PLANNING ANALYSIS
This discussion item pertains to potential strategies for addressing quality of life issues associated with existing and potential future apartment hotels in the South of Fifth area. The following are the initial strategies discussed by the LUSC on October 19, 2021:

FAR and Height Incentives
The current maximum building height in the R-PS1 and R-PS2 districts is 45 feet; for lots 50 feet wide or less the maximum height is 40 feet. The maximum FAR in the R-PS1 district is 1.25 and the maximum FAR in the R-PS2 district is 1.50.

Modest and context sensitive increases in allowable FAR and building height for residential apartment uses in the R-PS1 and R-PS2 districts would likely not have a negative impact, as the applicable area is limited. Additionally, the maximum FAR and height permitted in these districts is relatively modest. Since most of the apartment hotel uses are in smaller, older buildings, a small increase in allowable FAR and/or building height may incentivize a re-conversion back to residential only use.

Comprehensive Strategy to Address Quality of Life Issues
The development of a comprehensive and sustainable strategy to address quality of life issues in the R-PS1 and RPS2 districts should be explored. This would involve close coordination with Police, Code Compliance, and Parking, and would need to be looked at from a long-term, strategic standpoint.

Traffic and Circulation Management
A strategy to address cut-thru traffic, speeding, and reckless driving is currently being developed by the Transportation Department. Specifically, at the September 17, 2021, City Commission meeting, the Transportation Department was directed to conduct a neighborhood-wide traffic calming study for the South of Fifth area. The Transportation Department is in the process of engaging a consultant for this study, which is expected to take 6-9 months and include significant community outreach.

Zoning Overlay for 4th Street
The creation of an overlay for the C-PS2 area between 4th and 5th Streets, from Washington Avenue to Lenox Avenue. The overlay would allow for more of a transition zone from the lower scale R-PS1, R-PS2, and R-PS3 districts and the more intense C-PS2 district along 4th Street. A similar overlay was referred to the LUSC at the request of the Flamingo Park Neighborhood Association in July of 2021 and is currently pending. The proposed 6th Street overlay would create a transition along 6th Street and is intended to buffer the more intense C-PS2 district on the south side of 6th Street from the RM-1 Flamingo Park area to the north of 6th Street.

This same concept could be applied to 4th Street. Although such an overlay along 4th Street would be prospective (existing uses and developments would be grandfathered) it would be another component in the overall strategy of addressing quality of life issues in the RPS areas immediately south of 4th Street.

UPDATE (February 11, 2022 LUSC):
The following is a summary of the action items requested by the LUSC on October 19, 2021:

1. The Administration shall further study potential strategic increases in FAR and height within the R-PS1 and R-PS2 districts for the limited purpose of incentivizing the conversion of existing apartment hotels to residential use.

A draft LDR amendment establishing a special overlay within the R-PS1 and R-PS2 zoning districts was presented to the LUSC. The subject overlay would allow for an increase in building height and FAR for the conversion of an existing, legally established apartment-hotel, to a conforming residential use, such as apartment or townhome, with no short-term rentals. The LUSC recommended that the City Commission refer the proposed Ordinance amending the LDR’s to the Planning Board. Additionally, for the proposed FAR increase, voter approval would be required.

2. The resident supervisor requirement for apartment hotels shall be fully enforced in conjunction with the Customer Service and Code Compliance Departments. An update will be provided to the LUSC.

The Customer Service Department has updated all BTR’s for apartment hotels in the R-PS1 and R-PS2 districts to include the name and contact information for a resident supervisor. Additionally, in early November, letters were sent to all building and property owners of apartment hotels in the R-PS1 and R-PS2 districts, advising them of the requirements for posting the name and contact information for resident supervisors at each property, as well as the requirement for the resident supervisor to reside on site.

In January the Code Compliance began issuing violations to those establishments not in compliance with the requirements for posting the name and contact information for the resident supervisor. Both Planning and Code Compliance have received inquiries from some of the operators regarding how to comply with the applicable provisions. Planning and Code will continue to monitor compliance with these requirements.

3. The Administration will prepare a draft for a 4th Street Overlay.

Draft criteria for an overlay along 4th Street, which would be prospective (existing uses and developments would be grandfathered) was prepared; the LUSC continued the discussion of the overlay to April 8, 2022.

4. In conjunction with the Parking and Police Departments, the code provisions regarding the use of handicap placards shall be enforced and an update will be provided to the LUSC.

The City Attorneys Office and the Parking Department have had meetings with area stakeholders. In addition to increased enforcement, an Ordinance to address the abuse of accessible placards, by also requiring a residential parking zone sticker, was adopted by the City Commission on March 9, 2022. This Ordinance will ensure that placard holders using spaces in residential areas of the city are in fact residents of the specific area.

5. A separate meeting with affected residents shall be scheduled with the Transportation Department to provide a status update on the traffic calming initiative for the South of Fifth Street area. The Transportation Department will look at how this traffic calming initiative may be accelerated, as well as temporary improvements such as bumps. An update will be provided to the LUSC.

The Transportation Department has had follow up meetings with affected stakeholders in the South of Fifth Street area. Additional details, as well as an update on the traffic calming study, were provided at the LUSC meeting. The Transportation Department continues to have meetings with affected stakeholders in the South of Fifth area, as part of the comprehensive traffic calming study.

6. A meeting will be organized with all applicable City Departments and affected stakeholders within the South of 5th area to further discuss ways to improve residents’ quality of life and provide an update to the LUSC.

Members of the Administration, including representatives from Police, Code Compliance, Parking and Transportation had a virtual meeting with stakeholders from the South of 5th Street neighborhood on November 18, 2021. A number of items were discussed, including accessible placards and traffic enforcement, a potential retroactive reduction in occupancy for apartment hotel uses, the beach corridor project (monorail), as well as issues with certain commercial establishments.

A follow-up meeting, pertaining to violations at commercial establishments in the South of 5th Street area, took place on December 1, 2021, with representatives of the Planning and Code Compliance Departments, as well as the City Attorney’s Office. The Administration continues to be available to meet in the future, should any of the stakeholders within the South of 5th area request such a meeting for additional updates, as well as to maintain a cooperative and constructive dialogue.

UPDATE (April 8, 2022 LUSC):
The following is a summary of the action items requested by the LUSC on February 11, 2022:

1. An update on the enforcement of apartment hotel provisions, including all violations issued to date, and recommendations for enhanced penalties.

The following is a summary (as of March 22, 2022) of code violations issued to existing apartment hotels regarding the resident supervisor requirement:

• 338 EUCLID AVENUE - CC2022-12387
1/20/2022: City Code Violation - Failing to comply with the Business Tax Receipt issued by the City of Miami Beach.

• 350 EUCLID AVENUE - CC2022-12391
1/20/2022: City Code Violation - Failing to comply with the Business Tax Receipt issued by the City of Miami Beach.

• 334 EUCLID AVENUE - CC2022-12393
1/21/2022: City Code Violation - Failing to comply with the Business Tax Receipt issued by the City of Miami Beach.

• 350 WASHINGTON AVENUE - CC2022-12390
1/20/2022: City Code Violation - Failing to comply with the Business Tax Receipt issued by the City of Miami Beach.

• 735 2nd STREET - CC2022-12551
2/19/2022: City Code Violation - Failing to comply with the Business Tax Receipt issued by the City of Miami Beach.

Regarding potential enhanced penalties for violations related to apartment hotels, the following are some initial options:

• Increases in fines, stepped in sequence with recurrent violations.

• Based upon the number of violations during the FY (Oct 1 – Sep 30) additional financial penalties would be due prior to the renewal of the BTR. These financial penalties would be imposed automatically, and not subject to the special master.

• The property owner would have to pay a special fee, stepped in sequence with recurrent violations, to cover the cost of manpower associated with continuous visits and enforcement. These fees would be imposed automatically, and not subject to the special master. Also, a lien would be placed on the property by the City for failure to pay within a prescribed timeframe.

If there is consensus on exploring any of these options further, the Administration can work with the City Attorney’s Office to draft the applicable legislation. It is important to note that any increase in the amount of penalties and fines cannot exceed the amount set forth in Chapter 162.09(2)(d), F.S. The following is the applicable Chapter from the F.S.:

162.09(2)(a) A fine imposed pursuant to this section shall not exceed $250 per day for a first violation and shall not exceed $500 per day for a repeat violation, and, in addition, may include all costs of repairs pursuant to subsection (1). However, if a code enforcement board finds the violation to be irreparable or irreversible in nature, it may impose a fine not to exceed $5,000 per violation.
(b) In determining the amount of the fine, if any, the enforcement board shall consider the following factors:
1. The gravity of the violation;
2. Any actions taken by the violator to correct the violation; and
3. Any previous violations committed by the violator.
(c) An enforcement board may reduce a fine imposed pursuant to this section.
(d) A county or a municipality having a population equal to or greater than 50,000 may adopt, by a vote of at least a majority plus one of the entire governing body of the county or municipality, an ordinance that gives code enforcement boards or special magistrates, or both, authority to impose fines in excess of the limits set forth in paragraph (a). Such fines shall not exceed $1,000 per day per violation for a first violation, $5,000 per day per violation for a repeat violation, and up to $15,000 per violation if the code enforcement board or special magistrate finds the violation to be irreparable or irreversible in nature. In addition to such fines, a code enforcement board or special magistrate may impose additional fines to cover all costs incurred by the local government in enforcing its codes and all costs of repairs pursuant to subsection (1). Any ordinance imposing such fines shall include criteria to be considered by the code enforcement board or special magistrate in determining the amount of the fines, including, but not limited to, those factors set forth in paragraph (b).

2. Updated information on the maximum occupational load for hotel units under the Florida Building Code and Life-Safety Code.

Under the Florida Building Code (FBC):
• For units with one exit, the maximum occupant load for an R-1 use (transient Hotels/Motels) is 10 persons. The maximum occupant load per floor is also generally 10 persons if there is only one exit access doorway.
• When there are two or more exits, the maximum occupant load per floor increases depending on the number of exists.
• The corridor width, existence of sprinklers and the maximum travel distance to the exits will also determine the occupant load per floor in a building.

Under the Life-Safety Code:
• Occupant loads for hotel and residential units are based on exit capacity for the floors and stairs, and not the unit.

3. Discuss and consider the framework for a potential 4th Street overlay.

The following are draft criteria for an overlay along 4th Street, which would be prospective (existing uses and developments would be grandfathered):

Building Height
To address the potential future issues of context along the north side of 4th Street, maximum overall building height could be limited to 50 feet within the first 2 platted lots on the north side of 4th Street, regardless of use. A maximum height of 50 feet within this portion of the overlay would still allow for an appropriate and sensible distribution of the maximum FAR of 2.0. Additionally, under the certificate of appropriateness criteria in the Code, the Historic Preservation Board has significant latitude in requiring adjustments to overall building height, massing and the distribution of allowable building volume.

The Administration does not recommend limiting building height to anything less than 50 feet within any portion of the proposed overlay, as it could disproportionally affect smaller lots and development sites that do not have enough area to distribute the maximum allowable FAR. In this regard properties within the C-PS2 district have a maximum FAR of 2.0. As such, some flexibility in terms of overall building height is needed to allow for adequate architectural latitude in the distribution of this allowable volume.

Alcoholic Beverage and Use Restrictions
The following are additional types of regulations that could apply to properties located between 4th Street and 5th Street within the C-PS2 district, as well as more specific regulations for the first 2 platted lots north of 4th Street:

• Outdoor ambient music and television sets would be prohibited within 100 feet of the north side of 4th Street, unless approved by the Planning Board, pursuant to the Conditional Use criteria.

• Access points to transient uses (e.g., hotels), as well as food and beverage establishments serving alcohol, would be limited to side streets only, and would not be permitted on 4th Street. Additionally, a minimum setback from the north side of 4th Street, for all public entry points, should be required.

• Adding nuisance uses to a list of prohibited uses for the entire C-PS2 district. Such uses could include, but not be limited to, convenience stores, smoke/vape stores, package stores and the retail sale of alcohol for off premise consumption.

If there is consensus on these, as well as any other criteria for a 4th Street overlay, it is recommended that a draft Ordinance be brought to the City Commission for referral to the Planning Board.

SUMMARY
As indicated previously, the Administration believes that collectively initiatives such as those identified herein, as well as any others that may be identified, could have a positive impact on the quality-of-life issues in the South of Fifth neighborhood. As these are long term policies, and not quick fixes, all will need time to be properly developed, implemented and maintained.

In view of the foregoing, the Administration recommends the following:

1. The LUSC discuss the item and provide applicable recommendations to the City Commission.

2. The LUSC recommend that the City Commission refer the proposal for a 4th Street Overlay to the Planning Board.

3. The LUSC recommend that the City Commission discuss potential increases in fines and penalties, as noted herein.