2021-11-16 MINUTES1
MEETING MINUTES
NOVEMBER 16, 2021 6:30 PM 9900 NE 2ND AVENUE
1)CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 6:35 PM.
2)MOMENT OF SILENCE / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3)ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Councilmember Alice Burch
Councilmember Katia Saint Fleur
Councilmember Crystal Wagar
Vice Mayor Daniel Marinberg
Mayor Sandra Harris
ALSO PRESENT:
Village Attorney Richard Sarafan
Village Clerk Ysabely Rodriguez
Village Manager Esmond Scott
4)PRESENTATIONS
4.A PRESENTATION BY THE PROPERTY ASSESSED CLEAN ENERGY (PACE) PROGRAM
PROVIDER, RENEW FINANCIAL, TO ADD OPTIONAL FUNDING SOURCES FOR
RESIDENTS (JENNIFER ROJO SUAREZ, FL REGIONAL DIRECTOR GOVERNMENTAL
AFFAIRS).
Jennifer Rojo Suarez and Chris Peterson introduced the item and answered questions posed by the
Village Council. Mr. Peterson offered to provide back-up material to help the Village Council get better
acquainted with Renew Financial.
2
By way of consensus, the Village Council directed staff to draft a resolution in support of the optional
funding sources for residents.
4) PUBLIC COMMENTS
At the request of the Village Council, due to the volume of written comments, eComments were not
read into the record in the interest of time. However, all of the eComments have been attached hereto
as Exhibit A.
Before opening the floor to public comments, Vice Mayor Marinberg and Councilmember Burch asked
for the person who provided 144 eComments, containing the name and addresses of property owners
in Miami Shores, to address the Village Council on the methodology and reasoning behind the
transmission of such comments.
Mr. Brad Smith from Stern Development spoke about the community outreach efforts organized by
Next Movement which consisted of canvassing certain neighborhoods of the Village. Mr. Greg
King, on behalf of Next Movement, provided information regarding his canvassing efforts, indicating he
educated residents about the proposed items and asked if they’re in support of the items, their name
would be listed on a report in lieu of obtaining signatures. Mr. King affirmed that anyone whose name
appeared in eComments agreed to their name being provided to the public using the eComments
platform by this third party firm.
Robert Menge spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Jade Moran spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Allan J. Nichols asked for the item to be deferred and workshopped due to the number of residents who
are in opposition to the item.
Neil Cantor spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Diane Loffredo thanked every member of the Council for choosing public service. She further spoke
about the importance of listening to the public very carefully and spoke in opposition to Items 7A and
7B.
Carmen Renick spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Michael Suman spoke in support of Items 7A and 7B.
Scott Mellett spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Ernie Perez spoke in favor of the rezoning item.
Darlene read a letter into the record on behalf of Jack and spoke in favor of the item.
Tom Septembre spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Sylvia Clarke spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Robert Hagerman spoke in opposition to the item.
Noel Franz spoke in opposition to the rezoning and kayak launch proposals.
Rose Sayre spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
3
Eric Williams spoke in support of Items 7A and 7B.
Luis Guerra spoke in favor of Items 7A and 7B.
Chrissie Chiarella clarified that no one canvassed her home.
Pablo Urrieta spoke in opposition to the rezoning item.
Melissa Lewis spoke in favor of the rezoning item.
Bill Perry spoke about in favor of a gas station concept instead of a motel.
Tuyen Tieu referenced the kayak launch proposal near Bayfront Park due to the number of
Councilmembers who reside in such neighborhood. Ms. Tieu further spoke in opposition to Items 7A &
7B.
Gaixkander Elguezabal spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Pedro Chevalier spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Bruce Gibson encouraged the Village Council to consider the best and highest use of such parcels for
Miami Shores residents.
Carole Respondek spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Dana Rhoden spoke in opposition to the rezoning item.
Frederick Mueller spoke in opposition to the rezoning item and kayak launch proposal.
Howard Albert spoke about canvassing outside of the affected area.
Tyson Beckford spoke in favor of Items 7A and 7B.
Richard Fernandez spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
There was a brief intermission at 7:44PM.
The Village Council reconvened at 7:56PM.
Michael Cuddlip spoke in opposition to the proposed project and proposed deferring the item to gauge
more resident input.
Frank Rubio spoke in opposition to the rezoning item.
Jennifer Ale spoke in opposition to the rezoning item.
Franco Hernandez spoke in opposition to the item.
Stephen Zawadkas spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Bekky Leonard expressed concern about a resident who did not provide consent for her information to
be used by the canvassing team.
4
Maria Cordoba spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Ty Hart spoke in favor of readjusting the proposed site plan and advocated for the denial of the
proposed project.
Patricia Cocchi spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Linda Schwartz spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Janet Goodman spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B and presented the Village Clerk with petitions
from the residents on NE 105 Street.
Courtney Howell spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Melida Matos spoke in opposition to Items 7A and 7B.
Noah Kessler spoke in opposition Items 7A and 7B.
6)APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
6.A APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 2, 2021 VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES.
Councilmember Burch moved approval of the November 2, 2021 Village Council Meeting Minutes and
Vice Mayor Marinberg seconded the motion which carried a 5-0 voice vote.
7)ORDINANCE(S) ON FIRST READING
7.A AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, FLORIDA,
APPROVING A SMALL SCALE AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP WITHIN
THE VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CONSISTENT WITH 163.3161, 163.3184 AND
163.3187, FLORIDA STATUTES; REDESIGNATING THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION
FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY FROM MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT, CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE
(STAFF: PLANNING AND ZONING DIRECTOR).
Village Clerk Rodriguez read the caption of the ordinance into the record.
For the record, individual Councilmembers disclosed any ex-parte communications concerning
Items 7A and 7B.
Mr. Sarafan clarified Jennings Disclosure as stipulated in the ordinance for the benefit of the newly
elected members of the Village Council and the public.
Mr. Travis Kendall, Planning and Zoning Director, delivered a presentation of the item and answered
questions posed by the Village Council
Mr. Kendall elaborated on the basis of denial of the proposed changes to the future land use map,
citing the seven points outlined in his staff report.
Mr. Ryan Bailine, applicant representative, recommended the Village Council read Items 7A and 7B
into the record to ease discussions regarding the FLUM amendment and rezoning requests.
Please see Item 7B for further discussion concerning both items.
5
Vice Mayor Marinberg moved to approve the ordinance on first reading and Councilmember Wagar
seconded the motion, which carried 3-2 voice vote. Mayor Harris and Councilmember Burch
voted in opposition.
7.B AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, FLORIDA,
RELATING TO ZONING; AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO REFLECT A
DISTRICT BOUNDARY CHANGE; REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY, BEARING FOLIO
NUMBER 11-2230-001-0500, CONSISTING OF 1.08 ACRES (+/-) FROM A2 TO B2;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE
(STAFF: PLANNING & ZONING DIRECTOR).
Village Clerk Rodriguez read the caption of Item 7B into the record.
Mr. Kendall elaborated on the basis of denial concerning the proposed changes to the current zoning,
citing the various points outlined in his staff report.
Mr. Sarafan provided a brief overview of permitted uses, indicating every commercial use that is
allowed in the Village will be allowed in the proposed location.
Mr. Ryan Bailine introduced Ms. Marissa Neufeld, Greenberg Traurig Shareholder, and members of the
Stern Development team. He further delivered a presentation on the requests for the Future Land Use
Map (FLUM) amendment and rezoning from A2 to B2.
Mr. Bailine noted Florida law does not require the proposed site plan to be included with the rezoning
application. However, the Village does require the applicant to disclose the proposed site plan along
with the rezoning application.
Mr. Brad Smith, Stern Development, delivered his portion of the presentation concerning the proposed
site plan (gas station and mixed use development) and answered questions posed by the Village
Council. Mr. Smith further introduced Allan Levine, licensed professional engineer specializing in
environmental engineering, Wayne Gibson with Murphy USA, Mr. Andrew Deegan who is a civil
engineer that can speak to the proposed stormwater improvements.
Mr. Smith offered to maintain vehicular and pedestrian access on NE 105 Street.
For the record, Mr. Bailine provided a copy of the transcript for the October 28, 2021 Planning Board
hearing, the 2025 Comprehensive Plan, and a copy of the FLUM contained within Comprehensive
Plan.
Mr. Bailine clarified that his team did define the use of the southern part of the proposed plan when the
supplement to the application was submitted to the Planning Department. Councilmember Wagar
requested a copy of the original application. Mr. Bailine alleged the Comprehensive Plan points of
analysis, as outlined in the FLUM staff report, are factually inaccurate and were not presented to the
Planning Board. Therefore, he advocated for the removal of points 1, 3, 4, 5, and 7 from the
recommendations.
Mr. Bailine provided a copy of the November 16, 2021 Village Council Meeting staff reports to Village
Clerk and referenced the differences between such documents and the October 28, 2021 Planning
Board hearing staff report.
Mr. Kendall proceeded to ask questions based on the information presented by Mr. Bailine. Responding
to Mr. Kendall, Mr. Bailine did not feel it is appropriate for staff to cross examine the applicant.
Mr. Sarafan clarified individuals presenting evidence are generally subject to cross examination.
6
Mr. Kendall noted he did not receive the questions that were presented and therefore does not have
time to research and provide responses.
Mr. Sarafan raised concerns with the Village Council accepting the change of use without an approved
site plan.
Vice Mayor Marinberg spoke about the previous rezoning request (from parking lot to commercial use)
whereby staff and the Planning Board did not recommend denial even though the property was in close
proximity to residential properties.
Responding to Councilmember Wagar, Mr. Sarafan administered the oath of truthfulness to everyone
who raised their hand in response to providing testimony.
Vice Mayor Marinberg spoke about the type of crimes based on MSPD police call-outs at the Hacienda
Motel, Miami Shores Motel, and Ugas properties.
Councilmember Burch encouraged neighboring residents to work collaboratively to determine the best
use for the land as it cannot remain vacant.
Discussion ensued about environmental concerns regarding the adjoining canal. Environmentalist Allan
Levine answered questions posed by the Village Council.
Responding to Councilmember Wagar, Mr. Smith committed to considering helping the Village maintain
the cleanliness of the canal and also committed to considering an additional buffer against the existing
wall.
Mr. Andrew Deegan answered questions posed by the Village Council regarding design parameters
associated with the proposed double-walled tanks and stormwater improvements.
Mr. Sarafan reiterated the items presented to the Village Council for consideration: to consider
amending the FLUM and to subsequently consider the rezoning application.
Councilmember Saint Fleur asked for staff to respond to the assertions raised by the applicant. Mr.
Kendall expounded on the basis of his denial recommendation, citing the use that is proposed is not
defined and he thus felt uncomfortable recommending approval.
Responding to Vice Mayor Marinberg’s question as to whether there is sufficient ability for vehicles to
get through if they wall were reopened for access, Mr. Christopher Miranda, Public Works Director,
responded in the affirmative.
Responding to Mr. Kendall’s brief overview of restrictive commercial, Mr. Bailine clarified the legend on
the map that was provided to the Village Council does not address restrictive commercial.
Mayor Harris called for a brief intermission at 11:00 PM
Mayor Harris resumed the meeting at 11:05 PM.
Mayor Harris opened the floor to public comments concerning both ordinances.
Robert Menge spoke about how the experts are not qualified to speak about the Biscayne aquifer.
Chrissie Chiarella spoke about how the existing wall does not serve as a barrier as people have jumped
over it in the past.
7
Carmen Renick expressed concerns regarding vagrants and also spoke about constructing a nursing
home as an alternative to the gas station.
Robert Hagerman spoke about rezoning the property to B1 to limit the type of permitted uses.
Jesse Valinski spoke about staff recommendations, the undefined use of the rezoning application, and
concerns regarding possible leaks from the gas station.
Mayor Harris closed the public hearings for Items 7A and 7B.
Mr. Bailine provided closing remarks.
Vice Mayor Marinberg moved to approve the ordinance on first reading and Councilmember Wagar
seconded the motion, which carried 3-2 voice vote. Mayor Harris and Councilmember Burch
voted in opposition.
Councilmember Burch read a letter into the record.
Mr. Bailine requested for the road closure (disposition of land) item to be publicly noticed and appear on
the same agenda as the FLUM and rezoning items.
Councilmember Wagar departed from the meeting at 11:29 PM.
8)RESOLUTION(S)
Vice Mayor Marinberg moved to approve Items 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D, as it appears on the agenda and
Councilmember Saint Fleur seconded the motion which carried a 4-0 voice vote.
8.A A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL AUTHORIZING THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A 401(A) DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLAN ADMINISTERED BY
MISSIONSQUARE RETIREMENT ADOPTING A DECLARATION OF TRUST IN
CONNECTION THEREWITH, DESIGNATING A COORDINATOR AND AUTHORIZING
EXECUTION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS (STAFF: FINANCE DIRECTOR).
PASSED ON CONSENT.
8.B A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL CREATING BUDGET
AMENDMENT #3 TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021 OPERATING BUDGETS, INCREASING
REVENUES AND EFFECTUATING TRANSFERS TO REVERSE THE YEAR END
BUDGETARY DEFICIT (STAFF: FINANCE DIRECTOR).
PASSED ON CONSENT.
8.C A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, FLORIDA,
CREATING BUDGET AMENDMENT #1 TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022 OPERATING
BUDGETS; APPROPRIATING $247,768 FROM THE GENERAL FUND BALANCE,
APPROPRIATING $63,456 FROM THE TRANSPORTATION SURTAX FUND BALANCE,
APPROPRIATING $2,310 FROM THE BUILDING FUND BALANCE, APPROPRIATING
$857,394 FROM THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND BALANCE, APPROPRIATING $11,839
FROM THE STORMWATER FUND BALANCE, AND APPROPRIATING $181,893 FROM THE
FLEET MAINTENANCE FUND BALANCE (STAFF: FINANCE DIRECTOR).
8
PASSED ON CONSENT.
8.D A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL, CREATING BUDGET
AMENDMENT #2 TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022 OPERATING BUDGETS;
TRANSFERRING $106,225 FROM THE NON-DEPARTMENTAL CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT
IN THE GENERAL FUND TO VARIOUS POLICE DEPARTMENT PAYROLL ACCOUNTS
(STAFF: FINANCE DIRECTOR).
PASSED ON CONSENT.
9) MANAGER'S REPORT
This item was withdrawn in the interest of time.
10) ANNOUNCEMENTS
This item was withdrawn in the interest of time.
11) VILLAGE COUNCIL COMMENTS
This item was withdrawn in the interest of time.
12) ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Village Council, the meeting adjourned at 11:32 PM.
Village Council
Meeting Time: 11-16-21 18:30
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting
Time
Agenda
Items
Comments Support Oppose Neutral
Village Council 11-16-21
18:30
20 177 141 23 8
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
11-16-21 18:30
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
4.A) PRESENTATION BY THE PROPERTY ASSESSED CLEAN
ENERGY (PACE) PROGRAM PROVIDER, RENEW FINANCIAL, TO ADD
OPTIONAL FUNDING SOURCES FOR RESIDENTS (JENNIFER ROJO
SUAREZ, FL REGIONAL DIRECTOR GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS).
1 0 1 0
7.A) AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES
VILLAGE, FLORIDA, APPROVING A SMALL SCALE AMENDMENT TO
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP WITHIN THE VILLAGE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CONSISTENT WITH 163.3161, 163.3184
AND 163.3187, FLORIDA STATUTES; REDESIGNATING THE FUTURE
LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY FROM MULTI-
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL; PROVIDING FOR
CONFLICT, CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE
(STAFF: PLANNING AND ZONING DIRECTOR).
137 111 14 8
7.B) AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES
VILLAGE, FLORIDA, RELATING TO ZONING; AMENDING THE
OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO REFLECT A DISTRICT BOUNDARY
CHANGE; REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY, BEARING FOLIO
NUMBER 11-2230-001-0500, CONSISTING OF 1.08 ACRES (+/-) FROM
A2 TO B2; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, CODIFICATION,
SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE (STAFF: PLANNING &
ZONING DIRECTOR).
39 30 8 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 4.A) PRESENTATION BY THE PROPERTY ASSESSED CLEAN ENERGY (PACE) PROGRAM
PROVIDER, RENEW FINANCIAL, TO ADD OPTIONAL FUNDING SOURCES FOR RESIDENTS (JENNIFER ROJO SUAREZ, FL
REGIONAL DIRECTOR GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS).
Overall Sentiment
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:08am 11-12-21
Maria Manso 1621 N.E. 105 Street, Miami Shores, FL 33138 - mariamansorealestate@gmail.com - Ph: 305-978-
0796
I strongly oppose the proposed zoning change to the property located on 105 Street and Biscayne Blvd.
Agenda Item: eComments for 7.A) AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, FLORIDA,
APPROVING A SMALL SCALE AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP WITHIN THE VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,
CONSISTENT WITH 163.3161, 163.3184 AND 163.3187, FLORIDA STATUTES; REDESIGNATING THE FUTURE LAND USE
DESIGNATION FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY FROM MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT,
CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE (STAFF: PLANNING AND ZONING DIRECTOR).
Overall Sentiment
Daniel Tibbitt
Location:
Submitted At: 11:18am 11-16-21
I was active (the only person who attended the meeting in favor) in supporting the seawall grant of a million
dollars which came with a kayak ramp. Neighbors who bought houses across from a public park successfully
mobilized to prevent the grant and the kayak ramp, even though a prior council had already approved it and the
village ate $35,000 that was already spent. The use proposed of a kayak ramp was consistent with a public park
and the seawall would have benefitted the neighbors who were complaining. This council voted 5-0 in favor of
those neighbors. To me having attended that meeting, it was a farce, local government at its worst. A precedent
was set at that meeting that local neighbors can prevent something they don't personally like, whether or not it's
good for the village as a whole. One councilmember even said to the assembled local neighbors "If you're
against it we're against it" and another said that a million dollars is a lot of money for an individual but not a lot of
money for Miami Shores. That project would not have required a zoning change which this one would. I
personally don't care if a gas station and retail is built there on Biscayne and would like the kayak ramp (obviously
why the developer put it in is to get that support) but if I lived there I am sure I would not want to live next to a gas
station especially when at the time I bought that was not even permitted and required a zoning change. The
concerns of these Biscayne neighbors are to my mind far more obviously valid than the concerns of the Bayfront
Park neighbors, and the neighbors seem to unanimously be against the proposed development and zoning
change. I will be interested in how/if the council reconciles their vote in the Bayfront Park situation with their vote
now. The perception of some is that certain groups of residents that live in certain areas have more say with the
council than others. The job of the council should be to do what is best for the community as a whole not for one
group of neighbors, otherwise we will never get anything done.
Mary Benton
Location:
Submitted At: 9:40am 11-16-21
I am completely opposed to the proposed amendment to the future land use map for the same reasons spelled
out by staff in their recommendation to deny the amendment.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:54pm 11-15-21
Payne, Cicily
50 nw 109 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:45pm 11-15-21
Michelle Headley at 437 NE 102 Street. I strongly agree with the Planning & Zoning board who voted
unanimously 4-0 against the zoning change. I believe the village’s priority must be the overall benefits to residents
and not developers. ICUC Holdings in 2011 bought the property with the current zoning for $1.9 mm and 10 years
later want to triple the price. We should not ignore environmental concerns of having a gas station so close to our
neighbors and canal. Please vote against this zoning change.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:12pm 11-15-21
I'm Allan Respondek of 1162 NE 105 Street, where I've lived for 30 years. I hope you will DENY the change to
Land Use as well as zoning. The current Comprehensive Master Plan specifically requires that we maintain and
improve where appropriate zoning regulations which permit general commercial uses or a planned development
type mix of commercial and a variety of RESIDENTIAL uses west of Biscayne Blvd/105 Street. Please don't
conveniently forget the residential! As well, that Plan instructs us to ensure protection of natural resources, and I
don't believe that a gas station will protect the canal and Biscayne Bay. I understand that at this time you are only
voting on the change to land use and change to zoning, but since the developer has already put forward his plans
for a Murphy Express, you can't ignore the fact that they will not do this project without a gas station. A gas
station/convenience store is not only an environmental nightmare so close to the Canal and Bay, but also a
greater threat to public safety than additional housing. Additionally the current Plan requires that roads should
not be vacated without determining that that Right of Way is not necessary to accommodate future storm water or
sanitary sewer facilities. Have you done that??? Also, please consider that a traffic study has not been done, so
if you blindly approve this developer request, I believe that you are adding to the traffic congestion in the area, as
this new development will bring in a lot more traffic than would a housing development, already allowed under the
A2 zoning.
I do not accept the developer's position that is being pushed to all who will listen that it not this development, we'll
have another Shores Motel. They do not know that for a fact. We understand that these two parcels will be
developed, but the A2 zoning already permitted is more palatable than this increase in intensity.
Please listen to the overwhelming number of your constituents, especially those that will be directly affected by
this proposed development and DENY this change of Land Use and Zoning change.
Thank you.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:58am 11-15-21
I am Daniel Brady and live at 1080 NE 95th Street and I am a member of the Planning and Zoning Board. The
two items on tonight’s agendas 7.1 & 7.2 were discussed at the October 28th meeting. The Board held an
extensive public hearing in which members of the public, with one exception encouraged the Board to
recommended disapproval to the Council. There were multiple reasons for their recommendations, the hours of
operation allowed by the gas station, the proximity of the gas station to the residential neighborhood and the
Biscayne Canal and belief that a residential use was the best use for the property. The Board (including myself)
recommended against the change. On a related item, the proposal to put a kayak ramp on the property was a
late addition and had no support from either individuals at the public hearing or the Board itself.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:10pm 11-14-21
Sandra Bush
17 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:10pm 11-14-21
Shoshanna Robinson
17 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:09pm 11-14-21
Judith Bennett
6 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:08pm 11-14-21
Julie Weddbon
6 nw 107 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:04pm 11-14-21
Gabriel Angeli
137 nw 107 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:03pm 11-14-21
Yuan Thorpe
125 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:01pm 11-14-21
Aliya Neckles
125 nw 107 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:00pm 11-14-21
Ingrid Bazin
30 nw 107 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 8:59pm 11-14-21
Pamela Bazin
30 nw 107 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 8:59pm 11-14-21
Michele Bazin
30 nw 107 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 8:58pm 11-14-21
Jean Bazin
30 nw 107 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 8:57pm 11-14-21
Rico Blare
90 nw 107 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 8:56pm 11-14-21
Natacha Payen
90 nw 107 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 8:54pm 11-14-21
Fenold Floreal
150 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 8:53pm 11-14-21
Exante Cheryl's
126 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 6:00pm 11-14-21
Giselle Ruiz
2 nw 108 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:59pm 11-14-21
Ivan Ruiz
2 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:58pm 11-14-21
Brenda Arce
2 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:57pm 11-14-21
Sebastian Onyskiw
2 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:54pm 11-14-21
Marc-Arthur Berrout
50 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:53pm 11-14-21
Vvrose Valdez
86 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:51pm 11-14-21
Sabrina Moise
86 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:50pm 11-14-21
Joan Bojnansky
102 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:33pm 11-14-21
Charles Rose
150 nw 108 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:29pm 11-14-21
Edward RD Duffy
137 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:28pm 11-14-21
Ronald Imbert
138 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:28pm 11-14-21
Samantha Embert
138 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:25pm 11-14-21
Phillip Richardson
126 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:24pm 11-14-21
Rodney Clark
125 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:22pm 11-14-21
Alexander Rundlet
113 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:21pm 11-14-21
Karen Rundlet
113 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:15pm 11-14-21
Leigh Mulinare
74 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:15pm 11-14-21
Cory Mulinare
74 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:13pm 11-14-21
Martin Iglesia
62 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:12pm 11-14-21
Deborah Goldwasser
61 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:12pm 11-14-21
Camilia Iglesias
61 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:09pm 11-14-21
Valeria Soto
49 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:09pm 11-14-21
Luz Soto
49 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:01pm 11-14-21
Sui Pang
14 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:00pm 11-14-21
Yew Pang
14 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:00pm 11-14-21
Neil Bomberg
13 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:43pm 11-14-21
Jarrell Jenkins
173 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:40pm 11-14-21
Anthony Hay
149 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:38pm 11-14-21
Angelic Lopez-Cutton
137 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:37pm 11-14-21
Luis Morales
137 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:36pm 11-14-21
Marvin Armstrong
138 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:32pm 11-14-21
Josiah Mc Laughin
125 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:31pm 11-14-21
Ba Evans
113 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:27pm 11-14-21
Jockesta Megie
114 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:26pm 11-14-21
Ceilia Saunders
114 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:24pm 11-14-21
Leonardo Fernandez
101 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:19pm 11-14-21
Melissa Rodriguez
77 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:16pm 11-14-21
David De Paulis
41 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:13pm 11-14-21
Rhett Traband
42 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:12pm 11-14-21
Stephanie Traband
42 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:09pm 11-14-21
John Rodriguez
29 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:08pm 11-14-21
Andres Clavijo
18 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:07pm 11-14-21
Glenn Khaufhold
18 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:04pm 11-14-21
Michele Batista
6 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:02pm 11-14-21
Millicent McFadden
5 nw 107 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:01pm 11-14-21
Madeline Collins
5 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:09pm 11-14-21
Nelson Sanchez
126 nw 106 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:07pm 11-14-21
Rafael Perez
126 nw 106 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:56pm 11-14-21
Alejandra Gutierrez
78 mw 106 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:52pm 11-14-21
Sunday Leon
53 nw 106 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:49pm 11-14-21
Martinez Escobar
42 nw 106 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:48pm 11-14-21
William Escobar
42 nw 106 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:47pm 11-14-21
Jesus Jimenez
41 nw 106 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:42pm 11-14-21
Patricia Rose
29 nw 106 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:11pm 11-14-21
Daniel Vilus
101 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:10pm 11-14-21
Angelique Vilus
101 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:09pm 11-14-21
Michelle Zephirin
101 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:08pm 11-14-21
Sherwin Zephrin
101 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:55am 11-14-21
Catherine Manly
70 nw 105 Sstreet
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:53am 11-14-21
Timothy Wills
70 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:43am 11-14-21
Kevin Moraga
162 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:43am 11-14-21
Hugo Moraga
162 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:39am 11-14-21
James Van Der Veen
161 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:38am 11-14-21
Clarissa Van Der Veem
161 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:32am 11-14-21
Andres Garcia
144 jw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:28am 11-14-21
Margaritas Godsky
120 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:27am 11-14-21
Joe Godsky
120 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:25am 11-14-21
Isabella Duncan
113 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:19am 11-14-21
Isabel Lay
89 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:17am 11-14-21
Erie Reville
86 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:16am 11-14-21
Fabricia Reville
86 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:10am 11-14-21
Corrie Rice
41 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:10am 11-14-21
Rodrigo London
41 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:05am 11-14-21
Diana Smith
46 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:05am 11-14-21
Bradford Smith
46 nw 105 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:02am 11-14-21
Susan Mc Dowell
38 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:55am 11-14-21
Alberto O Neil
5 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:54am 11-14-21
Deborah Leone
5 nw 105 street
Tom Septembre
Location:
Submitted At: 10:19am 11-14-21
I am a property owner within the 500' zone. I am opposed to the rezoning for the following reasons:
1. The zone change is inconsistent with any applicable comprehensive plan for the area. “…no public or private
development shall be permitted except in conformity with comprehensive plans, or elements or portions thereof,
prepared and adopted in conformity with this act.” Section 163.3161(6) Florida Statutes.
2. There is no need for the zone change because there has not been a change in circumstances or the property.
3. The zone change will be inconsistent with surrounding uses, resulting in property values going down, will
potentially impact the health, morals, welfare, and/or safety of the public, and interfere with existing residential
development at the intersection and adjacent property.
4. That the zone change is consistent with the orderly development of public services. Within 300 – 500 feet
already has the services and supports the same type of development the proposed zone change will allow.
5. The zone changes and the development, as proposed, will support a significant increase in vehicle and
pedestrian traffic adversely impacting the adjacent residents and the ability to receive police and emergency
services and access to their property.
Respectfully,
TS
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:01pm 11-13-21
Moises Quinonez
188 nw 104 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:00pm 11-13-21
Isreal Quinonez
188 nw 104 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:54pm 11-13-21
Ana Humphrey
185 nw 104 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:51pm 11-13-21
John Garcia
169 nw 104 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:50pm 11-13-21
Carlos Avila
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:46pm 11-13-21
Katherine Dean
156 nw 104 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:46pm 11-13-21
Michael Dean
156 nw 104 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:44pm 11-13-21
John NeMeth
141 nw 104 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:38pm 11-13-21
Hilda Toney
121 nw 104 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:38pm 11-13-21
Fredric Toney
121 nw 104 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:30pm 11-13-21
Christopher Unstead
69 nw 104 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:22pm 11-13-21
Norman Martinez
38 nw 104 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:21pm 11-13-21
Jason Martinez
38 nw 104 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:20pm 11-13-21
Edgar Martinez
38 nw 104 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:15pm 11-13-21
Marie Valcour
21 nw 104 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:14pm 11-13-21
Antoine Valcour
21 nw 104 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:13pm 11-13-21
Jonathan Valcour
21 nw 104 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:12pm 11-13-21
Brian Valcour
21 nw 104 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:10pm 11-13-21
Keith Rouse
25 nw 104 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:58pm 11-13-21
Karina Fabges
141 mw 103 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:57pm 11-13-21
Enrique Perez
141 nw 103 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:46pm 11-13-21
Stephanie Dalton
85 nw 103 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:37pm 11-13-21
Joan Crawford
21 nw 103 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:26pm 11-13-21
Daphne Stewart
17 nw 104 Street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:25pm 11-13-21
Austin Stewart
17 nw 105 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:58pm 11-13-21
Keith Curry
511 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:57pm 11-13-21
Marsha Curry
511 nw 108 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:51pm 11-13-21
Alex Walters
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:27pm 11-13-21
Greg Johnson
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:22pm 11-13-21
Elise Stewart
17 nw 105 street
Daniel Berger
Location:
Submitted At: 9:03am 11-13-21
My take here is that we should not be allowing this to be rezoned under the current plan, which (as of the date
this was denied in the last planning and zoning meeting) is for a gas station and a TBD use for the southern
parcel. I think we can all agree that notwithstanding the environmental concerns, which I am frankly not qualified
to opine on, another gas station directly adjacent to residential homes and on a waterfront parcel isn’t in the best
interest of the village, the Biscayne corridor, or the surrounding neighbors. Additional tax revenue associated with
the site would almost certainly be offset by immediate declines in property values of the surrounding properties,
which are (again) waterfront and are in red-hot demand in this market and would almost certainly experience
future muted growth in property values as a result of the gas station.
I am not one of those that’s opposed to change simply because it is change, and I am not opposed to rezoning
this particular asset to commercial or increased multifamily density. But there must be a limit - we should not be
rezoning to commercial so that the developers can justify their ROI with a gas-station. That seems short-sighted
to me. For that reason I have voiced my opposition in the public comments.
We all love the village and I wish all of you well.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 8:20pm 11-12-21
This is Tom Johnson, resident of Miami Shores Village. The Village Planning and Zoning Committee has
reviewed this proposal and recommended that the proposal be denied. Having read their determination I do not
see any reason for the Council not to adopt that recommendation and to therefore deny the proposal. Imagine if
the applicants had suggested creating charging stations for electric vehicles instead of a gas station, then
perhaps their proposal would have been more attractive. It certainly would have been of great use to shoppers at
the adjacent mall. However, there are several existing gas stations already nearby, so it is hard to say this station
is needed. Secondly, and most important to me, is that the property abuts a canal which is currently being
studied for remediation and which flows directly into Biscayne Bay, a National Park, and treasure, which is in deep
distress. Placing underground fuel tanks so close to the canal seems, quite frankly, insane. A residential or multi-
family use project, as is supported by the current zoning, would have much less impact on the canal, and could
possibly be conditioned to provide some public access to the canal for maintenance or recreational use. Thank
you for listening to my comments.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:47am 11-12-21
I am opposed to changing the zoning to allow a gas station on this property so close to a waterway connecting to
the already troubled Biscayne Bay. Some have argued that what difference does it make there are gas stations
on the water in other locations, and it is our septic systems and fertilizer/pesticide use that are the larger pollution
issues. These arguments create a false impression though. Just because there are existing problems that must
be addressed does not mean we should compound the problems by allowing new uses that only make things
worse. Additionally, the residents in that area oppose this project. The Shores already set a precedent of acting
on the side of resident wishes when it turned down a public works project at the Bayfront front. Consistency is
key.
Cathy Peel
487 NE 100 Street
Miami Shores FL 33138
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:06am 11-12-21
Maria E. Manso - 1621 N.E. 105 Street, Miami Shores, FL 33138 - 305-978-0796 -
mariamansorealestate@gmail.com
I strongly oppose the proposed changes to the zoning of the property located at 105 Street and Biscayne Blvd.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:55am 11-12-21
no changes
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 8:51am 11-12-21
My name is Connie Benson. I reside at 1551 NE 105th Street. I am opposed to the zoning change on the
property that was formerly the Miami Shores Motel on the east corner of Biscayne Blvd. and 105th Street.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:02am 11-11-21
I'm writing to oppose the zoning change to commercial. I believe the proposed use (gas station) will be
detrimental to neighbors living nearby and presents a significant risk for the waterway directly behind. The
Planning and Zoning board has also determined that this change doesn't meet the goals of the Comprehensive
Plan and that the tax benefits would be minimal compared to a multifamily development. I do not believe the
addition of a kayak ramp supersedes any of those concerns and it's, frankly speaking, patronizing.
I encourage the council to follow the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning board and vote no on this
zoning change.
Alejandro Barreras
Agenda Item: eComments for 7.B) AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, FLORIDA,
RELATING TO ZONING; AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO REFLECT A DISTRICT BOUNDARY CHANGE; REZONING
CERTAIN PROPERTY, BEARING FOLIO NUMBER 11-2230-001-0500, CONSISTING OF 1.08 ACRES (+/-) FROM A2 TO B2;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE (STAFF: PLANNING & ZONING
DIRECTOR).
Overall Sentiment
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:52pm 11-16-21
After considering all of the facts related by Dan Marinberg at the Saturday park meeting, I am in favor of the
change to a B2 zoning.
As much as I would like to favor the local residents who are impacted, in this particular case I believe that a gas
station and the other businesses planned to be built on the property is much better than building another low
budget motel. Respectfully Elizabeth Cowen
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:40pm 11-16-21
Pablo Minces. I want the kayak and the resto. Not gas stations or motels.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 11:28am 11-16-21
Arturo O. Salow 10634 NE 10th Court Miami Shores, FL Resident of MSV for 30 years.
Dear Council Members.
I am opposed to the application to change this property from MF Residential to Commercial.
The only benefit in doing so is for the potential owner to build the proposed GAS station and potential other large
scale commercial project. The request to potentially vacate the ROW is only a benefit to the property owner with
no return to the Village or it's residents.
The proposed changes are a detriment to the adjacent Residential Properties and the Miami Shores Residents.
A possible Gas station would create unhealthy conditions from gasoline tanks, constant traffic, and large fuel
tanker trucks delivering gas.
In addition the potential and probable daily toxic chemicals being emitted from these activities should not be
something dismissed because of a small boost to the tax rolls. Environmentally this proposed project is blind to
the ongoing challenges posed to the health of Biscayne Bay. Building a GAS station adjacent to the Biscayne
Canal is simply a bad idea.
I request that the elected members of the Miami Shores Village Council listen to the residents they represent and
DENY this request for a change in Zoning from A2 to B2. Thank you.
Mary Benton
Location:
Submitted At: 9:43am 11-16-21
I strongly oppose the proposed amendment for the reasons outlined by the staff. This amendment could lead to
serious negative consequences to nearby residents, as well as environmental damages in a flood-prone area.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 6:01pm 11-15-21
Vanessa Javier
67 nw 109 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:59pm 11-15-21
Rosalyn Paulino
53 nw109 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:57pm 11-15-21
Gary Paulino
53 nw 109 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:55pm 11-15-21
James Nestor
50 nw 109 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:52pm 11-15-21
Michelle Julmisse
14 nw 109 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:51pm 11-15-21
Julmisse, Judicaelle
14 nw 109 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:50pm 11-15-21
Jessica Valinsky
2 nw 109 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 5:49pm 11-15-21
Jesse Valinsky
2 nw 109 street
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:04pm 11-15-21
This is a unique lot that could provide an incredible park/kayak ramp as well as a restaurant or other
establishment that shores residents will use and love. Say no to another gas station.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 3:00am 11-15-21
LESLY MARTELLY
149 NW 99TH STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:59am 11-15-21
JOANNE LABOSSIERE
101 NW 99TH STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:57am 11-15-21
ALEXANDIA VITAL
196 NW 95TH STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:56am 11-15-21
STEPHAN JEAN
196 NW 95TH STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:55am 11-15-21
CLAUDIA VITAL
196 NW 95TH STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:54am 11-15-21
ANATASE CINEUS
196 NW 95TH STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:53am 11-15-21
ALEX VITAL
196 NW 95TH STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:52am 11-15-21
BERNICE ALMODOVAR
182 NW 95TH STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:50am 11-15-21
LEONEL CARABALLO
124 NW 95TH STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:49am 11-15-21
BEVERLY MAJOR
105 NW 94TH STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:48am 11-15-21
ALAN MAJOR
105 NW 94TH STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:47am 11-15-21
ALANA MAJOR
105 NW 94TH STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:46am 11-15-21
MAYA HARRIS
102 NW 93RD STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:45am 11-15-21
TYRONE N HARRIS
102 NW 93RD STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:44am 11-15-21
TYRONE HARRIS
102 NW 93RD STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:43am 11-15-21
JONI HARRIS
102 NW 93RD STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:42am 11-15-21
NICHOLAS STEADMAN
8 NW 93RD STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:41am 11-15-21
MINNACHEE PERSAUD
8 NW 93RD STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:40am 11-15-21
MAHENDRA PERSAUD
8 NW 93RD STREET
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 2:35am 11-15-21
LARRY ANDERSON
170 NW 92ND STREET
Tom Septembre
Location:
Submitted At: 10:20am 11-14-21
I am a property owner within the the 500' zone. I am opposed to the rezoning for the following reasons:
1. The zone change is inconsistent with any applicable comprehensive plan for the area. “…no public or private
development shall be permitted except in conformity with comprehensive plans, or elements or portions thereof,
prepared and adopted in conformity with this act.” Section 163.3161(6) Florida Statutes.
2. There is no need for the zone change because there has not been a change in circumstances or the property.
3. The zone change will be inconsistent with surrounding uses, resulting in property values going down, will
potentially impact the health, morals, welfare, and/or safety of the public, and interfere with existing residential
development at the intersection and adjacent property.
4. That the zone change is consistent with the orderly development of public services. Within 300 – 500 feet
already has the services and supports the same type of development the proposed zone change will allow.
5. The zone changes and the development, as proposed, will support a significant increase in vehicle and
pedestrian traffic adversely impacting the adjacent residents and the ability to receive police and emergency
services and access to their property.
Respectfully,
TS
Daniel Berger
Location:
Submitted At: 9:03am 11-13-21
My take here is that we should not be allowing this to be rezoned under the current plan, which (as of the date
this was denied in the last planning and zoning meeting) is for a gas station and a TBD use for the southern
parcel. I think we can all agree that notwithstanding the environmental concerns, which I am frankly not qualified
to opine on, another gas station directly adjacent to residential homes and on a waterfront parcel isn’t in the best
interest of the village, the Biscayne corridor, or the surrounding neighbors. Additional tax revenue associated with
the site would almost certainly be offset by immediate declines in property values of the surrounding properties,
which are (again) waterfront and are in red-hot demand in this market and would almost certainly experience
future muted growth in property values as a result of the gas station.
I am not one of those that’s opposed to change simply because it is change, and I am not opposed to rezoning
this particular asset to commercial or increased multifamily density. But there must be a limit - we should not be
rezoning to commercial so that the developers can justify their ROI with a gas-station. That seems short-sighted
to me. For that reason I have voiced my opposition in the public comments.
We all love the village and I wish all of you well.
Lois Mamula
Location:
Submitted At: 11:17am 11-12-21
I have lived here in excess of 35 years. When I moved here the motel was an issue. I have tried to have the
crimes originating from the motel dealt with as have the MSV police. Robbery, burglary, thefts, harassment,
murder, shootings, prostitution, child prostitution, the traffic of children, etc are a few of thecrimes.. It was a daily
issue. The suggestion of changing the zoning to commercial is totally unacceptable. The idea of additional
traffic pulling in and out would only increase an already serious traffic problem we have on 105 St.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:09am 11-12-21
Maria Manso - 1621 N.E.. 105 Street, Miami Shores, FL 33138 - mariamansorealestate@gmail.com - Ph 305-
978-07796
I strongly oppose the proposed zoning change for the property located at 105 Street and Biscayne Blvd.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:54am 11-12-21
no changes
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 8:51am 11-12-21
My name is Connie Benson. I reside at 1551 NE 105th Street. I am opposed to the zoning change on the
property that was formerly the Miami Shores Motel on the east corner of Biscayne Blvd. and 105th Street.