Commission Preview

Susan Askew
Susan Askew

Commission Preview:

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Wednesday, May 17, 2017 8:30 am
City Hall, Commission Chambers

Attend in person or comment via email

City National Bank Building Redevelopment proposal
The new owner of the City National Bank property in North Beach has a big vision for the two surrounding blocks and he wants to partner with the City to make it happen. Miami Beach Commissioners next week will consider the proposal to redevelop the area around the CNB property, which is on the south side of 71st Street, and the surrounding blocks between Byron and Harding Avenues. Full story.

10:00 am: Rezoning of the 600 block of Washington Ave (first reading, public hearing)
The west side of the 600 block of Washington Avenue is currently zoned residential multi-family, medium intensity. It is proposed for rezoning to CD-2 (commercial, medium intensity), which is the same zoning to the immediate east on Washington Ave. 
CD-2 zoning allows retail sales, personal services, restaurants, bars, nightclubs, entertainment, and retail uses, as well as office, residential and hotel uses.
According to the Staff memo: “The existing residential and hotel uses within the subject property are consistent with the purpose of this district… while the enhancement of hotel accessory uses on the south side of the block will likely not present issues, the introduction of more intense, standalone uses within the proposed boundaries could create serious compatibility problems with existing established residential uses.” As a result, Staff is recommending specific use and height limitations “in order to safeguard existing residential uses within the boundaries, as well as adjacent and abutting residential uses.” Staff adds, “The boundaries of the proposed amendments fall within the Flamingo Park Local Historic District and the National Register Architectural District. All of the existing structures on the site, save for the recent additions on the south side, are classified as ‘Contributing’ in the City’s Historic Properties Database.”

Full details

10:10 am: Rezoning 6881 Indian Creek (Second, public hearing)
Currently classified as RM-1 (residential multi-Family, low Intensity). Proposed change to TC-3.
Staff writes, “The properties immediately to the north have the TC-3 designation, so this would be an extension of that district. The RM-1 and TC-3 designations allow for development of similar scales, so any future development would be compatible with the RM-1 districts to the east.
“The TC-3 classification is a low intensity district that, in addition to the currently permitted residential uses, also allows for office and hotel uses, subject to conditional use approvals, which may assist in improving the economic conditions of the neighborhood and provide services to surrounding residents. In addition, the existing uses within the subject property are consistent with the proposed designation.
“The TC-3 district also allows for limited neighborhood oriented retail and services, and small cafés as a conditional use, subject to Planning Board approval. Since the subject block proposed for rezoning is separated from adjacent RM-1 parcels by a street, the introduction of these limited non-residential uses, with Planning Board oversight, is not expected to have adverse impacts, if they should be proposed in the future.”
More details

10:30 am: Package store separation requirements (first reading, public hearing)
Considered last month but amended so it is back for first reading, it would increase the separation requirements for package stores from the current 300 feet to 1500 feet. However, the ordinance is amended as follows:
A retail store primarily selling alcoholic beverages may obtain conditional use approval from the planning board to operate at a lesser distance from an existing store, but in no event shall such a store open at a distance less than 700 feet from an existing store. There shall be no variances from this distance separation requirement.
Details and our coverage on why the change.

5:01 pm: Medical cannabis (first reading, public hearing)
The ordinance comes back to the Commission after Planning Board Review and has been amended based on the Planning Board’s recommendation regarding off-site parking locations. In addition, the proposed ordinance was modified to include two separate areas within the proposed mid-beach zone “consisting of Mt. Sinai hospital and the remaining area of inclusion in the mid-beach zone. This would allow Mt. Sinai, if it so chooses in the future, to have a dispensing facility, in addition to an allowable mid-beach facility… As proposed, the ordinance allows for up to three medical cannabis establishments in three different areas of the City.”
Details on the ordinance and Details on BTR procedures

Alcohol sale hours (first reading)
Back for another try! The proposed ordinance would return package liquor sale hours Citywide to 8:00 a.m. each day at retail stores and alcoholic beverage establishments. However, package liquor sales in the MXE district would be restricted to between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.

Sea Level Rise and resiliency criteria (first reading)
Commissioners will consider proposed sea level rise and resiliency criteria to be utilized by the City’s four land use boards when making decisions. The original proposal included a prohibition on underground parking but was referred back to the Commission by the Planning Board without  the prohibition.

Residents right to know
Proposed by Miami Beach United, this ordinance would create a process for registering neighborhood associations and individual residents and providing for delivery of notices “for matters that impact residents’ quality of life and allow for timely opportunities for public input.”


Terminate for convenience the agreement with Savino & Miller Design Studio for the future community park (former Par 3) project.
There was quite an intense discussion about this at the April Commission meeting with neighborhood residents speaking in favor of the Savino Miller design for the community park on the site of the former Par 3 Golf Course and City reps indicating the design was not responsive to the needs of the entire City. Residents were concerned about losing green space and the passive nature of the design. The Park was scheduled to begin construction in the Spring of 2016 and be completed this Summer.

At the meeting, Commissioner Joy Malakoff said, “There is nothing in here that says anyone wants it to be an active park. … it’s not a question of making it active. The question is whether there were enough level playing fields as opposed to hills.” Calling Barry Miller, a 30-year resident of the City a good landscape architect, she said, “The question is if this is the park the original Commission committed to do, which is supposed to appeal to the City of Miami Beach. It’s for the entire city so kids can play there, so grownups can go there to enjoy the water features… whether that is what was produced by the consultant is what we are here to discuss.”
Miller said, “Our contract …  and the will of Commission, called for design of a passive park. This is what we’ve designed.” In the meantime, he said he has incorporated all of the feedback from the City and added a tennis court, exercise courses, more playfields, and a reduced lake size. What was created he said, “We believe to be some of our finest work and we’re very proud of it.” Despite rumors to the contrary, Miller said everything is on budget. With community support and a project on budget, he said,  “We wonder why this has come to be.”
Commissioner John Alemán said, “This is not a neighborhood park. This is a City park. … the goal is for it to serve the needs of the entire city, passively. I don’t believe anyone up here has any intention of programming any city activities… there won’t be programmed recreation there as far as I’m concerned.” Calling the design “very beautiful” with components that are “really lovely” including the wetlands which she said “are amazing,” she indicated guidance has not been fully taken and, now, “The schedule about this is off the chain… it’s now been a year because we don’t have agreement.” She said the City needs to identify what parts of the plan can be done now so it can “kick into high gear in an approach we can afford.”
Miller has “a conflict of interest” as a park neighbor Commissioner Ricky Arriola told him. As a vendor he said Miller should be saying “I want to work with you.” Instead, he said there are delays because Miller doesn’t like the changes that are recommended by the City.
Jonathan Groff, a member of the Parks Advisory Board, speaking on his own behalf, said the park needs to have more open space for organized activities. He said the current design is “what Bayshore wanted, not what CIP [Capital Improvement Projects division] wanted. It’s a Valhalla for their neighborhood. It’s not functional.”
The item was deferred for action to next week’s meeting.
Discussion regarding best practices for sand sifting
Commissioner Grieco will discuss the Sustainability and Resiliency Committee’s recommendation that the City purchase equipment to allow for more days of beach debris cleanup.
Discussion regarding seawalls and Indian Creek Drive
As part of resiliency work along Indian Creek Drive from 25th Street to 41st Street, the City is currently installing new seawalls along City-owned parcels. The City has been trying to encourage private property owners to transfer their parcels with privately owned seawalls to the City in order to complete a continuous walkway along the water and ensure seawalls are constructed to new height standards in preparation for sea level rise.
The City has identified 33 individually owned parcels of land along Indian Creek between 25th and 41st Street. Staff writes, “To date, the City has received dedications from only one of the property owners and is close to obtaining 15 of the remaining parcels through quit claim deed or quit claim deed with cross easements.” With 17 parcels not yet committed, Staff is seeking direction from the City Commission as to the path forward. 

Details and Background

Discussion regarding default of South Pointe Park Fountain contractor
Follow-up from the discussion regarding the inability of the contractor to complete the South Pointe Park Fountain

Discussion regarding the installation of Tesla electric vehicle charging stations at the Pennsylvania Avenue parking garage