[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6355575,"mediaKeyId","2218128-609463b41fe2ad558ec22aee9ae2c4ab","parentId",2218128,"title","Planning board approves Palomar rooftop access for restaurant with noise, kitchen and queuing conditions","audioSeconds",4610,"startMs",1978000,"endMs",6588000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2218128-609463b41fe2ad558ec22aee9ae2c4ab&start=1978&end=6588","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2218128-609463b41fe2ad558ec22aee9ae2c4ab/thumbnail_1978000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6355575/Miami-Beach/Miami-Dade-County/Florida/Planning-board-approves-Palomar-rooftop-access-for-restaurant-with-noise-kitchen-and-queuing-conditions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6355575-9bb3fd073d48b84964583f353fb565b7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771185314&Signature=ZZZA~rBAOXkemqv-459LQPj9zE~wh2N47cuAB8vgn7yTVBq~QJ2Zr-cnI2KoDfj7UbothIL08H4B3geGt2S-7ef5qK5BHSl5PJZACy0yR4qp7WzOjCcxV5~8ziJybikdF0ONvWUjqgEzFcmYPgSWYB7CYlMxPxssGMLBH2tCx4~JD0o3HcevMUKQvXZiwDp50WbsO-TPvc4ttuZCvg4nrjY5hoznk-MsCIabm9dYHzJPFeALwFDBNVX2fze-eNRvr~11Jv7Pgi18KoSH4zXcT2cgh5CO8yAttKi3XXBdeO-XWwtd7tXp93n4L9kzQ3yoj4KhorVSsm4y4ePtberjAA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Miami Beach, FL","date","2025-01-18T22:44:35Z","article","The Miami Beach Planning Board on Feb. 4 voted to allow the Palomar Hotel (1750 Alton Road) to open its rooftop to the public in conjunction with a new ground-floor restaurant operator, subject to a set of conditions the board added after neighborhood concerns about noise and previous unpermitted events.

The board’s approval requires the rooftop restaurant operation to meet new conditions: the board added a plainly audible noise limit within 250 feet of the property, required that a functional kitchen be constructed and permitted on the rooftop before public rooftop service begins, tightened queuing/valet language to prohibit queuing in the public right-of-way, added a requirement that a substantive restaurant menu be available while the rooftop is open, and required pre-opening sound testing subject to staff review. The rooftop will not be permitted for special events, and the approval includes a condition saying rooftop public use must cease if the current operator leaves until a new operator is approved by the board.

Why it matters: The project pairs a Michelin-starred restaurateur’s proposal to add rooftop dining with community concerns about noise and previous unpermitted events at the site. The board’s conditions aim to balance economic development and neighborhood livability by keeping the rooftop available to hotel guests and the public only under enforceable limits.

Applicant and operator
Mickey Marrero, attorney for the applicant, framed the proposal as a way to recreate an active hotel-with-restaurant experience and told the board the project team had negotiated additional restrictions with neighborhood groups. Marrero said the applicant would construct a rooftop kitchen if the board allowed public rooftop use. \"We will not open the rooftop to the public until the kitchen is approved and permitted,\" Marrero said.

Chef and restaurateur Nicholas \"Nicky\" Stefanelli, principal of Masseria, described the concept as a dinner-only restaurant that would extend the ground-floor hospitality through the building and onto the rooftop: \"We're super excited to be coming down here... we're proposing... to be able to completely bring our hospitality into the whole entire building.\" Stefanelli said he plans an Italian, service-oriented restaurant rather than a late-night club.

Neighborhood concerns and prior violations
Neighbors — including John Courtney of the Palm View Neighborhood Association and Sarah de los Reyes of the Sunset Harbor Neighborhood Association — urged the board to preserve the existing rooftop prohibition in the Alton Road corridor, arguing the rooftop as proposed is more like a bar than a bona fide restaurant and pointing to past unpermitted events and noise complaints. Courtney said the legal test for allowing rooftop activation is whether the establishment meets the code definition of a restaurant \"— the principal business will be selling food — not that there will be menus available.\" Sarah de los Reyes and other neighbors described multiple noise incidents and asked the board to hold the applicant to strict, enforceable standards.

Staff perspective and recommended conditions
Staff recommended limiting rooftop hours and restricting music and alcohol service to reduce neighborhood impacts; staff proposed closure times and a 100-foot audible limit for music. During discussion, board members expressed concern that a 100-foot standard might be too weak and many supported requiring a more protective limit. The board ultimately adopted a 250-foot plainly-audible limit that must be met while the rooftop is open to the public.

Board action and conditions (selected)
- Approval of rooftop public access conditioned on:
- Noise shall not be plainly audible within 250 feet of the property while rooftop is open to the public.
- No queuing shall be permitted in the public right-of-way; valet/queuing operations to be managed to prevent public-right-of-way queues.
- The rooftop shall not open to the public until a rooftop kitchen for the restaurant is designed, permitted and inspected.
- A substantive restaurant menu shall be available during rooftop operating hours; menu scope to be reviewed by staff as part of permit review.
- The rooftop service bar or counter is limited to service-for-seated-guests and shall be reviewed by the planning director to confirm it is not an unpermitted outdoor bar counter.
- Sound testing of rooftop speakers/system is required and subject to staff review and approval prior to public opening.
- If the approved operator ceases rooftop operation, rooftop public access must cease until a new operator and conditions are approved by the Planning Board.
- No special-event permits will be allowed for the rooftop under the CUP conditions.

Vote and next steps
Planning Board member Yashael made the motion to approve the application with the applicant’s proposed conditions plus additional language on noise, queuing and the rooftop kitchen requirement; the board seconded and voted in favor. Staff will draft final CUP conditions, confirm sound-testing protocols and follow up with the applicant on the kitchen/permitting timeline; the rooftop may not open to the public until staff confirms compliance with the new conditions.

Ending
The approval allows a prominent operator to bring a high-profile restaurant to Alton Road while creating an enforceable package of conditions intended to protect nearby residents. The new rooftop use will require additional permitting steps — including rooftop kitchen permitting and sound testing — before public service can begin.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Planning Board Meeting 2.4.25","oneSentenceSummary","The Miami Beach Planning Board on Feb. 4 approved opening the Palomar Hotel rooftop to the public for a new restaurant operator, provided the applicant meets a set of conditions the board added to protect neighbors from noise and operational impacts.","taxTitle","Miami Beach, Miami-Dade County, Florida","taxId",2893,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6355570,"Planning board backs Deauville redevelopment ordinance with setbacks and floor-plate clarifications; neighbors press for more protections",373,6611000,6984000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2218128-609463b41fe2ad558ec22aee9ae2c4ab&start=6611&end=6984","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2218128-609463b41fe2ad558ec22aee9ae2c4ab/thumbnail_6611000.jpg","/articles/6355570/Miami-Beach/Miami-Dade-County/Florida/Planning-board-backs-Deauville-redevelopment-ordinance-with-setbacks-and-floor-plate-clarifications-neighbors-press-for-more-protections","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6355570-a4e2926257c09ff0b3dd79d912945958/orig.mp4?Expires=1771185314&Signature=a685TI7FAs5gRLMaGxg-odVy3tnFcpcV~~m-BDqYU3gwNNBf4oUSJChWXh3Rqu~9vs8Ja-ofCAXRCMr33f6UrSxiVXaLclUOYJVTjhKf1vNjkCpKe9llqvpILG6XN7AyLzHh~A~iNvNAaGg1F0TOlf0GDy874TzV~lYlMcJCMIvfpNVPpjh3vdtGpqUyEe-x4oTw2Oz~BHyAxBltWf7VgEiRJz~boVXL3tYN6R3EgQbQ7jMf50ZYjkS7I5AV4lgf2H2e2Q1QsE58Etn~KbOp0vj3ewjtoFtVfSAu7qhnuI2Z-UI0vjKqfkS67Us0eN5KIHIywchvF~wH4q9j9bYp-A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Miami Beach Planning Board on Feb. 4 voted to forward proposed comprehensive plan and development-regulation ordinances for the Deauville site (6701 Collins Avenue) and the North Beach Oceanfront Overlay District to the City Commission with a favorable recommendation, while asking staff to include additional clarifications on tower floor plates and maximum east–west dimensions.

Staff told the board the project is part of a six-step review process for any increase in floor-area ratio (FAR) in Miami Beach. The applicant and design team presented a revised approach that reduces the proposed bonus floor area and reinterprets the historic Deauville pedestal and tower, while proposing two slender residential towers set back from the beachfront. Staff recommended minor code changes to make the tower footprints and maximum floor plates explicit in the overlay code.

Why it matters: The Deauville site sits on a prominent block of Collins Avenue in North Beach. The proposal seeks to restore and reinterpret the historic hotel pedestal while permitting higher floor area through a bonus system tied to community benefits. The board’s recommendation advances the application to the City Commission but leaves room for additional analysis and neighborhood negotiation on setbacks and massing.

Project and design summary
Applicant representatives said the project is intended to \"rebuild\" the Deauville’s public pedestal and reinterpret the original tower, while limiting overall density through smaller residential footprints. Architect Alan Shulman described a plan that widens and upgrades the public sidewalk, creates landscaped beach-access paths at the north and south ends of the block, and reduces tower floor plates so that the towers sit farther from the beach.

Key legislative points and staff recommendations
Staff summarized proposed legislative changes:
- A revised bonus FAR system that achieves a 4.5 FAR overall through smaller, reallocated bonus buckets (the total proposed floor area was similar to prior submittals but the composition of base FAR and bonus FAR changed).
- Inclusion in the overlay ordinance of explicit caps on residential floor-plate size (staff recommended a maximum floor plate of 9,500 square feet for the new residential towers) and a maximum east–west dimension to prevent towers from extending too far toward the ocean.
- Specific allowances and encroachments for beach-access paths, loading consolidation and certain resilient infrastructure measures; the applicant described stormwater, cistern and green-infrastructure strategies as part of site resiliency.

Public comment and neighborhood concerns
Supporters — including nearby business owners, local residents and neighborhood associations — spoke in favor of redevelopment, calling the project an economic catalyst for North Beach and praising the applicant’s outreach. Several nearby property owners and residents — notably several speakers from the Sterling condominium — asked the board to preserve the existing 83-foot east/rear setback rather than accept a reduced 50-foot tower setback. They said a smaller setback would reduce views, increase shadows, and set an undesirable precedent for neighboring parcels.

Board action and conditions
The Planning Board voted to forward both ordinances (the comprehensive plan amendment and the overlay development-regulation ordinance) to the City Commission with a favorable recommendation and requested the staff include the recommended floor-plate cap and maximum east–west dimension in the draft code language for the Commission. Several board members urged continued dialog with neighbors regarding tower setbacks and shadowing before final Commission action; the board also asked staff to treat the application as subject to the city’s six-step FAR-increase process before Commission hearings.

Next steps
The ordinances will be transmitted to the City Commission for the next step in the review process; the Commission will hold its own hearings and can adopt, modify, or reject the proposed code changes. Staff and the applicant plan to continue neighborhood meetings; the board also noted that adjoining sites’ proposed development (for example, a separate proposal by another applicant immediately north of the Deauville parcel) may be influenced by the Deauville code changes, and that any change is likely to require additional analysis at the Commission stage.

Ending
By forwarding the ordinances with clarifying floor-plate and dimension language, the Planning Board advanced a contentious and consequential North Beach redevelopment to the Commission while highlighting neighbors’ concerns over setback and shadow impacts.","The Miami Beach Planning Board on Feb. 4 voted to forward proposed ordinances for the Deauville site (6701 Collins Avenue) and the North Beach Oceanfront Overlay District to the City Commission with a favorable recommendation, asking staff to include explicit caps on residential floor plates and maximum east–west dimensions.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6355581,"Miami Beach planning board continues Vendome revocation hearing, orders tighter security and bans special-event permits",1102,844000,1946000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2218128-609463b41fe2ad558ec22aee9ae2c4ab&start=844&end=1946","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2218128-609463b41fe2ad558ec22aee9ae2c4ab/thumbnail_844000.jpg","/articles/6355581/Miami-Beach/Miami-Dade-County/Florida/Miami-Beach-planning-board-continues-Vendome-revocation-hearing-orders-tighter-security-and-bans-special-event-permits","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6355581-e2e24dc3096c3ee800b2ffc43b1063ab/orig.mp4?Expires=1771185314&Signature=AQ1MX3qWGP56yPTn~k8odcyVuSF5ufsMsvpAPSQopIHjdwhnrWEDcuC2VwADyu3I0bj-hab4CZzRnXMxzaRiiu47T1UIBfDPl2BuPsRB~Hc-Gt2mP8R35VKOO8DeW4TSMgplAbRyu-edUg793xNueE0v9Timo9UPXVNx-sLCSE3qf~BTlMR1e65~03GKV72NNz-C2ZmG~hAj6sjHVxDtWwBYPmoQZvMgyd20A4iT43IDx4XGMMuI99ip43neIW2IV5kOikiwclKqMhxq3MjFLkLJmuYW4tiSF5zV8XZf3dIgdMq5h5Gea5GIQW-48Vwvf27ZL-c7JYPCoZKZOvNFAw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Miami Beach Planning Board on Feb. 4 continued a revocation and modification hearing for Mentor and Co. LLC, doing business as the Vendome (660 Washington Avenue), and instructed staff and the applicant to add specific security measures and ban special-event permits while striking a proposed ban on \"promoted events.\" The board set the next review for the April 8 meeting.

The hearing, which grew from repeated code enforcement citations and earlier appeals to a special magistrate, examined whether the venue complied with its Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Staff told the board that since the last hearing there were no new citations issued to the property, but several prior citations had been adjudicated guilty by the special magistrate in January. Staff recommended modifying the CUP to prohibit special events and to add public-safety-related conditions, then continue monitoring the property.

Why it matters: The Vendome has been under heightened enforcement and public scrutiny for nighttime queuing, promoted events and other violations. The board’s direction now imposes a near-term operational restriction on the venue and keeps the matter under active review, preserving the board’s ability to modify or revoke the CUP if future violations occur.

Board and applicant account
Mickey Marrero, attorney for Mentor and Co. LLC, said the venue has largely complied since May 2024: \"Since then there was no queuing violations despite the fact that 88 going into last time and I think 16 more since, there have been now a hundred and 4 proactive investigations by code since the beginning of the summer... other than Halloween night ... there were exactly 0 queuing violations from May till today.\" Marrero disputed the seriousness of the Halloween citation and argued the business had implemented a queuing plan, added staff and improved operations.

Staff noted several adjudications in January — including a tinting citation and sidewalk queuing citations — and asked the board to modify the CUP to prohibit special-event permits and to add security and operational conditions, then continue the matter for monitoring. The board debated whether to close the hearing and dismiss further review or to continue under new conditions. One early motion to conclude the hearing without additional restrictions failed on a roll call vote.

A compromise prevailed: the board voted to continue the revocation/modification hearing to April 8 and instructed staff to prepare the CUP modification to (1) add the security enhancements recommended by staff and (2) prohibit issuance of city special-event permits at the property. The board explicitly struck a broader ban on \"promoted events,\" leaving that definition and its enforcement to code and police review.

What the board directed and next steps
- The board ordered staff to draft a modified CUP for the Vendome that includes the security additions staff recommended and a prohibition on special-event permits.
- The board left the city alcohol-code definition of \"promoted events\" in effect but removed the recommended blanket prohibition on promoted events; the board asked staff to work with the applicant and neighbors on operational clarifications.
- The hearing will be continued to the April 8 Planning Board meeting for status review and further action if additional violations occur.

Community context and concerns
Palm View and other neighbors testified about past noise and rooftop events and said they want permanent, enforceable protections. Marrero and the applicant said recent operations and code enforcement scans show improved compliance. Staff emphasized that special magistrate findings and the number of proactive code inspections in 2024 factor into the board’s decision to keep the matter under active review rather than immediately revoke the CUP.

Ending
The continuation preserves the board’s oversight while requiring the applicant to incorporate the board’s security and event-permit restrictions into the CUP. The April 8 status review will determine whether the Vendome’s changes are sufficient to avoid further enforcement or CUP modification.","After months of citations and appeals, the Planning Board continued a revocation/modification hearing for the Vendome (Mentor and Co. LLC) to April and directed staff/applicant to add security measures and ban special-event permits; the board removed a proposed ban on \"promoted events.\"","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning board approves Palomar rooftop access for restaurant with noise, kitchen and queuing conditions

Planning board backs Deauville redevelopment ordinance with setbacks and floor-plate clarifications; neighbors press for more protections

Miami Beach planning board continues Vendome revocation hearing, orders tighter security and bans special-event permits