Bringing you into the loop: New owners, or a partner to the AutoNation Nissan property, may seek a huge upzoning for a substantial mixed use PAD development. I am passing on what I have heard. Perhaps a Palmetto Bay elected official will step forward with some facts to assure residents as to the project and the process.

The property is outlined in yellow

I communicated today (Monday, October 14, 2019) with a fellow resident who raised concerns that the AutoNation Nissan property has been sold to a major international developer who has big plans for this property. I am passing on what I have recently learned in order to bring my readers into the loop:

Here is the limited information I have to date:

• It is abundantly clear that the largest single platted property located within the Village’s ‘downtown area’ is in play – there will be substantial changes to the density, use and appearance of this property if the current proposed plans go through to development.
• The property has been sold to a major International Developer who has been performing due diligence. Staff has been contacted (which I am not privy to), but I cannot fathom a case where our elected officials would not receive ongoing updates relating to this property.
• The official property appraiser website still lists the owner as AUTONATION USA PERRINE INC. The new owner is not presently listed. I have no information as to whether the property is under contract with the proposed developer undergoing its ‘due diligence’ investigation or whether the ownership has changed/closed and the changes in ownership are not yet updated on the property appraiser website.
• Perhaps the ownership will not change as perhaps the developer will partner with the existing owner who will remain a part of the overall mixed use development.
• The physical address of the property is 17305 S DIXIE HWY Palmetto Bay, FL  33157-4365
• I have not been advised of the name of the developer – perhaps any number of our current electeds have this information.
  
• The term “PAD” zoning has been floated relating to this property. This is a way to side step the existing zoning on the property. PAD refers to Planned Area Development and such a project could be anywhere from what is compatible to existing development within Palmetto Bay or the developer could attempt to build something as high as what is permitted by existing County zoning adjacent to our Village.
• PAD or not, no formal application appears to have been submitted at this point.
• Unsubstantiated information I am aware of points to a substantial mixed use development that will include a car dealership, office, retail and residential. A true mixed use development.
• PAD or not, no formal application appears to have been submitted at this point.

Regardless, perhaps I missed, it but there appears to have been no outbound advisement at either Council Comments or a Village Update e-blasts providing notification to our fellow residents.

I look forward to any town hall meeting that might be set to discuss this major development to provide information to our fellow residents and allow concerns to be expressed.

I will post additional information when and if received. Please feel free to provide me with any information you may have on this matter as well.

Eugene Flinn

Who lost in the Village Manager fiasco of Monday, October 7, 2019? Perhaps everyone who wanted improvement to our village as confidence is shattered. This should be cause for concern as when a "partner" pulls out like this, it indicates an unhealthy, unstable government, expect a poor product in the foreseeable future.

I certainly did not see this coming. It is shocking to see a group like I3 use the language seen in an e-mail (posted below) to the Palmetto Bay Village Council. But as one saying goes, 'play silly games, "win" silly prizes'. The question is who terminated who and what will this mean for our downtown area?

Perhaps it is time for this current Mayor and Village Council to simply close up shop and scrap any planning. The word is out and it will be very difficult to bring new quality groups in to work with the present leadership. Work to repair the damage to reputation will take much more than a few staged events with live feeds and selfies.  What occurred Monday, October 7th, 2019, was a figurative torching of the reputation of Palmetto Bay. So many worked so hard for a positive image. Petty politics and scapegoating hit the fan.

It is important to contrast the behavior and actions exhibited at the Special Council Meeting of Monday, 10/7/2019 with the June 11, 2019 article that appeared in Miami Today, by Jesse Schecker, entitled "Karyn Cunningham Palmetto Bay mayor seeks creation of vibrant downtown".  The controlled village press fails to match the gutter performance. 'Resident-centric' change was promised, but to date, only chaos,  and unreasonable delay has been delivered. One has to wonder if this I3 project was to be a cornerstone in what the current Mayor had planned for the Palmetto Bay; what she termed (but did not fully disclose) “…creating a vibrant downtown that attracts new residents, businesses and visitors.” (emphasis added)

But now one has to wonder what will ever be created as never, never, have I seen a communication such as this from an alleged Public/Private partner:

Dear Council,

I’m writing because it has been brought to our attention that Ed Silva - Village Manager, is being terminated. 

It is not our business surrounding the issues related to his termination. However, Mr. Silva has been very helpful in his efforts to coordinate and provide leadership in the Village’s downtown area that provided i3 with the comfort and understanding of the opportunity to partner with the Village. Through his representation of the residents and the Council, i3 was afforded the opportunity and was rewarded with the approval to work with a task force, directed by the Vice Mayor and Village Manager, towards a development plan and financial structure that would be presented to Council for it’s approval. It has been clear to us and gave us significant comfort that his sponsorship and significant contribution towards the overall downtown redevelopment plan, coupled with his professional expertise prior to joining the Village as Manager, would help i3 navigate our planning efforts and negotiations with the Task Force. We sensed we could achieve a workable plan that the residents, Council, participating landowners, and i3 could gain excitement and consensus on.

Without Mr. Silva’s participation in this process as Manager, our understanding of and confidence in the Village’s plan to proceed is uncertain. i3 has already invested significant capital in getting to this point and we simply are too uncertain of a path to proceed. We are very disappointed to get to this point as we have spent many hours and days cultivating a plan and, even more importantly, a relationship of trust with many residents and Council. However, we simply cannot proceed without key, approved team members. 

I am happy to discuss this in person with any of the Council members or staff. I know you have a trust of your residents in making these decisions, which you don’t take lightly. However, I also trust that you understand our responsibility in making decisions based upon a path forward that is supported by clarity, stewardship, and sound business practices. This termination, after all of these months of work and establishing a path forward, unfortunately creates uncertainty that we aren’t able to navigate.

Respectfully,

RENE JOUBERT
Principal
i3

This is cause for concern, regardless of your position on the project: I may not have been a fan of this unsolicited bid, but wow, a pullout after substantial investment - I am told a '6 figure' investment by this private partner in the process before the pullout. Perhaps the so-called task force was seen as a sham. Perhaps any commitments made in private by the members of the village council fail to match the performance in public.  What is next? We shall see. 

CLICK HERE to view prior posts  relating to this Unsolicited bid project (I remain on the record and transparent).

More development! LOOK FOR A FUTURE ARTICLE relating to a grand new MEGA development that may be coming soon to a Palmetto Bay Village Council near you! 

The Village of Palmetto Bay is not legally or morally required to enter into/accept or otherwise continue to entertain this P3 proposal for the Franjo Road area.

The discretion rests with this current Mayor and Village Council – and with no other past, present, or future people or entities.

Would you like additional resources before the decision is made on the pending Public Private Partnership (P3) unsolicited bid presently pending before the Palmetto Bay Village Council? The City of South Miami has published its own guidelines for Public/Private Partnerships, Solicited and Unsolicited Proposals and Evaluation Process.

See the 24 page document created by the City of South Miami:

GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS,

SOLICITED AND UNSOLICITED PROPOSALS AND EVALUATION PROCESS

(Revised 4-10-2017)

*Note – as conspicuously stated within the guidelines promulgated by the City of South Miami;

The City reserves the right at all times to reject any or all bids/proposals at any time before signing a Comprehensive Agreement for any reason and may decline to pursue the Proposed Project. In the latter event, the City may accept new proposals for the Proposed Project should the City choose to restart the process at a later date. Discussions between the City and Private Entities about needed infrastructure, improvements, or services shall not limit the ability of the City to later decide to use standard procurement procedures to meet its infrastructure needs, whether the project will be a public/private partnership or not. 

QUESTION: are the Mayor and Village Council required to enter into the pending P3 proposal?

SHORT ANSWER FOR PALMETTO BAY:  NO. The Village of Palmetto Bay is not legally or morally required to enter into/accept or otherwise continue to entertain this P3 proposal for the downtown/Franjo Road area.

The discretion to move forward with approval or to deny (or anything in between) rests with this current Mayor and Village Council – and with no other past, present, or future people or entities.

CLICK HERE for 12 prior relevant posts providing significant details as to the Palmetto Bay Downtown Unsolicited Bid development issue.

Update on the Unsolicited Bid - i3's renderings provide some insight into a vision for the future downtown area

I was able to obtain portion of the two competing bids - There were two bidders who submitted by the March 7, 2019, deadline. The bidders were NAI Miami and I3 Investments, LLC.

CLICK HERE to view prior posts relating to this ongoing unsolicited bid issue.

This post is merely the proposed renderings. Note - that this are for illustrative purposes only. The renderings submitted are not final or official site plan submissions. These drawings are for discussion points of what could be, not what will be.

FUTURE POST: I will be reporting on the financial data and comments on the specifics from each proposal.

This proceeding arises out of Palmetto Bay receiving what is known as an "unsolicited bid" for a 5 story mixed use project that includes a parking garage for no less than 450 vehicles in the downtown Franjo Road area. You can review significant information on this project in my original post of November 13, 2018 - CLICK HERE - Campaigns are over - time for the first decisions, setting the course by the new Village Council - issue: setting any new policy and reacting to the Unsolicited Proposal-Mixed Use Downtown Development - UP No. 1819-00-002

Downtown Palmetto Bay DUV updates - presentation 3 of 3 - presentation by Graham Penn. Esq, who represents some of the stakeholder/property owners within the area at the Special Council meeting of Wednesday, Jan. 9, 2019

This is the Third and final of the three presentations that I will post here, the presentations from the Special Council Meeting of Wednesday, January 9, 2019.

 

This presentation (the third of 3) is a Powerpoint Presentation (file is in .PDF format) by Graham Penn. Esq, who represents some of the stakeholder/property owners within the area. CLICK HERE to download and view.

 

The second (2 of 3) is the Official Palmetto Bay presentation, prepared by Palmetto Bay Staff. (Prior post – CLICK HERE) 

The first (1 of 3) is Presentation by Council Member Marsha Matson, Special Council meeting of Wednesday, Jan. 9, 2019. (Prior post – CLICK HERE)

 

This completes the downloading of the three PPT presentations (all in .PDF file format).

Downtown Palmetto Bay DUV updates - presentation Two of Three – Official Palmetto Bay Presentation by Village Staff, Special Council meeting of Wednesday, Jan. 9, 2019

This is the second of the three presentations that I will post here, the presentations from the Special Council Meeting of Wednesday, January 9, 2019. 

(CLICK HERE) for the Official Palmetto Bay presentation, prepared by Palmetto Bay Staff.

 

The first (1 of 3) was Presentation by Council Member Marsha Matson at the Special Council meeting of Wednesday, Jan. 9, 2019. (Prior post – CLICK HERE for Matson's presentation in .PDF format)

 

One more to follow when time permits.

Downtown Palmetto Bay DUV updates - presentation 1 of 3 - Presentation by Council Member Marsha Matson, Special Council meeting of Wednesday, Jan. 9, 2019

I will have all three presentations from the Special Council Meeting of Wednesday, January 9, 2019, posted for your access when ready.  

CLICK HERE to download and view the 13 page .PDF slides from Proposal by Council Member Marsha Matson

FAQ - Flinn Answers Questions. Recent question on how much property is involved in this Unsolicited Bid proposal.

I never shy away from answering questions. The recent question was how much property is involved in this Unsolicited Proposal-Mixed Use Downtown Development - UP No. 1819-00-002.  The initial answer is that, when combined, the total property coverage for the combined folios results in 4.6 Acres (4.5673553719008).  I show my math work below for you to review and confirm or contest.

The answer is not obvious for at least two reasons:

1. Will Guava Street be vacated and added to the property in order for all folios to be one single project site?  I am assuming that it will be, but I have not seen the actual proposal.

2. The village obtained use of Right of Ways by abandoning/vacating streets/partial streets around Village Hall to use for the courtyard along northbound US1. It is unknown as to whether this use will be transferred to the project bidder. This occurred on November 2, 2009, by council actions taken on June 1, 2009, Resolution 2009-53 and on November 2, 2009, Resolution 2009-94. Please follow the links provided to view the actual resolutions vacating/abandoning the applicable portion of a road required to complete our Palmetto Bay Municipal Center.  

The vacation/abandonment of these properties do NOT appear to be an issue, however, the  square footage of the abandoned/vacated right of way frontage used for Village Hall may NOT be included in the combined total.

There is the sewer lift station that is present on the southwest corner of Parcel A, at the intersection of Hibiscus and northbound US1. I am interested to see how that sewer infrastructure is dealt with in the unsolicited bid project (and I am sure it has been). 

Parcel   Folio                              Lot Size          Owner
 A/D     33-5032-004-3120 -- 113,100 Sq ft  Village of Palmetto Bay
              33-5032-004-3120
  B         33-5032-004-3180 --   65,554 Sq ft  Hagan Properties LLC
  C         33-5032-004-3200 --  20,300 Sq ft  Dixie 176 Corporation

I have placed the official Property Appraiser Summary reports for these properties. You can access them through THIS LINK where you can download and review.

Note that when combined, the total property of the above folios results in 4.6 Acres (4.5673553719008). Note that this does NOT include any street vacation and I am assuming that Guava Street will be vacated (this is not confirmed).

See prior post, immediately below, from November 13, 2018, setting any new policy and reacting to the Unsolicited Proposal-Mixed Use Downtown Development - UP No. 1819-00-002

I will answer any additional questions as relevant.

Thank you,

EUGENE FLINN

Campaigns are over - time for the first decisions, setting the course by the new Village Council - issue: setting any new policy and reacting to the Unsolicited Proposal-Mixed Use Downtown Development - UP No. 1819-00-002

Palmetto Bay has received what is known as an "unsolicited bid" for a 5 story mixed use project that includes a parking garage for no less than 450 vehicles in the downtown Franjo Road area[(the area is depicted in "attachment A - site plan", the .JPEG (posted to the right) of the site location plan].

CLICK HERE to download and view the entire 28 page document.

Initial statement as to "unsolicited bids": Unsolicited bids - and the procedure for how the public entity (in this case, Palmetto Bay) responds to unsolicited bids - are managed by State law.  See FS 255.065. Unsolicited bids are not unique to Palmetto Bay. Unsolicited bids are common and that is why there is a specific state law that provides for a process when received.

It is the responsibility of the Village Manager/Administration to follow the State Law upon receipt of an unsolicited bid and present the proposal and responses to the Village Council for their action.

It is the responsibility of the members of the Village Council to follow the law in their action on any unsolicited bid, in regard to accepting or rejecting the unsolicited bid and other responses.

The proposed project (presently proposed as a five story project):

The Development initiative includes the construction of a mixed-use facility including:

A 450 space minimum parking garage,

20,000 sf commercial retail spaces,

An entertainment component,

Open public spaces, and

A 120-key minimum hotel component.

The Village has also specified that, at a minimum, the Project must include:

Landscaping,

Enhanced lighting,

Roadway interface,

Streetscape improvements,

Sustainable practices, and

Smart technologies.

The parking structure will provide a min of 450 spaces, with 85 spaces being designated for Village Hall use and the balance of parking being used to support other land uses which can be developed on one or all parcels shown in the attached site plan (Attachment A).

The mixed-use downtown development/parking garage component shall provide a pedestrian bridge connection to Village Hall Municipal Building in the future. The Project shall incorporate enhanced pedestrian-oriented amenities and ground floor activation along Franjo and US1, promoting walkability, activating street corners catering to pedestrians.

Involved land – four parcels of property (photos are of the existing properties): 

Parcel A in Attachment A is a Village owned parcel. The Respondent Proposer can develop the project scope on the full site or partial site.

 

Parcel B and C in Attachment A are not Village owned, however, current land owners have provided a Letter of Intent indicating interest in making their property part of the Village’s Mixed-Use Downtown Development Project.

The Project site can include three parcels. See (Attachment B) for survey information:

Parcel A- Folio # 33-5032-004-3120 Village Owned

Parcel B-Folio # 33-5032-004-3180 Owned by Hagan Properties LLC

Parcel C- Folio # 33-5032-004-3200 Owned by Dixie 176 Corporations

Parcel D- Folio # 33-5032-004-3120 Village Owned/ Village Hall Site

CLICK HERE to review the entire 28 page document.  This Proposal Requirements Document (“UP” or “Request”) is issued by the Village of Palmetto Bay, Florida (the “Village”), pursuant to Florida Statute Section 255.065, notifying interested parties that it has received an unsolicited proposal for the development of a parking garage and a mixed- use development in Palmetto Bay as a public-private partnership (the “Project”).  All information is contained in the Notice of Receipt of Unsolicited Proposal for Mixed-Use Downtown Development for Village of Palmetto Bay, Solicitation No: UP 1819-00-002

WHAT THIS MEANS – pursuant to state law, other qualified interested parties may submit a legally sufficient competitive bid for this project.

"The Village of Palmetto Bay (the “Village”) will accept other Proposals from qualified firms to deliver the Project and design, build, finance, operate and maintain the Project in accordance with the specifications set forth in this UP (“Proposal”). There are no Village funds allocated for this project."

TAKE NOTE: The Village’s project contribution is strictly land as part of a ground lease agreement with Developer.

Are you planning on submitting a proposal? 
Proposals Due December 11th, 2018 3:00 pm or earlier
Attn: Missy Arocha
Village Clerk
9705 E. Hibiscus Street
Palmetto Bay, Florida 33157

Get the Facts - a detailed read documenting that I have been the advocate for reducing growth in Palmetto Bay - and I have succeeded!

A shining example of politics gone too far! My opponent is rewriting her record of pro-development votes - 4 years of support for projects in the Downtown Palmetto Bay (DUV) area and is now trying to claim that she is "anti-development".  It is good for the voters that records are kept that prove otherwise.  Don't be fooled. She has voted for each and every zoning application in the downtown area (multi-story buildings) and she voted, without objection, for the downtown zoning code (DUV) that all applications are based upon.  

Development is not an issue that can be discussed in 100 words or less. I am therefore providing you with substantial information documenting the development issues in Palmetto Bay.  I invite you to review past articles posted throughout my blog where I keep a running log of information relating to our area.

General Issues relating to development:

I am proud of my record of actually REDUCING the potential density which has saved this village from the substantial growth that has been occurring to the south of us.  The Downtown Urban Village Code (hereafter DUV) started as an initiative of then Mayor Stanczyk. Read the article online, Oct. 29, 2013: Palmetto Bay Mayor Calls For Redevelopment. http://www.cre-sources.com/palmetto-bay-mayor-calls-for-redevelopment/ Read the full article which provides a great background for the why and for what reason the DUV code rewrite was sought.

“Palmetto Bay Mayor Shelley Stanczyk delivered her annual state of the village address Wednesday night to an audience of about 170 people. Stanczyk said this year’s theme for the village is ‘charting the course.’

That ‘course’ is the village’s new goal: An initiative to revitalize its downtown by creating a residential and business community in a relatively undeveloped district.

The project aims to improve the infrastructure and landscape of an area known as the Franjo Triangle – from Southwest 184th Street north to 168th Street and from the southbound lanes of U.S. 1 east to Franjo Road – to provide incentives for companies to open shop there.”

The record is clear on Palmetto Bay (and you can find many, many examples on my blog for your review) – I have led a real reduction in density here in Palmetto Bay as cited below. Much of this has involved residents who recognize that growth will happen, but that we need to have smart controlled growth. Resident input has allowed me to work to reduce density, while other municipalities have promoted increased growth, much of which we now see driving through our community.

The details on the full breakdown for the downtown area are posted below: 

Pre-incorporation/Miami-Dade County   -- This is what we could have in development had we remained unincorporated: 32,722,560 Square feet total in the downtown, DUV area,  a huge number: 23,000 residential units plus commercial of 12,022,560 square feet.

FT&I  -- This is the code that I worked hard to create, but was called “too restrictive” while I was out of office.  The possible buildout under this code reduced to: 9,935,000 Square feet (reducing nearly 23 million SF from the prior 33 million square feet), 4,360 Residential (18,640 potential units eliminated) plus commercial of 6,000,000 square feet.

DUV – in its current form: 6,850,000 Square feet (reducing nearly 25,872,560 SF from the prior 33 million square feet),  5,661 Residential units (17,339 potential units eliminated) plus commercial of 2,000,000 square feet. – the residential did slightly increase, but the commercial space was dropped by 2/3rds.

And, this council, dropped the prior council’s plan to increase building height to a possible 12 - 25 stories which, thankfully, did not get much traction and was rejected by me and this current council. 

Note the truth - the growth projected is substantially less than what was proposed by the original County code.  And we can't simply vote no on everything.  Any politician who tells you we can is either lying or fails to understand property rights.  Property owners have the right to build what the code allows, not what currently stands on the property.

And take note, our 'growth' is less, much less, than the increase that has occurred in Cutler Bay and points south.

I offer up the following population comparison growth numbers to demonstrate the real source of the current traffic, removing the hyperbole placed out there, presenting facts, not fiction (and note that I do not have the comparable for the corresponding Unincorporated area to the south):

Palmetto Bay: a less than 2% increase of only 454 people  

24,116 in 2002 to 24,570 in 2016

     

Cutler Bay: a 27.5% increase of 14,400 people

30,307 in 2002 to 44,707 in 2016     

Homestead: a 103% increase of 34,464 people

33,532 in 2002 to 67,996 in 2016

Palmetto Bay has planned.  We have studied.  We have completed transportation and traffic calming master plans.

Recent Downtown votes:

Record distortion is a horrible thing. I am posting the actual voting record for the entire council in order to demonstrate that an opponent claiming to be "anti-development" is distorting the truth. Her votes, on the record, contradict the statements made in private when she goes 'door to door'. 

Where are these "anti-development" votes? 

She has actually voted more often for development in the downtown district than I have.  The truth matters. 

The following documents the votes taken on downtown zoning matters - these are votes that result in actual approval, providing authorization to build.

I also ask that you read the Miami Herald articles for more background, applicable links and quotes cited at the end of this post.  

5 important votes have occurred in the Palmetto Bay downtown area:

Atlantico      passed  4-0 (Vice Mayor absent)

Parkview      passed  4-1 (Flinn voted NO – Karyn voted to APPROVE)

Sandpiper    passed  5-0

Soleste         passed  5-0

Shores          passed  4-0 (Vice Mayor absent)

Karyn voted for each and every development - 5-0 - 100% for development!

I own up to my voting record, 4 in favor and one very loud NO vote for the rental projects, but I also argued for substantial reduction in overall height and other extractions applied to each and every property that did in fact reduce height and density.

I also recommend that you review the Miami Herald, April 20, 2017: 300 apartments on U.S. 1? Palmetto Bay tells developers to think again, by Monique O. Madan.  My comments made at this hearing are indicative of how I manage development. 

In this case, the development would be LEED certified. Developers of the project currently have the right to 74 units, and were asking for 226 bonus apartments — a number that the mayor called “obscene.”

“Your entire project is car-based. I haven’t heard any mention of trying to get people to the rail, no stops, circulators to come pick people up. Everything is about cars and parking spaces, as far as you’re concerned,” Mayor Eugene Flinn said.

Opponents argued that the development would inundate roads with traffic on streets that are already congested during rush hour.

          ***   ***   ***
Planners offered to donate $100,000 to the city, contingent on the plans being passed. Councilman David Singer asked the number be bumped up to $250,000. The mayor joked and suggested $1 million. At the end, talks about $2 million were on the table.

“You know what? I’d rather you keep your $2 million and scale down this project,” Flinn said. “And I really don’t buy the traffic studies. It lead to the conclusion that the traffic issue alone is enough to reject this project. I strongly recommend that you come back and rethink this thing.”

This project did come back for hearing in June. The glaring deficiencies were not sufficiently addressed in my opinion, so I voted "NO".  My opponent voted IN FAVOR.

Is she "anti-development"?  Hardly. 

Palmetto Bay's DUV Development Code (Downtown district)

The zoning votes were based upon the DUV code written and passed unanimously by the Village Council.  Please see my blog post of August 29, 2018, Correcting the record. My opponent continues to dodge her votes in creating our downtown code. She owns a 100% approval record for creating it (as do I), but she also voted against extending the moratorium.  This post provides a very long explanation.

And here is the accurate history of the DUV code and the steps I have taken to actually reduced the density here in Palmetto Bay, See: August 3, 2018, Councilman David Singer's History of DUV Presentation Posted online.

Much more can be viewed on my blog by following this link to all the articles involving the DUV Code (CLICK HERE).

I remain available to discuss in any greater detail or to address any specifics.  I have not even begun to address the Pine Rocklands located along Old Cutler Road at the Palmetto Bay Village Center, but I will provide a link to the general articles (CLICK HERE)

Thank you for your time and willingness to research the facts.

Very truly yours,

Eugene Flinn

Avoid the political distortions. FT&I report rebuts the opportunistic political distortions going on regarding plans for a Community Center.

Preserving Public records (the public records laws) are the best friend to an informed public.  We can go back and see what happened and when.  This is why I remain a huge proponent of transparency and posting our documents online for 24/7/365 for access by the public (and elected officials).  

I invite everyone to read the Franjo Triangle Commercial Island Charrette Report to get the straight story, rather than the distortions disseminated by less than correct political candidates, of how the Community Center has always been envisioned for the commercial area, not within any Palmetto Bay parks.


I have previously posted information on this FT&I district, as part of the DUV debate. See: November 16, 2014, The Franjo Triangle Commercial Island Charrette Report – posted online and Sec. 30-50.18 of the Village Code  http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1021/ML102110564.pdf  

Note that this is an 84 page document and is a slow download.  This is “A Citizens’ Vision Plan” November 2004 and was a partnership with Palmetto Bay and the Miami-Dade County Department of Planning and Zoning, Community Planning Section.

The failure of some candidates to even acknowledge their prior inconsistent recommendations during campaigns is troubling to say the least.  I am pleased to see her position ever so slightly evolve back to her original 2004 position, based (I believe) upon listening to residents rather than campaign consultants. This is why political candidates have poor reputations.  

Please look to page 23 for the recommendations from Group 3 - a group which chose current District 3 candidate Marsha Matson as its presenter.  Under my leadership, Palmetto Bay has complied with all the recommendations of Group 3, Marsha Matson presenter. See PAGE 23 of the Franjo Triangle Commercial Island Charrette Report

Here are the recommendations of the Marsha Matson table (Group 3):
Summary of requests:

• Entrance markers
• Narrowed streets with wide sidewalks;
• A dog park outside of Perrine Park
• Pedestrian bridges over U.S. 1 
• Improve Busway stops
• Improve pedestrian design
• Allow rental and owner-occupied townhouses is Triangle area
• Allow mixed-use in the Island area
• Develop town center similar to Miami Lakes’ Main Street centered around Franjo Road and Banyan Street
• Provide a village hall and community center on vacant property between Perrine Park and Franjo Road (Emphasis added)
• Provide additional access to park from Franjo Road, improve landscaping around Brandsmart
• Retain residential area east of Franjo Road

The above was taken from table 3, the table/group who chose Marsha Matson to present their visioning plan.  See table 4., Citizen's Requests, numbers page 26, for the list representing the compilation of the most common suggestions received during the Charrette process. 

As noted in the report (page 26): 

A theme that unites nearly every request is the desire to see that the Franjo Triangle Commercial Island area develop into a distinct area with an attractive public realm that is pedestrian-friendly, accessible to the surrounding area, and provides a range of residential and employment opportunities.

This list is as follows (again, taken verbatim from page 26):

• Improve public infrastructure: sidewalks, street lights, landscaping, water and sewer
• Announce arrival to the Village with entrance features, signs, buildings, fountains and landscaping
• Make Franjo Road a neighborhood main street
• Locate the Village hall within the Franjo area
• Encourage mid-rise business/commercial/mixed use development on the Island
• Provide a pedestrian friendly mixed-use town center in the area
• Incorporate shops, restaurants, hotels, cafes, office, residences and ‘mom and pop’ businesses in new
development
• Create North-South connectivity through the Island
• Connectivity to a future Metrorail Station at Banyan Street and the Busway
• Retain the residential area and its character completely
• No additional commercial development east of Franjo Road
• Provide a community center in Perrine Park
• Enhance bus stops with benches, trash cans, signage and improved street lighting (eliminate orange
lighting)
• Provide roundabouts and traffic calming on key intersections
• Incorporate pavers in crosswalks and medians
• Provide a dog park
• Provide a skate park
• Provide an upscale flea market
• Provide an amphitheater for public events
• Provide more east-west connections as pedestrian linkages or bike routes
• Build additional neighborhood pocket parks and Village green
• Create a transitional buffer between the commercial and residential uses
• Improve the physical appearance of U.S. 1
• Standardize business signage along U.S. 1
• Restrict billboards
• Improve Landscaping and appearance of the Brandsmart area
• Add new buildings to display cars and dealerships
• Consolidate large parking areas into structured parking
• Replace obsolete buildings with new structures that respond to the community’s vision
• Improve and enhance the Perrine Wayside park
• Provide entrance to the expanded Perrine Park from Franjo Road
• Improve landscaping along all major streets and corridors• Provide a charter school within the area

Who were the individuals recognized for giving up a saturday to assist in this vision?  See page 78:

Daniel Alfonso, Vee Baldeo,, Sharon Maclvon Bame,r Ed Beh,l Jim Berg, John Breder, Sean Brennan George Cadman III Ginger Cates, Henry Clifford, Tucker Crusan, Thomas David, Lowell Elsea Margana Elsia, Arlene Feller, Bruce Ford Clara Fowell, Sheiela Frazier, Kim Frederick Barbara Golob Phillis Guthrio Stewart Guthrio Bill Gwynn Bill Hall Tom Hall Dee Dee Heacock David Hill Lou Kassinosis Timothy King Carol Klingbeil Amy Lamneck Vicki Lamneck Chuck Latshaw Donna Latshaw Jorge Liapur John Lindgren Wally Lucky Ed Ludovici Phil Ludovici Patricia Gadala Maria Carlos Martinez Donna Masson Barbara Mathews Marsha Matson Karen McGuire Barrie McHugh Chris Merinkers Todd Morrow Benn Mullins Pamela Mullvis Lois Neidhart Paul Neidhart John Overholt David Palm Paula Palm Joe Porter Vivian Poulos Juan F. Quintero DMD Sandy Bruce Robinson Julio Rodriquez Moises A. Saca Susan Schreiber J. Serohia Bonnie Simon Shelley Stanczyk Bernard Steele George Steele Marcelo Stolarczyk Cary Sylis Ralph Thiele Carolyn Thiele Petra Vandervlugt Mike Werner Marvin Winhold Eleanor Winhold T