2022-07-13 PB Minutes
1
Mayor Sandra Harris
Vice Mayor Daniel Marinberg
Councilmember Alice Burch
Councilmember Katia Saint Fleur
Councilmember Crystal Wagar
Esmond Scott, Village Manager
Sarah Johnston, Village Attorney
Ysabely Rodriguez, Village Clerk
PLANNING BOARD SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
DATE: 7-13-2022 TIME: 6:35 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1) CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Busta called the meeting to order at 6:35 PM.
2) ROLL CALL
Present:
Chairperson Busta
Vice Chair Snow
Boardmember Bolton
Boardmember Brady
Boardmember Hegedus
Also, present:
Chanae Wood, Attorney
Claudia Hasbun, Planning Director
Ysabely Rodriguez, Village Clerk
3) NEW ITEMS
3.A Creation of Property Rights Element.
7132022 Property_Rights_Element_Amendment.pdf
Ms. Hasbun provided a brief overview of the purpose of the property rights element of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Ms. Wood read the caption of the ordinance into the record.
DB move to recomment VC adopt the proposed ordinance DS 5-0
2
3.B Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Element Amendments (Text).
Ms. Hasbun read the caption of the ordinance into the record.
Ms. Silvia Vargas, CGA representative, provided a brief overview of the item, starting with the elements
that require amendments. Some include, Resolve all identified anomalies and inconsistencies (map and
text), Clean up outdated references, poor grammar and typos, unclear wording, Eliminate/update
obsolete planning practices, Incorporate MSV’s current vision and both long-term and strategic goals,
and Set the stage for forthcoming EAR-based amendment process.
Changes to the text to be recommended to the Village Council include:
Reword the proposed Policy 1.3 to include verbatim the statement from the former Objective 1
pertaining to “coordination of future land uses with topography and soil conditions and the availability of
facilities and services.”
Update FLUE Policy 1.2, under the Multi-family Residential section to reference the Florida Department
of Environmental Protection, not the Department of Environmental Resources.
Delete any reference to residential or commercial uses related to park service and security functions in
FLUE Policy 1.2 Water and Conservation Areas.
Add further explanation to our comments and/or data and analysis to clarify that replacement language
will be developed and incorporated in each Monitoring and Evaluation section throughout the FLUE
during the forthcoming EAR-based amendments. This will allow us to be thoughtful in coming up with
tailored indicators and performance metrics to support real monitoring and evaluation of implementatio n
progress.
Remove the current Coastal High Hazard Area being depicted on the FLUM and explaining that a
separate CHHA map will be developed as part of the forthcoming EAR-based amendment process
Ms. Vargas further pointed out that the concurrency section of the comp plan is outdated for 15 years or
more. There are also conflicting levels of service in several places in the comp plan.
Mr. David spoke about the concurrency which is the impact of development on levels of service, such
as park, water, etc. He further noted transportation section is not concurrent with Capital Improvement
in addition to other areas listed in the comp plan. Ms. Vargas further explained the analysis and
calculations conducted by CGA are theoretical.
Mr. Brady suggested numbering the pages to help the readers follow the document.
Ms. Vargas explained service establishments include hair salon, professional offices, etc.
In Policy 2.3, line 483, Hegedus recommended to revise language to include:
"temporary barricades to block streets"
Policy 3.6: strike through planned and add commercial
Maintain, and improve where appropriate, zoning regulations which permit a planned development type
mix of a variety of , commercial, residential and/or institutional types and compatible uses for large
tracts of land.
3
Ms. Wood clarified the Planning Board will be providing recommendations to the Village Council based
on the amendments suggested by the Village Council.
Mr. Snow mentioned the level of specificity in the mixed use section of the comp plan is not customary.
However, Ms. Vargas mentioned the purpose of the detail is to provide a foundation for the zoning
code. There was consensus to leave such sections broad, thereby indicating that specificity will be
stipulated in the zoning code. (Subdesignations shall be determined in the zoning code.) remove target.
5. Use mix : The overall mix of uses in the Mixed Use-Main Street district shall be determined in the
zoning code.
line
"line 279. Overall mix: The overall mix of uses in Mixed Use-Neighborhood districts shall be determined
in the zoning code. Same for line 313.
strike through breweries line 304, add "including but not limited to"
Add "mixed uses to section 3.1
Janet Goodman spoke about how mixed use was not a popular use based on the public feedback. Auto
related uses are prohibited.
Thomas Halloran spoke about the density around 1.5 acres sounds great in theory but not in practice
given the folios of downtown. Hegedus recommended placing a sunset clause to properties that are not
harmonious with the vision.
Sarah McSherry spoke about the short notice of when the document was published. Though the public
participation was encouraged, there wasn't enough time for residents to review the material. She further
suggested the lack of compliance with florida statute 163 for numerous reasons. She felt the process
was hasty.
Maria McGuiness spoke about the proposed information challenges the quaint vibe of the village and
recommended disapproval of the comp plan as presented.
Carmen Renick asked Planning Board to keep in mind that decisions made today will impact all
residents. She expressed concern regarding mixed use recommendations. She further mentioned
without the concurrency study how do they know the impact.
Village Clerk eComments for this item into the record.
Ms. Wood mentioned the statutory requirements have been met and the board may proceed to cast
votes.
IH/ DB 5-0to recommend approval of the ordinance to the village council, subject to the suggested
changes
Mr. David explained Miami Dade County, FDOT, South Florida regional Planning Council, el Portal,
Biscayne Park, MDCPS review the document in addition to DEO.
Ms. Vargas explained the 2010 designation for 105st street/Biscayne Boulevard property was
commercial and the 2018 designation was multi-family. The property was historically designated multi-
family up until 2010.
4
7132022 FLUE_FLUM_Amendments.pdf
3.C Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment.
adjourned
9:18 PM.
Miami Shores FLU 2022 Recommended Improvements FINAL.pdf
4) BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
5) ADJOURNMENT