration, they're in favor of the city. And in the case of dispute, do we get our costs recovered or how does that work? At this point, at this point, there's no provision for fee shifting. We can incorporate that before second reading. Okay, I think we should. Okay. Through the mirror. Yes sir. What's your thought process on that? Why do you want to do some shift? Because I don't want to have to bear the cost and force the covenant if there's a violation of it. And the covenants for what again? And we prevail what? What's the covenant? The covenant is to, so that we're not providing, The way I read this, the covenant is in favor of the city, so they're profaring it to us, right? That's right. And so we're the only party that can bring an action to enforce it. I do not want costs to be an impediment to this board or a future board to bring an enforcement action to make sure that any of the representations made by the applicant are adhered to. So it's silent on that point, I think, as I looked at this quickly. And I just want to be expressed that if there is an alleged violation and we bring forward an action to enforce the covenant, that ultimately the own of the properties and we burden with reimbursing us for our costs. That's why I asked for any objection to it. No? OK. OK. Mr. Pender, thank you for the clarification on the changes. We'll recognize the applicant that will open up the public hearing. Okay. Good evening, Mayor, Commissioners and staff, Javier Font, so many line, so many underlined a 45-33, I'm Boulevard, thank you for the opportunity. I won't go through. Mr. Fond, I just, I would appreciate your presentation. If you, I'm just gonna wanna keep, get us to the issues. Summary of what the changes were. And if you can share with us what the, what the comments you heard from neighbors, I know you had, I believe you, We left here the intention was to have conversations. Correct. Understand what was discussed, what you gathered from those conversations and how it may be reflected into the changes that you've incorporated. Okay. Yes. I met with the couple that lived right across the street. I met with her on site and walked the site. I was not able to be with the second person who spoke. I did speak to him prior to the meeting kind of showed him the changes but the the biggest move I think was if you remember we had one building with six units and the entry to the entry and exit from the driveway was actually on the left hand side of the plan that you're looking at sort of parallel to to the property next to us. So, we're townhouse one is depicted. Correct. Okay. And there was concern that that was coming out into the corner. And although we had some discussions about lights not shining into the neighbors when we're coming in, we were shining lights into the neighbors when we were were coming out So what we decided to do was obviously reduce one unit to five Take the three unit building and split the building in two So we took the three unit building put it on the hard corner, which is a little bit busier We took the two unit building and face that towards the neighbors across the street got rid of that driveway so It made it a lot more pleasant for them to look across the street and not see cars coming in and out. And we did put the driveway in the center where it comes out directly into the office building in front of us. So I think that that was the biggest move. Obviously as you guys have heard, two stories, 35 foot max, the entry drive move, no parking in the sway area in the front, all the parking in the back. We do have two cars per or a double car garage per unit, so we want to make sure we have plenty of parking back there. And once we've agreed that, because there are some trees on the side, there's some that are actually on the other end line, some on our site, the large oil palm that's back there, we hear is in pretty bad shape. So what we've decided is any trees that we have to mitigate for if we can't fit them on site, or we can't move them off site, we will plant those trees either in the other line in the soil area or in the other area or somewhere else that the city would want us to plant them. And then the last concession that we've made there was no shortterm rent, there was no air being beer, anything like that. So nothing under 30 days rent them. Okay. Colleagues, any questions or comments? Yeah. Yes, sir, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Font. Can you speak a little bit about the current tree disposition plan? Like, what is it that's there now? Any impressive folks or any... I would, I would, I specifically would like to know there's about four mango trees that are along the front that at least a couple of them from this plan will get lost. So if they're, if they're removed, those are the ones I'm interested in understanding how they're going to be relocated on the site or preserved. So they can be. Absolutely. I don't know if we can fit them on the site or not, but there are mango trees that would have to be removed. So the site basically has mango trees. I think there's one avocado tree. There's two royal points to be asked. One of them, which is on our property, one of them, which is just outside our property on the underlying property. There are some palms, that's palms, I think that aren't worth much. There are two royals on the property that are huge. And those are probably a hazard, honestly. Yeah, they have one on my property. So they should be removed. And then the one tree that is, I think, an oak, is actually on our neighbor's properties. It's not on ours. And it is on the side of the property where the driveway used to be and where we haven't landscaped area now. So, but yes, obviously because we're building the town homes on the street and those mangoes in that old cottage or along the street those are going to be removed or will either replace we'll mitigate for them. I'm happy to plant some mango trees wherever you guys would want. So, I mean, we want to do a heavy landscape plan. We want to do something nice, obviously, but for ourselves in that corner, because it is a busy corner, but we just haven't gotten to that point yet. So, but the one specimen tree if you will, at the top there is the Royal Poinciana that sits on our yard. We have had an arbor's look at it. He said it's not in great shape, but our landscape architect is talking to the underlying, to maybe move it onto the underlying next to the other one that's there, but we'll do whatever's right to be done. Mr. Guy, for the comments? No, thank you. Mr. Rodriguez, you're recognized. Hello, Mr. Rock. What do you do about guest parking? So we don't have any guest parking right now. We're gonna assume that they'll park either on the soil across the street, but that was one of the things that the city would have talked about. So, and they may be able to park behind some of the town homes there. So. For the comments, and vice mayor, I'm sorry. Mr. Vice Mayor, Madam Commissioner, nothing. Good to see you. Sorry, thank you. I just a couple comments. I think, you know, again, I don't know how much this was informed by a conversation with the neighbors, but I certainly prefer this disposition substantially and enhancement over the last iteration. I'm very interested to see how we can preserve. Those are pervary mature, seem to be very healthy. Mango and avocado trees. I mean, I think after the storm this weekend was driving down and ran across the manager, we had a fight this tree fall on Manor Lane and there are people out on the lot actually picking up fresh fruit that have just fallen off the tree with the weekend. So if those can be either you can keep them on the lot in the open area at the I guess it's the southeast corner corner of a lot. If my directions are off or we can relocate them somewhere else in the city, that would be my preference. I think we should work on the language in 25. The last option should be any sort of cash payment mitigation that's the least desirable outcome from my perspective. So we can work on modifying your proffering 2.5 and maybe get you some suggested language. I wanted to ask you in terms of the drive aisle, which I think is a very elegant way to push any traffic towards a commercial use, as opposed to into the neighborhood. Is that going to be access control? There's going to be open. What's the, it's open right now. We're not assuming access control. Because obviously we don't want to back up into the streets. So we're not assuming. So yeah, I think if that's open, it's a preferable condition as well. And then I think I am concerned about guest parking. We're probably going to need, We need to come up with a solution for at least a handful of spaces. One per unit and maybe if we can do that in the back, I would like to preserve it. are probably going to need, we need to come up with a solution for at least a handful of spaces. Maybe one per unit and maybe if we can do that in the back, I would like to preserve as much of the open areas possible. I don't know what the clearances are. It looks like you've got a 20 foot drive also, probably not deep enough there to, you'll probably have to eat into that open area to do that. But in the next iteration on second reading, if you can think about a solution for some guest parking. I do not, that that that swell condition with the office building up with standing it's a wonderful owner. It's like a sub-optimal condition for the neighborhood today and I don't want to compound it further by not planning for some level of guest parking for the units on site. So would appreciate your continue to work on that. We'll try. I don't think we can get five. I don't think any code would call for one per. No, but if we get, I'm just see what we can do on that. Shoot for the moon from my perspective. OK. Colleagues, further comments. OK. Thank you for your presentation. We're going to open up the public hearing. Thank you very much. I had two folks who had registered Mr. Lopez. You wanna come forward at this time, you recognize. Followed by Mr. Truby and then anyone else who would like to open up the public hearing. Thank you very much. I had two folks who had registered, Mr. Lopez. You want to come forward at this time. You're recognized. Followed by Mr. Truby. And then anyone else who'd like to come up and speak, please just line up behind the podium here. Good evening, sir. Hello. My name is Jason Lopez. I live at 7730, South Post 65 place. I would like to point out that I did have the benefit of speaking with them just minutes before this started. And I did speak to Danny Rodriguez just minutes before this started where he informed me that he had spoken to many neighbors that were in support of this, which he did not tell the city attorney at the time that he should have. So I'm a little frustrated right now. I feel intimidated by the commission to a degree. I realize that's neither here nor there. Let's talk about the trees. Moving those trees is a farce. Let's be real. They're not going to be taking care of and saved and properly moved. They do stand as a very enjoyable entrance to our neighborhood where they are. If you look at this plan, the easiest way to save the entrance to our neighborhood is to A, make it four units and not five. And to move those buildings back where there's no trees. Because right now they're choosing to build these buildings where the trees are. I will say you are correct that the royal poem is dangerous but it is not unhealthy. It is one of the healthiest royal poems in Miami and the Dalaniks Regia, the Royal of the Poinsiana, is also a very healthy tree. So when they're just like oh they're just mangoes, oh they're unhealthy trees. It's because it is not in their best interest to take care of them. It is not in their best interest to take care of the entrance to our neighborhood. They would rather point at sending the trees to the underlying. Has anyone discussed that the underlying is a native plant garden? It's going to accept the mango trees. It's hogwash. He's lying. It does, that's not accurate. So the easiest way for this project, not to have been the neighborhood and to protect the integrity of our tree canopy and our cultural history of this neighborhood is to change that plan. It's not to rezone it to six units. That is not the way to do do this. The other thing worth pointing out is that these units are going to be rented out. You guys talk about adding space for families and self-mining. Yes, OK, wow. 30-day rentals. What does that mean? That means we get a new family every 30 days. They're going to contribute to the integrity of the city of Pleasant Living. I think what they're trying to do with that restriction is respond to a concern about not authorizing short-term metals. I respect that. Yeah. But it would be a lot better if this that was going on that was changing the neighborhood was an opportunity for five different families to invest in South Miami, not for one developer to make money off of rental units. changing the character in the neighborhood. And so you guys have the opportunity to control what's going on here, I realize that we need to move forward. I realize that we need construction, we need to bring more people in, but this is still a greedy plan. This is still asking for too much, and it is not taking into account what is actually in the neighborhood. It's taking into account their bank accounts and how much money they can make and what they can sell. And so I ask you guys, please don't push this forward. Make them come back to you and make the plan better. Actually go to the site. Speak to the residents. I wasn't spoken with. I've been the most vocal person about this. They did not reach out to me. So I feel that the responsibility is on you guys to protect our neighborhood. I realize that we have to move forward, but we don't have to move forward with this plan. So please consider that. Thank you, sir. Appreciate the comments. That's a true being good evening. Good evening everybody. Um, this first I've heard Jason Lopez talk but I'm in total agreement. Sorry sir, please please state your name and address for the record. Christopher Truby. Thank you. And address your address as well. 77740 Southwest 65th place. Thank you. OK. I'm in total agreement of what Jason Lopez just said. As a resident of this city and a coach and a teacher at Sunset Elementary for 25 years, and I've taught 1,200 kids through there who sports and teaching them about pleasant living as we call it here. Teaching them to be good neighbors, just to be good people. I'm not saying these guys are bad people. I wouldn't go that far, but greedy is a good word. We don't want. I know I'm late to the party, but... You guys are not late to the party, just to be clear. Please, take into consideration what you're doing here. We're talking about putting apartment buildings on a corner that is one of the busiest. Have you guys ever been there in the morning? I mean, that's the way I go to work every morning. From Tom Thumb to 80th, I mean, to US one, is so backed up every morning. And I have kids on one side that go to school to sell at South Miami. I have kids that go down school, uh, school down South. And I have to go to work. You can't leave. I mean, you're really stuck in there for a good 20 minutes before you can even get out on the 80th already. And now we're gonna put six more two car units. Is that what I heard? It's five. Five more units with two cars so potentially ten more people right there in that little really rough area of parking and I mean of traffic and now parking sounds like two. So I'm not going to take a lot of your time. No one spoke to me or anybody that I know of around my neighborhood. And I really wish somebody would have talked to us about this. I know we got a few things in the mail here and there. But if this gentleman is saying he spoke to anybody, I'd like to know who he spoke to. I'd like to know which resident said, yeah, go ahead. Because I don't believe that. So anyways, that's what I'm trying to say. I just think this is, yeah, please consider everything that's going on here. And it's not for us. It's for all the little kids in the neighborhood. Traffic already down Manor Lane is horrible. Coming through people cutting through all the time. And in the morning and the afternoon, and I got two kids, they've been almost hit by cars so many times I can't tell you. I'm just letting you know, it's a bad area already. So traffic wise, I don't mean a bad area. I love South Miami, but that's where I'm going with all this. All right. Thank you Thank you sir. Appreciate the comments Is there anyone else who liked address this commission on please come forward? And again your name and address for the record please In the August I'm at six five one five Southwest 78th Terrace This the second time I've spoken in front of you. It was in April where this was not up on the docket, but I have to echo both of their concerns in addition to the traffic. It, for some reason, within the last few months, I don't know if it's the buildings that are going up around the area. It has just been a cluster of trying to get out of South Miami. And I have to say it's not 20 minutes, it could be an outroom. So I just have to echo both of what they're saying and what's happening in our neighborhood. And we're all very close living around in the area. And there's just tons of violations. South Miami police is in present, rights on reds on the streets that are not permitted. I physically see every morning within 20 minutes when I'm walking my dogs 10 violations. So again, just want you to consider that and maybe come out and see what's happening in the area. Thank you for your comments. Anyone else who likes your justice commission? Good evening. My name is Nancy Edwards. I live at 75, 61 Southwest 65th place. I've been a resident of South Miami since 1961. And to put that into our neighborhood would be absolutely criminal because you'd be destroying the mango trees. And I remember when I moved into the neighborhood in 1961, there was a single home there. And you're just making the city of South Miami a concrete slab. You're taking away all the natural foliage. And it's really a crime. And I really do feel it's greedy. It's very greedy. And what you did on 80th with all of those townhouses all the way down and the traffic in the morning. We didn't approve those, man. Those are in an unincorporated county just to be clear. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. No, it's fine. It's fine. We get it's I just want to so everyone's clear, you know. Yes, yes. And you weren't here either, just to kind of set the posture. We did defer this item for a full meeting. Yes. Yes. And you weren't here either, but just to kind of set the posture, we did defer this item for a full meeting with the purpose that they can have more conversation and evolve the plan. And I think we're hearing that that needs to continue. We'll decide whether we give them an affirmative vote today to move forward. And so everyone's clear. Today's the preliminary vote. The final vote would happen next month so they're still I again Mr. Truby said you're late to the party when I understand you're right on time for the party okay and I and I'm in total agreement agreement but wait we can give her her time back I'm sorry I interrupted her and if you can give her back at 30 seconds I stole from her I'd appreciate it I'm in total agreeance agreement to nitruby and Jason Lopez and Lisa, because that traffic on that corner, you need to go there in the mornings and watch the traffic going to South Miami Hospital down Manor Lane and then coming back in the afternoons, the traffic is horrendous. And then they're cutting through the streets to get to where they want to go. And they're just using it like a raceway. And that corner on Manor Lane and ADF, it's horrendous. You need to go there and experience it during the hours. As a matter of fact, all through the day, I'm so nervous. Take your time. There's nothing to be nervous about here. But in the mornings and in the afternoon at lunchtime and when everybody's getting off from work, it's really hazardous and people are rude. You know the city of Miami. They're rude drivers here and they're just respectful. So go there, experience it, and you'll see what we're talking about in this lazy, beautiful land of pleasant living in South Miami, which we're losing. We're losing because of such development and taking away the canopy of our neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Sorry, good evening. Good evening. Thank you. I was kind of this 6492 manor lane. I live five houses down from the property. I don't really have an opposition to the units. My opposition again like my fellow residents is those are some beautiful trees. There is no movement in those around. They're just going to be killed off if they try to get moved. Secondly, the driveway, while it solves a problem for the neighbor on the corner, they're not showing the entire scope of how that intersection works. You come off of a curb that then is a turn. It's a really awkward corner. And without showing the rest of it, that leads right out into the other street that's coming in from 67th. I foresee a lot of accidents if you put it there. Sorry, can you clarify? Can you clarify? I'm looking at the geometry with an aerial. Right, well it's not on here. I thought, just to, again, I just, since I had the chance to have a conversation with a neighbor, because we can't do that without having to disclose it in a outside the setting, the prior condition was where townhouse one was, if you can see on the drawing now. I thought the prior condition probably lent itself more to the condition you're concerned about about a conflict with the intersection. I did never saw the original rendering, and I'm not speaking as to ones better than the other. I am just saying that that center spot has a lot of blind spots for everybody coming around the curve when people are coming out. It is just a really hot intersection because it is not represented in this picture what is going on there. It is hard to understand. That is just a concern for being presented as rental properties more so than being sold as townhome. I don't think the applicants made any representation as to what they're I don't recall I was seeing a finger wagging the back row. I always say it because it's been brought up and that's special of 30 days and what not which I didn't know why we're really big., because I just see, so you can understand in the proffer, which they have to volunteer, we're not allowed to regulate short-term rentals any longer by mandate of telehassy. So from my perspective, that's a very valuable proffer, the applicant's giving, saying they're not gonna do Airbnb. For, they do it, it's gotta be for more than 30 days. Because that would that would that keep in the property to have it as a least property or they selling off the Well, we'll let them come back up and they can address that for they do it, it's got to be for more than 30 days. Because that would, that would, that would, keeping the property to have it as a least property, or they selling off the, well, let them come back up and they can address that question. That was my question. It seemed from that wording that maybe this was going to be a rental property where it wasn't being sold. It was just going to be run as a rental property. And that does change the dynamic in the neighborhood neighborhood because it's all single family homes with the exception of the motel down, you know, on the other side of the canal. And that already becomes businesses down there. So, you know, in that sense, it's all single family homes with the exception of the motel down, you know, on the other side of the canal. And that already becomes businesses down there. So, you know, in that sense, it's a different concept. If it's going to be a rental property to his point of bringing in five families that are going to be, you know. I understand. South Miami residents. So thank you for your time. Thank you very much. Further comments? Okay, seeing no one in the chamber. Madam clerk is anyone online. Anyone on the zoom please raise your your hand. Okay. So that will close the public hearing. Mr. Fought would you like to address any of the comments that were made. And I would appreciate because I, you know, again, I've seen some pretty large specimens trees, I think MG developers project in Coral Gables, relocated recently. But I think Mr. Lopez, sorry, if you're welcome to come back up, if you want to say something, it is, it is, but that's, I mean, that's, so that's the challenge here, right? So I think, you was made about the possibility of modifying the design. As I look at the arrow, we don't have the benefit of a survey that shows where these trees exactly lay out relative to the sidewalk that's there, but they're pretty close to it. You have a 10 foot setback area in the front yard? So if I can address the idea of pushing the town homes back. So we've done numerous plans for this site. Some of the first ones that we did were traditional town home designs, if you will, where you have two parking spaces in front and you back out into the street. So even if we push the townhomes back, we can no longer re-erload the parking on them. The parking would have to be at the front of townhome. So we would have 10 cars backing up into the street. Explain that to to me because the way I was gonna agree with my mental obstacle, look at the geometry of the site to Mr. Lopez's comment, in terms of setting the townhomes back, probably applied most of the heat to townhomes five, right? Because it looks like you're not gonna get enough for your apron to allow for a movement out of a rear garage. But with respect to the others. You won't. I mean, if you push the townhomes back and we tried it, right? There's no way to maneuver back into the town. First of all, you're going to close off the access way to them. As you can tell, you push it back, you'll close off the access so there's really no way to get back behind them. And you'll have no way to maneuver back there to get back into a garage. So you would have to have your parking in front, which is a traditional town home, right? But then you're gonna have the driveway cuts at the front, you're gonna have 10 cars backing up into the street. And you're gonna have to get rid of the trees anyways because there's no way you can do the 10 cards across the front and get rid of the trees. So... up into the street and you're going to have to get rid of the trees. Anyways, because there's no way you can do the 10 cars across the front and get rid of the trees. So I have in my personal home I moved five oaks, one of which was 80 feet tall to keep them. So I love trees. I can't tell you that it's probably cheaper to buy a mango tree than to move one of those mango trees So I'm not up here lying to you What I offered and what we profit in the coming it was that we will do whatever is right at the time If we can move one of the trees will move one of the trees if we need to mitigate We're happy to put those wherever you go. Well first and foremost. So does the design does the design you presented required to remove all the trees because I I I believe at wherever you go. Well, first and foremost, does the design, does the design you presented require you to remove all the trees? Because I, I mean, I believe at least it does. It does. It requires definitely all the man goes and we would remove the royals because we think they are dangerous. Even though one of them could probably stay, some of the tax pumps could probably stay. I don't think they bring any value. The Royal Poincyana. I would personally remove. I don't think it's it's a beautiful tree. It's not my favorite tree and from what I understand it it's not a good shape. We're happy to come back in with larger specimen trees. We're happy to donate trees to a park somewhere. We're happy to plant you know mature mangoes somewhere. Yes it's very hard to move a mango. It's not as difficult to move an oak. It's difficult to move an oak, but you have much, much success, and it's worth a lot more to move an oak than it is to move a mango tree. It's probably easier to say, okay, I'm going to plant two mangoes through the sides of those mango trees, somewhere else, then actually move those particular mango trees. trees. So we're opening ourselves to whatever is right and whatever possibilities there are out there to do it. Unfortunately, you know, it's not a huge site and for us to get the town home in front, which is what the new code is calling for, what the city is pushing for is that streetscape. So if you're walking along the street, you're not walking behind 10 cars, you're walking in somebody's front door, somebody's stoop. So it's a much more pleasant walk, you know, if you were to walk from Manor Lane over to the underlying, you'd actually be walking in front of these town homes and actually experiencing the architecture of the homes as opposed to experiencing the back of 10 cars, right? So we think that this is the right concept for this site. We truly believe this is a transitional site. We know that it's been land use plan for many, many years as town homes and that this, you know, a duplex on this site is just, you know, to me, it's not reasonable, right? So what else? As far as the rentals are concerned, we don't know if we're going to sell them or not. That'll, you know, we'll make that decision once we get closer if we're able to build the project once we get closer to finishing the project. Very strong possibility that they sell it. The market is right. I don't want to say that we're going to sell them. I know we'll at least rent them. I don't know if we'll sell them or not, but I know it will lease rent them. But we'll make that decision at that point. You know, if we rent them, they we'll make that decision at that point. If we rent them, they're not gonna be cheap rentals, so you're gonna have people that you would want in your community renting these. And I think that that was all the comments that were made. Okay, thank you for your time. Appreciate it. Okay, colleagues, if we want to kick off the discussion. Please. Am I right in thinking that across the street where bike tech is, that falls under RTC? Does that fall under that zoning? I'm trying to figure out like- I'm not sure aboutTC. I don't know Mr. St. Turn if you know it's definitely count it's definitely zone commercial by the county but I don't know it's RTC. I don't think it's RTC. So what could end up there? Yeah I it may be part of an urban center district. Yeah Tony I don't remember but I'm pulling pulling it up right now. Certainly, I will tell you, given that it has a mixed use commercial or industrial designation, you could end up with a very large of local projects. Yeah, in that area. So when I look at this, I mean, we all know that I was a, I don't know you so I'm sorry. Like, I don't have inner voice. I apologize, everybody. When we saw this last time, I was a hard-knower. There's no way. This is like trying to stick, you know, 25 French fries in the baby-sized French fry thing. This makes a lot more sense to me because it's less in your face. To the neighbors, I can understand somebody who may mention about the driveway, because we don't know much about driver. I get what you're saying, because that's a little scary. But when we look at the use of this land, realistically, I think we all wish that things would stay the same way forever and ever. I think we saw the same thing on 67th Avenue on three lots, where the neighbors were like, it was trees forever and ever. And when somebody buys it, they buy the property. They are able to develop it. And so your stuck kind of in that push pull between what neighbors are used to and what the purchaser is able to do. So I think we need to become for lack of the nice word, like realistic in what is possible here while we have the conversation. Because while I think we'd all love to see it stay a green space forever, he paid money for it. And so unless he's dedicating it as a park, we're very limited in what we can do when it comes to this. And so I look at it as five townhouses now and I mean I'm looking, it's like two thousand something square feet each. So it's not low end. So we find ourselves in kind of a push pull. I don't, I'd love to hear what you guys think about this because when I look at it now, notwithstanding the trees which I get it, I don't know how much better this could get Thank you, Scott you're recognized. Yeah, look so the biggest comment that I see from the residents and it and I mean most people know that I am the biggest proponent of tree canopy We've lost 10% of our tree canopy over the last 10 years and it's ridiculous. So we are doing a lot more to bring that canopy back. It's really important to us and we will work with the architect to make sure we enforce and make sure that the trees are either moved, protected or grown. So we have that same cavity, if not, what we have now, better moving forward. I think that's really important that the city of South Miami understands how passionate and how we're moving to really bring back canopy. Saying that, I agree with Commissioner Bonita where breaking up the facade, having two different buildings, you have roughly the size of one house and two townhouses. The comments made on traffic, we hear it all the time, we do have a major redevelopment going down in our downtown, and that's always the same concern when it comes to traffic. The traffic is not controlled by us, right? The traffic is moving north or it's moving south at the PM level. So having these points of entry are not really going to affect it that much. It really isn't. I drive on that street, on 80th street coming back, dropping off my daughter coming back on 80th street, so I can go back into South Miami almost every single day. The traffic on 80th street is unbearable, but to make it left on 67th is not. So there's some caveats to jump in on US one, and just US one is just a major artery artery that no matter if it's South Miami, if it's Pinecrust, if it's you know color Bay homestead. They're all driving on that corridor and it's only going to continue to get worse. What we can try to do is when we have these points of points of living that they're closer to the metro station you will see a big push and you're seeing it now with the underlying that we want to push closer to the metro station. You will see a big push, and you're seen and now with the underlying, that we want to push people to the metro stations. This is very close to the metro station, whether it's South Miami or Dayland, where it could be used a lot more. So traffic's always going to be an issue, and it's unfortunate, but this is only five homes. It's not a big condominium, which could go across the street. Those are the things that we cannot control. What we can control is this particular piece of land, the tree canopy that we want to protect, and the ability to make sure it looks in line with what the neighborhood looks like. So we are going to continue to do that. But the property and what the what the architect has already done to a piece a lot of the comments that were made before and my eyes look acceptable So that's my opinion on that Charteries Marcus are you able to put on G004 by any chance? Okay. I'm sorry, sir. I forgot your, sorry. So I think this one gives you a better depiction of what you were talking about, right? Okay, good. So if you look at this picture to the right, the one that's singleed by itself, the neighbor who's the house behind it and along that line, I know that there's an architect that most of those are rentals. Reason I bring this up is because rentals is nothing new to that, to that manner lane. I've spoken to him that those are a lot of rentals there. Like I said, so I just wanted to bring that point to you. So you know that rentals is in the neighborhood. I just met the rentals facility. It's always at a home. Sir, I'll allow you to come forward if you want to get a microphone. But we just can't have comments from the audience that are not captured in the record. So if you want to come forward and since he's addressing you Sorry, that was my fault, sorry. I just wanted to address your point because I know you said you were. Let me just recognize them so if you can put in your your two cents and then we'll close the public hearing again. Sir for the you name it that's the record more time. Yeah. John Carlos can I miss 6492 anyway. So to your point I'm not saying that I don't want people renting their private homes. I'm just saying it's a different component when you have five townhouses that are all rentals. It's just a different, it's just slightly different. When somebody owns a property, they may be renting it for now because they're trying to sell it. They have plans to do something else. That doesn't necessarily mean it's always going to be a rental. But when you make a facility like this, that is just for leases and rentals. It's just a slightly different component and I'm not against rentals or anything. And again, I'm just a slightly different component. And I'm not against rentals or anything. I'm just... And again, I'm just pointing that out because you said that, or we'll have different families coming because of the rentals, and I get your point. I'm just clarifying that those houses behind are a lot of rentals, that's it. That's all I was just trying to point out for clarification purposes. Thank you. Just to be fully clear, all those rental houses are my fault for chances. Oh, okay. All right, there you go. Then you know that their rentals in. All right. Okay. You can if we can, if we can all agree to do the following, I will reopen the public hearing for two more speakers. You're welcome to come forward. Just please come to the microphone. Your name and address of the record. You can keep some order. So August 6, 515 Southwest 78 terrorists. Thank you. Yes, we agree that there are rentals on Manor Lane, but they are single dwelling homes. I'd have multiple rentals. So I just want to go on the record. Single, I'm sorry. Can you? They're single family homes. Yes. That have rooms that are being rented. So a single family home yes that have rooms that are being rented so a single family home that are being rented that sounds that sounds that's worse than this yes that's all there's like at least three houses that have can you speak to that can you speak to that later that last is right there trying to come forth and please let her know what those addresses are and because I don't I doubt that that can for sure I can definitely let that does not comply with our, I'm sure we're going to have to do this right there. I'm going to try to enforce it and please let her know what those addresses are. I doubt that that can force it. That does not comply with our regulations. Thank you. Did anyone else want to say anything? I'm going to close the public hearing. I'll further objection. Can we start on drinking? You recognize again. I'm going to go. Okay. No. I just wanted to finish off. Thank you. I guess for pointing that out to. Again, I said this the last time. Townhouse is how we're trying to. Buffer from a commercial area. Like this into a residential neighborhood. It's in the downtown district, it's all around the city. That's what the zoning code what we're trying to accomplish. That way it just doesn't go commercial, residential, and you have a single family home backing up to a commercial building or commercial space. So townhouses is the way that we're trying to mitigate that. So I think this is a very nice project that you guys have presented. Ultimately, I do say to the residents, this, are we closing up for a live local here? Because if you are close to live local, be careful what you fight for, because at the end of the day, this could become much bigger and much worse than what you're getting right now. I'm just, just think about that. Okay, we had it with a clarification on the city attorney, you recognize sir. Sure, so that corner property crossed 80th Street to the south is zone BU1. BU1 would allow up to four stories under the base code provision, the base code provision with a density of up to 13 units per acre. Now under live local that would be considerably more. You're looking at something on the order of 65 units and sky's the it would be it would be restricted by how big the property is just because it's within one mile of of downtown Kendall. We have a floor and we have now have a lot of coverage preemption that's gonna take effect in July so the situation in terms of what our what telehazze is doing in terms of limiting our ability to regulate properties getting worse by the the day. So, I think to your point, Mr. Rodriguez. Mr. Vice Mayor, did you want to say something? Sure. I just wanted to thank the applicant for some of the revisions that were made at least off of the initial. I do think that this has the potential of being a beautiful project as an entrance to an amazing community, which is Manor Lane. I do think we heard a lot of feedback today that maybe we haven't heard before and incorporating as much as possible between first and second reading would give me a lot more confidence in the project. Obviously with the focus on trees, with traffic and any modifications that can be made to allow this project to be a little bit more neighborly in the community, that would be, unless there's other compelling arguments, I'll probably support it on first, but I would love to see some of the feedback that came from the residents who incorporated into the second reading. Thank you for those comments. Yes, you're recognized, ma'am. I actually don't have a comment for the developer. I have a comment for us. that is that we may want to see what we do in that area. If we've got people turning and going crazy on those streets, which I think that we do, I think that to say that we don't is to have never been down those streets. And I think when everybody that's on this day, this was campaigning, we probably at one point or another were there. I know that I was. We should maybe have the, I call it the being counter. It's not a being counter. It's a thing that counts cars and speeds and all of that. We should employ that in that area so that we can get an accurate read whether it's perception or reality, what is going on in that neighborhood, to see if we mitigate with speed bumps or something, or do not enter or whatever it is, but now having had the residents speak to us about it, doing nothing I think is irresponsible. So I'll just add a couple thoughts. One, for those of you who were not here the last time we discussed this project, I think obviously the biggest missed opportunity is we as the city did not act to try to buy this and make this a public green space. That's not a four-closed option, but it's a very expensive option because these folks just purchased it for a very nice number. If the neighbors are serious about preserving it the exactly the way it is, it's going to be a real conversation about digging into our collective pockets to acquire it and probably pay a very hefty sum just to leave it exactly as it is. I invite people that's a conversation you want to want to kind of show some support for that so that, you know, it's an option we could consider evaluating. But in the world of, in the world of the most likely options, this applicant has brought up proposal forward. I appreciate the modifications. I think the modifications both in terms of the orientation, respectfully disagree that the dry aisle I think here is much better position to avoid traffic conflicts because of the geometry of that other corner where it was cited before really lent itself to a lot more blind spots with two streets intersection, intersecting with the third and making that access more hazardous. I think this mitigates some of the visual and light impact on certainly the most abutting neighbor to the north and east. I appreciate the profit of a covenant. I think the design is very nice. I wanted to make sure that we're going to prove a rezoning here. We're proving it to a specific site plan. So that they do not build this. They're not just getting rights to build whatever. It's got to come back to be modified in the future so that the neighbors at least have some measure of protection in that regard as well. In terms of getting a good quality design product and getting a commitment on what was gonna be built there. I think where I'm still satisfied on two points through the homework between first and second reading, I think I'm gonna follow the lead of my vice here is I think some more conversation with the neighbors, particularly with the focus on landscaping. This is a very lush edge and to come as your guys point, it would be a shame to if we're going to lose these fruit trees to not replace the street or that street edge with some larger specimen shade trees that at least could preserve the character, that entrance in a reconfigured format, but certainly keeping the canopy healthy and lush at this corner. Like I said, we had not any significant storm event and literally I think when I drove by to meet the manager out there, there was three or four people scrying across a lot picking up whatever fruit I hit the ground immediately after the storm event. So it is a treasure little piece of dirt. I think the worst outcome for all of us is for it to remain vacant. Traffic at this intersection is a problem. I live just across the way on US one, just off of 80th. We've got a lot of work to do in terms of rationalizing our intersections across US one. It's not something that's not that we're not attuned to. I think traffic has been worse lately because we have a lot of evoTs or maintenance of traffic plans on 60 second. A lot of people are void going out to 60 second right now because of the work being done to the pedestrian bridge at That's off Miami Hospital and the New Worth the Petic Center that they're building north of sunset. So I imagine right now that condition is probably worse than it's been in recent memory because people are trying to avoid having to try and glean around that that that node right now. But I do think this is a fairly elegant execution. It needs some more refinement to kind of give the cop the applicant some motivation to kind of bring something continue to work with us. I'm going to support it on first reading again, but I would ask that you meet with Mr. Lopez, Mr. Truby, and others in the neighborhood with a real focus on how we're going to treat that street frontage from a landscape perspective, so that if we lose something, we're going to get something of like or but a quality. If in fact, we move forward with the approval. Any final comments? Is there a motion on item five? You'll move it to a motion to approve. What are we with the profit with the profit. I think you just laid it out really well. Okay, so motion by commissioner Boniach to adopt it and accept the profit. And I would like to work on the language for the journey in 2.5. And again, I think the apple So made a representation that they're gonna work into the revised site plan, some amount of guest parking to try to address that issue as well. Okay, item item item item item item item record please. Yes, item two. A resolution of the mayor and city commission of the city is off the floor of many the schedule fees and fines parks and recreation fees scheduled to amend the fitness trainer permit fees. Thank you, Mr. Manager. Are you handling the presentation? Yes, sir. Our parks director present the item to you. It's your pro. Good evening. How are you? Thank you. You, good evening. I know why you say. I always want to say, Po, I'm not sure why. I apologize. Good evening. As soon as I said that, I was correcting myself. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, commissioners. Thank you, manager. staff recommends increasing the fitness center personal trainer permit fee at the Gibson Belt and BELTLE Community Center from 600 annually to 300 per month effective October 1st, 2025. The benchmarking analysis in your memo provided indicates that comparable facilities typically charge personal trainers between 400 and 500 per month for onsite training access. The proposed 300 a month rate remains intentionally below market average to maintain accessibility for community users. Support local trainers who often subsidize membership fees for their clients. Reflect the facility's modest size and available equipment at the community center. It for proved as a pros. It for proved as proposed, the program could generate up to 14,400 in annual revenue. These funds could help offset operating costs or at the discretion of the city commission. Be allocated to subsidize membership or program fees for resident, you to qualify for financial assistance. I'm available, should you have any follow-up questions? Okay, colleagues, any questions of the director? Cute. Are we, so how many municipalities allow for non-residents and residents to use their gyms. Are we one of the only gymnasiums where we don't, that we allow non-residents to use it? No, from my understanding, every municipality allows for members of either residents or non-residents residents to use their facilities from what I know Including trainer or trainers. So some facilities. There's a few Miami-Dade County facilities that do not allow trainers Core gables their rec center their community youth rec center. They don't allow trainers there. However, at their country club, they allow trainers there. Village of Pinecress allows personal trainers at their site. They currently charge 400 a month for their trainers to be there. Okay, so us in South Miami and Pinecress are... Pinecress and us are pretty similar. And how we handle our personal trainers. OK, thank you. For the questions. Hi. What's your name? So was it part of the thanks, director? Was it part of the changes that you want to make also lowering the amount of trainers that we can do? Yes. So, currently it's at six. Currently as I said, our program allows up to eight, but currently we have six trainers. And you want to lower that to four? That is correct. And what's your thought process behind that? The reason for that is, one, there's the trainers, they have a lot of clients. It's the first reason. Some of them, not all of them, but some of them have a lot of clients. And they are not monopolizing but using a facility for the entire day. So they're there from, let's say from six or seven a.m. in the morning and they're spending roughly about four to maybe eight hours a day at the site. So I think that's okay, however, we can't have six trainers doing that, or at least we shouldn't have six or eight trainers doing that because it is a very intimate site. It's limited capacity there, and we have to find somewhere to find a balance, I think. So yes. Okay, and then the other question I had for you, do you feel like right now we're close to capacity or do you feel like we're inundated with people? Maybe from trainers or just you know residents or non-residents in general? No not at all. We do have peak hours. What are the peak hours? Peak hours anywhere between in the mornings from 6 a.m. or let's just say 7 a.m. to 9.30 and roughly about 4.30 to about 7 o'clock. So my opinion is a little bit different on what you're recommending to do. I attend the gym every morning, well, I try to go every morning. It's a lie, but I say it very very sorry, I apologize. I am lying if I say I go every morning. There's a benefit of having, if it's six trainers, and if they monopolize it, there is a benefit to that. The benefit is that whatever the clients are bringing are paying membership fees for the year. So that has its pros and its cons. In my opinion, what we always try to do, and I say this all the time, is that we want to strive for the best, right? So do we want our gyms to be full? Yeah, we do. I want more people to go and this is my opinion. I want more people to go to the gym. I want more people to go. And this is my opinion. I want more people to go to the gym. I want more usage of all the amenities that we have. Did I say that word correctly? I'm not. I'm not. I'm not. I always say that wrong. Like a sea creature. It's like a sea creature. I'm gonna say what? Yeah. Yeah. Should just get what it is. It's the street in you. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. I'm gonna just get it out of this. The point is that in my opinion, I think that we want to do is create a little bit more of an opportunity to have more and more people come here. So if that's trainers, I think the limitation of six or eight is fine. I don't think we need to lower it. I think that increasingly amount, and I understand where you're coming from, right? But I think increasing the amount on business owners that are attracting people to our gyms and generally creating a good ambiance for training to do it 600% on one shot like that is not feasible, right? People create businesses based on an understanding of what's already there, right? So if they make a business plan and they want to be a trainer, they're doing things like that. Increasing their net rent by 600% is a little crazy for me. I would recommend to the board that we lower it to like $150, $200 a month, from the $50 a month that it is now, not the extravagant $300. And if we feel the need that it's doing better or worse, we can revisit that in a couple of years. But overall, look, I don't think the gyms fall at all. I think that whatever we can do to attract more people to our facilities and understand what we're doing, it's all pros. So that's just where I stand on this. My spare. I certainly trust the wisdom of our great parks director. I do in some ways I agree with Commissioner Cae and that maybe just to make sure that we're not, you know, we still have the demand that would be necessary to have the trainer maybe going to the $150 a month. Of course, we want to be fair with our facilities and how much we're generating, especially if it's business owners and not residents necessarily involved. But yeah, I think I would be a little bit more comfortable with that $150 a month type of setup just because I'm concerned if we go too high we'll run out of demand. I'm going to reserve my comments and questions for after we open up for public hearing. No further questions you want to ask something? You're recognized. When this first came to my attention, it didn't have anything to do with money. It had to do with people in the gym. And I think somehow this moved around, did whatever it did, and we moved away from, at least in what I've seen, we've moved 100% away from anything having to do with a number per trainer and now we're looking at a fee. I agree with Commissioner Gaia when he's saying we had, and I think we continue to have an underutilized space. And for whatever reason, we tend, and I say this historically, not you. I think it stems from this day as historically. We tend to want to roll out the red carpet for people, and then when they put their foot on it, we pull it back. And I don't think it's a good look for us. I think that these trainers have planned for whatever the fee is, whether it's $6,100, whatever the number is right now, they planned on that. They brought their clients on that, their clients bought memberships based on that, whether it's three clients like the first gentleman that came to speak with us or 103 clients. These people have paid yearly membership now. They are. clients like the first gentleman that came to speak with us or you know 103 clients. These people have paid yearly memberships now they are our people whether they are residents or not they are our people they are our- Can I clarify for clarification you're saying they paid us yearly members? Yes they have to pay a yearly membership to the gym correct to be able to use it. And what is that for a resident non-resident? 150. For the year. What's resident and non-resident? We don't, we don't distinguish resident and non-resident. I mean, I think that's something we should correct. Absolutely. I think resident, non-resident, I just want to say this, because notwithstanding the people who have made a $150 investment,'s way below when anyone pay market and any Public or private jet my wonder where we are Relative to our benchmarks on that membership fee I would I would guess probably the bottom of the market It depends on who you look at if you look at it. Let's say a planet fitness, you know $ month. For LA fitness or certainly lifetime, I mean, again, not that we're offering those kind of facilities. That's not go crazy. But it is, but it's still, $150 a month is still very modest. But it doesn't take away that they came to the South Miami Gibson Bethel Center and paid their yearly membership. And as such, they are our members now. And we need to respect that. And so I think any changes that we're going to make, number one, they definitely need to be phased in this very, very big change in a very short amount of time. I don't think it's fair to a business plan for any of the trainers that we have. Number two, if we're going to do something like this, I don't know that we are even talking to where we originally started, which I, maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see it there. So vice mayor, I'm sorry, commissioner. Two of your points. One, we are phasing it where I'm asking or recommending that this be implemented October 1st. To give them time to make their adjustment, etc. Number two. Director, I just saw that point. Is that at the same time when the annual membership's laps for the members themselves, their clients? Not necessarily for their members. So that's not a fiscal year, because October 1 is our fiscal year start. So we'll be picking that date. That date was big because a couple of them actually expire on that time. And there may be another one or two that expire two months later or so. And, and then number two, to your point, yes, this started off in a totally different direction. However, we evaluate the entire program as a whole, which includes the fee. You know, how the trainers are operating, when they're operating, how many kinds they are, you know, training at one period of time, stuff like that. so we evaluated the entire program, and the fee was included in that assessment. So then we've moved away from the limiting the numbers, and now we're in the fee. No, not necessarily. The other matters are more so of what I would call day-to-day operational matters that will be handled internally. The fee itself that I'm recommending is more of a policy issue and that's why that's coming before. I I I'm sorry but I disagree. I think that if we're making a decision I think we need to have a whole picture because I want to ask you're asking us to approve just the fee or or the policy to limit the number of trainers as well just the just the fee adjust Just the fee adjustment. As a policy, I just want to clarify what we're doing. I want to be clear because I'm confused now from the discussion. So your decision to limit the number of trainers is one that's not part of today's action. Correct? Okay. I just try to make it because fees are approved by this board, obviously. And so that's what's specifically before you. Understood, okay. And it stems from originally, we had, you know, the trainers are bringing in their clients who are paying the yearly membership and then they come in. And there were some complaints from a certain number of individuals that they weren't able to use the machines. So then it was like, okay, we're going to limit the number of individuals that maybe a trainer can bring in. And then it went quiet and then this is the part we've seen. But I think it's more of a multi-layered approach. We're just seeing kind of like, you know, the tip of the iceberg of the Titanic. And that's why I think this is, it feels for me knowing what I know disjointed. First of all, I don't agree with $3,600 a year. I don't think anybody who's basing their business even two months ago with what we were offering them, two months ago can kind of keep up with that, even if we're saying it's October. We should have a phase in approach. And I think when we're saying we're trying to be best in class, I think that's great. But it can't just be best in class when it comes to trainers. We have to look at our summer program. We have to look at everything. We can't just, I feel like we're looking at pieces of teeth. I'm sorry, this doesn't make... Like, you know when you smack your mouth and you've got teeth everywhere? And you're like, I'm really looking at it. I think I think the point is she liked the full policy considered as opposed to just the piece of it. So I think I take that as your as your major point. I'm going to open up the I'm going to open up the floor for to allow folks are here to speak. And then we can close the conversation. Thank you, Mr. Director. Yes, Mr. Mayor. Sorry, I lost my list here. Mr. Stevens, I think you want to be recognized. Again, and Mr. Phillips, we didn't get a chance to hear from you. So whoever wants to go first, please step up. Yeah, just real quick, I think. Just again, one more time, David Stevens. 4051 Southwest, 57th Avenue. You brought up an important point where I think it is the tip of the iceberg. I heard some things that somebody was upset and then that started down this pathway of, well, let's reevaluate the whole program. And then the explanation just given moments ago about, well, they evaluated the, they're doing some evaluation to come up with these fees. Well, I'm one of those who don't, and it's not a heavy user. I'm not there at seven o'clock in the morning going all the way through till 10 o'clock at night. I'm there just in the middle of the day for a couple of specific hours. So doing a flat rate and jumping from $300 and going up 600% is a lot. So what would you recommend for as an alternative? So you could get in there. I mean, it's a great question. You could do a sliding scale based upon usage. Now, I understand there is an issue at times during peak hours. If you wanted to limit those hours to doing one-on-one training between during those peak hours, say 5 o'clock till closing, you know, you guys got to do one-on-one. You know, you can only, instead of doing their small group training, something like that, something more manageable. Because I'm not exactly sure what the issue is and why this whole thing came up. Was it a, um, we're overusing the facility or is getting too crowded? Was that, was that the issue? Well, that's why I asked a specific question of the usage and we agree that it's low. So, like, I don't think the usage is a problem and is what I heard from the director. Is that accurate? Director, want you to come up and address the question? Right now, I mean, a usage is higher than what it was two, three, four years ago. So, let's just, since I don't clearly do not go to the gym, right? I'm gonna ask the question, right? Which is, do we have a problem in peak hours where we have people doing group classes that are basically commandeering the equipment? That makes it impossible for Commissioner Coyote to work out at 5.30. The usage is within the building code allows for that role. Understood. Understood. But is it more likely than not that I mean I'm honestly at 530 you have a trainer who brings six clients to do a group class right. Is that what's happening? In my opinion it is not high usage at any period of time. However it is a very very intimate site. It is very small. So if you have 15 people in there at any given time, it feels crowded. It feels very crowded. Okay. So that's sort of the issue at hand. There's a few, there's a handful of folks who have complained that it is too crowded in here. Wenders, 15, 16 people, although from a building code, you can have up to 35 people in the room. However, from a comtability or ease of use, it's best to have 20. But again, 15 people at one time, to someone who's used to that gym being a private facility. like it was five, seven years ago, that is very crowded. Okay, so why the, well, let me let him finish making his comments. We'll recognize Mr. Mr. Phillips and then we'll I'll ask my question. Thank you. Well, that was kind of my question. I did the motivation behind is whether it was was a, hey, we're looking for more money. And we've got to put some more money in our coffers. And let's go to the trainers over there, especially now. I mean, we're not killing it. We're him and Eggers over here. We're wage earners. So to put this on us now is, you know, I wish it wouldn. Understood. Thank you, sir. All right. Mr. Phillips, you're recognized. Good evening. Mr. Mayor, Commissioner. I want to get name and address the record. Sorry. Richard Phillips, 5830 Southway, 53rd Terrace. Thank you, sir. I'm one of the trainers, the last trainers that were brought into the facility, the sick number six. As opposed to meeting with James, the director over at the thing, I met with him numerous times and I've asked him numerous times, are you able to handle the flow that if I bring here other people? He says, our gym is empty. Non-stop is empty, completely throughout the day. And. handle the flow that if I bring here of the people of he says our gym is empty nonstop is empty completely throughout the day and I've Basically offered me you come in start whenever you're ready, you know and I So what's your model if I can ask? What's your model when you come in and are you there all day? Are you there from the one who's there all day? Okay, so I started 6 a.m. and I finished at 12 in afternoon and I come back from four to six. Okay. I have South Miami family members that would like to work with their kids, like to work with their husbands, you know, bonding for their family. to work out together. You know, I would work out with, you know, the same, I would work at the same time with Mr. Kaia and Mr. Recyle about when they work out together and we all agree that the gym is empty non-stop. Mr. Secretary is a gym empty no no it's really, it's really never, never more than 12 people during the gym, okay? So, compared, it probably goes on occasion too, I'm sure. Yeah, and you have 20, by the way, you have 20 pieces, yeah, for it. Yeah. But you have like 20 pieces of equipment in there. So the most up ever counted in, in keeping track of kind of visually seeing people is 12 people and half of those people are with trainers. Do you understand? So it's like if you get rid of some of the trainers that come in there, then you go back to an MCGIM. What happens to them? You know, it's there's no happy medium where you can, you know, try to juggle and then make the customers, the members happy that do pay the membership, that want to work out with their family members. The husband and wife bond together, the son and the daughter, you know, work out together. I have a whole group of people coming and I've been in the gym for 35 years. How many, what percentage of your clients learn sophomore? I mean, that I can't tell you, that I don't know. I know there's a good thing. Is it less than 50 percent? Less than 50? No. Not less than 50 percent. No, more. OK. More live here. OK. More chose to come. One of my main reasons why I chose to come to South Miami, the Gibson Bethel, the museum, was one of my clients was also a member there. And she told me that there's never anybody there training. You can come in anytime you want. Now, I didn't want Steve and Damon, and there's a select of a few clients, trainers, that are only there for one hour, two hours, you know, a day, and then they leave and then you don't see them all day long. So basically we do have maybe three or four, a little bit more range of hours in the facility. But, you know, as a fullness and as a amount of clientele you have, there's nowhere near being capacity that you could not handle in there. And being a Steve and Damon, we're all professionals. We've been in this industry for so long. We know how to manage a room. If there's a member that's not with a trainer and they want to use their equipment, I'm Steve seeing me, I don't need to see me, I get up, I said use it, I give up the machine to let them have access to it and I always go back to it because I can always do something else, I can modify my training. We appreciate your comments, okay, thank you, sir. Thank you. Okay, anyone else who'd like to make comments on this, thank you sir thank you okay I'm Steve I'm talk 9701 south was 77 I've been in the gym now for four months I really love it that's it's great for me. And it's got a it's a great environment and one thing I've been in the gym now for four months. I really love it. It's great for me. It's a great environment. One thing I've noticed is that it has grown a little bit, but it's no near close to capacity. It's generally no more than 10 or 12 people. I think what's happened is perception. People used to be seeing it empty. even people that have been for a long time. Now that it's gotten some activity, they might have complained just based on not, it not being what it was a year ago, two years ago. But it's really, I haven't seen anything close to overcrowding personally. I'm one of the busier trainers. I'm there throughout the day. And I'm teaching some of the classes there. But I just think it's a wonderful place. It's got a great environment. It's a great vibe, if you will. So I'm grateful to be there. And I think it's one of my, I don't see an overcrowding issue personally. Yeah, so. Thank you very much. Appreciate the comments. Thank you. You may ask you want to question before you leave. Can you give out your I want everybody to know about your class on Thursday? Listen, listen, yeah self-defense. Yeah, I've been teaching it for years. I've taught law enforcement and other agencies, but yeah, I teach a little self-defense course that's I have to say it's very good because it teaches women how to get away more than anything else. What time? It's from 6 to 8? 3. It's 2 hours seminar and I would... I should, I probably learn a lot more than what I know right now. Yeah, if you know the young females, they would... I feel good when women take the class because I know that that's one person whose chances of survival are going to be so much better than somebody that didn't take the class. So, you know. My daughter signed up before she goes to college thanks thank you very much see if appreciate you okay colleagues questions of the director how do you want to land the plane on this quickly? I'm just going to give a little bit of the history because I guess it was me talking with Quinn and a certain gentleman. You created this mess? I'm just going to give you the the quick synapses of what happened. There was a client that or a gym goer that's a resident that was just, maybe, like you said, was just basically used to a gym that wasn't occupied and now the gym is occupied. you know, he says that a preference was being given to people that are not residents of the city where he felt that residents should get a priority. And that's basically how this all started. Okay. Yes, sir. Oh, yeah, go ahead, please. please so and we did take the opportunity to review Some holes that we haven't really touched. I mean we haven't had a price increase there for trainers and oh very long time is that accurate? That is correct We established a program and 2021 right oh, okay, so the ability here to actually come up with a little bit a little bit more fair. I mean $50 a month in my opinion was a little bit low We don't have the best facilities compared to Pinecrest or Which is the one you go to the Black time? I go I go to none of them. That's obviously by my fantastic Just a sneak right now. So a price increase in my opinion, was something that's feasible and to make sure that we accommodate not only our residents, but like I said, we want these trainers to bring more and more people. But the opportunity and the problem that we want to have is that we have too many people. That way we can go solve a problem and figure out what to do there. So we've had this conversation over and over. We don't want less, we want more. So I'll leave it at that. Can I see something? Yes, ma'am, you're recognized. Thank you. I think that we're solving for X when we don't need to. I think if we want to look at fees across the board, I don't think this is the only place to look at it. I think the Assistant City Manager said our summer program is $50 a week. If I heard that correctly. That is correct for me. So I think that when we're looking at that, it needs to be something we look at across the board because I worked at the youth center. I'm 53 years old. I worked at the Coral Guples Youth Center when I was 17. It wasn't $50 when I was 17. So, and that was so many years ago, it's not even funny. So, I think that if we're gonna look at things holistically, we look at everything. I think that it would also benefit us as a body to know what the entire iceberg looks like. So am I hearing a motion to table this item? We're deferred and taking it up as part of the budget? I just want to lay into the conversation. We're not, we're not, the director's not proposing to increase fees tomorrow. So I think it's fair warning to the trainers. We're probably going to see if he increase. It's probably from what I'm hearing, this board, there's no appetite to raise it to more than $150. That's what I'm getting from the conversation. So we may not take, I would suggest we just move to defer the item and take it up in the course of the budget. And I would suggest that the message that I would take away if I was sitting in your chairs is, You're probably new paying as much as $150 a month. Okay. That's what I've taken away from this conversation. In terms of where the board's head is at, we may revisit a final number over the course of the next few months. We start our budget planning now in June, July and adopt the final budget in September. So I would encourage you guys if you're interested in this conversation, maybe follow it. If there is a motion to deferral. So we want to give the director some some direction and and finalize a fee on this one item. Okay. I'm fine whichever direction you all want to go in. I move the deferral. You move the deferral. Is there a second? I'll second. I'd like when we defer it and we see it next time, I'd like an entire picture please. So I think what, you know, I would like to see, again, I'd like to see differential fee rates for all our facilities, gym, tennis, pickle ball, residence, non-residence. Again, I think we should, we should not kind of, we can talk about about it offline after we've got plenty of time to think about this so You know so I would say if we don't have a differential right here at the gym we should consider one, okay That's why I need a tour girl in this entire conversation. So we're going to have to do that. So we're going to have to do that. So we're going to have to do that. So we're going to have to do that. So we're going to have to do that. So we're going to have to do that. So we're going to have to do that. So we're going to have to do that. So we're going to have to do that. And then we'll take up item F1 so we can get the two consultants that have been patiently sitting in the room out of here. So I'm Clark if you can read item 3 for the record. and then we'll take up item F1 so we can get the two consultants that have been patiently sitting in the room out of here. So, I'm Clark, if you can read item three for the record, please. Yes, item three, air rules, which is an American City Commission at the City of Suffering Board, approval of an APRPOZU and agreement with the Cardinal Group, Inc. 2 for BORM, general planning services for the development services, utilizing the terms and conditions of the competitive city of Darrell continuing professional service agreement. Competitively be a consultant to RFP number 23-208. Thank you Madam Clerk. Mr. City Manager, you're recognized. Thank you Mayor. Out. Mayor this item is something that's been in the works for a little bit, our Director of Development Services, and I have been discussing augmenting and supporting the efforts of that department as it relates to planning and bringing a skillset combination, maybe a skillset that we may be lacking in or workload. So in this case, and we're looking at other ideas on how to augment what we do from that department as it relates to planning and zoning, including that conversations our city attorney, Mr. Rezio, and bringing in his perspective on working on land use issues. This is one piece that is part of that puzzle. We're also going to be discussing this through our budget process as well. So what's before you is the ability for us to leverage an RFQ that was competitively led by the City of Dorral for general planning services. In this case it would be with a Corridor group. This would allow if approve it, and it would be for us to be able to negotiate agreement with Corridino group on a work order basis, either hourly or fixed fee or lump or not to exceed, based on a project basis. It is capped at the purchasing authority that I have with $30,000 if we were to exceed that, it would have to come back to this board. So in this case, you're approving the ability for us to leverage this RFQ, let out by Dorral to be able to use Cordina Group in general planning services and they would serve as an extension of our staff. And then we would negotiate that work order individually for assignments. Again assignments again could be a hourly rate it could be a fixed fee and or it could be a not to exceed So that's what the assignments before you and certainly happy to answer any questions And I know our directors here and mr. Alvar is here who would be the person assigned on this project Colleagues any questions No only question No. Only question I have, Mr. Managers, this is on a work order basis with a cap subject you're purchasing authority. There's no total line item that we're allocating. So we have a line item that we would pay it from? Okay. That's what I thought of. I thought we were authorizing it up to the amount of that budget line item. No. It'd be limited limited by my authorization based on the item. So I know what I, what I, the reason I asked the question is I'm concerned if we have a larger project review, which is probably when we list Corino or a third party reviewer that the proposed scope exceeds $30,000. We now have an extra procedural step that's got to back to this board for approval so they can begin working. Some of which delays the review. And so I'm just wondering whether, and I don't know if we have to re-advertise this to make it legally compliant, but I'm wondering whether we should just authorize you to procure services, pursue into this contract on a work order basis, up to the budget line item amount. So, uh, you see attorney, you follow me? Yeah, I do. I don't think you need to re-adventize. We do not. So, I mean, my recommendation would be to make that modification. I do not want applicants whose projects are going to be reviewed to be delayed by the need for us to act on a work order that exceeds your procurement. Your procurement, your purchasing authority. No mayor, thank you. I mean, obviously that gives us more flexibility. I just declared a clarification and clearly correct me from wrongly. This would not apply to cost recovery type items, which are usually some of those items that are the biggest ticket items. But nevertheless we could find ourselves in that situation. So certainly if the board provides that flexibility, we would have. Certainly would only want, as it addendum to emotion, hopefully that someone would make, is to have that item any expenditure above the $30,000 cap to be included in a future manage report after the funding is in cover just so that we're aware. And if we have any questions, we can certainly ask you about it. Fair enough colleagues. Okay. This is a public hearing item, Mr. City Attorney, correct? So we will open up the floor for public hearing on item three which is an item to basically piggyback off a contract for the City of Drought for Planning Services. Anyone who likes to address this commission with regards to item three please come forward at this time. Okay, see no forward at this time. Okay, seeing no one in the chamber, is there anyone online, Madam Clerk? No, it's I. Seeing no one online, we will close the public hearing. Mr. City Attorney, anything else that you need or Mr. City Manager, by the way of clarification? No, I think we're clear. No, we're clear. So your reminding would be amending. I would move that we resolution. With with the amendment that we authorize the manager. To expend up to the budget line up, which I thought was $130,000. The line up has 156,000. $256,000. Okay, which we've approved in our budget for planning services pursuant to this contract. And that any expenditure and access of $30,000 be provided to be reported to the commission by the city manager once the contract is in comfort. Got it. Okay. Is there a second? As part of their report to us. Correct. Yes. Yes. At the subsequent meeting. So yeah. I'll second. Okay. With that any any discussion? Okay. Uh, Madam Clerk, we have a motion and a motion by myself is second by Commissioner Boniich. If you could call the roll, please. Yes. Commissioner Khaing. Yes. Commissioner Rodriguez. Yes. Commissioner Boniich. Yes. Vice Mayor Cory. Yes. Mayor Fernandez. Yes. Item passes. Vice Mayor.. Thank you if we can call the add on item F1. Please Number one is what is there someone here for number one? We have no we only have we have no contingent eyes. We have resolutions. Yes, I was just going to take I know we have Oh my gosh, I'm now having a senior moment. Kevin Crowder, thank you. With business players here, that's why I wanted to take up the CRA discussion without objection. Okay. I'm clerk if you can read F1, please. Yes, F1 community. We development agency. CRA discussion. Thank you. I think at our last workshop, Mr. Manager, we had asked you to procure a proposal. Do you have something to share with us? That's correct, sir. And we've shared a proposal by a business player, which, principal is Mr. Kevin Crowder, here with us today. And that proposal is a scope of work for finding a necessity, which the initial step to be taken in assessing a potential CRA. So that's to the tune of 27.5 to do that finding of necessity. Certainly Mr. Crowder's here to be able to share some light on on that process. The scope pretty much outlines what those tasks are but certainly he can illuminate a little bit more on that. He's worked on other CRA work throughout this community and he's currently part of the place making as a sub consultant to that process and certainly has worked with plus Serbia and CRA plans which would be the next step. So this is before you and I think we've shared a copy of the proposal. Okay. Colleagues, any questions Mr. Crowder regarding the proposal? I know Commissioner Rodriguez, you were not here during the workshop when we gave the manager directions. I know this is an item that is important to you. So do you want to kick us off with any questions if you have any or? No, this is, sorry. This is basically just to give the manager the go ahead to start working on it. I mean, all the details and the points of what we're going to do with the CRA is going to come down the line, right? Correct. Yeah. So this is the first of what I would say are three key documents. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Number one is the finding necessity which kind of sets our, you know, is our Study to evidence that we meet the touch of requirements to create one and then a negotiated interlocal with the county on the establishment of the Of the district and the trust fund and then lastly Is the adoption of a CRA plan which would govern the expenditure in priorities? Go to the CRA. So both the the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the creation of a CRA in Alapada for the city of Miami. I'm happy to answer any questions. The finding is a pretty straightforward process. It's physical examinations of conditions of blight as defined by the statute if they exist, as well as looking at some data, some data that we maintain and that we have access to. A couple of places that are pieces that we give from the city of crime emergency service calls building code violations. And then we'll find the bl the light exists, package that, and then get your start of that process. Can we check out your recognized? Have we reviewed the previous plight that we had? And do we see any changes, whether it's our demographics, crime, because a lot of those things have dropped. So, do you see, so obviously, this is variations from what it was before, what it is now. So, there have been changes, there have been some changes. And I think that some of the conditions apply to that existed in certain areas, but have changed. But we do see some of those still existing. I know in 2019 you had a finding necessity done to expand the boundaries of the CRA. And some of those, I mean, defective right away. You still have defective right away in the proposed boundaries. Sorry. Outdated. You know, the outdated building density patterns, I think you still have that in existence. I think that's changed. I think that the level of that that you have as contributing to BITE is maybe a little more localized. I'm not sure that you have the commercial vacancy that you had at that time. Residential I don't have a good sense would have. prior on chains since 2019. We'd have to get into that and analyze that. You know it's... that time. Residential I don't have a good sense would have. I probably unchanged since 2019. We'd have to get into that and analyze that. You know at the time it had a higher incident of crime than the city as a whole. When you're speaking about that just so I'm thinking, are you talking about the 20S compared to the 2019 study or the original theory? This is as compared to the 2019 study for that expanded area. I'm not reviewed going all the way back to the original study, which I think was 2000, maybe around 2000. 98. There we go. Thank you James. Thanks James. And at the time it was a higher incidence of building co-violations in 2019 at that time. I don't have a sense of that yet. It may not be. But. Obviously you're doing reports that we can understand that. My only fear here is that we don't have a sense of that yet. It may not be, but. Obviously, you're doing reports that we can understand that. My only fear here is that we don't qualify, but you would know until you finish reporting anyway. Well, again, I think we can satisfy how many to the 15 in the statute and the statute, what's the standard? I forget. There are two, so there are 15 standards in statute. I define blight and you, that's correct, Mayor. you have to meet two of those. I think we'll pretty easily do that. And I will tell you that when I looked at it and we're familiar with South Miami and as was mentioned we're on the push area team, we've worked for South Miami hometown and Red Sunset Merchant Association when they were thinking about trying to create a business improvement district. And if I was concerned that you were not going to meet the two criteria of blight, I would do a deeper evaluation before getting to the step asking to enter into a contract and spend money. All right, that was a rude o'clock question. I appreciate that. Thank you for the questions. Just in terms of timing for this, Kevin, what's your expectation in terms of time to complete the FOM and then I've seen this done in all sorts of sequences. We did the Omni expansion at the city, you know, in the arts. This was the last piece that was done as it should be the first usually. But the jurisdictions that go should the extension modify the CRA plan and then the DFON after the fact. So I know we're starting the right order. Colleagues from my perspective, there's a window time to get this done, which is probably this calendar year to get all three approved by the by our board and the county commission. So I just want to get a sense of the time to get this done and then you know when should we start preparing the plan and I think some limited public outreach to kind of gauge what priorities are in the downtown and the community and that will probably be part of the historic boundary. And if you can give us a sense of the cost of those two other people, that one other piece because the other piece is the legal instrument, which our state attorney will negotiate. Right. So the finding itself will probably take about six weeks. I think it'll take us about four weeks to prepare, but we're going to have to work with the city and gather some of the data and pull that in. But that's usually a pretty quick process. Some of the pieces, there will be an existing conditions element, sort of the phase one existing conditions as part of that that then can inform the plan. So there's some pieces of that. You know, call it six weeks for that. You know, the plan, public engagement, you know, I don't expect that there's gonna be a whole lot, but we'll do surveys, we'll do one-on-one, we'll get names from each of you, who are the people we want to make sure that we talk to and then see what other sort of outreach we need to do. In Alapata we did surveys or we did one-on-ones, we did one open house on a Saturday but it's much larger, Sierra, if we're pretty wise in large. It's a very large series. It's larger than the over-town and and non-missaries come behind you. But we've been doing this a long time and we're familiar with that. We understand what those needs are going to be. Also, keep in mind that there's limitations on what you can do in a CRA, even with your tip money. And a lot of the times, there's more hopes and dreams for an area than things that you things that you're authorized to do with TIFF. You know, alipada, the fighting and, the plan was about 10 to 12 week process. Now, that was under the gun of a potential effective bill in Tallahassee of July 1st. And so that went in and of getting accelerated quite a bit. But the timing for the plan itself is usually a three to four month process to do with the plan. You know, we talked to staff earlier today. It's in the 65 to 90 range, but again, there's different things that in fact that I would bet. I mean, if we were going to do it here, it's probably in the high 60s, 60s, 68. Okay. So I appreciate that. Obviously time is very valuable to all of us. And, you know, I mean, in my mind, what I wanna potentially use this tool for is to finance a portion of our streetscape enhancements, rebuild our transit station, which is not climatized and not a good amenity for that reason. Focus on upgrading our water and so we're infrastructure in the districts we can serve for the future of residential units. And then the last thing, other priorities for me is rationalizing and financing so these intersection improvements and enhancing the connectivity across US one. But I know that Sunset Place also is very motivated to have this to one place because their colleagues likely going to create a community development district, which is a financing mechanism for their infrastructure. That will, in part, the debt service for the bonds at the issue will be paid by, they'll probably come to us and ask us to do a deal on TIFF generated on their site. That's a home or complicated conversation. But those two things are intersected, and they do have a very significant infrastructure lift. That we obviously want to help them get over so we can get a project they're started. I say that all to say those two me or the main motivators were wanting to do this quickly. I also mentioned that because I think I'm going to turn to my friends and partner over there in Mr. Cabrera. I think if they could explore the possibility of helping us with a portion of the cost of not the fighting of necessity, but the actual CRA plan. It's as the manager to speak to them about that as a possibility and see if we can do some cost sharing since it's not just going to benefit us as a city, but them also specifically as a project. So anyhow, I'm hoping we can entertain a motion to, we don't need to approve a motion. It's within the manager's procurement authority. If we have no objections, I just want to give the manager a direction to get started. No objection there. OK. Yes. You're right. I made it through the mayor. So I just, I apologize, I missed the last meeting. I won priority for me as far as the CRA and what we can do with it is, then I'm just giving you broad strokes is how we can use it to incentivize businesses to come into our city. And you know, what I'm saying is not someone who's just creating a brand new business or that. We're talking about trying to bring in established people who have been in process. The requirements can be set later. That's down the road, but I do want to stress that, that, you know, the business aspect and bringing good businesses to our downtown or Marshall William's scenario and those related projects anywhere that we can. That for me is a high priority. Yeah, no, I share it. I would, Mr. Crowder could probably comment because he probably watches this all more closely than we do. But those are the kind of things that have been the subject of a lot of controversy and telehassy. Certainly there are a lot of scrutiny about events, festivals, some business grants that have been underwritten by CRAs have been the subject of a lot of conversation and a lot of criticism by CRAs and other jurisdictions. I don't know if you want to elaborate on the kinds of things that traditionally maybe some entities have done that have kind of fallen out of favor with the legislature in recent years. And I'm sorry. I'm sorry. And if I may, I've worked directly with the CRA in Halendale and in Delray where it was used for businesses to bring in quality businesses. One was on Atlantic Avenue. The other one was off Halendale Boulevard, which completely regenerated a whole block. So, and that's kind of what I'm looking, obviously, I know that we don't, you know, how do I say like this? I think we're so, you know, we don't know how I say like this. I think we're so, you know, we keep it. Corporate socialism, we're not trying to welfare, you know. But there's a way that we can do it where, you know, and I know because I've seen it done and I've been part of it. That's right. And of course, the rules were played by keep changing and what we can do, keep shrinking. But, and Halinda, we've worked in both of those. And Halinda, we've worked on the developer side on the Halinda City Center project, which is there on West Dixie, on Dixie Highway. And what we've done is, and there's also, like you can't support not for profits, there's a turnage and no opinions that have come out on that. But there's, once you figure out the need you figure out the goal, then you can look at the statue and say, okay, what meets the ways that we can do this? And so sometimes that means it's... But once you figure out the need and you figure out the goal, then you can look at the steps and say, OK, what meets the ways that we can do this? And so sometimes that means you're not going to be giving operational grants and that's sort of funding to an organization. But you can work with your developer partner to incorporate space. And that's what we did in Hal and Nell City Center to make sure that we could attract a supermarket that we could attract small entrepreneurial startups and pop-ups and have space for that. So we were able to figure out what are those needs and how can we incorporate those within the spirit and more in the spirit. What's going to be most likely next year, more of a letter of the law that they incorporate in there. It's just a matter of, you know, they may have one need over here, but we can find a way to meet that need over here in a way that complies with chapter 163. And so, I think to your point, there are things we can do to, you know, pay, you know, off to the cost of permitting fees, right, pay for water and sewer connections or upgrades for existing buildings. I think the more we stay in the, in the ambient of infrastructure, right? As opposed to some other organizations like Capitol facade grants, the buildings, et cetera. Some of that stuff is being screwed and ice more closely, although it's been done historically. And so, but I know that there's gonna be a healthy amount of skepticism of the County Commission this vehicle. And the more we get out of bread and butter kind of stuff, the more we risk the likelihood that we don't get enough votes to support its re-incarnation. The last priority, which I forgot to mention, I apologize, it's a big part of the statute to focus on affordable housing or workforce housing. And so this is also be able potentially to do something on city owned property or in the district to kind of shepherd a project to create, you know, opportunities for people in the workforce to, you know, live near work. Right. And that has been a lot of the work that we've done and where we're not working for the CRE, but on the developers has been on affordable housing and the needs, the ways thatAs can help meet that. FISOD grants would still seem supportive, but we've had CRAs that have been doing all kinds of different sort of grants and programs on the interior. Those are getting lumped in sort of with the parades and the festivals and other things that are really targeted. What we heard, I've been in Italy, I have have to see four times this this session because of 991. They want to see things built. That's how they look at the statute. And it can be infrastructure that they want to see built or they want to see brick and mortar. They want to see those stores. That's why we try and adapt in North Miami. One of the incentive programs we do is offsetting building permit fees, impact fees. impact fees. Impact fees was the big one especially in affordable housing there. We were able to do. Appreciate that. So any other questions?, okay, that will wrap up the conversation Sir manager, I think the direction is to proceed colleagues So look forward to working with you on this like what thank you. Thank you. Okay Moving on I think we've got a couple more items they want to read item one for the record madam clerk Madam Clerk? Yes, item one. It was which of the mayor's city commission that the city is not being floored or proven at all the rising that waiver, a certain event related fees and cost an amount not to see $3,06.84. Persona to a section 15B6 of the city code for a special event known as the Twilight 5K run walk presented by team footworks educational and business corporation to be held on Sunday June 1st 2025. Thank you colleagues and Louisville presentation. Do any questions for the director? Seeing none is there a motion? Motion to move. Motion to approve okay is there a second? Second. So motion by Commissioner Rodriguez is a second mayor. Madam Clerk, if you can call the roll excellent presentation. Thank you. Commissioner Cahing. Yes. Commissioner Bullneish. Yes. Commissioner Rodriguez. Vice Mayor Cory. Yes. Mayor Fernandez. Yes. I don't pass it's by the room. Okay. Madam Clerk, if I'm keeping track accurately, I think that leads us to discussion items. Is that correct? Yes. Okay, so Commissioner Rodriguez, we can read item one and then I'll defer to you, sir. Yes, Commissioner Rodriguez, review parking hours on Friday's insanity. Thank you. Sir, you're recognized. So this one's simple. Where? This one's simple. Well, man. There we go. Just cursed it, right? Um, yeah, especially that afraid was not here. Exactly. That was pretty simple. No. There we go. Just cursed it right? Yeah, especially that afraid doesn't have here. Exactly. That's pretty simple. No, so currently on Friday and Saturdays, or let me start over, Monday through Thursday and Sunday, we enforce parking till 10 pm at night. Fridays and Saturdays are two busiest nights. We enforce to 12 PM all his back. He's back. Damn. So no, but I feel that being are two busiest nights, I came out of Great Bapet the other day and I'm walking to my car and I see someone that's there here or here in our city and having a good time and enjoying our facilities and has a parking ticket at 11 o'clock at night and that just like e-tap me. We did the study and it would basically be a loss to the city of $45,000 annually give or take for reducing those two hours and just making it through enforcement, through 10 p.m. through the entire week. And I think just we're a city that's growing, we're a city that's asking people to come to our city. We have great faith now, we have Barbela, we have Recoveco, Foxes, you know, we're building a group of good restaurants. I think that it's good to not go so deep into the giving tickets aspect of this government and give these patrons a little breathing room. And, you know, I understand every city requiresing to pay for parking. I'm not saying don't do it. I just said let's stop it at 10 that way when people get out You know at 11 12 o'clock. There's not a ticket on their car and give them leave that as the last thing that they experienced in our city comments Okay, we don't want your comments. I mean, I echo the sediment wholeheartedly. I would just suggest this value of modification. So I had Mr. Riverwell prepare a year ago, a lovely analysis that basically tells us parking by hour and day for a week and then parking citation ticket issued, which can be a proxy for revenue. And I want to reduce the hours as you suggested. I think we probably make sense to reduce the Friday and Saturdays your proposing, but I also think that there's probably days like Sunday where we have very little parking revenue, a lot of parking citations, and we probably want to encourage people coming here to have brunch, right? And so reducing parking enforcement and maybe giving people the free day on Sunday makes equal sense. So with your indulgence, what I would suggest is rather than just moving, directing them to do it for these specific days and changing the enforce ours, let's look at how the district's performing enters a demand and adjust the enforcement to not suppress demand on days where it's already soft. So because what we saw, the way in part we got to some of the modification in the hours is we hadn't today's, we saw that in the hours that we were enforcing before, which went beyond 10 o'clock during the week we should force to midnight. Right? There was no parking demand. No one was parking anywhere in the district, but we were issuing tickets since you saw a lot of tickets being issued and there was negligible parking revenue in the inventory. So I think I would say let the numbers guide us where we should go in terms of, you know, where we have soft them in, let's dial back the enforcement so that we can encourage people to come into the district and enjoy it as opposed to, as opposed to just kind of arbitrarily picking days. I'm not saying, I think your, I think your selection of days is well-founded because even after 10 demand for spaces on Friday and Saturday drops off significantly so numbers will bear it out but I would just suggest to the two of our commissioners point in her prior conversation about fees to look at the whole I would say let's look at the whole picture and maybe come up with a with a suggested solution. Oh okay I'm sorry I Yeah. So, but it is 45,000 is what we lose in dropping those two hours, those two days. Yeah. Yeah. You want to go to check, see on Sunday when it's soft and add less parking enforcement on Sunday? So I think ages ago here, we had, we was free parking on Sundays. No, never. Yeah, okay. Okay. So I've heard from residents that at one point, it was like you could park here for free on Sundays. So at least not through 2010, but yeah. So again, I support like I'm whole hog on team reduced hours. I beat that horse that we're doing. So I'm going to be a little focused on the work that we're doing. So I'm going to be a little bit focused on the work that we're doing. So I'm going to be a little bit focused on the work that we're doing. So I'm going to be a little bit focused on the work that we're doing. and help support the man. That's all I'm suggesting, Madam Commissioner, you wanna say something? I just wanna remind everybody that is sitting on this day is that every time that we squeeze this balloon and we give up revenue or giving up revenue okay and I everybody's like we want to wave fees for event we just did it we a lower parking. We want we want a lower lower lower a lot of things And that's that's great. I don't have a problem with that We just have to see where the money is going to come from. We can't take away from here and not add here You know it wouldn't work at your house at your house You you can't turn around and say you know what? I'm not gonna do I'm not gonna pay my electrical and this and this. And so I'm going to have a bucket of money over here. You know what I mean? I think it's a hundred percent agree, but I think the worst thing we can do is balance our budget on the back of enforcement revenue, which is what we've done here for decades. This little 350, this little 350 spot inventory generates $3 million of recurring revenue, $800,000 plus dollars of enforcement revenue that keeps people from coming here. I'd rather have more people come, how the real estate become more valuable because it's more highly sought after and utilized. Rents go up, valuations go up, and that drives more revenue into our general fund. Right? So there is, I think we've got to create a virtuous cycle for investment. And right now, I share, I share Kim and Sherry Digg's opinion. We cut our nose to spite our face. Because again, as you said before, we roll out the right carpet. And then we put our business, and then we're pulling it back from under their feet. when people come on a Tuesday night at 10 o'clock, they get a parking ticket, and there's literally five cars on the street. I am not agreeing or disagreeing with the parking thing because like I said in an interview when I was first elected I think the best thing of sitting up here is none of this garbage, it's free parking. That is the reason. We get no parking tickets. Exactly. But if we're taking something away, we got to add something somewhere else. And that's our responsibility. And I see we minus minus minus. At some point, we are going to have to plus plus plus, plus somewhere else because guess what? The money's flying out of the back of the pickup truck. $45,000. We say it here, like it's $3. $45,000 is somebody's salary. Okay? That's a lot of money. So I'm just saying, when we have this conversation, I do not disagree with you that people get really unhappy when they get a parking ticket. I think that's the case universally. I am saying while we have these conversations, one of us, all of us, some of us, somebody in this universe needs to come up with where is this money gonna come from? Well, where are we gonna save it elsewhere? We're all aware of that. Yeah, but we're not doing it. So we better go go with the money, honey. Jim Fees. Jim Fees. There you go. I don't have a follow. OK. So how do we want to proceed? Is there a direction you want to give Alfredo to do some more? So you, again, I'm just trying to, am be the only one, I'm just trying to figure out exactly. I know we're on the same page, I'm just trying to figure out where we're different. That's it. I would just say Alfredo bring back, you know, give me a week last month of the chart that says revenues by day by hour, right, for parking and then enforcement. And we're looking at the two to figure out. There's demand from 12 to 2 during the week for lunch. We should enforce the hell out of the parking to make sure the people are turning it over. But. we're looking at the two to figure out. There's demand from 12 to 2 during the week for lunch. We should enforce the hell out of the parking to make sure the people are turning it over. But from seven to 10 on a Wednesday, there's no one parking in the district as I was about the parking revenues. Maybe we should go back enforcement. So I just say let's take a look at the picture, the full picture revenues versus citation revenue. Because I think what we're gonna find is that we are, the last time I looked at this, which is now 18 months ago, we were way over enforcing the district given the demand. We have two streets where our parking inventory is highly sought after, and then everything else in the district, even at peak hours, is pretty light, except during the middle of the day. I'm good with that. I mean at the end of the day I just wanted to put all of that all of that is going to be got at the end of the day to commercial needs point. It's going to be a limit on how much we can absorb in any year. In terms of reducing enforcement because we still need to bring that parking revenue home maybe less than four can run with that stay relatively stable. So that's, we'll have to figure out what the right balance is. But I'd rather look at the whole picture. If you're OK with that. I'm fine with that. OK, so is that something you can put together for us again, Alfredo? OK. Thank you. Thank you, sir. I know. I know he's thrilled. Okay further discussion. Okay seeing none Madam clerk if you can read item two please them to Commissioner Rodriguez Supple mean that $3,000, shorted to the Mosher Woods and scholarship. So this one's just short. Spoke to the manager about this. We, he, staff and with our great parts, Director Quentin, found the money. Basically this was there. We have the money for 10 scholarships. There's three extra scholarships. We don't want to leave those three. We want to give them their scholarship. Quentin found the money. We're good. OK. Thank you for that. Thank you, great. Any further comments or reports, commissioners? Yep. I did. Yes. Really quick. Please, yes, you're recognized. Thank you very much. We didn't have the opportunity to have the discussion we normally have before the meeting. So I just wanted to make the board preview a conversation I had with Alfredo regarding annexation. We probably should have had a map on the first resolution that I did for this, but essentially I saw sort of a gap area that would be interesting to include in our study, which we'll see the feedback on hopefully in the first sunshine meeting in June. But area B was not included in for the benefit of the public that's an area that's north of 64th west of 67th Avenue and south of Blue Road 48. So that area was not included in the original resolution. So I asked South Florida to create two models, one with the original area with the, that was part of the resolution, and one with this extra area, which is all residential. So hopefully in June 6th or soon after that, we'll have the sort of back of the napkin on revenue and cost for this. So area A, just to be clear, is a foot more heights and the area is north of 64th street that are in on incorporated date? Yes, okay. Yeah, and that's already been given direction to the city to look into that. And then area B was not included in the original resolution. It's all residential. And it would create a gap, which we're trying to sort of avoid and creating a more continuous service area. It would create a gap. It would leave us, I guess that's at 67th or? Yeah, it's the 7th. So it leaves a gap between, I guess, 60 seconds and 67th South of Lurow that otherwise would be out of our boundary. Oh, okay, okay. Can I ask Commissioner or Rice Mayor, excuse me, what is that large parcel just where it says there to be there? Do you know? There is a school. It's a school, okay. What school is that? The elementary, not the elementary, I think it's the elementary is it no I think that that's okay I'm okay that's my that's my I thought okay I wasn't sure all right sorry there's no street there's no street because I think that I think that's Miller right there because my house right there we hit a go up off from your house there yeah sure okay but that would also allow us to be connected to the Ludlum Trail that area as well. And obviously we don't want gaps. That's the whole point of this. Thank you. Yeah. Comments colleagues. Okay. Just a quick question. So um, Vice Mayor Cory, so this area here, that's the commercial area. We're not going to include that or we can't and we can't because of the moratorium okay Though there is some analysis on the bird road commercial I didn't want to share numbers that I heard from Alfredo yet because they're still working on it But it's very minimal it's very minimal, but we're precluded from asking for it. Yeah, okay Okay, any other reports Okay, seeing none and having no further business before this commission, we stand adjourned. No, I know. No, I know. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.