The Palmetto Expressway was supposed to be the line in the sand for developers seeking to build high-rises in Kendall.
In defiance of the scores of residents who participated in the Downtown Kendall plan and the 215 residents who signed up to protest the developer plan, which called for a high rise WEST of the Palmetto (taller buildings were supposed to go EAST of the Palmetto according to the plan) ,the Community Council 12 approved the misplaced 8 story building. It was a pretty underhanded vote because it was a tie score until one Commissioner, feeling ill left after the vote. After she left they took an additional vote at 11 p.m and her absence broke the tie, Leaving the developer, J. Milton & Associates the victor.
Although, Amendment 4 would not have kicked in as this was not a comp plan change (as a reader pointed out) it is decisions like this -- that totally ignore the public's wishes -- that is making Amendment 4 a popular choice.
Holly White the president of the East Kendall Homeowner Organization and Continental Park Homeowners Association called the vote "underhanded and inappropriate." Vote for State Amendment 4 Holly! The Kendall Downtown Development Plan was approved only after years of public participation and here it - totally ignored...sucks doesn't it? The plan was also approved by the County Commission to establish guidelines for future development in the area. Blame Council Members: Alberto Santana, Angela Vazquez and surly Jorge Garciga. Who was the attorney involved? None other than Miguel Diaz de la Portilla. This should lose him some votes.
52 comments:
This was a site plan change - a zoning matter. There was no change in the CDMP. Amendment 4 would not have applied in this case. Some additional clarification is needed as to what and what property issues are covered by Amendment 4.
I believe the county attorney was wrong stating that the Colony item had not been set for the next meeting. Those attending heard the date being set. The Chair said "lets move on to the next item". At that time the ill community
council member left and almost everyone else too.
I believe that Carla Savola and the attorney Miguel de la Portilla, who are close, engineered this result. I saw hand signals between Savola and one of the Community Council members --Garciga.
We were promised twelve years ago that the Downtown Kendall plan would keep high-rise development east of the Palmetto Expressway. Building height would be "stepped down" so that there could be seven or eight story buildings east of the expressway but lower-rise buildings to the west.
Three of the community council members recalled this in their own comments. Yet the county's planning staff sided with the developer.
I can't blame the developer for asking for more, especially since he can see that he can GET more. And I know that some community council members don't see our point of view, or simply haven't been fighting these fights as long as we have. But it is nothing less than betrayal for our own county staff—in the same departments as those who worked with us in the 90's—to throw us under the bus.
The year and a half of volunteer service that my neighbors and I devoted to the Downtown Kendall plan has been betrayed. Again.
First, we fought to limit the size of the buildings, and lost. The result: empty buildings that can't be sold, rented or leased. Next: the tree-filled public squares we fought for were decimated, not by the developers but by county staff. And now this.
We need change at the county. I'm ready to make it happen.
This is exactly why some off us in the East Kendal area wanted our own municipal government instead of the county wearing two hats, County and municipal services. This kind of promise would not have been broken in Pinecrest, Palmetto Bay or Cutler Bay. The mayors and council members there would know they would be out on their buts if they broke this kind of promise. I find it funny that one of the arguments against incorporation was that we are already built out so there will be no major zoning issues. Just wait to see what the county does with the west side of US 1 along the transportation corridor through our area, high rises, you can bet on it. The municipalities along the east side wont dare upset their residents. You may remember when Pinecrest opposed a high rise outside the city near Dadeland and helped stop it.
Albert you were on the East Kendale MAC, what is your position on incorporation?
BTW: Carla Savola was one of the extremely vocal and passionate anti incorporation voices. Wonder what Barry White, another extremely vocal and passionate anti incorporation voice and one of the people Eye on Miami worships, has to say about this?
Repeal The Home Rule Charter!!!!
Eye on Miami does not worship anyone.
The Downtown Kendall plan is a failure and this hearing was the first result of not planning to step down zoning in the area surrounding it. The only accomplishment of this plan was to grant greater density to developers at the expense of the quality of life for the surrounding homeowners outside its boundary. This zoning issue is evidence that we need new leadership, that the people involved in the Downtown Kendall plan either were part of the plot to add more density or simply taken advantage of by the developers.
Albert’s mention of promises demonstrates the problem with his participation; unless I have forgotten, the Downtown Kendall project was his baby. Unless those "promises" were translated into changes in zoning code the "promises" are not enforceable. Follow-up should have been made by changes to the area zoning. No changes were made. He must know that, but he is not saying it.
The zoning for the site allowed nine stories. The new project is eight. The density is within the allowable for the zoning district where the recent project sits. The developer already had the height and density as a matter of right.
The scope of the Downtown plan was too narrow. It should have taken into consideration the surrounding areas if the board did not want spill over.
Albert – this one is yours. You cannot hide from it. You are a party to this disaster and we will only have to wait for other shoes to drop in the next few years. The "promises" are going to continue to bite your neighbors and my friends on the rump.
This is exactly why I moved out of the area; the zoning was going to get out of control.
ALBERT-You sat as a member of the East Kendall Municipal Advisory Committee and in all those months of meetings you never came out for the incorporation of East Kendall.
Now you can see the result of not incorporating and being unable to control our local zoning. Why should you be our County Commissioner? You have no vision.
The above comments demonstrate why we need to elect someone who can stand up to developers and pass a building moratorium as was done in Homestead.
Like Linda Bell. Get real, she can't win.
Albert has been standing up against these exact developers and standing up FOR the kind of downtown Kendall that the majority of the community wants. He has done so voluntarily and consistently for more than a decade running into fast-switches like the one at Council 12 again and again . . . this is exactly why he's running for County Commission, so he can do more. As a citizen and active participant in local government to the extent a volunteer can, he's done all he can . , , just to have the rug pulled out from under all of us with no recourse. Albert should be elected so he can represent us with a vote on the commission that can make a difference. And make no mistake . . . Downtown Kendall was the Developer's "Baby" . . . Albert has just been the strongest opponent to unhealthy development of the area.
Yeah. Albert's wishes were ignored along with the rest of us. No one else has taken the lead to stand up against this greed in Kendall except Albert.
Flinn can't oppose the developers while he's holding hands with them . . . the bulk of contributions to Flinn's campaign come from developers.
Re: Flinn. I don't see him kissing tush for money. As a Palmetto Bay resident I have sat through more than one zoning hearing where he has told developers to pound sand. I hate to be sounding like I am taking up for developers... but property owners and even developers have rights too.
Development is inevitable and can be good, but someone has to urge healthy development without corners cut to increase the developers' profit at a cost of safety, community, etc.. Albert has done that and will continue to do so.
OK, Eye on Miami worships no one, but you sure have featured info about Barry numerous times. I know he only shows up 1 time in the index. Have not seen Alberts answer yet! At least I know Flinn supports incorporation. Also we don’t know where Eye on Miami stands on incorporation.
As a citizen advocate, Albert led the local push for incorporation of Kendall so we could have some control over pedestrian friendly road ways and better use of trees/parks to improve property values and the health of community.
Albert's Downtown Dadeland crew missed the boat when they did not finish the community design with attention to impact on the fridge community. You can't accept promises and you have to look beyond the area you want to revitalize to imagine the possible impacts of your work product. The design changes are not localized when it comes to implementation.
And then, you have commission approval and the subsequent zoning changes which is what gives the charette teeth. That process is like putting the . at the end of a sentence.
Where was everyone when this zoning code was approved years ago. I personally know a few who were and they did try to fix it. I don't recall Albert even reading it and speak up against it at the Commission? Or, did he not understand the zoning part of the process. I have to question the judgement of someone "thinking" something is a done deal, then gets surprised when something else is written in there. Where was the follow up?
There were some very good people involved with East Kendall and this process. I don't recall Allbert speaking out, I do recall him being a yes man.
It's hard to re write history of Commission hearings, so if Albert did speak against this, I'll stand corrected.
Dadeland is a mess........but, I don't think an 8 story building next to another 8 story building is going to make or break the area. Too much was built too quickly and now we may need to go back into the Charrette and see what really happened and how to fix it.
How Flinn got in to this thread is amazing. He campaign report is on line. Albert's report is much more interesting. There's a lot of money from Puerto Rica. Albert also said he didn't take special interest funds but he took money from Peter Schnebly who's been historically trying to open up the UDB through the back door, so to speak.
Here's the article: http://homesteadishome.blogspot.com/2008/05/schnebly-winery-owners-indicted.html
Albert read, understood and tried to fix the zoning years ago, as did I. The usual supporters of healthy development were there and have been there consistently until exhaustion takes over. The powers that be prevailed. It's time for new powers to be.
Downtown Kendall? Where is that? Dadeland Mall? Kendall is unincorporated Miami-Dade County. There's no town for a downtown.
Albert served on the East Kendall Municipal Committee and to this day, I have never heard him say that the cure to securing control of our zoning in East Kendall was to incorporate.
Anyone who believes that developers pushed for the Downtown Dadeland zoning doesn't know what they are talking about. The Dadeland zoning is generally seen as nothing but a headache by anyone actually tring to build something.
Genius, I suggest you keep the comments on this post in mind when you remind us of how Amendment 4 is only going to stop "bad" development on the fringes.
This application is classic infill development. Look how popular it is with your readers.
A headache but they build nonetheless. I was there at numerous meetings when the zoning of Downtown Dadeland was being established, and so were the developers with prominent attorneys on retainer for this endeavor. They affected the legislation of the Dadeland area to their benefit. They persist in the pursuit of development of the East Kendall area despite headaches they helped create, and it is not out of the goodness of their hearts that they do so. It is not for the benefit of the people who live there. The developers build and have built there as a roll of the dice for profit. It's just business . . . with high hopes clouding imaginations of what might be left in the wake of a bad gamble.
You gotta be real careful with Albert. He's a real chameleon.
He tries to get credit for fighting against overdevelopment in downtown Kendall but a lot of people on here don't recall him standing up against anything during the real overdevelopment fight a few years ago. One blogger even called him a "yes man".
Albert has visited A LOT of groups -- Republicans and Democrats alike and I've noticed that to most groups he tells the crowd everything THEY want to hear.
To Republicans he's a pro-life advocate who is fiscally conservative. To Democrats, he's a social progressive who is a devout environmentalist and a pro labor advocate.
He even had the big ones to come down to a Homestead Chamber lunch a few weeks ago in jeans and a plaid shirt - you know, to "fit the stereotype". That's real insulting, Albert! Where's OUR suit?!
The more I see Albert, the more I see a typical politician trying to manipulate the vote by pretending he's all things to all people. Not with my vote!
Funny. I am an attorney involved with the "development" being discussed, and anyone who has been involved knows that Albert has been fighting a certain Downtown Dadeland development at every opportunity, like him or not. Also, I know him to be an honest guy, agree with him or not, who has been vocal since the start on these issues. He is a an environmentalist, pro-life as a practicing Catholic and yes, a fiscal conservative. You might not like the combination, but there is nothing chameleon like about Albert. I've gone up against him and still have to respect him for that. The clothes comment is just silly . . . I wear jeans some days and a neck tie on others, and I definitely am not pretending to be all things to all people.
you sir, may not be prentending but he sure is!
To the last anon, you really expect me to believe that you wear jeans and a "working" shirt to a Chamber of Commerce luncheon? Really? I don't think so.
That's pandering!
Just like his campaign banner -"Katy's Seat" trying to appeal to "Katy's voters". If he's a Republican who wants to appeal to "Katy's voters" he'll have to reconcile his views with Katy's, including her regular bashing of the Boys Scouts - from the dais of all places!
I wonder what's Albert's position on the Boy Scouts? His answer could tell me a lot about him.
I am getting the impression that the other candidates are scared of Albert.
Nope, they think he's a loose cannon with no vision of his own. To me, and I've been around County Hall a very long time, he reminds me of a cross between Souto with his long answers and Martinez making decisions whichever way the wind blows. He'll be part of the URM in no time if he's elected.
After the last comment, I'm inclined to believe Albert's got some folks scared, too, . . . In no way is that guy a loose cannon. Too methodical, and I've heard him say unpopular things because it's what he believes. While I don't agree with his pro-life stance, I heard him state it with a large pro-choice crowd knowing it wasn't what they wanted to hear. I admire the strength and haven't ruled him out for my vote because of it and based on his position on relevant issues.
The problem is - as a representative of Dist 8 - he needs to represent the "people" not his own self gratification, which is what he's doing. And, that goes to all the candidates.
Yes, I too, was in that same dinner/forum when Albert was FORCED to reveal his pro-life stance.
The question was clearly aimed at the conservative candidates in the room and Albert looked very uneasy as the "yes/no" answers went from Taddeo all the way down the dais to Bell and FINALLY to Albert - who looked like a "deer caught in the headlights" as he struggled to answer.
And when he finally did answer, sitting "side saddle" on his chair, he studdered just a little bit as gasps from the mostly liberal audience - surprised and disappointed at the fact that the "liberal" facade had suddenly fallen off Albert's "costume". It was a very telling moment and I'll never forget it.
At that percise moment is when I realized that this candidate was, in fact, a chameleon - someone who would say anything to any group in order to gain their favor. This current discussion only confirms what I, and quite a number of other people who attended the UEL Dinner learned that night - Albert Harum-Alvarez can't be trusted.
He'll go along to get along - that's not leadership. That's "politics as usual." And we need "politics as usual" like we need new taxes!
Wow, there's a whole bunch of vitriol toward such a mild-mannered dude. I'm fascinated by the anger leveled at Albert.
Stunning really.
He is a bit of a conundrum. An environmentalist who seems overly focused on process issues and generally considered pretty liberal since he thinks government can fix problems. He's also socially conservative and a devout Catholic (the former was news to me until the campaign. It just never came up.).
Anyway, developers walk all over Council 12 and that's somehow his fault. Is he on Council 12? No? Then what's all the bitching about.
He may diverge severely from my personal philosophy on social matters, but the last thing I'd worry about is that he'd kowtow to developers.
Anyone with a memory will recall that the zoning in downtown Kendall had UNLIMITED height by right. The urban center designation allowed more units at lower height by ditching old ideas about building setbacks and other arcane sprawl features. But in the end, it took from developers as much as it gave (if not more).
There's nothing keeping the development west of the Palmetto at any height except pressure from the Council and the Commissioners representing the area with long enough memory to recall what the deal was. The only way to "fix" that is to change the definition for the underlying zoning type countywide which you can do, but get ready to open up your wallet to pay for the "taking" lawsuits.
^^^I'm Albert Harum-Alvarez and I approve this message^^^
Yikes! What is going on here? I support incorporation. Get the county out of local issues as much as possible is my philosopy. I like Barry and Albert and Gene. Because I like someone does not mean I agree with them on their issues nor does it mean I will vote for them.
The person who invoked that this project is infill --infill was ironed out at the charette...there were a shitload of meetings on what kind of infill it would be in the area and where infill would go. The people feel betrayed now. Lee Allen we all know you are a land use attorney.
I'm a Democrat, and Harum-Alvarez did not seem nervous at all answering any question at the UEL. He answered them all candidly with confidence . . . perhaps it was the listener who was uncomfortable. That's definitely not politics as usual. He had an opportunity to give the bland one-word answers everyone else did including the career politicians, but he didn't . . . which apparently made others squirm. This is his first time running, and he's obviously bringing something new to the table. Can we just discuss issues, say yay or nay with our votes and not bring the whole conversation down to personal attacks?
P.S. Albert in my view is honest and has a strong center. I think he is undeserving of being painted as an opportunist. I don't agree with him on some issues but I don't question his integrity.
While you all argue, Taddeo will slide into office.
Albert will go along to get along - one of you said above. That is the most accurate statement on Kendall issues and Albert.
BE WARY OF SAVOLA. My understanding is that she is a snake in the grass. She's running for the House of Representatives. Perhaps you ought to see who is running against her and throw your weight there.
115 District:
Ascencio Savola,Carla (REP)
Blau, Christopher
(TEA)
Diaz, Jose Felix (REP)
Solomon, Jeffrey "Doc" (DEM)
Savola did receive a 200.00 donation from a GARCIGA, GEORGE 3/10/2010
Is that okay???
While you all argue, Taddeo will slide into office.
Or Piedra or Linda... that is exactly why Albert should rethink his candidacy. He is not ready yet for office. He needs to be an understudy for a while before he takes main stage.
I don't want another protege politician groomed by the same folks who've not served us well. I am a Democrat. I favor the Incorporation of Kendall, and I am voting for Albert Harum-Alvarez after having worked toward incorporation with him for years. He works tirelessly for his community. He is brilliant. He's honest . . . what you see IS what you get. He's run his own international business based in Miami for decades, and best yet, he has the intelligence and strength of character to do what's right always.
If you lived in the incorporated east side of the county you would know the strength of leadership it takes to incorporate and build a strong community. There is a strong interwoven community that consists of 3 fine local governments.
I am sorry that Kendall under Albert never made it to point of incorporation. You have to seal the deal. It is not enough to call yourself an activist. You have to win. Where is the trophy in Kendall?
I don't to see, hear or smell party politics in my commission office. I want a commissioner who is non-partisan in their way of thinking. Not one beholden to the Republicans (sorry GoD) or even the flower children dems.
Just run for the seat and keep the republican and democratic party handlers where they belong, unlike Alvarez and Taddeo, who are managing to drag party politics in.
Sorry to last anon, but we're receiving "conflicting reports from the field" - He's been around enough people already for them to begin to talk - and they talk to each other too.
That's bad news for Albert.
We expect this type of 2 faced "politicking" from a jaded, established politician not a candidate running for office for the very first time.
Anyone who thinks the machines of politics are not behind every election is naive. Candidates are unwise not to acknowledge that if only to move on to less partisan endeavors during their campaigns.
Regarding Albert, what is the "two-faced" aspect the one Anon keeps mentioning. I've read this whole thread and nothing contradictory has been shown . . . unique Yes, inconsistent NO.
Going back, way back to the original post. Yes the "decision" to allow the Colony high rise was underhanded and unethical. Yes there were hand signals and obvious special interests at work. Yes, Savola and Diaz de la Portilla were both absolutely disgusting in their behavior. And finally yes, the community council did not have to vote for it, just because the developer was allowed to build what he was asking for. This horrible "vote" is going to set a precedent for other developers to ask for the same. Downtown Dadeland was built with the understanding that high rises be kept east of 826. And just for the record, as far as Albert, who I am married to, he will never log in any log as anonymous. He is not a chameleon, he is who he is and he is not afraid to or ashamed to say it. Maybe that's what is so bothersome to some.
FYI the max contribution was made to Gene Flinn's campaign by lawyer/lobbyist Miguel Diaz de la Portilla.
I've known the Diaz De La Portilla brothers for years and Miguel never ever contributes and/or gets involved in anything unless he KNOWS he's getting something in return. He considers it an "investment". Very sinister guy.
Pam Gray, Jason Culler now Miguel Diaz De La Portilla?
I wonder what "Mikey" is getting in return for his "investment" to "let's make a deal" Flinn?
Post a Comment