Planning board approves 197-unit mixed-use project on West Flagler Street over tenant objections

The Miami Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board on a 6‑to‑1 vote approved an exception and multiple waivers that let developer W.R. Flagler LLC propose an 8‑story, mixed‑use building totaling about 306,080 square feet and containing 197 residential units and roughly 14,412 square feet of ground‑floor commercial space at 2157 and 2199 West Flagler Street.

The vote authorizes an increased maximum lot size to 57,333 square feet (the T6‑8 limit is 40,000), three 10% parking reductions for residential, guest and commercial parking, and a waiver to consolidate existing curb cuts along West Flagler. Board member Mario J. Bailey cast the lone no vote; Chair Adam Gersten, Paul Mann, Joseph Corral, Paula DeCarolis, Joshua Patinkin and Manuel Badillo voted yes.

The exception matters because the project requests more floor area than normally permitted on a single lot in the T6‑8 transit zone. City planner Darren (presenter) told the board the building is designed to place parking in a rear garage with the aim of activating Flagler Street with street‑front retail. He said the project received Urban Design Review Board and coordinated review approvals and that school concurrency and bicycle parking were reviewed.

Developer representative Alessandra San Armando, representing W.R. Flagler, said the project “consists of a ground floor retail and commercial component along West Flagler Street and NW 20th Avenue” and stressed the site’s proximity to transit. She asked the board to approve the exception and waivers, saying the ground‑floor retail would “activate Flagler Street with neighborhood‑serving retail businesses.”

Public comment was the most contentious part of the hearing. Tenants and small‑business owners who occupy the existing one‑story shopping center said they were given little time to relocate. Daycare owner Lisonbee Bone told the board, “My business is a daycare… These are 59 families that are being affected,” and said parents and employees would lose an affordable local childcare option if the businesses are removed. Longtime tenant Henry Herrera described multi‑decade operations and said he learned of the redevelopment only recently and feared the loss of affordable commercial space.

Developer representatives replied that the application was filed in August, that outreach to tenants had occurred and that the project team intends to work with tenants and to keep retail operating as long as feasible. Jonathan Rafie, representing the applicant, said the current retail “is not in great condition” and argued that consolidating retail into a new development plus housing and parking would be better for the long term. Rafie said the applicant estimates a realistic pre‑construction permitting period of at least nine months to a year.

Board members pressed the applicant on traffic, building massing and parking. Several members cited Flagler Street congestion and questioned granting a 10% parking reduction that translates to about 29 fewer parking spaces than code would otherwise require. The applicant and staff said the project’s parking ratio (1.6 spaces per unit overall) and the site’s proximity to bus and trolley routes would reduce vehicle demand; the developer also said roughly 70% of units will be studios or one‑bedrooms, which typically have lower car ownership rates.

The board’s approval included recommended conditions and standard compliance language. The applicant and staff noted that final traffic and building permit reviews remain part of the permitting process and that a formal demolition/permit timeline was not yet set. The decision is appealable to the hearing board within 15 days.

If built as proposed, the project will replace an existing neighborhood shopping center and add two hundred or so residential units and new retail frontage on West Flagler Street. The developer and some board members said the project aims for a more efficient garage layout to support a denser, transit‑oriented product; opponents warned of displacement and added traffic pressure.

The board’s actions were formalized with a roll call vote; the decision is recorded as final unless appealed in 15 days.