you I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next floor. Good evening, everyone. If you could please silence your cell phones or turn them off at this time, we'd appreciate it. Welcome to the city of South Miami. Today is Tuesday, March 4th. The time is approximately 7 p.m. We will now call the meeting of the South Miami City Commission to order. Madam Clerk, if you could call the roll, please. Yes, Mayor Fernandez. Present. Vice Mayor Quarry. Present. Commission Cuyahe. Here. Commission Rodriguez. You have a quorum. Thank you, Madam Clerk. If we could all please rise for a moment of silence, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. And this evening, just like to ask for your prayers, we lost a distinguished member of our community, South Florida community this week, Lincoln D.S. Blarke, former State Rep State Center and Congressman. Also, I'd like to ask for your prayers for a dear friend of Commissioner Bonich, who she's mourning this evening and a former colleague of mine, Mr. Jose Rilo, who was a long time employee of the City of Miami's Parks Department and passed away recently. If you could keep them in your thoughts this evening, we would appreciate that. Thank you. Give us your call. We do the pledge, please. The flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which stands on one nation under God in the little liberty and justice for all. Thank you, please be seated. Madam Clerk, we have no presentations this evening, correct? Correct. Well, then I'd like to take a special moment of privilege to congratulate one of our most distinguished citizens or neighbors. Mr. Dick Ward, and wish him a belated again. Happy 87th birthday to Mr. Ward. If he could give him a round of applause please. And our colleagues, you know, he often gives us a little bit of a hard time, but we love to have him around here. And I thought maybe we could commemorate the birthday with a quick picture. Mr. Ward, if you'd like to take a picture of the commission up front here, invite you up. Come on. Let's see what's come on down. Why don't we take, can we take a picture with you here in front of the chambers to commemorate your birthday? Are you serious? Come on. Don't want to? Come on, let's do it. Come on, they're close to it. Thank you. I'm clark on any add on items tonight. No, they're all right. Good. Let's see. I get a motion on the minutes of February 18th. Is there a second on the approval of the minutes? Yes. Great. Motion by Commissioner Kaye Madam clerk if you can call the role please. Yes commission Taiyay yes Commissioner Rodriguez yes vice mayor Cory yes mayor Fernandez yes minutes past 4-0 thank you mr. Manager report please and deputy manager you've got us this evening welcome good evening two more outdoor pickle box courts have officially been retrofitted at Martial Williams in Park. Those are four courts now and they're all available for the community to use. This weekend we have our next Somie Second Saturdays. It's Millennials night so we welcome everybody to come out 5 to 10 pm and I can officially say we've launched a Metro Connect Somie powered by via that launched on Thursday. So on the marketing community affairs, I know we've done a big push to make sure everybody knows about it, everybody knows about the change. It's been on our website. If you've logged onto our website, you received a pop-up letting you know what was happening. We had mailers go out, press release. It was picked up by Channel 10, Community News, Papers, the radio, social media ads. we've sent in the resident and business newsletters. So hopefully everybody's aware. And if anybody has questions, we have full FAQs up still on our website. That's the manager's report. Colleagues, any questions? Yeah, I have a couple questions. Are the pickle balls? I thought we had some already. Are they permanent? Are they retrofitted? Like they're permanent or they're temporary? They're permanent. They were we added to what was there already so now we had the capability having but they're the removable nets. Okay. So the removable? So does someone have to come in there and ask for pickle for it to have the right thing or is it? Yeah, just one net and you can just go play. I'll let our parks director kind of get in the details of that I'm not really sure but yeah, it's it's not like a brewer park where it's a fixed court. Yeah Good evening at brewer park is permitted pickleball everything's fixed at Marshall Williamson is retrofitted So the actual pickleball course all to the side, the actual netting. When you want to play, your move is portable and you'll put it on the lines for a pick a ball play. Oh perfect. Okay. We went from, we already had two retrofitted courts at Marshall Williamson. Now we have four. Okay. If it's directors that first come for a serve or is that correct. First come for a server or if you want to reserve a court, you can contact us via email or our office and we could reserve it for you. Excellent. It's either or, right? It's either tennis or. Pickable. Correct. So if you have tennis being played, two pickleball courts will not be available on that tennis court. Understood. OK. Thank you, sir. Man, I manage your one quick question. Any sense of the ridership on the weekend for or can you get us statistics on the first weekend? Yeah, we don't have any yet, but we can request it. Thank you. And against the follow-up on the freebie database. So we can get it up there on that as well. Thank you, Madam. Thank you. Okay Mr. City Attorney your report please. We have nothing to report at this time. Okay thank you very much. We have a number of discussion items that we will be deferring since in the absence of Commissioner Bonnich. Can I get a motion to defer M2, M3, and M4? I'll move the motion. Is there a second? Second. If a motion by Commissioner Guy, a second by Commissioner Rodriguez, without objection show those items deferred to the March 18th meeting. Okay. Commissioner Rodriguez, you have a discussion item in one. Madam Clerk, if you can read that into the record, please. We skip public remarks. Oh, my apologies. Can you give me a list, please? Mr. Ward, I know your name was first on the list. Why don't you come up and kick us off for public remarks. Forge yours. I hope you're welcome. I hope you're welcome. I hope you're welcome. I hope you're welcome. I hope you're welcome. I hope you're welcome. I hope you're welcome. I hope you're welcome. I hope you're welcome. I hope you're welcome. I hope you're welcome. I hope you're welcome. I hope you're welcome. I hope you're welcome. I a couple more months. You know, this is the first meeting I've been to since November. And I've been attending these meetings on a regular basis since 1961, probably before some of you were born. The thing I wanted to address you about today is the fact that these high rise buildings that you had approved and I stood here and just gave you, you know what, for those buildings. And when that article appeared in the paper with the pictures of the buildings and everything else and oh boy, I can't wait to see what happened. And it didn't happen. So I have to say to you, I guess all the old timers just moved away or passed away and when you won't be here when those buildings are complete, but the traffic is going to be out of sight and they're going to be hollering bloody murder. It's good to be back and I have a feeling that all of these ordinances and most of the ordinance on tonight, I'm gonna make it possible to build larger buildings in some of these areas. And I say to Commissioner Rodriguez, I congratulate you on your victory. And I can't believe the amount of money you all spent to get elected, you worse than the mayor. I said when the mayor raised that 64,000, I said, you know, we're not going to see the good old man run for office or the lady anymore. I tried to get three people to run against some of you people and couldn't get a soul to do it and they all told me too much money. But anyway, I have to say this, regardless of how much money you raised, all of you as much as I shoot at you once in a while. I have to say people have to realize that, you know, something's wrong with you guys that are willing to seat up there and serve the people 24-7. And to me, I think that's great that you all have that dedication to help this city, even though I don't agree with you a lot of times. But I don't know why government is able to run because people like you are willing to serve the people. And I say that's great. With that, it's about to best remark I'll make for the next two years Thank you, Mr. Ward. Thank you Next on list we have Mr. John Edward Smith And Mr. Jacobs your your next thereafter Good evening,. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, Vice Mayor Dick, I really like what you had to say. Congratulations to this group. And, well, I support all of you and Lisa and I'm here. I'd like to just briefly say and thank Vice Mayor and the commission for recognizing Dr. Reverend Dr. Anna Price at her memorial this past Saturday. Our advice married at an excellent job in presenting the proclamation from the city. And Anna and I go back many, many years from her first election as mayor, the campaign that followed that was very divisive, unfortunately, for the city. And then later on, working with Dr. Price and then vice mayor, Amando Alvaro, in putting together a group called Citizens for Good Government in South Miami. He's always been such a beacon of light. And... for good government and South Miami. She's always been such a beacon of light. And you know, with, we used to observe our mutual birthdays. You know, we were four days apart, February 43. And she was on the cusp of Aquarius, and I'm on the cusp of Pisces. So we always jumped about to fish in the water, getting together and observing, however, birthday. And I want to say also working with Gail a few weeks ago when that news broke and I was speaking before you. I followed up with the mayor and I apologized. I just wasn't on top of my game that night and with Gail's passing. I was very distracted and I also had at I had a a senior moment. You know I go with the Joe Biden shuffle. I always used to be very concerned with who's getting off the helicopter going down those steps. Come on Joe, you can do it. But I'm also reminded that Mick Jagger is also 82 so there you go. Have a good evening. Thank you, sir. Mr. Jacobs, good evening. Good evening, everybody. Good evening. I'm glad to see you all here. I'm happy to be a part of this city. And I was on the planning board from 2016 to 2022 when we were one of the main things we did was re-zoned the whole city. And it used to be that the applicant would come in and present what he wanted to do with a parcel of land. And then people would get to hear what the plan was and how the zoning was developing how much more dense it is. But I feel with the new way that you're doing it, it seems like you make the deal in lobbying mornings and you come back and instead of the one who wants to change the zoning come in and present, you just tell us what it's going to be and it's pretty much a done deal. It seems like we've lost some citizen input in that way. And the other thing I wanted to talk about, I want to thank Commissioner Kayye and Rodriguez and the mayor for helping me look into this. In my neighborhood, there's a mango terrace. There's right next one street away from me. And you all sent me the information that the city had. And in 2023, it started to flood. That was the first notice of it. And I asked you, was there any evidence before that? And no one has come up with anything. So in 2023, what happened? There was a very large house twice as big as any other in the neighborhood, double the size, built. It's a mansion among modest homes. And I thought that the flooding was gonna be all up and down mango terraces, but no, it's only in front of that house, the house east of it, the house west of it, and the house north across the street. That's where the flooding is. So I wonder how did you investigate it? It seemed like yes, there is flooding there that needs to be done, but it only happened after this huge house was built and the runoff from it is causing flooding. And there's no evidence that it's the weather, it's the zoning. So what are you going to do with it about it? when that came up, who is in charge of investigating why it's flooding? It's flooding, yeah, but it's not flooding anywhere else. Why? It's a simple, simple, reasonable thing to scrutinize what comes before you. Mr. Jacobs, if I could ask you a question. Are you referring to 6790? 6790. Okay. Mango tears, yeah. And the... You have to scrutinize what comes before you is $150,000 out of a budget for flooding of 650,000. So's about 25% of the flooding budget. You're building, you're allowing three houses where there was one, two houses, you're developing intensely in the residential neighborhoods and if flooding happens, we pay the bill. Why is it that taxpayers aren't stressed with this bill? I mean, it's not hurting me in any way, but it doesn't make sense that the city would do this. So I'd like to know what happened and what you're going to do about it in the future, because you're still building. Sir, I have actually had an answer for you if you'd like to hear it. So I actually got an insolucid text after our last meeting on February 18th from Bradley, Casell, who used to own the home at 6790, Southwest 76 Terrace, which is the, before it was demolished. And his response to me was that there was flooding in front of his home all the time. So it's been a long standing, persistent condition, apparently unrelated to the construction of that home. But we have asked our public work started to follow up and confirm that. It was just that he never complained. I don't know the fact that's from the horse's mouth, the owner of the home immediately before we re-developed. So I don't think there's any reason for him not to be telling me the facts. So he's still very involved with our pension board, as you know, so someone who's still notwithstanding his livability, he's still giving to the community through his service. So just by way of a quick update for you. Mr. McCance, 6210 Southwest Secretaries. First of all, thank you guys for the flowers and the proclamation to Dr. Price. You did good, and it was a beautiful home going for Dr. Price. I've been knowing Dr. Price for a long time. You heard all the beautiful things that were said and done if you read the habituary, you know she has done so many things. So I'm here to say that I'm proud to have considered her a friend and a mentor for all she's done. You know, what a one-two punch would gale in in her. So we are still planning something for her and I think it's April 12th and I'll give you guys the fly-up when it's finalized so we can go ahead and I'm give you guys the fire when it's finalized. So we can go ahead and still talk about her and our special ways we'll have time. I also want to thank you guys for the discussion for the mobile sales, possibly, and the amendment of the ordinance to reflect that. I think that will solve a lot of problems. And we can discuss on how this can be done with the local churches, hopefully, and properly. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for your comments, sir. Yes. Mr. McKenzie, can you let us know if there's anything that we can do for the event on April 14th? You said April 12th. I know I couldn't attend this weekend. I was at a town this weekend. So whatever I can do to help, please let us know and you know, we'll see what we can do to figure it out. We'll show. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Williams. Good evening. All right. Good evening. The show on the Williams 6477 Southwest 60th Avenue. I was coming here today because I was looking over the agenda and I see that there have been some changes since the last meeting that we had regarding the future designation for the Mangle lot. And I know that that's going to be discussed as an item later this evening. So I think I'll speak more to it then. But you know, one of the things I just wanted to reiterate is that there there was some language and that item regarding the dates and and some of the meetings that took place. We hadn't really like I said last time been noticed in that way, like required within a mile of that change and I am happy. I am, I will say, to hear that it's trying to lessen the density. However, I do have a concern about what you're putting there. And so, like others, there are some issues now coming up. And I don't know if it's just because of the neighborhood itself needs to be upgraded in terms of certain things. I know that's happening, but there are issues with flooding. There are issues with growth. So I just I want to speak more to it when the item comes up, but I just wanted to let you guys know that I was a little disappointed. Last time I think part of that was supposed to be identified as the North East corner is a park and now it seems like the entire lot is up for Resoning I was hoping that part of that would include that space because you know it's important for all residents. I understand their growth. I don't want to ever come up here and say I don't understand growth because it's happening all over but I think that when residents come up and we're speaking to specific things, if there are things that you can do as a day, because there's not any anybody up there that I haven't voted for. Regardless of party, I don't get into that. I look at you as a person and I say, hey, what can you do to bring to our city to keep us out of litigation that could ultimately save taxpayer dollars but can also kind of preserve what we have going. to be very frank, you know, I know that we're all of you live and many of you live in places that are abutting tree line street after tree line street after tree line street. And I understand that the area where I may live may not have that, but we do want to maintain some of that. I also want to talk about the historical nature of that. I really think that that plays because of the effect that it has grandfathered trees by state of Florida Statute. They should be preserved as part of the historical component of a person that found that the city. He actually made those trees and planted them, and they're over 50 years. So you can't replicate that anywhere else. It would be lovely to see that well beyond our years, I'm sure we're all middle aged, most of us. Well beyond we're gone from this earth that we would still have something to look back from as a token. We have other things, statutes, but there's nothing like having an actual thing that's somewhat planted by hand. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr. Kelly, you're recognized. Good evening. Good evening. Levi Kelly, 6250 South by 6.0 Avenue. Couple items that I want to just Kudusu by his mayor for his efforts this past weekend. Great job. And. I want to just go to Vice Mayor for his efforts this past weekend. Great job. And I understand that if you guys could have been there, you would have. I think on the other issue that of course, the last meeting we had some discussions that were needed to to be had and I just wanted to just specifically thank the chief and the assistant chief for falling through on their commitment to coming out to the community. There was a meeting with the Lee Park Management there They shall go're really discussing ways to better do things in terms of how and when and how and so forth and understand there's a move and a foot to address some major issues. So I just want to say Kuru to so the chief and his staff are falling through on that. As a relates to the upcoming events that we are planning now, which is our June team activity, which will be on the 21st. And that's a smaller event, much better combined to an area. So we just wanna let you guys know that that is in the planning stage and we'll keep you abreast. So thank you. Thank you, sir. Appreciate the comments. There's no one else registered. There's no one else in the audience who'd like to address this commission at this time. If so, please come forward. Floor's open. And clerk, there's no one online. No one's online. Okay. Again, anyone else in the chamber? Seeing none then, we will close public remarks. Colleagues, we have a brief agenda. So did anyone want to make any commission reports who want to share this evening? None. I just want to, again, extend my condolences to Hollis and the family. It was a wonderful ceremony. I watched it on the livestream remotely. I was in Orlando this week with my son for lacrosse tournament. I was touched to hear that after the naming of the park space that we designated a few meetings ago that she was able to internalize that before she passed and shared a wonderful moment with her son about it that brought me a great deal of comfort following her passing. So thank you to the vice mayor who did a fantastic job representing all of us at a difficult time. We're indebted for your presentation and for your presence. So thanks again. With that, we'll move on to our discussion items. I'm sorry, Commissioner Cahya. Sorry, Mayor, I just wanted to tell the public that we had the senior games last week as well. We did, yes. I know it was part of the management, the managers, the reports, but we didn't really talk about it. And I figured, good time to talk about it. We had a really good turnout. A lot of good pictures and videos. The Chief did a really good job of dancing and playing, so it was a good job. But it was a really good turnout and I'm glad Parks Department is usual, doing a great job, so thank you guys, appreciate it. Yes, give me the Corey, you're recognized. I just also wanted to thank all the residents from South Miami who showed up to Dr. Price's funeral. It was obviously she meant so much to so many different people all over. And then also thank you to Mayor Danielle Levin-Kava who came and spoke as well. I thought that that was a very nice thing for her to do and continue support for the people and things we do in the city. Yeah yeah, her remarks are excellent as well. Very, very humorous, very personal. Chair Rodriguez, I think we've been okay. So we will move on. We do have one discussion item. Commissioner Rodriguez's item. I'm Clark. If you just quickly read the title. Yes, a special mobile vendor events for churches. Okay. Commissioner Rodriguez, why don't you kick this discussion off? So currently we have an ordinance where we do not allow food trucks or basically in the city other, then an industrial area or at a construction site and basically after 30 minutes they have have to move. At the Unity event, event I was with Mr. McKance and we were discussing because we were eating off the food trucks that were there. The food was great, everybody was having a great time. And it came to light that this, having some of these food trucks come into some of the communities and, you know, where the residents can come and I guess build a sense of community from me sounded like a good idea. It also gives an opportunity for these local vendors, you know, to make a little money, you know, while working and so we discussed and, you know and it'd be something great to offer the community where at whatever local church in the city, so it could be at Mount Olive, at St. John's, it could be at Voo, that they would be able to provide the community, you know, food trucks, you know, on the days that they approve. And like I said, bring the community together, build a sense of community. It's a place where we can all attend and we can go out and meet the residents, you know, our police force can go out, our employees from the city can go out and meet the residents. And I just think it's a good opportunity. But like I said, our code right now doesn't allow it. So I wanted to bring this up to see what you guys thought of it, what the commission and Mr. Mayor you thought of it. And hopefully we can move forward and come up with some guidelines and give the community an opportunity to do something where they can all gather and the local vendors can make some money on the side and provide some delicious food. Let's go left to right here. So, Commissioner Corey, thoughts I do think it's a good idea and I, you know, whenever I've been in areas where there isn't, you know, a walkable distance to a restaurant or a coffee shop or something like that, there's always this desire for that type of activity. Of course, you have to be wary of any unintended consequences, competition that might exist with restaurants or things like that in that area that's usually the argument against food trucks, regulations, in terms of health, safety. So I do think there's a lot that might have to go into the considerations on how to approve these things. But I do think it's a great idea. And I think particularly in the areas that you had mentioned, I've heard a lot of feedback that there's a desire for like actual programed activity instead of just sort of loose gathering. So. And I agree. That's why this is mostly in residential neighborhoods and away from our you know, our so-and-me district and-and I have heard interest in people doing this at parks too. I know that would be an economic expansion of this and I don't know if that would be appropriate either, but I have had residents request that before. So, just a thought. Commissioner Coyne. Yeah, so look, we've spoken about this before about having food trucks, specifically at church locations, religious locations. There's only two issues that I have with it. Voo, for example. Voo, we have an issue with traffic in population. When we have the churches in general, like the community's not a big fan of all the traffic and the parking on the swales and doing all that stuff. So that's something we have to be a little conscious about when we start moving forward with this particular idea. And I'm mostly talking about Voo there, but as we grow that, just to be conscious of traffic and the abilities of in and out because Voodoo has a really big footprint and they can bring a lot of trucks and they can bring a lot of people. So just be conscious with that. The other thing that I was going to say is I would love to do the event with our local vendors. I think that one of the things that we've struggled with is really to bring up and nurture our community of vendors. Not only from giving the opportunity and how to run a food truck, giving the ability on how to get licensed, get the tax local taxes, everything all the document prepared, so they can do this with a permit and move forward. Not only just here, but to maybe create a living out of it. And so one of the things that we want I would want to do commissioners figure out how we actually have a program in place. Whether with Hector Lobo in our offices or with our community in general. So the community understands how to make sure all their food trucks and what they're selling is all legal and there's no issues moving forward so they can expand. I think those are the two major issues that I had with it, but other than that, I love the idea. Yeah. Sure. I'm going to just give you my question. Oh, go go. I just want to say, I think it's an excellent idea. I think a monthly roundup or so would be, and if it rotated around the city, I think that would be an interesting thing as well, to kind of bring people together from a wider cross section. I think the collection of vendors that we had at the University of Westwood were excellent, but it'd be great to have them come across this tree to maybe maybe get a staple of a second Saturday part of the programming to have that kind of orientation for the event. So again, there's more cross-pollination. And again, I think we just need to be careful when we allow these things, have the permitting be such so that it's contextually appropriate to give us your guys' point, make sure there may be different locations. You have a, you limit the number of possible vendors, so you limit the amount of traffic and size of the roundup. But I think it's a, I deal with exploring and look forward We bring back some legislation for us to consider. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, commissioners. So. The idea is actually to answer some of your questions. We're already discussed parks. I guess that's something we will have to discuss with the city attorney. I. For this instance chose churches just because it's, they have the parking space. And they're also a place where, you know, community can come together. And they're usually located somewhere central of the residents and have the parking for it. So that was the choice behind that commissioner, Kaya. Yes, the idea is to have a certain amount of trucks because your right rule can bring 40 trucks in there, huge parking lot, and I agree that. So it would be a set amount where it goes cross city. So I add every church, whether we choose to do five or six, something that's reasonable that fits, you know, in all the parking lots and it also helps to do five or six, something that's reasonable that fits in all the parking lots and it also helps our local vendors. And I agree with Commissioner Gain. I think that's what me and Mr. McKenzie, it's bringing local food trucks into these events. So we are helping our locals, you know, serve to our residents. So I appreciate it. I mean, any ideas or anything else? Any other questions? I think you gotta go right legislation now. Yeah, yeah. No. Well, we got our great city attorneys right here helping me out with that. But I hope to bring this for first reading. And I hope we could get this done. And you know, like I said, I just think it's good to bring the community together and build a sense of community. Okay, we'll look forward to it. Thank you. Madam clerk, if you can read item one, our first reading ordinance for public hearing. Yes. I don't want an ordinance of the mayor's city commission. The city of South America. Many of the future land use map other future land use element of the city of South America. Comprehensive plan. the seat your set forth in section 163.3187 for the statues to change the future land use destination of, and the city of San Francisco, and the city of San Francisco, and the city of San Francisco, and the city of San Francisco, and the city of San Francisco, and the city of San Francisco, and the city of San Francisco, and the city of San Francisco, and the city of San Francisco, and the city of San Francisco, and the city of San Francisco, and the city of San Francisco, and the city of San Francisco, to the south from their current destination, their residential limited commercial RLC to mixed use commercial residential MUCR. Okay. Mr. Diaz, good evening. How are you? Mark Diaz? Everett. Mark Alvarez, sorry. Sorry. Mark, it's been too long. Mr. Alvarez, good evening. My apologies. I'm not using your moment today. Good evening. This is Mark Alvar's Yeah, do you have is your presentation one presentation for all three items or are there separate presentations for each? It's one for each item. Okay. Thank you sir. So Great. So we'll go ahead and hear your presentation and we'll open up the public hearing. Thank you. Okay. You're recognized. Thank you. Thank you Mayor. Um good to be here. be here. We have to do this. I'm going to ask you to just move the slide forward to the second one. So what we have tonight is a future landing amendment. It's just a map amendment. It's for the part 16 persons along the west side of north, I'm sorry, Southwest 62nd Avenue. It's a small scale amendment process, so we don't send it for state review. This will go through two hearings and the planning board. This has been sponsored by the city administration and what we're changing is we're going from this currently designated residential limited commercial, RLC, and we're changing it to mix use commercial residential NCR. The reason we're doing this is that when we changed the future land use element which is that the conference of planning text we eliminated these categories. We eliminated the category of RLC with the intention to have a mixed use buffer there. So this all really it's part of the overall intent of a rezoning effort that happened with downtown. We got through the TSDD, we discussed this trip as being a buffer, but we always discussed it as a mixed use buffer and having a little more room to work with it. So the MGUCR that we're changing it to is exactly the same as the former designation of the hometown. One of the things I want to emphasize is this is only a future land use map change. We are not changing the zoning. So the effect of this immediately is not to change the zoning and allow something else to have happened there. We will have further discussions about the zoning. We intended to have this become neighborhood mixed use, which is a district that we will be writing in the next few months. So we're gonna have a lot of discussion about details of what the form is and what height is and what can go there. But right now we have to sort of clear the way for that and change the future land use map. Future land use map designation. Next, please. This shows the effect of land area, 16 parcels in its entirety is about 2.79 acres. It is next slide, please. It is surrounded by, I was we all know to the rest of it is a residential neighborhood however is separated by a 20-footality to its east is the 62nd Avenue. 60-second Avenue again this is our transition from the TSDD from the downtown to go one step down on this trip and then transition into the neighborhood. And again, how that transition will happen will be part of the zoning discussions. What we have to do now is change future land use. To the north is also residential, and to the south we have TSD. So this is, again, this is the transition area between downtown and the single family, residential. And in this case, we have the additional benefit of the 20 foot buffer on the alley. Next slide please. Just to show you on the map I mean it's I guess the map is just a color change sometimes it helps people understand that we have this salmon color which is RLC which has now been a category that's eliminated from the text of future line use element or the comprehensive plan and we're changing it to the text of neighborhood and UCR which is still intent to use this now as our buffer area. So that's the map change and as you can see to the south is TSDD purple, the downtown designation to its east is the downtown designation. Also to the east is the school, is the JRE Lee school. We have a little bit of Williamson Park and we have the home for senior citizens. And just to the very north, we do have called the sack from the Fort Terrace. There are single family homes up there. Again, this is basically clearing the way so that we can now do the neighborhood and excuse zoning in the coming months to really define the form that will be in there and that it will be next to you. Next slide, please. So this is a table of first two columns are the change from future land use map category to the MUCR and you can see the residential limited commercial which again doesn't exist anymore but it's a very, very low density, low intensity use and in fact this area is most of the parking lots and most of the land I think is kind of an FAR about point two for the whole strip. We will change that to MECR and the existing zoning is still there. We're not changing that. And the existing zoning can still be compatible with the MECR land use. When we get to rezoning it, that will be the neighborhood mix use. And it's a column where it's just we're we will define that then and that's when we'll sit down and really work through the form, the height, the transitions and the uses that will happen in there. Next slide please. And finally we always apply the eight criteria that we need to do to satisfy state staff shoots. We found a case with all of the criteria. If there's any questions on this, I'll be happy to answer them. She's colleagues, we have any questions. I have a couple. You want me to kick off. Just Mark, from a process perspective, you said something at the beginning of your presentation about the RLC category, not existing. So you're just a clarify for the bend of the audience. But we're intending what we've been doing with our both Rizoni and Lenny's categories is given that we had so many unique categories. We've been trying to consolidate them, correct, into a handful of categories. And this is part of that consolidation process, correct? So the RLC designation will be deleted eventually. We will be deleted. It was marked for deletion at first reading of the last round of text changes to the comprehensive plan. At first reading, we had discussed it at first reading and said, well, we can't get rid of it yet. It's still on the map. So we kept it, but it is marked for future deletion. Okay, so this is the remapping. This is the remapping. Once there's no land designated RLC, then the guidelines are no longer necessary, so they'll be deleted at that time. That's correct. Okay, so I just want to make sure we're explaining that to the public clearly. Secondly, Mark, if you can clarify a statement you made, again, this is just addressing the land use component. There are no implementing, if this change is adopted on second reading, we still have to actually implement this category through the adoption of a zoning ordinance or zoning designation. Yeah, that's correct. I might, if you want Mr. Alvarez to answer that. Either of you is fine. Okay, yeah, that is correct. Okay. Yeah. And again, in terms of what RLC allows versus what the proposed category allows in terms of height and density, can you give us a quick summary because I'm sure there are people that are interested in that? Yes. So there is currently the RLC allows two stories, five units in acre, which means 13 units could be built on this area. And then FAR.8. The mixed use, the agency are- Mark, you can stop one second. Mark, excuse me, Mr. Alvarus, my apologies. So just so I understand what you just said, five units in acres, so across all of these parcels, 13 units could be built. Is that correct? Previously under the current designation. Okay. Good, continuing my follow-up. It's an extremely low intensity, it's an extremely low intensity mixed use because really not viable. And we had this discussion in the middle of last year about changing this area. The MUCR is much more open and would allow it, it basically changes, it has permissive mixed use, but it will require the zoning to regulate the height, the density and the FAR and everything will really depend on the stove. So we're changing it to a category that allows a lot, it's very open. However, currently it sits with its neighborhood retail zoning, which is consistent with the MUCR. The ain't neighborhood retail zoning only allows pretty much but's there. Two stories, 25 from time, and a point two if they are, a point two five. So we're not... Anything right now. Mr. Alvers, you're breaking up. What? Mr Alvers you're breaking up there. If you repeat basically the ms are. We'll have this only discussion to know. Say again I'm sorry. Yeah I we you broke up there your connection. Got a little a little week so we couldn't you. So, Mr. Attorney, if you could help me out here. I just want to be clear for the public. What does the MECU or designation allow? Is there a limit on height or density? There is no limit on height or density. It calls for that all to be limited through the zoning ordinance. And at present, the zoning, what Mr. Alvers was saying is that the zoning ordinance allows basically two stories, 24 feet. Okay. And so I just again, because I want to simplify this because these are complicated topics. So for people who are listening to this, again, this will all be, what will be permitted will be defined by what are the implementing rules, the zoning ordinance that will say whether it remains the two stories or something greater than two stories. Okay, that's correct. Okay, colleagues, any questions? Through the mayor, just to expand on what the mayor, because that's the same question I had, what we still yet have to decide what the height and density is going to be. That is correct. at present it's two stories. Okay. Perfect. And being mixed use commercial residential, that basically means that the owner of this property or properties has the choice of whether they want to do a, what I would say, I guess, apartments with commercial in the bottom or town homes. Or or both or yeah, but what I'm saying is it's to their discretion. What they want to build it. Yeah, they have the ability that it is intended to provide for mixed use. So a mix of uses, but it does acknowledge that there can be horizontal mixed uses where you've got, you know, residential here, commercial over commercial over here. As long as the district is intended to be a mixed use district, you have to be every building is mixed use. Also, is there anything this may have not even been written? the distance from, I guess, would be the residential or alleyway to the front of the property. Are they supposed to build on a certain, because, again, my fear, and which we've said from the beginning that we started talking about this in December or actually before you guys years now, my worry is that we put something too big there and those residential houses that lie behind these properties now lose their privacy. Right, so the current zoning restriction is two stories, but we also have a restriction of a portion of the property and I'm looking for it right now. I can't remember if it's 75 feet or 100 feet of depth. If you are adjacent to residential, there's a limitation of two stories. Okay. Also, in our code, generally, across the board. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Yep. Further questions? None? Okay. Let's open up public remarks at this time. There's a member of the audience who would like to speak on item one. Please come forward. Ask for your name and address for the record. Please. Good evening. Good evening. Chaunte Wells, 6102 Southwest 68th Street. So my question is, what is it as far as the advantages for them? Because it's not been wiped out, the current use, and you still have to change the zoning. So what's the real true purpose of actually going through this process to get the declaration of the mixed use? I'm concerned with the traffic and the congestion. I'm concerned with the seniors that live in that area. Primarily, I'm concerned with all of those retired educators who are along that strip who you guys already ran off a gym that we had there long-term that invested in this community. So why now will we be looking to change the zoning as the goal to get some high rises? Overadowed. Like let's think about the whole of this. So I want to know specifically what is the purpose of changing this declaration, especially when you would have to then go to change the zone. It's not making sense to me. So I mean, you may recognize. State law requires that any zoning be implemented, be consistent with the comprehensive plan. This is changing that comprehensive plan so that the zoning process can then take place. I don't know that there is a specific end in mind. I know that what has been discussed before is a neighborhood mixed use category. Like, definitely not high rise. I don't think that's in the cards at all. That's not been discussed. You know, a low rise, like two, three, three, maybe four stories. I don't know. That's up to the commission to determine. But essentially, it's a mixed use neighborhood type of, you know, community serving, retail with some residential component. That's the concept behind mixed use. The best I can address your question is by saying that I think what we're trying to create is a condition where something gets built on that corridor, that corridor has been vacant empty for too long. And I don't think that's serving the neighborhood well. I walked all those homes when I campaigned on the backside of Stunners, which you mentioned, who lived in direct opposition for a better way of putting it with that business. Very clear to me that they would want nothing more than three stories to the neighbors I spoke to. So certainly that's kind of my guide star in this conversation, but I think the goal is to do something there that activates the streets so we just don't have a bunch of empty lots. Since they've been that condition for the better part, at least the 20 years I've been driving up and down that section of the roadway. That's the best answer I can give you right now. The one comment I do have, so city attorneys, as we pick the right zoning category, just to your point about high rises, we always have to be mindful, I says, the public of the effects of the live local act, where we have been by the state legislature in some instances we have a mixed use designation from a zoning perspective, you know, can be preempted. So we have to factor that and I just wanted you to make sure you could explain that further in the record as well. So yeah, the live local act allows for a certain amount of development of what the state considers affordable housing. As long as it's an affordable housing project, but that means 40% of the units have to be affordable housing under the state definition. This is allowed in any commercial industrial or mixed use district. The state is considering now a bill that would better define the mixed use districts. We obviously have a vested interest in how they define it because the goal is not to have this area live local development basically trumps any kind of local zoning. So what we'd like to do is find a sweet spot where it is attractive enough to development that they remain local. They don't build under the state regulations and destroy our whole planning strata. So let's put it in that conversation. We'll get back to what we discussed here, but I just wanted to have that out there. Further public comment, please, at this time. So I heard you say that it requires 40% of the build density to be affordable housing. If it's mixed use, MM, U you are whatever it is. No, no, no. Oh, you didn't say that. If it's live local act under the state regulations, in order to basically ignore our local zoning, yeah, to override us. To override us, they have to have 40% of what the state considers affordable housing, which is different from the common definition of affordable housing. What is it? 120% of AMI. Yeah. 40%? A hundred, four hundred, twenty percent of AMI. 40% of the units are not more than 120% of AMI, which is not particularly cheap. Okay. Further public comment. Floor's open. Seeing no one in the audience at this time, Madam Clerk is anyone online? No, no, it's not. Okay. So we will close the public hearing at this time. Colleagues discussion. Can we draw a drink? You're from the mayor. Mr. City Attorney, Tony. Do we know those lots are, do they land in the, in the Todd? Are they a mile away? Are they further than, from the station? These are not, we do not have these designated transit oriented development. So then live local here wouldn't apply? No, live local still applies on any commercial industrial or make use of that. Or make use of that. So then we need to be. That's been the biggest concern. So yeah, so I was gonna suggest, you know, this has always been the point of sensitivity for me since we started talking about sunset place and the impacts of that zoning change on neighboring communities. I've always had 60-second avenue in mind. So I think, look, I think I'd like to move the item for adoption with a caveat that we We probably take it up on second reading after the session closes. So we know with some level of predictability what Tallahassee has adopted and whether we want to move forward with this this particular designation based on modifications they may or may not make the live local act that could impact what we've said to do here. So yeah, can I clarify two things? Yes, you may. Yeah. The current zoning of those parcels is neighborhood retail. They are already a commercial district. So they, to the extent that the state moves forward with House Bill 943 as written, which I'm sure will change some. They're still exposure. Understood, but query whether is it the land use or the zoning that is the arbiter of whether they're eligible. That's what I don't remember right now and I'm asking you. It's the zoning. It's the zoning. It's the zoning. Okay, so. Yeah, zone for commercial industrial or mixed use. Okay, so we have exposure today. Correct. Correct. So just keep that in mind. Okay, that's fine. Thanks for the clarification. Yep. Colleagues for their discussion. The actual land the way the width, I mean, proportionally, It's very difficult. It now I rise so I think we're pretty safe on there but yeah I agree yeah just making sure it's an excellent comment I agree it mentions your talk that's it okay is there a motion I move the motion okay is there a second motion by commissioner guy a second by the vice mayor madam clerk If you can call a roll and item one please. Yes, Commissioner Coyote. Yes, Commissioner Rodriguez. Yes, vice mayor Cory. Yes, mayor Fernandez. Yes, I don't Thank you. You can read item two please item two in ordinance of the mayor and city commission of the city of Southland Florida I mean the future land use map a future land use element I use element, a city of Southland recovery and supply and pursuant to a small scale amendment procedure set forth in section 163.317, for the statues to change the future land use destination of certain parcels located at North Side of Southwest 64th Street, January 20th, Southwest 59th Avenue on the east and Southwest 59th place on the west from the current destination, the mixed residential modern density MRMD to townhouse residential TR. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Mr. Alvarez, you are recognized for your presentation. Thank you, Mayor. Mark Alvarez, the corridor you know group, consultant, plan consultant for the city. This is similar, however, we have four lots along the 64th street that are currently designated on the teacher land use map as MRMD, mixed residential modern density. This is also a category that we seek to eliminate from the text and we have provided to strike that out. It's again this is a consolidation. When we discuss, again we started this discussion in the summer. We talked about changing much of this area to a townhouse designation. So we are taking only these four lots because they are designated with mixed presidential the differential modder of intensely, which is a category that we are eliminating from the future lenient element. I have had some owners call and ask why we are doing the rest of some of the other area, and that's the reason. We do intend to do this to the larger area, and we'll have that discussion in the future. We wanted to make this change to these four lots because we want to eliminate this category from the text of the comprehensive plan. So it is sponsored by the City Administration. It is again a small scale amendment process. And I explained the reason why. And again, it is consistent with everything that we discussed in the workshops and how we want to start trying to redevelop this area. One of the things since we just had a live local discussion was part of the last item. This area has been looked at to make some changes particularly along 64th Street and one of the reasons we don't want to go to mixed use is exactly because we don't want to change the protection from the local right now. It's a residential category. Yeah, it's a residential category. It's written almost not that it is considered residential and we're going to keep it residential. Townhouse residential is also a residential category that has a little lee little way for the work on the bottom. So the whole live local discussion again we are continuing to check this area from the effect of live local. Mr. O'Reilly. Please. Mr. O'Reilly quickly just to kind of summarize and pre-cap what you just said. These parcels are not eligible today for live local and the change we are making will not make them eligible for live local. Is that correct? That's correct. Okay. Thank you. Next slide please. And these are the four parcels. They are each duplex parcels to living in as each. They are 63 by 100 feet deep, 63 feet wide on the front. Then we again, the the reason we're picking the fourth parcels out and not doing others is just because they have a category that we seek to eliminate from the text of comprehensive plan. Next slide, please. So their location is that they are actually approximately across from approximately across from Manus and Square and they are surrounded on their rear side and actually on the east side by single family residential. The oneness on the west side does actually affect our blanket parcel that is zone NGCR. So we again we can't control that transition but we can control what we're changing today. These will continue to be insulated from the local and the townhouse residential basically creates a better development potential for these areas. It's not really focused on duplex but on townhouses, a pre-story with with a A with a ADU on the bottom or a live work on the bottom. Next slide, please. Again, the map change. The subject lane right now has a six-fear with the MRMD designation. It's different from everything else around it. We're still doing the same thing, which is different from everything else around it. Again, we do intend to bring the townhouse designation into more areas of this neighborhood, which is want to take care of these four, because we're eliminating the MRMD category. Next slide, please. please. Early in the this has the change from the future land use map category from MRMD currently. There could be 13 units on this land. They're on the way the land is divided up. They're eight, two flexes. The density allows for townhouse residential, which the future land use map, the future land use category for townhouse residential is quite dense, but the zoning will change this and how they can fit into that area will change this. Currently right now, actually, these work parcels are also zoned on RS3, which is not actually consistent with MRMD. We will leave the zoning and we will intend to rezone these later when we're doing this more comprehensively. I've spoken to some of the owners with Trappin' and Explaned what we're doing. In fact, each of these parcels would, instead of having a duplex on them would be allowed to have two townhouses, each townhouse would have a unit above and possibly an ADU on the bottom. So it does double the density and creates an envelope that's much more developed and that's what we want to see on 64th Street. Again, we're not changing the zoning yet, but the townhouse zoning is already in place. It has allowances for these parcels. The 60th foot width is consistent with the zoning. Again, we got them on there, but when we do, these will fit in perfectly. These are exactly what we intended to change the zoning for. And then finally, the last slide is criteria. if you do the next slide. Is the criteria, we always apply these criteria so that we're satisfying state statutes and so that we make sure that we don't do anything that's going to make something that's no longer or incompatible or will have adverse effects. We do believe this will be beneficial to the neighborhood as we move towards resounding it and will create a product that is both something to help reestablish, re-develop the neighborhood with a very positive and desirable product that doesn't change the neighborhood, that still has front doors, that still has the neighborhood feeling to it, which just allows more and more affordable housing. As well as, a possibility to have a work on the bottom, because it is a 60 first treat is more of a collector's treat. There are any questions? Colleagues, any questions of Mr. Alvarez or the city attorney? None? Okay. Let's open up with the public hearing. Anyone who'd like to address this commission on item two, please come forward at this time. Your name and address for the record. Good evening again. Chantay Wells, 6102 Southwest 68 Street. I am in disbelief at what I'm hearing today. Because in essence, what I'm hearing is the desire to eliminate the people, long time people who look just like me from being in that parcel, to affect the church that is also along the street of that parcel that has had that lot in an actual house right there on the corner of 64th Street. Changing the zoning for what purpose? We all know if you build new town homes, none of that will be affordable and none of those people who currently live there will be able to return there. So what purpose would it be other than gentrification? There is absolutely no reason for us to sit up here and to do this to people who have worked hard to own these properties. Not only that, the whole fancy words of changing this and the future land use for what? We We have what we need right now. We have a whole bunch of capacity and if we wanted to actually do a sprucing up of the actual street which we've already done but there's nothing that's gonna be more affordable than what's already currently present. So let's not sit up here and try to make this thing seem like it's friendly. Let's call it what it is. I have a problem with this proposition. I have a problem with the fact that any of you, if you're considering to vote to change that, to town homes, you know good and full well, none of those people will be able to afford it. And it sickened me that we would sit up here and try to play these games after people have spent their lives building this city. There's no place else like 64 street and to use the term a more positive, what's not positive about my people? What's wrong with 64th Street as it is? What's going on along the street where the corridor of the church is? What's wrong with having those duplexes? Absolutely nothing. And you all should be ashamed of yourselves if you do vote to go and pass this. Don't think that I will sit up here and let this go just nicely and you start on that zoom you should also be ashamed of yourself. Those people work hard. That is affordable housing already currently and our community is positive. Thank you. Disagree with everything you said with the exception of the fact that the community is positive. Miss Williams recognized. All right. Mr. Under Williams, 6477, South by 68th Avenue. One of the questions I had is they not to mongol did a street skate to kind of, it's kind of swervy there. So it kind of limited that. So I don't know if that is part of the plan to expand that if they're planning to increase the density. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I don't know if their plan is to expand that when they're talking about increase in the density. The other thing I would say is that when you are talking about the town home, the question I have is, what is the difference? Because right now when you have a single story designation you can build two stories. So what is the difference between that and what the town home designation is because it seems like it's a little bit more that and then you mentioned something about it, ADU. So I think now you can apply for some kind of permit to do an ADU without that. So what makes that the thing for this current slated project? And have there been traffic studies done? Because right now, that's the small street, even though it goes kind of both ways. And it's a main thoroughfare to the residents that I named her, which I'm one of, and then also through University of Miami. I want to know that we built two other projects in that area. What traffic studies are they doing to ensure that if you're increasing the density, how that's going to affect the residents? So let's take that in pieces if we can. So we can get all her questions answered. So Mr. City Attorney or Mr. Alvers, if you can explain what can be built under the current category, I heard a question about ADU specifically. Yeah. Is that allowed today and would it be authorized under the new proposed category? And then what's the difference between single family home to story and this town home resident? Correct. Yeah. OK, so if let's start with, remember that this is always a comprehensive plan, this is not the zoning, right? So the zoning doesn't change with this, but under this comprehensive plan designation, there is the ability to do ADUs. Okay, so that is that's contemplated in this, it would have to be implemented through this. Not allowed today, or the current with the current that's I want to I want to clarify the distinction for her. Correct not permitted. So A.D.U.s are not allowed under the current category. Correct. They will be moving forward so an existing owner could build an auxiliary unit. Provided that they get the zoning in place. In place to do in the future. Correct. Yes. Okay. Next question, regarding, or do you think the envelope of the building? Yeah, basically, what's the difference and what it can be? Like, to what, so for example, I know I saw something on the previous screen that said something about 10 units per, I don't know how many square feet, I don't know how big the lot would be, I'm just trying to figure out what the difference is from a typical South Miami single family residential versus the town homes. OK, so again, this is not the zoning, it's part of it, right? So what this contemplates is, townhouse residential has a total density of no greater than 36 dwelling units per net acre. However, if you don't count the ADUs, that number is 20 units per acre under this category. The way 20 units per acre. And so for us, the whole city, what is the current density? The current density under the comprehensive plan, I'm getting there. It actually, yeah, it's a little tricky. It's, well, go ahead. Mark,, go ahead. Mark, yeah, the current density is 6.9 and one is quite low. But again, right now, I assume. I didn't hear that clearly. Did you say 6.91? No. 6.91. OK. So I mean, I've never seen a densely designation with 200s of a fraction. So is it fair to assume, drivers when they created this category? They basically created a allowable, was there today and nothing else? Based on your professional experience. Yeah, and it's based on the sizes that they would allow. Basically, we basically we have we have we have an existing designation and density that fits whatever was on the parcel when that was adopted. Is what it sounds like to me? Is that correct? Yes. Okay, so okay, I just want you had further questions. Yes, I just wanted to know whether are there traffic studies like when you did this flume And you know because I don't Remember being invited to any of the surets or meetings, but when you were having the discussions did you discuss you know traffic impacts and just The the need for services in that area. How does it impact the community as a whole because we've had a lot in that short area And there are other areas in South Miami that are under threat. And we are not in that zone, that Todd District. So I'm trying to figure out, you know, where this is going. Like I said, I like the fact that some of it is being downgraded. But if you're telling me that this new distinction is more units, then really it's a little bit more than what we already have there. So I'm concerned about that. Yeah, so we've done data and analysis that's were required to by the state to support each one of these designations. We submitted so that the process is clear. The text amendments that were adopted that created this district or actually that amended this district went to, there was an initial planning study, it went to I think three or four public hearings, three or four, I guess discussion agendas, you know. Yeah, but let me let's, let's, because I, I know we're going to get by way of a comment and it's fair comment, which is there was not notice of those public hearings other than general notice. And the reason for that is Williams, is that those were legislative actions, right? The reason these were notices because we've identified a subset of parcels that are being specifically affected. And so we have specifically affected parcels, We noticed the surrounding notice rules apply. I still am not receiving those. I know my time is running but I still am not receiving that and the mail and you know within that zone that that mile radius we're not getting it. And I think that if you if you have more feedback because I just didn't go through the state legislative process but there's a legislative process that happens here first with the feedback from the residents to see is this what we want. It's not just for sale throughout for whomever wants to develop. Of course any developer wants to, is a great area, but what is going to fit in with the current topography? What's going to fit in for the residents? I think that that is the piece that we want to make sure that's being heard. So in that, and I think there's another concept you I just want to elaborate on for the benefit of the audience. The conference of plan is kind of like the Constitution. Right. And. And I think there's another concept here, I just want to elaborate on for the benefit of the audience. The conference of plan is kind of like the Constitution. And you know, you or zoning is your regulations, right, that actually put into practice. And so historically these things, I think in South Miami, it's better to say, have been with, I would say, is lockstep. They've been the same, one the same. So the same standards are found in the comp plan and in the zoning code so they they've worked exactly the same with this category Again to the city attorneys point before which I'm not sure everyone captured We do have the opportunity of having a much more liberal right designation like this one for the parcels of the comp plan But limiting it to exactly the moment we have today under the zoning. The only thing I mean I understand what you're saying but we've had surets before we've gone through this process and usually what's in that flume that future land land use map is what they want to enact because then we've had developers through the city to say hey this is what you guys said you can't now zone for something that this is what it was so I just want to start there. We only get locked in into that situation when we've adopted a zoning category that we kept back off of, but we are on, I think the state attorney can reiterate this. We are on perfectly solid legal ground. If our comp plan, because again, it's supposed to be a future land use map, right? So it's talking about a 20 year horizon. We're not talking about just today. That's the plan. That's the master plan for the community, right? So but then does consider that we need single family as well. And we need duplex as well. Everything doesn't have to be up zone. But I'll talk more about the next slide. And again, I just wanted for free, because I know you've asked this question a few times. and we just kind of get to the bottom of the notice issue. And Mr. C. Attorney, with respect to the zoning that will follow, it will affect only a handful of parcels. It will also be noticed correct if it's if it's yeah site-specific rezoning yes, so the companion zoning the companion zoning for this parcel right so again First shot at the apple we hear you. There'll be another opportunity, right? There will be notice associated with the, absolutely. Okay. So the process is after second reading, then you're noticing people by mail, is that what the process is currently or? No, no, no, after this, after the comprehensive plan designation process, individual landowners could petition the city to change the zoning and that will require all sorts of notice. Right, but that's individual land. I'm talking about this surrounding area so you no longer have the responsibility for the public. No, no, no. So two things. I'm just two concepts. One is these owners that there today could ask for a rezoning consistent with his designation option one. That would trigger notice to the surrounding neighborhood. Of course. Yes. Correct me if I'm wrong. That's right. Secondly, we could come in and say we want to adopt rules that render it more consistent with the current carriage of the neighborhood, right? That would be a rezoning process as well. It would also trigger notice. So when we complete this process to implement these regulations, there's got to be a category adopted, right? Yes. Well, no, we already have a category week. So that'd be clarified. No, that's that side. This is what I want to clarify. Yeah, sure. So we have the text of this designation says that the following zoning districts are consistent. RT18, which is a townhouse district, RT9, which is a two-family district, RT6, which is just a slightly lesser duplex district. Low density multi-family residential, which is RMA team, and medium density multi-family residential, RM24, all of these, one of these districts would be consistent with this, with this designation. But the question is, what will be the designation at the, do we have, as a site designated under our, under our zoning outlist today? Under our zoning outlist presently, it is RS-3. So it's a single family designate or zoning district. Okay. So are we going to, is that category is not consistent with this complex designation? It would not be consistent with this. So we would at least have to rezone it to a category that is consistent. Yes. However, let me, that we do have a provision which says any existing use and occupancy is deemed consistent. Yeah, because it's grandfather. No, but even we have like a, like a novert, like an express grandfather, grandfather clause. That doesn't mean we don't have adopt a category designation that's consistent. That is correct. Okay. So, yeah. So what's there can remain, no doubt. Right. But we will have to come back to a subsequent process and rezone, at the very least, we will have to rezone it to run to be consistent with this complex designation. Is that correct? That's correct. Okay, so. So one more thing, the only thing I have an issue with, I'm sure that there are some developers that own those properties as rents. I remember them changing hands. I mean, we can look that information up. I'm concerned that that is the goal, and we will have the maximum density bill, which is the issue that we're having throughout. And I'm just gonna leave it there. And I'll just talk to the next item. Thank you, Ms. Williams. Okay. Yes, sir, you recognize Mr. Jacobs. Thank you. What I understand is see if it's correct It's zoned for six units per acre and it's going up to 18 per acre if you okay this. It's not well. This plus a change in zoning. It would require a change in zoning on top of this. So you're tentatively agreeing to 18 units per acre. We are adopting a land use cap. We're preparing the for anything between zero and 18. Okay. Yes. For the public comment. Mr. War you recognized. You know, when I listened to this both pros and cons, this lady right here had the nail on the head. The people of the neighborhood are going to be displaced over a period of time. I don't care how much you want to say it won't happen. It will happen. I saw there, I think I saw in one of the screens, 10 townhouses. Where are the people going to be? Those townhouses are going to have to find property to build on. And some of the property, there's a lot of rental property in these areas. And I remember one apartment building on 62nd Avenue at one time was redone inside. Everybody in the apartment was given a written statement your apartment will be available when we finish. Sounds good, doesn't it? Except they were paying $300 a month and when they came back under the new one it was going to be six. So they got their apartment back. You can be they didn't. And this young lady hit it on the head. I don't care what has been said here today by me or her or the other lady or Lee. The votes for nothing. Thank you. Just for the public comment, sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm wrong. I think I'm right. Throughout the entire city, didn't we get rid of the designation of duplex and converted to townhome through the entire city? We have not done that at this time. We did move in the tax changes for the zoning to support a townhouse. So the idea is that we were going to change all the duplex, the currently, like the ones on sunset and 63rd and all those designations were going to move to townhomes or to be changed to townhomes. Correct. And the reason we did that was to establish two things. We would have a product and so for example, if you had say one of these properties which are 6 feet 3 feet wide, you could take the duplex there, redevelop it as a townhouse. Actually two townhouses each 25 feet wide have the same two or two new market rate units on the top and still have an affordable unit as an ADU on the bottom. And so that was the configuration that we realized was a much more modern configuration that gave us a little more affordable housing and allowed a very soft mixed use by allowing all an alternative of a live work occupation on the bottom. So while we haven't done it yet, and this is probably the first time we're actually moving this designation, this is the first time we're actually doing it, the others were already existing, this is the first time we're doing it, and that is the intent to create an envelope that we can actually get a little more without losing the neighborhood effect. The whole idea of the townhouse was to make sure that all of our doors face the street, so that we still have a neighborhood that people still come out on the street. The idea was not to have necessarily a multi-family development where people are no longer facing their doors on the street and taking care of the street. Okay, thank you. For the questions, yes, Mr. Cory. As a possible result of this, would it be feasible that just some of these properties added an ADU to them and had additional housing on the property or they not big enough for that. That is, I haven't analyzed each one of these for that question but that is a possibility. An ADU is permitted and an ADU would have to serve the low income category or lower. Okay. All right. Thank you. Yep. From the comments, questions? Mr. C. Attorney, just I have a question. Can you reiterate the zoning categories, again, that are consistent with this designation? Yes. RT18, which is the townhouse district. Okay, which allows the density of what? 18 units per acre. Okay. RT9. Okay. RT6. RM18, which is also 18 units per acre. RM24 subject to the caveat that it cannot exceed 20 units per acre. And RO subject to a 20 units per acre. And what is RO? Residential office. You said it allows for office use. Yeah, on the corridor. Yes, yeah, but it would only be allowed in connection with the live work unit. Okay, Mr. Alvarez if we were to Just to kind of get to I want to dress something angst about this particular action which From my perspective was being done just to basically consolidate categories and have a more manageable jama is Apologize we're trying to have a conversation. I'm hearing your conversation as well in the background. I think we're trying to console the category. So we have a much more workable code for the purposes of our staff, right? As opposed to a bunch of one-off categories that have been created over the last couple of decades. Mr. I was what zoning designation would you recommend be adopted for these parcels to keep it consistent with the current development category? Just to understand what that would look like. We intend to recommend RT18, the townhouse designation. Okay, but that was not my question. My question was what would you recommend to rebuild exactly what's there today? Let me simplify the question. RT6. As we consolidate, there would still be the RT8. Well, I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good consolidate, there would still be the RTA. Well. Oh, I'm looking for some questions. Let me rephrase the question again. What is the least intense designation that we could impose on these parcels to allow for the units that are there today to be rebuilt without them being nonconforming. The least intense will be the RRT6. RRT6. Okay. So. Colleagues, I think that's what I would just I just wanted to have that articulated so we understand as we. making a decision about the designation on the going forward basis, if we want to address some of the issues that we're hearing today about possible displacement, the best thing we can do is when we bring this item back for rezoning, it's like an RT6 designation. I'm happy to sponsor that if that's a disposition of the board. And come and main the future, people can make a request to change the category To something else but at least we provide a direct translation from what is there today To what'll be there at least for the for the year term so is there a motion item to if there's no further discussion I'll move the motion mayor. Okay second motion by commissioner guy a and a second by vice mayor Madam Clerk, if you can call the roll on item two, please. Yes, Vice Mayor Cory. Yes. Commissioner Rodriguez. Yes. Commissioner Kaye. Yes. Mayor Fernandez. Yes. I'm a past first reading. If you could read item three, please. Item three. In the ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Florida, a minute of future land use map or the future land use element of the city of South Miami Comprehensive Plan. We just want to small scale amendment procedures. There are four in section 163.3187.4. Is that you to change the future land use designation of certain process on South, on the South side of South West 64. Terrors between South West, 65 Avenue on the east and South West,st Court on the west from the current designation of Miss mix used residential density and our MD to town has residential TR Thank you Madam clerk. Thank you Madam clerk. Mr. Alvers you recognize your presentation Thank you, Mark Alvers of the Group planning consultancy with the city. This is extremely similar to the 64th street that we just discussed. These parcels, commonly we call them mango parcels are currently designated MRMD, which is a mixed residential moderate density category. So they are not, they are designated for a sort of duplex type unit. We intend to change that designation to townhouse residential for the same reason that we intend to eliminate the category of MRMD and use townhouse residential as our general category for all townhouse type dwelling units or designations that we can have different zoning categories for. It is sponsored by the City Administration. It is also a small scale amendment process. And it is also continually consistent with what we discussed in the workshop in the summer. And as we move forward with the future landry settlement text that we would be looking at. As we go north from the downtown designation to come into this area with a townhouse designation to transition. Next slide please. So the area that we're talking about it is currently, it is all vacant, it is owned by the city. the comprises an acre almost even. It comprises three parcels. There's, I think there's been some concern about the strip on the edge. The strip on the edge going back to when it was, was put together was actually from another plating. And it does have a restriction for nopersuction and I think the restriction still is with it. However, we are taking this all together and we don't the fact that there's a restriction on that small strip on the end wouldn't affect what could be done as far as any development there. We could look at the whole parcel. Next slide please. So it's a lot of usually shaped parcel into the east. It is a single family residence and that single family residence is in historic preservation overlay. It is the former home of Marshall Williamson who actually was donated much of this land and even theEU in school to the city and to the county. So this parcel goes around that home to a certain extent. And then on the west side of it is the JREU in school, the first court, the designation of that is educational at the moment and north of that is 64thace. We have single family homes across from it to the north. And to the south of it, it abuts on the side, lot lines, two single family homes. So it is most used around the single family homes. And it is across from the school, but the rear side of the JR EV school, and the sum block works around the form of home of Marshall Williams. Next slide please. And I failed to say to it is, Cadi Corner across from the Madison Square to the northeast. So again, this is very similar to the last one we are changing just the future land use map. We are eliminating the MRMD category. We wanna replace it with townhouse residential. Next slide please. And the impact are very much the same. I know it was a bit of a complicated discussion, but the townhouse residential future land use category allows 36 units to make her. The zoning would only allow 18 units to make her. And the reason for that was to account for the ADU's on the comprehensive land. Right now, the MRMD allows this, you know, 6.9 units1-year-its-naker, 6-year-its-six residences could be built there, but they would be basically duplex residences. So we are increasing the density, but again, this is something that will be controlled. As much of the TR category, when we get to the zoning of the TR is very much controlled by the dimensions and the site, the dimensions of the lot. In this case, it's a little bit more open and we would look at the zone at the time of the zone and when somebody comes in to we develop it or I guess it's the city, so somebody has an idea. Next slide, please. And finally, the same categories for consistency. We want to make sure there's consistent state requirements in chapter 163. We've gone through the all aid of them and planted to be consistent. If we have one to have a discussion, I'm open to questions. Colleagues, questions, Mr. Alvarez. Mr. Alvarez just just I know on page four of your staff report you made mention the second or the first full paragraph our discussion on February 4th about the park a park designation I thought we had we had we hadn't moved to designate I think roughly not less than 8,000 square feet of the Northeast portion of this lot for a park and honor of Dr. Anna Price. Why not bring this item with a POS designation with decided prepared and advanced at that discussion. This item was prepared and advanced to that. That's just what I want to clarify. Okay, so, Mr. C. Attorney, then the question to you, if our express intent through that resolution on the fourth has already been to designate that portion as a park, would we bring back this item with that POS designation on second reading or should we continue this item, re-advertise it with that modification? We can do the ladder or we could proceed with this item. We could also pull back the boundary for this change if you wanna do that and then just come back with a separate item for the park. I guess my only reservation about this item, right? That was my question. Let me say that for the discussion other questions are these two journey? Staff, okay. Seeing no questions from the colleagues from the commission, why don't we open up this item for public hearing? Does anybody have the public who'd like to address this commission item three, please come forward at this time. Good evening. So, Wells, 61.02, Southwest 68th Street. Thank you. I have a few questions. How did the city come to acquire this specific lot that we as the locals refer to the Marshall Williamson's lot? How did you guys come to own it? Mr. State attorney, you have that answer or maybe we can rely on the good office of Mr. McCants if he's perhaps the history of the McCants would be easier. I know it came through the CRA. Yeah, but that was my guest, Miss Wells, it was acquired by the CRA, but I don't know that definitely. Mr. McCants, could you just for the record clarify for us? Everybody, it was acquired by bond of the CRA. The purpose was to possibly in our Madison Square initiative. And it was at one time, we tried to put all the portions together for that aspect. And that was doing the days of the CRA. Okay. Thank you. So we got rid of the CRA and do you believe as a governmental body that what you're proposing to do was the intention of Mr. Marshall Williamson when he donated this. Is that, was that the purpose? When it was initially acquired? What you're seeking to do now? Was that the purpose? I just need someone to tell me. I don't think any one of those conspucuilates to what was in the mind of Marshall Williamson when he donated the property. I will say what we have had conversations about, I'll tell you what I certainly have said on the record. One is I think that I wanted to disinit a portion of this land as a park to preserve some of the canopy that's there because of that legacy. Also, I've had conversations with our cats about getting to give the family because I think it's important for us as a city to preserve his hom's head and make the combination of those two two two lots possibly a cultural heritage site for the city to recognize and memorialize that history. There's a competing interest which is the CRA my understanding of the CRA plan historically was for the majority of this lot to be developed for town homes for affordable town homes for the benefit of the community.'ve had some conversations about Reserving the balance for that purpose Mr. McCants mentioned their Madison Square initiative my my review of the historical records was that at one point Possibly about 10 or 12 years ago This lot was for RFP mr Mr. Alvers if you can meet your microphone was put out for a RFP in conjunction with the parcels that were developed and awarded and negotiation rights were awarded to that developer to develop the site as part of that project. That those negotiations apparently never went forward. So a parcel when the CRAC's to exist was reverted back to the city as the local governing unit. And that's how we ended up in possession. But what we do with it is can be within the range of any of those options. I believe what staff is proposing is a category that gives us a certain amount of flexibility to accomplish any or all those goals. So my issue is this. That lot hasn't been developed on for purpose. It has been that way for a reason. Mr. Marshall Williamson really sacrificed and built that entire community. And what I'm seeing happening now is there used to be apartments on the other side. There's been a portion of it that was dedicated to housing as that was important for him. But what I'm seeing is a consistent pattern. There are other empty lots that were brought up even as you guys were campaigning. There are other areas, but every single area that was formally considered the CRA area, now we're going through this whole land use. This is nothing but fancy talk for gentrification. There's no need to get rid of these, the actual trees that are there. So is this supposed to become now a concrete jungle like in the Northeast? We already got those type of policing like strategies that are happening now in the area. So what is the purpose? What would be the purpose? That is not why Mr. Marshall Williamson has that lot. And I really, really would encourage you all to go ahead and come back and allow more residents to come forward before you make a determination on this. Cause I can tell you this will not sit well with the rest of the residents. Had they known this? Now I do like the idea of the Anna, I wanna call her Dr. Price. It's fine. Former Mayor Price having that designation, a piece of that, but to sit up here and to have a plan for housing for all of this, that's never been a part of the plan ever. Yeah, I can tell you as what's in the record. I don't want to argue with you, but I frankly want to defend the motives of this commission. I for one have no interest in gentrifying anyone. I've commented about the fact that in my six years in public office when I walked the neighborhood six times in 2018, I've seen the change in a very short period of time. I've even suggested that we preserve this parcel completely as a part and it's entire its entire configuration today. Again, I'm one person. We will have a conversation at the board. We've had different we have now different members when we started the conversation a year and a half ago. But I think again, just I just urge you. Not imputing the motives of the people that are sitting here because frankly, we're trying to honor what we have seen in the written record and the written record as the vision for this area as memorialized in the CRA plan was to have development on this parcel. Now, I'm not saying that's right, but that's what was in the plan created for created for this parcel by that entity that no longer exists. We can choose to do that or we can choose not to do that. What we're doing today is adopting a category that would give us the flexibility to do it. I would like to see us possibly consider this item after it's deferred and at least in sconce, the one corner that we've already said, we wanna keep a park to memorialize the great legacy of the Reverend Dr. Anna Price reflected on the map that we adopt. So again, thank you for your comments, but again, I just urge you, let's have some conversation, so we all can get to understand what we're trying to accomplish. I hear and understand your frustrations and concerns, But again, one of the things I love about South Miami is its diversity. The last thing I want to see is that legacy, that history completely wiped out. I just read body language. As I read body language the last time, and many of you guys seem disinterested in what's being said here, not just by myself, but also when Miss Williams was speaking. So I just want us to be clear as to where this is coming from as well. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your comments. Mr. Ward, you're recognized. This commission, I think, is probably approved more major development projects in the short time you've been there than any commission in the history of this city. You know, you all are elected by the people not the developers, but you're representing the developers. You're not representing the residents of this city. And that's a shame because most of you and all of you in my opinion are well-intended people. But you just... the residents of this city. And that's a shame because most of you, and all of you in my opinion, are well-intended people. But you just somehow or other can't connect with the fact that the people are not pleased. You see, one, the trouble is, one is not enough. Your developers are running this city now. Thank you. Mr. Jankin. Once again, you're looking at an increase of six units per acre to 18 units per acre. It's to me, it's a sacrilege on land that was donated in the black community for a certain purpose for the good of that community, which used to be completely black, and it was for their good. A community needs some space, some place for the kids to go, from place sit out in the shade and that's what that provided. To provide a little 8,000 foot square for it is not enough. It should be the whole thing, it should be a park and if it's not, did the CRA, I heard them say that it was for affordable housing. 100% affordable housing, can you do that? Six stories, 18 units per acre of affordable housing. Thank you. Mr. Proctor, good evening. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Commissioner Jerry Proctor. I'm an attorney with office at 7600 Red Road in South Miami. I represent a brewed development, which is a current property owner and developer in the city of the Madison Square development. We have engaged in the beginnings of discussions to potentially develop part of this property. I'm coming forward tonight with a little bit of hesitation because normally when I stand here I represent a property owner. You are the property owner and you have the control. As you do even when a private property owner stands in front of you. So you know we recognize that you are the not only the decision maker in terms of the land use, but in this case, you're the property owner. What I would commit to you, and I have a couple of commitments and a suggestion as someone who has interest, not someone who owns the property yet, the commitments are that if my client moves forward in any tangible way on this matter, that any proposal that we make, and we're not in a position to make a complete proposal tonight, will include affordable housing. The second commitment is any e-proposal that we make will include a suggestion to you as property owner that part of the land be designated and held in park use in honor of Mayor Price. I hope that those commitments are helpful. My suggestion, having heard from members of the community tonight and having heard from you, is that if you pass this matter forward on first reading tonight, that perhaps you consider a delay of the second reading in order for these conversations to continue not only involving my client but yourselves, the community, and that perhaps the second reading be delayed until the middle of April or thereabouts, something to allow the discussion to continue. Again, we're not the property owner, but we come forward with these suggestions and commitments as a way to hopefully help the conversation. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Ms. Williams. Good evening again, the Sean W.M. 6477 Southwest 60th Avenue. Grown as hot really has on him much time. Well, first of all, you guys know I live over there. It's across the street from my house. Not just respect to the developer, but he's trying to get a job for his client. And you guys are part of us. You're not only residents, you're elected officials, we voted for you, we're hoping that you're going to listen to our concerns. So with that being said, I was on the CRE board when they transitioned that. And initially, Madison Square at the fore height that it is, forestories, was not a thing, which is why they were trying to preserve the Madison Square lot. Because when the housing was lost, It was 80 units of housing that was lost and people were displaced. So Madison Square was supposed to be the replacement of that. They... the Madison Square lot because when the housing was lost it was 80 units of housing that was lost and people were displaced so Madison Square was supposed to be the replacement of that they built two two different parcels that the Mr. Abray's group that I think is connected with our county commissioner Regalato but with that being said we've done that part already what we don't have in space, and I did contact the county, Mayor Cava is very much a part of making sure that we have a heat officer. There is a heat index for every cubic foot of concrete that we're adding. There is a temperature increase, that's a proven fact. And we need open green spaces. I don't mean green spaces in little parts, so we need a space is for wind mitigation, it's for hurricanes, it's for flood mitigation. So there are other factors not just having housing. If you are going to consider housing, there is a place that abuts on the opposite end directly in front of the park. Why would it be in front of the residents? We already have had, we had to fight having four stories abouting single family homes. We don't have a 75-foot buffer. I don't know if that's a new thing, but we barely have the soltles. They're so tired of coming. I almost beg Angie to come with me tonight. She doesn't, she's over it. She says she's tired. You know, we have so much trash that has come about from the mixed use facility, traffic, just all kinds of things, big trucks down the street early in the morning, and we are trying to preserve. Not only that, that fruit... the mixed-use facility, traffic, just all kinds of things, big trucks down the street early in the morning, and we are trying to preserve. Not only that, that fruit from those trees, it, you can't grow there. I've been growing a mango tree in my yard from those pits for 12 years. It still hasn't produced any fruit. It's starting, it looks like I've ever got a year this year, but nonetheless, that's something that he was proud of. Not only did he eat that fruit and his wife planted those trees, but it was for the community. And let me tell you, we still utilize that. People still... this year, but nonetheless, that's something that he was proud of. Not only did he eat that fruit and his wife planted those trees, but it was for the community. And let me tell you, we still utilize that. People still come by there. The only fruit I found better is in the Redlands. And our doctor, Barbara, used to work with me at UM, guy rested so he used to bring them to work and they were delicious. That's the only fruit that can rival that. for you guys during the season to go by and try one. But it's not just about that, it's about the community and being able to have a space that's open. Every space doesn't have to be filled. I offer you guys during the season to go by and try one. But it's not just about that. It's about the community and being able to have a space that's open. Every space doesn't have to be filled. And I've done this now for how many years. And when I was on the board, and I'm gotten off a lot of boards because I don't have the time. But it's very important to me for us to preserve it. Not just for Dr. Price, but also for medicines for Marshall Williamson. His family still lives there in that house. They're right next door. So whatever we put there, they're gonna be affected by it and me as well. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. For the comments, Mr. McCants. I'd you do the first, sorry, I wanted to. Thank you for clarifying. James McCants, 210 and self-wrestling, 60-territorious. Is there a way to post one to second reading to get a better perspective through the actual community about these items tonight? We're going to have a community meeting on the 19th at the community center at six o'clock. And if it's possible, because someone can come so that we can reach a broader majority of the immediate area, just to heal the concerns and just to give their input so they are no-witch coming, is that possible? It is, actually. I was gonna have some comments that regard as well at the end of the discussion. So, appreciate it. Second thing is gonna be about this traffic there with the traffic study. Before there's a major incident and I have talked to people about 64th Street in front of the dollar store 64th and 60th Avenue, 64th and 59th Place. There's a potential hatchet there. We don't want anything to happen to the kids or anybody that's disabled coming across there. I was there just today to see the traffic there and can we initiate something with the county to sort of do something to try to at least stop, slow down the traffic so people can come by, especially during the rush hours when kids are coming to and from school. Okay? Okay. Good night. Thank you, Mr. Kance. For the comments? Okay, seeing no one in the audience been clerk, is there anyone online? Yeah. So we will close the public hearing at this time. Colleagues, give us your guide. You recognize. Mr. McKenzie speaking about the crosswalk, you don't need to stand up. Just talking about the crosswalk. We had designated in our CIP budget to make sure that we have we have designated more spots throughout the city. So we're going to be able to get the city to the city. And we're going to be able to get the city to the city to the city to the city to the city. And we're going to be able to get the city to the city to the city. And we're going to be able to get the city to the city. And we're going to be able to get the city to the city. And we're going to be able to get the city to the city. I don't really quickly for a question to see attorneys. Is that a location where we can actually, if we were short of, see, I'm just curious to see if we can actually see the information. Can I pick you back on just on that item really quickly for a question to see attorneys? Is that a location where we can actually. If we were short of CIP dollars, could we use proceeds from. The school cameras. To improve pedestrian connections across 64 street. I don't know the answer to that. I need to look at the statue. If you could, I'm just curious to that. We know that we have that opportunity. There is a school. There is a school on the south side of 64th. So potentially it's a very important connection if people are traversing that very busy roadway. Thank you. Go ahead, sir. So when we first started talking about this part for Dr. Price speaking about it for nearly over a year. The idea was always to create a park. Longer by the way. Longer. It was always to create a park to leave it as is. There's been back and forth on the days, whether there's already a lot of park space across the street. So my understanding is that we always wanted to do a park. I don't know if the CRA's intention was to create affordable housing out there. So the intention was either leave the park or affordable housing. Now, with the creation of set park that we have, the minimum maximum of 8,000 square feet, our number was Minermax, whatever it was. The ability to do affordable housing, the density in that space doesn't really matter. There's only so much you can create in that little sliver of land. So to create affordable housing there, is it really worth it? Is it even doable, to be honest with you? You know, in construction, it's not that easy to do affordable housing in that particular spot to be, you got to be really creative with it. So just letting the commission know that it's difficult and we really need to study that. So a deferment here might be the best way to do, you know, best thing to do here. But those are the two issues that I've always contemplated. What, what, what does the community want? So I think what Mayor you were going to go at, do we need to have a public forum and really discuss what we should do with this particular law? Yeah, I was going go step further and say, we should just identify an area, a radius around this parcel and send people a very short question there and ask them between the handful of options, what their preferences and maybe they can rank them. we can come up with an instrument to ask people their opinion. We do it often, we can leaflet door to door with our public work staff and get some direct feedback on what their preferences as to the future use of the park, so whether it's preservation as a park and its entirety, whether it's developmental together, or whether it's the combination that we had been discussing at the last meeting when we talked about the park naming. So I'd be supportive of that idea. Something that worked really well, and I think this is only when we are actually designing a park, but when we did it for Paseo, we had like a little sandwich poured up and with a QR code and people just filled out a survey for what they liked the most and we did get a lot of feedback from that I think it would be would be particularly helpful and I have had the benefit of being on this day is with a lot of different commission members and I would say that of that this commission has had really the best ideas for how to utilize this space in terms of preserving history, in terms of creating community. There have been a lot of ideas that have come forward for this lot that were a lot less attractive than what we're considering, but I do think we should put it out to the community see what everybody wants. I've always been a fan of a passive park. I know that that initiative was taken on by the mayor and it was very very difficult when we first started and took us a year and we're here. So I'm a fan of that but I would love to get more feedback on it too. Through the mayor. Sure. Um, Chantal and LaShonda, um, I agree with you LaShonda,, we work for you. You don't work for us. I said that many, many, many times to everybody that I spoke to in the city. Being the most recent one to walk your neighborhood and walk the city in general multiple, multiple times, I want you to understand, in speaking to a lot of the residents in the community or especially the Marshall Williams and community, one of the things that they stated was that they needed housing. So for my understanding in speaking to a lot of the residents that were saying we need to not only, and Mr. McKenzie can can account for this bring back People to South Miami people who have left the the neighborhood we need housing for them for them to come back so for me Thinking if we can do affordable housing here in this lot or in this designation of the lot It would help the community now. Now, like I said, we work for you. If the community doesn't want it, I am okay with voting against it and not doing anything with that land. I was just trying to follow the voices of the community. But again, if the community doesn't want it, then so be it when it comes to my perspective. Yes, ma'am, if you want to come forward, we'll work it. If you can keep it to a minute, we'd appreciate it. Thank you. No, I agree with you. I think that, hi, it's LaShonda again. I'm just to be very brief. I agree with you in terms of the housing, but what hasn't been a thing, there's a term affordable. And I work in different avenues and I can tell you that we're talking about for the other project, 120% of the area median income. This area median income is high. And so a lot of people that have left, you know, and I know the people, I always tell them, can you say can we figure out something? And a lot of times they just can't because the incomes are haven't been increased enough to a Ford with this AMI is. So when you're talking about affordable, that's really not affordable for the people that left to come back. What we would have to look into would be low income and that's become a dirty word you know that's become a dirty word because people don't want to have to support those projects and like you said it's mixed use but I will say that they're a brand new project that they did it has no green space. So when it rains, whatever runoff we used to have, there used to be two shotgun houses there with grass. There's no more of that. There's no green space. So we have to come, we have the balance. We can't just build, build, build, and say, oh, when we get a flood, oh wow, how did that happen? Yeah, we're gonna have that because we have a lot more permeable land. So like I said, I'm all for that. If we want to talk about projects, but it doesn't necessarily have to be there. There's a huge city. It doesn't have to be in that area. When people came back, we weren't. land. So like I said, I'm all for that. We want to talk about projects, but it doesn't necessarily have to be there. There's a huge city. It doesn't have to be in that area. When people came back, we weren't juxtured just to that little block. That was a certain section. We have people on the dark side. We have people all over my enemy. So I'm not saying that they're going to be in like very high end of skill neighborhoods with these projects. We know that that's not what we do, being honest. But if you are going to talk about that, then we have to be realistic. I'm saying in terms of who can come back. Because we did that that's not what we do, being honest. But if you are gonna talk about that, then we have to be realistic. I'm saying in terms of who can come back. Because we did that with Madison's court. We fought like hell to get some, excuse me, some people back in there, but for the most part, it's a mix, and it's fine. The next project was the same. The next project was the same. So we never really talking about 2012 study, that was from 2022 and it didn't happen. So as each board changes, then the focus changes, what they promise change. So I would like to see it once and for all be something that we can assure that will be there for the community. And I do feel affinity about the Mangle. Somebody came the other day to cut off one of the things that wrecking the tree. I was having a fit. I'm like, what are you doing? I have a picture. I didn't send it to you guys, but I took it. You know, I'm like, what the, you can't do that. This is City of South Miami. We have trees. This is trees sitting USA. We have ordinances. You can't just go doing that. Okay, don't think cause we're black. I'm it. You know, I'm like, what the, you can't do that. This is a city of South Miami. We have trees. This is trees sitting USA. We have ordinances. You can't just go doing that. Okay. Don't think because we're black. I'm not looking. I'm looking. I see you. It's my house. It's my investment. You know, I work. So anyway, I'm sorry. I just wanted to say thank you. Thank you for your comments. Okay. We're going to close public hearing if we hadn't already done that. But colleagues, I'd like to move to the further item for the first meeting in June. And with the idea that in the interim, we directed the manager to put together some sort of a survey instrument that's delivered door to door. Mr. Manjol, I leave it to you and staff to determine what you think is an appropriate radius. If it's 500 or 700 feet, I'm not sure exactly what the right radius will leave it to you guys to determine. And if you could kind of circulate the instrument for common individually by each one of the members of the board. As soon as you have it ready, let's get it out. If we can bring a good idea. I think that's a good idea. As soon as you have it ready, let's get it out. If we can bring the item back with that feedback sooner, I'm happy to consider it. That would be my motion to defer it in total. At least the first meeting in June with the provisional. We can bring it back. We advertise and bring it back sooner. If we have community feedback, in the community shows up to those meetings because they've got other life commitments. I think a direct survey, the community shows up to those meetings because they've got other life commitments. I think a direct survey, so what I'm proposing, would probably give us a more accurate representation of what people would want. So if there's a motion, that'd be my motion if there's a second. Before the motion, Mayor. Yes, sir. I just had a question. I know we've been working on a lot of the designations, timelines, and making sure that we hit this doesn't affect that right this. I don't believe it does Mr. St. Charney. What are the impacts of deferring this item? This item would be would be slowed down obviously. But if we can separate it right? We can yes we can pull it out of it without any help. So I've moved the deferral for just 60 days or 90 days. Yeah I think you're saying you to the first meeting in June, which is this? Let's do this. Let's defer to the first meeting in May that's 60 days. That should be enough time for us to get feedback. If not, we can defer it again if we need more time. Okay. Okay. First meeting in May. Is there a second? A second. Okay. Any discussion on the deferral? So on the deferral, So what we would do is send out a paper and it'd be a survey rather than the residents coming in and doing. Yeah, and again, we can do both of that's the preference of the body. I think, you know, my experience, I'm a big believer in scientific data. You know, I spend money polling things and I believe in the science still. I think if we had a direct survey door to door, then a follow-up wants to collect it. We probably could get better feedback about what the true wishes are, supposedly, to having community meeting where maybe for any number of legitimate reasons, only handful of people can show up. And again, given that is one of the fear of meeting green spaces here that's not accounted for in this neighborhood, happy to be more deliberate about what we decided to do here. Again, my intention from the beginning was to keep this as a green space as vice mayor Corin had mentioned, there was some pushback to that idea because they felt we should monetize the site originally in some portion. And so again, trying to get something done, particularly in my case, trying to get a portion of the site named in honor of Dr. Price, I was trying to strike a compromise there with the board at that moment in time. I also want to say I was trying to be respectful of the history of the site, which again the documents I've read very clearly this body the CRA had moved to bifurcate the site and developed it for affordable housing. So my intention was to honor that legacy but again not only does this board change the preference of the community can change as well. So again I see no I see no harm done in asking people what they want to see at this particular point in time. Certainly neighborhood has changed in the decade that probably this last idea to develop it was considered. Through the mayor. I will go with however you all decide. I just think I'm afraid to hear we're going to oh we got lost in the mail I never received it in the mail I think the community has shown like we saw in the last commission meeting when it's important to the community they're going to show up so I think let's let them show up show how the importance of it and I think it's more impactful. Would you like to amend the motion then to do, can we do a combination? We can do a combo. I think it's a best of both worlds to a combo. I'm happy to accept the amendment. Is there a date we would like to try to target our week? So I know some of us have travel schedules. First week of April makes sense. Okay, so Mr. Manager, if you can identify a date the first week of April for a public meeting. So, I think we can prepare the survey circulated for comment and get that out with an information on this about a public meeting. People can deliver their surveys responses at that meeting or come in person and speak their mind as well. So, okay, we have a motion as amended. Is there a second? Mayor, just to clarify, it would be a meeting. It would come back to commission for first reading on May 6th. That's the fun, May 6th. That would be announcing we would not need to re-advertise in. We would not, we may want to, anyway. Assuming the item is not modified. I mean, the feedback is, you know, community says develop it as planned. We could bring it back with, again, I'm just trying to save costs as well on your show. Okay, so we'll have a date certain of May 6. We'll defer the item to which direction to staff to prepare a survey, survey the community and schedule a public meeting date the first week of April. I've moved that. Was it a second by Commissioner Coye? Co-Bites fair Cory. Okay, so I'm motion to accept the the accept the modification sir. Yes. Okay, so we have motion and a second is modified Any further discussion? And clerk if you can call the roll please. Commission Coye. Yes, commission Rodriguez. Yes, Vice Mayor Cory. Yes. Mayor Fernandez. Yes. I'm pass it to defer. Thank you. Seeing no further business before this board, we will consider ourselves adjourned. Thank you.