you you you you I have to call the meeting of the City of South Miami planning and zoning board for Tuesday, August 13th. Everybody please rise for the pledge of allegiance. the Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Jay Miller here. Joseph Corvus in here. Dana Garrett present. Christina Artega present. Augustin borrower present. We have a call. Okay. Any administrator. I see that we don't have any administrative matters this month. We don't have any administrative matters, but I just want to welcome our new plan of our member, Joseph Corvus, into the board. And tonight we have Ms. Nordiskabera, Joan and us from the planning department today here as well. Okay. We want to welcome them to the meeting tonight. Welcome. J.R. as you go by. So, okay. Our first item is PB 24016. Yes. Person is PB-24-016. The applicant is Robert Cameron who is in the audience tonight. A resolution of the Mayor and the City Commission of the City of South Miami Florida approving our denoting and application for waiver of plat pursuant to section 20- 20.2 of the land development code seeking to subdivide a property within the semi-state residential or RS2 zoning district located at 5400-sauce-60 third avenue providing for conditions, corrections, implementation, severability and effective date. Just a little background on this application, I will be giving the presentation for this item. On May 10th of this year, the applicant, Mr. Robert Kramer, submitted his waiver-plied application to the city and he requested to subdivide the property and to two parcels of land. The property currently is located in the city's semi-state residential RS2 zoning district. Currently at this time, there is an existing one-story single family structure on the property along with a wooden deck concrete driveway concrete paddery area and a starts your structure a wooden shed on the site. Based on the plans that the applicant has provided, he's proposing to keep that existing structure on the site, as well as a driveway and going to the monster when they're going to back to build a pool. Pursuing to the cities of the vision regulations, found a section 20-dats-4.2 B of the LDC. Prior to approving a waiver of plan 10, there were final plans to commission shall use, specific guidelines to review the project. In the interest of time, I'm only going to review, going to speak on the review of certain guidelines that that need to be addressed or are pertinent to be brought up at this time. First one is section 20 as 4.2 B2A, Roma Numer I. The booting cycle. to a Roman numeri. The building site created by the proposed waiver apply tentative or final apply should be equal to or larger than the median of the existing building sites. In this running area, this shall be demonstrated using copies of the official plat maps for the subject property in surrounding neighborhood unless otherwise permitted by this ordinance. So running areas defined as all lots within the same zoning district and within five hundred feet from the exterior boundaries of the subject property. It's adapted this media analysis of the site in comparison to everybody within the same zoning district within five hundred feet. I found that while the property that that would be keeping that existing structure meets the meeting on lot size and meeting frontage for the area, the new lot that would be created only meets the frontage for the area. It doesn't it doesn't meet the lot size. Therefore section 20s 4.2 B2A room and number two they will see will come into play with states as essentially that the commission can approve this type of project as long to complies with the minimum commission requirements for the code but it will require a four fifths vote to do so. The next item is section 20s 4.2 B2B. The building site created by the proposed waiver plan, 10 of the final plan would not result in existing structures becoming not performing as they relate to setbacks, a lot area, a lot with and death, ground coverage, and other applicable regulations of the city's land development code and or city code of ordinances. Except as permitted by this ordinance compliance with this provision may occur, but by demolition or relocation of existing structures. The way that the applicants were posing this plat, the single family structure will be in full compliance with the code. However, they have a shed at about the halfway point of the property, when the property is going to be split, that new line is going to go right through that shed. So they'll either have to relocate it or demolish it. And that follows up with a second 20s 4.2 B2C. Boone side created by the proposed wherever final plait will be free of encroachments from the budding building sites. It's the same concept with the shed. The next one is section 20 as 4.2 B2E as an elephant. The scale of any proposed new construction shopping compatible with the ASPO character of the surrounding area and shall not create adverse impacts on the surrounding area. But if so, the applicant shall provide satisfactory commitment as to how the adverse impacts on the surrounding area. But if so, the applicants should provide satisfactory commitment as to how the adverse impacts would be mitigated. An example of an adverse impact includes visual impacts, arising from a proposed two-story structure in an area built out with single-story homes, mitigation could include adding a condition to the approval of the waiver of a flat, tentative flat or final flat, relanx-gate buffers, or adjusting second story setbacks of building façades to reduce the visual impact. Because the applicant is proposing a one story structure, there are no adverse impacts. I'm mentioning this only because the plans that the applicant provided for the conceptual plan were drawn by a Florida professional land surveyor, which for a conceptual site plan that's fine for this project, is being brought to the intention. So it's noted that when they submit the building permits and the plans to the city for the DRB meetings, all of those plans have to be signed as so by Florida Register Architects and Landscape Architects. Section 20 has 4.2 B3A and share the retention of a specimen trees for six years and permanently maintain 50% of existing protected tree canopy but in no event shall the condition be less restrictive than what is required by the cities and counties tree ordinance. There are four trees that are specimen size trees. They're on the lot where that's going to contain that existing structure. They're not being affected. I'm bringing it up because the code requires specimen trees to be retained for a number of years and that they be protected. Section 20-DAS 4.2 B4C. A certified tree survey overlay directly upon the site plan is required by section 20 as 4.5. The tree survey must include the canopy measurements once in application for a waiver plan or ten of the plan is filed. No tree may be removed until after final waiver of plan or final plan approved is issued or remove a more auditorium. The applicant may appeal to the city commission to waive the tree removal of a auditorium if for good cause. Turtle. The applicant provided there are two trees that are in direct conflict with the proposed home on lot two. That's tree number 27 and tree number 35. They will have to pull the tree removal permit to remove those trees. In addition, there's a third tree. It's tree number 42. It's not in the footprint of the proposed house, but it is adjacent to that shed that would have to be relocated or demolished by demolishing that shed and may affect that tree. So I'm pinning it up so that that tree may need to be removed as well. Section 20 is 4.2 C1, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, drainage, and paving shall be installed by the owner or developer of the Abutting Parse with an accordance with chapter 28 of the county code, other afloat most city requirements, unless such can be entered away in order for the city to be removed by the city. This project was removed by the city of Public Works Department and they provided comments for this application and they state that the neighborhood does not have existing sidewalks therefore it is not required additionally each property must maintain must retain the storm order within the property line for any new utilities connection that require connection on the roadway the payings resurfacing limits shall be edge to edge and property line to property line. Staff is recommending approval for this application without with staff's conditions. Thank you. Okay. Marcus, before we go on, Danny Rodriguez is on, I think what's marked as the oh yeah okay we already already got a mark is you but we have an echo for you somewhere yeah could have it on my phone if not sorry you just have to mute your computer then yeah one of the other yeah yeah okay would the applicant like to say anything? Certainly. Exactly, yes. Do you swore to tell the truth to hold you with another, but the truth? I do. Excellent. My name is Robert Kramer. I'm the owner of 5400 Southwest 63rd Avenue. I'm requesting a waiver of that and persuade with section 20 dash 4.2 of the code. I'm requesting to subdivide the lots in such a way that 28,057 square feet will remain on the lot, fronting 63rd avenue. So I can keep the existing structure and it would the rear lot would be 15,235 square feet both would have the same frontage 138 and a half feet. I plan on remodeling the existing structure for my wife daughter and I. We currently live on the street, but maybe three blocks away and we love the neighborhood. So we want a one story house, but would like to stay in the same neighborhood. So this is ideal location and situation for us. So just here, hoping you guys approve the waiver of plat. And if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them you guys a proof of the waiver of the plan and if you have any questions and have an answer to them. Thank you very much. Do we have any public comment? Anyone on line that wants to say anything? Okay, close public comment. Board members. No comments? Okay. Call for a vote. I'd make a motion to approve with restrictions or the changes requirements that Mark has outlined earlier. We have a second. I second it. Okay. Motion was seconded by Christina. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. We have one opposed that's Danny. No, no, I said aye. Probably will be best if you do. Yeah, one by one. Okay. Jay. Yes. Yes for me. Yeah. Yes. Yes. Yes. I'm going to go to the city of South Miami. Yes. Okay. It's unanimous passes. Okay. Item number two. His PB dash to four. That zero. One seven. The applicant. The city of South Miami. Ordinance of the mayor and city commission of the city of South Mamie Florida Mending Article 8, transit support of development district of the land development code, demotify applicable development regulations providing for corrections, severability, conflicts, implementation and an effective date. This item will be a hand of our planning consultant, Mr. Mark Alvarez from the Cordino Group. Thank you. Good evening, I'm Mark Alvers with the core deal group. I have a short to medium presentation of PowerPoint and Marcus can bring that up. And then what I'll do is I'll go over the main points of what this owning code does. There's a substantial amount of change. You have in front of you or in your package, you have a cross through underlying version, which is really nearly impossible to read because there's a lot of change. There's a clean copy at the end of the staff report. I think you have that, and that's a lot easier to read. So it is quite different from the existing code. And Mark is just for the record, as a matter of housekeeping, we are going to swap the red line version that it was attached to the draft ordinance with the clean version that is attached to the staff report. So I'm just stating that for the record simply because there are some typographical errors in the red line version and they are corrected in the in the staff reports exhibit. So just for the record we will be swapping those exhibits. And then as we go forward if we have additional changes I guess we can still highlight those in red line. Correct. So this is for the Trans supportive development district, which is formerly the transit oriented development district was renamed in March of this year. As always, I want to go through a schedule. We have a lot going on with the rezoning effort. And we have everything sequenced instead of doing it all at once which would be impossible to understand anything We've been sequencing everything month to month. So what we've had done already We already have the townhouse ordinance come to you. That's past second reading. It's enacted. It's not effective yet because it's not mapped We have put we have done the first reading on the comprehensive plan, land use amendments only, which is to support the zoning that has gone to first reading, has been transmitted. We have comments already back from the State, from Department of Transportation, as well as DP, Environmental Protection. So that's happened already. We are right now in August and what you have in front of you is probably the, really what started all of this was to change the downtown code. This is only the text, it will not be mapped until later on. So this text would entirely replace the current TSDD. Again, it's the same, it's a modified code, it's not really an entire placement, but it's a lot of changes. We get to the same place in a lot of ways. In October, we will be presenting the neighborhood mixed use, which is the last news-owning district that we wanted to present and have passed. That would be something to replace all wanted to present and have passed. That would be something to replace all the ROs and LOs. And in some cases some of the commercial zoning like on bird road. Again, it would be more of a bird road for the edges of the downtown district. 60 second avenue is one of the thoughts that will come to you for first reading next month. This will then go to commission next month. No, I think this month and next month. We will also, you have a busy month next month because you also have the sunset place site plan coming in next month. So we're trying to lighten it up on the zoning efforts. And in a lot of ways, sunset place, it is the giant sort of keystone project for all of this. So we consider that part of this zoning effort. In fact, we did do the rezoning on that conference of land amendments back in, was in October at this board, November at the commission. In November, we will start to bring forward the future land use map amendments. That's when we're going to first start with the map amendments that go with all the text changes. So we've changed the text. We've got the zoning codes all prepared. Now they have to fall into place on the map. As I present to you some of the changes tonight, you'll see some maps. Some of it is not going to be enacted with the text because it needs the map changes. Then we will start that process. It's a fairly heavy lift to a process. We have to do the comprehensive plan feature laying use map and the zoning map. And the notice is different. We have to do a property by property. It's quite an extensive effort. So that will start in November. So we'll do the first reading and transmittal for the map for both length, the comprehensive plan and the zoning. Then by December we take a break because the future language plan will be off to getting a state review. And then when we come back we will do the second reading and hopefully have an ordinance to enact the map that goes with all of this text and will be closed to done. And then 45 days later because it's a compliment amendment 45 days later than the zoning code will be fully enacted. We'll probably have a few cleanups at the end of that. We'll have to delete zoning districts that are no longer in use that are obsolete. So that's the short version is actually a lot of work. We also will have a larger conference plan effort going on in the middle of that. I think it says there are planning board workshop in October. It's a much larger process for the whole comprehensive plan. The city has just due on a seven year cycle to do this. So everything's interleaved and I always, every time I make a presentation, I'll give you the schedule of where we're at and where we're going with this. So for the TSDD, transportation supportive development district, as it's called, we have some guiding principles. They've been pretty much the same principles when we started. I remember the first workshop we talked about the same thing. We wanted to have some flexibility to respond better to the market, particularly the commercial markets. As commercial retail and office and industrial markets are all moving around, and we want to be able to respond to those with a more flexible zoning code. No question that the residential market is very strong, and we want to respond to the housing needs as well. So this code also supports market race, market rate housing, as well as affordable and workforce housing. And you'll see that a little later in some of the bonuses. Clearly, one of the big efforts is to direct density towards the infrastructure. Infrastructure is the transit station, South Miami metro rail stations. So we want to support the use of the metro rail station. We bring the density as close to the metro rail station and we taper it off as we go out or we should say we do the intensity and I'll make that distinction I think on the next slide. Compatibility is a very big area what makes South Miami a great place to live his its neighborhoods and we intend to protect them fully as we slide down our intensity towards the neighborhoods. So all of the edges is a transition to bring the heights down to the very edge so that we move into the neighborhoods. Was there a comment? Okay and then finally one of the one of the issues is simplification and predictability. Three big things. One is to try to get all of the regulations in one place in one chapter. So right now you would go to the permitted land uses, you go to the parking section, you have to jump around to get everything in one place. We're putting it all in one place, one chapter, one set of regulations. The other thing is to make as much as we can administrative or if it does go to commission for a decision or to this board for a decision, we have a lot of rules to follow. So we have standards and criteria. The reason for that is nothing pushes development away more than if you have a lot of loose criteria. So they'll just go to some other city where they know what their performance looks like. And finally, simplification. Every place we can, we get rid of words and paragraphs and put in a table. I like tables a lot better, much easier to understand, and I think that helps a lot with the zoning code. So residential density is the first topic. We have currently in the TSDD no maximum density limit. We have a minimum density limit of 50 units in acre. Given a lot of the preemptive issues that have come up with the live local bill, there are things that started to look like maybe we should put a maximum limit in there. Right now it's limited by form, the maximum height you can get, the size of the building, how it plays out and parking. That's my food triangle there. Those are the three things that always will regulate what you can put in a particular site. There's a lot of variables for those things. Not everything scales up and down so easily. So building form, we define a building form, but when somebody comes into develop it, for example, 60, 75 across the street, it could have been a giant block, but nobody's going to develop that. We need a 70-foot corridor to get a take. And so the buildings don't always take up their space that they can. So we build building envelopes, but what actually happens is a little different. So a lot of times it's very difficult to really control density with building form. It's a very flexible standard. So the decision was to put a density in here. Just in case somebody comes in someday someday and they want to build a whole lot of tiny units and really stuff them in there, we won't allow that. So the density is, there are two maxims, one's 150 units an acre which would be the base level and that's approximately what, that is actually what the SOMI project is at Windixi I think it's 149 Across Red Road and Coral Gables the MX-1 MX-2 or 125 the Counties RTC ordinance for this type of station comes in also at 125 so 150 was a pretty good place to go And we know we've had an approval at 150 with the sewing project. For bonuses, we decided again, we calculate all this. There's a lot of variables, but the easiest thing to do was to look at the track record. The one that came in surprisingly high, but it's a good looking project, was across the street at 196 units in acre. So we've used 200 as a maximum with bonuses. So that gives us some protection. To give you some idea, just a reference point for larger station areas, the RTC allows 250, and for something like Miami Downtown is 500. So that puts us where we should be in basic area. That also allows us to gauge concurrency a lot more Particularly not so much the traffic because we're in an exception area but for water and Silver we can actually at a comprehensive plan level get a better handle on it. Whereas now we have to make a lot of assumptions based on the form which usually those assumptions come out to around 200. So the next issue is subdistricts. And this is really a little further in the code, but we have a legacy of subdistricts already. We have the MU file. Originally there was an MU4, back when it was TODD, there was an MU4, MU5, MU6, PI, which is where we are now on parks. The MU4 was done away with some years ago, everything became MU5 and MU6. Those had height and bonus allowances and height requirements that went with them because it was a form-based code Some prudence that we would keep the geography of those areas even though they're being renamed to TSDA Which is the transit support of development area? This sort of the medium pink or lavender and then the darker one is the total transit oriented development area Which is something that came as a preemptive item in the state's level of local build. We would still have this area which is meant to be the area right around the station. Highest density, very short walk distance and then we can spread out into the TSTA. So the way it's mapped out is exactly the way MU5 and MU6 are currently mapped out. We added the city hall site, PI, into the MU6 and the parks has just gone away. There's a new district that's added. I know there's some history we've talked about the edges of the downtown. There was some talk about changing the density and making some changes to the multi-family residential zoning category. We had a lot of discussions about that. Realized there was probably going to be something that was using an axe instead of a scalpel. We would have a lot of effects elsewhere in the city, so that was scrapped. And instead, we've made as a transitional area for the downtown. So that band-aid color, that light pink, is something that's not existing as a TSDD area right now on the zoning map. And it would be for the lowest transition, no bonuses, six stories, residential only. That's the way the text is written. Again, it's not mapped yet. One of the big things that we wanted to do for predictability and for ease of use and to attract development and maintain, retain development, was change the permitted use categories. So like many cities, we have about 140 something enumerated uses on a table. And most of those uses are obsolete, like video tape stores and so forth. You might have a carburetor shop. Things that just don't exist anymore. And often, there are things that aren't on the list that come in, because particularly the commercial markets are always reinventing themselves in these times and there's always something new. So what we've done in the past is we've created categories of general uses and if you look in the code there's a very big long table and it seems like it's more complicated it is not anything would fit into say a retail category which allows anything doesn't matter if it's a mattress store, patio furniture, clothing store, we don't care. You're selling something, you have a fun-facing retail presence, you don't make it there, that's retail. If you're selling a service, that's a professional services, offices, same thing. Everything's a general category. The reason the table and the code is really long is now we have to use performance measures. We have to have a number of criteria to make sure, the same as the existing code tries to do with all the different uses. We want to make sure certain things don't occur. And they're all listed out there as you shall not do this. If you're having outdoor dining, you'll be in this category and so forth so we can control it correctly. But basically, it's a large category of general retail, of food and service, businesses of entertainment, movie theaters, theaters, et cetera, gaming places all under entertainment, professional offices, which for these purposes, it includes medical. They're pretty much the same except for parking is the only place where we divided parking into two. Civic uses educational public schools and places of assembly which is really again a category that's thrown together of all the things that don't fit the categories very well. And then a few new categories, we have hotel, residential, I'll go over the new categories over here. So one of the things we did was to get rid of light industrial. Light industrial, the way it's written, doesn't really belong here. We have a lot of it on progress and commerce streets. We would like to move away from that, but still because of the current economy and we don't know the direction of retail or office or workspaces and there's an entirely new economy. So it has reached the economy of makers economy. People who are just making things in small batches or one off kind of things, we want to support that. So and honestly even, you know, I sometimes follow markets, I can do it a lot. And I'm looking at even all the real estate investment trust, they're all looking at industrial these days because it's stable and residential, but nobody is sure where retail and office are going. Not that they're dying, we're just not sure what's happening with them. So there are three categories that are in this. One is martisinal occupation. And basically, this could be anything from an artist studio or a jeweler making one-off items and selling them in that store. So there's a glass front and there workshop in the back. And it could be up to small batch processes. So there's a picture there, a little ceramic shop. Not very large. It could be a bakery. It could be like Zach's bakery, and not one of us. And that, and you're voting for it. Thank you. Those kinds of things that we would like to encourage, it's also very good for a local economy. They tend to be more owner-operated. They tend to be local people, both local customers and local proprietors. That's one category and there's a number of criteria on that, you will not have not just things going outside, you will not have anything outside, you'll store in the front, you're not going to put garbage out in the back and leave it out there. There's a lot of rules to go with it, not anything that no one can follow, we just want to make sure it stays clean. Limited automotive businesses, so there's a lot of automotive business, again on progress and commerce, and in that area, in the triangle just north of that, that we would like to support, but we're going to grandfather those in as we go forward with this, but what we'd really like to do is still encourage that sector. So there's a lot of automotive sales type businesses that are boutique kind of sales. Very high-end vehicles or sometimes they're builds, people who are in for-of-a-drive or custom builds. Even motorcycle shops have had this concept down for a long time. The main thing here is that there's absolutely no outside inventory. It's all on the building. It's a storefront. It works like any other store. But it's geared towards the automotive business. And then lastly, warehousing and storage, which we originally thought to get rid of it, but there was the thought that since we have a business economy as well, whether it's office or whether some of these kinds of uses, it doesn't need to store things. What we don't want is a storage block of a building with its little door down at the bottom and a loading bay. So we're allowing it as an ancillary use to any other use. And we don't want it on the street. It's hidden. We don't want to see it, but you can store your stuff if you have another business that's going on. That's fine. But upstairs. So those three things have come into the code as again general use categories. A lot of rules to follow mostly about what you let go outside. You have to keep it all inside. But other than that, if it's a tricycle shop, we don't have a planning director that has to say no, no, it doesn't say tricycle shop here, it's in the category, that's it. So those are the new uses. Along with the categories of uses, we can simplify parking. And one of the reasons to simplify, there's a lot of reasons to simplify parking. But one of the big ones is what happens in a lot of shopping centers is you have Trapping centers they fill up all their cells and they are restante and a clothing store and you know the pool store and so forth And I literally have seen this happen when I was planning director So a mattress store leaves and the mattress store had very little parking allocated to it because it's a mattress store and Then the cell is ideal for somebody who wants to have a deli. Well, they can't go in because on paper they don't have enough parking. We want to get rid of that problem. And then you'd go by the place and you see there's plenty of parking there not to mention the deli and mattress store of different hours. So we want to get rid of that problem. So if you have your parking for multiple uses and multiple cells, you have your parking for those businesses. So if they're retail, they're retail, we're not gonna worry if it's a mattress store, or if it's a clothing store, or if it's cells, buttons, it's just we're gonna let it all mix in. And in fact, in the industry, Institute of Transportation Engineers, there's a lot of categories for all the different uses for both parking and trip generation but then there's one that's called shopping center, 300 or 320 or something like that. It's everything together. They just say, well, the mix kind of works out and we let the owner of the property work out the mix. They'll work it out if they're losing, if they're tenant is losing customers. They will, they will solve it themselves. We don't have to do that for them. So the parking has been differentiated for both the sub districts. We treat the edge a little more gently, in other words, we require a little more parking at the not existent right now, the transit supportive neighborhood area. The area is closer to the station, have a much more aggressive parking rates. What's been done with these parking rates is they came out of the ITE Institute Transportation Engineers' National Average, we took all of the urban numbers for them because we're in an urban environment. And then we discounted for transit and discounted for shared use. So what happens now in the code is you can come in with an application and you can say you want to do a parking study for shared use. And one, you're cheating it a little bit yourself because you can only do it for your development. And we're looking at it and saying no, it's going to be the whole downtown. We want people to park in one place and go walk in five blocks. So we want this to work for the whole downtown and two, we don't want to have all these independent studies that say different things and have different regulations applying to each development. So it made sense to just kind of do it for everybody. So we've applied 20% for the transit, which is actually conservative. I think 25% is used in some areas in downtown Miami and so forth. And then we've applied for the shared use. We worked out in a fairly general way the shared use aspect of that and discounted all of those rates by 20%. Generally there are some that went to 50 like entertainment uses and created a table. So it's easy, right? You come in, you have retail use, you know what you're going to need for parking. Those rates are fairly aggressive as far as requiring less parking and there is there are It's almost never that you get parking right on the nose that you get it right. First of all parking is something that's Utilized for one time and the rest of the time the spaces to empty Concept of share parking as you hopefully utilize those spaces a little better. But Over parking has a lot of costs not only to a developer at 30 to $40,000 for structured space, but they cost the city. They cost the city in terms of those spaces are where habitable uses could be. Habitable use, habititable uses, generating people, and that's what we want downtown. We want people downtown. We want them walking. And not only that from a financial standpoint, a space versus a habitable use, habitable use pays a lot more taxes once it's built. So we tend to, if we have to make an error, we'd rather under park than over park. Under parking is almost more solvable in the long term because you can add parking or allow more off-site parking. Over parking, you build a garage, you have too many spaces, that's it, you're not going to do anything else. So we would rather error a little towards the under parking side and we can correct it as the years go on if it's not right But we think we've got it pretty pretty close to where we should be for a starting point Does what happens with parking Demented rates and then we did a few other things to to acknowledge some of the trends that are going on So right now it's not unusual as fact fact, we've the city had an approval like I'm remember 6075 had some tandem parking spaces. We're going to continue to allow that. Not just for valet, but also for residential. We figure people live together in the same apartment they can probably work out who goes out to work first and who comes home first. So tandem would be allowed for single only for one unit. In other words, if you have a two-bedroom and you're required with two spaces, those two spaces can be in tandem, but not with another unit. We also are permitting motorcycle and scooter parking to count towards 5% of the parking. We all drive around. Some of us even ride scooters or everywhere. And they do take a lot less parking. You know, in a garage, it's about four to one for scooters to one parking space. You can actually, like that picture shows, you could actually arrange eight to go into one parking space. More importantly, with structured parking, there's a lot of waste. Every climb, there's a column, there's a piece of structure, there's some exits, there's spaces around the exits. You can use those and pick up the efficiency of how much garage we have to build for the amount to parking that is required. We've also included bicycle parking to embrace the multimodalism. Bicycle parking is required already. We kind of ironed out the rates a little bit more, made sure there's inside and outside. You need the racks outside and storage space inside and the rates overworked out very generally for the uses. Next topic, sorry, is development bonuses. The basic concept is that we want to get a public benefit and we're going to allow more development. So there should be good parity, which I think was one of the criticisms of the existing code, was that there wasn't a good parity between what you get as far as the bonus goes and what you had to give. So we tried to bring that parity in a better state so that you really have to give something that is closer to the benefit that the developer receives and that those benefits, which with developer gives, is actually a benefit to the city. So when we were, I'll get to that in a second. So the process, it's only available to sites over 40,000 square feet, so it goes through the large scale development process. We're not confident that the bonuses should be administrative. Feel pretty strongly that they should go to commission. So anything that's for development bonus is going to be part of the large scale process. If you're not large scale and you have one to do a bonus, you can, you can still go to commission, but generally speaking bonuses get a little bit out of proportion on smaller sites. So that's the process. And of course with bonuses, we limit them away from the edges of the downtown. We allow them to concentrate a little closer to the station. The bonuses, this was something we thought about at great length when we were working out with downtown Somi code changes because we knew we wanted to keep the bonuses fairly parallel between downtown Somi and the TSDD, which at that time was called the TODD. So a lot of this was worked out and you'll recognize these. They're very similar to downtown Somie. There's an open space bonus. You have to get 15%. That's well above the requirement for the base requirement, which I'll get to in a slider zone. And you can get one story out of it and it's applicable only in the Tota and the TSDA. So another is the most central area central areas, the one right around Metro Real Station and the one next to it, but not in the periphery. Affordable housing, workforce housing, again I think these have been discussed a lot. We do value those as a benefit to the social benefit and the benefit to the city to bring in people who are not of means to buy a home in our area, which will become very expensive. So we want to have that lifetime transition that you can start out at a young age in South Miami and stay here and buy a house one day. And that's why affordable housing and workforce housing are a benefit to the city as well as being a social benefit. Condominium is a bonus and again you saw that in downtown Somi. We recognize that condominium owners have a little more stake in the community. They will keep their property a little bit better and again we want to provide all be it is a fairly small bonus but it's a bonus. And it works the same way as it did in downtown Somi. The developer would post a bond and they would forfeit the bond if those are not sold as condominiums. For sustainability, there's already a requirement for the equivalent of green, I always call it green. The base level of green or silver, but if you want to go above that, and this might be one that gets taken a lot because if you're already required to get a lead certification, and the certification is apparently where all the money is, then you might as well go gold or go platinum and get some extra floors. And we would love to see that. And there's no payment and move for that floors and we would love to see that. And there's no there's no payment to move for that because we would we really would like to see a lot of lead gold and lead platinum buildings in the city. And then finally additional parking so we want to reduce parking I'll start with that but there's there's a kind of a catch on the TODA area that part of the live local bill is that if it's a live local application and they're in the transit or oriented area, the one right around the station that the development can occur with no parking whatsoever. We think that's a little bit onerous. We also think it's unrealistic particularly for residential. If you're a residential project, you're going to build parking. So since that's the highest area and we didn't want to on base level give that area extra rights without bonuses, we made those into bonuses. So in other words, if you're going to provide the parking, you can get some bonus floors out of it and you probably will provide the parking anyway. So those are the, that's the menu of six, I actually say seven because I think we go and plat them. But those are the menu of bonuses. There's a number of times that you can use each of them and if you were to be able to use all of them on your project you could get ten stories. There are a few places you could do that. Street hierarchy. So this is part of the regulating plan. And actually, the street hierarchy is already in the existing TSDD. And this is very similar. But the reason for it being is it's good to define, when we get to the building setbacks and stepbacks, we want to be able to define a little bit more of a, where we have a very large sidewalk, where we have more pedestrian activity, and where we were just having circulation pedestrian activity, which one has more retail possibilities one has less. And the best way to do that is to create a street hierarchy, and one of the big reasons for this being there is that we do change the setback requirements and the setback requirements based on where the building faces. There's also small changes in the open space locations and types of open space based on the street that you're funding. And lastly, we needed, we had some language and we have some language in the current code about Paseos, cut through is on long blocks. It was fairly generic. We thought we'd just say, here's what we would like Paseos to be. And it's the long blocks, but we thought it would be better to be fully prescriptive about that. So the green lines are where Paseos would be an option for the developer. Those are like a bonus option. And we would hope that they would be taken because they're fairly easy to do. In these rules, you can build the building over them. We think that's OK if it's high enough and if the enclosure is right, if it's not too long, you can see light at the end of the tunnel kind of thing. The open space plan, it regulates the amount of open space, which the base levels are much lower than the 15% bonus. We have 5% and actually it's just a 10% of the lot area. We based it on the size of the site. So anything below 20,000 square foot site, it doesn't, it's not required. It's just too small of a site to start putting open space in there and taking too much away. It's probably an interior block, interior property. So there's no requirement at 20 to 40,000 square feet of site, of unified site. Then we have the 5% regulation. And there's just some dimensions in there so what we don't want is for setbacks to count as open space and the quotas clear setbacks are not open space that sidewalk open space would be a little pocket park a little plaza whatever it may be but something that's distinct and a little bit more of a landmark when we go to the 40,000 square foot site then we ask for more of an open space requirement and it goes to 10%, I'm sorry, the chart is wrong. And then you can go to 15% through bonuses. Different types of open space, depending on where you are, plaza is something we consider to be the entry to a building. It's a little bit more of a landmark, a square. I don't know if there's going to be any squares in South Miami where we put it in there. Square would be something that's actually off the site. So another across the street, you might dedicate something for what's called a square. Like you see in Europe, you know, the streets all around it and that's a square. Pocket parks would be more appropriate for the smaller streets that are not primary streets. Again, it's not got a circulation function and it doesn't have a function to be an entrance to the building. It's just a small place for people to sit down and enjoy themselves. And at Paseo we discussed already. So we have a building height plan. And this is actually important because right now, building height is tied to whether you're in the MU5 or MU6 zones or whether you're in PI. PI where we are now has actually no height limit. It's said to be compatible, which burdens the commission and you actually in this board to have to make that decision. We think it's better to, like I said before, we want to have everything pretty much prescribed so everybody knows what they're coming for and what they can have and what they have to give. So we have a building high plan that's comprised of both a table with the districts or the sub districts on it. So TOTA, I'm sorry, the transit support of neighborhood is something new. It's not in the TODD and it's limited to six stories residential. It's on the edges. What you'll also see there is our height to the roof. So general and floor heights and a height for the building overall. Building overall is generally 20 feet taller than the roof. You can have your additional amenities and stuff up there Machinery, parapets etc. I would go in that 20 foot the The floor the floor to floor heights and we had I actually we had some discussion in this when we're talking about townhouses We've included floor to floor heights because they relate and basically what we have is we're allowing a very generous height for The first story which is 22 feet. You're gonna we have is, we're allowing a very generous height for the first story, which is 22 feet. You're gonna even have a mesenene in there. Looking around a lot of downtowns, that's becoming not so far out of the norm. Very tall first floors are becoming something that's very important for retail. They want that sort of vertical presence. So that's 22. And then instead of prescribing floor limits for the upper floors is an average. And the reason and 12 foot average. And the reason for doing the average is that recognizing that sometimes at the penthouse level or at the top of the building amenity level that you would have a higher ceiling, you might want to have a much higher ceiling. So you have this sort of 12 foot average to work from. You can have 11, 11, 11, and then something that's 18 feet tall at the top. We want to allow that kind of flexibility. Everything with this code is we're trying to prescribe a lot, but not over-prescribe to allow some design flexibility. So this is for base level heights with alponuses. And then when we got to bonuses, again, right now, So this is for base level heights with alponises. And then when we got to bonuses, again, right now, that maximum height is defined by MU5 and MU6. And we felt the need to get away from that because of some history, it was no longer so logical as creating that transition. And I recall when we did the first workshop on this, I think it was January of 2023, and former mayor's daughter was here, and he said, just give us a bimodal height, which he meant, sort of like two camel humps. He was talking about a sunset, drive in the middle, and then hire, and then you taper down. And we wanted to do that as well. Stuck with the MU5, MU6 situation, it was kind of hard to do. So this becomes the maximum height that you can do with bonuses. So if you can get 10 bonuses in your property, but you can't use them all of the height, that's OK. You just can't use them all. That's it. The bonuses are not as a right. If you're in an area where you can only go to 14 stories but you say, I can get 10 bonuses, well, don't use them all because you can't get higher than 14 stories. So that's the way this works. We have sort of two tiered system. This is the maximum height we'll ever see and the idea was to again push it all towards the metro rail. We're keeping the north-west side of downtown a little more aggressive on height and keeping the, which now the hometown area a little less aggressive on height because we think it's appropriate for that transition. This also includes these hatched areas, which are sort of green and yellow I think. So the last 75 feet of any property, the last 75 feet before you're, when is adjacent to an existing single family neighborhood, that last 75 feet would be no more than four stories and 50 feet, and that's to preserve the transition into the neighborhoods. And in fact that standard came from measuring out the related projects that's going on right now they have the sort of townhouse kind of structure at the edges and there's 75 feet ish deep and there are actually two or three stories. So we kind of copy that it's working pretty well and that would be around the edge of the whole district, wherever there is not a sub-district that takes care of that, or wherever there's not, you know, where it's abouting the hospital, we don't worry about it. The last thing on this slide is also on the map is also there's an area for an additional step back along sunset drives. So one of the things that's been a very persistent issue from the beginning was that we need, we want to redevelop the hometown area. It needs to go a little taller. We already have 10 stories, nine stories at the Sonew Project that wind-to-sea property. But we want to preserve sunset. It's not historic, but it's a historic context of the main street. And one of the best ways to do that is to keep within the visibility as you walk on the sidewalk a two-story height. And then it has to step back 30 feet. We'd like to go more with those or narrow blocks, so 30 feet and then go up with the rest of the building. And on as an extra bonus for that, not really bonus, but as an extra incentive or that, not really bonus, but as an extra incentive or way to promote that, whatever we want to have an active use there, so it could be, if it's residential, building it could be just a garden area for the residents, but it could also be an outdoor dining for a restaurant, and anything that's up there would not have a requirement for parking. So we wanted to make sure that we activate those rooftops with a little incentive such as that. So and that's on the map as well. And I guess it's red and blue hatch. So that's the building heights. It's a little different from what we have now right now. Heights is solely determined by what sub-district MU5 or MU6 you're in. Finally, the building form, not finally, the building form is about the sort of bulk of the building. There's a lot of things here, I don't think I want to go through all of them, but this defines the setback and the setback and again that's based on the type of road that the sawdust is on, whether it's primary or secondary. It has the sunset part included. There are regulations for vertical variation. I'm careful to make that vertical variation certainly not a lot by feet, but also make sure that it's... So two things happen with the 65 or 70 foot width. One is that, you know, a double loaded residential. You need 70 feet. So we wanted to knock it smaller than that, even though it's only 5 feet. The other thing that works out perfectly is as double loaded 90 degree parking also happens in 70 and 60 feet actually. So that was constructed so as not to interrupt some of these requirements for the developments themselves. So there's a lot there and it again is defined by whether it's a secondary road or a primary road and that's already defined so we don't have to guess at that when we have developments coming in. Architectural standards and again this is where it's there's a lot of issues with trying to be somewhat prescriptive but not over prescriptive, because we want to allow for the imagination of architects. But there's always the question of, you know, you see these sort of ugly buildings with the little tiny windows, and you say, I don't want that, but I can't regulate that because of my, you know, unintended consequences. So they're fairly loose in this one place in the code where there's some aspirational language, which I never like in code, but I think it's important if you do have a commission decision or a decision by this board on a design then provide some guidance for the board. So you can point say this is the intent of this code. So there's a little aspirational language in there, but it covers five things. One is visual interest, which is aspirational. There's not a lot we can do except, you know, we already defined the form, we have to have variation, we add a few things to vary the surfaces horizontally as well as you go up the building. I think if you walk around UM's campus, they've done a great job of that. You'll see a lot of buildings at the top. It's a little different than the middle and the middle is a little different than the bottom. It creates a lot of visual interest, but we don't want to make hard rules about that. It's just kind of guidance. Energy efficiency was already in the code. We've continued it. Minimum requirement for basic lead or silver stays there. Glazing and transparency. Again, one of the things we can define is the amount of glazing. Again, what is it that the federal penitentiary is a good example of a little tiny windows downtown. We don't want that. And I think we can all agree on at least that one. So there are glazing requirements for the building. One thing that is also in there, we had a bird safe building ordinance or reference in a prior version of this code. It was stricken. It's extremely expensive the way it's written as a bird safe building ordinance. However, we can do one thing which is not to have mirror glass. That's not expensive. So mirror glass is prohibited and perfectly clear glass is prohibited. Nobody builds with perfectly clear glass, but I think mirror glass we can get rid of. And there's a lot of differences opinion about whether mirror glass is really something that we like or not. This also defines building encroachments. We also realize that we do not have arcades or, you know, arcades or colonnades in this code. There's a lot of issues with arcades and colonnades that are really difficult. And it seems that there's a lot of mixed opinion on whether people really like them or not. Typically, they just create dark spaces. They do provide some shelter, but in their place we do like canopies. So canopies will be an encroachment. We need to regulate those a little bit. Again, allow for some imaginations and creativity, but provide some open area of, you know, provides an opening for people to have canopies that encroach. Balconies may encroach, but none of them, they may encroach their step back lines and the setbacks where they don't go over public property. So there'll be, in no case, can something be over the public right away or public open space. Too many, there's liability issues and they go to the city for that. And then finally, no, no, finally, so, yeah, finally. So, sunset drive no, finally. So yeah, finally. So sunset drive historic context. And again, I spoke about it a little bit. We have the step back after the second floor. The one last piece to put in there. And I think there's been a lot of discussion about it. We have, for example, the Crossroads building. It has a wall. It is a wall, a stucco that has the word crossroads on it. What we would rather architects do is reinterpret that feature in a new building. One of those discussions we had internally was, and Miami Beach had this problem a lot where they would have to preserve facade and architects complaining that the cement that was you, the rebar's rusted, the cement that was used is no good anymore. It's just adding a lot of cost and a lot of impossibility to the project. So this code says you can knock it down, but you have to recreate it and reinterpret it as part of your new building. And that would be, I think, a better solution than actually trying to keep the old stuck on concrete there. The last thing is we always have criteria that we review. Without belaboring the point, we went through the eight criteria. We're consistent in this code with old eight criteria. We have a reason that we're doing this. It's consistent with the comprehensive plan. It's not in consistent with any other part of the zoning code right now. We have no adverse effects on the general welfare. We have no adverse effects on people's property rights. We're consistent with the state standards for zoning codes and land development regulations. We have internal consistency and finally we have not done an extremely detailed concurrency review because we're only doing the text. Will we do the mapping? We will be doing that review. But the text, as it stands now, actually has a negative impact because we're limiting density. But we'll calculate that when we get to the mapping. And that, I am concluding. Thank you. I know that was a little longer than meeting my. Thank you. Before we open up for board comment, is anyone from the public that would like to comment on the item? Anyone online? OK. Questions? Thank you very much. Questions? Very extensive presentation and work. So thank you very much. It strikes me as that last part where we're talking about the arcades for Scanapese and in particular the part about the historic like part of the district to re-imagine or to re-imagine it or whatever. It's going to have an amazing amount of subjectivity to it. So 95% of the seems extremely A or B you get C. That part does not. Maybe that's the nature of the beast. We're not worried that that's going to either open the doors to just not anything that goes or make it virtually impossible for anybody to do anything with those properties. Well, one of the things, so right now, if it's a property that is in the historic overlay, there's about eight properties, long sunset. They have to go to ERPV. We think the context is important, and if you think the context is important, you could have an ERPV process for that. I'm not sure if that stifles things too much or not, but that's one possibility because I recognize, I mean, different interpretations, although most architects do fairly well with these kinds of historic things. Yeah, I'll trust you. I'll trust you on that. And also on the commerce lane, you know, the other things over there, in your proposal about them being boutique, car places be tolerated. But you also mentioned, I mean sometimes places rebuild, you sometimes places rebuild cars, vintage cars. There's no way to do that without having mechanical involved and you have expressly prohibited mechanical and one of your line items there. So to me, that sort of in conflict. It allows, of course, prep work. There's a little bit of a bit of it. This would be beyond prep. I mean, yeah, I mean, we could refine that language. What we're trying to not do is, it could be, we could refine that language. We're trying to not do as allowed to be a repair shop. Yet the ones who are there grandfather didn't correct. Correct. Yeah. Yeah. An alternative to that. And I, it's been suggested before, it's a little harder to regulate. It's actually a lot harder to regulate. Is the sort of working retail place. Part of the attraction is to come in and see somebody working on the car. Right. You have to be very careful with that though because is it welding? Is it grinding? Is it oil involved in environmental contamination? It's so many issues there so it's very well-wated anyway. And personally I love that kind of stuff but yeah you know I get it's very hard to draw the line. I'm just saying that that there seems to be some conflict and how that's word is you might take a look at that. Okay. Other board members comments? Danny or Mueh? Sorry. Sorry about that. So Mark, I see a lot of work has gone into this. Is there any way that you can put the total map up? Yes. I just kind of want to. Is it up? This is the sub districts map. So the tone would be the darker magenta. Yeah, so, so, so that is there any way to share that market? So I can. So keep to anticipate a question, keep in mind that's not the same as the height map. That includes MU6 properties that to preserve rights, we still included. Okay, actually it was, I guess it was the TSS D map, the one that showed the blue, the light blue, I guess the darker blue. Right. Thank you. This one. So, okay, so I just, I'm reviewing this. So basically, along 60 second avenue, you're showing here, I guess, where it starts off 68th Street on the west side of 60 second. So you have going from a 10-story building along 60 second, falling to a six-story, to then a four-story townhouse. Is that correct? What I'm seeing? Correct. So you. Go ahead. Sorry. No, no, go, go, go, go, sorry. Yeah, that area has been difficult because it's not a lot of block width. So we do, we have been talking to some property owners and there's not a lot of issue with building the townhouse on the back of those properties. That's one where the 10 stories is a little too much. building the townhouse on the back of those properties. That's one where the 10 stories is a little too much. And again, this is not part of the code, but I think there's some willingness to go to six in those areas. And we may have to work on the regulate. I know actually that the 60 second street, 60 second avenue is something that may have a little bit of work on it because the 10 as a maximum is too high. But remember that that's with bonuses. So without bonuses that would be a four-story. Okay, yeah, I so and I'm sorry I'll add one more thing is that the bonuses do have to go to commission. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, because definitely with the 10 story there, the commission is going to, is going to have a fight on their hands with all the residents right from, you know, a budding to those properties. The townhouses, I don't see an issue with that, even a four story, but 10 story, that's going to be an issue. And I mean, I've spoken to most of those people back there and that's, that'll be a fight, you know, coming to the commission at some point. So just advising that. Yeah, that area as of right will be the front will be four, but it would take a little bonus to get it up higher. I can see six as being something that's a lot more workable. Ten is I agree ten is too much. We're going to have to work. One of the things we're going to do is we're going to play with some of the properties and apply the zoning code and see how it works out before we get to the commission because those two blocks are very interesting set of questions about them because they're so narrow and because they're so sensitive being next to the neighborhood. And the townhouses too, right now following the townhouse passing the townhouse ordinance, there's been a lot of interest in townhouses. It's a product that's found its time and place. But nobody's going for four stories. Three. Thank you. Just one last question. From the downtown area. Behind. I guess you would say south of sunset. I guess all these buildings on 59, 58, 57th in between sunset and 74th. We're going to be change the zoning would be changed for all those to be. 10 stories would be allowed in all those parcels there. The light blue would be six stories, no bonuses. Oh, that's so be 10 with bonuses, but six stories typically. No, no, the very light blue at the very south of seventy-fourth. Yeah, I'm saying actually the dark blue in between sunset and seventy-fourth. Oh, yes, that's ten stories is the allowable with bonuses with bonuses. Without bonuses, it's it's what four or six four before without bonuses. Okay. Okay, thank you, Mark. Appreciate it. You know, again, we have this only project and it didn't make sense to leave that as a thumb sticking up. And again, to get some development to occur, we do need to be a little generous with the height, but also watch out for what we're doing to the neighborhoods. Okay, thank you. I have another question. And I'm not sure really it's for you or for Swami, or whether it's for the Mayor and the Commission but as we look at these bonuses, have we ever thought or will we be able to link getting people across Dixie Highway as part of our bonus structure? So one thing that worries me is we're so reliant on the mass transit, for as we look to see our city evolve. But we all kind of act as if that black line through there is fairly simple to cross, which we all know it is not. And so I have some very strong feelings about getting people across the highway using escalators and covered walkway and that kind of thing to do it. So as I think about the bonus situation, could we include that in that situation or because that's not even a day county road to the US highway? I have no idea who has the right of way over that thing. And could you link them? But I would point to Brickle City Center, which does actually have a metro mover station going right in their far eastern wall. I'm sure that's a county road, not a state road there, and certainly not a US road. There's already pedestrian bridges and the Gables. Yeah, I'm just thinking we can find. For the bonuses, sure, in there. The somehow. That would be hard to tie to the bonuses because we're crossing a state road and we will be providing a bonus for An uncertainty that it could be permitted that said You know, we don't have that answer today. I'm just I'd like to see bonuses are a great way to get things done, you know People want something from us as you so eloquently pointed out. So maybe we ought to be thinking about getting something from them along those lines because this is the big unknown in my opinion of how we developed. So yeah, it's like two downtowns. There was a proposal, of course, entirely unfunded. It was just a concept really. The Miami-Dade TPO Transportation Planning Organization did a study, I think it was in 2022, 2023, about US-1, South-XXI highly. And there was a proposal there for a not really a pedestrian bridge, but a much more grand pedestrian and bicycle overpass, something with that that's almost of a park like a linear park kind of thing. And it was actually on the east side of Red Road across US1 and across, I guess you can see sometimes sunset, across sunset. No wait, what comes into red? Yeah. No, wait, what comes into red? Yeah, no, no, no, no, no. It's across the intersection of red and US one. And it was a crossing for the underlying, which would kind of go over a little bit at that point. And it was like a T-shaped, very large bridge. So it's a discussion that's come up before. I know there's a lot of concern about pedestrian bridges. You know, they start out with a grander plan, and they turn into, you know, like a hamster, a habitrail, a cage thing. And there's been a lot of comment that we don't want that at all. So it's a good discussion, though. Yeah, sorry. So, it's a good discussion though. So, Sir Amicadad, the other services director, so I would agree with him that we can't have that it would be difficult to incorporate that. However, we could discuss with the city attorney on if there are ways of having like an impact fee to do these types of things so that we collect money so that we can and if you all want I mean there's a process for that right now we have road impact fees collected by Miami-Dade County and so the Miami-Dade County Code does allow projects to satisfy road impact fees that would otherwise be charged so we could talk offline about speaking to the county and finding a way to potentially incentivize a developer. For example, to offset their impact fees by having their in-kind contribution, actual construction of and permitting of that sort of facility. But this is all very theoretical. We're really going to sit down. I want to make it very clear this is something we're sort of brainstorming here. We understand. And I mean, we know that US one is an issue coming up in some other studies that consultants are doing for the city that that is an issue. And I know that we had once in the gapels that we were able to get certain fees that will be only to do the underlying park. So, and that was specific to the gapels. So I'm wondering if, you know, we could look at something like that for this also. We'll talk offline, I think that's a great idea. I wasn't trying to change it, it's want to make sure it's in the conversation. Sure. And one of the things that some municipalities do is people donate to a parking fund, and we're providing parking. So it can be a fund that has to be an impact fee. And whether or not that's tied into bonuses, this is a whole different conversation. But that's, I think, but this for safety, it would improve the traffic flow, if we could get people off the sidewalk, because if you try crossing 57, and people turning right, it's very hazardous there. So, it's a very good point, Jay. Other board members would like to comment? Okay, one of the questions that I think Jay touched on a little bit is there's a lot of existing uses that are no longer going to be permitted. So those are going to be grandfather in and there's no time limit as far as how long they can stay, correct? Correct. Okay. And can they make modifications modifications should they need to do improvements to their facilities are they permitted to do those things that they're not negatively impacted by this ordinance up to 50% if you think it's prudent to do it what we did for the townhouse ordinance as we provided a little bit of an exception to that so that we think it go beyond the 50% because we realize that when we map townhouse we're going to be mapping it into places where there's like R.O. and L.O. and presidential offices and We don't want people to stop investing in their property while the time comes to redevelop And they could sell so if it's an icon for me, they can sell that property with an icon for me use for somebody else. We can add, I mean, it's not in this code, but we could take that language that was in townhouse to provide the exception to the 50% rule so they could be more than 50%. Yeah, I just want to make sure that our merchants that have been with us many, many, many years are negatively impacted by this ordinance. And when we talk about the issue of historic that Jay brought up is it happens to be on some of our most pristine real retail quarter, right? And the concern is make sure that we don't hamper anybody from doing commercial developments along sunset because of the historic overlay, right? So that's something that we really need to make sure that we provide flexibility and not handcuff developers from really developing that. Because again, it's right on our most prominent street where we can really, we're developers who want to do more because of the value that Housekeeping slide 14 the table said seven stories and not six We keep saying six stories it said seven so just a little something there that you should pick up on I think those are, it may not be common but with today's technology, you know, we show these two dimensional plans, two stories, 13 stories. Can we do it in three dimensional? Yeah. I mean that would be so much easier for people to understand, not just the board, the commission and the public to see a three-dimensional diagram that shows the maximum heights with bonuses and without. We're working on that in the background, but we did it on townhouse because it was a little easier. Yeah. This has so many variables that we'll try to solve. Yeah. Either it's with bonus or without. The maximum bonus and without bonus. You can't go in between. Say, what if you do two stories of bonus is not. Maximum was allowed by right and was allowed by maximum. Well, that's easier for people to use. So many things, the size of the block, the size of the site, how it parks. And building's not really a big block. It's so hard to understand. building is not really a big block. I understand, I understand whatever. But it helps. Yeah, we're going to try to do that. I recognize that. It's really hard. And today we're boarding on the first reading. Mr. Attorney. Through the chair. Yes. Yes. I'm glad you brought up the three dimensional option. And you also touched on something that's very concerning to me in terms of the non-conforming use and the domain forward. And under our current status, our current code under section G2, and if you look at section 20-4.8, non-conforming uses and structures, It's very restrictive and very harmful to existing properties. In fact, this goes all the way down to residential. If more than 50% of your home is damaged, even by an act of God, our code currently says we're going to take that bedroom from your child. And that's, I think, overbearing and unreasonable. So I do think that it would be something that we need to address quickly before somebody is negative the impact that. Thank you. So it just goes to the same point that you said about the commercial merges. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you. Mr. Markslaus, is this first reading of this? Would this this is going to come back to us? Or is no, this is just a recommendation recommendation. Okay. Commission would vote on first reading. Okay. And second. All right. Any other questions or comments from board members? Do I have a motion? I'll make a motion to approve it for recommendation to the full commission. Do I have a second? I'll second it. Seconded by Danny. Okay, take one vote at a time. Jay. Yes. Yes. Yeah. Yes. Yes. Yes. Daniel. Yes. Okay. We have an anonymous vote. Thank you very much. Yeah. Nice work. Item number three is PB-DAS-24, DAS-018, the applicant in the city of South of Miami. Ordnance of the Marins City Commission of the city of South Miami. Florida, amending Article III, zoning regulations. Section 20-S, 3.3D. It's in David. The committee is scheduled and then the committee's schedule of the men's development code to allow you to use merchandise establishments within the low intensity office district, providing for corrections, severability, conflicts, implementation and effective date. This item will be handed by Mr. Edward Marcos, City Attorney. Thank you. Thank you, Marcus. Board members, this ordinance is very straightforward it just slightly changes the use table to allow use the merchandise establishments in the yellow district. The yellow district represents a small portion of our city. There's only two parcels that we're aware of that are zone dello. And frankly, when the changes at Marcus has discussed, go, I'm sorry, that Mark Alvers discussed go through, this may end up being irrelevant in the sense that the new code would provide for broad range of uses and won't distinguish between things like use merchandise or buttons or what have you, a mattress store. It'll just be very broad. However, there is an interest in moving forward on one particular site. The nonprofit group has, you know, petitioned to make this change so that they could do the used merchandise sales. And so that's what this does. What are the two parcels that you mentioned? Like what area is this specific me? Just a moment. The area where the used merchandise, it's over there off the 68th Street. It's next to where the mobile building is at. Next to the power substation. It's a red roll comments. And then the substation. And then it's like a small office building that's right there. And then it goes into the mobile parking lot in the city in the city swimming pool. Just what exactly. I believe the owner of that nonprofit is in the audience tonight. The representative for the nonprofit is here. If you'd like, if you have any questions for them, yeah. Please remember this is the nickname of the sign-in. Mr. Chair, do you like to open public comments now? Yes. Open up to any public comments at this point. So. Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board. My name is Bob Delafonte with law offices at 1200 Brickle Avenue. I'm here representing Leap, which is the nonprofit that was mentioned earlier. And with me tonight is Malia Linquist. She's the executive director of Leap. So as alluded to earlier, Leap is a recent transplant to the city of South Miami. They are now leasing the space at 5813 Southwest 68th Street. And for those of you who don't know, and Miss Linquist is here and can give you additional information, but Leap's mission is education, entrepreneur training, and mentorship to women during and after prison. So this space that they have leased on South of 68th Street is ideal for their operations. It provides office space for them, allows them to provide counseling and training to their their women. And part of Leap's main program, though, is use merchandise sales. And currently they operate the Dragonfly Thrift Store that is part and parcel of Leap's mission. And that is located on Southwest A Street and 37th Avenue. It is called Dragonfly. It's widely recognized by the new times and other publications as being probably the best thrift store in Miami-Dade County and what they would like to do is be able to do this in South Miami as it is part and parcel of their program. Fortunately when we approach the city City did see that the use as proposed by Leap is appropriate for the current zoning as well as as Mr. Marto said what is eventually contemplated which will be allowed in this site anyway so we're just a few months ahead this will allow Leap to continue their mission and to be able to consolidate their mission and as you know as with every nonprofit money is always super super, even more than for any others, especially during these times, and they will be able to soon give up paying rent at the other place where a dragonfly currently is and consolidate their operations here. So, again, this is, we believe, consistent with the existing uses in the area as Mr. Lightfoot pointed out when he read out the uses immediately around leap. It is consistent with the area and will not adversely impact the area. So if you have any questions or would like to know additional information about leap, Ms. Linquistus here and we can answer anything you might have to ask for us. Thank you for the presentation. Any other public comment? Board members? So I have a question. So retail is retail. So under the new code, would this be a permitted use? The one that we're working now, it will be. Yes, please. Hi, the smart covers. Yes, thanks for the question, it will be retail. Yes, OK, because when I see to carve out something with such a special use seems kind of, to me, you're selling something at retail, right? So I just want to make sure that retail will be permitted so all we're doing here like you said is getting ahead of the curve by a few months in order to permit you to start doing that so I just wanted to clarify that all right thank you yes thank you when you brought up buttons I was thinking back to what the old cold code was kind of nitpicky right exactly yeah so it's a hybrid asherty yeah okay all right so I have a motion on this item motion to approve motion by day you have a second second second second by j and this a second. Second. Second. Second by Jay. And this one will just, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Aye. Okay. Item passes. Thank you very much. Thank you. Last item. Last item is PB-2-4-1019, the African and the City of South Miami. Orders in the Marin City, City Commission of the City of South Mining, floor demanding Article 2 definitions, Article 3 zoning regulations, and Article 4 other regulations of the NED Development Code to establish regulations related to residential single family driveways, providing for corrections, serviceability, conflicts, implementation, and effective date. And I believe this item will be handed by the city attorney as well. Thank you, Marcus. Board members, this item rather straightforward. Our code lacked any guidelines or standards for driveways and single-family homes. And so the city commission has asked us to prepare some standards. And that's to have in front before you. One of the larger changes that is being proposed is that mulch will not be permitted as a driveway surface. Gravel would be permitted. Provided that, it is contained. So that means putting a curve around it, effectively what is it? What is it? Six inch curve? Six inch concrete curve to contain the gravel. And then there's a number of other items if you turn to the red line or black line ordinance to this page. You see them listed pretty clearly. We can run through them very quickly. One curb cut for lots of 60 feet or less. Two curb cuts if you're greater than the 60 feet. A minimum of nine feet in width, okay? No greater than 22 feet and width for the driveway. You have to be five feet from the front property line except of course for that portion that comes up to the approach, the driveway approach. The entirety of the driveway cannot exceed 35% of the front and side yards. It needs to be constructed with a material and character with the residence, and shall be maintaining a good condition for your debris. The next paragraph covers some of those, some of the permitting materials. It's a long list. So we're providing a lot of flexibility from concrete, grass-crete, concrete pavers, Turkish tavertine pavers, porphyry stone, Chicago brick, encapsulated gravel, any other material approved by director of development services. Okay, and then here's where we specify materials such as loose gravel shall be contained in a six-inch concrete curb. And mult is expressly not expressly prohibited, but it states their mulch is not considered suitable for construction, for driver construction. Furthermore, it says if you have a cracked driveway, you have to restore it to its original condition. And finally, the driveway shall not cause a lot or yard to exceed the allowable impervious section coverage per our impervious standards. If you have any questions, we're happy to answer them. Questions or members? I'm happy to answer them. So the, I guess I have a lot of questions. How do I break this down? So if you have an existing condition where your driveways is wider than nine feet and you just want to replace what's existing. Would it be permissible to just redo what you already have? So nine feet is not a minimum is not a maximum. It's the minimum. Okay. There is a maximum conversation somewhere. Maximum is 22. Okay, and so if I have 23, do I lose functionality because of replacing something? If you are grandfathered and you are making repairs, that's another at that point you would have to come into compliance with the code. So if I'm resurfacing my 23 foot wide driveway I would have to remove the foot. It depends on the nature of what you're doing if you're completely redoing it entirely. I think our current non-forming improvements provision says yes. So, Rami, are you familiar with that? I mean, if you're just resurfacing with the same, like you have asphalt and you're just putting asphalt down again, then that would be my interpretation. That's grand problem. I got to repair exactly. But if you're removing R your asphalt and you're going to come in with papers or whatever, then yeah, you would need to complain correct that would be my interpretation correct Okay, and then the six inches in concrete curve is that a vertical six inches or horizontal because Realistically the slider Or movement the slider to be on gravel would would mostly be at the low point, which is the exit of the driveway. So I'm not sure what we're defining there. That's horizontal. Horizontal. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, and it's just to try to contain the gravel because it, fair. Yeah. But I mean, there was an original version of this where we weren't going to allow gravel, but that's we've gotten feedback that really they want to be able to allow that so that was the. And that's where I just it was unclear to me so maybe we can more clearly define that that it's a horizontal a six inches and then I guess my other question would be you're not really required to have a drive wing why would we prohibit mulch or anything else? No, we're not prohibiting mulch. We're just saying that it's not a appropriate construction material for a driveway. So you can have mulch in your yard certainly, but you can't serve. You can't surface a driveway with mulch. Yeah, and Lord is correct. If I'm wrong or Marcus, but I think that we require driveways when they have to go from the right away, the sub back of sidewalk to either the garage or you have to have parking on your driveway in your on your property. So yes, it is a requirement. Okay. Thank you for the presentation. Okay. a requirement. Okay. Thank you for the presentation. Okay. That answers my questions. Thank you. I have an issue. I guess a question with this 22 feet maximum. I'm pretty sure I've seen driveways in our city that are probably wider than 22 feet. I actually just googled what amount of space you need for a two-card. It says 20 to 24 feet. And I'm just wondering why limited to 22 feet? Well, this is not for the parking area necessarily, but rather for the driveway itself. And so typically what you have is a driveway, you, a driveway approaches the area where you're going to park. And so that area where you're actually parking certainly could be wider. Subject of course to impervious area requirements and things like that. Are you saying that? Sorry, and now you confused me a little bit. Are you saying that? So for example, I have a, and I'm using this house because it's just popping in my mind. It has, you know, on the side, they fit probably two and a half three cars. It's much larger than 22 feet, but they cut you go into the street straight in front of their house and park there. Are you saying what part of that is the drive is? The whole part that is cemented was a car's are going or just like a little portion of the front going into. Su-Dami is going to address that question. So first I don't know if that's a legally permitted condition what you're actually showing if it sounds like somebody has like a huge parking area in the front of their lot. So I don't know if it's actually a permitted, vehicle condition, but Lorde is I think was gonna add some information on that. Thank you, Surami. Getting back to what it says here, she'll be a minimum of nine feet in width and no greater than 22 feet wide. That number, those two numbers, a minimum and a maximum, 9 feet in width and no greater than 22 feet wide. That number, those two numbers, a minimum and a maximum, are actually the point where you have your approach that's just outside of your property. And then that is the width that you could into your private property. After that, a driveway can want it. But let's say you have a lot that has a width of 75 like the majority of the city for example 75. You can't have like what you just described, all of the you know coming into the property direct for e-cars. A parking space is 9 feet in width. The 22 comes precisely for two cars, a driveway that leads to a two car garage right in front. You have your approach 22 feet in width as a maximum. And your car garage is just, you know, just on your private property and gives you the two cars side by side space to get in your driveway. That's where that maximum number comes in. To Christine's point though. And then you can have two, two, two curts. You could have, let's say, a nine in one area and a smaller one on the other side, and then you have the semi-circular type of thing, you see. They're just the minimum number and a maximum number as you cut in your actual site. So as you cross from the easement into your property? And yeah. Correct. Because obviously there are three-car grudges in our city, correct? Right. So as you cross from the easement into your property. And yeah. Correct. Because obviously there are three card garages in our city, correct? Right. And so it widened somewhere to get you in that third spot. Yeah, I don't know about the three card garages like facing the front of the property. The idea is not to legalize what we have today. The idea is to make an ordinance that makes it better so that our front yards look better than they do today because we've received a lot of complaints and concerns about the entire front yard of a house becoming a parking lot. So the idea is to limit that. We also took advantage of limiting curb cuts because it makes for a more walkable and safer city if you have your curb cuts because it makes for a more walkable and safer city if you have your curb cuts. So that is the idea. Now, how you would deal with the three, you would have to come in with the 22 and widen and do something that looks good. Then that's something that the design review board would look at, right? And that I think that's what you see around town today. I mean you know here Gables wherever else for the few that had the three cars adjacent. Yeah. Christina you look like you're still thinking. I'm just not I don't know I don't read this language to say what she's saying. I don't see how this is just that area into your property. It's just a new driver, she'll be permitted by Ryan, maybe constructed in the front or side set back in a single family resident for either driver meets the following requirements. She'll be a minimal, and there says nothing there about that little entry way as she calls it. And I guess I'm not so much concerned of the size of a garage because the garage is something separate. So you can have an area that goes towards your garage. And obviously your garage could be much wider than that. But I don't consider that a driveway. I just I don't you know just the fact that online it says 24 feet and this is 22 and it's more limiting. I also don't like that either. So Christina with regards to the 24 feet if you look up online 24 feet is normal when you have a parking lot and there's cars that are backing into each other Correct right that's when you have 24 feet most driveways when you don't have parking are arranged between 20 and 22 feet That is the standard the only time you have 24 feet that is required to be 24 feet is when it's a parking lot or parking garage where cars are backing out into the driveway. Okay, and maybe what clarifies this is where it says should be limited to one Should be limited to a minimum of nine feet and width and maybe we should just insert the word curb cut You're defining when it crosses the easement or have a best way to put it Because you're defined that you're allowed one curb cut in paragraph A under C12, but then you get into the 9 feet and you don't say that the 9 feet applies to the curb cut. That's really what it is. It's just saying that the curb cut is a minimum of 9 feet and a maximum of 22 feet. Once you get beyond that, if you want to make it wider, you can make it wider. You can make it wider, but you can make it narrower, and I'll give you a little bit of history of what's happened is that we've had applicants try to say that a five foot wide area is a driveway. That's not a driveway. Right now, it's uncomfortable. This gets very, very difficult for staff to make a point. So the idea is no, you need to have minimum of nine feet. The 22 feet is that, exactly like you said. I mean, we don't wanna have, that well, the commission wanted us to look at this. And the idea is to improve our front yard. So the idea is no to not have a 30-foot entrance to a driveway up against the back of sidewalk. That's not the idea to make your front yard a parking lot. Thank you. So is the... All right. J.R. I have a comment. Now that's your right. Okay. My question is something else. And so paragraph G, you talk about if the driveway becomes crack or deteriorated, that it be restored through its original condition. But is there further clarification as to a definition of what crack and deteriorated is because a concrete slab driveway could have a crack in it perfectly fine for like 50 years. There's no further definition if you have recommendations by all means. I think like staff needs to use some common sense. Yeah, I'll be like understanding. You're not going to tell somebody because they have some minor cracking that they're going to. I doubt if people would even come in to replace that. It has to be that it is really deteriorated and they're coming in to repair it. But yeah, I don't think that I agree with I agree with him just because this is the code it lasts beyond you beyond me and maybe you are reasonable and the people and your staff are reasonable but that doesn't mean the people that, you know, succeed you will be. And if it's allowed in the code or it's not allowed in the code, then you can enforce it. So I think if you want to make a suggestion on how to modify that, I would, I would agree with you. Through the chair, I would add to that that if you have an existing condition and you're trying to either improve it and make it the better or just maintain your existing condition. I don't think you should be precluded from that. I understand what Sudami said about new applications trying to take advantage of the lack of clarity on this. We definitely don't want that, but I wouldn't want to remove somebody's existing condition, especially if that's why they bought the property. Yeah, I mean if somebody is coming into repair, it will be with safe material. So if the concrete is cracked, they're going to have to put concrete again. There isn't really a way, the way we interpret a repair versus replacement that they have hairline cracks on their concrete driveway and they want to come in and make it that same exact size but out of pavers because that's not a repair. They would have to come in and come in again. So there's really like no reason why anybody would do that. It's what I'm saying. But I can recommend a couple of some language perhaps that might help. Instead of crack or deteriorated, what if we use something like falling apart or crumbling? The idea being that it's not a crack but rather pieces of it are coming apart. That's something a little more bright line. I'm just throwing out ideas for the board to see. I have a concrete driveway that has hairline cracks. So according to this, I have to repair it. When I'm saying it's a different condition when you have cracks versus when pieces of it are coming off. No, I understand that. So this definition that's here is to open ended where a neighbor can walk by and say and report you because you have a airline crack in your concrete driveway. Well, and also think in Chicago brick driveways or whatever. I mean, those bricks deteriorate. That's part of the charm. They move apart, part of the charm. And so, you know, how do you draw that line? I didn't read this as being designed to create a code for you and force on a regular basis more of a what you did to repair it. So which would be your own choice, not my neighbor's choice, but maybe it doesn't read like that. But through the two at the same point, maybe we maybe we let you guys try another draft. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Do you want us to bring the definite back? Unless this is urgent. It depends who you want. I think. I mean, there's a lot of words you can use like instead of deteriorated or cracked unsightly. Right? Or hazardous. Or hazardous. Or hazardous, right? I mean, that's if hazardous is a good word, because then that means it's deteriorated and it's crumbling and people can trip and fall, right? And unsightly, because it could have weeds growing out of it and things of that type. But deteriorated, like brickpapers, Chicago style, they do deteriorate, that's part of the charm. Rome is deteriorated. Yeah, so Does this South the other comment you made? Does this solve the Four cars parked in the front yard. We won't let them put mulch up there But it doesn't keep them off the grass. I'm not gonna throw a park on the grass. That's a cold reinforcement group. Because the cold requires that you park on a, what is it a, like not on mulch, not on grass, it has to be a driveway or parking spot. I mean, I say space because it sounds like we're talking about a parking lot. But the idea is exactly that to not allow this. So people are getting around it because they'll just have mulch down and we don't want that either. That's what the commission has expressed. I agree. Your mulch arrangements, the mulch is in the street. That's not acceptable. So I think words like unsightly hazardous, I think those are more applicable. Yeah. Then cracker deterioration. Through the chair, I would urge that when they do the rewrite that it is considered that even if you're changing materials but it's an improvement, I wouldn't want to deter somebody from going from asphalt to a newer product and making something more pleasant and visually pleasant just because they're changing materials. If they're replacing their 23 or 24 foot wide current existing condition with a newer material, I wouldn't want to prohibit somebody from doing that. Yeah, I would agree actually with that. So maybe we can make it that if they change the material but they're not changing because now it's like I want to keep it 24 but I want it to turn here, turn there so maybe we make it so that if it's just a material change that can be graph-folder. Yeah, that's true. If it's a 30-foot wide sidewalk, I mean if it's a 30-foot wide curb cut, I'm going to take some reason this in addition. Yeah, they're going from asphalt to like papers. Do we really want to not encourage that? I think we want to encourage that, right? I get Gus's point though. So if it's a art, do we have, do we have any idea if we have a bunch of non-compliant driveway cuts at the easement level? That's really what we're talking about. Well, whatever it say is that we're also talking about annexations. So today we don't have it maybe, but what if we do later and now that existing zoning is going to affect somebody much like the one I just mentioned that if somebody has a non-conforming and 50% of it's destroyed, the Nile under rebuild it and their child doesn't have a better. I think we should be careful to, let's look 20 years into the future as opposed to today. I agree, I second that. I also have just some concerns with like E where it says maintained and conditioned free from dirt. I mean, it's a driveway. I don't know if there's another way of staying this because I feel that there's quite dirt everywhere. And any stains, I just don't, I'm not comfortable with the wording and maybe there's something else that we can use. I don't know if anyone I can't think of a suggestion right now, but that kind of popped up on me. I think ENG should be one and they need to be rewritten and I don't know how a problem with the coming back. Neither. either. We need a motion to do that. Yeah, you'll need a motion to do that. Okay. Jay, why don't I make that a moment? I'm motion, we fix it. Come back. So we're actually don't have any further. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I'll run through all this here. So I'm hearing, I'm hearing concerns about B. B is the provision that sets the minimum width and the maximum width. We may break this up so that it has a standard for the curb cut and then a separate standard for the driveway width. Now, one provision that isn't here that we may add has to do with Mr. Garos' concerns about improvements and losing, you know, grandfather status, if you will. We'll craft some language, I think, that we'll try to be a happy medium between the aspiration of improving conditions, but also allowing some grandfathering. Okay. of improving conditions, but also allowing some grain fathering. OK. So with regards to that one, in order to get away from, I don't know if they exist a 30 foot curb cut. Is that would say that this should be a tolerance of, let's say, 10%. OK. So if you're allowed 22 feet and you have 24 feet, that falls on that 10%. You can keep it. But if you have 30 feet, you're not gonna keep 30 feet. Okay. That's a good idea. That's a good idea. Because if they're going from one material to the other, believing everything else the same. Okay. Yeah. I mean, if it doesn't work for the purpose of the curve cut. The information you come up with. Once you come off the curb cut. Right, right. Yeah. The 22 come from the approach. They're usually the same. The approach has, it's usually even by public works. There's a manual. There's typically 33 or 34% of the actual lot width. So as you limit that width, that driveway, you also limit the approach and you are allowed more trees along, you know, the streets. And this is really an issue for existing because anything that's new, you have minimum driveways because of the requirement of a pervious surface. Right. Right. I mean, that's, this this is really a challenge for existing. Anything new nowadays with the requirements of the impervious surface, you don't have these big driveways anymore. Because you can't. Yeah. Right. You can't. It's not. The numbers don't work. So, you can't. So, E. Now, also E is the provision that talks about dirt and stains. We're going to rework that per Ms. Guzman's request. Likely. Well, I'm sorry Mr. Attorney, but if you look at F, it already talked about materials. So E, a material and character with the residents. Period. That's very subjective. Right. Yeah. Yeah. And we understand that. And the idea was that it will go to design review board and anything with us that exists. Yeah. If I already talked about all the materials that are acceptable, and then you talked about maintaining a condition, which then ties into G. Correct. OK. So. And so keep it simple. G, with respect to G, we're going to focus on modifying the crack than deteriorated to find some other terms such as hazardous, falling apart, crumbling, et cetera. We'll work on that. There was hazardous and another unsightly. Unsightly. Yeah, I mean, that's well, we'll play with that. That I can see that being subjective also. Okay. Yeah, I agree, but I mean, hazardous implies that it's dangerous and that it can cause injury. So I feel like hazardous might be the best word to put there. With heels or without? Yeah. OK. I think we beat this one enough. And I think staff has a direction. There was a motion made by Jay. Is there a second to go back and rewrite E? I'll second. And look at the clarification of the curbway cut in the 9 and 22. Yeah. OK. It's been motion been made and seconded by Daniel. Jay. Yes. Yes. Yes. J. R. Yes. Daniel. Yes. Yes. OK. It's unanimous. I think the last item is the approval of the meeting minutes of Tuesday, July 9th. Do I have a motion? Excuse me, Chair. I just want to point out that Jay handed me a couple comments that he wants to meet me to correct in a minute. Okay. I'll make those corrections. Starting with me, not being here that day. Yeah. So I wasn't hosting. I said you weren't. Okay. I'll make those directions. Starting with me not being here that day. Yeah. I wasn't hosting. It says you weren't yeah. Yeah. So, it started with actually in calling. Uh, on July 9th, I was absent also. Yeah. So you can add me to that list of being absent. Yeah. It's been a must-be in the show. Yeah. My name is spelled wrong but it's okay. I'm not sure if you're going to be able to do it. I'm not sure if you're going to be able to do it. I'm not sure if you're going to be able to do it. I'm not sure if you're going to be able to do it. I'm not sure if you're going to be able to do it. I'm not sure if you're going to be able to do it. I'm not sure if you're going to be able to do it. niece and she spells that C. R. She doesn't put the age. And then I have another friend that spells it with the age. So it's very frustrating. I know someone that's K. R. Y. So. Oh, and then then you have Catherine with the C and Catherine with a K. Okay. Come on. Let me make up for mine. But it's it's Gresteena. Yes. Yes. Okay. So the record R. Christina ran a great show. We have a motion to approve with the comments made. The corrections made. Do I have a motion? I move for it to be a thing. Yeah. So second. Second. It's been seconded by Daniel Rodriguez. Jay. I wasn't here, but I'm good with what you know but we can but we can yes we can vote even though yes yes yes yes Christina with a C. Yes yes see or and Danny yes yes okay any other items to be discussed? I have nothing. Okay. Meeting is adjourned. Thank you, everyone. Thank you, everyone. Have a good night. Bye. Okay. Oh. you