Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances North Beach residential-incentive amendments after debate over subterranean setbacks
Summary
The Land Use & Sustainability Committee voted 2–1 on May 26 to forward amendments that would expand residential incentives in North Beach to the planning board and commission, approving a south-side-only subterranean-setback waiver and leaving density and mitigation requirements subject to further review.
The Miami Beach Land Use & Sustainability Committee on May 26 moved to send proposed amendments to the Miami Beach 2040 plan and the city’s land development regulations for North Beach to the planning board and city commission with a favorable recommendation after a contentious debate about subterranean setbacks and density.
Tom, a city planning staff member, told the committee that staff supports the incentives in principle but flagged two major concerns: removing subterranean setbacks and a proposed density limit. “Under our code, subterranean setbacks have to follow the pedestal setbacks that are specified,” Tom said, adding that those setbacks “ensure that there is adequate pervious area and adequate water retention area on all sides of the property.” He said eliminating setbacks could produce property-line-to-property-line development and worsen water-retention risks.
An applicant representative said the request is narrowly tailored: the team would seek subterranean-setback relief only on the south side of the site where it would abut the vacant Deauville parcel, and would provide additional on-site stormwater mitigation — bioswales, rain gardens and cisterns — plus a civil-engineer technical report quantifying the increased capacity.
Commissioners split over the trade-offs. Commissioner Bond expressed safety and environmental concerns and said he was wary of creating a dangerous precedent: “I am very concerned though about the subterranean setback,” he said. Other members said the Historic Preservation Board would still review any waiver and that the waiver would be limited by the ordinance language to properties not abutting existing buildings or to sites meeting other narrow criteria.
On a motion to forward the item as amended to the planning board and the commission, the committee voted 2–1. The committee record shows Commissioner Magazine and Commissioner Suarez voted in favor and Commissioner Bond opposed. The staff-recommended next steps are to transmit the revised ordinance to the planning board and, if transmitted, to schedule first reading before the full commission.
The planning board will hold the required hearings because the LDR revisions include FAR increases; staff noted the planning board already held a first hearing on May 5 and will rehear the matter with follow-up sessions in late May and early June.
