2021-05-18 MINUTES1
MEETING MINUTES
MAY 18, 2021 6:30 PM 9900 NE 2ND AVENUE
1) CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 6:32 PM.
2) MOMENT OF SILENCE / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3) ROLL CALL
PRESENT: (5)
Councilmember Alice Burch
Councilmember Katia Saint Fleur
Councilmember Crystal Wagar
Vice Mayor Daniel Marinberg
Mayor Sandra Harris
ALSO PRESENT:
Village Attorney Richard Sarafan
Village Manager Tom Benton
Village Clerk Ysabely Rodriguez
4) PRESENTATIONS
In light of Mr. Benton’s retirement, Mayor Harris, on behalf of the Village Council and Village staff, read
a proclamation in honor of Mr. Benton’s 49 years of service into the record, presented him with a plaque,
and a farewell gift. Mr. Benton thanked Village staff, past and current Council members, as well as
residents for their support throughout his years of service.
2
4.A MIAMI -DADE FIRE RESCUE ANNUAL REPORT PRESENTED BY FIRE CHIEF ALAN
COMINSKY.
Fire Chief Cominsky delivered a presentation on the annual service delivery for Miami Shores and
answered questions posed by the Village Council.
Councilmember Wagar thanked Fire Chief Cominsky and his team for their dedicated service.
5) PUBLIC COMMENTS
In light of the numerous eComments that were received and the number of attendees who were present
to provide in person public comments, the Village Council elected to forgo the reading of eComments
into the record in the interest of time. Such comments were circulated to the Village Council prior to the
meeting and are attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Mayor Harris opened the floor to public comments.
John Ise spoke about the quality of life in Miami Shores compared to other communities. He lauded the
Police Department, the Public Works Department, and the other services provided by staff. He thanked
Tom Benton and Chief Lystad for their dedicated service to the Miami Shores community.
Timm Duerkop spoke about change and the petition signed by residents who are in opposition to Item
9A. He asked the Village Council to find alternatives to address the seawall issue that do not include the
construction of a public kayak ramp.
Jonathan Drome requested to speak on behalf of a group of residents and for his allotted time to be
extended to 6 minutes. Mayor Harris moved to extend his time and the motion was seconded by
Councilmember Wagar. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Drome, on behalf of various residents,
spoke in opposition to Item 9A due to existing issues with parking and crime enforcement that may be
exacerbated should a public kayak ramp be constructed at Bayfront Park. He advocated for the
exploration of other funding alternatives that address the seawall issue while preserving the quality of life
of neighboring residents.
Frederick Mueller thanked the Village Council for engaging residents and thanked Mr. Benton, Chief
Lystad and Chief Cominsky for their service. He further spoke in opposition to Item 9A due to the risk and
liability challenges associated with the construction of a kayak ramp. He further asked for the Council to
consider additional funding measures that do not include the kayak ramp requirement.
Nancy Cigno spoke in opposition to Item 9A due to potential liability challenges; however, she suggested
the Village Council consider improvements to Bayfront Park that elevate the quality of life of residents.
Mark Stead noted the number of residents who attended the meeting because of their opposition to Item
9A and asked the Village Council to consider other funding alternatives that do not include the
construction of a kayak ramp.
Dan Tidbitt spoke about of the importance of considering the costs associated with the elevation of the
seawall and expressed support of Item 9A.
Brian Giller spoke in support of elevating the seawall, but expressed opposition to the kayak ramp. He
further advocated for the activation of a fact-finding committee to help the Village address seawall
elevation at Bayfront Park.
3
Eli Bravo spoke about the importance of listening to the concerns of residents who live near Bayfront
Park and for the Village to find a solution that addresses the interest of all Village residents.
Robert Menge spoke in opposition to limiting the number of times a member of the public can address
the Village Council during public comments and he further spoke in opposition to Item 9A.
Maher Nana spoke in opposition to Item 9A.
Carlos Canasi spoke about alleged rumors circulating the Village.
Michael Reguzzoni spoke in opposition to Item 9A, but he spoke in support of improving the seawall and
other aspects of the park.
Yuri Morales spoke in opposition to Item 9A and asked why Bayfront Park closes at 10PM when other
Village parks close earlier.
6) CONSENT AGENDA
The Village Clerk read the introductory statement and the caption of each item contained on the Consent
Agenda.
Vice Mayor Marinberg pulled Item 6A to note a scrivener’s error, recommending the term “nominated” or
“moved to appoint” be reflected in the place of “appointed” under Item 9A of the May 4, 2021 Village
Council Meeting Minutes.
Mayor Harris pulled Items 6B & 6C for discussion.
6.A APPROVAL OF THE MAY 4, 2021 VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES.
Councilmember Wagar moved approval of the minutes as amended. The motion was seconded by Mayor
Harris and the motion carried a 5-0 voice vote.
6.B MONTHLY REPORTS TO VILLAGE COUNCIL FROM EACH DEPARTMENT HEAD TO BE
PRESENTED AT THE FIRST REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING EACH MONTH (SPONSORED
BY: VICE MAYOR DANIEL MARINBERG).
Vice Mayor Marinberg explained the intent of the item is to have directors provide departmental updates
to the Village Council in written form or during Council Meetings.
Responding to Vice Mayor Marinberg, Mayor Harris spoke about the accessibility of information by way
of Village Manager briefings. Should the item pass, Mayor Harris further requested for the departmental
reports to be delivered on a quarterly basis through the Village Manager and for the proposed reports to
commence upon the start of a permanent village manager.
Individual Councilmembers raised concerns about how the item may be perceived as a charter violation
and how the proposed item may increase the workload of an already limited workforce.
Councilmember Saint Fleur expressed interest in tabling the item until a permanent village manager is
hired.
4
Vice Mayor Marinberg also expressed interest in revisiting the item at a later time when a permanent
village manager is hired. Therefore, he withdrew the item.
There was no further discussion regarding the item.
6.C DELIVERY OF MONTHLY FINANCIALS AND QUARTERLY FINANCIALS (SPONSORED BY:
VICE MAYOR DANIEL MARINBERG).
In the interest of transparency, Vice Mayor Marinberg brought the item forward for the purpose of the
Village Council gaining a better understanding of the financials of the Village.
Responding to Vice Mayor Marinberg, Mr. Benton indicated the Finance Department prepares the monthly
financials for his review and will forward such record to the Village Council upon request.
Vice Mayor Marinberg indicated that he will request the latest financials and review such document for
possible formatting changes. Vice Mayor Marinberg withdrew the item.
There was no further discussion regarding the item.
7) ORDINANCE(S) ON SECOND READING- PUBLIC HEARING
7.A AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 6, “BUILDINGS AND BUILDING
REGULATIONS”, SECTION 6-10.(c); TO UPDATE THE DEFINITION OF “SUBSTANTIAL
IMPROVEMENT;” PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE (STAFF: PLANNING & ZONING DORECTOR).
The Village Clerk read the caption of the ordinance into the record.
Mayor Harris opened the public hearing.
Jonathan Drome spoke about how the current definition of “substantial improvements” poses an undue
burden on residents and thus spoke in support of the item as presented.
Ms. Rodriguez, Village Clerk, read eComments into the record, which have been attached hereto as
Exhibit A.
Mayor Harris closed the public hearing, as no else wished to provide comments regarding the proposed
ordinance.
Mr. Travis Kendall, Planning and Zoning Director, provided an overview of the proposed ordinance,
shared the practices of other municipalities with respect to overseeing projects that may fall within the
category of substantial improvements.
Mr. Ismael Naranjo, Building Official, answered questions regarding the determination of fair market value
calculations of a property.
Discussion ensued regarding the calculations of fair market value of a property and how the proposed
ordinance assists applicants who have encountered significant challenges renovating their homes as a
result of a substantial improvement determination when the value of the proposed improvement equals
or is greater than fifty percent (50%) of the value of the structure.
5
Councilmember Wagar moved to adopt the ordinance and the motion was seconded Councilmember
Burch. There being no further discussion, Mayor Harris called the question and the motion carried a 5-0
voice vote.
8) RESOLUTION(S)
8.A A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, FL, AMENDING
THE PROCEDURES AND RESTRICTIONS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT VILLAGE COUNCIL
MEETINGS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE (SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER KATIA SAINT FLEUR; CO-SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR DANIEL
MARINBERG.)
The Village Clerk read the caption of the resolution into the record.
Councilmember Saint Fleur provided opening remarks and turned the item over to the Village Clerk who
provided a recap of the previously discussed public comment procedures and restrictions.
Responding to Mayor Harris’ request for clarification, Ms. Rodriguez explained any member of the public
who provides item-specific public comments during open public comment shall not provide additional
comments when the presiding officer opens the floor to comments related to such item(s). In other words,
if a member of the public provides comments about an existing item on the agenda during open public
comment, such participant will be precluded from sharing additional comments regarding such item(s)
when the presiding officer opens the floor to item-specific comments for such item(s).
Ms. Rodriguez sought clarification from the Village Council with respect to when item-specific public
comment shall be opened to the public: before Council discussion or after Council discussion. There was
consensus from the Village Council to amend the proposed resolution to indicate that item-specific public
comment shall be opened before Village Council discussion of each item.
Councilmember Burch moved to approve the resolution as amended and Councilmember Wagar
seconded the motion. There being no further discussion, Mayor Harris called the question and the motion
carried a 5-0 voice vote.
9) DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION ITEMS
9.A DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE BAYFRONT PARK SEAWALL.
(STAFF: VILLAGE MANAGER)
Mr. Benton provided an overview of the item, indicating the temporary suspension of the project due to
significant public dissent concerning Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) grant criteria involving the
construction of a public kayak ramp. Therefore, he asked for direction from the Village Council as to the
next course of action regarding the project.
Responding to Vice Mayor Marinberg, Mr. Benton provided insight into the 2019 FIND grant application
process for the elevation of the sea wall and further explained such application was denied at that time.
Mr. Benton mentioned FIND match grant funding has not been disbursed because the construction of
the kayak ramp has not started. However, the Village has invested approximately $35,000 of Village
funds towards the design phase of the project.
Vice Mayor Marinberg spoke about balancing the priorities of the community and spoke in opposition to
the item.
6
Councilmember Wagar encouraged the Village Manager to find alternatives to the FIND grant and
recommended referring the item to the Sustainability and Resiliency Committee for further review of
alternatives.
Responding to Councilmember Saint Fleur, Mr. Benton explained the Village’s grant writer is always
seeking grant funding.
Councilmember Burch relayed historical context of the item. In 2019, Councilmember Burch stated the
Village Council supported the FIND grant; however, they were not aware of the grant requirement
concerning public access to a kayak ramp.
Councilmember Wagar moved to reject the item. Vice Mayor Marinberg offered a friendly amendment to
the motion to include language directing staff to continue to work with FIND while seeking alternative
grant funding. Councilmember Wagar accepted Vice Mayor Marinberg’s friendly amendment.
A motion was moved by Councilmember Wagar and seconded by Vice Mayor Marinberg to reject the
item as presented and to direct staff to continue to work with FIND while seeking alternative grant funding
and for such findings to be brought forth for Village Council consideration. The motion passed
unanimously.
There was no further discussion regarding the item.
9.B DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING PRIDE MONTH CELEBRATION COSTS
(STAFF: VILLAGE MANAGER).
Mr. Benton provided an update regarding the costs associated with Pride Month banners which have
been ordered by Village staff. He further provided an update on the logistics and costs associated with
future Pride Month events.
Councilmember Wagar spoke in support of the programming devised by recreation staff and thanked Mr.
Benton and his staff for looking into potential events to celebrate Pride Month on such short notice.
There was no further discussion regarding the item.
9.C DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING RFI RELATING TO PUBLIC WORKS LAND
(SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR MARINBERG).
Vice Mayor Marinberg provided opening remarks, recommending the exploration of potential recurring
revenues by leasing vacant public works land. Vice Mayor Marinberg mentioned he's not interested in
taking any action at the moment, but he would like to investigate the possibilities by engaging industry
professionals through a request for information (RFI) process.
Mr. Benton explained the current use of the vacant public works land and the unintended effects of
potentially leasing such property, which would result in the Village not having a place to temporarily store
debris/trash in the event of a hurricane.
Councilmember Wagar spoke about the importance of determining the current use of the land, its value,
and the potential impact to the Village should it be leased.
Vice Mayor Marinberg concurred with Councilmember Wagar’s sentiments about obtaining additional
information regarding the current use of the land and explained this item is one of several conversations
he expects to have with his fellow Councilmembers regarding the vacant public works land.
7
There was no further discussion regarding the item.
9.D DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING RESIDENT SATISFACTION SURVEY
(SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR DANIEL MARINBERG).
Vice Mayor Marinberg withdrew the item.
9.E DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE CREATION OF SEPARATE HUMAN
RESOURCES MANAGER AND COMPLETION OF ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS
(SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR DANIEL MARINBERG).
Vice Mayor Marinberg withdrew the item.
9.F DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING RECRUITMENT PROCESS FOR NEW
CHIEF OF POLICE (SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR DANIEL MARINBERG).
Vice Mayor Marinberg withdrew the item.
9.G DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING TRAFFIC CALMING AND
ENFORCEMENT(SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR DANIEL MARINBERG).
Vice Mayor Marinberg initiated discussion regarding the intersection at 96th Street and 4th Avenue and
asked the Village Manager to provide his professional expertise on whether placing a roundabout will
help aide the flow of traffic. Mr. Benton indicated the placement of a roundabout at such intersection is a
viable option; however, it may cause more vehicular collisions due to drivers not yielding to other drivers.
Councilmember Burch spoke about the 2016 traffic calming study and mentioned the Village has not
been able to implement all of the recommendations in such study because of funding limitations.
Responding to Councilmember Burch’s comments regarding the placement of bollards on North Miami
Avenue, Mr. Benton explained the County did not approve such suggestion.
Responding to Vice Mayor Marinberg, Mr. Benton clarified there are two speedbumps in stock which
have not been deployed, but will be implemented on 111th Street in the near future. Mr. Benton further
elaborated on the process by which the Village implements speedbumps. Mr. Benton stated the Village
will be receiving $4.3 million in Recovery Act funding to help address programs, such as traffic calming.
There was no further discussion regarding the item.
9.H DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE APPROVAL OF THE AQUATICS
FACILITY ACCESS AND USE AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWN OF BAY HARBOR ISLANDS.
(STAFF: VILLAGE MANAGER)
Mr. Benton introduced the item and recommended approval of the aquatics facility access and use
agreement with the Town of Bay Harbor Islands.
Councilmember Burch moved to approve the of the aquatics facility access and use agreement with the
Town of Bay Harbor Islands and the motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Marinberg. There being no
discussion, Mayor Harris called the question which carried a 5-0 voice vote.
There was no further discussion regarding the item.
8
9.I DISCUSSION & POSIBLE ACTION REGARDING PREPARATIONS FOR SPECIAL MEETING
ON MAY 20, 2021 (STAFF: VILLAGE CLERK).
Ms. Rodriguez provided opening remarks, indicating the purpose of the item which is for the Village
Council to engage in brief preliminary discussion on the goals and desired outcome of the May 20, 2021
Special Meeting concerning the interim village manager position.
Discussion ensued amongst the Village Council concerning the shortlisting of candidates to reflect their
respective top three candidates before the Special Meeting on May 20, 2021, the preferred interview
structure, and the date of the interviews.
Councilmember Burch spoke in favor of the Village Council conducting individual Council interviews in a
round-robin forum as opposed to hosting interviews at a public meeting in order to afford individual
Councilmembers the opportunity to ask specific questions of their choice.
Vice Mayor Marinberg moved for the Village Council to discuss and further shortlist the top candidates
of each individual Councilmember at the May 20 Special Meeting, for the Village Clerk to subsequently
schedule and coordinate individual interviews to be held on May 25, 2021 with the top candidates,
and to organize a Special Meeting on such date, beginning at 6:30 PM, for the purpose of asking
further questions of the candidates as a collective body and potentially making a final selection. The
motion was seconded by Councilmember Saint Fleur. There being no further discussion, the motion
carried a 5-0 voice vote.
By way of consensus, the Village Council agreed that the person serving as interim village manager
will not be precluded from applying for the permanent village manager position.
There was no further discussion regarding the item.
10) ANNOUNCEMENTS
The Village Clerk did not read the announcements in the interest of time.
11) VILLAGE COUNCIL COMMENTS
There were no comments offered by the Village Council in the interest of time.
12) ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Village Council, the meeting adjourned at 9:42 PM.
Village Council
Meeting Time: 05-18-21 18:30
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting
Time
Agenda
Items
Comments Support Oppose Neutral
Village Council 05-18-21
18:30
27 122 54 57 4
Sentiments for All Meetings
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented
will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
Village Council
05-18-21 18:30
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
5) PUBLIC COMMENTS 14 4 5 3
6.B) MONTHLY REPORTS TO VILLAGE COUNCIL FROM EACH
DEPARTMENT HEAD TO BE PRESENTED AT THE FIRST REGULAR
COUNCIL MEETING EACH MONTH (SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR
DANIEL MARINBERG).
3 1 2 0
6.C) DELIVERY OF MONTHLY FINANCIALS AND QUARTERLY
FINANCIALS (SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR DANIEL MARINBERG).
2 0 2 0
7.A) AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES
VILLAGE, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES,
CHAPTER 6, “BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS”, SECTION
6-10.(c); TO UPDATE THE DEFINITION OF “SUBSTANTIAL
IMPROVEMENT;” PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, CODIFICATION,
SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE (STAFF: PLANNING &
ZONING DORECTOR).
1 1 0 0
8.A) A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES
VILLAGE, FL, AMENDING THE PROCEDURES AND RESTRICTIONS
FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETINGS; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE (SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER KATIA SAINT FLEUR; CO-SPONSORED BY: VICE
MAYOR DANIEL MARINBERG.)
6 1 5 0
9.A) DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE
BAYFRONT PARK SEAWALL. (STAFF: VILLAGE MANAGER)
83 37 40 1
9.B) DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING PRIDE MONTH
CELEBRATION COSTS (STAFF: VILLAGE MANAGER).
1 1 0 0
9.C) DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING RFI RELATING
TO PUBLIC WORKS LAND (SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR
MARINBERG).
1 1 0 0
9.D) DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING RESIDENT
SATISFACTION SURVEY (SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR DANIEL
MARINBERG).
2 2 0 0
9.E) DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE CREATION
OF SEPARATE HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER AND COMPLETION
OF ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS (SPONSORED BY: VICE
MAYOR DANIEL MARINBERG).
2 2 0 0
9.G) DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING TRAFFIC
CALMING AND ENFORCEMENT(SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR
DANIEL MARINBERG).
7 4 3 0
Sentiments for All Agenda Items
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented
will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
Agenda Item: eComments for 5) PUBLIC COMMENTS
Overall Sentiment
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:00pm 05-18-21
We strongly oppose to the ramp on 94 street. The impact on traffic and parking is a major concern and unless
this is addressed with proper experts studies our neighborhood will be at risk of major impact
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:39pm 05-18-21
If we only knew what the plan was to run it efficiently to prevent more traffic then there already is at the park.
Those poor residents across from the park. I'm sure they knew what they were in for when they purchased their
properties but to put up with additional traffic and possible motorized vehicles that can get access to the ramp
would be unacceptable even if I owned a home on 96th street. If it could be strictly used for non motorized
vessels then I'm neutral. However, I am grateful for all the hard work that went into applying for the grant and
being accepted. I am sure this was not an easy task. Let us just think this thru efficiently.
Adam Rice
Location:
Submitted At: 3:10pm 05-18-21
Please allow the planned sea wall to continue as planned. We have already invested money into this project as a
Village.The folks that don’t live on the water front would love to access to the bay for our kayaks. My children
would love to be able to use their kayaks at the ramp as well. They people that face the bay bought houses that
face a PUBLIC PARK .
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:42pm 05-18-21
Support receiving the grant money to build the sea wall to secure against potentially hazardous circumstances
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:22pm 05-18-21
If there is a Kayak-Canoe- etc boat ramp built will the access be ADA compliant so handicapped and people with
limited mobilities, etc be able to use the ramp?
JOHN MITCHELL
Location:
Submitted At: 2:16pm 05-18-21
I think the boat ramp at 96th and Bayshore would be a rousing success, so appealing I believe it will create a
traffic and parking problem for 96th to 94th streets and all of N Bayshore Drive. I suspect most ramp users would
not be Miami Shores residents. As such, I am voting "opposed".
Russell Kline
Location:
Submitted At: 2:10pm 05-18-21
I have question on the Consent Agenda points 6.B and 6.C on what is the need for monthly reports and financials
to be presented to the Village Council? This appears to be in conflict with the Village Administration as
described on the Village website (copied below) and are responsibilities of the Village Manager.
As the Village utilizes a Council/Manager form of government, the Village Council is not involved in the day-to-day
operation of the Village, rather the Council sets the policies, enacts the laws of the Village and appoints members
to the various Village Boards. The day-to-day operation of the Village is the Village Manager's responsibility.
Regards
Russell Kline
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:07pm 05-18-21
I would suggest a traffics study
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:58pm 05-18-21
Bonnie O'Meara and Harry Tapias, 18 NW 106th St, Miami Shores: My husband and I are very much in favor of
the seawall grant, inclusive of the kayak ramp for the following reasons: 1) Our village was built as an open,
welcoming place (and not a gated walled-off community afraid of its public); 2) free money in the form of grants is
a no-brainer; 3) the sea is rising, whether you accept it or not; 4) a kayak ramp is yet another recreational
attraction for us as village residents, and 5) if you bought property next to a public park but don't want the public
to come to it, i'm sorry to be so blunt, but maybe you should have moved to Westin or Fisher Island.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:46pm 05-18-21
Nunzio Casalinuovo
I support the grant for the sea wall and the kayak ramp.
Thanks,
Nunzio
Sandra Carro
Location:
Submitted At: 1:40pm 05-18-21
Please note that I support the sea wall and kayak ramp. I’ve been a Miami Shores resident since 2012 and truly
believe this will add tremendous vale to our village.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:28pm 05-18-21
I approve of the sea wall construction. Sea level is rising and this wall is imperative to contain floods and protect
against sea surge. The ramp for the kayaking is an awesome idea, we need an opening for miami shores
residents to enjoy the bay. 100% support this initiative and I believe all my neighbors do as well.
ADAM MALAMED
Location:
Submitted At: 8:56pm 05-17-21
Kayak Ramp
susan ackley
Location:
Submitted At: 5:06pm 05-14-21
Susan Ackley.
I appreciate the opportunity to submit my comments online and also recommend the public comment be either at
the beginning or the end of the meeting. The same 5-10 people get up at each items discussion and just rant for
3 minutes, prolonging unnecessarily the meeting's length.
Agenda Item: eComments for 6.B) MONTHLY REPORTS TO VILLAGE COUNCIL FROM EACH DEPARTMENT HEAD TO BE
PRESENTED AT THE FIRST REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING EACH MONTH (SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR DANIEL
MARINBERG).
Overall Sentiment
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:42pm 05-18-21
Having timely and accurate financial reports will help the council members to focus on dealing with current issues
and planning the next year's budget.
Per Villiage's auditing website, the village was able to produce the audited FS in a timely manner from 1992 to
2002. Since 2003, the last fiscal year's audited report was finished in April or May on the following year, which
was 7 to 8 months after the village closed the fiscal year. As an accounting professional, I believe it is very hard
for the village controller, Village manager, and Council members to make a reasonable projection of the next
year's budget without the timely monthly, quarterly report, and audited annual reports.
Richard Fernandez
Location:
Submitted At: 11:49am 05-17-21
We are a weak mayor manager form of government. This is a public municipal corporation. You get one payment
of income with minor amounts of revenue sharing and fees over a period of time. Income streams are generally
level and predictable. Expenses are also generally predicatable. Any revenue or expense out of the ordinary
would be reported by the village manager. This proposal is micromanaging and contrary to a manager form of
government. Additional burdens of staff that are not necessary. Particularly in the regular course of
administration. I strongly oppose this intrusion upon management. Certainly you can set goals and provide
oversight of the manager, not individual employees. Has anyone considered this direct involvement may violate
the law if not employment agreements?
donna hurtak
Location:
Submitted At: 11:22am 05-17-21
5 additional bosses??? That is NOT the way the Shores is set up. Please do NOT approve this item
Agenda Item: eComments for 6.C) DELIVERY OF MONTHLY FINANCIALS AND QUARTERLY FINANCIALS (SPONSORED BY:
VICE MAYOR DANIEL MARINBERG).
Overall Sentiment
Richard Fernandez
Location:
Submitted At: 11:51am 05-17-21
Without backup and an explanation I will not support this and urge others not to support it!
donna hurtak
Location:
Submitted At: 11:24am 05-17-21
This should NOT be on the consent agenda...I oppose this for several reasons: It is NOT the way the Shores is
set up and it makes the dept heads beholden to 5 additional bosses
Agenda Item: eComments for 7.A) AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 6, “BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS”, SECTION 6-10.(c); TO
UPDATE THE DEFINITION OF “SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT;” PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY
AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE (STAFF: PLANNING & ZONING DORECTOR).
Overall Sentiment
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 7:58pm 05-13-21
This is a good start. The treatment of the FEMA 50% rule by this Village is backwards and harmful causing blight
to the neighborhood. It is time to move the Village into 2021.
Agenda Item: eComments for 8.A) A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, FL, AMENDING
THE PROCEDURES AND RESTRICTIONS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETINGS; AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE (SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER KATIA SAINT FLEUR; CO-SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR DANIEL
MARINBERG.)
Overall Sentiment
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:16pm 05-18-21
Maria McGuinness. I oppose the entire resolution that further reduces the exercise of free speech at public MSV
Council meetings. I oppose a reduction in speech from three minutes to two minutes at MSV council meetings. I
also oppose the proposed limitation to prohibit publicly speaking at a council meeting if an individual submitted an
ecomment in advance. There is no guarantee that a person who attends a meeting will have an opportunity to
speak publicly and 2 minutes is incredibly brief. I also oppose reducing the window for closing of ecomment
remarks by two hours (i.e. from its current one-hour before the meeting to three hours before the meeting).
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:18am 05-18-21
Good evening, on the campaign trail Councilmember Saint-Fleur, stated that everyone has a right to be heard
and how Meltz was denying residents that right by asking comments be made in the beginning of the meeting.
Fast forward and now you want to lower the amount of minutes for pubic comment and those that e public
comment cannot comment in person. So you basically you were projecting what your plans were all along? Why
go through the rigmarole of changing the amount of time by 1 minute if you campaigned on everyone's right to be
heard and attacked other candidates on this point? Doesn't make sense and like the old adage says actions
speak louder than words.
Dennis Leyva
Location:
Submitted At: 3:54pm 05-17-21
Thank you to Council Member Saint Fleur for sponsoring this agenda item. Allowing more opportunities for public
comment encourages greater participation by the residents. Public comment should be allowed after Council
discusses an item and before a vote is taken.
donna hurtak
Location:
Submitted At: 11:26am 05-17-21
I oppose this--- limiting the public comment,,NO!!!
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:32am 05-17-21
Kristen Mustad
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:31pm 05-16-21
Oppose restrictions
Agenda Item: eComments for 9.A) DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE BAYFRONT PARK SEAWALL.
(STAFF: VILLAGE MANAGER)
Overall Sentiment
Walter Bordeaux
Location:
Submitted At: 5:02pm 05-18-21
My name is Walter Bordeaux, I am an home owner at 76 NE 102nd Street in Miami Shores. I support the sea wall
project with public access to the water. This would benefit all the owners of Miami Shores.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:02pm 05-18-21
Teresa Kurack
The proposed kayak launch would eliminate part of the green space in the park which is already limited. I am also
concerned on the impact of the ecosystem by the seawall
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:59pm 05-18-21
Christina Bordeaux yes I support the building of a kayak ramp
Dorothy Campbell
Location:
Submitted At: 4:55pm 05-18-21
Hello, My name is Dorothy Campbell and I have been a resident of Miami Shores for over 28 years. I want to go
on record for support of the public access to Bayfront Park. I understand the concerns for those who live
proximal to the park. However, for those of us who don't and have to travel outside of Miami Shores to gain
access to the beautiful waters of Biscayne Bay, I support the addition of public access. I am an avid Standup
Paddleboarder and have been enjoying this activity for many years, along with kayaking. You can find me
paddling out on Biscayne Bay often and while there I am picking up the trash from the water and our little bay
islands. At this time I have to travel north to Oleta River State Park, south to Morningside Park or east to Pelican
Harbor to access the beautiful Biscayne Bay. I would love to be able to paddle out of my own back yard instead
of others. I could transport my board via my SUP mule with my bike and would not need to even park my car.
There are many like me who would love to have this public access. I believe this would truly benefit our Miami
Shores Community. Thank you
Rose Bordeaux
Location:
Submitted At: 4:47pm 05-18-21
I’m in favor of a kayak ramp. It will just add to the reasons Miami Shores is a great place to live. The park is a
public park maintained by taxes paid by residents of the entire village and should be a place that benefits
everyone not just the people who live across the street.
Kate Mason
Location:
Submitted At: 4:36pm 05-18-21
I cannot tell from listening to the meetings or reading the attachment whether other grants were considered prior
or since discovering that the kayak launch is a necessity to receiving the grant. If not, this should be done. If there
is no other grant available, then I think research needs to be done on the repercussions of adding the launch in
this area. There seems to be a lot of fear that it would increase traffic, parking, trash etc, but I cannot tell if that's
fear or based on actual information.
Finally, before a substantial project is done for the seawall, I do think we owe it to our neighbors in that area to
research the possible effects no the already horrible flooding situation. Perhaps there is a project that can be
done in coordinations to alleviate that issue. Was this discussed with the resiliency board?
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:02pm 05-18-21
Maria McGuinness. I oppose the project. There is no need for a public kayak launch in MSV's residential area.
Pelican Harbor's public kayak launch is 2.2 miles away from Bayfront Park (Legion Park 2.5 mi, Albert Patto Park
4.4 mi, Oleta 6.7 mi). MSV lacks the resources (financial & manpower) to properly control the use, safety and
logistics a public kayak launch will create. The project's environmental impact on the park itself (i.e. reducing
green space including grass and palm trees and increasing concrete) and on the grass beds, reefs and sea life in
Biscayne Bay should be determined and evaluated. The adverse impact of increased watercraft use (boats and
jet skis launching and/or picking up/dropping off riders) in the area should be expected. Costs to MSV for liability
insurance, legal defense and liability payments for injuries and deaths also have to be factored. Additionally, the
proposed kayak launch designs negate the purported objective of the seawall project (i.e. to protect against
predicted sea-level rise) by creating an opportunity for increased water intrusion to an area that is already prone
to substantial flooding when it rains (especially 94th Street). The seawall project itself offers little sea-level rise
protection to the eastern boundary of MSV given that its design for a 3 foot increase of the seawall for the length
of Bayfront Park (NE 94, 95 & 96 Streets) is partial and leaves approximately 80% of the eastern MSV boundary
exposed (91 St. to 104 St. plus canals on 102, 103 and 104 Streets). Water flows to the path of least resistance.
The "free" money of the FIND matching grant that requires the kayak launch is not "free." The tangible and
intangible costs of the project weigh heavily against it.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:49pm 05-18-21
While I think that in a perfect world having a kayak ramp in the Shores would be great, I cannot endorse the idea
with the plan as it stands. If the green space in front of the promenade is left as is, there will not be enough
parking and people will park in front of houses and on the swales. And the idea of doing away with the green
space to add more slanted parking spaces just adds to the problem of too much paving, the ensuing flooding,
cars, traffic. This is a quiet neighborhood. That's why people want to live here. There are too many unknowns
with this plan to endorse it. I feel it is bad for the neighborhood as it currently stands.
Karen Smith-Gulaskey
Location:
Submitted At: 3:45pm 05-18-21
I strongly support accepting the grant money to repair the seawall. The big issue is to fix the seawall to protect
our public park, community, and village. If accepting the money includes a small kayak ramp, that will benefit all
Miami Shores residents - then you should still YES and continue. To be able to have access to our beautiful bay,
which now, only people with waterfront property can enjoy, will enhance our whole village and increase home
values. During my last 15 years in fundraising for a local school, I know firsthand how difficult it is to find grants,
and apply for grant money. In 15 years, I applied for many grants and only received one for $1,000. As a taxpayer,
I strongly support using other money to repair the seawall and keep our taxes down. Thank you for finding this
grant that will enhance our neighborhood. I walk in Bayfront Park almost every day, at various times during the
day, and have never seen it crowded or filled with unruly people. Everyone is always friendly. Please vote to
accept this grant. Karen Smith-Gulaskey. 16 year resident.
Mary Benton
Location:
Submitted At: 3:42pm 05-18-21
My husband and I love to walk along the seawall when we get a chance, and we would also love to see more
residents taking advantage of it by being able to access the bay with their kayaks and canoes. It seems a shame
that the bay is there, but is inaccessible for use other than gazing at it and walking along its length. I am sorry for
those who bought homes in front of the park, but they did so knowing that it was a public park. I think any
problems that might arise can be dealt with in a reasonable manner.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:38pm 05-18-21
I Natalie Castro of 3 NE 109th st support the park sea wall. The kayak addition will be wonderful.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:31pm 05-18-21
Tuyen Tieu
I, along with my husband and two children, wholeheartedly support the kayak ramp in Miami Shores for the
following reasons-
-Having access to the bay will only add to the value and experience of living in this community.
-Kayaking is a non motorized sport that strengthens you mentally and physically
-Brings us closer to the bay to learn about the wildlife that we need to protect.
-The more kayak ramps we have, the better off we all are
-Turning away money for something that is so beneficial to the community is senseless
-Turning down this opportunity will set a precedent for future (progressive) endeavors that involve public spaces.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:05pm 05-18-21
My name is Ashley Kebrdle and as a resident of Miami Shores I encourage to accept the grant and allow the
kayak ramp. This will be a great addition to the Shores for families and everyone else that wants to get out into
nature.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:04pm 05-18-21
Good evening Mayor Harris and members of the Miami Shores Village Council:
My name is Patrice Gillespie Smith and I reside at 358 NE 101st Street. I first want to thank Councilmember
Burch and the members of the 2019 Village Council for voting to approve the Florida Inland Navigation District
(FIND) Grant application to rebuild the seawall at Bayfront Park. At the May 4 Council Meeting many of you
encouraged the Village Administration to follow Miami Beach's lead and improve our Community Rating Score
(CRS) to help reduce our residents' property insurance. Bolstering our dated and compromised seawall would be
one of the best steps you could take to improve our resiliency. I appreciate that the Village Council of 2019
recognized the significance of this step and encouraged staff to pursue the FIND grant two years ago. Now, we
face an important decision. Do we give back $1 million in grant funds and compromise the safety of the entire
Shores or do we take advantage of these funds and invest in our crumbling seawall? The choice should be
simple-- invest in our seawall. The addition of a kayak launch is just an added bonus to the critical infrastructure
improvement of our first line of defense to sea level rise -- our seawall. Refusing this grant would be irresponsible
-- especially given your mutual desire to improve the Village's CRS. If you are truly concerned about the traffic
that will be generated by a kayak launch, there is an easy solution-- add time limited pay by phone parking on
North Bayshore Drive. By charging a small fee to park, you will not only generate revenue for the Village, you will
limit traffic.
This open space is a park our family has been enjoying for the last 10 years. We bike, walk and scooter to it as a
family. Part of what makes it so wonderful is that it is a park open to everyone. Thus, please don't allow the
unverified fears of a few to disrupt progress on our seawall. Let's make our leadership on resiliency known. Thank
you for your ability to think globally and for remembering the needs of the 10,000 residents of Miami Shores.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:44pm 05-18-21
Support building a sea wall for safety and security — Abha Shrivastava
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:36pm 05-18-21
I support this initiative. Orville Rodriguez
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:28pm 05-18-21
It would be foolish to turn down the grant money for this important improvement, The Kayak launch is almost
besides the point.
MA Armand
Location:
Submitted At: 2:28pm 05-18-21
I support accepting the grant to construct the seawall, as well as, the building of a kayak ramp to provide public
access to the bay.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:09pm 05-18-21
I am a Miami Shores resident and fully support the funds for the sea wall and kayak ramp. This will ultimately
make Miami Shores a more desirable place to live.
Sandra Carro
Location:
Submitted At: 1:41pm 05-18-21
I support the park sea wall and kayak ramp. This will bring value to our village!
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:28pm 05-18-21
I have a Kayac, but have no access to the bay in our city, despite that our city has a public park adjacent to the
bay.
I strongly support the construction of a ramp
Lisa Herbert
Location:
Submitted At: 1:28pm 05-18-21
Voice in support of seawall. Good for our community.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:18pm 05-18-21
PART II
The majority of neighbors that I have talked to are convinced that nearby Bayfront Park plays a significant role in
local crime. I also believe that the park brings drug use, as many afternoons on my daily walks or runs, there is
noticeable odor of marijuana. Although we see the Miami Shores police clearing Bayfront Park at night, that effort
is simply not enough. The planned enhancements of the park will bring only trouble. The additional costs to
address these issues will be significant. I believe that is irresponsible that Miami Shores Village is considering the
installation of a kayak launching ramp into our residential neighborhood. The additional need for parking of people
who want to use the kayak ramp will disrupt traffic flow. Trash and burglaries in the area will increase which will
beget more police patrols. This will quickly amount to costs that will exceed the grant sought by the Village. In
addition, this may lead to the necessity to open other access points, other than 96th Street, which will provide
easier access to our neighborhood and more opportunities for crime. Instead, we need speed bumps and other
ideas to make this neighborhood a safer place to live in. We need a robust solution for our drainage issues to
prevent flooding, better paved roads, and a conscientious collaboration with FPL to secure our power lines. I
oppose this proposition and request that the Village seek alternative means to rebuild the seawall and address
the concerns listed herein. -Christopher DiSchino
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:16pm 05-18-21
PART I
I have been living in Miami Shores for 6yrs. 2 yrs ago, we moved to NE 92nd Street for greater security, as 96th
Street is the only access to our neighborhood. Bayfront Park is a highlight for everyone who lives around here
and for many other visitors. There is room for improvement of the park, and we are happy that major issues such
as future sea level rise are addressed by this project. However, the consequences are not being addressed.
Traffic, parking, safety, and security are the greatest concerns. A few years ago, I was a victim of car theft, where
thieves broke into my car and stole my tires and rims. Moreover, at night, there is a constant flow of slow-driving
cars, crawling the neighborhood, looking for vulnerabilities in cars and homes. There have been several
occasions where these conspicuous drivebys have resulted in a call to police. Most recently, one call led to a
high-speed chase through Miami Shores. The police officer involved in the chase returned to my house nearly an
hour later to let me know that the culprit was able to escape by driving full speed down 96th street to I-95 where
he lost the chasing police officers. We have a great neighborhood where people know each other and people talk
to each other. We are tired of speeding cars and worries over our safety and security.
-Christopher DiSchino, NE 92nd Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:13pm 05-18-21
I am in support for receiving a grant for improvements which include the building of a new kayak ramp. With 3
boys at home, my husband and I would enjoy taking them out to the beautiful bay that we have right in our
backyard.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:13pm 05-18-21
I’m Carlos Segura and we live in Miami shores. Our address is 285 NE 98 ST, Miami Florida 33138. I oppose the
kayak ramp for the following reasons: 1 Parking
2 Crime/ security
3 Speeding cars
4 Litter & trash
5 Liability
Thank you
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:12pm 05-18-21
Suzan Lam
I support the grant for the sea wall and the kayak ramp. This is great for the residents of Miami Shores.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:11pm 05-18-21
Parking
Litter & trash
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:04pm 05-18-21
I write in strong support of accepting the grant for the necessary construction of the seawall and the bonus the
kayak ramp. It would be outrageous for a vocal minority to cost the village a million dollars over inflated fears of
kayak users (by and large not exactly a rowdy crowd). There is sufficient public parking at the park already and in
my experience with other local kayak ramps (the ones which do not have rentals) there are normally only a few
users at any given time. The kayak ramp would be a great addition to the village and the alternative: spending an
additional million dollars of our local taxes to do the necessary infrastructure work is completely unacceptable.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:50pm 05-18-21
To whom it may concern,
my name is Sylvie Rose Garcon-Duerkop and I live since more than 10 years at 1250 NE 94 ST.
We love Bayfront Park and we appreciate that there is a project to enhance the seawall, drainage and boardwalk.
However, to include a kayak ramp does not make sense. It will only create more problems with parking, speeding
cars and trash. Costs to maintain the ramp will increase. I am opposing the current design for this project as long
as it includes the kayak launching ramp.
Eli Bravo
Location:
Submitted At: 12:12pm 05-18-21
Parking - Crime/Security - Speeding cars - Litter/trash - Liability. I will participate in today's meeting. Thanks.
Elizabeth Hitt
Location:
Submitted At: 11:54am 05-18-21
I am patently against the kayak ramp for reasons that I would be happy to discuss.
Elizabeth B. Hitt
9701 NE 13 Avenue
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:50am 05-18-21
David Siqueiros
1230 NE 91 Terrace
Miami Shores, FL 33138
Miami Shores Village Council,
As a Miami Shores home owner, I would like to extend my vote in opposition of building the Kayak launching ramp
on NE 94th St. and N Bayshore Dr.
I recognize that a seawall repair/reconstruction is needed, but the kayak ramp as an addition to this project makes
no sense other than receiving a grant that pales in comparison to the added expense such a ramp would
generate for the village.
The major issues I share with the majority of residents I have spoken to about this project are:
1. Parking
2. Crime/Security
3. Speeding cars
4. Litter and trash
5. Liability
The 79th Street boat ramp has ample parking, regularly patrolled by police and is designed to launch watercraft
and is located where prevailing winds make this a safe endeavor.
I ask you, the council members to consider that what you are contemplating is a construction project that will cost
the city $1Million or more (in addition to a 1 million grant that likely can be found elsewhere) and result in
increased costs and potential crime and accidents when there are 8 or more boat ramps or launches within 10
miles from us.
This ramp is not for Miami Shores residents exclusively. It will be used by people from all over greater Miami and
will result in immeasurable additional costs to the village and its residents.
Please vote against this project to be completed.
All the Best,
David Siqueiros
davidsiqueiros@me.com
Melissa Mazzitelli
Location:
Submitted At: 11:04am 05-18-21
Much of our Village is on or near the water and the seawall is in need of repair. As our budget is relatively limited,
seeking out grants to fund high dollar value projects is a responsible thing to do. If it is a choice between adding
a preventative measure against severe flooding in our low-lying, hurricane-prone village, where the water levels
continue to rise, and major hurricanes are becoming more common, versus possible parking / litter / "riff-raff"
issues, this should not be a difficult decision to make. Adding a kayak/canoe launch to the design of the seawall
should not be the kind of issue that prevents approval of this project. Potential issues like crime and parking can
be addressed by increased patrols, which could also help with traffic calming in the area. There are also possible
community solutions such as a neighborhood watch or community service park clean up days that will bring
people together and keep our Village clean. But more likely, the launch will just provide another lovely amenity for
our community. I know a few of the people who oppose this measure and respect them greatly, and hope that we
can all work together to address their concerns if this measure passes.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:55am 05-18-21
I support the new sea wall with a ramp, especially if it helps in getting outside money to help pay for it. The water
access and sea wall would add to property values and be a nice asset for the community.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:44am 05-18-21
I oppose the kayak launch. The additional traffic will cause an immense amount of stress on the local police force.
Compromising police availability when a serious crime is committed. Our neighbors are constantly having to
collect trash from the park area due to random visitors that have zero respect. Plastic and other rubbish going
into the bay will increase should this project go ahead. This project isn't a practical idea and I oppose it 100%.
The Bay Area isn't a public park , it is a slither of grass adjacent to the bay. It is already crowded with people that
do not live in miami shores nor pay property taxes to MS. These projects should be for larger public parks with
parking availability not a residential area of single family homes with no parking. It will result in lawsuits and
damages to properties.
John Rourke Miami Shores Resident.
Darryl Proctor
Location:
Submitted At: 9:41am 05-18-21
I vehemently oppose this based on the following:
Crime rise - it goes without question that crime will rise and whilst police are dealing with potentially petty crime,
other more serious crimes will be neglected.
Traffic. It is already an issue with “out of area” traffic racing down 12th ave thinking they can get out at 92nd in
peak times. Not all GPS shows this as blocked. Children and walkers have nearly been hit many times and I have
personally had to call police many times for this. This will be exaggerated massively by frustrated kayakers who
are trying to get out or into the neighborhood to launch at peak times.
Property tax income degradation: Miami Shores will see a decline in property prices as the neighborhood
inevitably declines and therefor tax income will decline too. The east side of Miami shores has seen a
considerable rise in property value and therefore new buyers are paying higher property taxes. This will stagnate
or decline and therefore income affected.
Costs. Miami shores budgets and costs will rise due to increased trash, wear and tear on roads, new policing
requirements, and an increase in park usage will result in higher maintenance costs of the park.
Storm / Hurricane impact.: it is well known that driving water due to wind will travel further on a sloping surface
than a wall. The ramp will act as a natural wave creation tool as it shallows therefore creating risk and additional
flooding to the neighborhood that already suffers from rain based flooding.
Liability insurance and Claims: Miami shores will be liable for any and all slip and falls which will be exacerbated
due to inebriated bay kayakers and users. This will severely impact costs.
Many thanks for taking time to read this note.
Darryl Proctor
Miami Shores Resident
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:12am 05-18-21
Terrible idea. Find another way to augment the seawall. Putting in a kayak launch ramp in that area is insane! It
invites increased traffic to an area in which you have previously taken clear steps to limit traffic. That traffic would
then be funneled to an even smaller area that has extreme limits on parking. Traffic and parking aside, it's a
liability nightmare for the city, and frankly it's likely going to cost more money long term for upkeep, insurance,
policing and problem resolution than the amount of the grant in the first place. You would be selling your soul for a
few grant dollars if you accepted this contingent money. Find another solution. They are out there.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:01pm 05-17-21
We moved into our home on 96 Street in July. We have already had a few unpleasant experiences in the
evenings walking our dog by the bay. We have watched cars wait for the police to leave after announcing the
park is closed and return to the area. One night in particular, my teenage daughter and I were pretty horrified
listening to the loud/obscene sounds a couple in their parked vehicle were making for anyone to hear. The area
often smells of marijuana. There is no parking. Will these cars now park alongside the street in front of our
homes to drop their kayaks for the day? I’m terrified of the thought of even more traffic in this residential area we
invested in believing it was safe. It is not feeling very safe already. I cannot imagine if this kayak ramp project
goes through.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:15pm 05-17-21
I Am adamantly opposed to the addition of the kayak ramp, not the seawall project. Although widening the
walkway by bayfront Park to reduce the green space is a terrible idea.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:07pm 05-17-21
As per my previous letters and conversations with council members we remain oposed to the kayak ramp.
ADAM MALAMED
Location:
Submitted At: 8:55pm 05-17-21
Kayak Ramp
I wish to speak at public meeting at 6:30pm May 18th, 2021
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 8:53pm 05-17-21
Danielle Beyda. As a resident of Miami
Shores, I strongly oppose a kayak launch being added to the park on the east side of Miami Shores.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 8:51pm 05-17-21
Andrew Beyda. As a resident of Miami Shores I strongly oppose the addition of a kayak launch to the park on the
east side of the neighborhood.
melissa pregen
Location:
Submitted At: 8:09pm 05-17-21
While I agree that we need to upgrade bayfront park do not support taking the grant money and making the kayak
ramp. I am very concerned about the traffic, noise, unlawful activity, and sanitation issues that will arise because
of the water access. I believe we should be working to make our neighborhood Safer not opening our community
up to these issues which can directly impact quality of life and property value. Please do not move forward with
making this kayak ramp and let try and figure out how we can upgrade bayfront park on our own. Thank you
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 6:02pm 05-17-21
Frederick W. Mueller, Jr and Joan M. Mueller.
We strongly oppose the addition of a Kayak launching ramp as a part of the plan to be included with the proposed
seawall and drainage reconstruction project at Bayfront Park. The impact on the quality of life for residents in the
vicinity, along with logistical challenges such as parking, security, litter, environmental impact, overuse,
management, and liability are obvious and negative. As a lifelong resident of Miami Shores, as a waterman,
paddler, and former captain, I can assure you that is proposed kayak venue would create a nightmare and expose
the village to significant liability. Prevailing (and sometimes strong) winds, potential for significant tidal
fluctuations, extensive rip rap, wave action from weather and powerboat traffic, could make it very hazardous as a
launch site for human powered vessels. Furthermore, I think it is also premature to pursue this project and any
source of grant money that would have a launching ramp as a contingency. The Village has clearly not explored
all options available for funding this project, and erroneously advanced funds toward the project which is
untenable. Move forward with the plans for seawall and drainage reconstruction...but eliminate plans for for a
kayak launching facility. Thank you.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:49pm 05-17-21
My wife and I strongly oppose the Kayak ramp part of the project as it will bring lots of traffic to the area with
concerns about parking space and safety in general.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:01pm 05-17-21
Bonnie Bennett. 1266 NE 101 St. I’ve just been informed about the proposal 9 A for seawall and kayak ramp at
the bay and 96 St. As a resident (again) I am appalled. What amazes me is it its doubtful that a kayak launch is
legal in a residential area. This is basically an open invitation for people to access properties in the area in a
dangerous way. Currently it is a hotspot for non-residents getting high, hanging with boom boxes etc. Additionally,
how sound is the seawall change for flooding? Additionally, how does Miami Dade County fit into all of this? This
will be heavily opposed; I would not rule out a class action suit by the residents most affected. There was, to my
knowledge, no public forum for disclosure of this plan for ALL residents. I will email the counsel on this as well.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:51pm 05-17-21
Daniel Aguiar
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:03am 05-17-21
My name is James Turk and I live on the eastern end of 94 street. I am writing to express my concern over the
proposed kayak launch. I have a host of concerns related to traffic, flooding, safety, and liability. Additionally, I am
extremely concerned about the secretive nature in which the initial phases of the project were handled. At the
very least, a comprehensive study is warranted to understand the potential traffic (on a very narrow street),
parking challenges, security, and impact on flooding (this area floods horribly). I am 100% in favor of a sea wall
project, and other strategic efforts to mitigate rising sea level, but this plan is short sighted and will result in
significant quality of life issues for those of us that live close to the proposed site and potentially great longer term
expense for all Miami Shores residents.
Lele Tracy
Location:
Submitted At: 11:01am 05-17-21
I vehemently oppose the Bayfront Park Seawall / Kayak Launch
Janine Turk
Location:
Submitted At: 10:50am 05-17-21
With regard to the rebuilding of the sea wall & kayak launch on 94th ST at the Bayfront Park, I am concerned
about the increased traffic on 94th. It is already an extremely narrow street with major traffic all day and night. It is
difficult for cars to pass through especially when visitors & worker vehicles are parked along the street. I am
particularly worried for the safety of our children, pets and elderly who walk along this street every day because
there are NO sidewalks. The tight corner of 94 street and Bayshore drive is even more dangerous because cars
regularly parked there leave inadequate room for others to make the sharp turn safely. This street is a very
popular walking street for All of our Miami Shores neighbors who come to enjoy the waterfront, however, I fear the
added traffic will make it a lot less safe for them.
Secondly, the distance and location of this ramp would result in further flooding issues on 94th ST which Is
already quite severe. Such a wide-open entry for more water to enter through one of the lowest streets in Miami
Shores would be devastating. It is already well known that this street floods with even a bad rainstorm and worse
with high or king tides, not to mention tropical storms. The flooding is again dangerous for all. There is nowhere
for this water to drain properly and is a safety concern for all of us driving or walking along this street. This is a
huge liability for all.
Please reconsider this project and at the very least provide a responsible study of the concerns and countless
significant impacts and liabilities this will have on our entire neighborhood.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:26am 05-17-21
Kristen Mustad
I paddle board weekly. I use the 79th street public boat ramp and have never been inconvenienced by it. I do not
want or need a ramp and the end of our street (or any other street in our neighborhood) as the county has given
us a convenient and well built ramp on 79th street with ample parking. For Miami shores residents, the trip to the
79th st boat ramp will take less than 5 minutes more than going to this proposed ramp that is exposed to East
and NE winds (prevailing winds) and will make launching difficult and dangerous.
Thsi is an irresponsible project.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:22am 05-17-21
Karen Bass
As a resident of the 1200 block of NE 94th Street for the past 21 years and am writing to you to express my
concern over the proposed kayak ramp that is under consideration at the end of our block.
There certainly must be better alternatives to raise the seawall that does not include a kayak launching ramp as
part of the grant deal. Let me be clear that we agree that we need to raise the seawall, but not at the expense of
adding a kayak ramp!! A kayak ramp will severely impede the quiet neighborhood feel of our beloved Miami
Shores Bayfront and surrounding homes.
We, along with many others in our community are opposed to the kayak ramp and were quite surprised that it
was even in consideration in our area. The additional unwanted traffic, noise, congestion, liter, crime and liability
is not something that any one of us wants to see in our neighborhood. In addition, where do these kayakers
expect to park their cars? As it is now our street is very narrow and most of us have reflective driveway markers
on the edges of our property to keep everyday vehicles from driving over our lawns or from parking on it and we
do not need our street nor any of the others to become a parking lot.
Please listen to us and don't allow this to happen to our beloved neighborhood.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:13pm 05-16-21
Dear Council Members,
in general I am in favor of a new seawall and enhancements of drainage. However, due to potential issues and
additional challenges around overflow parking, crime, trash and speeding cars in narrow NE 94th Street I am
expressing my great displeasure at the proposed kayak launching ramp. Please stop the current design of this
project. Please investigate alternative funding sources that do not make it mandatory to have a kayak ramp.
Timm Duerkop
1250 NE 94 ST
Miami Shores, FL 33138
Veronica Dumas
Location:
Submitted At: 6:47pm 05-16-21
The kayak ramp will pose severe safety, traffic, security, and liability issues for Miami Shores Village.
It will particularly affect the quiet enjoyment of those of us who live near the park.
Please find another way of improving the sea wall without turning Bayfront Park into a highly traffic, congested,
loud and unsafe park.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:31pm 05-16-21
I oppose the action as outlined by the council. I support a new seawall but I strongly oppose the addition of a
kayak ramp. It defeats the purpose of keeping out water (the water will push up this ramp). Moreover, there is
absolutely not sufficient parking to assure the easy use of this ramp. There will be too many cars without
appropriate spaces. The liability is also a huge problem. The additional expenses this ramp will incur on the part
of the city negate the matching funds. Instead, let's research other matching grants that do not demand a kayak
ramp.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:20pm 05-16-21
We live by bay front park and we feel that the traffic increase, congestion, and potential liabilities associated with
the installation of a kayak launch ramp would create problems for the residents of the neighboring area as well as
adding to the police departments responsibility.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:01pm 05-16-21
Eric Cheng 54 NW 104th street. I am in support of the seawall and the Kayak launch.
Yiannis Dumas
Location:
Submitted At: 4:53pm 05-16-21
Dear Mayor Harris and council members,
My name is Yiannis Dumas and my family and I live on 9650 North bayshore drive.
I am writing to you about the proposed project to raise the seawall at Bayfront park and to include a kayak launch
ramp.
We would like to express our concerns with this project:
1- We believe that this project will present a safety risk and potential liability to the Village of Miami Shores. We
see the directions of the winds every day from our windows and believe that kayakers could be pushed towards
the rocks and people could get hurt. Additionally, there are always children running up and down the park and we
feel there could be a risk of someone drowning if there is a ramp with access to the water.
2- Secondly we think that there is a potential HUGE PARKING and TRAFFIC issue. The park does not have a
proper parking lot, like all other kayak launching parks in Miami DADe. This will attract a ridiculous amount of cars
in the park, with extreme congestion to the area. Please remember we live here, and we sincerely believe that
this project will infringe on the QUIET ENJOYMENT of our homes.
3- Third, there is a SECURITY concern. We already have expressed to the Village and the Police department on
numerous occasions that in the last 13 years, we have repeatedly been affected by what goes on in the park,
particularly after dark. Loud music, drugs, one car parked after another with their engines on and polluting our
environment, people engaging in sexual activity in their cars...the list goes on...
The rules ARE NOT enforced, because MSV simply does not have the resources to enforce them. How is this
going to be any different with more and more people being attracted to this park?
What we suggest is to find the proper grant to raise the seawall without having to install a kayak ramp. In the age
of climate change and rising sea levels , there have to be many other options to get funded for the seawall
reinforcement.
As our representative, we sincerely hope that you take these points into consideration and you stop this project
from going any further.
Sincerely,
Yiannis H. Dumas
9650 North Bayshore Drive
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:29pm 05-16-21
No - oppose
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:51pm 05-16-21
While my family supports the consideration of strengthening the seawall at Bayfront Park, we are vehemently
opposed to the kayak ramp. As one enables the other, we would be solidly against the project altogether.
It's simply naive to think the kayak ramp won't exponentially increase traffic in our neighborhood and create a host
of problems and liabilities for the village and all the residents on 94th-96th streets. Among them:
Parking
- There is no plan to control this - we don't see any feasibility studies around this as part of the planning process
Crime/security
- This is already a serious problem in our neighborhood
Speedsters
- Visitors to the park can be incredibly disrespectful. On any given day there are drivers and motorcycle riders
zooming along at 40mph or more
Environmental Issues and trash
- Last summer there was a terrible environmental breach of Biscayne Bay and it decimated the fish populations
around Bayfront Park. Thousands of fish belly-up on the water for a few weeks and a horrible stench. The fish are
just beginning to come back again, as the coral gets healthy
- Trash - what a problem this is!! Apparently some mamas did not educate their children well enough as to how
and where to dispose of trash. I am often picking up after people and disposing in a trash can 30 feet away
because I do not want to see water bottles and beer bottles in the bay
And not least of all - liability
- Not only will the village bear the guilt of serious injuries and possibly deaths due to weather, winds, waves and
general people's irresponsibility, are you ready to bear the inevitable costs from the lawsuits that are sure to
follow?
- Can you guarantee the safety of all the users and the neighborhood's children?
We are against these plans without further study and alteration.
Thank you.
Tarek & Imelda Korraa - proud residents of Miami Shores
1263 NE 94th St
Miami Shores
305-906-2530
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:45pm 05-15-21
Would like to submit a comment in support of the kayak ramp. As a shores resident I think this will enhance our
ability to stay active and enjoy the outdoors. Thank you for your consideration, Paula Garver
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:56pm 05-15-21
Karl Markeset - 1438 NE 104 Th St. Miamu Shores. I strongly support the kayak launch. A area of for public
access to the Bay is a much needed amenity in this community. Access can be controlled and a few vocal
residents should not block access for the rest of us. Access to the bay is part of a sustainable community. Thank
you!
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:33pm 05-15-21
I support the Kayak ramp. We should build it! Kayak’s are fun. Kayakers are great and non bothersome people!
Let’s do this!
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:24pm 05-15-21
I wholeheartedly support the kayak ramp at the end of 94th Street on Bayfront Park. I live on 93rd Street, east of
12th Ave. Every time I walk to the park, I wish I could launch a kayak in my own neighborhood. It is ludicrous
that I have to go to Oleta and pay for a kayak rental, when I am so close to water access. It would be an amenity
that would be of great benefit to me, and to several of the neighbors with whom I’ve spoken. I have yet to hear
any opposition to the ramp that is based on logic or solid reasoning. I can’t see a dramatic increase of traffic or
parking issues at the Park, but assuming arguendo that demand for parking increases, parking enforcement
would curb any issues. Rise in crime, littering, truancy makes no sense, when a kayak ramp is likely to attract
kayakers, who will likely be paddling and picking up the trash they find. I often take my 11-year old kayaking. It is
our time to connect with nature, disconnect from electronics, and reflect on the enormity of what surrounds us. It
is a great way for us to spend quality time together. I would love to have the ability to do this in our own backyard.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:36am 05-15-21
My name is Daniel Fruciano and I have been a resident of Miami Shores for 11 years. I wish to go on record to
state that I unequivocally support the addition of public access to the water at Bayfront Park. I have lived near the
water most of my life, having grown up on a small Pacific island and summering on the coast of Maine and Cape
Cod, before moving to Miami Beach and finally The Shores. Whether it’s on a kayak or paddle board or by just
dipping your toes in, water access engenders a connection to our environment that we can get in no other way.
Having also spent my life traveling, I have encountered this universally. From the Embarcadero in San Francisco,
to the steps leading into the water on the seafront in virtually every town in Croatia, Greece and Turkey, or more
locally, the bayfront in St. Petersburg, our ability to access the water is paramount to enjoying a greater quality of
life. My husband and I are incredibly excited about this amazing opportunity to add something that will truly
benefit our whole community so easily!
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:03pm 05-14-21
Would be such a wonderful addition to our neighborhood!
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:53pm 05-14-21
I am totally opposed to building a seawall with the stipulation of having a kayak ramp. The kayak ramp will bring
more traffic, crime and cause issues with parking in the area. Additionally, the ramp may cause destruction of the
coral and seagrass that butts up to the current seawall. I also think that people will use the kayak ramp to enter
the bay to go swimming. This will be a major liability, as people may hurt themselves in the rocky, shallow water in
the bay near the seawall.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:23pm 05-14-21
I'm in full support. The ramp is not going to create a sudden influx of traffic, anyone who's been to the 79th St
launch knows you only have a handful of people each day. In fact, half of us there on any given day are Shores
residents! As for people parking there, people park along the bayfront now. And it pays for a much-needed
upgrade to the seawall. This is a no-brainer.
Julie Brady
Location:
Submitted At: 4:47pm 05-14-21
I support the kayak launch at Bayfront Park for many reasons. We live a block from the park and walk there daily.
I love seeing people enjoying the park but often thought that a kayak launch would be wonderful. We raised our
boys in Miami Shores and enjoyed being so close to beautiful Biscayne Bay. We had to go to other locations to
launch our canoes and kayaks. Having a kayak launch in Miami Shores will make venturing out into the bay a fun
activity. I support this endeavor and hope that we will move forward to make it a reality! Thank you, Julie Brady
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:30pm 05-14-21
Bob Smith 230 NE 94th St. I support the installation of a kayak ramp in Miami Shores Bayfront Park.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:18pm 05-14-21
We strongly support the installation of a kayak ramp and seawall upgrades. We, as a family, love to kayak (so
much so that our children have their own kid-sized kayaks). This is a win: [1] preparing our Village for the
inevitable effects of climate change; and [2] providing access to our residents to a healthy family activity that
many enjoy. We see no appreciable down side, and we strongly support the installation of the ramp. - The Tims
Family
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:53am 05-14-21
Daniel Brady - I am speaking today to support moving forward in the Bayfront Park sea wall and kayak launch
area. I live on 95th Street, second house west of NE 12 Avenue and have visited that park almost once a day,
either walking or riding my bike. It is a beautiful place to take a look at Biscayne Bay and watch both sunrise and
sunset. There are rarely more cars than area for the cars to park and have always found those individuals visiting
the park to be both polite and respectful. It would be a shame to have the 5 house that abutting the park being
the only citizens of Miami Shores who can enjoy the park and limit additional access to Biscayne Bay that the
kayak launch area would provide. Be Brave, move forward with a plan that serves all the residents of the Village.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:07am 05-14-21
Lory Freiman - I approve the initiative for the seawall and kayak lift. For our families and to promote outdoor
activities within our small village and boost community culture around something fun.
Alejandro Barreras
Location:
Submitted At: 11:04am 05-14-21
I'd like to state my support for the proposed kayak ramp in North Bayshore Park.
Kayaking is a healthy, environmentally conscious and family-friendly activity. Having a close and easily accessible
launch within the Village will benefit all residents, promote the activity and encourage the use of our outdoor
resources. It won't bring excess traffic or noisy disturbances. Kayaking is also the less expensive alternative to
enjoy our wonderful waters in a manner accessible to all ages and income levels.
Biscayne Bay is one of our most precious community assets, but historically, and by design, access to it has been
limited to those fortunate enough to buy it. North Bayshore is the only part of the Village where the whole
community can enjoy the bay and it's underutilized. It's time to open it for all.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:54am 05-14-21
I live in miami shores and I think the addition of a kayak ramp (and corresponding grant) would be an excellent
addition to the community and the park. Kayak ramps aren’t known to majorly increase traffic or attract lewd
behavior - this seems like a no-brainer to me.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:54am 05-14-21
I want to express my support for the Kayak ramp initiative. The park is public, it's not a private garden with a
beautiful view. I feel the ramp will benefit the public, a healthy activity for all.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:37am 05-14-21
I think it would be an amazing activation of that park (even without the matching grant)! - Tims Family
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:22am 05-14-21
This would be a great addition to our wonderful community. A low cost access point to allow young and young a
heart access to our waterways to help enjoy the environment in a non harmful way. The community of kayakers
and paddle boarders is a environmentally friendly one that would only add value to our community
John Ise
Location:
Submitted At: 9:50am 05-14-21
I strongly, strongly support the addition of a kayak launch with any proposed redevelopment of the seawall at
Bayfront Park.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:44am 05-14-21
I support the action to reinforce the sea wall and build a kayak launch. Miami Shores must start action against
climate change now and cannot afford any missed opportunities.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 7:57pm 05-13-21
As a resident of East Miami Shores, and a real estate professional, I believe this is a misguided project. I
appreciate the attempt to utilize grant money, but municipalities are obligated to specifically reserve money for
infrastructure projects such as this one. There is simply no where for anyone to park to utilize a ramp. The ramp
will clog up the area and cause untold unwanted passers by. The truth is, Miami Shores residents would be in the
significant minority of users of the ramp. The sea wall is fine for the time being.
The real issue ought to be how to privatize the park as it currently exists since it is barely patrolled as-is.
-Greg Baumann 91st Terrace
Agenda Item: eComments for 9.B) DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING PRIDE MONTH CELEBRATION COSTS
(STAFF: VILLAGE MANAGER).
Overall Sentiment
Dennis Leyva
Location:
Submitted At: 3:58pm 05-17-21
Thank you for celebrating and honoring the LGBT community.
Agenda Item: eComments for 9.C) DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING RFI RELATING TO PUBLIC WORKS LAND
(SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR MARINBERG).
Overall Sentiment
Kate Mason
Location:
Submitted At: 4:37pm 05-18-21
This is a creative idea. I would also like to know if the staff has any opinions on this.
Agenda Item: eComments for 9.D) DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING RESIDENT SATISFACTION SURVEY
(SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR DANIEL MARINBERG).
Overall Sentiment
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:24pm 05-18-21
A survey will allow the council to get a sense of the issues and opportunities for the purposes of prioritizing
projects and allocating budget.
Dennis Leyva
Location:
Submitted At: 4:02pm 05-17-21
Excellent idea.
Agenda Item: eComments for 9.E) DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE CREATION OF SEPARATE HUMAN
RESOURCES MANAGER AND COMPLETION OF ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS (SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR DANIEL
MARINBERG).
Overall Sentiment
Kate Mason
Location:
Submitted At: 4:38pm 05-18-21
I support this. It's shocking that we do not already have performance reviews.
Dennis Leyva
Location:
Submitted At: 4:10pm 05-17-21
Vice Mayor Marinberg you are to be commended for this agenda item. Fiscal responsibility and transparency
equal good government.
Agenda Item: eComments for 9.G) DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING TRAFFIC CALMING AND
ENFORCEMENT(SPONSORED BY: VICE MAYOR DANIEL MARINBERG).
Overall Sentiment
Kate Mason
Location:
Submitted At: 4:43pm 05-18-21
I support research into what resources exist to correct our various issues. My suggestions are for research into
how to help 12th avenue speeding (circles or stop signs, speed tracker set ups), east bound traffic on 96th street
trying to turn left onto Biscayne (lengthen the left turn lane), more pedestrian crosswalks on NE 2nd ave.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:30pm 05-18-21
John Rodriguez
I support all types of traffic calming (speed humps, medians with landscape and traffic circles). We should have
more traffic circles at the main intersections. There are too many accidents, like the one at N Miami and 103
Street that took place this past Sunday. Also too many people speed and drive recklessly on our streets. It can be
a hazard to walk, run or bike across the area. I also support regular and ongoing enforcement. Other higher traffic
cities, such as Bal Harbor, do an excellent job at using enforcement to reduce the speed of motorist.
Russell Kline
Location:
Submitted At: 2:21pm 05-18-21
Is there any detail on when is being proposed for Traffic Calming and Enforcement? I did not see any detail
below the Agenda item. I believe there needs to be increased and ongoing enforcement of traffic and speeding
laws in Miami Shores in order to reduce the number of cars that speed through MS. My house is located at
103rd St and 6th Avenue at the intersection and I witness daily the high number of vehicles speeding on 6th
Avenue through the school zone time periods and through out the day. I believe there needs to be ongoing,
visible enforcement of the speeding and traffic laws in order to ticket offenders and to discourage other drivers
from breaking the traffic laws. In addition this could be an income source for MS that could support the MS
Police department budget. From my perspective the current enforcement is sporadic and needs to be done
regularly in order to set expectations that MS is not an area to speed through.
In the last year there was the fatal accident on 6th Avenue near MS Country Day school when walkers were
struck while crossing the road. I believe that without further enforcement there will be other incidents resulting
injury or death due to the excessive speeds.
Regards
Russell Kline
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:15am 05-18-21
Will cuase alot of crime and take away side streets where the kids play
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 7:44am 05-18-21
There is no reason to open the streets the dead end streets on be 10th for Miami shores east..we already have a
speeding problem and our park is very busy now...the traffic moves quick enough during rush hour it will only
cause more traffic and crime in the area
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:17pm 05-17-21
I understand there is some discussion about possibly open up streets from 10th Avenue. This means that many
residents who purchased on a dead end street intentionally due to concerns about living on a busy street (and
many with small children) would lose the benefit (despite paying a significant premium).
If this happens I would very seriously consider moving to somewhere else. It takes away our peace and quiet and
also opens up the streets to crime and puts additional stress on our police force. It will surely affect our property
values and put our kids in danger. Please- this cannot be allowed!!
Mary Romano
1147 NE 97th St.
Dennis Leyva
Location:
Submitted At: 4:12pm 05-17-21
Great to hear campaign promises are on the agenda.
From:Robert Menge
To:Ysabely Rodriguez
Cc:Alice Burch; Attykavloff@aol.com; Crystal Wagar; JonathanMeltz; Sean Brady; Janet Goodman; Carol Eannace;
JOE; Gdrody; Michael Green; Carlos33180; Oscar; Jadeocean@live.ca; Agustin Ayuso; Norma C. Ayuso; Philippe
Alluard; jeffrey winograd; Watbon99; Brett Firestone; Noah; A K; EdGriffith@miamisao.com; Thomas Robertson;
Tom Benton; Lazaro Remond; Ismael Naranjo; Sandra Harris; danielmarinburg@msvfl.gov; Katia Saint Fleur;
Hefty, Lee (RER); Grossenbacher, Craig (RER); Gray, Catherine (RER)
Subject:Re: Marine Related Business operated out of Single Family Residences in Manatee Protection Areas and the
Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve.
Date:Tuesday, May 04, 2021 2:01:39 PM
Good afternoon Ysabely,
I would like to submit this statement to be read at the Village Council Meeting this evening.
I would like to thank the Village council and the village Staff for following up and protecting
the Quality of life in our community regarding the recent issues of vessels and businesses
operating out of single family residences. DERM is looking into the number of vessels
allowed in back of a single family residence, but it is also important that the Village Council
continues to support the Village Administration, Code Enforcement to enforce the existing
zoning Laws that do not allow all kinds of businesses at single family residences, especially on
the waterways of our community.
As our New Mayor and Village Council Members we recently elected, we need you to help us
protect the Quality of Life in our community which has made us safe and prosperous, during
times of disasters and uncertainty.
Over the years, we have accomplished a lot as a result of the Council and Administrative staff
listening to the residents of our community. We were able to minimize traffic congestion and
some of the speeding concerns in most of our community, by closing streets to thru traffic,
adding speed bumps and stepping up Police activities to address those issues in problem
areas.
We closed the Shores Motel, a haven for drugs, prostitution, and othe illegal activities, thanks
to the building Department, Code Enforcement and other County and local agencies, working
together to better our Village.
We have been able to control Vacation Rentals, which continue to be a problem in Miami-
Dade County, with the recent death of a 3 year old child, attending a Birthday Party in a
Vacation Rental.
The Shores Golf Course known all over the world, is a treasure in our community that the
Village council residents need to continue to protect, as once green space is gone in South
Florida it can never be brought back or restored to its original condition.
We are lucky to live in our little piece of paradise, and we all need to work together to make
sure we make all the right decisions in protecting our Quality of Life and our local
environment.
We look forward to all of you helping us in our Village Beautiful, thank you.
Virus-free. www.avast.com
On Sun, May 2, 2021 at 8:07 AM T. Septembre <tseptembre@aol.com> wrote:Good morning Robert,