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

Board approves setback variance for paddle court at 1631 West 28th Street with noise and lighting conditions

January 10, 2026 | Miami Beach, Miami-Dade County, Florida


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Board approves setback variance for paddle court at 1631 West 28th Street with noise and lighting conditions
The Miami Beach Board of Adjustment on Jan. 9 approved a variance allowing a private paddle court at 1631 West 28th Street (Sunset Island 1), reducing the rear setback to permit a court footprint that would otherwise encroach on required rear-yard open space. The board approved the variance with conditions intended to reduce noise and light impacts and included staff's amendment that any future citywide regulation of paddle-court hours would take precedence.

Planning staff described the site as a 20,800-square-foot lot in RS-3 zoning where paddle courts are permitted in rear yards but the applicant faces practical constraints. Staff recommended approval subject to mitigation measures including acoustic barriers or noise-dampening materials, a paddle turf surface over a concrete base or similar attenuating material, a minimum 7-foot tall solid perimeter wall or equivalent noise‑attenuation treatment along interior lot lines, and lighting limited to the premise and turned off overnight.

Tracy Slavens, attorney for the property owner Jamie Elias, told the board the applicant had worked with neighbors and submitted about 18 letters of support or no-objection statements. "We have submitted approximately 18 letters of support or no objection, and we've worked very hard with them to make sure that the operations of this court don't impact or affect their quality of life in any way," she said. A neighbor representative, Tucker Gibbs, said his client supported the application.

Board members questioned enforcement: staff said noise complaints would be handled by code enforcement under the city's noise ordinance and that any violation of the variance conditions would be subject to enforcement through the board. The final motion approved the application "as presented" with the applicant's conditions and the staff amendment (which included language that more restrictive future city code on hours would apply). The board voted to approve the variance.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Florida articles free in 2026

Republi.us
Republi.us
Family Scribe
Family Scribe