Today is Monday September 9, 2024. We are here for the planning and zone and board meeting agenda. I think we have quorum. So I'd like to confirm that we have quorum. Yeah. I'm literally interested to the flag of the United States of America, considering the public for which it ends when one nation under that individual is the whole for the liberty to have this role. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Roll call. Mr. Jimbaum. Mr. Heisler. President. Mr. Thomas. Here. Mr. Kreifer. Ms. Moussoumian. Here. Chair St. Bill. President. Chair, you have a quorum. Where's Larry? Oh, Mr. Thompson. Sorry, yet. I'm at the top and the top. We have not heard. We have corn but we're not sure if we're coming. He may or may not come in. He is. I just called it name. Because he's missed. So we're going to item three approval of the August 12, 2024. Planning and zoning board meeting minutes. Mr. Arpinitans, thank you for the chair. We have provided you with a slightly modified version of the minute. I was going to know much more detail meeting meetings. I appreciate that I think it definitely helps capture the essence. A little bit more thoroughly of what we're discussing. So I appreciate that for the adjustment. With that being said, I don't know if we once had opportunity to review. I did check my comments and I read through on the uptown project just for my recollection and it seems pretty accurate. I'll entertain a motion for approval of the meeting minutes. Yeah. Yeah, Chair, if I may. Yeah. In addition to the print of versions you have before you today, we put it on a new copy for you because they were some endeavor and misspelling of names. They're just nothing to thinkative It's just cousin which fell like cousin and you know like in a family member at at the boat to KUS E add and for their one I have had it. Oh, yeah, so we went through and made sure that our name like miss misumi It's name were Uh, uh, Bell correctly. So there's nothing to think of in there. We just wanted to make sure that we had correct bellings of names in there. That way the new copy before you with the correct version of that. Okay. And now we'll entertain a motion approval of meeting minutes. Motion to approve the meeting minutes. Yes, second. I didn't either, but the thing was recorded and it was a core transcriber here. We have a motion. We have a motion in the second all in favor say aye. All opposed motion carries. We get a minute. So there's a little bit of a package. Oh, you mean in advance to review? In advance. So like, direct a name as a request from the board to see what it be possible to have the minutes provided in advance when you're sending over the documentation. So I believe. I have opportunity to review. Yeah, I believe the original version was sent and the print of version tonight was just to make the minor correction. But they would, yeah. The only thing that was there was the agenda. I'm correct. It was just the agenda. There was no minutes included. Ah. Okay. Yeah, that would have been included in our apologies. So. Okay. We'll just make sure that goes out. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, moving along to item four, quiz at judicial public hearing. The first order of business is going to be Feldman Warehouse. It's a site plan approval. But I'd like to swear to anyone who is here before the board for the Feldman warehouse project and who intends on speaking on the project. If you are here for the Feldman warehouse project and intend to speak before the board please stand so that you can be sworn in. I can't wear my clothes in here. Sorry. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth walked in. Are you guys here by chance for the Feldman project? No, the cop to current one, they would need to be sworn in as well, Chair. Okay. For the separate. But what's up at where I am for them at that time? Okay, I just wanted to make sure they weren't here for the Feldman. Okay, so we have here before the site plan approval, will we be hanged from the city or the applicant first? It's attorney, do you want me to read it into the record? I can. I really appreciate that. It's been a long day. Sounds good. Fileman warehouse, type plan approval, item 4.2. A resolution that's been here in city commission with the city of Narbine Beach, Florida. I'll be moving on to nine of the area from section 24, that 95B to allow 14 parking spaces in lieu of the 23 parking spaces to require. Approving on denying a variant from Section 24. That 122A1 to allow for A2 feet 1-8 length length of buffer in lieu of the 5 foot buffer required. Approving or denying a variant from Section 24. That 122B1A to permit the amount of one terminal island at the end of each parking row 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, that 1, 2, 2, 3, 1, a, 2, 3, 4, that 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, that 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, that 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, that 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, that 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, that 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, that warehouse building with 11,400 and 8 square feet of warehouse base and 3,331 square feet of office-mediting base located at 19818818153 provided for finding the fact confirming a break and then let me take a little approval provided for conflict and provided for an effective date. Thank you. Can you speak with the spoon? Mm-hmm. Well, you know, it's at the time, right? Right, right. Yeah. Um, um, uh, Will you be attending for the city? I will be representing tonight our regular planner. It's out with the flu and I did not want her threading it to any of us, including myself and my health had been severely weakened. But if it's okay with the board, I can put them first followed by the applicant. I'm for you this evening is a public hearing for the Feldmore Health located at 1981 to 20 11 North 8.50 Ders Street If the die you can just click on that though. I can actually click across Okay, there we go. Yep Thank you the applicant There we go. Yep. Thank you. The applicant, Representative of the Jones-Onto-Mont property owner, Jamie Holding, and it's both a regard to fully old 07-Dath 221-6019-009. They're all the property size is 14,740 square feet for the building that's been proposed and the last side is a 28,189 square feet. It's currently in the B4 doning district, which is our business and light industrial district that is going to be slated for redoning a later in the year or early next year to a to a TOD because it's in the within the station area. The existing land use is one story, two thousand square foot office building, and the future land use is warehouse of office space right now. I'm going to board the request for four of our entities and a stipend approval for two story warehouse with 3,331 square feet of office space tied to the warehouse base, which is approximately 11,400 nays square feet. There are actually, at the type of that should be 23 parking spaces, a total that's required. However, you'll see a variant and I'll explain how the wide-a variant comes into play despite the 23 bases. The zoning in a minute. The zoning there is before, surrounded by before, and it is our future TOD area as well. Pardon? TOD. TOD, trend the orange development. Yeah, so because we're getting a train station like down the street. We've note that there are three different properties there. David already checked, we're insured that there is a unity title for this. the master plan that you see here is the proposal to story where I'll with you know multiple units and parking in front. When I come to where I'll do it from a parking standpoint, it's very formulaic. So how do we get like 2223 basis? It's because when you look at where how you use one base for every thousand square feet, and then off at a three basis for every thousand square feet. So because there are two different uses, we calculate it as such. Now, the reason why there's a variance requested is because even though the applicant does provide all the spaces because it's a configuration and the property being on a curve and make that difficult to configure all of that within one parking lot. So what the applicant has actually proposed instead of a completely on site. A parking is to put off some of that parking and put it at on street parking, which would be you like, but the general public as well. So at the end of the day, you're still getting a damn amount of parking, but because our quoted written in such a way that it demands on site. It's kind of a wash, but it does require that extra variance request that being considered for you this evening, just based on the wording of the code. The on street parking. It's right there isn't it? Yes. Well, I mean off street parking. Off street parking. Yeah, on street parking for anyone, off street parking would be for the property itself. But the property itself will require 22 spaces. It just configured a little bit differently in this. They are providing 22. And it's currently on the street parking lot. There I believe there is existing entry parking. No, no, no, on the parking right now. Yeah, so that will be new. Yeah, it's right here. It was 3000. Right. Mathew, do you have a- No, I found the answer. They have 3000 feet of office. I was just trying to find the different. Because you're gonna need three per thousand on the office component, what you're saying is you have that. Yes. And then you have one per thousand on the warehouse component. Yes. We also note that the applicant, well, it's not required, had all voluntarily provided an additional nine bicycle parking spaces on site as well. Just in case that, in the future at the operation change, there might be people who might commute to work on a bicycle given that it's going to be near a train station in the future. So they thought about that as well. You'll find that the exterior in your packet is a little bit different than what you normally expect for a warehouse. That was also partially a task request that it would come in a little bit more pretty considering that in the future, that it's a trend or in development area, so it's going to be a little bit different later. We wanted to think that would be consistent with future facades. So this is why while coming in at the warehouse, the applicant had graciously provided a design that it actually a step higher than what we normally see in a facade improvement for a building of this type. We then review across our regular criteria, range from natural environment aside, down to landscaping and lighting, for a while, you know, we tried before bringing forward to you. We know that the landscaping does have a variance request. I'll go into that a little bit more, but you'll know that the pretty, it will, you know, have the lining of the planted requirement outside of the building that under B4, which really doesn't have a much landscape regulation just because it's an industrial property to begin with. They ought to provide a shadow study, we find that. There's no objection to do that from staff standpoint. For variants, I just covered parking variants. If you do a lot of parking parking paid at 123 required, they will provide other bikectors mentioned. We do note that for the purpose of traffic generation and onsite employment, when you evaluate it from fast standpoint of those 14 parking spaces, they would probably only normally need about nine of those, like on a regular basis, based on the employment that you expect for the office base and so it 14 all within the slightest efficient, but you know, they were willing to provide those on three parking Which can be utilized by the city Uh, it's a variant it granted Uh, the landscape of the variant come from the unique shape of the site. You see that? Instead of like a square site within the packet, it curves. And that curve would create a lot of issues with trying to fit a square building and onto a curved piece of land. It just with the setback requirements that we have, the landscaping requirements we have. You know, they're the trade-offs there. We want those parking spaces and we want them align a certain way where it's safe. So that's kind of the consequence of getting through parking spaces. We can't fit the landscaping a certain way. So it is a policy decision and something that the, that the board can discuss further and recommend approval or denial. That of viewpoint is that there's something that we negotiated with the applicant because we know we consistently have been told, hey, let's make sure we have the parking and that we're the best way to really get that facility in, but there is, you know, understandably a policy tradeoff for your consideration here. This proposal, very ended to five or two feet, one foot, landscape upper with five foot is required. We do know however that despite that, that only a portion of the property is offset out there. So when you look at it from a purgeousness and total square feet of a landscaping standpoint. It's actually the same as if you were consistently, five feet across, it just reallocated on different parts of the site because from part of the site, it's wider than others. You get anything out of landscaping, it just aligned a little bit differently at the result. There's the duravirarian required the terminal island variance. We have a role where you have to have to in islands to separate the parking spaces. And we were to do that there, we wouldn't be able to get in all the parking spaces that would be required here. So that's the consideration for this non-nuclearian and the same as fair and forth interior island variance, same deal, it's had to do with the parking lot configuration. So the discussion there really is policy trade off and whether or not to grant that the variant because if you had to put those islands in, then you would have to reduce them out of parking even further. variant because you had to put those islands in, then you would have to reduce the amount of parking even further. The type of conditions are not main conditions, I wanted that on the site plan, they just need to provide for a type of really triangle before they go through a building permanent part of plan. And the option for the board of the evening are to move for approval or move for denial of the other type of the application. And with that, if it's okay with the board, we would invite the applicant to provide a brief presentation on a brief presentation of the application. Good evening, my name is Jennifer. Yeah, good evening. Better, there we go. Good evening, my name is Jennifer. Someone with my Miarchitectual Studio. It's a pleasure to be here with you today. Thank you for your time. If you could just put your address into the record, please. Jennifer. Sorry. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Maybe a little bit better. I'll try. I don't know you. You could. I'll speak right in the mind. Our address is 7910 Northwest 25th Street, Suite 200. And Dr. Al Florida. Thank you. Well, Edward, thank you for your presentation. I think you did it better than I could have. We can. Thank you for your presentation. I think you did it better than I could have. It's been a pleasure working with all of you on this process. Here you can see just a few other renderings, different key points from the house. As Edward mentioned, we are trying to do something a little bit more upscale in the area. Our client, Errol Feldman with JME, he's going to occupy the building, not for speculation, he plans to move his office there. So, is there overall a site map? You can see the train station that we're talking about. What's that? Oh, yeah, from there. Yeah, difficult. We're good. So you see in pink the train station which is just steps away from from our property. I don't know if there's a is there a pointer here? Does it point? There we go. Oh, but not at the moment. Anyway, so you can see here on, can I zoom in? So you see this L shape building that's here right next to the word Avenue shows the location of the property and moving to the right towards the curve. And the large pink building which will be the train station which is part of our justification for requesting some of the parking reductions. In addition, our client doesn't need 23 spaces for their own purposes, in reducing the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the cost of the code, the five feet or two feet and in some places you'll see. So here's our site plan here and you'll see like the parking layout. So this area, this area at the edges in front of spaces 2, 3, 4, 5. There we meet 2 feet. And then it gets a little tighter. We're 12 and 13 are. But then we open up and we have some large areas, 270 square feet. And then a 40 foot space of well over the 5 foot minimum requirement of the landscaping area. And in overall we're in excess of the minimum required then skipping. But the configuration of the site did require there were some early discussions with T-RAD where we could only have one entrance to the property and the curve on the property also like drove the situation with the parking here. So I think we've got a lot of spaces in considering the parameters. The building floor plans, as Ed mentioned, and also in our packet, you'll see the square footages, roughly 147. We have about 3,330 square feet of office space between the two spaces. Some regular parts of the roof plan here, the elevations. That's it. You happy to answer any questions you might have? Before we go further, I do because it's a quadri-judicial hearing and because a comment was made about my working on development, I need to put it on a record. Even though I know that the Craig Fergates put it in Jeff, I do need to officially put it in a record. No, I do not work for the developer's side. Yes. I know this matter. Yes. Is it all right? I have some questions. I would just want to make sure we open up a public comment and close it. And then confirming with staff that we received any communications about this item. No communications received. It's public comment. Okay. Is there anyone here that has a public comment on the item before the board directs you? You have to come to the mic. Introduce yourself. And you could go to the mic and introduce yourself. You could go to that mic. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and not the truth? Yes. My name is James Toronto. I'm a resident here at North Miami Beach. Currently located at 1759 Northeast 169th Street. I'm part of the beautification committee. I've actually come in contact with Ed myself. We've had a couple of discussions at our meeting about the tree canopy and part of the beautification committees. Their main focus is on making sure any new development coming in, kind of addresses our goals in our future outreach. So one thing I noticed is throughout the renderings that you've produced, which are fantastic, by the way, me as an architect, not an architect, but an architectural designer, working for a firm, I understand the background and the work that she's put in. But the one question I do have is that the tree can't be that they're providing. Is it going to be sufficient enough and beneficial enough for the community to be able to produce enough shade and have a walkable and beautiful sense of city and location across from that train station. So that's just one comment I wanted to make out to the public is if we can kind of address going forward some of the trees that we have or will be going in be trees that can produce a large enough canopy in terms of coincidences with the beautification committee. That's all. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I have a comment I'm not sure if you want to comment on that on the beautification. I know that We talk briefly on landscape or if the staff would like to comment on it entertain comment from either before we discuss as a boy Before I come out to to occur to me with our turning do we do Jennings? 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 sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I thought that you sort of asked genuinely and that the answer was no one had, but obviously that wasn't the case, so let's do it formally. At the adjunct disclosures, Ms. Matumiann. I have not spoken to anybody regarding this project and I'm ready to make a decision based on what I hear tonight. Thank you, Mr. Thomas. I haven't spoken to anyone. Thank you, Mr. Thomas. I am spoken anyone. And you can make your determination. Yes. All right, what presented evening? Mr. Kreitberg. I have not spoken anyone. I will take my decision independently. OK. On Mr. Heisler. I have not spoken to anybody and I can make my decision independently. Yes. Chair, thank you, Bill. I haven't spoken to anyone in my decision to be made based on the information presented before us this evening. Thank you. As far as the landscaping port can it from staff standpoint, Staff had only looked at, you know, the item holistically. So we looked at the amount of square footage that would be done, you know, in the project and we noted that you're not really losing any square footage of landscaping that you've had otherwise. Or, you know, obviously there are aspects of where it's a bit narrower. We're not going to have trees and it would be bushes and dead, but that's how different constraints of space. We do know that, again, actually it's a standard criteria for hardship even though our code did not require a heart of criteria. This actually does provide for a heart of criteria. And the applicant has, though despite that maintain the amount of wherefor to do expect landscaping in any case. As far as existing plans are known in the landscape sheet that they do comply with the Florida friendly or native species aspect that's required under the code? Are there going to be any trees as it relates to his specific question about trees that will create a canopy? I understand from both presentations that although the five of landscape isn't maintained throughout the project, the net area of landscaping exceeds what the minimum is, but is there any comment one way or another? This is my question before I open it to the board, just so we can have the most current information of bus information perhaps. We would direct you to the landscaping sheet which is on page. I don't know if you have that more available from the applicant side. Thank you to the landscaping sheet which is on page. I don't know if you have that more available in the applicant side. I believe so. Yeah. Sorry. Give me a second. I have a good memory, but it is not a small packet either. No, it's not. I didn't put the landscape on the slide here, but I know you had it. There are wherever there's a large enough island. We have trees. They're listed in the 270 square foot on either side of the entrance. There's a tree. So if I could direct your sheet, you have to pay to sheet LP that one and a landscape legend you'll find that there are various trees in here these include the cabin pomental trees which are not really a shade but there are some shrub there for example red tip cocoa plum and and other that, you know, can grow a little bit more, right, again, for? Yes. You'll find that the trees are because of the shape of where the landscaping is, clustered a certain way. They're, as far as where there would be potential for shade, what the record use would be, where it marked off around the end trend and 16, 15, 16, 17 for the parking space, that where the trees, that potential to provide a little bit of shade would be adjacent to. Correct. Thank you. I'd like to have from the board on the matter. Let's start on your side, Mr. Hessler. Oh, sure. The 35 foot height, that's includes the office component. It does. So what size, what is the height of the warehouse? Well the warehouse has, that's the 35 foot mark. So in between we have, I think it's 13 feet for the first floor and an additional 12 plus the industrial spaces for. So the clear height to stack on in the warehouse? Total height is 35 feet. No, but just the warehouse component. Correct. Is- So it says here maximum building height is four stories or 45 feet? It is. But the- We're less than that at 35. Just the warehouse where you're going to stack boxes. Yes, they're doing shelving, a shelving system that goes in- That's not 35 feet though. Correct. A little bit less because we've got the joists at the roof and so maybe it's going to be at 30 feet, 32 by the time we have mechanical and- Just the warehouse, not the office component. Correct, the warehouse. Okay, so you've got 35 clear just for the warehouse plus the office. Separate from the office. So the two story area doesn't cover the entire footprint. Only 3,000 of the 14,000 is two stories. So where the first and second floor is, you can see on the floor. On sheet A1, you can see that there's a small portion, 600, 700 square feet of AC area in each of the spaces. And the second floor only covers a portion of the building. So part of its double height and part of its two stories. Sorry, I've been looking at a lot of multi-family drawings, so I got excited when I saw warehouse. I see, I used to work for, I said it'll do a developer that does warehouses. It just seems to me just viscerally quickly looking at this. You've got two warehouse doors and you've got front loaded. Is that going to be street level or those dock? Street level. Okay, so you got two, are you planning on bringing the trucks inside the warehouse? It's possible we wanted to leave that open. Just looking at the real quick, just without, it may not be necessary. I like the project, but just looking at it real quick, it just doesn't look like you have enough room to bring, let's say, if you do 35 clear, that implies to me, distribution in a part is a lot of goods and you're going to stack high. So you're going to have a lot of stuff going into the warehouse. Yes. Utilize all that space. I don't know if you have enough room here to maneuver. I think we do, we've evaluated that with our client. They have very small objects, like it's computer parts, very small, not large equipment that's going in and out of there. So smaller trucks, smaller boxes, just need the height for pallets and stacked. So they don't really need the distribution court, you know, the large, you know, truck court, so to speak, to bring, okay. Okay, because it would probably be short of warehouse store. And could use a little bit more room in the front. But I'm just looking at it for the reason. I'm asking what are we doing? He's excited. I'm happy. I'm like, right, I'm like, I'm like, I know you don't like warehouse. I'm like, I mean, my bones are working. Yeah, after the same concern at Mr. Heisler and actually at part of your packet, there should be, I believe, a truck turning on movement. Oh, girl. should be, I believe, a truck turning on movement. Oh, girl. A diagram that you may have heard me talk about another project that's being important for this type of thing. And so that was the requirement for the applicant to provide for a little bit longer the result. But we did want to test on that. Yeah, I mean, other than that mean it looks like a great project. Thank you. Okay, thank you. I'm board member. You see me? Thank you. So was parking instead of street parking, did you entertain, and is it possible, Mr. Ang, to park in the back? Because there's 15 feet of grass area back there. So why did you not put parking in the back? Yes. Or move the building back, should it move in the back? Well, there's a minimum setback in the back. There's an easement back there as well. So we can't really occupy that area. Impossible. Not possible. No, we explored even seeing about moving the building back in order to provide faith in the front. But then that's an all other series of chain of additional variants about really aiming meaningful in the type of development just because of the shape of the of it. That they try to run that through with the applicant in different scenarios over a quarter of several months to see if we could do something alternative. Yes. And it did not go out at all. Yeah. Also, fire department has a saying that as well in like the driveway behind So that's really really where to come to come then So the parking on the street How many parking spaces for your employees and your customers do you really need realistically? because my fear is that once a train station goes in, the community is going to take a little spots. Oh, on the street, you mean? We can certainly manage with what we have on the property. Right, that's my question because I would assume that everybody's going to park there to take the train. So it's a street parking, right? Well, I'm hoping that part of the parking in the train has a parking garage for commuters to park as well However, yeah, sure you can't prevent that take they're gonna take those spots So your business still will have Yes, I and for working. Please. Hi. I'm Earl Feldman. This is my warehouse project and I appreciate the time. Just a little bit about the business, what we do. You said Feldman's name addresses. No, different address, maybe. Just put your business address. Another, our business address is 15421 west xia away. Thank you So we're a block away right now We've a bunch of ways in the plaza above it We provide computers and related technology to schools throughout the country primary focus in Miami Miami-Dade College So we store computers and parts and we have a few office staff. We don't really have customers visiting us. We don't have people coming to the office as much. It's more of just storage and administration. So I don't think parking will be an issue. I think we're pretty okay with 10, 15 spaces. Currently we have five bays down the street and we have four spaces and somehow we make do. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you. I think that's fine. by Bayes down the street and we have four spaces and somehow we make do. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you. I think that's fine. Thank you. Board member Thomas. I have no questions at this time. I think my fellow board members have asked what I'm interested in. Other than, you know, we're asking for variances. One, for parking, landscape, terminal island variants, interior island variants, like my only annoyance with the city is that we have a zoning requirement. And it seems like on a regular basis, variances are being granted. So I would like us to be a little more vigilant in those areas, even though I know progress is a wicked thing to deal with sometimes. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Board Member Cresper? Well, just on that subject, if the building was different shape or different size or different footprint, that would make the not happen variance. You built the 200 square foot warehouse. You wouldn't need two spaces. You went to the maximum. But we did not go to the code. No, we have the sufficient parking. The variances are for the green spaces in between the parking. But you're also asking to shrink the parking spaces from the night to include the street parking. Okay, yeah. That's right. There's no street parking, but I'm not parking by the code. The question is, on the wording of this, the variance is to provide 13 continuous parking spaces between the landscape areas. Instead of the eight spaces required, that is done. Am I? Normally, you would have an island in between them, so it would be groups of eight. So for example, you would have an island in between them, so it would be groups of eight. So for example, you would have eight parking spaces and an island, yeah, eight or eight and then a. They were doing 13 instead of 20. Right, so it becomes a nod number. So this is where conceptually you were saying, why do we have a code? Because this is coming back every week. We bend over backwards to accommodate the fact that they're not making the building the way it should be built in order to comply with the code for either one. You know, a lot of it is no big deal. Maybe in this project, it's no big deal. But drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, and we got, you know, a billion dollar ridiculous project going on because of whatever. And it continues. Okay. Good luck to you with this project. My question is, did you post a sign that says, we certainly did. The size that's required and what is required. Yes, Destiny provided us with a sign in. It was posted on the property, on the gates. I saw an 8.10 sheet of paper. That's what we were given to post. We do not. So we have to do now. People used to put more, but I would. We would like the time to be bigger, but the code doesn't prescribe a sign side, right? The code says, I've never seen a teeny sign. I had to get out of my car and what I'd do when I picked it up. It's 4, 8, 5, 10. That's all that's required. I'm saying what? How is the public personnel? This thing is taking the place of all these beautiful developments there now with red cards. That whole one situation first, one situation second, one situation third, one situation fourth, the plea, other nightmare. It's a black eye to this scene. Mr. Creiber. In that way forever. Mr. Creiber, I'm starting to rub you, but IT contains it. I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I see it. They're not capturing your voice at all. That's because of that. That's probably a good thing. Yes. On the record, the insinuation that Mr. Aing has. No, no, that's not referred to. It's not not we were not going to get into the Georgia joke okay and I don't mean it to be taken seriously what I do mean to take seriously is that we need to have the philosophy that we are going to enforce what some wiser people and maybe us put as the law, the law of planning and zoning. What the code says, you have to provide x spaces. Okay, there's a hardship. There used to be a hardship now. There's not a hardship. So it's the Wild West. If you, I'm going to say that this 66 black Mustang takes the place to five spaces because it's such a nice car. Other than that, I really wish we would try to enforce. And hopefully this will be the spearhead for better development, but I would like to really address the signage because nobody in nobody will be able to tell. Driving there, I drove around the block five times to identify the property and then to say, where's the sign? So who told you that the eight by 10 piece of paper could be a sign? When everybody else has spent hundreds and hundreds of dollars to get a sign put up and painted and identify what the project is? Where is it in the code or where is that we waived it or where did we decide it? All right, we state that the credit book for the take of time, we're gonna note that in the undernoted it it does have a time posted on property. Time to have the mention of 48 by 48. Application containing executive test will be 48, why by 60, high. Time pertaining to the think of family resident job be 24 by 24. So it is in the within the code that that time it needs to be put to the third away. Well, it's not but you know that that's the point that can be brought up and the and that the board discretion on how it want to approach this matter. But you ask for clarification on what the sign is in the code and we are providing it. I think in whatever we do with this project, if we say it's the minimum, it doesn't matter or it's such a horrific block, block that we're replacing horrible development with nice development so we're going to turn the other cheek or the other eye. I think the direction of this board to our city staff should be to make sure their signs, inspect that their signs, and have a picture of the sign in the package. This is not on you. Okay, I'm not coming down on you. However, you could have blown that eight by 10 up to, I'm wondering where the desert sign is. I don't even see it on the property. Is that it's not a subject of this discussion would apply by Mr. Craig or I'm worried that that we may be have waived the requirement of a sign, but it's part of the law, it's part of planning and zoning. So beautiful building, beautiful car. That would know for the record that if the board feels that the time that not content to proper noted is well within the board discretion to deny or to ask for a continuing for proper posting that it well within the board prerogative. I appreciate that statement. But yeah. Let's not do that because somebody didn't enforce. All the applicants are provided with the code and it is and we do not, that does not do the posting the applicant through and there. It's for 12, 13 years that was always the first question we asked and was always a picture presented of the signage and it's become an issue for me. So, um, that's what it is. Well, yeah, what is it? I think so. Okay. Um, I don't have any questions about the particular applicant. I hope that the staff takes it takes heat of Mr. Crestburg's, uh, directive as it relates to just being proactive and making sure a signage is, is, um, something that's, whether it's labored, whether it's touched upon. At some point I know that there's always conversations between the applicant and the staff to just make sure that we're not having to rehash this out separate from you as an applicant. But with that being said, I didn't have any questions that haven't already been addressed. They were particularly as related to the parking, but it doesn't seem as though you guys are an outward facing organization. So I don't know that the parking situation will be some that causes a lot of quarrel for the community. Mr. Director. I would have to note that that would know for the record that the applicant is providing all the parking spaces that would normally be required countwise under the code. At the variant and question come with the configuration. So that's where we need, we're putting that on the record. I'll pick it up with you put it down. So you're saying there's required 23 spaces. They have 23 spaces but not in a bank of. 23, yeah, at 14 plus 9 at 23. So there's a pretty shit number on the site. Yeah, so the total number parking, what they would have to require anyway, it just the variant allowed it to configure it in a way that actually fits onto the weirdly shaped site. God, it wasn't as clear on the Caribbean. Yeah, so I understood that that's what I might take away was. And I also, you know, before we open it up for vote, I appreciate the member from the beautification department to come in and speak and ask about that because we are moving towards, you know, and development wanting to have that type of the border, the greener, the canopy, something that's important and it definitely helps mask when you're dealing with something like a warehouse. But as it's been touched upon, this isn't your run of the middle warehouse, the rendering stool looks exceptionally well. And I hope you do best. I will entertain a vote on the matter. If that we have a motion. I don't know. No one heard that. I'm not speaking to him. I sound like he had a motion for approval. I move to approve with the four variances. And that's a second. Motion in a second. Directive, you want to do a roll call vote? Mr. Kreiberg. Yes. Ms. Matumiun. Yes. Mr. Heisler. Approved. Mr. Thomas. Yes. Chertainville. Four. Chair, please bill. 4. Vote, path to 5-0. Thank you, Ambassador Luck. Thank you so much. Go forth and make beautiful warehouse. We're trying. May it, may it hoarder, then it had to be. Yeah. I mean, and you know, and the interim as we get ready to transition item 43, which is the 174 shop. It cuts both ways and I do understand. You know, the sign thing has to be addressed because that's just you have to put the public on notice. But as it relates to just the concept of us having a code that's supposed to be implemented and the need for variances I see it from both sides because if there aren't any variances then we feel like we don't know what projects are coming before So we can want to kind of put eyes on it But then it's also kind of productive for us to put it together a code and then Someone comes and builds what they want it has you know 15 16 17 variances to get the project that's not in line with what the code says it should be in line with in order to pass it through just so I definitely understand the frustration can I just one question of the city of course so there was two standards that you cited for signage right yeah one was for residential I think residential One was for residential. I think residential. One was for. That one was for single family residential. And the other one was for everything else. All right. So this one happens to fall under single families, that correct? No. No. OK. That one falls under the first standard with the time it must be at least 48 by 48 inches. Would be 4 feet by 4 feet, unless, you know, did the really long ordinance title, right? And with case, we provide for an exception where you have really long ordinance title and they, you can go by 48 by 60 so that you can get that extra foot to actually print the rest of the text on them. Technically, they should have put that size of sign on the. Yes, they're good. And okay, maybe we should have made them put the sign up and come back or whatever, but yeah, there are certain. Yeah. There are certain areas where the sign would, in this neighborhood the sign I cannot say is so important. I'm just saying there's this issue may come up in like in five minutes. We used to have sign handed out from planning Donny Board that would be that the applicant can take and use. As you may be aware, we've got a $300,000 plus cut into the division last year. We could not print new signs at this point. So we do not have resources in the department. We are understaffed. I'm not saying it's muted, but that's the reality of what we have right now. Who knew in the past when they made the sign? They painted it, they bought it. No, we had a standard sign with R&D pre-printed and it said, they had lines on it and you would just paste the notice onto where it had the line for the text or a marketed in like the motor to the do. So we had a standard like time that we were potentially paying out of pocket at the city to do. The opposite weren't necessarily paying for it. And though they were prescribed side, we just don't have to pay for the issue. Because I definitely want to address the next. So but I'm confused because I've definitely seen signs that look like the resolution just printed on a right. You guys are doing that? No, the applicants are doing that but in the path we used to have a separate start as they could take. We're not advocating for you to spend city funds to make things easier for the applicants to applicants especially if they have variances just need to comply with so we don't have any four by four plywood I don't think we should be I agree. I agree. Let them pay for it. They're developing. I'm just saying we know but we don't have that. I like the suggestion about putting it in the presentation a photo of the sign and you know to show I've seen to show that it's wide. We can interrupt. We've definitely drove and we've all driven around and seen that they drove around a lot. I didn't know you did that. We admirable. Yeah. Well let me have an aside. It's bored. But make it just part of the package. No, no, no. Yeah, we could. Members of this board used to get a $20 a month stipend until we didn't. And the reasoning was because of the cost of driving around and looking at the sites and the signage. That was taken away by one of our mayors who made it through who know has a Blast. All right. All right. All right. Let's move forward. That will that will take all your comments and we will find way to improve. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I don't for three one seven four shops this before it's for a site planning very interproved like the hair from whoever's presenting from the city and the applicant which I'm assuming you guys Okay, um, well, we do that. Let's get you sworn in wearing. I don't think that you were sworn in beforehand So if you're gonna be speaking on this 174 shops, please stand up to be sworn or raise your hand to be sworn. I ever Do you sort of tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Are you also presented on this? Yeah, I've been sworn in before. I'll just make a shout out. No one in. Yeah, okay. Thank you, Chair. Chair, I think Bill. Before we begin with reading it, planning disclosure. On the item for the 124 shops I plan on varying approval, Ms. Miss Umian. I haven't spoken to anybody and I can render a decision based on what I hear tonight. Mr. Thomas. The same. All right. Mr. Kreidberg. I haven't spoken to anybody. I went to the site and was on the property and I was confronted and accused and, um, rightfully so, rightfully so, of being, um, and I was, as I told the, the person put me on the phone, who somebody, Mohammed, who supposedly had some kind of authority, I was just trying to, you know, be helpful and looking around and that's it was just uncalled for and other than that, I think I was to the to the bar once like a decision based on information that you have. Okay, that's all that just for that. Thank you. I didn't speak any I'm sorry. I can't make a decision. I'm sorry. But is that 35? I'll be to high learning when. Yes. Yeah. Charity bill. No, I didn't speak to anyone. I make my decision based on the information presented before us. Yeah, thank you. All right, so this is a resolution though. Bear with me if I read the ultra long resolution. A resolution to the mayor and city committee, not the city of North Miami, Florida, approved in the 9 of varying from 1024 that 52d5 to allow for a minimum per of 13.5% and lieu to require 20%. Approving on denying a variant from technical 24 that 122A1 to allow for a zero foot that like a buffer with five feet required. Allowing on denying a variant from technical 24 that 122B1A to allow for a five foot in Atlantic Island and lieu the 10 feet required. Approving on denying a variant from technical 24 that 122B1 B to allow for 10 contingent parking spaces between landscape area and lieu the required parking spaces. Approving or denying of variance from section 24 that 52 D1 to allow for a lot area of 1.28 acre or 56,090 square feet and lieu the required three acre. Approving or denying of variance from section 24 that 52D3 to permit a front tap back of a foot 11 inches for building one and will the required 25 feet. Approving or denying a variant from Section 24, that 52D3 to permit a front tap back of 5 foot 8 inches for building two and will the required 25 feet. Approving or denying a variant from Section 24, that-52D-3, to offer a rear setback of zero for building one and new of the required 20 feet. Approving a denying variant from Section 24-D-52D-3, to submit a rear setback of those we've for building two and new to required 20 feet. Approving a denying variant from Section 24-D-97, to permit the allowance of two loading baiters during opposite hour only. Approving and denying a variant from Section 24-9-5B to permit the allowance of 80 parking baiters and those required 104 baiters required. And approving the nine-to-side plan application with conditions for the construction of a 20,000. Wherefore shopping turner can provide the two building, 11 in 10 paid and 80 parking paid to locate at 1 7 4 5 They're all between Boulevard providing for finding the fact Conferring inspiration and limitation of approval provide for conflict and providing for an effective date Yes, chairman Let the record reflect that I offered to read this one, but Didn't give me a chance. No, more importantly, the top sheet, your cover sheet, has a typo, where it says property size at 20.00 square feet is supposed to be 20,000. That's what we need to put. Yes, thank you. Thank 20,000. That's what we need to put. Yes, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Attorney. Yeah. Mr. Zero. We're very, very, very, that the comments in the right play that the meeting is zero at the annual apology for that typo. Three orders of magnets. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. I'll hear from staff. The applicant. Yes. The applicant that the evening. Uh, uh, uh, when we can be at the top of there. When the pop up there, we can begin. Okay. There we go. Thank you. Thank you. All right. The project that the in our die-capitated majority this evening uh, uh, uh, uh, into the mouth will come up in a little bit, uh, job property don't MTV 55, uh, LLT. Um, the property address at 1745, 0-bit game ball of art with the folio 07, that 2209, that 2009, that's 090. The property tied is 20,000 square feet. As you see this right along the FVC rail line, and it is elongated. Although that provides for a extreme shape. The drawing-doning is a B2-gedroom business district. The existing land use is one story, the thing structure and regional and you did the shopping center The requested for nine variants inside plan approval that we're really result in a shopping center at 20,000 square feet with two buildings North and South side with 11 independent bays a within those buildings So Bay for 11 up up businesses in there, and 80 parking spaces. The zoning itself right there, just these are B2, district, which provide for up to 15 story, but has a side requirement of three acres, obviously in order. It did it from the intersection all the way to the city limits. So there's really no way, unless you want nothing to ever develop there to not, you know, to enforce the three acre rule, you never see anything there. That's just the hardship of the other thing, a location allocation will come to that variance. There's proposed matter plan. You see how to maximize the state in order to fit the sheer amount of parking spaces needed. It won't fit like 104. We try it all towards a different way than the only other way to do so. It's a goal vertical, which not sure that, not sure that something that the board will have feedback on but that's where the very required comes in. That's a word for the applicant to see what could be done on the site. The site, the north building on this site is a proposed that 11,1160, three square feet, one story was sick independent pay for the door with a front and a rear set back, and it's due to the extreme side. If we don't have it, your building will be just a tiny sliver that's essentially not rentable, I'll pay it on the size. Similarly with the top building, 8,837 square feet, one story five independent beds in the front and rear step back. The beds here are divided for parking from 67th beds for the retail and 13th beds for the showroom. The loading beds normally see in, you know, in a, the valentice type. At the pattern, the applicant, they will only have the loading spaces there or the loading time in the evening because there's no way to put the loading spaces on the site. So the loading must be considered at night only and that would be a condition of approval that staff is recommending because otherwise you're just going to take away from the parking spaces on the site. We reviewed again on the type of criteria with other projects, the night through the leaves least you know, and landscaping and lighting at the site. We note that the project has various trees and other elements that try to preserve that at the market, the landscape buffer in front of it's possible. And where it does it, it changes where you normally have to treat by incorporating it into the building design. So it would normally, you see those trees all along the strip. Now it will, you see, there's no building to the circle door, we're representing a tree. So they are getting tree then, it just aligned differently the result of design due to a tight base. I'll end up giving some point. The various requests include various area variances. I previously mentioned 13 was printed them, permanent buffer variant with the five zero feet, where five feet is needed. Terminal island so that you can fit more parking without those interspatial items in there for every eight spots. Again, that's another internal island variance. The lot area variance are there. If you don't provide for a variant for at least three acres, given where if you located geographically, you're never going to be able to build anything there. That's the reality of the code. And that's the true hardship from all evaluations, standpoint. The step back variance, they're looking for a non-userien to permit a front step back where it required 8 feet at the post to 25 feet. 25 foot would essentially take away another dirt of that building and then another step back in the back would take another dirt of that building as well. So you end up with about a third of what you see at the forefront there if the variances were not you know not considered here We do note that from a president's standpoint there is a similar property to the south that is narrow And the grant and in order to provide for that development there along the rail tracks the and in order to provide for that development there along the rail tracks, the though variants that were granted. So there is a president rule from a, you know, from a similar standpoint, even though variants are about unique, can be about unique to place. We do have a similar situation to the style where the variances of the tape type were granted in order to provide for something similar here. That's important precedence item to note because it applied to the front and rear setbacks. Bear in number eight is for the loading space variance. That's where the requirement is that it granted comes in that they have to provide for that loading only at night or not to take away from the parking during the day. The advocate is also going to be providing a belief some bicycle parking as well from a multi-motor standpoint that normally wouldn't be required in order to offset some of the parking aspect as well. The parking are varenced here, the applicant requesting non-varenced allowance are only 80 parking spaces and ludicity required 104 parking spaces. That took a hard look at it. Because the entire place is retail, it normally goes to a higher standard. However, since the applicant intend to have a furniture showroom, when we look at the traffic generation and the parking generation in the engineering manual, not outside of our code, we realize that from an actual practical standpoint, furniture showrooms don't actually generate as much parking demand as a regular retail space. And that's where staff note this granted that proposed non-events did not appear to affect the stability and appearance of the community or create any incompatible drowning manuals because of the typology of the youth on the community or create any incompatible to drowning man uses because of the typology of the youth on the site. I know we have been talking a lot about variances and whether or not they'd be granted. You don't necessarily have to approve it, but staff wanted to provide that consideration for you as part of the fact-finding process as you make it to terminator from a policy standpoint, fact-finding standpoint, and whether or not you were to port that to the variant. There are conditions for this site, because it is along FEC and a DOT road in the form of the King Boulevard, applicant must address all required from DOT as outlined in a meeting minute from pre-application or pre-application meeting and anything that, you know, DOT may require from the active management permitting applicant. It's that the applicant must provide a letter from FEC Railroad, acknowledging no objection to the project. FEC had refused to provide any official letter but had in their email chain noted no objection, staff had received those emails and staff is comfortable with that condition being satisfied because FEC apparently, the account is like we never signed official letters but I'm like but you're email said there's no objection so Rather than put the applicant in a no-man's land. We Accepted that email chain and our brain to for you the evening the we also Required the applicant to provide an updated traffic impact that he that includes a new traffic operation analysis for the intersection at 22nd Avenue with the stealth of it because it's right next to the intersection that does have an impact in that intersection and we want to make sure that data is addressed appropriately, particularly with the new train coming through. That involves looking at that intersection from a particularly a signalization standpoint. And the applicant is required to update the intersection capacity and now that it's in a related table for any traffic impact study as the final configuration comes into place on what they're trying to do from a tenance standpoint. So before you did evening, the board noted that to move for approval or move with denial, the board had reminded that you don't have to vote on the variance at all at the whole. I, you can't separate them. I look at it individually, if you still wish. I should have known that on the last one as well. And that, yeah. And at that point, if the board wishes, the applicant here can provide their presentation on this project. Good evening. My name is Martin Shemal. Thank you for having me here presenting today and thank you staff for the presentation. How does it work? This one. Thanks. Okay. So we've been working on this project for quite a bit of time. We've owned the property with a different group of investors since 2012. We previously had approved a Cypeland for a 19,200 square feet retail center similar to this, but with a different configuration due to market conditions and and our learning experience on on having recently finished another development across the street on 171 50-Vskine Boulevard where Belamo and Cookies are right now operating. We decided to change those entitlements to address one of these issues that seems to be a recurrent issue in today's presentation, which is parking. Parking and circulation on this retail property is very important. So one of the things that we have changed is to centralize the parking field on the center of the development. Originally, this was a three building scheme where you have two buildings on the corners and one building in the center. You had two entrances, the same amount to basically make a T hammerhead and get out of the site, which we learned that if we have a centralized field, it's much more efficient and it works much better. So basically we segregated the buildings into north and south, similar to what we didn't want to anyone 50, and we created a centralized field that has an entrance and an exit. So we basically have a circular kind of circulation. You can get in and get out on the other one without backing it, back in the circulation app. So, you can see, sorry, I'm going to show you the slide, but you can see the buildings on the north and to the south and the centralized parking field. In regards to the south and the centralised parking field. In regards to the loading areas which we are proposing, we are taking two areas of the sets of parking spaces that exceed the minimum requirement for loading area size. And we are utilising those as parking as loading areas for each of the buildings for off hours of operations. So from 10 p.m. to 8 p.m. in the morning, usually the liver is anyways happened during this time. We don't foresee having food and beverage in this facility, other than a small coffee shop, if we get lucky with the leasing. And basically, we don't foresee having issues with deliveries during the day The South building is around 8,800 square feet is composed of five potentially individual units that can be Listed together merged for a larger occupant. We have like Ed was presenting before we we had interest, as a matter of fact, at one point, we had a lease with a furniture store and we've had a lot of interest in this industry, the potential to lease all these spaces as a single tenant. Each of these spaces have their own independent entrances and have great visibility from this can go in north and southbound. The north building is similar to the south building with the difference that is slightly larger, is 11,000 square feet approximately, with a potential second phase of a second story over the north portion of the building. So we created a courtyard in the middle of the development in order to segregate the two buildings, give us the possibility of augmenting the north building as to a second story. And in that courtyard we created some sort of destination which we believe will bring in people. And ideally, we would like to have a small, there's a few, I don't think that you can see the dotted lines on the screen, but each of those facettes that are at the angle show the independent entrance to each of the stores. The last one where the courtyard is is a small 844 square feet space that ideally we would like to have a coffee shop to bring in people to a center because what we've learned is that if you have a huge regional center with like 300, 400,000 square feet people go you have anchor ten and you have a grocery store people go go in and out and you have traffic naturally. In this smaller boutique retail centers where you don't have the luxury of having a large anchor ten and we struggle to bring in traffic. So we want to give something that is a use that it's not a convenience but it's more a destination to bring in customers and help the other businesses drive in regards to The aesthetics of the building sorry So you can see area of the environment. Let's go to the second one. So this is existing conditions, the north building as existing with the adult entertainment facility on the parking field and south of it. And there is the proposed two buildings. Mark in the entrance to the city of North Miami Beach. We would love to see that intersection improved. We have now beautified both of the northern bound properties with beautiful buildings, hopefully. So this is the south building, pretty clean and modern design. That building is approximately 24 feet high. The storefronts and 14 feet high with a clear interior height of 17 foot high. It lends itself for a very high end retail operation. the North Building very similar. We created an eyebrow covering to protect the patrons from the elements and be able to allow them to go comfortably to each of the stores. And that is the North, look in South, South elevation of the North building, where you can see that box that it's slightly different in design, we would like to, that we actually treated as a free standing and that potentially can be a two story building. There is no render of the second phase. Interesting. There is a very beautiful picture of the North portion of that building having a second story over the same footprint. It should be on the packages that you have because in the floor plants and the... What's in the second floor? Second floor. Shoulder room space. Shoulder room space. Thank you. Similar question to earlier that we receive any communications from anyone. As a 4 p.m. today for public comment. Shrineqa? No, we did not. We did not. Okay. At this time I opened it up. The Florida Public Common, if there's anyone before us that would like to speak on this item. 4 3174 shops, please approach. Saying no one, our close public comment. Strange. But they have it on the five. We included this here. Are you attempting to show us something? I was trying to see if we can find, you know, some of the, that's it, there you go. That's it. Right. It's just that portion after the courtyard is the exact same footprint, it has a second story. Most of the furniture showrooms are looking for spaces that are arranged in six to 20,000 square feet. There's nothing in the market for something like that and they are like- So I would imagine you would need to come back with, you know, for approvals for that. We are proposing it as a second phase. So we basically- So we're really not approving that part of it now? No, we're approving everything. They are requesting, they are requesting approval of that as well with the option to not build the fake tool that doesn't pan out. Okay, so basically if you don't get a furniture store that wants that thing. If we decide, so you may not build it. If you're exactly. Right, so. Based on market conditions and who's in the reality of the market, we may take the risk of building it but the way that this works is I've heard a lot and by the way I'm an architect and I study at heart a big planner and I hear the concerns in regards to parking requirements and they are a real concern. The problem is that's an owner, an operator of this facility and especially on a location like this when there is no plan B. Like the gentleman before me, he has the option of using off street on street parking and other uses have a more urban environment. Our facilities are completely isolated. If I don't provide parking for my own clients, my clients will strive and they are my partners somehow because if they don't succeed, I fail. If I don't collect the rent or they cannot pay rent, I fail. So I'm not asking for anything, I wouldn't build something that I cannot operate properly, if they want to try and to say. Phase one, which is the ground floor of this facility, meets all the parking requirements on its own merit. When we propose this project, we made a parking analysis, basically look at the IT manual, which is the engineering manual for traffic engineers. And we look at precedents for other cities and municipalities in regards to the requirements for different uses. Unfortunately, we are forced to request variances on the City of North Miami Beach because some of the code requirements are obsolete. There is no properties on this game boulevard, and I've been here for 24 years, that currently has three acres of land contiguous that are available for development. Yet, the code requires that I come here in front of you and I say if I could hopefully get a approval to develop on a smaller size. And it's unfortunate, but it is like this, and probably it requires constant updating the same issue with the parking requirement. I've had endless offers of restaurants trying to lease this property, endless. And I love to have a really good restaurant here. You know what my problem is? The code requires 20 parking spaces per thousand square feet of retail of restaurant. I do one restaurant. I cannot pay the cost of the land with the current interest rates, and I don't do a good business. I don't do myself a favor. I don't do a city a favor. Our other cities updating their code requirements for certain uses or certain realities they are. Unfortunately, some of these things we learn as we go. So most of the variance is that we are currently requesting on this project that have mostly to do with side disposition and the very awkward nature of the site. Back, rear, setback, requirement is 20 foot from the property line. My property is 67 feet from property line to property line. The front setback is 25. If I take 20 and 25, I'll have minus the green buffer, minus the five foot, green, well, we won't do that because we will do it on the setback. You end up with having a 20 foot deep building. I don't know of any occupied. That doesn't work? It's not going to. Maybe if you do a single lane, a single lane bowling alley could probably work. Financially, I don't think it would work either. So really, we tried to work with variances. With variances. No, a long time ago the business that was there. Yeah, yeah, with variances. They didn't build that building with 20 feet. It's a zero, zero lot line. They requested the same variances that would be a very small building. Yes. Generated a lot of parking. Well, it's a total entertainment requires the parking code requirement for that use is similar to to find dining for 20 per thousand. So they had 120 parking spaces for that space, but that use is no longer and I had a lot of interest also. They knocked the door and believe me, but we don't want to entertain that kind of business anymore. Sounds like something else we want to add before we discuss this. I would like to clarify a few things in regards to the green islands. It's minor, I don't think that you may have issues with them, but I want to explain. The existing, the current parking requirement requires that we have one island and a re-aid parking spaces. Parking sizes are 9 feet wide. There's existing trees and there is existing improvements on that facility that when you demolish or let's not say the mullish, when you start designing, it doesn't fall in the same place as the current parking code would do. So for example, we had very old oak trees. The requirement for the code is a three inch caliper. It's a tree that I buy from Home Depot and I planted there. It will take 30, 40 years to be a tree that we have right now. So what we decided is in lieu of demolishing everything and scraping the property and starting from scratch, we say, OK, we meet the criteria for the Green Islands. We have the amount of Green Islands that we would be required if we do it every eight parking spaces, but they don't fall in the exact place. So for example, one would have six spaces. The other one may have eight spaces, and another one may have 10, but we maintain the existing tree where it is. So that was a trade of, I'm requesting a variance to do the city a favor of having a nice canopy in other words. So that was one of them. The other one is in regards to the width of the islands. We requested a reduction on the entrances to be able to meet this requirement also. Okay. It's mostly this position, the disposition of the existing trees and where they fall within the new plants. Who's parking on their map? It's the developer, Mackin. What, three are the development? Right. The different space from here. Because they don't have parking. You need to have parking during construction. They are building their own parking structure. I assume they don't have a CEO. They won't be able to occupy it. So we rent that. So you don't have cars spread apart. For reference, the Mackin it's known as Aura. If you recall the Aura project on on. But 70 170th and Dixie. Yeah. It's going up. It's still being constructed. In fact, it's good that they're using that base because we've been trying very hard to not have that parking overflow into our parking space which is right next door so for the time being while the contractor going on construction space. Okay. Anything else? For now, you may have more questions. We'll talk about I would like from the board at this time. Let's start with Mr. Cresper. Where's that four by four sign information on your property? Where's the sign that says? Yeah. There is no sign. I was an advisor. I should install a sign. No, because we developed with actually in that on that piece of property, which is highly visible, which a lot of people may have be impacted by and may have a feeling about it. It should be. You weren't advised. You didn't know, you didn't do it. You didn't do it. You didn't not do it because you willfully, purposefully ignored it because of the $500 costs of the sign. But it's very unfortunate that there's not a very big sign because this is not a $15st Street that nobody goes on. It's this cable. Mr. Brown, I'm going to leave it at there. Now, I want to make a point there, because it's important that I put this on the record. Not only in previous developments that we have done in the city, the city's responsibility to pose that sign, not the developer. Now, I'm going to tell you something. I did actually reach out to the neighbors. I invited Todd Kiesel from the community across the street. I sent him all the information on this project. I met with him multiple times in order to participate and his team of neighbors to participate in the outcome of this project. And I have all the a documentation show for that. But that doesn't account for the thousands of people drive by and have an entry. Well, regardless, it's part of the requirement. It's part of our city laws. It's been required forever. I've only been here for 14 years, but that feels like forever, especially to some members. Did you make a statement saying that the city's responsibility to post a sign? Yes. No, where is that? Where is that? No, it's not. I have never had to post a sign in the city of Donor of Miami Beach myself. I've never had any developer not post design. We got the labels, we paid for the labels, we send them no requirement of the No. No, I'm good. Interesting. We leave it aboard the question. I'm still let's continue with the comments. Mr. Thomas. For me, me too. I just have a question that when you requested the variances in parking, I thought I heard the city say that one of the reasons why the variance was granted is because there was a showroom going to be implemented as part of the plant. Right? And therefore, because it was a showroom, not a retail space that you allowed for better words, less parking than because of that. But isn't the showroom part of a second phase and if it isn't built, then what? No problem. So the showroom approach in the second floor is the second floor of the first floor. The showroom would take 7,000 square feet. As a matter of fact, you will get a reduction in parking in the use of the parking because the parking requirement for showroom is not for per thousand. It's one per thousand. So if they lease you actually would have a surplus. Parking. I'm confused. So we had to calculate a little dollar retail. What's it? We had to calculate a little's all retail with, we require more spaces, but when you go from, when you take a chunk of that back out, instead of having fourth basis for a thousand square feet. And you go down to one paper, a thousand square feet, chaining the youth from just pure retail to a warehouse actually reduces your dress roll. So that's what's worth saying that if you had 7,000 square feet of retail, for a retail, it would be 28. I understand. But now it's 7. Thank you. I still go on record. If we have a code that's supposed to be adhered to. I understand we're going to have these properties that come up that are just odd sizes and hard to build on and we want to encourage people like you to take a hint and build with them. But the first blush at approving or not approving should be, you need to meet code requirements to start with. Now, if they come back saying we can't do it, then I think the cities would be who've itself to say, well, don't say can't. Here's some of the ways you can do it, rather than wholesale variance grants, because the developers looks at it like, I got to make a living here and I have to be able to build something. Well, the builder is going to always want to do what he can to maximize his profitability. Our job is to say fine, but it needs to meet our standards within our code so that the people that live here in the future have a place that they want to live in and not have, I mean, zero setbacks and this and that because of this property configuration, whatever. That's all I'm going to say I'm done. Board member, Missoumi. Yes. How many handicapped spots are provided? Four. I can't make it out this far. Four. Four. On the ends? Two on each side. Two and two. Yeah. Let me. That is the legal requirement. Gotcha. Thank you. So the three-acre Setback, the cookies place had the same issue, correct? Identical. Yeah, exactly. Narrowness at an issue. The problem is that if you have a precedence and you Granted on the base of the one but not the other then and you're you know the code it written in such a way it doesn't contemplate it It tried to cookie cutter everything, but the reality is that you don't have always have a perfectly safe lot or in this case you have a really narrowly shaped one. That's why the variance system exists. But otherwise you have come from the community to have no variance, it will be granted for da da da da da. We don't have that in this case because the hardship aspect needs to be considered. But if you do it for one and not for the other for the same reason, then it may result in some cases of looking arbitrary and capricious with it what we need to try to avoid. OK, and then my last question is. Every low. What is the difference? Can I add dictionary? No. What is the common distance from the end I'm sorry to interrupt but at some point I'm sorry to interrupt. They mentioned capricious and I've been writing all the terms that are very esoteric and at the end I was going to have to terminate if I could put them in the record for purposes of the minute because today the minutes because today has been the most esoteric. I'm sorry. It's okay. Man, I'm interrupted you. It's okay. Thank you. The distance from the edge of your building or the egress, I think is more toward the middle. It's like 500 feet approximately. Is that enough room should the city, which I can't imagine why we haven't done it yet, improve the one, the one seventy second intersection, which I was of the impression that the building that's on Dixie, that's being built, currently, that was a part of the approval process, that they were supposed to upgrade the intersection prior to issuance of the permit, from a meeting I watched a long time ago. So there there will be some type of improvement improvement at one 72nd. Will that leave us enough room to improve that encroaching on your? No. So as a matter of fact, Introduced a project before we even started discussing this to public works department many years ago and we were able to I won't say obtain because we don't obtain the grant But there was an available grant of half a million dollars from the Department of Transportation for improvement of that intersection. The north, there's like a small park between the intersection and my property. It's around 200 to 350 feet long with frontage on the scale by 67 deep. It's a drive retention area, basically what it is. It holds water when there's a lot of rain in the Nibb andiscayne Boulevard. There is a bubble and it flats that area so it doesn't flat the road. But it's mostly dry most of the time. That place could be a park. A manatee of Antura actually has a maintenance agreement with the DOT and many of these areas are beautified and the same with the intersection. It belongs to, it used to belong to a city north Miami beach and it's solely to the Department of Transportation in the 90s for the expansion of the Skimbola World. So there is- The city property. But you could improve it. You currently have a maintenance, I'm going into. It's territory, but you do have a maintenance everywhere. Yeah, it's adjacent to like your property adjacent to DOT and FEC property. Yes. Yeah. So they're important to see in their map and it looks like a city property because it looks like it publicly owned. We don't actually own it. It's actually DOT. Okay, so so the answer to my question is is his property will not be affected by an improvement at the one seventy second Train crossing the intersection. Yeah, there is, you know, from a traffic review standpoint. Yes, you know, that property was taken into account, but we're seeing that it probably had a certain effect on one bill. So that's why when we were noting the condition of a approval that staff is recommending there is an additional step there that they are required to take to assist with the revision to the signal timing and so forth. So that contemplated, it is addressable given that side of their actual impact, but we felt that because there was an impact, because there was an other item coming in that's most appropriate to address that, it's okay, let's complete that project and continue with the necessary improvement to that intersection, particularly with the signal timing. Right, because you've lost, or we have lost now on the south side, any ability to improve because you've got the building right there for police. Really? Yeah. The only way to actually widen that intersection, for instance, like at 163rd and Biscayne, if we were going to make it that big where there's three lanes going east and west, we wouldn't have the room. It would be more to that than just simply widening. Is there a turning lane? Right, there should be a right and turning lane. To be. To be. And they need to do something with that you turn. Eventually. Not that this is not his problem, I realize that, but I want to make sure that we are leaving ourselves enough. We do. Yeah. I don't think I'm going to go through it. But that's the improvement of the ones we're dead in the water there. I have nothing when you're coming from a myth in the room. And I think we know from a professional standpoint, there are the room. However, as someone with a transportation planning background, I can say that because of the nature of that crossing with the FEC track and the multiple layers of approval, you can have this base. It may not be built, you know, regardless if you have that base. So that might, that's something that I do want to, you know, put out there, just from a factual standpoint, it's that because of how that is aligned with the rail track, that extra turn, it's not something that's necessarily something that, you know, it required a lot of engineering, a review and it may not actually go through. Okay, so because I know how do you? It was supposed to be. Right. Yeah, there is enough room. It was supposed to be improved with the other building. Right. There is enough room, but whether or not it will actually, so we thought the improvement is a completely different matter. So I see it's so basically that piece there where there's like a little division. Yeah. Right there. Yeah. And so all that property here also belongs to the FDLD. Yeah. I'm not requesting a side setback variance. I am OK on my side to the property that you're pointing out. I am not requesting a variance towards that side. Right. I just wanted to make sure that it's not going to impact you, should that, you know, or it's going to impede us from improving that. But if we don't even own it, then it's a mood point, right? Right. Okay. Thank you very much. I don't have any further questions. Okay. Board Member Hezler. Sorry, just to clarify, variance number nine and Tom, we were talking about parking the four per thousand assumes the second floor is in place. So if you don't build that second floor, you're obviously going to be close to the five per thousand or something like that. For shopping centers of a certain size, the requirement is 4,000. I meet my parking requirement without the variance if I don't build second faith. Right, right. That's okay. So the 4,000 is assuming that gets built and that it's 4,000. If not, you have a lot more parking. I have sufficient. Yeah, you have more than enough. Okay. And then we're again, I'm okay with everything else, the loading and off loading you're doing between 10, I guess in 6. 10 and 8. And then when you designated two spaces. Well, with this, so, so, seldom we see retail spaces open before 10 in the morning. OK? The idea is that we have 80 parking spaces on the shopping center. At any given time during those hours of operations, since we don't have food and beverage that usually operates at night, the shopping center is going to be closed during those times. So the idea is that if they have scheduled deliveries, they can perform during those times. So the idea is that if they have scheduled deliveries, they can perform during those times, and it wouldn't affect the operation of the shopping center as a whole. But the parking would be accessible to all patrons, shall there be a shop that decides to open at six in the morning? I don't know, maybe a doctor's office or something has irregular regular hours of operation will be affected. We still have something like 64 parking spaces available at all times. It was the time that you just say 10 a.m. to... 10 p.m. I made him, he said, I'm tired. 10 p.m. to 8 a.m. I don't know how that's going to work though, because I mean, but he's saying 10 p.m. to 8. So overnight is yeah, overnight. I don't know. I don't know. Everybody gets furniture. I mean, in the warehouse guys, that's what the comment. This is that's what I saw right there with furniture in the second. Yeah, if it's furniture should be probably they do one. They do want to work for you to know because we have other properties are tenants, they are furniture stores, they change their layout on the showroom because by the way, what is a showroom is a showroom where there is no inventory, okay? So furniture stores don't in this very valuable locations, they don't keep inventory of big items. They may have small decoration items and stuff that people can take with the bag, but they will not have the couch that you want for your house or the dining table. So what they do is they have these last showrooms where they display the items, but then the logistics happen from a warehouse. So to clarify this, they usually do once or twice a year or collections changes. They will not be delivering furniture here or recurrently. If the board had to turn about it, that would suggest that you could make a condition that the showroom can have inventory inside other than what is like being shown for the showroom. And that might be a way you know that is the objective way to Kind of alleviate that concern. I would have thrown that out there Good that it's not a bad idea. So it's not one of those discount, you know places that you just We don't back our truck and all that up But we're not yeah, I were asking rent is a hundred dollars of foot. There is not dollar stores there. Triple net. Triple net. It's healthy. I'd say asking price. I don't know if they're paid. Yeah. I mean, you will. I'm just a ranch shopping centers before. And I know when you come up with these rest, we had a hell of a time just trying to get people behind the parking, utilizing the employees to use the parking, utilizing the employees to use the parking. So have these restrictions good luck when you're doing multi-tenant. If they have delivery at 12 o'clock noon, they're going to do it. No, we can put rules and regulations on the shopping center, and I can't enforce them. And we have done it. We do have rules and regulations on our shopping center. And that did make a suggestion at one point to say that it made a specific parking spot at the loading zone just because we had that same concern early on. So that, you know, eventually at some point, you're gonna have folks who come in to do the stocking. So it's not just loading, there's that carryover from the loading and operation to the stocking of those places that you need and you need to avoid. So that did make that recommendation at part of our review with the applicant. Anything else for this? No, I'm finished. Thank you. I'm welcome. May I ask a good question? Go for it. When it comes to fire hydrants and whatnot, how do we handle that? We defer to the Miami-Dade fire department at part of their review process and their permitting process when they submit for a building permit. Okay, so whatever the requirement that they need to have, they're going to fulfill with the permit. Okay, so that's so whatever the requirement that they need to have they're going to fulfill with. Yeah, at part of the building permit approval they are required to go to Miami Dave's fire and get the appropriate approval just like every other applicant or a therm or other things. Right. So that all are likely swept up together within it. Part of what Miami County also does is reviews staging areas in addition to the fire hydrant because it had to be a cohesive plan for it, you know, in case of the disaster, right? Right, okay. Thank you. Nothing further. Thank you. Just real briefly, you talked about maybe having a cafe shop centered for that little cut out for the second building. Have you identified a tenant already? Are you talking about like a cafe shop like a Vickies where you could come and get a Pasalino in a coffee or this is supposed to be like a Starbucks that's going to be completely different in the type of traffic that you render. I understand what you're saying about parking spots, but I think if you're looking, I can't really call it an anchor tenant because it's a coffee shop, but I think the type of coffee shop is really gonna dictate what you anticipate as far as pedestrians. So we don't have an identified tenant. We know that if we give this space the use, we will find the good tenant. Okay. In regards to a traffic that it generates, the idea is that it's small enough, so it does not become a place for people to hang there forever. But we do want the traffic. We operate the... You want it to generate a traffic. We want to generate the traffic. We definitely want... You want it to generate it. We want to generate the traffic. We definitely want it. And I'll give you a present because the code doesn't analyze the real world conditions. It's a learning experience. And we put in words what we learn from experience. And in our shopping center, once or any second, once or any one 50, we scan Bula or what Bellamon cookies are. Sometimes I go there and there is no cars in the parking lot. There's none. There's like maybe the two or three employees and the random guy that goes in and out of the store. And that to me is not a good business setup, but not because it's not profitable to me. I make the same amount of rent, where it's empty or it's not. But the reality is that you want that place basing, you wanted moving, and I'm not going to rent to a 5,000 square feet restaurant. I know I will not, because I will not be able to lease the remaining portions, but an 844 square feet, which is minute for a commercial size, for a commercial operation, could be really interesting. It couldn't be a very, very beautiful place. And as a matter of fact, it will enhance the idea of the city in regards to planning of making the urban fabric more walkable. We're spending a lot of money on making the urban grid work. Like they made me do sidewalks and back entrances on the 172nd to hopefully one day tie in the other side, Dixie and Biscayne and the people from Marina Palms to walk towards these places and the people on 163rd to walk but give them a reason to walk. I was talking to the owners at Marina Palms and they were very excited about our previous plan while we were having a furniture store with three stories was kind of like the restoration hardware in Palm Beach where they have a restaurant in the roof and they were thrive to learn that we would be designing something like this. Unfortunately, that deal didn't go through, but I think that the community wants to be able to not get to a car and have to go out for a cup of coffee. If you're living across the street and there is 700 apartments around there and there's going to be another 350 behind and there is another thousand around there, and there's gonna be another 350 behind, and there is another 1000 or something 2000, I think, is a pool of units on 163. It would be really nice for them to be able to grab a bicycle and go to the store instead of having to grab the car. We've been blinded by the requirement of vehicular needs, and it's sad, it's a post-war dream, but it's changing. And the count is changing, and the way that we develop the city is changing. And in five years, parking lots are going to be probably just charging stations for automatic cars, you know, but who knows? Anybody else need any final words? If not, I'll entertain a motion. The only thing I was thinking, would you be willing to, or what your thoughts are on creating those designated loading zones now? And then when you build the second phase, at that point when you can reconvert those back to just regular part of the way. They are always. They are always. They are over parking. I mean, you have an access to parking the way if you just do the first phase without the second story. So I tell you how they were designed. They are, I think, that may be confusing on the presentation. But those are regular parking spaces. What we basically did is we grabbed and we put just like Miami Beach or my city of Miami in this very urban environment. They have a plague that says business loading area during certain hours. Okay, so you go to Miami Beach and you'll see this loading area from seven to six. Otherwise it's regular parking. So that's the intent. The intent is exactly what you're proposing. Okay. To maintain those as regular parking spaces during hours of operations Yeah, and then I don't know if it's already in here, but that that second story just just like we had mentioned before There's a lower density use is going to be approved for that second story Is there anything that precludes them from putting like it was mentioned like a five-and-dime store on the second story? Or is there a restriction on that? You can add a restriction at part of the condition to approval, that it's a concern of the board. Okay. What? You can make it a condition of approval if that it's your concern. Yeah, so I motion to approve So I motion to approve. I motion to continue. I motion to approve with the condition that that second story be a low density type, at least to a low density type user like a furniture store. Mr. Attorney. Mr. Attorney. Question. Mr. Attorney, question. Neither one has been seconded so far. So there's neither one is on the table. Okay, the question, okay. You have a question. I've been opposed. No, neither one is because neither one has been seconded. You need a second on one of them. How would it work? So there's, we would have willingly do that. The problem is there is not a use. Actually, unfortunately, there is a desic. It's the furniture showroom is the terminology. You say it's already in the code as a retail use. So the city code does not see furniture showroom as a whole as a lower inset. So it's like a catch 22. Like what is going to be that lower use if the city already- They designated it as retail. Exactly. It treats it as regular retail. That's why we ask for the variance. If you ask me, I wouldn't have asked for the variance. I would just have a separate designation for, but it's not the case because that would be a complete different process. So understood. That's the answer. I'm in your motion to just have a... I'm in my motion. Yes, go ahead. Whoever has a motion. Yes, go ahead. Whoever has a much. I move to continue pending a placement of a minimum four by four sign on the property and on coming back, you can form a bureau. Your five and die, your, or whatever we were talking about. Anyway, my mind is to continue. And after placement of the sign, we'll come back and get another shot. And that's it. On second. Mr. Attorney, the motion would require a time-ster in that part of the motion. It's always useful since it has been seconded now, so it's on the table to clarify Mr. Chairman that we'll have a time-ster. The time-ster? I mean, a specific date when we actually hear it again. You guys there is there something in the ordinance that says how long the time has to be. It has to be at least seven days. And but we only have PDB on certain days. So you have... The date... Yeah. Well, the sooner that it's available. Well, the reason why we need to have a time term term is because for advertisement purposes, if we continue to a certain date, there's no additional legal ad advertisement. In addition, if it's a certain date that is separate from our actual schedule planning and don't include. I don't think that's the intention. I think the intention would be to have it at the regular BBZ. Okay, but it's not assuming that there's enough time. Right, but there need to be clarity from That we just put a sign up now before the this has to go in front of the commission. That's why I was gonna suggest Can't we just put a sign up now until the commission meeting? Right that's what I was suggesting No, no no next month Just look that way you can get yeah that way you don't hold this up and then we can get Comments from the public as a result of that sign between now and the commission maybe I mean sounds as though mr. Hester is looking to make a friendly amendment to mr. Cresper's motion to continue and sign um And accordance with the code so are you Continued to and then come the code. So are you expected of this? Well, they continued to, and then come before us. No, thank you. So the commission said he would have to comply with the terms of the code by putting up the sign and provide us with the code has been complied with by a photograph of the sign of the branch of the commission. So we would vote as is and we take his scouts on it at he's going to put up the big um. Well, it's a condition we make our just know we would make as it has to be a number ties or not or I'm not getting into the whole advertising aspect of it, but I would assume we would be able to make our approval contingent on his complying with this condition because this is a condition that we are acting to play on our vote. That's correct, and it's an effect you're waving that restriction if you thought that it was going to be prohibitive in some way or compelling in some way and The the commission will be advised that that was a condition if he didn't comply with it They obviously would have the right to deny Advertising will generate Well, but then they can go to the commission right right? Then they can attend the commission meeting and I think this and I know we still have a Request to make a pose. I don't know that you've accepted it but I think that there's two things Two for one it gives an opportunity for the public to know that there's development that's happening here and as you kind of pointed It's on a more prominent street being on this cane just opposed to 153rd. Secondly, it errates our point to staff to make sure that these applicants understand that whether they realize it or not and this is someone who's built in the city you need to comply with the signage. So I think that this could be an affirmative step in the right direction to make sure that everyone moving forward understands that you know this is something we're going to convert. So continue to hold. No, that's not. Mr. Chair, just to add, it is going to get re-advertised again for commission, just so you are aware. For commission is going to get advertised for commission again. If he continues to go to commission, it's going to get re-advert commission again. Which, for which meeting? If he continues to go to commission it's gonna get re-advertised again. Where is the advertising happening? On our website. On the website. He's in the newspaper also. And on the newspaper also. Sorry, Miami Harrow. Can you pending your installation of a site at your expense on the property? I think the chairman has clarified that if you accept a friendly amendment it's not to continue. It's to require the posting of the sign and anticipation of the commission meeting, which would be the October one. So that's a, we know about that. And of course there's a plenty of October what it's gonna be whatever 20s And if he doesn't comply that 21st is in the Posting the sign And mr. Applicant just Is there appetite do I do you have concern quarrel with which being proposed to I think is a suitable idea I was concerned about the difference of the item but if you guys agree as a condition to the approval but I have no objection I was never I mean, it's pro. Okay. So you. So it sounds as though. You have to be put up. Because if it's put up this for for October 22nd. I can go to the bridge up on how it does. At first, at least seven days prior to. No, he's going to post it this week. Yeah, the intention is not for you to, you know, drag your feet on this. Yeah, yeah, I don't think that you want to. I never, this is not the way, it was not an omission. No, no, I get it. It was a mistake or a miscommunication. I will correct it. You're at the wrong place at the wrong place. No. So, what that being said, one being bis came ball bar. Right, right. So, ignorance of the law. That is true. That is true. What that being said, it seems as though you have accepted the friendly amendment, the applicant has shown an interest in willingness to update the signage and compliance with the code. We have a second, a first, and we are ready for a vote. Just to clarify again, we're voting on. We are voting on the motion to approve. He's already clarified that just suggesting that the particular spots be dedicated as loading was already contemplated. And he's also made his representation that he will have an updated sign placed within the week. And that- So there will be a continuance of P and Z, it just be- No, this is motion for approval with the understanding that our minutes will reflect and he will have the sign up well and have answered the time needed before it goes to commission if he so proceeds to the next step. Which he is going to do that otherwise this would have been exercising futility so perfect everyone okay thank you director it's so I he it was his motion he second no you seconded I seconded oh he seconded I accept it you change we change You changed, we changed. Questionless motion. Thomas second. Amended by Heisler. And then we're going to vote. You remember. I don't. He accepts us. Yeah, I was. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Just preferring how friendly that is. So clearly we have no idea what we're voting for. No, we're clear. We're clear. We're clear. Let's go. That's it. Roll call. Roll call vote. Mr. Heisler. Yes. Mr. Minnesrumi and. Yes. Mr. Thomas. Yes. Mr. Kreisberg. Yes. Chair St.ville. Four. Chair, I'm motion carried with the, what would the condition that will document and follow up with the applicant and provide an update for both the board and the commission. So accordingly. Thank you and best of luck to you. Thank you all. Good evening. All right, you do the same. Moving along, we have item five legislation, which is a right of way. I'm sorry. Oh. A right of wave vacation ordinance. This is a city ordinance legislation. I don't you don't have applicant. Right. This is all city. The legislation. Yeah. Yeah. Right of way very. All right. Way very. So. And ordinance the mayor and city commission of the city of North Miami B for the amenity of the city of North Miami B Code by amenity chapter 24 entitled zoning and land development Article 15 by creating a new section entitled a bananment and vacation of right away and eat men to provide a uniform procedure for abandonment and vacation of city street alleys, eat men and other fee or non-feet property interest, also in the same character, providing for conflict, severability, and qualification and providing for an effective date. So that was good. We have to make the ordinance at some point. Parties? We don't have an ordinance. We, you jump into. I'm not sure I understand the question with the Christburg. I apologize. If I may, I think what you're asking is you want to amend the ordinance to create this ordinance that allows you to take control of these easements and you're going to put this in front of the commission Proof that right if it if we have our say for yeah, so I think it may be either if we let your dire run through what the ordinance that would provide in your packet entailed and why we're a staff at recommending this to your consideration and any comment to move forward to a commission when we are together. How did I? Good evening board. My name is Josiah Israel and I am presenting the ordinance for abandonment invocation of right of ways and easements. So to let you guys know what this is, abandonment and vacation. So we're creating SOPs or standards of operation for abandonment and vacation of right of ways. Because it's a process that people do. People request abandonment or vacation of right of ways, it could be a alley or anything of that nature. What we're doing is creating standard procedures for us to put into coal. That means for the review of these right away vacations, the process for right away vacations, what the applicant must do, what they must submit. That's what this ordinance is for. So, background of it, we have received numerous requests of abandonment of right-of-ways. Whether it be part of a larger scale project or someone requesting abandonment of some right-of-way in front of their yard or alley, we receive these requests. What we're trying to do is create now the process that we must operate by as city staff. So with that being said, what this is creating a process. So as you can see, the findings, this complies with the city code, it modernizes the city code. It creates a process that is needed within the city code with the city code of ordinances. All right, so with that being said, the public right of ways and the mixed use as well will be subject to this ordinance because we understand that we have larger scale projects that may request, hey, there's an alley that runs through this property. Can I request a badmment or vacation of this alley? We now have a process to go through that review. So looking at this right here, here are the procedures. Just a quick run through, there'll be a pre-application meeting. First, when the applicant comes to the city, we discuss, have a meeting about this. They can about the right of way, whether it be Ali, whatever it is. We can discuss and have a conversation with them if it's feasible. Next will be the application process. They will submit the application. So what you see here, A through J would be, everything that's required for them to submit when it comes to the application. They will then go to track. They will go through the track process, which is technical review of applications for development. They will go through that track review. Of course, track review, after the track review, they will come to PCB if they make it through the track review. After PCB, then they will go to the city commission to be heard and to be approved or denied. We have a banter review standards, so they just don't get an abandonment. They have to meet certain review standards. Every review standards is that the city still use that right of way. If they purchase this right of way, if they take this right of way, will it affect the emergency vehicles? Will it affect the trash? Will it impede traffic? So there's certain review standards that we have that we're going to review this abandonment based off of. With that being said, if you guys have any questions, you can go ahead and ask. Is this the actual legislation where the green food? You mean the actual, the ordinance? Yeah. The ordinance was included in your packet. So you'll see that the ordinance for the right of way and everything should be in there if you guys reviewed that. So all the banements still come before us. Correct. Yeah. Go with different criteria. And we choose to have or more identify process. Yeah, it's just making more uniform process so they can identify how to review, how to review. Right. And then what happens once it becomes abandoned, then it becomes the property of that applicant? Of that private owner. It becomes abandoned, then it becomes the property of that applicant. Of that private owner, so now there'll be the ones responsible for maintaining it, everything of that nature. And what are they paying the city for that, anything? You have, I know you have the application to submit, I believe it's $3,000, but then it's a separate fee. Separate fee to purchase that amount. And that may be continued on how the commission want to act on this. Multiple important part of this is that right now we don't have any set standard on how it's approved. But when we look at other cities, we're like, I'd like to die with saying, it will close in this have an effect that's unforeseen. Like, what if it had an effect on fire rescue, right? We are making sure that we do appropriate due diligence from staff standpoint before it even comes to you of the planning and owning board. Right now we have no process, so it depends on the quality of your staff. So, you know, we don't want things to fall for least the correct between the crack there. So that's really trying to accomplish. So this has the potential of generating additional income from the city by going through this process. That's the same process. It may generate additional income for the city and two ways. First is the actual abandonment of a city owned property. Not if it were alleyway that were dedicated by a private property that does completely different aspects of that. With the original city property and we're essentially abandoning it to sell it off. There's a, you know, there are aspects of getting income from that. The other aspect is that by abandoning city right away, it no longer are not possible. So add to the taxable value of the property, the abandoned piece of right away, it's attached back to, that makes sense. And that generates a regular income from a large volume tax over time. It also provides for us if we don't need that right away, if we maintain that right away at the city, we are all liable from the standpoint of something happens on that. And so forth. So it's a liability issue that well, I call a liability from a financial standpoint. There's a maintenance liability as well for anything that it's paved that we may not need. So it's doubting the process, it allows us to actually critically look at all the right of which we have. And we have a lot more alleyway than your average city, actually. So if somebody was gonna purchase the right away, this is based on the market price of that. The park that doesn't really entirely outline that portion as well. Right, so maybe that should be added because don't you want to standard? We can look at to it. Generally you can, you know, they're, you know, depending on how you want to approach it, but looking from a market standpoint has been a step to bulk. Based on the square footage. And the square footage. And the current market rate for something like that, if you don't do that, you know, somebody offers you, you know, the $3,000 and, you know somebody offers you you know the $3,000 and you know I believe it's a hub because right there you go so you know you might want to set the standards into setting a standard for that yeah but that would involve in a we will review based on that a appraisal standard yeah we will with any other city property and looking at other I I know. Yeah. I suggest that connection is chairman that it be based on the tax appraisal. So you don't end up as actually having to do appraisals of very small alleyways and. Right. It's spoken like a true attorney. Thank you. Right. So the the value and I still have all the terms that I want to put in. We're getting you. Yeah. So never you ask them to separate up someone separate to a separate appraisal correct? Right. So you would take the average price of the square footed or the adjacent property of what you are, what you're abandoning. So they next door the average square feet is $100 per square foot and you're abandoning 10 square feet of right away 10 times 100 is a thousand that your price. As per the property appraisers value. Yeah. Okay. Because the price will drop the according like what if that is the pleasure of the board. Sounds like it is. Is there anyone else have any comments before? Just a question. City streets have utilities that run through there. It's a responsibility of who to terminate those. Or are there a lot of the people to build over them? Or how does that all get washed out? It actually within the product project describe within the ordinance that you have to grunt through and get all the clearance letter from utilities and so forth in order for the project to continue. So it is ultimately the out of the applicant or the receiving entities responsibility. But this project does provide for that, whereas we don't actually have a process for that right now. Great question. That's great question. Oh, this was meaningful conversation. Mr. Chairman, I guess it's appropriate then, I think the way you're headed for a motion to continue. Motion to continue. We have a motion to continue. So that the staff can take into a motion in a second with the direction that you're Motion to continue. We have a motion to continue. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. We're the direction that you're taking to consideration. Yep. The comments that we've made as a board and how we can, well, I don't want to put that on the record. The comments made on the board and how you can fine tune and bring back before us the right away variance. But on October 21st. Sounds good to me. All right, sounds good. I think it was a good first by the de apple, and it's something that definitely is needed because as staff has mentioned, it's something that we see on a regular basis. So let's put something in place so that we have something to turn to. Are we more abandoning or picking up? No, people coming before, like just when you have projects, and they have easements, and you got to have them. It might as well have something. And it might potentially generate some additional funds for the city, so. It also provides a process for things that might get a little dornier. For example, when you receive a right away for transportation, it's supposed to be you for that transportation use. Now we're in a city where we are slowly running our parkland for concurrency purposes, and so other cities have tried to stretch them with their right away to turn to parkland. And so having a process like this also allowed us to move forward with a more concrete depth day if we wanted to convert right away into parks. Now we park to something like that, would you go public park? How do you have the underlying? Yes, or our altbyes. We now have a better process to actually run through and say, can we check that all the time? Mr. Do we need Hessler to continue where we are? We're We're You know what? The question is That would be warm. So just out of curiosity the The pico pro tico pico tico Tico project that we did they had That right away Is it a project? Yeah, that was your pick of a project. Remember that? So they have they had a right away correct? Yeah. So was that city owned and we then allowed them to assume that? It was that was more of an easement though. It would, yeah, it would dedicated as an easement for access purposes. We agreed to the vacation so that it would, yeah, it would dedicate it as an admin for access purposes. We agreed to the vacation so that it would be rededicated instead of a, like Northeast self-worth. Edmund, it became the new entrance for that development. So they had to formally vacate it and then we had to rededicate it as a right away for that entryway. So that was basically a wash, yeah. And then we had to re-dedicate it at a right away for that entryway. So, that was basically a wash, yeah. But it needed to be procedurally done in order to take it to be valid the way it was dedicated. Yeah. You know, it just occurred to me while we're talking about this, too. What about, say, the property property owners rights? The easement by definition means it's owned by utilities or cities. So you're not going to take away anyone's property. No, I have to respect. I have to go through the review process and not regard. So that would be my concern. Yeah, it's about having no check and balance it in a checklist in a process that's really not well to find that the city and by better defining it And you know, we are able to make sure that that yeah, that's following the proper step moving forward It's chairman if I may to congratulate this board for Incredible use of terminology today. I have among the, what I call esoteric words actually they were exotic or sesquipadellian and today we heard a formuleic, nervousness, I've never seen it, I've never seen it that way. Interstitial, and this is for the minutes too. Day Minimists? I'll tell you the minute that was good. Topology, as opposed to type, I love that one. And somebody referred to a hammerhead shape of some sort. I think one of the applicants. So is the applicant for one sub-floor? All right. Do we have a motion? Let me see the next planning in board. Wait a minute. We didn't actually to be in sleep mode. Oh, they were going to vote the second. I'm sorry. We have a motion and a second for continuous with the directions. Yes, ma all right, but You want a roll call a voice vote? Do we have to have a voice all in favor of Continuous? All right, I all oppose I Can be by the way Mr. Attorney there the I hear everything that happens in the restroom because everything's wrong. Mike up. Yeah, are we saying? You the next planning and board meeting scheduled for Monday, October 21st. Yeah. Chinduatou is that it? I don't know. I don't know. It is later than normal because of a Jewish holiday. So, you know, as you know, for our kitty rule, we were, I got no, our Jewish holiday then watching me to that. Yeah. The adjourn. We'll motion in a second. All in favor. All right. Thank you board members. Thank you. Everyone get home safe. It's the Minimus. Yeah. Thanks.