We asked candidates standing for Commissioner seats in the upcoming election to answer questions on topics important to our neighborhood. Read their responses below.
Residents QOL: Our neighborhood parklets on the Bay at 10th St, 14th St., Lincoln Rd, Lincoln Ct, & Bay Rd have become blighted with trash, illegal fishing, homelessness, drug dealing, & lewd behavior. What are you plans to help our residents address this urgent issue?
Andres Asion (Group 4):
It’s clear that we need the city to reinforce policing strategies in the South Beach neighborhoods as much of our headlines over crime and safety happen here. As a resident of South of Fifth, I understand this uniquely and believe the police department should create a dedicated South Beach unit that is focused on these very issues. When you have a dedicated strategy you increase the likelihood of success.
In addition, we need to work with the neighborhood buildings to ensure they have proactive policies in place, install their own security cameras and partner with commercial and residential building managers to be part of the solutions.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4):
First of all, this shouldn’t be an issue that residents should have to address – the city should be responsible for monitoring and addressing the problems. Here are some tactics that I’d like to see implemented immediately:
- Review and adjust landscaping so there are no hidden nooks and crannies for inappropriate/illegal behavior to happen. There should be clear sight lines from street to water.
- Ensure bright light at night – not directed to infringe on residential windows – to deter bad actors for doing things in the shadows.
- Regular foot/bike patrols around the clock by police and park rangers – not on a set schedule, however, so that patterns are known – to catch bad actors in the act and remediate the issues.
- Daily public works sweeps to address trash.
Mitch Novick (Group 5):
I propose implementing increased police patrols, enhanced trash collection, and community programs aimed at involving residents in clean-up initiatives.
David Suarez (Group 5):
Ensure that both police, park rangers and sanitation frequently (multiple times a day) visit each parklet to enforce the law. I will also engage and coordinate with FWC to stop illegal fishing activities at all parklets, marinas, and bridges.
Joe Magazine (Group 6):
While canvassing, this issue was brought to my attention and pictures were shared with me from multiple residents at 1450 Lincoln Road. There were multiple people overnight on the baywalk in complete zombie like states, presenting a clear and immediate issue for the surrounding neighborhoods. To address problems like this, I would reassign city resources to create a residential quality of life team. There would be a handful of team members assigned to South, Mid and North Beach, and would act as a more engaged, proactive neighborhood affairs committee. Their sole job would be to proactively traverse their respective areas, and identify neighborhood issues such as this, and liase with the proper city departments. We can have zero tolerance for the behavior that was shared with me, and allowing it to simmer at the surface just leads to more brazen, more voluminous behavior like this.
Marcella Novela (Group 6):
My campaign slogan is Elevate Miami Beach, which centers around cleaning up our streets, engaging county resources to deal effectively with homelessness and completely eradicating blight and common illegal activity like fishing. If we increase enforcement with additional police services and public service department, we can address this, additionally I will push for a Clean Streets Campaign to ensure that this is dealt with comprehensively.
Loss of Parking spaces on West Ave: Although the completion of the street raising and infrastructure project on West Avenue is necessary and long overdue, what are your recommendations to ameliorate the negative effects of the loss of over 120 parking spaces due to the project and street parking reconfiguration for this project?
Mitch Novick (Group 5):
I believe it’s important that the design and construction of the project follow best practices and standards at the local, county, state, and national level for the safety and well-being of all West Avenue residents. I support the City’s offer to build a parking garage along West Avenue as a viable way to address the concerns of the loss of parking spaces.
David Suarez (Group 5):
Before parking spaces are eliminated a solution for the 120 parking spaces must be presented. Work with the parking department to “squeeze” in as many available parking spots. Work with current parking lot owners to subsidize parking fees to residents.
Joe Magazine (Group 6):
As an active participant at WAVNA meetings, I have heard loud and clear the concern for the loss of parking. I have worked with WAVNA and city staff to identify underutilized private parking facilities and surface lots that the city could look to partner with in providing temporary parking solutions during the next phase of the West Ave infrastructure project. Also, there should be more proactive parking enforcement in the nearby residential parking zones, with tourists that park in residential parking zones immediately identified and towed. These two issues would i) provide additional parking capacity, and ii) free up and preserve existing residential parking that is being utilized in improper ways.
Marcella Novela (Group 6):
Whenever such a remediation project is under taken there needs to be a plan to account for and replace lost parking. Unfortunately this was not accounted for and must be dealt with after the fact. The city has the leverage to accommodate for parking in the area when issuing new construction and zoning permits. I am committed to do just that moving forward to accommodate the residents on West Avenue.
Andres Asion (Group 4):
The loss of over 120 parking spaces north of 14th Street—along with additional spaces that will be lost south of 14th Street—is a pressing concern that must be addressed. While the raising of roads and infrastructure improvements are crucial for mitigating flooding, it’s essential that we also preserve the quality of life for our residents. To that end, I propose exploring ordinances requiring city staff to offset any loss of residential street parking by creating new parking options. For instance, we could convert existing lots into city garages that offer residential permit parking. This approach would ensure that the burden of infrastructure improvement doesn’t fall solely on residents through the loss of parking spaces.
Furthermore, I recommend re-evaluating our current parking plans to identify potential areas where we can fit more spaces. One approach could be to eliminate parking lines along streets, allowing for more flexible parking arrangements and maximizing the number of cars that can park.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4):
There have been a number of very thoughtful suggestions submitted to the City by Stephan Ginez, with the backing of West Ave residents, which include providing flexibility on street parking demarcations, , changing some traffic flow signage, creating a new residential parking zone, and reconsidering placement of green space plantings on private property which would mitigate the loss of between 100-144 (depending on who’s counting) spots. These are above-ground changes with little to no impact to cost or timing of the project; instead of ignoring these careful recommendations, the City should be embracing and working to incorporate them in their plans.
Additionally, the City should also be reaching out to any nearby private lots and commercial buildings with parking to determine if there may be available capacity that the City could lease and provide at a deeply subsidized rate to residents.
Building a new parking structure at 1624 West Ave is not a viable option. The project is already over budget; the loosely-estimated cost of close to $20 million dollars is not funded, and the time horizon to complete such a project does nothing to address the immediate needs. Moreover, for residents used to parking within a block of their buildings, especially older residents, walking up to three blocks carrying groceries in rainy season is not useful. Losing accessible parking decreases the value of their homes, and makes vendor services even more difficult to obtain as many firms refuse to work where there is no easy access to parking.
Proposed new Community Health Center and Condo Tower development @ 710 -740 Alton Rd:
What is your opinion regarding this development and how would you address resident concerns regarding increased traffic and congestion, loss of views / sight-lines, and a potential ‘canyon-effect’ due to construction of another potential tower on West Avenue?
Joe Magazine (Group 6):
While a new community health center is needed given the condition the county allowed the current facility to deteriorate to over the years, as Commissioner, I would fight for more funding from both the city and county and ensure this be budgeted for. With funding from both the county and city, the scale, density, and footprint of the residential development could be drastically scaled down, providing a much less dense, impactful project in the neighborhood. When this project was originally introduced to the Commission in March 2022, the concept of the city providing funds to minimize the development impact was introduced, but never followed through on. As commissioner, I would fight to ensure this was added into the budget.
Marcella Novela (Group 6):
Unlike my opponent, I am opposed to this project which does not protect the integrity and nature of the neighborhood. The added congestion and traffic add insult to injury of the West Avenue area. I will oppose any future projects which continue to contribute to the “canyon effect” of the current neighborhood.
Andres Asion (Group 4):
While residents approved this project through referendum in 2022, I intend to work with our neighborhood residents most impacted by this to minimize any disturbance to quality of life for the area. Traffic is a major concern and the city administration must be prepared to address how they will mitigate this if they approve recommendation of the development agreement.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4):
I have been and remain opposed to this project, and deplore the bait and switch tactics used to get this project approved. This City needs to stop granting variances and must hold developers accountable to build projects as they are presented.
Mitch Novick (Group 5):
I didn’t support the referendum, and I do not favor increasing the building height. Residential development is less impactful compared to hospitality, commercial, restaurant, and office development.
David Suarez (Group 5):
I believe we have enough high rises on Miami Beach and cannot support any further, especially on Alton between 5th and Lincoln rd. As your next City Commissioner, I will oppose proposed FAR and height increases.
What concerns, if any, do you have regarding the future development of other ‘under-activated’ properties along West Avenue and Alton Road and the potential for developer buyouts in order to increase FAR and height for these properties, including but not limited to: Federation Towers parking lot at 8th and Alton; South Bay Club parking lots at 8th between Alton and West Avenue; the parking lot at 824 Alton Rd; and several other ‘under-activated’ land parcel?
Andres Asion (Group 4):
It’s time for the city to engage in a renewed master plan and vision for Miami Beach. We cannot continue to have one-off projects that do not tie in to the community. We must have a broad approach that ensures residential quality of life is preserved and protected. We’ve seen how the Legislative actions are now encroaching on our rights and local control, and we must ensure that we do not see massive towers come to areas where eland exists. We need to put forward a broad vision to the voters to review and approve so we have the strength of our voices heard clearly.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4):
Our City Commission acts like a glorified Zoning Board spending far too much of its and the staff’s time and resources trying to fit for-profit development project round pegs into square holes, granting variances and de facto spot zoning for the latest shiny bauble dangled before them. We need to build the city we need and want, and work only with developers who are willing to create our vision. That means looking holistically at what we have too much of, versus what we need, and allowing only what is good for our community to be built. We do not need more $5-20 million apartments on these under-utilized parcels. However, they could make excellent housing for the “missing middle” – 2-3 bedroom, well-built rental units that don’t boast 70,000 sq. ft. of amenities because they are located in walking distance to excellent parks, schools, and the ocean. We need to build homes for our teachers, first responders, young families, city staff – who will contribute to our community by activating these under-utilized blocks.
Mitch Novick (Group 5):
Any development needs to be thoughtful, appropriate, and have community support. It Question also be vetted by the various stakeholders, including city land use boards.
David Suarez (Group 5):
They should remain “under-activated” ; not every piece of land needs to be developed. We need to maintain our surface level parking lots during the WA construction.
Joe Magazine (Group 6):
Very significant concerns, with those concerns being warranted just by looking at the property owners along Alton and West of several of these empty surface lots or underutilized properties. We should not allow any more overlay districts that serve to essentially spot zone in this area and has previously lead to massive, out of scale development. We must also fight to prevent concepts such as rapid transit zoning, live local act, and transfer of development rights, as they will all target to have massive, out of scale development in this very corridor.
Marcella Novela (Group 6):
I firmly oppose the concept of “under activated” properties. Miami Beach does not have the infrastructure, space or tolerance available to accommodate the development of these properties.
What is your definition of responsible development?
Mitch Novick (Group 5):
Responsible development is that which is compatible and contextual with the neighborhood.
David Suarez (Group 5):
Development that improves the quality of life for full-time residents, with a particular caution for height and density that supports and enhances the surrounding, existing neighborhood area. Developments that are permissible within the existing city code. I will be a Commissioner that consistently opposes any further height and FAR increases or requested “variances” that developers constantly ask for.
Joe Magazine (Group 6):
Selective, ‘smart’ development is certainly needed to keep our city moving forward. However, it is important to get the usage right. We should focus on residential housing, given Miami Beach is the only city in all of Florida losing full time residents. We should not be having commercial development in our residential neighborhoods. Development also needs to be in scale with the existing area and zoning, and we should eliminate so many overlay districts, which almost always serve as a means to spot zone.
Marcella Novela (Group 6):
Responsible development maintains and respects the current integrity and nature of the neighborhood. This means it is in keeping with it surroundings without placing undo stress on traffic and infrastructure. Furthermore, historic preservation must be paramount to all considerations. In simplest of terms this is a Residents First approach.
Andres Asion (Group 4):
We must focus any development projects with three key issues in mind. Does it generate workforce, affordable and/or senior housing in a neighborhood that either needs it or warrants it; does it address resiliency and offset flooding issues through redevelopment; if it applies to the project, does it preserve or honor our history and integrate into the proposed neighborhood.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4):
Responsible development addresses and fills a need for the community, rather than just enriching the developer. There’s no issue with allowing developers to be profitable, but building purely for maximum profit without considering the purpose of what is being built is the height of irresponsibility (no pun intended). Moreover, responsible development should:
- fit within the defined zoning laws for the parcel, not seek de facto spot zoning and variances
- ensure that all the affected infrastructure is in peak condition, and if it isn’t, should replace it
- build using the latest eco-friendly systems/technology, such as porous concrete, green roofs, etc., wherever appropriate
- consider adaptive reuse wherever possible, rather than demolishing and building new – this is the single greenest way to build
- work with the community BEFORE they get too far down the road so that what is being built is actually going to benefit the neighborhood in which it will be existing.
Rapid Transit Zone (RTZ) Ordinance & Transportation Option: What is your opinion of the recently adopted Rapid Transit Zone (RTZ) ordinance that would allow significant increased FAR and height for properties adjacent to the metro lines which would have a deleterious effect on the historic art deco district of Miami Beach? Low rise buildings would no longer be protected – thus becoming vulnerable to being torn down and replaced with new taller and more densely occupied buildings.
Joe Magazine (Group 6):
For the past year, there has been no single person in our city that has done more to raise awareness to the disastrous effects and overdevelopment that would result from Rapid Transit Zoning. I was the person that raised the likely implementation of RTZ and its impact leading up to a vote on the Baylink by our city commission, which caused the commission to pause their support in the face of uncertainty with RTZ. I raised this issue to the City Manager, Planning Department, and key neighborhood organizations, including giving an in person presentation on RTZ to WAVNA, working with SOFNA, Flamingo Park, Palm & Star Island, and more.
Marcella Novela (Group 6):
I am fundamentally opposed to this ordinance. Local control is critical to protecting our community.
Andres Asion (Group 4):
RTZ’s undermine local control and we see how Tallahassee’s efforts to take over our local zoning decisions can have major adverse impacts. As a city must stand up for our local control at any level of government. We must engage in direct conversations on any RTZ deployed project because the city should have a clear opportunity to weigh in. In summary, we need to fight to maintain local control over developments and ensure that our city’s historic and cultural fabric remains intact for years to come.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4):
As a long-serving board member of Miami Design Preservation League and the Vice Chair of the Planning Board in the Historic Preservation seat, as well as being a firm believer in the law of unintended consequences, I am adamantly opposed to this ordinance. It makes a great deal of sense in underdeveloped areas of the county; it not only makes no sense, but it actually harmful, to small historic cities like ours with literally no room to expand. Our Art Deco district fuels our economy in Miami Beach and Miami Beach fuels the tourism industry for Florida – the only city or entity that sends more tax resort revenues to Tallahassee is Disney World. Our low-rise density and charm is one of the reasons many of us choose to live here; destroying that opens the floodgates to turning us into Sunny Isles South.
Mitch Novick (Group 5):
Based on my understanding from media reports, our historic districts, including the art deco district, are exempt from the RTZ ordinance.
David Suarez (Group 5):
Low rise buildings would no longer be protected – thus becoming vulnerable to being torn down and replaced with new taller and more densely occupied buildings. – I completely oppose the RTZ and as a Commissioner will fight against it.
Would you support exempting Miami Beach from the County as a Rapid Transit Zone (RTZ)?
Andres Asion (Group 4):
YES, I am strongly opposed to the current proposal for an elevated Baylink Metromover that would come down Government Cut and onto the median of 5th Street.
An elevated structure running through these areas would be a visual intrusion. Additionally, 5th Street is already a high-traffic area, and the construction and eventual operation of an elevated Metromover will exacerbate congestion.
Instead of pursuing this elevated Metromover route, I propose that we push for more alternative transit solutions that are more in harmony with the character and needs of our community. These alternatives need to include immediate improved bus services, as well as the expanded use of other services like FreeBee, Uber Community Cars, and additional trolleys for the city. We should also improve lanes for bikes and scooters to better align with the area’s aesthetic.
I strongly believe in the importance of local input when it comes to large infrastructure projects like this. As your commissioner, I would fight to ensure that the voices of Miami Beach residents are heard in discussions at both the county and state levels.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4):
100%
Mitch Novick (Group 5):
Yes, I would support exempting Miami Beach from the County as a Rapid Transit Zone.
David Suarez (Group 5):
Yes
Joe Magazine (Group 6):
I would not only support exempting Miami Beach, I would demand doing so. However, even this would not be failsafe. I have personally read every page of Chapter 33C of the Miami Dade Municipal Code which governs RTZ, and all it would take is a simple vote at the county level, which Miami Beach may not even know is occurring, to change that exemption. I have analyzed and studied the County’s cost estimates and ridership levels for the Baylink, and adding modest adjustments, the Baylink is financially unfeasible without eventually implanting RTZ, which is why Miami Beach would have to go absolutely above and beyond in making sure Miami Beach is not only exempt, but remains exempt through higher thresholds than a simple vote at the County.
Marcella Novela (Group 6):
Absolutely.
What is your opinion of the current proposed elevated Baylink metromover coming down Government Cut onto the median of 5th Street with elevated stations at Lenox & dead ending by Washington St?
Mitch Novick (Group 5):
I believe the current plan needs to be studied further before implementation.
David Suarez (Group 5):
I am completely against it. It will ruin our marine life and seagrass along I-395. It will also open up pandora’s box for a RTZ along Alton Road and other parts of Miami Beach.
Joe Magazine (Group 6):
I am a huge supporter of mass transit, but such an expensive, capital intensive project can financially cripple a city (or county) if the wrong project is implemented with the wrong ridership estimates, and I fear the current iteration of the Baylink will do just that. Cripple traffic for over half a decade during construction, and do little to alleviate traffic when it is completed, as there are no first or last mile solutions. In my opinion, options more feasible that could be implemented quicker, with less disruption and less financial risk include widening the shoulders for autonomous shuttles, electric ferries, or bus rapid transit. All could be implemented quicker, cheaper, and without the unintended consequences of things such as the need for Rapid Transit Zoning.
Marcella Novela (Group 6):
I am opposed.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4):
We all know that we have woefully inadequate public transportation to/from the mainland, but this is not the solution. As it is, the Metromover is a pitiful mockery of urban metros with its single car circling downtown Miami, and its unsafe platforms. The propose Baylink is problematic because it:
- would be wildly overpriced, and based on the County’s track record (no pun intended) would come in over-budget and late.
- would destroy the sightlines along the MacArthur and disrupt (at the very least) the marine ecosystem that exists there.
- would not serve the working population who need to get to the city’s single largest employer, Mount Sinai, or the major hotels like the Fontainebleau or Eden Rock.
What other transportation solutions would you support to provide better transit connections throughout MB while not jeopardizing the charm and beauty of our neighborhoods and their historic structures or degrading our iconic views?
Joe Magazine (Group 6):
In my opinion, options more feasible that could be implemented quicker, with less disruption and less financial risk include widening the shoulders for autonomous shuttles, electric ferries, or bus rapid transit. All could be implemented quicker, cheaper, and without the unintended consequences of things such as the need for Rapid Transit Zoning.
Marcella Novela (Group 6):
First of all, we have not synchronized our traffic lights despite years of discussion. This simple measure would alleviate congestion throughout Miami Beach. Additionally, further funding of programs like Freebee and trollies that reduce car traffic would greatly increase ride sharing and reduce traffic.
Andres Asion (Group 4):
We should be the first City in Miami Dade to create a partnership with WAYMO (or any other leading autonomous transportation option). Through Grants we can create a pilot program that provides the option for residents to choose Waymo for their transportation needs and can lobby for federal and state funds for the project.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4):
We should be expediting the BRT lanes on the Julia Tuttle, and reconfiguring our trolley routes to get riders (both from the BRT buses, and Miami Beach residents) to destinations north and south via more direct “express” routes rather than the existing loops.
We also need to do a much better job of creating more, and safer, bike lanes that can be used to get from tip to tail in our city without risking life and limb. That means PROTECTED bike lanes, proper green markings rather than sharrows, and plentiful and direct routes that can be used for commuting, etc. rather than “just” recreation.
Mitch Novick (Group 5):
I’m supportive of bus lanes and expanding our protected bicycle lane network. I believe we should focus on improving what we already have.
David Suarez (Group 5):
I support expansion of the CMB trolley program and freebee services.
