Planning board backs rezoning of four lots on Anastasia Avenue, residents urge design safeguards

The Coral Gables Planning and Zoning Board on Sept. 17 recommended that the City Commission approve a future land use map amendment and zoning map amendment for four lots at 627 and 635 Anastasia Avenue, changing the designation from religious/institutional and special use back to multifamily low density and MF‑3 zoning.

The applicant, Joe Jimenez of JMC Group, told the board the request is intended to restore a long‑standing multifamily designation and to create eight fee‑simple townhomes across the two 10,000‑square‑foot lots. “What we are here for today is to revert the zoning… to multifamily 3, which is consistent with the rest of the block,” Jimenez said during the meeting. Planning staff recommended approval, saying the proposals are consistent with the comprehensive plan, compatible with surrounding uses and supportive of housing diversity.

Neighbors who live near the site spoke at the hearing and asked the board to require stronger design safeguards at later site‑plan reviews. Pamela Pierce (resident) said the proposed buildings’ facades could appear “looming” to adjacent one‑story homes and asked for step‑downs and more green space. Michael Chenoweth (resident) said he had no objection to the rezoning itself but warned of a trend toward large replacements that reduce green space. Board members acknowledged those concerns and discussed the limits of the board’s jurisdiction for this specific rezoning: because the subject parcels total less than 20,000 square feet, the code does not require the site plan to return to Planning and Zoning; instead the subsequent site plan and architecture reviews will go to the Development Review Committee (DRC) and the Board of Architects (BOA).

Board member comments urged safeguarding compatibility at later reviews. Board counsel and staff said the board may include compatibility concerns in its recommendation to the City Commission but cannot impose site‑plan conditions on a rezoning where the code does not require a site plan. Board member Alice Bravo, newly appointed, and other members emphasized the multiple subsequent review steps: administrative site‑plan review, DRC and the Board of Architects. Jimenez told the board the project team intends to locate garages in the rear, similar to neighboring townhouse projects, and said architecture refinements remain under development. He also said the proposed development would maintain the existing unit count (eight units) and would not increase density.

Votes at the Planning and Zoning Board: for the future land use map amendment (Item E‑1) the roll call recorded Nestor Menendez: yes; Felix Pardo: no; Robert Behar: yes; Alice Bravo: yes; Alex Bustelo: yes; ABI Eisenstadt: yes (motion and second reported on the record). For the zoning map amendment (Item E‑2) the board similarly recommended approval; board members recorded their votes during roll call and a friendly comment was added asking that future rezonings include site plans where practicable. The board’s recommendation will proceed to two City Commission readings as required by city code.

Staff and the applicant said notices were mailed to 703 properties within 1,500 feet and that the request is a small‑scale amendment to correct a legacy zoning classification that was changed in 1983. Clarifying details presented to the board included: the two existing structures contain eight dwelling units built in 1949; each lot is roughly 10,000 square feet (20,000 square feet total); the applicant proposes eight townhomes (fee simple) with rear garages; and the rezoning request was described as restoring a prior MF‑3 designation for three of the four lots (one lot reportedly already remained MF‑3 on the map).

The board’s recommendation does not approve any specific site plan, architecture or building permits. Those design elements must clear administrative site‑plan review, the Development Review Committee and the Board of Architects, where neighbors may raise compatibility, landscaping, setback and massing issues. The board recorded a comment encouraging staff and commission consideration of attaching site plans to rezonings by code amendment if the commission wishes to change the process.

If the City Commission adopts the ordinances, the next steps will be the required commission readings and later administrative reviews for site plan and architecture.