Madam McCrea, the chair of the Miami-Dade County Planning Advisory Board, if we can now all stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. I would like to welcome you all to the PAB's public hearing on the May 2025 cycle, application number CDMP 2025-0007, October 2025 cycle, application number CDMP 2025-0021. Staff, if you could please call the roll. Good morning. For the roll call, Elisa Zapata, Carlos Diaz-Padron, Evo Fernandez, Jr. Yes. Eric Fresco, Solomon Janais, Michael Gengora. Present. Horatio Juembez, Frank Lago, Max Lozner. Present. Michael Montiel, J. Will Morris, Daniel Rogers. And Vice Chair Thomas. Present. Chair McRae. Present. Miami-Dade School Board Representative Natalie Simon, Homestead Air Reserve Base Larry Ventura. Mr. Chair, you have a quorum. Thank you. So the PAB was established by the Miami-Dade County Charter and consists of 17 members. The PAB members are appointed by the Board of County Commissioners, four at-large members, one non-voting member representing Miami-Dade County Public Schools, and one non-voting member representing Homestead Air Base. We are all residents of Miami-Dade County and serve on this board without pay. It is our responsibility to make recommendations to the Commission on planning-related issues. The public hearings will be conducted by the PAB acting as the county's local planning agency, with assistance from the Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources. We would like to recognize the resignation of PAB member Lynette Cardoche, who has resigned as a PAB member and requested her statement be included as follows. If staff could please read her statement. As I step down from Miami-Dade Planning Advisory Board, I want to express my sincere appreciation for the dedication, thoughtfulness, and professionalism each of you brings to this work. It has been a privilege to serve alongside such a committed group and to support the county's long-term vision. I'm especially grateful for staff for their steady guidance and to my fellow board members for the respectful, substantive discussions that shape better outcomes for our community. As you continue this important work, I hope you give careful consideration to the integrity of the urban development boundary, recognizing its critical role in protecting our economic investments and maintaining the resilience of our region. Thank you again for the opportunity to serve together. I wish you all continued success. Thank you. I think that now makes me not by age. So as we say goodbye to Ms. Cardoche, we welcome three new members to the PAB, with one District 4 Commissioner appointee, Solomon Janay, and two at-large appointees, Ivo Fernandez Jr. and Michael Gongora. So in that order, if the new members would like to introduce yourselves and say a few words. Good to have you. Mr. Fernandez. Good morning. Ivo Fernandez, the principal of Modus Architects. I've been in the architectural industry for about 30 years here in Miami-Dade County. I'm also a resident of Miami-Dade County, and it's great to be on the other side of the dais for once. Board Member Gongora. Thank you. Good morning, everybody. Michael Gongora. I'm a lifelong resident of Miami-Dade County and somebody who loves government. I had the pleasure of serving three times as commissioner in Miami Beach, so I'm glad to be back in a public service role. My paying job is a condo lawyer at Association Law Group. Welcome. So thank you all. And the purpose for this hearing is for the PAB to receive public comments on the proposed CD&P amendments and the initial recommendations to the department. Persons wishing to speak during the hearing should fill out a speaker card at the desk in the lobby and indicate the application they wish to address. So some of the public hearing procedure, staff from the planning division will summarize the CD&P application, followed by a presentation by the applicant. Public comments will then be heard. At the conclusion of the public hearing for the agenda item, the planning advisory board will adopt by resolution its recommendation to the board of county commissioners. Now for the chair's report, I just want to welcome the new members. We're happy to have you guys on board and contributing to our discussion. All right. I would now like to introduce Ms. Rosa Davis to present the first applicant. Good morning. It's a pleasure to be here today. As you can tell, neither Jerry Bell nor Garrett Rowe were able to be with us today. I, too, would like to welcome the new members on behalf of staff. We look forward to working with you in the future. For now, let me go ahead and introduce our first application. I would like to call up Ms. Noelle Stillings, who will deliver the staff presentation for CD&P 2025-0007. Thank you, Ms. Davis. And if we could bring up my PowerPoint. And this is for the, I'm going to get the Noelle Stillings. I'm principal planner at the county's planning division. And I'll give you the staff presentation on this May 2025 cycle application number CD&P 2025-0007. Okay. So this application site is a little bit over 84 acres. It's filed by GPC Miami Business Park, LLC, as a contract purchaser. The site is located west of the Turnpike and east of Southwest 112th Avenue and between Southwest 186th Street and Southwest 196th Street. And for some background, this application dates to a very old development of regional impact for the American Bankers Insurance Group. And that was originally approved with zoning changes by the Board of County Commissioners, the BCC, back in 1981. Ironically enough, for insurance company, the complex suffered extensive damage from Hurricane Andrew in 1992. And the BCC in 1980, 1994, 1995 approved substantial DRI changes and revised zoning conditions. Years pass. And then when the pandemic happened and the business went through some operational changes, and the site was even offered for sale to Miami-Dade County in 2023 for $160 million, but no action was taken at that meeting. So here is the site that you are currently looking at. It's 84-plus acres, and as you can see, it's in the shape of a triangle. And it contains a mix of buildings and also natural resources. And so starting from the upper left, that is the northern entrance to the complex. And to the northwest, next to the Quail Roos Children's Park, you'll see this five-plus acre portion of the site is currently designated low-medium density residential. And then moving to the south, and the sides of this application site are bordered by Southwest 112th Avenue to the west and the turnpike to the east. And a key portion of this application site is that the old zoning records indicated two-acre parcel in the northeast that contains significant tree resources. And you'll see a small portion of this pine rock land, and that is in the photo to your upper right. In the original DRI and the BCC resolutions, one of the conditions was to only alter less than one-third of the area. So a lot of the upper site towards the north you'll see with lots of trees, vegetation, and open, undeveloped space. And the picture in the middle left was taking along the western boundary of Southwest 112th Avenue, looking through the fence of the application site at the undeveloped upper portion. So moving down to the site in the southwest corner, you'll see a former child care facility. And then in the left photo, you'll see a picture of the 11-acre lake in the shape of an L. And it is in the south part of the site that has the office buildings complex. And you see a picture of that in the final lower right-hand photo. So the majority of the application site, about 89 of the 84-plus acres, is designated office residential. And that's depicted in that light pink color on the map. And that designation allows offices in certain residential uses. And then the remaining five acres up at the north and north and west, and they are depicted in the light tan color as low-medium density residential. That allows residences at a density of 6 to 13 dwelling years per gross acre. So on this slide, you'll see the current potential development, which is under the conditions of the existing DRI, and that limitations of the 470,000 square foot office uses, the 30,000 square foot warehouse, the 250-room hotel, and the 330-student daycare. Now going to the proposed land use, the applicant is requesting land use change on the majority of that formerly pink office residential to office and industrial for 81-plus acres. And then they would like to keep a portion indicated in red at business and office for a little over two acres, and then keep a small portion of the low-medium density residential indicated up in that light tan color. Regarding the applicant's proposed land use re-designation, staff recommendation is to transmit with the application, and that would be with acceptance of their proper declaration of restrictions. The application has merit as it is proposing infill development consistent with CD&P policies. And as this is a standard CD&P amendment, it will require two hearings through the Board of County Commission hearings. And as this application moves through this process, we believe there should be enough time to address staff's concerns. Now it should be noted that the requested CD&P designation does allow potential residential development on the site, which can range from 16 townhouses to 54 apartments. And also because it is located within proximity from a quarter to a half mile of the South Dade Transit Wade, it could utilize the CD&P mixed-use provisions of up to 36 dwelling units per acre and also 60 dwelling units per acre. Also, the initial recommendations report pointed out that the site also qualifies for the state's Live Local Act, which could allow residential development at much higher densities. Now the applicant has proffered a declaration of restrictions, a covenant, and it proposes development of a little bit of over 1 million square feet of industrial uses, 20,000 square feet retail, 75,000 square feet of office, a 75,000 square foot multi-purpose recreational facility, and a 50-room hotel. And the covenant also includes a traffic equivalency matrix, and that allows simultaneous increases or decreases among these uses, provide that the total vehicle trips don't exceed 903 net external PM peak hour trips. This application is also processed concurrently with the zoning application number Z-2025-00117, and that seeks to modify the existing DRI development order to allow their proposed uses. And regarding environmental concerns, as mentioned, the county's zoning map and the original DRI identified a long-standing pine rockland, which is a globally imperiled habitat in the northeast corner. The county's environmental department, DERM, actually did a site visit that confirmed the presence of these rare, threatened, endangered plant species, such as including Kunti plants with the indication of Atala butterflies, and Pineland croton, which is the only larval host for the federally endangered Bartram's hair streak butterfly. The site's also located within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service consultation area for the federally endangered Florida bonneted bat. And due to this, DERM is recommending that this two-acre pine rockland site be preserved in perpetuity and protected from development. As this application site contains significant tree resources and dense vegetation, before any tree permit could be granted, the owner also has to conduct a wildlife survey and to also agree to incorporate wildlife best management practices and submit this to DERM. So the applicant has agreed to that, and those conditions are included in the applicant's proffered covenant. So here is a summary of the application with the current and potential development and the applicant's requested change. We will notice that regarding roadways, the traffic analysis did show that there's a segment of a turnpike located to the west, southwest 168th Street, where the county's adopted level of service, the LOS, is D, but the segment of the turnpike there is operating LOSF. And because of the turnpike is a designated hurricane evacuation route, we are requiring the applicant to provide a condition in the covenant that has them enter a proportionate share agreement with the county to address the impacts to this important evacuation route. And as the applicant is proposing a state-of-the-art logistics park, so their proposed uses will be a little bit more intense than the standard traffic code used for warehouses. So due to this, we asked for an additional analysis, which is still pending, and we noted this in the initial recommendations report. So again, the staff recommendation is to transmit with acceptance of the applicant's proffered covenant. And at the, as mentioned, as a smooth-through process, we believe we have enough time to address, you know, staff's concerns, especially regarding the environmental and the roadways' impacts. For the public participation component, we sent out our usual standard courtesy mailers. We have the ad in the Herald and also up on our legal ads and the planning websites. And this was heard at the Redlands Community Council. And at the Community Council, approximately nine people spoke in favor of this application, and they cited the opportunity for jobs in the area. As the applicant's presentation, 4,000 new jobs were mentioned. Now, the applicant did submit several economic studies, which were analyzed by a research section. And their latest one showed that the number of total jobs, including those for construction of the facility, is over 4,000 jobs. But it should be noted, however, that the figure of recurring jobs, you know, after the construction of the project is completed, is estimated to be just a little over 2,000 jobs. So just to clarify that point. The next steps in the process would be for the BCC transmittal hearing, which is scheduled in this commission chambers, May 21st at 9.30 a.m. And if the BCC decides to transmit this application to the state and the local planning agencies with comments, and it should come back to us later on this year, and there will be a final hearing before the BCC later on. Also, we'd like to note that the applicant at any time can request deferral of the application. So if any of these dates change, we'll be putting them on the upcoming hearing section of our website. So that concludes my presentation on this. I'm happy to answer your questions now or after the applicant's presentation. And thank you for your attendance today, and I also welcome our new members to the board. Thank you, Ms. Thielings. Do we have any questions for staff? Thank you. Okay. Now here from the applicant. Good morning, everyone. My name is Tracy Slavins. My address is 3800 Northeast First Avenue, Suite 200. I'm here today with our team from GPC Miami Business Park, the applicant for this property and contract purchaser. I want to thank staff for their very thorough presentation, and thank you all for being here today to consider this application. I have a brief presentation that I will walk you through. So as Noel mentioned, this site is formerly a major corporate campus for Assurant, also known as American Bankers Insurance Group. And as was discussed by Noel, Assurant was at one point a thriving corporate campus, 470,000 square feet of office use, a daycare facility, and plans for warehousing and a hotel that never quite materialized. And prior to COVID, approximately 2,500 people were coming here to work every single day. But once everyone started working from home, the remote work model suited this company much better, and they determined that they were going to permanently stay on a remote work basis. So the 2,500 jobs still exist, but most people work from home. About 150 people go to the office every day. So Assurant determined that it was time to right-size their operations. They leased space in Blue Lagoon for the 150 or so people that do come to the office. That was a more centrally located area to put the office for that group of people that commuted every day. And they put this property up for sale. That was about two years ago. And since then, the county did have the property under contract. At one point, they were considering relocating the South Dade Government Center here and building affordable housing. However, that deal did not follow through. The property ended up back on the market. And GPC Miami Business Park is now the contract purchaser. The vision for this property is to revitalize it, re-imagine it, and address a need in South Dade for logistics, commerce, and jobs. And what we found was all of the bidders that came to the table for the property envisioned this as a logistics hub with offices. And I think that addresses the need that the South Dade Logistics application that you considered a few years ago that was outside of the UDB was also trying to do. And when this 80-acre parcel came up, I think the market understood that this is the right place to put that type of use. You're directly adjacent to the turnpike. You're in the smart corridor of US-1. And there's connectivity directly to those major arteries of the county and no need to traverse through any residential areas or impact other uses in the surrounding area in a negative way. So the purpose of this application is to redesignate the land and right-size the development program with simultaneous increases and decreases to do that. So parcel A on your screen is about 1.4 net acres, 2.1 gross acres. We envision that as convenience retail, a bank, a Starbucks, something for people getting on and off of the turnpike to stop and take care of convenience services or business. Parcel C, which is at the bottom of the screen, is platted as a non-development site. And we are in talks with the Miami-Dade County Parks Department, perhaps to donate that land to the adjacent park directly to the south. And then parcel B will be where the majority of the development takes place. This will be warehouses, office, potentially hotel. And within that area, perhaps a multipurpose recreational use. Think of indoor soccer fields, rock climbing gyms, the kinds of things that activate this space on nights and weekends. And engages the community in some way. Along with this, and in recognition of the DRI, you know, we are doing our best to either not increase or decrease any infrastructure impacts by this application. And so, as mentioned, there are 903 net external PM peak hour trips. We are keeping that number. So, our development program is one-for-one on traffic trips, even though the numbers have changed. And that's because office generates a lot of traffic and warehouse doesn't. And so, we can, you know, quadruple the amount of warehouse space, reduce the amount of office space, and not result in an increase in traffic. It also results in a decrease in water and sewer impacts. So, that, along with the environmental considerations, are included in our proper declaration of restrictions. Here's a quick look at the siting of the uses and the type of use and square footage that we are proposing. This is intended to be a well-rounded development, serving the community's many needs, including jobs, economic development, recreational spaces, hotel use. And that, we believe, complements all of the recent development of residential uses in South Dade. Based on our analysis of the county's inventory for industrial use, there's a real crisis for industrial, but particularly in South Dade. Only about 15% of industrial use county-wide is located in South Dade. And most of the sites are well below 10 or 20 acres. So, this is a really unique opportunity to put in the type of logistics use that can service all of these bedrooms. One other thing worth mentioning is a lot of industrial jobs are being eliminated at the nearby Amazon warehouse. I don't know if you follow the real deal, but there was an article last week mentioning that it's going to be closed for at least two years, and all of those jobs will be eliminated. So, we're hoping that this helps to balance out that deficit, you know, and provide more employment opportunities for the people in the area. We are also in infill development, and that is obviously a very strong and practiced goal of the CDMP. We are not seeking to move the UDB. We are not, you know, destroying a neighborhood to assemble land for some very different use. We're taking a corporate campus and turning it into an industrial park. We are right within all of the major arterials, as I mentioned, and we believe that the adjacency to the turnpike is the real asset here. As for jobs and economic growth, so here are the numbers that Noel mentioned. There are about 4,400 unrecurring construction-phase jobs. These are marketing jobs, sales jobs, leasing jobs, and construction jobs, as well as all of the engineering and lawyering and accounting that goes into developing a project. And then, once the project is completed and stabilized, we expect about 2,100 full-time permanent jobs will be created by this project, which surpasses that Amazon facility and we think really will make a difference in people's lives and their commutes in South Dade. As far as the fees being paid, $3.1 million is in impact fees and building permit fees, and then the $6.5 million is the annual recurring tax revenue to the county. This just reiterates and summarizes what I just said. You know, we're creating jobs, we're reversing the commute for a lot of people, and we're creating jobs in an area that needs it most. And this also just demonstrates that the unemployment levels in South Dade are already higher than the county-wide levels, and their commutes are much longer than most people. So, again, we look to this project to hopefully address some of these deficiencies in this market. As for trips, the 903 is the approved trip generation number from the DRI. These trips have been vested and utilized on the roads for the last almost 50 years, and we are not intending to change any of that. In fact, we believe that by changing the uses, you do change the traffic patterns, although not the volumes, and we expect that most of the traffic now, and this is a little hard to see. I'll change the colors for next meeting. But we're pushing most of the traffic onto the turnpike and US-1. Very little traffic is traversing the residential neighborhood to the west. This is also a comparison. So the black and white is the 1981 map, and the little boxes next to the numbers show what today's trip distribution will be. So, you know, you have a connection down Caribbean Boulevard to US-1 and a connection to the turnpike, and those are where the majority of our trips are going. And then what heads north then continues up onto the turnpike towards the airport and onto the Dolphin Expressway east to the port. As for our environmental protections, DERM issued two comments to us. One was to ensure that there was an endangered species survey conducted prior to any tree permits being issued or development being permitted on the site. We have agreed to that. That will help to protect the Florida bonneted bat and any other vegetation that is found in the area or any other animals that may be there. Because as noticed on the aerial, there is a large swath of undeveloped grassy area. And, you know, don't think anyone's looked into what's there for a very long time. And then the Pine Rockland area abuts the turnpike. It is approximately two areas. It has been protected since the inception of the DRI. The roadway that is on the left side of your screen, that has been constructed and cut out from the tree area was cut out from the development area back then. And we have committed to continuing to protect that. We've actually, DERM defined that red area and is providing us with a legal description of the area. That will be incorporated into the covenant, and this area will be protected and properly maintained in perpetuity. So as we see it, this will be a destination for people on the weekends. It will be a destination for people to come to work, and it will be a place where hopefully some convenience, retail, and hotel uses exist to serve the community. We intend to work with the zoning department during the site plan phase to ensure high-quality design, and we hope that this changes the fabric of this corridor. The application meets all of the criteria for adoption of a CDMP amendment. It satisfies a deficiency in a type of land use. It enhances levels of service. It ensures compatibility. We are protecting all of the resources and infrastructure impacted by any development here, and we are promoting transit ridership by including certain conditions on the zoning side to encourage commuter incentives, such as carpooling, shuttles to the busway, etc. The departments that have reviewed the application have no objections. All conditions that were requested of the applicant have been included in the covenant, and at Community Council 14, we received a unanimous vote recommending transmittal and adoption of the proper covenant. So with that, I will conclude my presentation, and I'm available to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. Do we have any questions for the applicant? Vice President of the Staff. You're recognized. Hi, good morning. Good morning. My question to planning staff, actually. The recommendation is to transmit, but not to adopt, or there's no recommendation to adopt the recommendation. Why is that? Thank you, Board Member Thomas. As mentioned, this is a standard application, so if we were completely happy with all the conditions and everything, then we would do a staff recommendation to adopt. However, at this point, we are still working with the applicant. In regards to, excuse me, some of the roadway impacts, especially the impacts on the turnpike, I don't think we're in agreement, but we're working, you know, towards getting through this. Also, in regards to the endangered Pine Rockland, as both of us have noticed, the Durham Environmental Agency did do an actual site review and go out there and look at the Pine Rocklands, but they did notice that although this two-acre parcel was in the original DRI, it has suffered from, you know, it's not been kept up with, so they noted it was a large presence of exotics. So that's why they recommended that this parcel, if there's a big development coming along, we want protection for this parcel. We're still debating whether or not, you know, additional buffers may be needed for that. The Durham people are going to work in coordination with, you know, the applicants and see if we could get this surveyed. And the applicant did put most of this language into the covenant. It's just we want to make sure, you know, at this point, is there any condition that, you know, they wish to convey the property to the county at this point. We don't have indication on that yet. But, again, our recommendation is to just transmit because of we do feel that it is a good application. It fills, you know, infill development. As Ms. Slavins has pointed out, this is a site that's not outside the UDB, so it does fulfill infill development. It's just we do have those outstanding concerns, you know, especially regarding the roadways and environmental. And so that's why our recommendation was to transmit and just not to adopt, which would be another recommendation that we could have made. I appreciate the answer. And the reason I was asking was because I did see the covenant addressing the environmental issues. And then I was a little bit confused as to the number of trips aren't changing, but the level of service is an issue on the turnpike. I think that is one thing that we're working through with the applicant in that this is an old DRI, so they had a certain number of trips vested. However, that was back so long ago before, you know, the county underwent a paradigm change with all of our policies, especially regarding natural disasters, especially regarding hurricanes. So our CDMP policy does state that if there is an impact to an evacuation route, such as a Florida's turnpike, extremely important evacuation route, then they have to commit to that in a proportionate share agreement in the covenant. So we're still working through this point as staff believes that this is a point we have to address in the covenant. And we have yet to come to a consensus on that, but we are working through the issues. And we're pretty sure we can reach an agreement before the, if this gets transmitted by the Board of County Commissioners and comes back to them for final hearing, we believe we can reach an agreement on, you know, exactly the impact on the turnpike, as that's our main, you know, roadway concern. And through the chair, if I may, if you note from various applications in the past, whenever there's an impact to any evacuation routes, the CDMP does require to have proportionate share mitigation, even though there might not be impact otherwise. In this particular case, as Ms. Stillings noted, we are trying to do our research to determine, because it is an existing DRI, whether this will be required or not. We're in the process of doing that. The applicant believes that because it is a DRI, it was vested, and therefore that's not required. But we are trying to do our due diligence to make sure that we are meeting the CDMP requirements. And so through the transmittal process, we hope to address this and come to final resolution. So it seems like there's no physical change in the number of trips. It's just policy change that they've gotten caught up in. Exactly. It's 903 trips regardless, and that's not changing. I appreciate the information. I'm generally favorable to the project, so thank you to the applicant for proposing. Thank you. And Ariel Centurion, our traffic engineer, is here to answer questions. I would note, so the change in percentage of trips on the turnpike is just about 2%. So it's a very small number of trips that trigger this proportionate share discussion. And one of the things that we're working through is, number one, the vesting of the DRI. Number two, the Florida statutes set a threshold of significance for impacts triggering proportionate share mitigation, and that's at about 5%. So we just have to work out our numbers, and that's something that we're handling. But, you know, we are working with staff diligently to make sure we all agree. And lastly, to the applicant, I just want to make sure, are there any planned driveways, entrances, exits along the residential area? No, sir. Thank you. Do we have any other questions for the Board Member Patron? Yes. So we don't have any tenants yet. Obviously, we need to get through this process. But thoughts would be you're going to have a mix of larger-scale, you know, distribution facilities. Like, we did program from a traffic perspective an Amazon or UPS-type facility. That's the high-cube logistics facility that's identified in the breakdown of the million square feet. There's two categories of warehouse that we looked at. And then the other would be typical. So you may have a construction company storing its goods there. You may have a small business working out of there. Or you may have, you know, some larger company operating out of this place like they would in a Beacon Lakes or a Flagler Station. But think of it, think of it kind of like a Beacon Lakes. Yep. Yes. And I think what you're thinking is... Exactly. We thought of this as kind of like an AC hotel type where it's a smaller, you know, business-friendly, clean, you know, like nice hotel. Not, yes. And then if you live in the area and you don't want your in-laws staying with us, with you, you've got, you know, a place to send them to on the weekends. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Tracy, I just had a quick question. Can you delve into a little bit the methodology and the trip distribution that you had on that slide? In your presentation, you kind of discussed, you know, commute times for folks in South Dade going to work. And it looked like in the trip distribution it contemplated like more than half commuting from actually outside of South Dade. Yeah. So good morning, everyone. Ariel Centurion with Kim Lee Horn, offices at Tua Lombra Plaza, Suite 500. So the trip distribution is mainly based off the county's 2015 and 2045 trip distribution report, which is a report that for your given traffic analysis zone or location in the county, it gives you the estimated percentage of trips coming from every direction. So north, south, east, and west. So we use that as sort of our baseline to determine the trip distribution. And then we also consider local roadway characteristics. So for this site, we do estimate that some traffic would be coming off the turnpike in US 1. But then given the adjacent residential areas, we see some traffic coming from both the residential areas east and west of the site. But given the nature of the turnpike and the US 1, we do expect more significant percent of traffic utilizing those facilities to get to the site more easily. Any other questions for staff or the applicant? I do. You're welcome. As far as the hotel is concerned, so I see that you have a 50-room hotel. Is that based on some sort of study or actual discussions with a flag? We did not want to eliminate the hotel use. The approved development program showed 250 rooms. That was too high. We felt that some smaller hotel component would be useful. We do have an equivalency matrix included in our trip generation and traffic limitation analysis in our covenant. So 50 would seem to be the right number. But if we need to increase it, we would decrease some other use. I think 20,000 square feet of retail may be too much. I don't know if it would fit on the two acres. So what we determined was we'd like to have some flexibility on the retail side just because we don't know if it will go vertical. But if it doesn't, then we can always convert that extra retail square footage to hotel rooms if we need a larger hotel. So you can adjust that if you need to? Yes. Because I'll say just in my experience, very seldom do you see a 50-unit hotel. They usually run between 80 to 120, even on what they call a limited service hotel. So I didn't want you to lock yourself at 50. It's a very small number. Yes. Understood. Thank you. Appreciate it. Any further questions? All right. Seeing none. Thank you. Ms. Slay-Mazul. One thing I do want to add that I neglected to mention in my presentation is we have done significant community outreach as part of this application. We dropped 800 letters in mailboxes by hand in the area, and we held four community meetings. As mentioned earlier, we had about nine people come to the community council all speaking in support. When we held our community meetings, only one person came, and he was a former employee of the assurant group, and he just wanted to know what was happening on the site, and he actually came and spoke in support at our community council meeting. So we've done the work to make sure that the community is happy, and we have not received any negative feedback and very little engagement at this time. So we will continue our outreach efforts, but I just wanted to let you know that we have been engaging. Thank you, Ms. Slay-Mazul. You're welcome. So I'm not going to open the public hearing for the application number CDMP-2025-007. I've got one speaker card. Mr. Ken Forbes, if you could please state your name and address for the record as well. You're recognized. Good morning, board members, Ken Forbes, 25101 South West, 130th Avenue, Princeton, Florida, and I hosted a couple of the community outreach meetings, and everyone that was in attendance was supportive of it. Now, and you heard from staff at the community council meeting, yes, we had nine speakers to speak in favor, but we had, you know, representative support there, and it was asked that, you know, they didn't get up and, you know, do repetitive comments and so forth like that. So that's why it was limited to nine. And, you know, just as a reminder, it was mentioned here before, we had a project several years ago, logistic and technology, and the issue was the UDB. This is not the issue now. The community still need the jobs. This looked like a great application to help us with jobs in the South Day community, and I hope you guys will adopt and transmit this application. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Forbes. Is there anyone else in the public wishing to testify before this item? All right. Seeing none, I'm closing the public hearing. Is there any board discussion on the application? I'll move to transmit with acceptance of the proffered declaration of restrictions. Second. Second. Please call the roll. We have a motion and a second. So we have a motion by board member Lossner, and the second was from board member Gungora. The motion is to transmit the application with acceptance of the proffered declaration of restrictions. So on that motion, the roll call. Board member Diaz-Padron. Yes. Member Fernandez Jr. Member Jene. Member Gungora. Yes. Board member Lossner. Yes. Board member Daniel Roberts. Rogers. Vice chair Thomas. Chair McCrea. Yeah. Yes. Congratulations. The motion passes. All right. We'll now proceed to the next item. Ms. Davis, if you could please present the next item. Mr. Chair, if I may interrupt, I have to leave at this time. So thank you all. I've enjoyed my first meeting and look forward to next month. Through the chair. Thank you. For the second CDMP application, I would like to call up to the application manager, Mr. Ivo Rondononi, to deliver the staff presentation. Good morning, planning advisory board. This item, CDMP 2025-0021, is in Commission District 8 and is located north of Southwest 278th Street, west of Southwest 157th Avenue. South of Southwest 272nd Street and east of Southwest 159th Avenue and abuts the urban development boundary to the north. The site is approximately 40.16 gross acres in size and is currently in Avocado Grove. The property is located within the UDB and has a concurrent zoning application. The property is currently designated as state density residential which allows 1 to 2.5 dwelling units per acre or up to 100 residential units on the site. The applicant is requesting a redesignation to low density residential which allows 2.5 to 6 dwelling units per acre. At the maximum density, this designation could allow up to 240 units. However, the applicant has proffered a declaration of restrictions limiting development to 185 units, which equates to approximately 4.6 units per acre below the maximum permitted density. The site is partially within a half mile of the South Day Transitway Smart Corridor. These photos show the property from the northern, eastern, southern, and western boundaries. The applicant has proffered a declaration of restrictions which agrees to density limitation, connection to public water and sanitary sewer services, an endangered species survey, and environmental monitoring and restoration. Staff found the application consistent with CDMP land use policies supporting infill development within the urban development boundary. Therefore, staff recommends adoption with acceptance of the proffered declaration of restrictions. In summary, the potential development under the current designation would be 100 single-family detached units, and the proposed potential with the covenant density limitation would be 185 single-family detached units. Planning staff is recommending to adopt with acceptance of the proffered declaration of restrictions, and the Redland Community Council's recommendation is to adopt with acceptance of the proffered declaration of restrictions. Thank you. I'm happy to answer any questions. Do we have any questions for staff? Thank you. All right, we'll now hear from the applicant. You're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have a presentation, if they can pull up. Hugo Arza, 701 Burkle Avenue. Joined today by Melissa Bolivar, Carmen Orozco of Lenar Homes, as well as by my colleagues Eric Adams and Joey Vasquez. There we go. And I want to thank staff for their presentation and for their recommendation of support for this application. A little simpler, I think, than your first one today. This is vacant land being changed in the master plan from the state density to the next category up, and with a cap of essentially 4.6 units an acre. So a very modest project. But I'll take you a little bit through the visual of why this particular project, this model, and how it fits within this area, because I think it tells a little bit of a story. I'll go to the next slide. Again, roughly 40-acre parcel. And as you can see there on sort of the bottom right-hand part of the screen, that's US 1. That's the busway. So, you know, it's a parcel in that part of South Dade that both feels like it's been farmland forever, which it obviously has, but which is also obviously very proximate to the transit corridor. So what you see just to the right there, those two squares that are under development on this picture, are already fully developed. And, in fact, this body recommended approval of changing the land use for that one. And a couple of other projects closer to the busway. And I'll show you in a second how that density has been decreasing as you move away from the busway. And this request is actually sort of the logical continuation of that decrease as you get a little farther away from the busway, but still to provide for some infill greater damage. Again, we are proposing a covenant and would be capping it at 185 dwelling units, not the potential for 240, which is what the six units to the acre would yield if we did all 40 acres at that density. Here is the proposed land use existing on the left proposed on the right. And this will start to tell a story, and then I'll layer it in with the graphic you already saw from EVO, which is the proximity and the fact that half of this property is actually still inside the half mile to the corridor. Half the property could enjoy a different development program, could go down a mixed use program with 36 units to the acre. There's a lot of density that someone could try to tap in that way. Probably isn't the right location for it, though, because it is removed away from the busway, which is why I think you see that as you move from that dark red, which is the busway in US 1, sort of to the north and west. And I've been blessed to work on every one of those projects that doesn't have the green color are firm and I've worked on. And as you can see, the greater and darker colors, which represent the higher density, are the ones that abut the busway. Then you've got and you'll see a graphic in a second of the townhome development. That is the two squares that you see on the east side of 157th Avenue, just east, south and east of our parcel. Then there was the project, the last project that got approved, which is the yellow with those cross hatches, a little bit higher density coming in. And now as we remove ourselves a little bit farther to the north and west, closer to an entirely state residential development, then we make this much more modest request and then further cap it at 4.6 units to the acre. We do have a companion zoning application as a result of that. We're getting a site plan that's moving through. I will show it to you. Obviously, your vote this morning is on the land use change, but it is an all single family home community. And it does have one neat feature that I want to show. And that is that along the western perimeter and the northern perimeter, that is closest to established estate home, EUM as it is, including that entire sort of pinkish color that you see there, which is an entire EUM community, we are proposing EUM. So our project is 185 single family homes, but the boundary on the west, as you can see those larger home sites and on the north, that boundary is all EUM lots. And then the lots, you know, sort of interior are the U1MA lots. And so all single family homes, but again, just to provide a little bit of an additional buffer. And so the folks that have an existing EUM home don't back up into anything other than what they see or what they have, we are proposing that. That obviously is one of the reasons we bring the density down. We're not doing the smallest lot sizes throughout by any stretch. We are obviously including 39 of the larger home sites. And here it is in the additional sort of graphic. Again, along the north, east, and west, you've got sort of the encapsulated community with the estate homes. Again, and we talked about this a little bit, moving half the property. This is the graphic that shows you about half of our subject property. You see still has that line going through it. That means that it's in the quarter to the half a mile, which means that you could develop up to 36 dwelling units to the acre in a mixed use project for the portion of the property that's there. And you could density average, and you could certainly do a lot more on this site than what is being proposed. It's not the right site for that. I won't argue otherwise. But it does inform you, you know, I think this board, as it did the community council, which recommended approval, that obviously these are sites that the county has looked to to try and address the needs that we have. So, you know, a modest increase like this can be supported based on the policy arguments behind the corridor and other arguments in this area. And here is, you know, more of the same story. The compatibility, the stuff in the bottom right is what's already approved with the townhouses. The pink in the top left, built under construction, sold in many cases, many of those. I don't know if the community is entirely finished at this point, but those are all state homes. And then you see our pink estate homes and then the other interior single family homes. Proffered CDMP declaration with both what I call above and below ground monitoring or DERM requests, meaning we are doing a wildlife study. We have to do that. It's in there. We're also going to monitor for obviously any issues. As we know, fairly consistently in South Dade because of farming, most land will have some aspect of remediation, whatever that may be. We don't anticipate anything. Obviously, this entire area, as you see, has been developed, especially over the last few years. But we do need to provide and monitor and report. We make that commitment in the covenant and look forward to doing so. Outreach efforts. While I don't believe there's anyone here today, we did enter into the record outreach that we made to local businesses who obviously depend on folks who are going to drive to whatever they're doing or selling the small restaurant, the dry cleaner, the whatever the case may be. You know, in the strip shopping center, maybe on US one needs households, right? And that's what makes their business. So we have 12 letters of support. We turned in before the community council there in the record. We also did door knocking in the area and in full candor because Lennar is developing some of those other parcels. We have a kind of a separate direct line of communication with existing neighbors because as those parcels are being developed, when questions arise regarding construction concerns, you know, a truck going down the wrong street or dust because, you know, the site, you know, it hasn't rained in a week and the dust gets a little suck. We have direct lines of communication and so, you know, we're talking to them all the time about the work we're doing now and we'll continue talking to them as we move forward with the work. Broad picture justifications, you have it in your packet, but obviously the code or the master plan wants to encourage infill, you know, wants to encourage as you're doing so that you're compatible with your adjacent neighborhoods. I think we make that effort by how we're laying this community out and by the modesty of their requests and obviously no degradation of levels of service, no impacts to environmental or historic resources. All of those are covered and we're going to monitor and test those that need to be and those are all here in the LU land use category or land use policy area why this application can be supported. And again, you don't have to take my word for it. Staff is recommending approval based on the very same elements, which is the segue to both their adopt with acceptance of the proper declaration as well as the community councils taking the same approach unanimously last month. And then while this is a planning board, sometimes it's nice to see pretty pictures. And so this is some of the stuff for the community that we're going to be building out there and that's it. And that's it. So look forward to answering your questions and hopefully to receiving a favorable recommendation in line with staff's recommendation and the community council. Thank you. Do we have any questions for the applicant? You are the most tenured member, so you get to ask first. No, not tenured. I said tenured. The homes or the lots? The lots, the EUM lots are 15,000, you know, that's the, you know. Right, the state lots are EUM, which is 15,000 square foot categories, and then the interior lots are U1MA, which allows you to do 5,000 square foot lots. So the interior lots are smaller than the exterior one. Yeah, I actually had the answer to the size of the houses, but I didn't think that's what you wanted. Any questions, any further questions? All right, thank you Mr. Arza. Thank you, thank you. All right, I'm now going to open a public hearing for application number CDMP 2025-21. I don't have any speaker cards. Do we have anybody in the public wishing to testify? All right, seeing none. Public hearing is now closed. Is there any discussion on the application? I'd like to commend the applicant. I think that when we talk about the need for housing in the county, everybody's always focused on workforce housing and apartments and density. And I think one of the growing needs is homeownership, and particularly closer to the busway. It's easy to push the higher density on all these lots that are close to the busway, but the homeownership being close to the busways is just as important. And there's plenty of urban, you know, zoning around the busways that can accommodate all the workforce housing. So the fact that you've, you know, proposed homeownership and then went just another step further by creating larger parcels around the MU zoning to buffer and create smaller houses in the center portion, I think is even more recommended. So, great job. Thank you. Thank you. Any further discussion? I'd just like to echo, I really appreciate the density gradation away from the EUM. So, thank you for that. All right. Do we have a motion? Do we have a motion? Yeah, no. Let me echo my board members' comments. I really appreciate how you're kind of scaling everything back on this and creating those types of buffers. So, I would make a motion to adopt with the acceptance of the proper declaration. All right. We have a second. Please call the roll. I'm sorry. Who was the second made by? Okay. It was made by board member Thomas. Okay. So, on the application, the motion was made by board member Rogers to adopt with acceptance of the proffered applicants' proffered declaration of restrictions. And that was seconded by board member Mr. Ernie Thomas. Yes. On the motion, Carlos Diaz-Padron. Yes. Ivo Fernandez, Jr. Yes. Solomon Genet. Max Lozner. Yes. Daniel Rogers. Yes. Vice Chair Thomas. Yes. Chair McRae. Yes. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you all. Have a great day. All right. We're now going to proceed to staff announcements. Ms. Rosa, do you have any staff announcements for us? Yes. Thank you very much. I have four announcements to make. Number one, we have previously had presentations and updates to the board on the progress of our seven-year update to the comprehensive plan, otherwise known as the EAR process, the evaluation and appraisal process. We just want to let you know that there's an EAR task force today at 2.30 p.m. at the county's main library, so if you want to stick around after lunch and go to the task force, you're more than welcome to join us. I also want to let you know that the planning advisory board meeting for May 4th has been canceled. However, we will be meeting in June at 10 a.m. June 1st, thank you. In front of you, I passed out what we call the matrix, which is a summary of the various CDMP applications from 2024 and 2025 that have gone before you and the results of the motions from the community council, your motions, as well as the board of county commissioners, just so that you have an awareness of some of the things that you voted for and what happened with them. And finally, I would just like to take the opportunity again to welcome all of our new members and to also thank our existing members for being here every month and looking at our applications and helping the county grow and prosper. Thank you so much. Thank you. Do we have any new business before the board? Do we need to move to transmit all of our recommendations? Thank you, board member Lazer. Not for this time because of each cycle was only one application. So, but thank you for the question. Board Member Toms. I just wanted to say thank you to the staff. I know you've done musical chairs today. All of you have done a great job, so I appreciate that. Thank you. Move to adjourn. All right. Second. Second. Meeting's adjourned. Thank you.