Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal-Public Comments Submitted Online for the November 20, 2025 City Commission MeetingOnline Public Comments -Miami City Commission Meeting of November 20, 2025 Online Public Comment Report for November 20, 2025, Regular City Commission Meeting November 20, 2025 8:06 PM MST Public Comment motero@miamigov.com Stree First Last t Agend Reco g Nam Nam Public Comment rded e e Addre a Item Date ss FR. 4 #1845 2 436 Amend Nov Mari Gon NE Code - The affordability crisis is about income mismatch, not unit count. Miami's crisis is driven by: 20 a • wages too low, • investor speculation too high, • insurance and climate risk inflating costs, 2025 zale 77th Chapt "Mari • loss of older apartments, • no deep subsidies for extremely low-income renters. Doubling 7:21 z Stree er 62 - density does not address any of this. Please vote NO. am t Rd Resitie MST nce Trust Fund FR. 4 #1845 2 Nov 243 Amend 20 Pete Ehrli NE Code - 2025 ch 59th Chapt Please vote No. Please oppose increased density. 8:27 Terra er 62 - ce Resitie am MST nce Trust Fund FR. 5 #1844 0 Amend Code - Establi 1040 sh Nov BiscClau Rou yne a 18 Dept - Please extend the BFPT until the forensic work Gabela started is done. The citizens want to 2025 Downt know what happened during Carolto's reign. Furthermore I want to be on the record Gabela dia ssel Blvd 3:11 #400 own is doing a great job and every commissioner killing BFPT better has a working plan. pm 7 Bayfro MST nt Parks and Open Space s 18564 Submittal -Public Comments Submitted Online for the November 20, 2025 City Commission Meeting First Last Nam Nam e e Stree t Agend Addre a Item ss Public Comment Reco rded Date I'm here to strongly oppose items FR.4 (18452), PZ.12 (18270), PH.14 (18463) and the FR. 4 related and use and density measures. Miami residents are at a breaking point. We just #1845 went through an election where voters clearly rejected efforts to concentrate more power 3843 Kumq2 and weaken public oversight. Yet these items would fast -track major Land use and density Nov uat Amend changes that wilt permanently alter neighborhood character, without meaningful community 20 Geor da Aven Code - buy -in. We see a familiar pattern: • Zoning changes and special deals that primarily benefit 2025 Chapt Large developers, • Increasing pressure on already strained infrastructure and services, and ge Guia ue 5:39 er 62 - • A public process where residents are rushed, cut off, or ignored white Lobbyists have the Coco am Reside advantage. This is about trust. When decisions repeatedly favor a few powerful interests nut MST nce over the Long-term needs of our neighborhoods, our environment, and our infrastructure, Grove Trust people Lose faith in City HaLL. I'm asking you to vote NO on FR.4, PZ.12, PH.14, and all Fund related Land use and density items. Instead, commit to a transparent, neighborhood -driven planning process that respects voters' wilt and protects Miami's future. Thank you. RE. 6 #1832 I'm asking you to DEFER item RE 6 on the November 20, 2025 agenda. This Bicycle Master Plan update is Long overdue, but the current version is bloated, unfocused, and not 3843 5 actionable. It reads Like a grab bag of every bike idea ever proposed, without dear policy Nov Approv 20 Kumq priorities, timelines, or implementation steps. Approving a plan Like this wilt not make our Geor da e and 2025 uat streets safer or more bike -friendly in any real, measurable way. I respectfully request that ge Guia Adopt 6:09 Aven 2025 you: 1. Defer RE 6 indefinitely, and 2. Direct staff to return within six months with a dear, am ue concise Bicycle Master Plan that includes simple policies, implementation guidelines, and Bicycle MST realistic priorities for action. Miami needs a bike plan that we can actually use —not just Master another document on a shelf. Thank you. Plan PH. I stand in strong opposition to the measures being pushed forward — the doubling of Nov 2970 PH - density without proper community input, the decision to give away Watson Island for a 20 Marti Pom White PUBLI fraction of its real value, and the continued destruction of our already -endangered tree 2025 n bo head C canopy. These decisions don't reflect the Long-term interests of Miami residents. They 5:48 St HEART undermine the character of our neighborhoods, threaten our environmental resilience, and am NGS prioritize short-term gains over the wellbeing of the PEOPLE who actually Live here. MST Sand Mois 5910 PZ. 12 I am writing to strongly oppose the density -increase items sponsored by Commissioner Nov ra a NE #1838 Damian Pardo, FR-4 and PZ-12, on today's agenda. These proposals would allow 20 6th 8 developers to double the density of their high-rise projects in exchange for contributions to 2025 Court Zoning a so-called "Resilience Trust Fund." Let us be honest: this is greenwashing, not resilience. 6:06 Text - Supporters claim this would apply only to a Limited section of Edgewater, yet a City Planner am Resitie stated on the record that the intention is to expand this program citywide. That alone MST nce should be alarming to every resident who values transparency, planning integrity, and the Trust basic Livability of Miami. To say this is a bad proposal is an understatement. Miami is Fund already zoned to allow eight times more housing units than existed in the 2010 Census. We do not have a housing -capacity problem. We have a problem with policies that continuously and deliberately push the city toward Larger, denser, taller, and more profitable developments, regardless of the consequences for residents, infrastructure, or the environment. The term "Resilience" has now joined a Long List of political camouflage phrases "Affordable Housing,"""Workforce Housing,"""Transit Oriented Development;' "Transportation Corridors," and "Rapid Transit Zoning" all repeatedly used as cover stories that mask relentless upzoning and developer giveaways. These buzzwords are consistently deployed to justify policies that in practice deliver almost exclusively one outcome: increased developer profits. City Proposal Would Double Density — For a Price by David ViLlano and Jenny Jacoby on November 17, 2025 https://coconutgrovespotlight. com/2025/11/17/city-proposal-would-double-density-for-a- price/ Miami: Damian Pardo has a developers' dream in density -for -dollars deal. By Ladra on November 19, 2025 https://wwwpoLiticaLcortadito.com/2025/11/19/miami-damian-pardo- developer-density-for-dollars-resilience/ Please consider the impacts: Traffic congestion and Longer evacuation times Sewage and wastewater infrastructure already strained to capacity Garbage disposal and landfill Limitations Loss of neighborhood character and scale Diminishing park space per resident Potable water supply concerns Continued erosion of trust in local government None of these items are addressed or meaningfully mitigated by allowing developers to simply buy their way into doubling density. Calling this "resilience" is First Last Nam Nam e e Stree t Agend Addre a Item ss 5910 Sand Mois NE ra a 6th Court FR. 4 #1845 2 Amend Code - Chapt er62- Resilie nce Trust Fund Public Comment not policy; it is marketing. It is a financial mechanism designed to advance development, not protect Miami. We must stop pretending Miami can grow infinitely without consequences. Residents feel the impacts every day, and they see clearly who benefits from these zoning changes. We have, effectively, a government of developers, for developers, by developers. Anyone who doubts that need only review the campaign contribution records of our elected officials. I urge you to reject FR-4 and PZ-12. Stop allowing zoning policy to be shaped around donor interests. Stop using sustainability Language to disguise upzoning initiatives. And above all, start governing in the interest of the people who actually live in this city. Residents deserve transparency, honesty, and policies that prioritize quality of life, not profit margins. Sincerely, Sandy Moise Reco rded Date I am writing to strongly oppose the density -increase items sponsored by Commissioner Damian Pardo, FR-4 and PZ-12, on today's agenda. These proposals would allow developers to double the density of their high-rise projects in exchange for contributions to a so-called "Resilience Trust Fund." Let us be honest: this is greenwashing, not resilience. Supporters claim this would apply only to a limited section of Edgewater, yet a City Planner stated on the record that the intention is to expand this program citywide. That atone should be alarming to every resident who values transparency, planning integrity, and the basic Livability of Miami. To say this is a bad proposal is an understatement. Miami is already zoned to allow eight times more housing units than existed in the 2010 Census. We do not have a housing -capacity problem. We have a problem with policies that continuously and deliberately push the city toward Larger, denser, taller, and more profitable developments, regardless of the consequences for residents, infrastructure, or the environment. The term "Resilience" has now joined a Long List of political camouflage phrases "Affordable Housing,"""Workforce Housing,"""Transit Oriented Development;' "Transportation Corridors," and "Rapid Transit Zoning" all repeatedly used as cover stories that mask relentless upzoning and developer giveaways. These buzzwords are consistently deployed to justify policies that in practice deliver almost exdusiveLy one outcome: Nov increased developer profits. City Proposal Would Double Density — For a Price by David 20 ViLlano and Jenny Jacoby on November 17, 2025 2025 https://coconutgrovespotlight.com/2025/11/17/city-proposal-would-double-density-for-a- 6:05 price/ Miami: Damian Pardo has a developers' dream in density -for -dollars deal By Ladra on am November 19, 2025 https://wwwpoLiticaLcortadito.com/2025/11/19/miami-damian-pardo- MST developer -density -for -dollars -resilience/ Please consider the impacts: Traffic congestion and Longer evacuation times Sewage and wastewater infrastructure already strained to capacity Garbage disposal and Landfill Limitations Loss of neighborhood character and scale Diminishing park space per resident Potable water supply concerns Continued erosion of trust in Local government None of these items are addressed or meaningfully mitigated by allowing developers to simply buy their way into doubling density. Calling this "resilience" is not policy; it is marketing. It is a financial mechanism designed to advance development, not protect Miami. We must stop pretending Miami can grow infinitely without consequences. Residents feel the impacts every day, and they see dearly who benefits from these zoning changes. We have, effectively, a government of developers, for developers, by developers. Anyone who doubts that need only review the campaign contribution records of our elected officials. I urge you to reject FR-4 and PZ-12. Stop allowing zoning policy to be shaped around donor interests. Stop using sustainability Language to disguise upzoning initiatives. And above aR, start governing in the interest of the people who actually Live in this city. Residents deserve transparency, honesty, and policies that prioritize quality of Life, not profit margins. Sincerely, Sandy Moise Andr Mor 3371 FR. 4 I am writing to strongly oppose items FR.4(18452) PZ.12(18270) PH14(18463) and the Nov ea ales Florid #1845 related Land use and density measures. As a born and raised Local of Miami, I speak for 20 a ave 2 myself and many other Miamians, we are overwhelmed with the density of this city. The 2025 Miam Amend traffic is absolutely out of control it is affecting our quality of Life immensely. At this point 8:25 i, FL Code - there is no "traffic hour" it takes 30 minutes just to get down the street at any moment of am 3313 Chapt the day. Especially here in the grove all of the construction has made it dangerous to even MST 3 er 62 - walk around the neighborhood because of the traffic it's causing. I don't understand how Resilie increasing density wilt help this issue ? More housing unfortunately = more cars. Growing nce up in Miami I've seen the city grow along with me and it's a wonderful thing but I believe we have reached our Limit. Stree First Last Reco Nam Nam t Agend Public Comment rded e e Addre a Item Date ss Trust Fund I am concerned about this ordinance being citywide. While it is claimed that currently it will FR. 4 only affect parts of Edgewater, the ordinance stated that contribution to resilience trust fund 3525 #1845 allows for building with double the density. I strongly oppose to increased density in Ro at 2 Coconut Grove, because - traffic has been becoming more congested and increasing Nov Pal Amend density with existing two -Lane street Landscape is not possible - we are nowhere near 19 Oyst Code - meeting our tree canopy goal. citywide and current rate of the city approving removal of Tatia Ave, 2025 ache Chapt trees in our neighborhood causes concerns for rising temperatures, hurricane and flood na Miam 10:5 r er 62 - resiliency, as well. as it will. surely affect future property value for all of us. There is no way i, FL, gam Resitie to increase tree canopy with doubling the density. Therefore, I think this ordinance should 3313 MST nce be revised to allow only for increased density with contributions to the fund only in certain 3 Trust areas where residents and community groups have this need. I oppose to this ordinance Fund affecting our neighborhood and the Language in this ordinance that makes changes citywide. Maji Ram os FR. 4 #1845 2 Amend 555 Code - NE Chapt 56 St er 62 - Resitie nce Trust Fund Good morning Commissioners. My name is Maji Ramos, I'm a Realtor and Sustainability Advocate. I am trying to protect our property values, city and our economy. I'm here to urge you to vote NO on FR.4 and PZ.12. Not delay it — stop it. This proposal creates a brand- new Resilience Trust Fund with no independent auditor, no public dashboard, and no guardrails to prevent the money from being swept into the general fund. Residents have been asking for independent oversight for years, and every attempt has been avoided. We saw the exact same pattern with the Miami Forever Bond, where financial oversight was clawed back and funds meant for resilience ended up backfilling deferred maintenance. We cannot keep creating new trust funds with no transparency and no accountability. Miami has a Long documented history of vague ordinances becoming Loopholes, and Loopholes becoming slush funds. This one is no different. Second: this ordinance is being sold as 'just Nov for Edgewater,' but the Language is broad by design. Once the structure exists in Chapter 20 62, it becomes a precedent that can be replicated in T4, T5, and T6 areas citywide. This is 2025 a citywide density tool — just introduced through a pilot area. Residents across Miami 7:49 deserve honesty about that. Third: doubling density does not create resilience. It does not am reduce flooding. It does not Lower insurance. And it does not address affordability. Miami's MST affordability crisis is driven by a wage mismatch, investor speculation, escalating insurance costs, and the Loss of older housing — not by a Lack of Luxury units. Nothing in this ordinance fixes those drivers. What this does accomplish is a major increase in development profitability without any updated infrastructure capacity studies, without concurrency analysis, and without safeguards for neighborhoods. This is not resilient planning. This is developer -driven planning. If the City truly believed in resilience, you would strengthen Chapter 17 to protect trees, implement real. stormwater upgrades, and create independent oversight — not bypass it. For all these reasons, we ask you to vote NO today. Not defer. Not modify. Vote NO until a real, independently audited, infrastructure -supported resilience plan is brought forward. Thank you Maji Ramos Maji Ram 555 PZ. 12 Good morning Commissioners. My name is Maji Ramos, I'm a Realtor and Sustainability Nov os NE #1838 Advocate. I am trying to protect our property values, city and our economy. I'm here to urge 20 56 St 8 you to vote NO on FR.4 and PZ.12. Not delay it — stop it. This proposal creates a brand- 2025 Zoning new Resilience Trust Fund with no independent auditor, no public dashboard, and no 7:47 Text - guardrails to prevent the money from being swept into the general fund. Residents have am Resitie been asking for independent oversight for years, and every attempt has been avoided. We MST nce saw the exact same pattern with the Miami Forever Bond, where financial oversight was Trust clawed back and funds meant for resilience ended up backfilling deferred maintenance. We Fund cannot keep creating new trust funds with no transparency and no accountability. Miami has a Long documented history of vague ordinances becoming Loopholes, and Loopholes becoming slush funds. This one is no different. Second: this ordinance is being sold as 'just for Edgewater,' but the Language is broad by design. Once the structure exists in Chapter 62, it becomes a precedent that can be replicated in T4, T5, and T6 areas citywide. This is a citywide density tool — just introduced through a pilot area. Residents across Miami deserve honesty about that. Third: doubling density does not create resilience. It does not reduce flooding. It does not Lower insurance. And it does not address affordability. Miami's affordability crisis is driven by a wage mismatch, investor speculation, escalating insurance First Last Nam Nam e e Sam a nth a Wits on Stree t Agend Addre a Item ss PZ. 12 #1838 8 Coco Zoning nut Text - Grove Resitie nce Trust Fund Public Comment costs, and the loss of older housing — not by a lack of luxury units. Nothing in this ordinance fixes those drivers. What this does accomplish is a major increase in development profitability without any updated infrastructure capacity studies, without concurrency analysis, and without safeguards for neighborhoods. This is not resilient planning. This is developer -driven planning. If the City truly believed in resilience, you would strengthen Chapter 17 to protect trees, implement real stormwater upgrades, and create independent oversight — not bypass it. For all these reasons, we ask you to vote NO today. Not defer. Not modify. Vote NO until a real, independently audited, infrastructure -supported resilience plan is brought forward. Thank you Maji Ramos Reco rded Date Good morning Chair, Commissioners. My name is Samantha, and I am here to state my firm opposition to items FR-4 and PZ-12, sponsored by Commissioner Pardo. Let me be absolutely dear: these proposals attempt to double density across wide areas of our city without the necessary infrastructure, without community protections, and without any credible demonstration that the public —not the developers —wilt benefit. FR-4's so-called "Resilience Trust Fund" is nothing more than a mechanism to sett increased density to the highest bidder. PZ-12 Locks those increases into our zoning code. Neither of these proposals address the real -world impacts on the people who actually Live here. Here are the facts: Traffic and congestion wilt worsen, dramatically and immediately. Miami streets are already over capacity. Doubling density without transit upgrades is reckless. Our water, sewer, drainage, and storm -risk infrastructure is aging, overloaded, and in need of major repairs— Nov not more strain. These proposals place more units and more people in flood -vulnerable 19 areas, increasing risk and evacuation burdens white calling it "resilience:' Neighborhood 2025 character and Long-standing communities wilt be displaced, because nothing in these 4:25 ordinances protects affordability or prevents speculative redevelopment. And the pm environmental impact of higher density —heat, flooding, Loss of tree canopy —has not been MST meaningfully addressed. But most importantly: Public Land is not a bargaining chip. It is not inventory. It is not theirs to give away, trade, or Leverage. Much of the Land and coastline in Miami exists because Mother Nature created it — not the City Commission, not developers, and not political sponsors. This Land belongs to the people. It is our right —and our duty —to defend it when decisions threaten its integrity, safety, or accessibility. Commissioners, you are temporary stewards of this city. You do not own this Land. You do not own these neighborhoods. You do not own the future of Miami. The public does. Any proposal that reshapes density at this scale must serve the public interest first, Last, and always. FR-4 and PZ-12 do not. For that reason, I strongly urge this Commission to vote NO. Thank you. Good Morning Commissioners, I need to express my strong disapproval regarding the resolution to sett 3.2 acres of public Land on MacArthur Causeway for just $29 million, an PH. 13 extraordinary undervaluation of public property. Single-family homes in Miami sett for more #1846 than this, yet we are considering setting a prime, waterfront, income -producing parcel for 8 Less than one -tenth of its true market value. Independent analysts and recent comparable Execut sales put the value of this Land welt above $250 million. That is about a quarter of a billion e - in Lost public benefit when our city needs resources for residents. Yes, future property taxes Nov 211 PSA - wilt eventually help. But the reality is that we could use that additional quarter -billion dollars 20 ELen Davit SW Sae of right now to address pressing needs —flood mitigation, infrastructure improvements, traffic 2025 a a 19 3.2 management, affordable housing, climate resilience, parks, public safety, and funding for 7:43 RD Acre cultural institutions. This is especially critical because this project wilt dramatically increase am Parcel traffic, density, and strain on an already congested and flood -prone gateway into our MST downtown core. We are giving away a once -in -a -generation, historic asset at way below the Watso market value without a transparent valuation, and without ensuring that the people of n Miami receive Long-term, equitable benefits. This is not responsible stewardship of public Island Land. Commissioner CaroLto, as your constituent, I urge you to vote NO on this resolution. Demand the true value of the Land our community owns. Miami residents deserve far better than a cut-rate sale of one of our most valuable properties. Thank you. Elena S. DaviLa Jilt Ada 2992 FR. 4 Density without infrastructure and resiliency first increases insurance Losses, pushing Nov ms Virgin #1845 carriers out of Miami, resulting in Less affordable housing. In particular, The grove is already 19 is 2 over developed and is Losing its canopy and charm. 2025 Stree Amend 9:49 t, Code - Stree First Last Reco Nam Nam t Agend Public Comment rded e e Addre a Item Date ss Miam Chapt am i, FL er 62 - MST 3313 Resttie 3 nce Trust Fund PZ. 12 #1838 Nov 8 3460 20 Zoning As a taxpayer citizen , I am not in favor of the resilience trust fund. It is vague and doesn't Mirn Nav poinci 2025 Text - address the real environmental issues the city is facing. We need better transparency and a a ana 8:08 Resilie independent audit of the trust fund. Ave am nce MST Trust Fund 4130 Katri Morr Lyby na is er Ave urge the Commission to vote no on PZ 12. This is a drastic move, and there has been no independent infrastructure capacity study, or a long-term impact analysis. The wording is eerily similar to Transit Station Neighborhood Development plan, which you passed unanimously in July. That already asked double density within a mile of a fixed -raft transit Line. Furthermore, the live local act allows for double -density, but with restrictions: The project must be in an area zoned for commercial, industrial, or mixed -use (not a strictly single-family/tow-density residential zone). If mixed use, at Least 65% of the square PZ. 12 footage must be residential. At Least 40% of residential units must be affordable (rental) for #1838 a minimum period (often 30 years) at up to 120% of area median income (AMI), or 8 $95,289. Apparently, this isn't enough for some developers. Now they're asking for double Zoning the density and the ability to build market rate buildings with zero guardrails citywide. This Text - time, instead of transit, they're using resiliency as the excuse. The supposed future Resilie resiliency fund, which has not been defined, mentions affordability as one of the possible nce uses. According to the 2020-2024 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice for the Trust City of Miami, there are 31,779 vacant housing units, which represents 15.7% of total units Fund in the city. However — and this is important — not all of those are "available" in the usual housing market. The same report says that 18,755 of those vacant units are for "recreational, seasonal or occasional use, or are owned/rented but just unoccupied." Doubling density does nothing for affordability. It just gives us more of what is drowning us in infrastructure costs and rising rents already. Beyond the affordability concerns, Resolution 18268 aims to "doubting density within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA)." If doubling density in a HIGH HAZARD ZONE doesn't raise any red flags for you, then I don't know what to tell you. Nov 20 2025 6:32 am MST Sam Wits Coco FR. 4 My name is Samantha, and I am here to state my firm opposition to items FR-4 and PZ-12, Nov anth on nut #1845 sponsored by Commissioner Pardo. Let me be absolutely dear: these proposals attempt to 19 a Grove 2 double density across wide areas of our city without the necessary infrastructure, without 2025 Amend community protections, and without any credible demonstration that the public —not the 4:24 Code - developers —wilt benefit. FR-4's so-called "Resilience Trust Fund" is nothing more than a pm Chapt mechanism to sett increased density to the highest bidder. PZ-12 Locks those increases into MST er 62 - our zoning code. Neither of these proposals address the real -world impacts on the people Resilie who actually Live here. Here are the facts: Traffic and congestion wilt worsen, dramatically nce and immediately. Miami streets are already over capacity. Doubling density without transit Trust upgrades is reckless. Our water, sewer, drainage, and storm -risk infrastructure is aging, Fund overloaded, and in need of major repairs —not more strain. These proposals place more units and more people in flood -vulnerable areas, increasing risk and evacuation burdens white calling it "resilience:' Neighborhood character and Long-standing communities wilt be displaced, because nothing in these ordinances protects affordability or prevents speculative redevelopment. And the environmental impact of higher density —heat, flooding, Loss of tree canopy —has not been meaningfully addressed. But most importantly: Public Land is not a bargaining chip. It is not inventory. It is not theirs to give away, trade, or Leverage. Much of the Land and coastline in Miami exists because Mother Nature created it — not the City Commission, not developers, and not political sponsors. This Land belongs to the people. It is our right —and our duty —to defend it when decisions threaten its integrity, First Last Nam Nam e e Sam a nth a Wits on Stree t Agend Addre a Item ss Public Comment safety, or accessibility. Commissioners, you are temporary stewards of this city. You do not own this and. You do not own these neighborhoods. You do not own the future of Miami. The public does. Any proposal that reshapes density at this scale must serve the public interest first, last, and always. FR-4 and PZ-12 do not. For that reason, I strongly urge this Commission to vote NO. Thank you. FR. 4 #1845 2 Amend 2627 Code - bays Chapt N/A hore er 62 - Resilie nce Trust Fund End of Report Reco rded Date Nov 19 2025 4:19 pm MST