Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commissioners deny K E Reyes zoning application after staff cites residential character and multiple variances

5827628 · September 25, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Miami-Dade commissioners unanimously denied a zoning application from K E Reyes property management (Z2023000526) that requested nine variances to allow an office use in a residential neighborhood; staff recommended denial citing map designations and intensity.

Miami-Dade County commissioners voted unanimously to deny a zoning application from K E Reyes property management (application Z2023000526), following a staff recommendation that the proposal was inconsistent with both the county’s comprehensive development map and the zoning map and that it would introduce an office use into a residential block.

Planning staff told the commission the application included nine variances and represented an unusually intense use for the small, single-family neighborhood where it would be located. “Both the CDMP map and the zoning map are residential, and they’re proposing an office in a residential neighborhood,” a planning staff member said on the record, adding that the site was not on a major roadway and that office uses did not currently exist on the block face.

The commission’s motion denied the application without prejudice, meaning the applicant may file a revised, less-intensive application for future consideration. The denial was moved and seconded in accordance with staff’s recommendation and passed by roll call with all commissioners present voting yes.

An applicant representative told the commission they wished to withdraw the item to return with a declaration of restriction tied to a planned opinion of title; the commission declined to continue the matter and instead acted on staff’s recommendation.

The record shows that staff’s principal concerns were the number of variances requested (listed on the record as nine), the proposed office use on a residential block and the potential for the application to set a precedent that could change the neighborhood’s character. Commissioners encouraged the applicant to return with a less intense proposal.

The denial does not bar the applicant from submitting a new application addressing staff concerns; any future filing will be returned to staff review and public hearing as required by county procedure.