COUNCIL ZONING MEETING

>> JANUARY, 29TH, 2020, 6:20 P M. PLEASE CALL THE ROLE. >> CALLING ROLE. >> MAYOR, YOU HAVE QUORUM. >> IF WE CAN ALL PLEASE RISE. AND FACE THE FLAG, AND JOIN US FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. >> (SPEAKING AWAY FROM MIC). >> TODAY'S INVOCATION WILL BE LED BY OUR CITY MANAGER, MR. ALBERT [INAUDIBLE]. >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. BEFORE WE BEGIN OUR MEET WILLING. LET US THANK THE MOMENT TO THANK THE LORD FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE. WORKING TOGETHER WITH THE COMMON GOLDS OVER REACHING THE CITY OF DORAL, AND ALL WHO WORK HERE. LET US PRAY. LORD, WE PRAISE YOU, AND ASK YOU TO GUIDE US IN THIS MEETING, THAT WE MAY BE GUIDED IN THE SPIRIT OF MUTUAL RESPECT. AND HEALTHY EXCHANGE OF IDEAS. HELP US TO WORK TOGETHER FOR THE GOOD OF ALL IN THE COMMUNITY, AMEN. >> OKAY. AGENDA, ORDER OF BUSINESS. ANYTHING? DEFERRALS? YES? >> EYE BELIEVE IT'S ITEM, 8 B. >> YES, THE MORATORIUM ITEM WILL BE DEFERRED UNTIL THE MARCH, 18TH -- >> IT WILL BE DEFERRED UNTIL, MARCH, 18TH ZONING MEETING. IT WILL BE, ITEM, 8 B. PROPOSED ORDINANCE, HYPHEN 02. RIGHT? >> CORRECT. >> ANYTHING ELSE? NOTHING ELSE. >> OKAY. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WELCOME TO THE CITY OF DORAL, COUNSEL ZONING MEETING. WE WILL NOW GIVE YOU BASIC INSTRUCTIONS, NUMBER ONE IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK, YOU NEED TO FILL OUT A CARD, THERE'S A WHITE ONE IF YOU WANT TO HAVE GENERAL COMMENTS AND BLUE IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF IT, AND ANOTHER ONE IF YOU'RE OPPOSED. YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC PORTION OF IT, AT THE BEGINNING, OF ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT. AND THE FIRST PUBLIC PORTION, AND UM, AT THAT POINT, DURING THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, WHICH I THINK A NUMBER OF YOU HAVE FILED DOCUMENTS FOR, WE WILL CALORIE YOU UP ON THAT ITEM. THREE BASIC RULES, IF YOU ARE GOING TO SPEAK TO YOUR NEIGHBOR, AND OR ON THE PHONE, PLEASE STEP OUTSIDE, BECAUSE SOMETIMES IT'S DIFFICULT TO HEAR, THE APPLICANT AND EVERYONE KNOWS YOU'RE SPEAKING AT THE TIME. NUMBER TWO, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TODAY, BECAUSE SOME OF YOU HAVE GIVEN THE TIME TO TWO SPEAK IRRELEVANTS, WE'LL GIVE YOU A MAXIMUM OF TEN MINUTES. THE THREE BECOMES TWO IF WE GET MORE PEOPLE. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO TELL US WHAT YOU THINK AT THAT TIME. NUMBERLY: YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO CRITICIZE ANYBODY. MYSELF INCLUDED, THE COUNSEL MEMBERS AND THE ADMINISTRATION. AND EVEN YOUR SPOUSE, IF YOU DO SO. DO IT RESPECTFULLY, IF YOU DON'T, SOMEBODY IN DARK BLUE WILL TAP YOU AND ASK YOU TO STEP OUTSIDE. THAT'S WHAT IT IS FOUNDED ON, RESPECTFUL DISAGREEMENT. MADAM CLERK, YOU HAVE TO SWEAR PEOPLE IN, IF THEY WANT TO SPEAK. >> I'LL DO THAT WITH THE PUBLIC SECTION. AFTER THE -- AFTER THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION AND WE GET TO THE ITEMS, THEN THE CLERK WILL ASK YOU TO STAND UP AND FOLLOW HER INSTRUCTIONS. OKAY WITH THAT BEING SAID, THE REGULAR PUBLIC COMMENT IS NOW OPEN, ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO ANY ITEM THAT IS NOT ONE THAT YOU ALREADY REGISTERED TO SPEAK FOR, PLEASE COME ON UP, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, AND GIVE US YOUR OPINION, IN A SHORT SUCCINCT AND CONCISE MANNER, WHICH MEANS FOR THREE MINUTES. OKAY, WE CONTINUE ON WITH THE AGENDA. NEXT ITEM. >> 6 A. COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM (CRS) ANNUAL REPORT. >> AS YOU KNOW, WE GIVE YOU INFORMATION, ON THE MARK -- CITY MANAGER IS PRESENT TO GIVE YOU A PRESENTATION ON THIS ITEM. >> COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT UPDATE, COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM IS THE FEMA FRAME THAT PROVIDES DISCOUNTS FOR FLOOD INSURANCE POLICIES HERE. FOR ANYBODY WHO LIVES IN THE MUNICIPALITY THAT ENFORCES HIGHER REGULATORY STANDARDS. THE FLOOD PLAIN IMAGINE ANGLEMENT PLAN IS WRITTEN IN THE COUNTY, WE APPROXIMATE FACE PATE IN IT. THROUGH THE LOCAL ADMINISTRATION STRATEGY. THERE'S NO CHANGE TO THE PLAN, HOWEVER, THERE'S UPDATES, AND WE HAVE THAT IN OUR ORDINANCE, IN THE CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, LIKE CANAL BANKS, AND STABILIZATION, AND ADDITIONAL DRAINAGE THAT THE PUBLIC WORKS, UM, DEPARTMENT, UM, PARTICIPATES IN AND DOES IS UM -- THE UPDATE IN THE LETTER TO COUNSEL THERE IS THE UM SPECIFICS AND I'M JUST HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE IN THIS SPECIFIC ITEM. >> ANY QUESTIONS? >> PLEASE. >> ONCE AGAIN WHAT METRIC DO WE USE TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS HELPING OUR RESIDENTS AND OUR BUSINESSES. >> WE HAVE OUR CLASS 7 WHICH IS A 15 PERCENT DISCOUNT FOR EVERYONE WHO HAS HAD A FLOOD INSURANCE POLICY IN THE FLOOD HAZARD AREA, THAT'S ROUGHLY ABOUT, 38 HUNDRED POLICIES, THEY REPRESENT OVER A BILLION DOLLARS IN THE COVERAGE, SHOULD THERE BE A PROBLEM IN MAJOR FLOODS OR CATASTROPHIC. THERE'S A MILLION DOLLAR ENFORCED. >> THE FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON THAT, IS HOW DO I GET A METRIC OR A NUMBER ON -- I SEE THE COVERAGE SIDE, HOW DO WE GET AT, TO THE SAVINGS PORTION OF IT, PER POLICY, FOR EXAMPLE. >> THE RATE THAT YOU RECEIVE ON THE FLOOD INSURANCE POLICY ALREADY INCLUDES THE FLOOD INSURANCE DISCOUNT FOR C R S. IT IS ENUMERATED ON THE POLICY AND IT SAYS, THE COMMUNITY NUMBER. FOR DORAL, AND CLASS 7 WILL BE, 15 PERCENT, AND THE RATE ALREADY HAS THAT 15 PERCENT, BECAUSE WHEN THE INSURANCE AGENCY RUNS OUT. THE FEMA ALREADY HAS THE DISCOUNT WHEN IT COMES BACK, AND IT'S ALL PRINTED OUT IN THE INSURANCE POLICY. >> THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE, THE INSURED WOULD SEE IT ON THERE -- WHAT I TELL PEOPLE ABOUT THIS, THEY SAY, IT DOESN'T SAY THAT IN MY POLICY. >> IT ACTUALLY DOES. YOU KNOW THOSE STATEMENTS, IT DOESN'T SAY THAT THE CITY OF DORAL -- >> IT SAYS, C R S CLASS 7 AND ALL IT HAS IS THE NUMBER, 1240041. >> I APPLAUD THE BETTER THE RATINGS. BUT WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S SOME SORT OF MESSAGING THAT LETS US KNOW THAT WHEN THEY LOOK AT THE POLICIES. >> WE DO HOLD EVENTS, OUTREACH AND WE TRY TO GET PEOPLE TO ATTEND TO EDUCATE THEM, AND THEY ARE WELCOME TO CONTACT ME AT ANY TIME I'LL BE HAPPY TO WALK THEM THROUGH IT. >> MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE TO GET TOGETHER WITH MAGGIE AND FOR OUR RESIDENTS TO BECOME AWARE THAT THE FACT THAT THIS PROGRAM IS LED TO REDUCE RATES, AND YOU KNOW, MAYBE, HAVING COVERAGE. >> IT'S GOING TO BECOME A BIGGER PROBLEM BECAUSE, STATE WIDE AND NATIONALLY. THIS IS GOING TO BECOME A PROBLEM FOR SOUTH FLORIDA IN GENERAL, NOT JUST DORAL, AND THIS IS AN EXAMPLE THAT THE CITY DOES, IT'S VERY HARD FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND IF YOU DON'T SPOON FEED THEM. SO I APPLAUD YOU FOR THE EFFORTS TO GET OUR RESIDENTS AND OUR BUSINESSES IN THOSE BENEFITS, BUT IT HAS TO BE COMMUNICATED. >> WE'RE GOING TO BE HAPPY TO ADD ADDITIONAL OUTREACH PROGRAMS, WE HAVE ALL SORTS OF PAMPHLETS. >> I GOT YOU. AND WE HAVE A LOT OF FLOOD PLAIN MANAGERS. >> I'M HAPPY TO WORK WITH MAGGIE ON THIS. >> IT'S GREAT THAT THE PRIOR DIRECTOR WOULD MENTION THAT WE HAD 17 FLOOD DIRECTORS, IT'S GREAT THAT WE HAD OTHER MUNICIPALITIES. THAT'S FANTASTIC. BUT THIS IS WHAT THE RESIDENTS NEED TO KNOW. THAT THEY ARE GETTING A BENEFIT FROM THIS PROGRAM. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> ALL RIGHT >> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MARK? >> THANK YOU. >> BY THE WAY NICE BEARD. >> IT'S A JOKE, BUT A GOOD ONE, HE APPRECIATES IT. >> (SPEAKING AWAY FROM MIC). >> NEXT ITEM. >> DISCUSSION ITEMS, 7 A. PUBLIC ARTS COMMITTEE MEETINGS NOMINATIONS. >> THIS IS STRAIGHT FORWARD. YOU SHOULD HAVE THEM. THEY ARE ACCORDING TO THE ORDINANCES, CITY ATTORNEY CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. THERE ARE FIVE INDIVIDUALS THAT WOULD MAKE UP THAT COMMITTEE, UM, FOUR, HAVE BEEN ON THERE OR THE DIRECTORS OF THE DEPARTMENT HAVE BEEN CHRISTOPHER IS HERE. AND ALL FIVE OF THEM ARE HERE. >> MOTION APPROVE. >> SECONDED. >> CALLING ROLE. >> MOTION PASSES. >> WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUBLIC HEARINGS YET. IF YOU ARE SPEAKING, PLEASE STAND UP, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND REPEAT AFTER ME. I DO SO MANY ONLILY SWEAR OR AFFIRM, THAT THE INFORMATION I'M GOING TO PRESENT SHALL BE THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. ITEM, 8 A: ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. >> ANYBODY WANTING TO SPEAK, GIVE US YOUR NAME, AND WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY. >> NO ONE HAS CHOSEN TO SPEAK TO 2020 HYPHEN, 01, ITEM, 8 A. AND NOW STAFF, MR. ADAMS, YOU HAVE PRESENTATION? >> I JUST HAVE A FEW BRIEF COMMENTS TO LET YOU KNOW ABOUT THIS ORDINANCE AND AS YOU KNOW, THE CITY OF DORAL HAS SEVERAL TIMES HAVE DECIDED TO PLACE SOME MORATORIUM ON THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES THAT WAS DONE FOR US TO ESSENTIALLY ALLOW THE STATE TO DECIDE WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO AT THE STATE LEVEL, EVER SINCE SEVERAL YEARS AGO. THEY PASSED BY VOTER REFERENDUM THE STATE LAW ALLOWING MEDICAL MARIJUANA. AT THIS POINT, THE STATE HAS ESSENTIALLY COME UP WITH THEIR REGULATIONS AND AT THIS POINT, THE MORATORIUM WILL BE EXPIRING IN APRIL. AND WE DO NOT HAVE A FEBRUARY PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING. AND SO, WE'RE COMING TO YOU AT THIS TIME, IN JANUARY, LOOKING TO HAVE A SECOND READING IN MARCH. AND THEREFORE BEFORE THE CURRENT MORATORIUM EXPIRES. THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING A COMPLETE BANNED ON DISPENSARIES AND THE WAY THAT THE STATE LAW IS WRITTEN RIGHT NOW, YOU -- ESSENTIALLY HAVE TWO CHOICES, YOU EITHER ALLOW THE DISPENSARIES, IN AND IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS, NO IT ALLOWS IT -- FOR YOUR SECOND OPTION, YOU CAN BANNED IT ALL TOGETHER. OUR U RECOMMENDATION TO YOU AS A BANNED ON THIS POINT, AND UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, LET ME KNOW. >> ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. ADAMS? >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> WE WERE DOING SOME RESEARCH ON UM -- COUNSEL WOMAN AND FROM OUR -- TAKING A LOOK AT THAT FROM DAY AND BROUWER COUNTY. WE HAVEN'T COMPLETED THE RESEARCH BUT SO FAR, WE IDENTIFIED 8 LOCATIONS THAT HAVE PLACED THE BANNED. WE'LL HAVE MORE INFORMATION BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING THERE. >> MOTION TO APPROVE AND SECONDED. >> I GOT TWO COMMENTS AND A QUESTION. ED ONE IS FOR YOU, MR. CITY ATTORNEY, OBVIOUSLY, EVEN THOUGH I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS MAY BE TOUCHED UPON IN TALLAHASSEE THIS YEAR, IF THERE'S STATE LEGISLATION, UM, THERE EXISTS THE POSSIBILITY OF WHATEVER WE MAY VOTE ON; IS THAT CORRECT. >> THERE'S STATE LEGISLATION. TO WHATEVER WE PASSED ON. >> SECOND IT WILL BE MY CONCERN TO WHATEVER IT IS WRITTEN NOW. WHAT HAPPENED TO OTHER CITIES, IF YOU CAN PUT THEM ANYWHERE, THAT'S A PROBLEM. BECAUSE YOU TALK ABOUT THE SCHOOLS. AND IT'S NOT TO FAR. AND AND HAVING SAID THAT, CAN YOU CLARIFY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DISPENSARY AND -- THAT WAS GOOD. I LIKE THAT. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY -- MAYBE SOMEBODY IS COMMUNICATING TO US BUT NEVERTHELESS -- THERE'S AN ENTITY THAT WORKS OUT ON THE SHOPPING CENTER ON NINETY 7 AND -- >> DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? >> THAT'S KIND OF A LITTLE BIT OF -- PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN BANNED EVEN IF WE WANTED TO. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE? >> SO THE SIMPLEST WAY TO STATE IT IS THE RESIDENTS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA VOTED FOR A MEDICAL MARIJUANA REFERENDUM. THAT JUST ALLOWS THE OVERALL, UM, LAW AND THEN IT WENT TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO DECIDE HOW TO IMPLEMENT THAT LAW THE WAY THAT THEY HAVE CREATED THEIR STATE REGULATIONS, IS THAT WE CAN NOT REGULATE THE DOCTORS. WHERE YOU GET A MEDICAL MARIJUANA CARD OWE HE YOU HAVE TO GET I CARD, YOU HAVE TO SEE A DOCTOR. AND THE DOCTOR AGREES, IT'S NOT JUST WALKING INTO AN OFFICE. LIKE A PILL CLINIC. WE CANNOT LIMIT WHERE THE DOCTOR'S OFFICES ARE. THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO -- BEHIND A MCDONALDS. >> WITH THAT ENTITIES, BEHIND THE MCDONALDS. THAT'S A UNIQUE WAY TO PLACE IT. >> YEAH. >> RIGHT BEHIND THE MCDONALDS WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE A PLACE FOR PRESCRIPTIONS, IT'S NOT A DISPENSARY. >> TO BE CLEAR. >> AND IT'S ALSO ESSENTIALLY, C B D PRODUCTS THAT YOU SEE AT C B S, THESE ARE NOT CONSIDERED BY STATE LAW MEDICAL MARIJUANA. THEY ARE NOT SUBSTANCES. THIS IS A TOTALLY DIFFERENT SUBSTANCE, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING TO BE CLARIFIED. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OR CONCERNS SOME IF NOT, MADAM CLERK. >> I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE IT ON FIRST MEETING. MADE BY COUNSELMAN, CABRERA AND SECONDED BY COUNSEL WOMAN, CABRAL. >> YES. >> CALLING ROLE: >> NEXT ITEM, WE'RE NOW GOING TO SECOND READING. AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL EFFECTIVE DATE >> I'LL GO A HE'D AND DO IT ON BEHALF OF THE CLERK. HAS ANYBODY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO ANYBODY ABOUT THIS? LET US KNOW IF THIS IMPACTS THE DECISION MAKING. >> I HAD PREVIOUS CONVERSATION WITH THE APPLICANT AND IT WILL NOT HAVE ANY IMPACT ON MY DECISION TODAY AS WELL. >> I HAD A BRIEF CONVERSATION WITH THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT AS WELL AS IN RESIDENTS AND IT WILL NOT HAVE AN IMPLICATION OF MY DECISION. >> YOU ALREADY TALKED TO ME. >> I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THE APPLICANT AND I HAD NO IMPACT ON MY DECISION TODAY. I KNOW THAT THIS WHOLE SIDE OF THE ROOM IS HERE FOR THAT. I'M GOING TO READ INTO THE RECORD THOUGH, MADAM CLERK, THE INDIVIDUALS WHO FILLED OUT THE FORM. IF I MISPRONOUNCE YOUR NAME OR HAVE IT WRONG ON THE FORM, LET ME KNOW. LET ME READ INTO THE RECORD,{READING DOCUMENT}. THE ADDRESSES ARE HERE. AND MR. D A V I L.A. WILL SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU, TEN MINUTES. YEAH, SO, YOU CAN LET US KNOW, AND EVERYBODY HERE. WHAT YOU ARE APPLYING. RESTATE THE NAME AND RECORD FOR THE AUDIENCE. SINCE YOUR FELLOW RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN KIND ENOUGH AND AS CHAIR, WE'RE PERMITTING IT. >> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS, JUAN CARLOS. D A V I L.A. I LIVE IN DORAL FLORIDA. I HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF MY FELLOW RESIDENTS. UM, IT'S BECOME, SOMEWHAT OF A NUISANCE AND IT HAS BECOME A BURDEN AND IT HAS BECOME A NEGATIVE -- IT HAD AN IN THE CASE TIFF IMPACT ON THE PROPERTY VALUE. UM, ALL OF YOU ARE AWARE -- ALL OF YOU HAVE BEEN INFORMED OF WHAT HAS BEEN TRANSPIRING FOR THE PAST FEW YEARS. DEVELOPERS DIDN'T AGREE WITH EACH OTHER. AND THEY DIDN'T REACH AN AGREEMENT, AND RIGHT NOW, WE'RE AT THE POINT, WHERE WE'RE SPLITTING THE P U D. WE UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NECESSARY AND WE UNDERSTAND THE PROTOCOLS, WHAT WE DON'T UNDERSTAND AS RESIDENTS IS WHY THEY KEEP -- FOR UM -- STOPPING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE. >> OKAY. WHOEVER HAS THAT PHONE, CAN YOU PLEASE TURN IT OFF. I KNOW THAT IT'S EXCITING TO HEAR PEOPLE, IT'S NOT -- THIS IS THE DAY THAT WE'RE -- WHERE EVERYBODY'S PHONE IS GOING OFF, CAN YOU PLEASE PUT IT ON SILENT. GO AHEAD. >> SO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE HAS BEEN POSTPONED AND CANCELLED AND MODIFIED. AND SPOKEN ABOUT PROMISED, BUT NOT DELIVERED, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY. I HAVE BEEN IN CONVERSATIONS WITH THE DEVELOPER OF PHASE TWO FROM THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE. HE HAS OVERLY STATED TO ME, AND HE HAS COMMITTED OVER GOOD FAITH, OF THE CLUBHOUSE. I ALSO HAVE A LETTER FROM HIM, IT WAS SENT TO ME, COPYING SOME OF THE RESIDENTS, WHICH STATES AS SUCH, UM, THE PROBLEM THAT WE ARE FACING NOW THOUGH IS THAT YOU HAVE ALL OF THE DEVELOPERS, ALL OF THE FACES THAT ARE PLANNING TO INITIATE CONSTRUCTION. PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE. THE DEVELOPER OF PHASE TWO, HE HAS AGAIN COMMITTED TO BUILDING THE CLUBHOUSE. WHAT WE'RE ASKING TONIGHT THIS EVENING, IS WE'RE HERE TO UNDER SCORE THE SUPPORT. WE CANNOT CONTINUE ON THE SAME PATH THAT WE HAVE BEEN FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS. WE WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS NONSENSE AND QUITE FRANKLY DISRESPECT. DISREGARD. WHICH IS BORDERLINE NEGLECT, IF YOU GO BACK, AND YOU SAY, WE HAVE LAW AND STATUTES, BUT IT SEEMS THAT SOME ENTITIES TRY TO EVADE, TRY TO DEVIATE FOR WHAT'S BEEN ESTABLISHED AND IT ACTUALLY -- WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER IT TO BE THE VIOLATION OF THE RIGHTS, YES, WE WERE PROMISED ONE THING AND YES, SOMETIMES LIFE IS NOT PERFECT. AND SOMETIMES THERE'S DEVIATIONS AND WE DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT HOW COME THESE ENTITIES ARE ABLE TO ESTABLISH THEIR OWNER AM ENTERS. AND ALSO FOR THE RESIDENTS, SO TONIGHT, WE ARE NOT ONLY CONCERNED IN, BUT WE HAVE THE EXPECTATION AND WE WANT TO WORKOUT OF THIS HALL UNDERSTANDING, KNOWING THAT WE HAVE FULL SUPPORT FROM THE CITY OF DORAL BECAUSE THERE MAY BE ONGOING ISSUES. WE UNDERSTAND THAT TOO. BUT RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE TO FIND AN IMMEDIATE PERMANENT SOLUTION TO WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR SO MANY YEARS. THIS IS WHERE I'M STANDING BEFORE YOU REPRESENTING MANY OF THE RESIDENTS. AND WE WANT YOU TO HAVE -- NOT ONLY THE EMPATHY BUT ALSO, THE WILLINGNESS TO SAY, LET'S PUT A STOP ON THAT. THAT'S OUR PETITION TONIGHT AND IT HAS BEEN FOR YEARS AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO BE. SO I RESPECTFULLY AND ASK YOU TO CONSIDER, PUTTING A STOP TO ANY CONSTRUCTION PRIOR TO THE CLUBHOUSE, AND WE CANNOT ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN, THEY WILL NOT ONLY BE UNFAIR TO BE THE NEGATIVISM PACT THAT WE HAD FOR SO MANY YEARS, IT'S AGAIN, WE HAVE EMPTY PROMISES, AND IT'S NOT YOUR FAULT, BUT YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY, YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY, YOU HAVE THE UNDERSTANDING TO POSSIBLY GO -- TO MAKE A POSITIVE CHANGE, CHANGE IT IN THE COURSE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE BEEN FACING AS RESIDENTS, IT'S A SIMPLE PETITION. WE UNDERSTAND BUSINESS PRINCIPALS, WE UNDERSTAND THE LAW, WE UNDERSTAND THE STATUES. BUT WE WANT FAIRNESS. EQUITY -- WE WANT OPTIONS. WE WANT OUR COMMUNITY TO FULLY DEVELOP. YES. AGAIN, NOT A PERFECT WORLD. NO ONE IS PERFECT. BUT WE HAVE A CHANCE NOW, WE DON'T LOOK BACK AND SAY, OH, THIS IS DONE, AND THIS DIDN'T DO THIS. I'M NOT HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE PAST. I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE FUTURE. THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT WE CAN CHANGE. PAST WILL REMAIN THE PAST, AND I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE FUTURE, THE FUTURE OF THE COMMUNITY, THE FUTURE OF THE PROPERTIES. AND THIS IS SIMPLY A RIGHT THAT WE HAVE AS RESIDENTS. AS PROPERTY OWNERS. SO, BEAR IN MIND THAT BESIDES, OURSELVES AND YOU AS THE COUNSEL PERHAPS, NO ONE ELSE HAS IN MIND WHAT RIGHT FEEL I DON'T BELONGS TO US, WHAT IS WRIGHT FEELLY BELONGING TO US AND ACTUALLY, I WANTED TO FEEL THAT WE'RE A TEAM AND PARTNERS, AND LIKE I SAID, I HAVE A LETTER FROM THE DEVELOPER, FOR PHASE TWO. HE HAS SHOWN GOOD FAITH. AND UM -- I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT IT'S GUARANTEED, BUT IF I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS GOING TO TRANSPIRE. IF THIS IS THE ONLY THING THAT WE NEEDED. WE WOULDN'T BE HERE TONIGHT. WE WOULDN'T BE SITTING HERE TODAY. SO I WANT TO REITERATE THAT WE NEED YOUR HELP, WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT. WE NEED YOUR PARTNERSHIP. YOU SITTING IN AUTHORITY HAVE -- YOU ARE IN POWER TO DO THAT. WHAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE APPEALING TO. AND UM, WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE BEEN LISTENING TO OUR CONCERNS, NOT JUST ONCE OR TWICE, NOT EVENTUALLY, BUT YOU HAVE RECEIVED CALLS AND YOU HAVE TAKEN THE TIME. WE APPRECIATE THAT. YOU WANT TO HAVE THAT CONTINUOUS SUPPORT FROM ALL OF YOU, FROM EACH OF YOU SO PLEASE CARRY THAT IN MIND WHEN WE SEE OR HEAR WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED. WHAT'S GOING TO BE DECIDED. NOT SURE IF THERE'S A STATUTE IN THE LAW, NOT SURE IF WE CAN ACTUALLY SAY, HEY, YOU CANNOT START CONSTRUCTION. BUT OUR CONCERNS ARE, WHAT IS IS IT THAT WE CAN DO. UM, AGAIN, I DON'T UM U EMPHASIZE IN THE NEGATIVE. I DON'T EMPHASIZE IN THE PAST, IT'S A POSITIVE, WHAT IS IT THAT WE CAN DO NOW? IT'S YOUR COMMUNITY. IT'S YOUR COMMUNITY. SO OUR COMMUNITY, LET'S DO SOMETHING POSITIVE. LET'S NOT ALLOW A FEW PEOPLE TO CHANGE THAT. IT WILL BE JUST UNFAIR ILLOGICAL, IRRATIONAL AND WE JUST HAVE THE COMMON SENSE TO AT LEAST, SAY, I'M A -- AGAIN, I CARE. >> THANK YOU. OKAY. CAN YOU PLEASE GIVE A COPY OF THAT LETTER TO THE CLERK. BECAUSE, YOU POINTED TO THAT IN YOUR PRESENTATION. I'M GOING TO READ EVERYBODY'S NAME, BUT CARMEN IS GOING TO COME UP. RIGHT? CARMEN, IS THAT A Z? >> IT'S A DOUBLE Z. >> OKAY. >> SOME OF THE FAMILY HERE, AND CARMEN WILL SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> SO MAYOR, AND COUNSEL MEMBERS, MY NAME IS, CARMEN KRISTINA [INAUDIBLE]. I AM HERE ON THE UNITS THAT MY FAMILY BOUGHT IN 2015. THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE THREE MINUTES, MY FAMILY INVESTED A LARGE POTION OF THEIR SAVINGS, TO BE ABLE TO LET THEIR KIDS LIVE IN A COUNTRY WHERE JUSTICE EXISTS AND THE LAW AND AUTHORITIES ARE RESPECTED. WHAT WE RECEIVED LATER, THE ESTIMATED TIME OF CONCLUSION OF THE PROJECT IS FAR FROM WHAT WE WERE OFFERED IN THAT SALE'S [INAUDIBLE] THE PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL THAT WE RECEIVED AT THAT TIME, THAT'S ATTACHED IN THE COPIES OVER THERE. AND UNFORTUNATELY, UM, WE DON'T NEED MUCH EXPLANATION. IT TALKS BY ITSELF. IT SAYS A GROUP HOUSE IN A CLASS OF IT'S OWN. THE PAST SIZE FACILITY WAS BUILT TO LAST A LIFETIME FRIENDSHIP, AND FEED THE NEEDS OF FAMILY AND INDIVIDUALS. NOTHING WAS MENTIONED IN THOSE BROCHURES OF PHASE TWO OR PHASE THREE NOTHING ABOUT FIVE HUNDRED 37 UNITS INSTEAD OF 550 WERE CLARIFIED AT THE SALE'S OFFICE WHEN WHO NOW COINCIDENTALLY IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE MASTER ASSOCIATION BOARD WHICH IS, NANCY PASTOR WAS SELLING US THAT PROJECT AT THAT TIME AS A SALE'S MANAGER. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION TODAY IS SOMETHING ELSE. IT IS THE APPARENTLY -- NON SYSTEMATIC METHODOLOGY THAT FROM MY UNDERSTANDING THE DEVELOPER HAD BYPASSED THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW, IN CONTROL OF THIS ASSOCIATION UNTIL THE DAY THAT THEY WANT. AFTER YEARS LIVING IN DORAL, WE HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH SERIOUS EXAMPLES NOT ENOUGH SAMPLES OF UNITS, NOT ENOUGH CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE IN THE AREA, AND NOT ENOUGH SECURITY PRESENCE IN THE SECURITY. RENTAL TENANTS, SCREENING NOT EFFECTIVE ENOUGH. BRINGING PEOPLE AND PETS TO THE COMMUNITY THAT DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO BEHAVE OR HAVE NOT BEEN INFORMED PROPERLY. PRESENCE OF SHORT TERM LEASE IN A COMMUNITY THAT'S NOT ALLOWED. THE DECREASE OF VALUE OF THE INVESTMENT. LACK OF RESERVES IN THE MASTER ASSOCIATION. IN CONGRUENT AND NOT EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION OF HOMEOWNERS ABOUT MEETINGS, COMMUNICATIONS AND SENSE SIEVE MATTERS OF OUR COMMUNITY. THESE ARE VERY LONG. WHEN FINALLY THE TURN OVER TO HOMEOWNERS WAS ANNOUNCED AT THE END OF LAST YEAR, WE WERE EXPECTING THINGS TO CHANGE, ON DECEMBER 6TH, [INAUDIBLE] MOST OF ALL WERE REA LIED HOW THE MASTER OF ASSOCIATION'S BOARD WERE KEPT UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE SAME PEOPLE. THE EXPLANATION I RECEIVED FROM A MANAGEMENT OFFICER DURING THAT MEETING WAS THAT THE SQUARE FEET THAT THEY HAVE ACCORDING TO THE BYLAWS GIVE THE OWNERS OF THOSE RETAIL SPACES APPROXIMATELY TWO THIRDS OF THE VOTE VERSUS FIVE HUNDRED THIRTY SEVEN RESIDENTIAL UNITS. BASED ON THE BUDGET, WE RECEIVED LAST FRIDAY THOSE RETAIL SPACES ARE GOING TO PAY IN 2012 FOR JUST 25 PERCENT OF THE BUDGET. SO, TWO THIRDS OF THE VOTES 25 PERCENT OF THE EXPENSES. JUST AS A BRIEF EXAMPLE ON HOW THINGS ARE WORKING IN THE ASSOCIATION SOMETHINGS ARE SO IMPORTANT AND AT THE SAME TIME SO REGULATED BY THE CHAPTER 720 THE HOMEOWNERS ACT AS THE NOTICE FOR THE PROJECT APPROVAL MEETING. FOR THE ANTICIPATION ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. HAVE BEEN PERFORMED ACCORDINGLY BY THE MASTER'S ASSOCIATION BOARD. AFTER THREE WEEKS OF ME MAKING PRESSURE ON THE SUBJECT LAST FRIDAY FINALLY SOME OF THE HOMEOWNERS RECEIVED BY E-MAIL THE BUDGET 2020. THAT WAS APPROVED IN DECEMBER 27TH. AND THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE AVAILABLE 14 DAYS BEFORE. ATTACHMENTS ARE ALSO AVAILABLE ABOUT THIS BUDGET. BEHIND A [INAUDIBLE] INCREASING THE FEE OF LESS THAN , 20 DOLLARS PER UNIT. IN THE BUDGET, 2020 THERE ARE SOME LINES THAT NEED TO BE CHECKED DEEP AND CAREFULLY. FOR EXAMPLE, A VALET SERVICE SHOWED UP THAT'S GOING TO COST US, APPROXIMATELY, 2, THOUSAND 50 DOLLARS EACH YEAR. WITHOUT FEEDBACK OF THE HOMEOWNERS TO AT LEAST UNDERSTAND HOW IT'S GOING TO WORK AND HOW THEY CAN BENEFIT FROM THIS SERVICE. THEY SAID THAT THIS SERVICE IS FROM ALL OF THE RESIDENTS, AND YOU ASK 90 PERCENT OF THE RESIDENTS AND THEY THINK THAT THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR IT. IT IS INTERESTING TO REALIZE HOW THOSE FOUR RETAIL SPACES WITH THE MAJORITY TO VOTE ARE JUST GOING TO PAY 15 PERCENT OF THAT VALET PARKING, IN THAT BUDGET ATTACHED, YOU CAN MAKE NUMBERS, AND REALIZE THAT THAT IS GOING TO BE PAID 85 PERCENT BY THE RETAIL SPACES. [INAUDIBLE]. SO FROM MY UNDERSTANDING WHEN FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THEY ARE THE MAIN BENEFICIARIES, BECAUSE THIS IS THOUGHT FOR PEOPLE COMING FROM THE RESTAURANTS, ETCETERA ETCETERA THEY DON'T WANT TO PARK OR DRIVE AROUND. AS I SAID, THIS IS NOT ADVERTISING. IT WAS NEVER TALKED BEFORE. AND COINCIDENTALLY IT MATCHED THE DEVELOPER TO ACCESS ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING SPACES THAT IN MY PICTURE LOOKED LIKE VALET PARKING, I HAVE PICTURES OF THAT, AND THE SPACES ARE IDENTIFIED AS VALET PARKING AND I REMEMBER THAT YOU WERE TALKING OR THE LAWYER OF THE DEVELOPER WAS TALKING ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL GUESTS RESIDENTIAL GUEST PARKING SO MY QUESTION IS, ARE THEY FOR RESIDENTIAL GUESTS? ARE THEY FOR THE VALET AND IN ANY CASE THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS, IS THAT IT'S ON THE THIRD FLOOR. THERE'S A DOOR CLOSING THAT. AS PER TODAY, AND BEHIND RESTRICTIONS AND [INAUDIBLE] THEY HAVE NOT GRANTED ME ACCESS TO THE OFFICIAL RECORDS, MEETING REPORTS, FINANCIALS, CONTRACTS, AND BUDGETS, AND INFORMATION ABOUT THE RECENT ELECTION IS ALL INFORMATION THAT ACCORDING TO THEM, IS AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE WHEN FINALLY, WE START LOOKING DEEP ON THIS AND PEOPLE START TO ASK FOR THE PASSWORDS, WE ARE REALIZING THAT IN THAT WEBSITE THE INFORMATION WAS NOT UPDATED, ANYTHING WAS THERE. IN THE LAST FEW DAYS, PROBABLY DUE TO MY E-MAILS AND PRESSURE, THEY ARE NOW STARTING TO UPDATE ALL OF THE INFORMATION -- SOME OF THE INFORMATION. THERE'S AN ATTACHMENT LOOKING FOR THE SCREENS, LAST SUNDAY AND TODAY SO -- I WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE MY PARTICIPATION, UM, RECOMMENDING THAT THIS CITY NOT APPROVE THIS MOTION OR ANY OTHER RELATED PERMIT IN DORAL. UNTIL THE DEVELOPER PROVES THAT IT'S CAPABLE TO BUILD AND MANAGE WITH FIVE HUNDRED 37 UNITS AS WE ARE NOW THE CLUBHOUSE. SOMEBODY'S TALKING AND UNFORTUNATELY IT'S NOT INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED DIRECTLY, BUT THIS CLUBHOUSE IS GOING TO BE MAGNIFICENT. IT'S FOR -- [INAUDIBLE], IF RIGHT NOW IF WE ARE RECEIVING BASIC CLEANING OF THE COMMON AREAS, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THAT FEE WHEN A CLUBHOUSE FOR ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED UNITS IS APPROXIMATELY -- TO BE PAID BY US. SO THAT'S WHY I RECOMMEND REALLY TO REDIMENSION THIS PROBLEM AND AT THE END, AT THE END, ASK RECEIVING WHAT WAS OFFERED IN PHASE ONE THAT WAS A CLUBHOUSE. MAYOR, COUNSEL MEMBERS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE FIRST OF ALL AND SECONDLY TO GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THIS SECTION TODAY, WE APPRECIATE WHATEVER YOU CAN DO TO PROVE THAT THE JUSTICE DOES EXIT. >> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME? COME ON UP, AND STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, AND GIVE US YOUR OPINION IN A SHORT SUCCINCT AND CONCISE MANNER. >> HELLO, MY NAME IS, EDUARDO A P O N T E, [INAUDIBLE] BUILDING THREE. AS I HAVE BEEN UNDERSTANDING THE ECONOMY IN THIS COUNTRY, EVERY PERSON THAT GOES OUTSIDE THAT SPENDS MONEY, THAT STIMULATES THE ECONOMY. AND ALL OF THE PEOPLE FROM DORAL ARE STRUGGLING BECAUSE THEY ARE STUCK. IF EVERY PERSON THAT GOES TO -- DORAL AND SAYS I WANT TO RENT WHAT DO YOU HAVE? AND WE DON'T HAVE UM -- WE DON'T HAVE THE UM -- WE DON'T HAVE THE MAINTENANCE AND THE HOUSE, BUT IF YOU GO TO ANY OTHER PLACE IN DORAL, ANY OTHER COMMUNITY THEY HAVE UM -- THEY HAVE A POOL, A TENNIS COURT AND THEY HAVE -- A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE DON'T HAVE AND WE'RE PAYING FOR IT. SO WE CAN'T, UM, MAINTAIN THE PRICE THAT'S WE'RE PAYING IF WE DON'T HAVE -- BECAUSE LIKE MANY PEOPLE INVEST ON THE BUILDING TO RENT THE PROPERTY BUT NOBODY WANTS TO RENT A PROPERTY THAT THE PRICE IS TOO HIGH AND THEY DON'T HAVE ANY BENEFITS. AND THAT IS A [INAUDIBLE]. THANK YOU. >> ANYBODY ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME. COME ON UP, AND GIVE US YOUR OPINION. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC COULDN'T PORTION, WE'RE GOING TO START WITH THE STAFF AND THEN WE GO TO THE APPLICANT. AND THEN WE GO TO QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, QUERIES AND CONCERNS. >> WE HAVE A FEW BRIEF COMMENTS. UM, I'LL KEEP IT BRIEF. THIS IS AN ITEM THAT HAS FIRST CAME TO YOU BACK IN THE -- LATER PARTS OF LAST YEAR. UM, IT WAS DEFERRED SEVERAL TIMES FOR THE DEVELOPERS AND THE DIFFERENT ENTITIES TO GET TOGETHER AND MAKE A DECISION MOVING FORWARD. UM, AT THIS TIME, THEY HAVE MADE A DECISION AND BROUGHT BEFORE YOU -- >> EXCUSE ME ONE SECOND. THE VICE MAYOR STEPPED OUT, I'M NOT SURE IF SHE'S ALLOWED TO VOTE OR PART OF THE ENTIRE DISCUSSION? >> SHE CAN VOTE. >> SHE'S JUST GOING TO THE RESTROOM. >> WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE IS HERE FOR THE ENTIRE DISCUSSION. >> SO WE'RE BRINGING BEFORE YOU THIS AGREEMENT IN WHICH THEY COME TOGETHER ON. I BELIEVE THAT AT THIS TIME THERE'S ONE ITEM THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY WOULD LIKE TO MODIFY SLIGHTLY IN HERE UM -- AND WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE. LET ME GO BACK -- DO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION ON THIS AT ALL? >> WHERE THE ADMINISTRATION IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, AND AS I SAID, I THINK THAT THERE'S ONE ITEM THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY WOULD LIKE TO SLIGHTLY MODIFY. >> NOW WE'RE COMING BACK TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. AND PLEASE BE CLEAR ON WHO YOU REPRESENT IN THIS PROCESS. >> GOOD EVENING MAYOR, AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNSEL. ON 7TH AVENUE. THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTIES. THE ENTITY THAT DEVELOPED -- AND AS YOU MIGHT HAVE HEARD FROM ME AND SOME PARTNERS THAT MADE UP THE ENTITY WERE INVOLVED IN LITIGATION FOR SOME TIME. UM, THEY, UM, THEY SETTLED THOSE DIFFERENCES AND IT'S A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHICH CALLS FOR THE UM -- PARTNERS TO REVIVE THE BALANCE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, THERE'S A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT PROVIDES FOR CERTAIN DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS AND RIGHTS FOR EACH. AND THAT WILL SHAPE THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BALANCE OF MID TOWN DORAL, AND ACTUALLY, I WANT TO GO TO THE POWER POINT BECAUSE I KNOW THAT EVERYONE'S VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROBLEM, AND WE WANT TO REFRESH A COUPLE OF POINTS, AND WE WANT TO TELL YOU WHAT IT REALLY IS ABOUT. AND YOU HEARD A LOT OF COMPLAINTS THAT ARE VERY TYPICAL WITH THE WORK. AND IN CONDO AND ASSOCIATIONS, BUT THE APPLICATION BEFORE YOU, IT'S A VERY NARROW REQUEST AND I WANT TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHAT STATUS QUO IS TODAY AND WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO. 30 ACRES OF LAND THAT USED TO BE PART OF THE OLD GROUND BAY D AND D THAT BECAME A GROUND DAY P U D. AND THEN IT BECAME DOUBLE -- ON 7TH AVENUE. FROM NINETY STREET. FROM THE 137 UNITS, AS WELL AS COMMERCIAL SPACE, AND THE UM -- THIS IS THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT FORMATION AND THIS IS WHAT IT WAS APPROVED IN THE P U D. BACK IN 2014. 2000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL USE. AND [INAUDIBLE], THE CLUBHOUSE WAS TO BE BUILT IN THE LAST PHASE OF THE PROJECT ON SOUTH SIDE OF 90 STREET, TO BE BUILT WITHIN THE NEXT PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT, PHASE TWO IN BUILDING FIVE, SO IT HAS MOVED OUT FROM BUILDING 12 TO 5 SO IT'S IN FACT CLOSER TO THE PHASE ONE -- OF THE PROJECTS. SO THERE'S A PICTURE OF PHASE ONE, AND IT GIVES YOU THE SENSE OF THE FOUR BUILDINGS AND THE PARKING DECKS HAVING BEEN BUILT ON THE COMMERCIAL USES, THIS IS HOW WE REVISE THE PROJECT MOVING FORWARD, AND EACH OF THE PARTNERS WILL CONTROL CERTAIN PHASES OF THE OVERALL PROJECT. >> CAN I INTERRUPT YOU FOR A SECOND? >> YES. I NEED CLARIFICATION AT POINT. THEY WERE BUILT AT 550 UNITS? >> YES, I'M GOING THERE. >> AND THE LAST PHASE WAS BUILT, BUT YOU KNOW -- 537 AND 505 IS A LOT MORE THAN 550. >> WHAT I INDICATED IS THAT IN THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL, THE CLUBHOUSE IS GOING TO BE LOCATION LOCATED -- WHAT WE CALL FOR PHASE TWO, BUILDING FIVE, WHICH IS THE LIGHT BLUE SO THE ORANGE ACROSS TO PHASE ONE. AND WHAT THE APPLICATION HAS DONE TO, IT DOES NOT SEEM TO INCREASE IN ANY WAY THE DENSITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT NOR DOES IT CHANGE ANY OBLIGATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ACQUIRED BY THE DEVELOPERS TODAY, AND WE TALKED A GREAT LENGTH LAST TIME ABOUT PARKING AND WE WENT BACK AND FORTH ON THAT AS PERMITTED UNDER THE CODE, THE P U D REGULATIONS PROVIDE THAT EACH P U D CAN PROVIDE ITS OWN CALCULATIONS, AND DOES NOT NEED TO FOLLOW THE OFF STREET PARKING. AND WHAT WE HAVE AGREED TO DO, AND I'LL GO TO THAT LANGUAGE SHORTLY IS THAT OUR FUTURE PHASES OF THE PROJECT WILL COMPLY WITH ARTICLE FOUR. CHAPTER, 77 OF YOUR CODE, SO PARKING WILL BE PROVIDED FROM THE CODE, AND NON EXISTENCE TIME OF THE P U D. THE SECOND PART OF THE GREAT CONVERSATION AND THE LAST REASON WE ASKED FOR REFERRAL A COUPLE OF TIMES IS TO COME BACK TO YOU WITH THE LANGUAGE TO THE CLUBHOUSE. LET ME TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE STATUS QUO ON WHAT WE INTEND TO DO. AND THE COMMENT ABOUT 550. SO THE DOCUMENT THAT CONTROLS THE TIMING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE IS CALLED THE DECLARATION OF THE CLUB COVENANTS. IT'S A DOCUMENT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PART OF THE CLOSING DOCUMENTS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN REVIEWED. WITHIN PHASE ONE. FROM THE COVENANT. AND I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO READ IT. THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE WOULD BE RULED OR CONTROLLED BY THE NEXT -- CLUB OWNER COMMITS TO APPLY FOR THE NECESSARY PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT THE PERMITS, WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME, WITHIN 550 UNITS, RECEIVED A SERF OCCUPANCY AND TITLE TO SUCH UNITS HAVE BEEN TRANSFERRED TO UNITS, AND IN A COMMERCIAL AND REASONABLE BASES TIMETABLE. SO THE OBLIGATION IS FIGURING IN CLOSINGS, AND THERE'S NO END POINT, AND IT'S CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDING TO THE REASONABLE COMMERCIAL TIMEFRAME, AND IT ALSO DOES NOT HAVE ANY TYPE OF ZONE -- WE GIVE THE CITY OF DORAL, ANY ENFORCEMENT RIGHTS, AND IT'S ONLY ENFORCEABLE IN THE COURT OF LAW, AND IT IS REALLY OPEN ENDED IN IT'S TIMETABLE AND WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO NEXT TO THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD AND OTHERS IS TO GIVE YOU AN EXACT TIMEFRAME AND THE START OF COMPLETION AND WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO, AND SAYING THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE, WILL COMMENCE WITHIN 60 DAYS THE EARLIER OF THE 60 DAYS, OF THE BUILDING PERMIT OR, JUNE 30TH, 2022. THE EARLIER OF SO THAT THE LATEST, THIS CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE WILL BEGIN, JUNE 30TH OF 2022. THE REASON THAT IT TAKES THAT LONG TO GET THERE. TO GET TO THE POINT OF CONSTRUCTION IS THAT THE OWNER OF PHASE TWO, WILL SUBMIT FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE CITY, AND THAT WILL COME BACK TO THE COUNSEL. ONCE THAT APPROVAL PROCESS ENDS, HE WILL HAVE TO SECURE A BUILDING PERMIT TO START CONSTRUCTION. UNLIKE ALL COMMUNITIES LIKE DORAL AISLES AND PARKS, ONE COMPONENT OF THE VERTICAL INTEGRATED BUILDING IS NOT A CLUBHOUSE -- THAT ANYBODY CAN GO AND BUILD THAT IT WAS IN THE DORAL PARK DORAL. THIS IS -- THIS WILL BE A COMPONENT WITHIN A BUILDING. THE LAND WHERE THAT CLUBHOUSE IS GOING TO BE BUILD WILL BE CONTROLLED BY THE PARTNERS AND THAT'S WHY [INAUDIBLE], HAS TAKEN THE RESPONSIBILITY TO BUILD THE CLUBHOUSE. AND THAT'S WHY THE DOCUMENT SAYS THAT THE OWNER OF PHASE TWO WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE. AND THE ONLY INSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE, WILL BE COMPLETED WITHIN 24 MONTHS OF IT STARTING. AGAIN, THIS IS A MULTI STORY BUILDING. 24 MONTHS. IT'S A REASONABLE TIME TO ALLOW FOR -- WHETHER ISSUES AND THE LIKE FOR 24 MONTHS TO BUILD AN ENTIRE 8 STORY BUILDING IS ACTUALLY PRETTY FAST, SO THE STATUS QUO TODAY DOES NOT HAVE ANY TEETH, AND DOES NOT PROVIDE THE CITY ANY ENFORCEMENT. AND IT'S A PRETTY ENDED OBLIGATION. POINT OF CLARIFICATION, IF I MAY? >> SURE. >> SO WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU CORRECTLY THAT THE CLUBHOUSE IS PART OF THIS BUILDING THAT ONCE THEY BUILD A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THAT BUILDING THE CLUBHOUSE IS INCLUDED IN THERE. >> YES. >> SO WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME IS THAT THE CLUBHOUSE, THE BEGINNING OF THE CONSTRUCTION. WILL BEGIN ON ANY DEVELOPMENT ON SITE AND PHASE TWO. >> YES, SIR. >> IF THAT'S THE CASE, WHY DOES THE LANGUAGE IN THE CLUBHOUSE SAY THAT IT BEGINS IN LATER THAN 60 DAYS, BUILDING PERMIT. AS I READ IT, I REALIZE THAT I SHOULD SAY ANY BUILDING WITHIN PHASE TWO. >> OKAY. >> SO WHAT WE'RE BRINGING TO THE COUNSEL TODAY IS THE ABILITY FOR THE PARTNERS TO MOVE FORWARD. EVERYONE WOULD HAVE ASSUMED THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND IT TURNED OUT EVERYTHING THE WAY THAT IT WAS PLANNED AND WE WOULD NOT BE HERE BEFORE YOU. THE MARKET INTERVENED. AND WHAT WE HAVE BROUGHT TO YOU IS THE ABILITY FOR THE PARTNERS TO WORK TOGETHER, BUT MOVE FORWARD INDEPENDENTLY AND WE'RE BRINGING TO YOU A COMMITMENT IN BLACK AND WHITE, WHICH WILL BE ENFORCEABLE BY THE CITY OF DORAL. AND WE HAVE PROFITED THAT MODIFICATION INTO THE RECORD AND IT SHOULD BE THE VERSION BEFORE YOU, THAT INCLUDES THE CHANGE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY REQUESTS THIS MORNING WHICH GIVES THE CITY MANAGER THE ABSOLUTE DISCRETION TO GRANT ANY DISCRETION TO THE TIMEFRAME OR NOT. WE URGE YOU TO APPROVE THIS APPLICATION, AND FULFILLED ONCE AND FOR ALL. >> ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT TO ADD? >> I SEE MR. FARRELL REPRESENTS ONE OF THE PARTIES? FOR YOU MR. CITY ATTORNEY. >> (SPEAKING AWAY FROM MIC). >> QUESTION ON THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE THAT I WAS ASKING? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE -- I DIDN'T -- THE WAY THAT IT WAS DRAFTED AND MY INTERPRETATION WAS THAT IT WOULD BE A PROCESS OF THE DISCRETION, IF THE ADMINISTRATION DENIES IT, IT CAN BE APPEALED TO THE COUNSEL. WHAT I WANT TO MAKE IS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION THAT'S NOT APPEALABLE THAT WE CAN HOLD FAST TO THAT DEADLINE AND THERE'S NO EXTENSION AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY I JUST WANTED TO MAKE IT ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU, BUT I'LL COME BACK AND ASK YOU ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT LATER. >> OKAY. DISCUSSION, QUESTIONS -- WE'RE GOING TO START WITH COUNSELMAN CABRERA. >> BEFORE I EVEN ASK YOU A QUESTION, I JUST WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE COMMUNITY HERE. I HAVE BEEN HERE FOR A LONG TIME, I HEARD A LOT OF STUFF, AND UM, IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS -- A LOT OF THE STUFF THAT WE APPROVED IN THE BEGINNING, IT DIDN'T GET BUILT FOR YEARS, AND MUCH YEARS LATER. SO A LOT OF THE CONSTRUCTIONS AND THE PROBLEMS, FOR ALL OF THAT DEVELOPMENT IS SERVICING IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS IN THE OTHER TRADITIONAL YEARS, I WILL HAVE IN ONE, BUT I HAVE BEEN DISCOVERING SOME OF THE GREAT -- UNFORTUNATELY, WHEN YOU'RE BUYING IN MY CASE, BECAUSE I BOUGHT SECONDHAND. BUT THERE'S A LOT OF FINE PRINT. AND -- I'M ADDRESSING -- IT'S UNFORTUNATELY, A LOT OF THE POWERS ARE DIVIDED AND WE GET ONE LITTLE PIECE OF IT AT THE END. THERE'S A PIECE THAT'S BEING REGULATED. AND NO ONE SEEMS TO GO AND COMPLAIN ABOUT IT TODAY. I'M ASKING YOU TO DO THAT. AND THE DEPARTMENT OF REGULATIONS. SALE'S PEOPLE WHEN THEY ARE WILLING TO SELL, THEY WILL SAY ANYTHING, WE HAVE NO JURISDICTION ON THAT. BUT WE REAP THE CONSEQUENCES OF IT. THEY SAY THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BUILD THE LANDSCAPING OF IT. AND THAT'S NOT TRUE. AS A CITY, WE SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES, WE VOICE YOUR OPINION OF WHAT WE HAVE POWER OVER IT. I'M ASKING YOU ALL TO GO TO THE STATE. THERE'S ANOTHER PROBLEM OF THAT. WE'RE FIGHTING ON ONE PART OF IT. AND THERE'S ANOTHER DIMENSION, WHICH IS DOCUMENTS, I'M ASKING A QUESTION ABOUT THAT. BECAUSE WHERE THE RETAIL IS PAYING A SMALLER PERSONAL OF THE ENTIRE PARKING GARAGE. WE'RE PAYING A BIG SHARE OF IT. SO YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT THE CLUBHOUSE, THIS IS 15 HUNDRED PEOPLE, THERE'S A CONDO -- HOW DOES IT ADDRESS THE PAYMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE OF THAT CLUBHOUSE, WHILE EVERYTHING IS BEING BUILT? BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING UNITS TO TAKE THE BURDEN OF IT. TO TO MY KNOWLEDGE, JUST SO I KNOW FOR THE RECORD, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE COST OF MAINTENANCE FOR THAT? HOW IS THE -- IS THERE A CURRENT EXISTING DOC AND HOW IS THAT MANAGED. IF THE EXISTING CONDO, WE CANNOT CHANGE THAT HERE. HOW DOES IT ADDRESS THAT PART? >> SO THE CLUB COVENANT. >> IT HAS A PROVISION THAT DEALS WITH THE MEMBERSHIP INTO THE CLUBHOUSE, AND AS A UNIT OWNER, YOU PAY A MONTHLY FEE THAT DOESN'T GO UP AND DOWN, WITH THE COST OF MAINTAINING THE CLUBHOUSE. IT'S A SET FEE. ONE HUNDRED BUCKS A MONTH. AND THAT GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO USE THE CLUBHOUSE FACILITIES. >> I USED TO -- THERE USED TO BE A CLUBHOUSE, AND THOSE FEES, WERE BY THE ASSOCIATION AND BY THE BOARD ASSOCIATION. WHICH WAS TOTALLY CONFUSING, WHEN WE FIRST STARTED BECAUSE AT ONE TIME, EVEN A SMALL GROUP TOOK OVER IT. THE MAYOR REMEMBERS THAT, AND DORAL PARK HAD A SAY IN IT. BUT THEY HAD EXPENSES AND THEY DEVIED THAT UP. THE EXTRA THOUSAND BUILDINGS. IS THE DEVELOPER ADDING IT IN. ALL OF THE OWNERS FROM ALL OF THE DIFFERENT PARCELS ENDING THE PORTION OF IT. SO THE CLUBHOUSE IS NOT OWNED BY THE ASSOCIATION OR THE DEVELOPER OF PHASE TWO. SO ANY SHORT FALL WILL BE BORN BY THE DEVELOPER AND THE OBLIGATION IS TO JOIN THE CLUBHOUSE AND ALL 15 HUNDRED UNITS PLUS -- >> IT'S NOT EVEN AN ASSOCIATION. IT'S A PRIVATELY OWNED CLUBHOUSE. >> THEY ARE GOING TO BE OBLIGATED TO PAY SOMETHING BUT THE -- BUT THE -- DOES THE DOC ADDRESS A SPECIFIC AMOUNT AND WHAT THE MASSIVE INCREASES WILL BE. OR DOES IT SAY, WE'RE GOING TO CHARGE ONE HUNDRED TO BEGIN WITH. BUT IS THERE AN ASSOCIATION. OR HOW MUCH THEY WANT TO CHARGE BUT AGAIN THEY ARE GOING TO ASK THE 537 AND IF THE SECOND PHASE GOING TO BE BUILT? AND WHATEVER IS NOT BUILT YET, IS BEING EVERY PARTIAL OWNER. >> THE CLUB HAD TO BUILT FOR 537 MEMBERS OF THE CLUBHOUSE. THE ONES NOT BUILT WILL NOT BE ASSESSED WITH THE CLUBHOUSE. THE OTHER UNITS, UNDER THE CLUB COVENANT. BUT THE ADDITIONAL COST OF MAINTENANCE WILL NOT BE PASSED TO THE UNIT OWNERS, FOUND IN 37 ALL UNTIL THE OTHER FAMILIES COME ONLINE. >> YOU SEE THE ASSOCIATION'S DOCUMENT SAY -- >> COUNSEL WOMAN, MARIAGA. >> YES, ONE THING THAT IS NEAR AND DEAR TO THE MAYOR, AND A LOT OF US UP HERE, WHICH IS THE HOA'S, AND THE BOARD'S, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR STRICTER RULES TO HAVE PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE FOR PAPERWORK. BECAUSE YOU'RE PAYING INTO THAT BUDGET, SO IT'S VERY VERY IMPORTANT. SO MAKE SURE THAT YOU KNOW WHAT THE BUDGET IS. AND KNOW WHAT THE BUDGET IS GOING TO BE. AND MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S ENOUGH FOR ANYTHING THAT'S COMING AWAY. AND COUNSELMAN CABRERA SAID -- WHERE YOU GUYS CAN GO AND MAKE COMPLAINTS UM, THAT CAN HELP YOU BECAUSE THERE'S A LAW WHERE THEY NEED TO PROVIDE THE DOCUMENTATION. THEY CANNOT WITHHOLD THAT FROM YOU AND THEY NEED TO PROVIDE IT WITHIN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME, SO YOU DO HAVE CERTAIN LAWS AND BACK UP THAT YOU GUYS HAVE ON YOUR SIDE, UM, WE CERTAINLY KEEP PUSHING FOR MORE OF IT IN LAWS THAT NEED TO BE CHANGED UP IN TALLAHASSEE. BUT YOU DO HAVE SOME BACK UP, SO DON'T FEEL THAT YOU'RE OUT THERE SWIMMING ON YOUR OWN, THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT WE CAN DO. UNFORTUNATELY, WE DON'T HAVE THAT ABILITY TO ENFORCE BUT THERE'S AGENCIES THAT CAN DO IT FOR YOU, SO DOCUMENTATION IS ONE OF THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED. AND SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO THAT. AND THE OTHER THING IS PARTICIPATION A LOT OF TIMES, YOU GUYS ARE WONDERFUL. MOST PEOPLE DON'T PARTICIPATE. SO YOU MENTIONED THE VALET -- MOST PEOPLE DON'T KNOW, BECAUSE THEY DON'T EVEN READ ANYTHING THAT COMES TO THEM, AND THEY DON'T CARE TO KNOW, AT THE TIME THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM. SO MAKE SURE THAT YOU GET PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS TO GET MORE INVOLVED WITHIN THOSE BOARDS. AND THAT MEANS THAT WE'RE GOING TO SAVE UP, I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE DONE A GOOD DEAL IN TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CLUBHOUSE IS BUILT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. I MAY HAVE MISSED THIS COMMENT, BUT ON A LEGAL ASPECT YOU MENTIONED OR IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THERE'S THE 550 UNITS. ONE OF THE THINGS FIRST OF ALL TO BEGIN, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY TO STOP ANY DEVELOPMENT ON ANY OTHER PHASE PRIOR TO THE CLUBHOUSE BEING BUILT? >> YES, UNDER THE CLUB DOCUMENT. BUT NOT UNDER THE METHOD AGREEMENT THAT WE'RE SUGGESTING, BUT IN THE CLUB COVENANT IS ESSENTIALLY A LAWSUIT. >> SAY THAT AGAIN. THE CLUB COVENANT REMAINS A RECORD, AND IT HAS THE TRIGGER. SO, I MEAN, THAT ACTION TONIGHT WILL NOT AFFECT THE RIGHTS OF THE RESIDENTS UNDER THAT CLUBHOUSE. >> I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR FOR YOU GUYS. THE TRIGGER IS 550 UNITS, IT DOES NOT SAY 550 UNITS BY THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT THAT IS PHASE ONE OR TWO. THAT MEANS THAT IF ANY OTHER PHASE DECIDES TO BUILD AND THEY BUILD THE 13 EXTRA UNITS, IT TRIGGERS AUTOMATICALLY THE NECESSITY TO BUILD THE CLUBHOUSE, DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? >> SURE. >> TO BE CLEAR -- >> LEGALLY ON THAT COVENANT. >> BUT WHAT IT DOES SAY IS THAT FOLLOWING THE CLOSING, A DEVELOPER WILL APPLY FOR A PERMIT TO BUILD THE CLUBHOUSE, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE A DEADLINE. BUT THE ACTION, IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS IN THAT CLUB COVENANT. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO TELL YOU GUYS. THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS THAT WE CAN DO AND CERTAIN THINGS THAT WE CAN'T DO. DO WE HAVE ANY ABILITY TO STOP IN THE PERMITS, AND THE BUILDING PERMITS OF ANY OTHER PHASE BEFORE THE CLUBHOUSE? >> NO. WE DO NOT. >> AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THAT. SO PHASE TWO. THE PHASE TWO CONTROLS THE CLUBHOUSE, THE 47 THOUSAND SQUARE FEET OF THE CLUBHOUSE. THE CONTROL OF THE RIGHTS, SO THE REASON THAT THE PHASE TWO OWNER HAS BEEN TAKING THAT RESPONSIBILITY IS THAT HE CONTROLS THE LAND, AND THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, AND ON THEIR -- ON THE PARTNERS, THAT RESPONSIBILITY WAS ASSIGNED TO PHASE TWO, DEVELOPER AND GOING BACK TO THE AISLES AND THE DORAL PARK EXAMPLES, IT'S NOT LIKE THERE'S A LAND THERE, AND YOU CAN GO AND BUILD THE CLUBHOUSE. IT'S INTEGRATED WITHIN A VERTICAL STRUCTURE. >> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE 136 SPACES WE DISCUSSED LAST TIME. >> IT'S BEEN BROUGHT TO SOME OF OUR ATTENTION THAT THESE SPACES ARE DESIGNATED FOR VALET PARKING. >> IT HAS A TABLE. AND LET'S SEE IF I CAN ASSIGN THE COMMERCIAL PHASE THE RESIDENTIAL PHASE. >> FOR VALET, THAT'S, 1 HUNDRED AND SOME SPACES, THAT'S ACTUALLY -- FOR THE CITY STAFF, AND THAT'S SUPPOSED TO CONTROL, THE UM -- MANAGEMENT OF THE PARKING SPACES AND THE ASSIGNMENT PARKING SPACES AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT GOES BY THE ASSOCIATION -- IN RECENT WEEKS, BUT THERE'S A SET OF PLANS THAT WOULD DEVELOP TO ALLOCATE THOSE SPACES, AND WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION WITHIN OUR DEPARTMENT. HAS THE CITY ROVED AND SEEN -- >> NO -- >> THE APPLICANT HAS APPLIED FOR A VALET PARKING PERMIT, AND PART OF THE VALET PARKING PERMIT INCLUDES A SET OF PLANS THAT SHOWS WHERE THE VALET PARKING SPACES WILL BE. AND THEY ARE DISTRIBUTED THROUGHOUT EACH OF THE FLOORS. THEY ARE NOT IN ONE SPOT, SO THEY ARE DISTRIBUTED THROUGHOUT THE FLOORS. >> SO THEY HAVE GONE THERE TO CONFIRM THAT. BECAUSE WE'RE GETTING A DIFFERENT FEEDBACK FROM THE PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING THERE. BUT THEY HAVE NOT BEEN APPROVED FOR THE VALET PARKING. THEY HAVE APPLIED FOR THE VALET PARKING AGREEMENT. AND WE HAVE THAT DOCUMENT WHICH PART -- >> SO THERE SHOULD BE THE GUEST PARKING AND THE VALET. IT SHOULD NOT ENCOMPASS THE GUEST PARKING THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS FOR THEM. >> THE PLANS THAT I REVIEWED HAD BEEN ALLOCATION FOR GUEST PARKING SPACES AS WELL AS VALET SPACES. >> HOW MANY, DO WE KNOW? >> BECAUSE RIGHT HERE, I'M SEE, IS 36 ON THIS DOCUMENT. >> THAT'S ACTUALLY FOR PHASE ONE, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S A MINIMALCATION. SO WE HAVE ADDED THAT TO THIS DOCUMENT. IN THE VALET PARKING. IT'S BEEN REVIEWED BY STAFF, AND THEY CAN -- HE WAS TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S EXISTING RIGHT NOW, WHAT WE TALKED BEFORE, SAYING, THAT THERE'S NO CHANGES. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. WAITING FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE PARKING PLAN TO IMPLEMENT -- THAT'S IMPLEMENTING IT IMMEDIATELY. WHEN WE CAME THE LAST TIME TO THE MEETING. NOT -- NOT FOR WHAT'S COMING, FOR THE NEXT PHASES BUT WHAT'S EXISTING RIGHT NOW. >> WE WILL NOT HAVE THE PROBLEM WITH THE SUBSEQUENT PHASES. >> NO NO, WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT CHANGES FROM A P U D. TO WHAT THE CITY CODE HAS. BUT WE REQUESTED THAT. OR WHAT I TALKED ABOUT WITH YOU, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT SINCE THE LAST MEETING THAT WE HAD, THEY STILL HAVEN'T BEEN SEEING THE CHANGES OF THE ONES THAT WERE TALKED, THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE CHANGED TO, 136 PARKING SPACES, AND THE CHANGES WERE IMPLEMENTED. THAT -- >> THE RESIDENTS ARE SAYING THAT THAT'S NOT THE CASE. >> WE'RE GOING TO FINISH WITH THE VICE MAYOR, AND GO TO COUNSELMAN CABRAL. BUT HAVE THE CHANGES THAT YOU REPRESENTING ALL OF THE PARTIES INDICATED THAT -- MY UNDERSTANDING MR. MAYOR, IS THAT THOSE CHANGES ARE IMPLEMENTED. YOU ARE LEARNING FROM MY RESIDENTS, AND THE CHANGES WERE IMPLEMENTED. BUT WHEN THIS PLAN WAS DEVELOPED. THOSE CHANGES WERE AFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY. >> IF THE CHAIR ALLOWS IT, I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HEARING WHAT YOU WILL SAY ABOUT THE PARKING, AND YOU SEEM TO HAVE AN IDEA ABOUT WHAT SHOULD BE DONE, CLEARLY SOMETHING IS NOT BEING TRANSMITTED CORRECTLY. SO ON TO THE CHAIR TO ALLOW. >> IT'S NOT A PROBLEM. ONE OF YOU, ONE OF YOU, COME ON UP, IF THAT'S THE CASE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO REPEAT IT. YOU WANT TO DO IT? COME ON UP. >> WHAT I SEE THE CONFUSION HERE AND OUR CONCERN IS ABOUT THE GUESTS RESIDENTIAL GUEST PARKING. ONE OF THE BIG PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE OWE HE HOW TO MAKE A LITTLE BIRTHDAY OR WHATEVER, BECAUSE THERE'S NO PARKING FOR OUR GUESTS AS RESIDENTS. THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT 130 SOMETHING RESIDENTIAL GUEST PARKING, WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IN THE LAST WEEKS I THINK WHERE THEY ARE MARKED AT VALET PARKING, I HAVE THE PICTURES HERE IN THE THIRD FLOOR, AND I HAVE CONCERNS, ABOUT HOW OLD THIS DYNAMIC WILL BE. BECAUSE THE THIRD FLOOR IS JUST FOR RESIDENTS AND THERE'S A GATE BETWEEN THE SECOND AND FLOOR FLOOR, SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THESE CARS GOING SUPER FAST AROUND. >> SO WE GOT THE POINT, BUT THE QUESTIONS YOU UNDERSTAND THIS? >> DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT SHE IS SAYING. THE GUEST PARKING TAKEN BY VALET PARKING. >> ALSO TAKING THEM TO THE THIRD FLOOR, AND CREATING THE SPACES. >> AND THE THIRD FLOOR THAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE -- BECAUSE THE GATE, SHE'S CONCERNED BECAUSE THERE'S VALET PARKING THERE. SO LET'S NOT TURN THIS INTO -- >> THAT'S --; IS THAT CORRECT?? >> THAT'S A VALID CONCERN, UM, OBVIOUSLY, IF YOU'RE GOING TO USE THEM FOR GUEST PARKING SPACES, THAT'S GOING TO BE AVAILABLE AND ACCESSIBLE TO THE GUEST, I WILL OF COURSE, COMMUNICATE WHAT I HEARD TONIGHT, AND THE OTHERS AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY TAKE THOSE CONCERNS INTO ACCOUNT. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT ALL OF THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED WEEKS AND MONTHS AGO. ANY -- >> WHERE IT SAID THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE. IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE. >> THAT'S A GREAT CATCH. THE CLUBHOUSE IS SUPPOSED TO BE IN BUILDING FIVE. FROM BUILDING 6 -- >> THE OTHER CONCERN WAS LANGUAGE ADDING TODAY. I UNDERSTAND THE REASONING WHY THE CITY ATTORNEY MENTIONED UM, MY ONLY THING IS THAT IT'S NOT PUT INTO THE DOCUMENT AS A WAY TO ASK WITHOUT HAVING TO COME HERE AND CREATE -- I ACTUALLY -- I'M SORRY. >> YOU RATHER IT COME -- >> NO, I THINK THAT THEY MEANT TO MAKE IT TOUGHER. >> OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS? >> COUNSELMAN CABRERA? >> FIRST OF ALL, TO THE POINT OF THE PARKING, BASED ON THE CONVERSATION WITH THE PLANNING DIRECTOR. AND THIS DOES INVOLVE YOU ALL, IN THIS WHOLE VALET PARKING AGREEMENT, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY IT'S ALL JUMPED AROUND IS BECAUSE I GUESS, CERTAIN PARKING SPOTS HAVE BEEN ALLOCATED TO CERTAIN APARTMENT UNITS ALREADY, IN LOWER FLOORS, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. I HAVE THE SAME SITUATION IN MY BUILDING SO I UNDERSTAND. SO I THINK THAT SOMETHING NEEDS TO HAPPEN THOUGH, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS WHAT WE CAN SOLVE TONIGHT, THIS IS MORE INTERNAL WITH THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION AND THE BUILDING. AND IF THIS IS ASSIGNED TO THE PARKING ASSOCIATIONS. 101 IS MINE, AND I CANNOT MOVE TO 103. THAT'S THE CHALLENGE THAT YOU HAVE. IF THE ONLY PARKING SPACES THAT YOU HAVE AVAILABLE TO THE THIRD BUILDING ARE UP TO THE THIRD FLOOR AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS DEEDED. THE ONLY WAY TO GET UP THERE IS GOING THROUGH THE GATED AREAS. SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT. I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO SOMETHING THAT'S MORE IMPORTANT AND I, UM, I WANT TO ASK QUESTIONS. AND THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE PLANNING DIRECTOR -- IF WE DON'T APPROVE THIS CHANGE TO AN EXISTING, P U D. WHAT HAPPENS? >> SO THE EXISTING STAYS IN EFFECT. WHAT HAPPENS? >> SO TWO THINGS THAT WON'T HAPPEN, AND THE PHASES WILL NOT BE WITHIN THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS, NUMBER TWO, THERE WON'T BE A DEADLINE, TO COMPLETE IT. OTHER THAN THE CLUB COVENANT. BUT IN THE TERMS OF BUILDING THE REQUIREMENTS -- >> DON'T TELL ME IT'S EASY. IT'S VERY COMPLICATED, BUT THESE GUYS WON'T COME TO AN AGREEMENT OF BUILDING ANYTHING. >> NOTHING WILL BE BUILT. >> YOU KNOW HOW YOU GO THROUGH A DIVORCE. >> MY POSITION IS THIS, THE REALITY IS THAT -- THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE GOING THROUGH A DIVORCE. >> YES. >> AND YOU GUYS ARE ASKING THE CHILDREN TO PAY THE PRICE FOR IT. AND EVEN THOUGH THE CLUBHOUSE DOCUMENT HAS PROTECTION IN THE COURT, COURT IS COSTLY AND TIMELY; OKAY? THE REALITY IS THAT THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS, THAT ARE KEEPING THE OTHER PHASES. THEY ARE RELEASING THEMSELVES, WHICH IS THE ORIGINAL PROPERTY OWNERS, THE ORIGINAL PROMISE TO THE HOMEOWNERS, IF THEY ARE NOT ALL ON BOARD, WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CLUBHOUSE, WHEN THE FIRST BUILDING PERMIT IS APPROVED, I'M NOT SUPPORTING THIS. AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, EVERY PERSON IN EACH OF THOSE PHASES, IS PART OF THAT OWNERSHIP OF THAT PROPERTY, AND PART OF THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PROPERTY, AND THEY HAVE RESPONSIBILITY OF THAT. THEY WILL SAY, THEY NEVER GET THEIR CLUBHOUSE AND THEY WILL NEVER DEVELOP THE PIECE OF THE PROPERTY. AND IF THEY CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO IT, GOD BLESS THEM. >> APPLAUSE. >> WHEN THEY GET TO THE 550 UNIT. THEY HAVE TO BUILD THE CLUBHOUSE, THEY MAY TAKE FOREVER BUILDING IT. THAT'S FINE. BUT THEY HAVE TO ANSWER TO THAT POINT IN TIME AND IF THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE BUILDERS, I DON'T THINK THEY WILL DO THAT. SO EACH ONE OF THOSE PHASES, HAS A RESPONSIBILITY. AND THAT'S A LANGUAGE I'M NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTING. THE -- GOING THROUGH THE LITIGATION. AND IT WAS SETTLED. AND THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, AND BOTH OF THE RIGHT AND THE DUTY TO BUILD A CLUBHOUSE WAS ASSIGNED TO PHASE TWO. SO THE PHASE TWO OWNER HAS THE OBLIGATION THE OTHER OVERS HAVE ENFORCEMENT RIGHTS OF THAT OBLIGATION AND THE -- [INAUDIBLE], WHO CONTROLS PHASE TWO IS THE ONE WHO IS MUCH FURTHER ADVANCED IN HIS PLANS TO BUILD THE NEXT PROJECT, SO TO ME THE BEST HOPE OF SEEING THE CLUBHOUSE CONSTRUCTION COMMENCED QUICKLY. IT IS ACTUALLY APPROVED THE ITEM BEFORE YOU, AND ALLOWS YOU TO MOVE FORWARD WITH PHASE TWO. >> THAT SOUNDS GREAT IN THEORY. YOU TELL ME THAT THEY ARE THE ONES FURTHER ALONG. I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TOMORROW. AT THE END OF THE DAY AGAIN. WHAT THE COURT DECIDED HAS NO BARING UPON THIS COUNSEL IS AND MYSELF. THAT'S THEIR DECISION. AT THE END OF THE DAY, I CONSIDER THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THAT PROJECT BELONGS TO ALL FOUR OF THEM. AND THAT'S THE BIGGEST CONCERN. SO TO ME TO HAVE THEM WASH THEIR HAND $ OF IT IS UNACCEPTABLE. JUST BECAUSE THE COURTS GAVE THEM THAT. AND THAT'S FINANCING AND MAKING SENSE TO THEM. AND MAYBE, BUILDING THE PERMIT AND -- IF HE DECIDED HE'S NOT GOING TO BUILD THAT PROJECT AND LEAVE THAT FOR TWO YEARS FROM NOW. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE BUILT UNTIL, 2022. AND THEY ACCOUNT ANOTHER THOUSAND UNITS THERE. BUT BUT WHATEVER THE FIVE HUNDRED IS IN THOSE UNITS. AND IT'S GOING TO SIT THERE. TO WHATEVER IS IN THIS. >> THE OWNERS, BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OBLIGATION TO BUILD THE CLUBHOUSE, IS THAT THE PHASE TWO OWNERS CONTROLS THE LAND AND ALLOCATION OF THE RIGHTS TO DEVELOP THE CLUBHOUSE. SO IF THE DEVELOPER OF PHASE TWO IS NOT COMPLIANT WITH THE AGREEMENT MOVE ASIDE -- >> I HAVE TO BUILD THIS BUILDING, IT'S NOT LIKE -- THERE'S A PART THAT HAS A PIECE OF LAND. BUT THE PROBLEM IS -- I AGREE WITH THAT. THE PROBLEM IS THAT, THEN, THEY WASHED THEIR HANDS. IF YOU TOLD ME THAT PHASE TWO GUARANTEES ME. WITHIN THE YEAR. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 2 AND A HALF YEARS AWAY. SO, WITHIN A YEAR, SINCE YOU'RE SAYING, [INAUDIBLE], I WOULD HOPE -- AS FAR ALONG SO IF YOU MOVE THAT DEADLINE UP TO DECEMBER OF THIS YEAR. I'M FINE WITH IT, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY ELSE WILL BUILD A PERMIT FOR THAT YEAR ANY WAY. ASK THAT MEANS THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY, EVERYBODY WASHES MY HANDS, WHICH IS I LEFT THIS ONE OUT. I CALLED THE LEGISLATIVES. AFTER WHAT I HAVE BEEN LIVING. IT HAS TO BE SOME KIND OF PROTECTION OF THE STATE, WHEN DOCUMENTS ARE PREPARED FOR SOMEONE WITH SOME -- THIS COUNTRY, BUYER BE WARE. IT IS COMPLICATED AND IF THEY CREATE THIS KIND OF LAWS. SO I ASK YOU TO CONTACT THE STATE LEGISLATURES. THEY NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT PROTECTING THE PEOPLE. IT GETS TOO COMPLICATED, AND THE EMOTION OF BUYING IS THERE. SO MY -- IT'S -- I UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS COMPLICATED, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS ARE WALKING AWAY FROM THE RESPONSIBILITY. >> SO THE NOT WALKING AWAY. THEY ARE PART OF THE AGREEMENT -- THE PROBLEM COUNSEL MEN IS THAT TO GIVE YOU AN EARLIER DATE IS THAT WE STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH SITE PLAN APPROVAL. WITH YOUR STAFF AND WE MAY WANT TO MAKE SOME CHANGES WITH PHASE TWO. THAT WILL TAKE THREE OR FIVE MONTHS. SO IDEAL LEO OWE >> I KNOW HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS. BUT 2 AND A HALF YEARS IS A LONG TIME. >> YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO. >> WE HAVE PLANS. WE HAVE MET WITH STAFF WITH THE PLANS AND WE DON'T HAVE THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS, AND THEY HAVE NOT BEEN VETTED BY STAFF OR COUNSEL. BUT MORE THAN THAT -- IT TAKES A BIT OF TIME. >> PROBABLY -- IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO PROVE, YOU CANNOT PULL A BUILDING PERMIT. SITE PLAN APPROVAL. >> I INTEND TO FILE THIS IMMEDIATELY, AND MAKE CHANGES TO THE PHASE TWO DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND DESIGN. AND AS SOON AS WE GO THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, PROVIDING THAT YOU APPROVE THAT, AND SEEK A BUILDING PERMIT TO START WITH BUILDING FIVE. >> IS THERE A REASON WHY THEY DON'T WANT TO COMPROMISE THE OTHER PHASES. >> IN TERMS OF WHICH, MR. -- THE OWNER OF PHASE TWO. THE RESPONSIBILITY COMES FROM THE RIGHTS, SO THAT FOR EXAMPLE, THE OWNERS OF THE OTHER UNITS, WOULD HAVE TO JOIN THE CLUBHOUSE, THAT'S THE INCENTIVE FOR IT. FOR THEM TO FINISH THE CLUBHOUSE -- >> THAT WAS THE CASE ANYWAY'S. >> UNDER THE UM -- THE DOCUMENT, RIGHT. >> THE DESIRES IS TO HOLD UP YOUR -- THE PROJECTOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PHASES THERE'S BEEN A SLIT BETWEEN THE PARTNERS ASK THIS IS REALLY THE BEST WAY TO MOVE FORWARD AND BE ABLE TO GET THE PROJECTS BUILT BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I AGREE WITH COUNSELMAN, CABRERA, FOR THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE MADE THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROPERTY. AT THIS POINT, FROM WHAT WE'RE HEARING FROM THE COLLEAGUES, IF IT IS FAR ENOUGH, AND YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT THAT'S NOT THE CASE, WHY NOT PUSH UP THE GUARANTEED FINAL DATE TO A DATE THAT'S MORE REASONABLE TO FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE SAYING, THAT WE HAVE THE ISSUES -- CHANGING THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND CERTAIN CHANGES WILL BE MADE AND THE CLUBHOUSE WILL BE MOVED TO THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. SO THERE'S SOME BENEFIT TO THE DIVORCE. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THERE'S CERTAIN OBLIGATIONS THAT WE'RE NOT SURE WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE RESIDENTS THAT WE'RE PHASING THAT BURDEN CURRENTLY, SO WHAT'S THE OBJECTION OF BEING ABLE TO MOVE THAT FORWARD TO A DATE MORE REASONABLE IF YOU ALREADY HAVE CERTAIN DOCUMENTS PREPARED. >> IT'S NOT AN OBJECTION. >> BUT YOU HAVE LANGUAGE WRITTEN IN THERE. OR THINGS OUT OF YOUR CONTROL. IF THE CITY IS NOT APPROVING CERTAIN, YOU KNOW, DOCUMENTS, AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET THAT PERMIT, BUT THERE'S LEEWAY IN THERE. BUT THERE'S NO PROJECT TO TAKE PRECEDENTS OVER THE DEVELOPMENT. >> I WOULD HAVE TO CONSULT WITH MR. -- ON THAT. THE DATE THAT WE HAVE GIVEN YOU, TO GIVE TO THE PARTNERS, AT THE SAME TIME, HE TOLD ME AND THE REST, THAT HE WANTS TO START CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE IMMEDIATELY IF HE COULD. BUT THERE MAY BE A DATE -- IT PUTS US IN THE DIFFICULT POSITION BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE DON'T HOLD UP CERTAIN OPPORTUNITIES TO CONTINUE TO MAKE PROBLEMS WITH THE ISSUE, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME TYPE OF PROBLEMS. WE SEEN THE DELAY MANY TIMES AND I UNDERSTAND MANY TIMES. I DON'T WANT TO HOLD YOU UN -- IT'S NOT GOING TO BENEFIT EITHER. THERE'S NO BENEFIT IN THAT ASPECT IF IT DOESN'T GET UM CLEANED UP. >> I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. >> THAT POINT, UM -- I KNOW THAT IT'S AN UNUSUAL REQUEST BUT AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME, YOU WANT TO GIVE US TWO MINUTES, TO SEE IF HE CAN MOVE THE DATE -- >> HE CAN. >> BUT I HAVE QUESTIONS. LET ME GO TO -- AND SOME HAVE TO DO WITH YOU TO REPRESENT OTHER PARTIES. >> LET ME START WITH YOU, WHERE ARE ALL OF THESE DOCUMENTS WHERE YOU REFERRED TO ON THE PRESENTATION, BECAUSE I NEVER RECEIVED THEM. WHO DID YOU SEND THEM TO? >> I HAVEN'T RECEIVED A COPY ALSO. >> DID ANYBODY HAVE THE DOCUMENT BEFORE. >> I DIDN'T SEE THE DOCUMENTS, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'M SEEING THEM -- SECOND QUESTION FROM YOU. WHEN WAS THIS ORIGINAL AGREEMENT >> WHEN WAS IT ORIGINAL LIE APPROVED BY COUNSEL? >> 2014. >> THAT'S WHEN THE CITY COUNSEL APPROVED THE AGREEMENT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO CHANGE TODAY. AND IT IS YOUR ARGUMENT THAT THAT AGREEMENT GIVE YOU NO SPECIFIC DATES? >> IT PROVIDES NO DEADLINE FOR THE START OF THE -- OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE OR TO FINISH IT. >> IN DECEMBER OF 2014 WHEN IT WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY OF DORAL, AND I'M ASSUMING, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS OR WASN'T, I'M ASSUMING THAT IT WAS RECOMMENDED BY CITY STAFF, THERE WAS A DOCUMENT THAT HAD NO DEADLINE TO BUILD THIS FACILITY; IS THAT CORRECT? >> THAT IS CORRECT. MR. MAYOR, BUT UNDERSTAND THAT AT THAT TIME, THE ENTITY ON THE PROPERTY. IT