Loading...
pz 11-13-08Planning and zoning November 13, 2008 1 MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 13, 2008 The regular meeting of the Miami Shores Planning Board was held on Thursday, November 13, 2008, at the Village Hall. Richard Fernandez, Chair at 7:00 P.M. with the following persons present, called the meeting to order: ROLL CALL: Richard Fernandez, Chairman Robert Abramitis Norman Powell Sid Reese Paul Madsen ALSO PRESENT: David Dacquisto, Zoning Director Richard Sarafan, Village Attorney Valerie Bierley, Clerk Norman Bruhn, Bldg. Director Mr. Sarafan swore in all those participating in the meeting. BOARD MEMBER DISCLOSURES: Mr. Abramitis disclosed he visited all of the properties except pz-12-07-200761. Mr. Reese disclosed he visited all of the properties except pz-12-07-200761. He was approached by Mr. Stokesberry who spoke in favor of the Chickee Hut amendment. Mr. Fernandez disclosed he was approached by Mr. Stokesberry who spoke in favor of the Chickee Hut amendment. SCHEDULE ITEMS: PZ-12-07-200761 MSVC LLC (Owner) (Applicant) 9450 NE 2ND Ave. Special Approvals, Sec 600: Sec. 504. Signs. Master sign agreement. Mr. Dacquisto provided background information and summarized the information on the Staff Report. The Planning & Zoning staff recommended approval of the proposed site plan with the finding that it is consistent with the technical provisions of the code subject to compliance with listed conditions. The applicant nor the Board members had questions for Mr. Dacquisto. The applicant addressed the Board concerning the master sign agreement and the layout of the window signage. The Board questioned the applicant concerning the banner request and discussed the conditions set by forth by staff. Mr. Fernandez opened the floor Planning and zoning November 13, 2008 2 for public comment. A potential tenant for the building spoke in favor of increasing the amount of signage. Mr. Abramitis moved to approve the application with the recommendations set forth by staff excluding the any banner signage. Mr. Powell seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. 5-0 PZ-9-08-200896 Bank Of America (Owner) Andres Rodriguez (Agent) 9475 NE 2nd Ave. Special Approvals, Sec. 600: Sec. 523. Bank remodel, ATM Lobby. The applicant requested this item to be tabled. Mr. Reese moved to table this application and Mr. Abramitis seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion 5-0. PZ-10-08-200898 Shore Square Investments LLC (Owner) Chen Medical Association (Applicant) Ernesto Cercas (Agent) 9031-9065 Biscayne Blvd. Special Approvals, Sec. 600: Sec. 523. Article IV Schedule of Regulations: Change of use; Medical Offices. Mr. Dacquisto provided background information and summarized the information on the Staff Report. The Planning & Zoning staff recommended approval of the proposed site plan with the finding that it is consistent with the technical provisions of the code subject to compliance with listed conditions. The applicant had no questions for staff. The Board members questioned Mr. Dacquisto concerning the capacity of individuals within the building, parking, sewer lines, the layout of the building and whether this application is a site plan or change of use. Mr. Dacquisto answered four doctors and ten staff. Parking meets code, the building will connect to the county sewer and this is a change of use that is done in the form of a site plan. The applicant addressed the Board and briefly explained how the interior office views would be concealed from the street. The Board questioned the applicant about the target customers and if this was a chain or individual office. Another expressed concern was the storage of commercial vehicles and the oxygen and the disposal of medical wastes. After further discussion about the sewer connections, Mr. Reese moved to approve the application with recommendations set by staff. Mr. Powell seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion 5-0. PZ-10-08-200899 Ken & Patricia Duboff (Owner) (Applicant) Mark Campbell (Agent) 795 NE 95 St. Planning and zoning November 13, 2008 3 Special Approvals, Sec. 600: Sec. 523. New attached garage and storage room. Mr. Dacquisto provided background information and summarized the information on the Staff Report. The Planning & Zoning staff recommended approval of the proposed site plan with the finding that it is consistent with the technical provisions of the code subject to compliance with listed conditions. The applicant nor the Board, had questions for Mr. Dacquisto. The applicant addressed the Board and briefly explained the changes to be made to the house. The Board questioned the applicant about the location of the septic tank, additional access to the interior of the home and the fence. Mr. Reese moved to approve the application with the recommendations set forth by staff. Mr. Madsen seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion 5-0. PZ-10-08-2008100 Richard Haft(Owner) (Applicant) Scott Weikle (Agent) 9200 N. Bayshore Dr. Special Approvals, Sec. 600: Sec. 523. Second story addition. Mr. Dacquisto provided background information and summarized the information on the Staff Report. The Planning & Zoning staff recommended approval of the proposed site plan with the finding that it is consistent with the technical provisions of the code subject to compliance with listed conditions. The applicant nor the Board had questions for Mr. Dacquisto. The applicant did not address the Board. The Board did not question the applicant. Mr. Reese moved to approve the application. Mr. Abramitis seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion 5-0. ACTION ITEMS: PUBLIC HEARINGS a. First reading of amendment to permit chickees in Miami Shores. - Mr. Sarafan: Amendment to sec. 523.1 of the Miami Shores Village Code of Ordinances to permit Chickees in the village. - Chairman Fernandez: Could you give us a run down? Cause we have a new Board member here. - Mr. Sarafan: Sure, there are various procedures in the Village Code for amendment of the Village Code. There’s a procedure for instituting an amendment by petition. There’s a procedure for instituting an amendment by this body starting it and there’s a procedure for Council to initiate proceedings to amend the code. What’s happened here is that the Council in accordance with that last provision passed a resolution referring to us a proposed amendment of the Planning and zoning November 13, 2008 4 Code. Our current code prohibits Chickee Huts anywhere in the Village. By statute, if Chickee Huts are permitted in a municipality they don’t have to comply with the Building Code. But the legislature says that you still have to comply with municipality’s zoning regulations. Municipalities through their zoning regulations have the ability to prohibit Chickee Huts, which we do. Council passed a resolution referring to this Board a proposal which was drafted by a member of Council for amending the Code to permit Chickee Huts with certain conditions and limitations. Code says once that resolution has passed this Board is to have public hearings, gather the evidence evaluate it prepare a report and recommendation to Council. Then Council will act on it, they can adopt the recommendation, they can ignore the recommendation, they can do what ever they want but they have to receive our recommendation and report first. We had a public hearing last month. We received evidence and testimony. The Village Building Official was present as he is now; he offered testimony. To generally summarize it, he talked about fire safety issues, vermin issues wind resistance issues what happens in a hurricane, things like that. There was some documentary evidence gathered and submitted. At that meeting, we had less than a full Board and it was decided that we would continue for a second meeting. No one appeared at that first meeting to testify in favor of the proposal this is the second meeting, we’ll gather additional information the Chair is going to open up to Public comment as he did the last hearing and we’ll take it from there. Either we’ll have a vote tonight or if any additional information is necessary or sought we can go that route as well. - Chairman Fernandez: Mr. Sarafan, thank you very much. Let me refresh everyone’s memory. Six items that emerged out of the discussions and testimony by Norman Bruhn, our building Official. What came out of that basically was a consensus of the members present that there was an issue concerning harmony, that it was non harmonious, there was an issue concerning size and disproportionate as to the maximum size and scale of buildings. There was an issue concerning fire hazard results as there where no building material standards, no fire proofing etc. An issue was raised concerning it breaking apart during storms, the thatch comes apart although the poles may remain. There was an issue concerning insects, vermin and termites. There was a discussion in reference to wooden contact to the ground as well as rats infesting the thatch and there were continuing maintenance issues raised. Gentlemen who were in attendance was that your recollection of what we discussed? Planning and zoning November 13, 2008 5 - Mr. Abramitis: Yes. - Mr. Powell: Yes. - Chairman Fernandez: OK, at that point is there additional discussion here, because I will open it up to public comments. Let’s reopen Public Hearing. Public hearing is now open. Does anybody wish to make comments? Ok. Public hearing is now closed. Gentlemen discussion? - Mr. Sarafan: Staff has submitted pictures that should be included in the file. - Chairman Fernandez: There are pictures of Chickee Huts that have been up for awhile. Dave, I asked you to get somebody from the pest control people, were you able to get anybody. - Mr. Dacquisto: Mr. Chairman, I had a very long conversation with guaranteed Floridian but from my discussion I wasn’t able to get somebody to come. - Chairman Fernandez: OK. Mr. Sarafan, my understanding from prior conversation with you is our charge at this point in time would be making a recommendation and issuing report is that correct? - Mr. Sarafan: Yes. The procedure for the amendment requires us to have a public hearing which we had, to gather such information as you deem necessary. Then let me read it to you in sec. 10.03 of the Planning Code the Planning Board may require any applicant for an amendment to submit an evidence in the form of affidavits in support of the application failing which if so requires the application shall be denied. That’s if it’s a third party coming to the Board seeking an application for an amendment. The planning Board may also take evidence from sworn witnesses, as soon as may be after the hearing the Planning Board shall make a written report there of the Village Council, which report shall contain a statement of the petition, the evidence offered and support there of any evidence in opinion there too and the finding and recommendations of the Board. The report is filed with the village clerk who shall without delay notify the applicant in the case it initiated by petition and then the Village Council hold a hearing on the proposed amendment - Chairman Fernandez: Alright, as to a practical matter for the report is this an item we give Dave direction to, he comes back at the next meeting, we approve the report? - Mr. Sarafan: My recommendation would be as follows. Based on the evidence Planning and zoning November 13, 2008 6 you’ve heard. I think you should discuss the matter, I think you should arrive if you can either at a consensus or take a vote as to what the conclusion of the board should be, and then Dave should be directed to prepare a report that summarizes all the evidence that was received and recites the resolution that you’ve passed. Now we have the tapes from the last meeting that can be made part of the application as well or the minutes, which I understand we have yet to approve. Or whatever else you’d like that will reflect what went on. - Chairman Fernandez: Are we best to approve the prior minutes before we proceed with this? Do these two minutes address this item? - Mr. Sarafan: I think Dave should summarize in his accompaniment to your vote. I think it should say there was a public meeting on this day continued till today that testimony was received from the following individuals the gist of the testimony as follows. I think you summarized it earlier that based on that the following resolution was adopted and we have both the tapes and the minutes to include. To answer your question I don’t know it it’s strictly required to approve the minutes now but certainly there should be an approval of minutes before the report is finalized and sent to the council - Chairman Fernandez: My thought is that we should be approving a report that’s going to council. - Mr. Sarafan: If what you’d like is to reach a conclusion today and delegate to staff to write a report to bring back at the next meeting to sign off that be doable. - Chairman Fernandez: Dave can you undertake that for us? - Mr. Dacquisto: Our next meeting is two and a half weeks away on December 3, 2008, if you want to go that route, as long as you give me finding and conclusions etc. I will incorporate it into a staff report with your approval on that staff report I will incorporate it into a report for the village council. - Chairman Fernandez: But it will come back to us in the first meeting of December? - Mr. Dacquisto: It will be back to you December 3, 2008 - Chairman Fernandez: When does council meet? - Mr. Sarafan: The first and third Tuesday of every month. Your clearly too late for next week’s meeting. Planning and zoning November 13, 2008 7 - Chairman Fernandez: OK. Council can accept reject or modify right? - Mr. Sarafan: Right. - Mr. Dacquisto: I don’t think it will be on this year. From what I understand the agendas are pretty full right now - Chairman Fernandez: Alright, I’d like us to come to a conclusion tonight. Get this thing out so you can deal with the draft. When council deals with it, council deals with it. - Mr. Sarafan: Definitely. - Mr. Dacquisto: If you come to a conclusion today I will have my staff report with the finding and conclusions etc. To you for the December 3rd meeting and then it will be ready and whenever it gets on the agenda that’s when it gets on. - Chairman Fernandez: Alright, let me do the following then. Robert can I start with you as to your comments, I know what your comments were from last meeting but I would suggest be cause Mr. Reese and Mr. Madsen are in attendance tonight it would be a good idea to go over it again. - Mr. Abramitis: First I don’t believe we’ve had anybody appear from the public to support these things they’ve been banned as long as I’ve been in Miami Shores. It seems like they bring problems not solutions. They bring problems of vermin. problems of fire problems of things flying around in hurricane and storms. I think if there were lots of them there’d be the potential of having lots of them in disrepair and become an enforcement issue for the Village to chase. We didn’t have any testimony about the availability of qualified Seminole and Miccosukee craftsmen to reconstruct them after every storm. We have three or four storms that pass throughout each year that might blow them apart. I’d have to say at this point if someone would say something or point to something I’ve overlooked; I would vote against them at this point. - Chairman Fernandez: OK. Mr. Reese? - Mr. Reese: Not being at the last meeting, I differ what you’re saying on a couple different grounds. I feel that the state has put before us that if the Native Americans build it then it should be permissible to be built. However, I understand further that we can deny them by code but if we don’t deny them by code we have to accept them. Planning and zoning November 13, 2008 8 - Mr. Sarafan: That’s close. What they say is if we permit them at all, they don’t have to comply with the South Florida Building Code if they’re built by a card carrying member of the specified tribes. - Mr. Reese: Right. Now that ‘s what I understand. To me it’s looks like we’re going against the government ruling if we don’t allow them. I’m a little different in my opinion than you are, I’d like to see them allowed if it’s permissible. - Mr. Sarafan: Well, let me say it this way, the statute addresses whether or not they have to comply with the Building Code and it specifically says that they’re all subject to our Zoning regulations. So we are absolutely lawfully allowed to prohibit them. It just says that if we allow them to be built they don’t have to comply with the Building Code. Now let me put it to you this way, the thing that’s before you is do you want to amend the Code to permit them to be built, that’s the issue. - Mr. Abramitis: If I understand what Mr. Sarafan is saying correctly, we will have none of the normal assurances that the Florida Building Code gives us that things are done correctly. Now whether that’s a good decision or bad decision it’s made by the legislature and it’s not in front of us. But whatever protection we’re afforded from what our neighbors do next door we won’t have with these things, on fire or anything else our neighbors do. We’re protected to a certain extent because when our neighbors erect something it has to comply with the Code. So that’s what I understand the difference to be. - Mr. Sarafan: Right now if your neighbor built a patio and puts electric stuff out there it all has to comply with the code and you’re protected. Right now if they build a Chickee Hut? - Mr. Reese: They don’t have to comply with code. - Mr. Sarafan: Right. - Chairman Fernandez: Mr. Reese does that conclude your comments? - Mr. Reese: Yes. - Chairman Fernandez: Mr. Powell? - Mr. Powell: My comments are pretty much the same as last time. I think there’s in addition to what was already discussed in compatibility issues. I just don’t think it’s compatible with what we have here. - Chairman Fernandez: Mr. Madsen? Planning and zoning November 13, 2008 9 - Mr. Madsen: Same thing, I don’t see anything favorable about having them allowed. Since we are permitted to have them prohibited then I don’t see why we should allow them. - Chairman Fernandez: OK does that conclude your comments? - Mr. Madsen: Yes. - Chairman Fernandez: I’m going to reiterate a story from last time. I have three major concerns here. First, one is harmony. I’m not one who likes to hang my hat on harmony but harmony certainly is an issue and I don’t believe these are harmonious with the general make up of Miami shores. This would in essence permit people to build these things next to a Spanish Mediterranean home, next to a ranch home. I just don’t think they’ll be harmonious. The other big one I’ve got is fire hazard. There’s no provision here for building materials when these things get dry somebody put a bar-b-q under one of these things, an amber goes up, boom you’ve got a fire. Some people will be cautious some people won’t be. My next door neighbor this weekend has his college aged son visiting. He’s usually the quietist calmest guy you’ve ever seen. He and his wife, and they had a wild party going on over there and my wife’s going “what’s going on?” and the band was playing, the fireworks were going off and the whole bit. The last one was insects and vermin My personal experience has been and I gave this story last time When I was going to the University of Miami, we had a Coral Gables resident who had a home close to the university, that a lot of us used to hang out at because he was just a nice guy and football supporters and all that kind of stuff. The guy would have basically a tailgate party in his backyard at every football game. In his backyard along the waterfront in the Coral Gables waterway was a Chickee Hut. I would say this Chickee Hut was probably 10 across by m aybe 15 wide. 150 sq ft. or so, 10 ft. up right on the waterline. The city of Coral Gables eventually found out about this thing and he had to take the Chickee hut down. He asked a few of us to help. A bunch of us go over there to take the Chickee Hut down, I have never seen so many rats come out of a structure in my entire life. So again, I reiterate the story. I am taking from the comments being made that if a vote were to be taken at this time it would not be affirmative in passing a resolution proposed by council. Do we basically pass a resolution recommending Planning and zoning November 13, 2008 10 not to pass the resolution? - Mr. Sarafan: Someone should make a motion to pass a resolution to recommend as part of this report that we continue the existing prohibit, I would like to see a vote on that and if as I suspect it comes out four to one I would suggest to any dissenters that if you’d like to have a statement included in staff report as the decant opinion we could certainly include that. - Chairman Fernandez: Let me come back on item here Dave, I’m turning to you for this. Distinguish the difference between Chickee Huts and Tiki Huts - Mr. Dacquisto: My own personal opinion is that like a lot of words people use then interchangeably .When I write in my staff report and the draft that I constructed for the amendment. I use the term Chickee because that is the term used in state law. Chickee is a Chickee Hut without walls and it talks about that they’re exempt from the Florida Building Code but they’re not exempt from local Zoning Code so because that’s the term used in state law that’s the term I use. - Chairman Fernandez: OK. Norman I’m going to ask you a question as well. If we’re doing an electrical install on a Chickee Hut, basically non treated lumber attached to the ground to install lighting or install electric outlet could it be done pursuant to code. - Mr. Bruhn: If any electric is added to a Chickee Hut, the Florida exemption no longer stands and the entire structure would then need to comply with the Florida Building Code. - Chairman Fernandez: The answer the same for plumbing? - Mr. Bruhn: That is correct. - Chairman Fernandez: Is there a fire coating product that you are away of that could bring such a structure in compliance? - Mr. Bruhn: Yes. Because the structure would not have to be fire protected to residential lot as long as it wasn’t within so many feet of the property line as an accessory structure - Chairman Fernandez: So there could be a possibility to comply with fire code by more than ten ft. from a property line and how far from the building? - Mr. Bruhn: I don’t’ know an exact number. My first inclination would be is that Planning and zoning November 13, 2008 11 there would be no required separation from the building on lot that it’s on as an exemption through the Florida Building Code of accessory structures on a residential property. That would only be on single family and duplexes if we had an apartment building or similar then those requirements would change. That’s referred to as distance separation. - Chairman Fernandez: Thank you. Gentleman what do you want to do I think this board would be inconsistent in taking any other point of view other than this should remain prohibited. It is within the pervue of council to over rule us. Council can go ahead and make a decision to take it in a different direction as they so choose. - Mr. Reese: I’m basically thinking we can’t stop it and we ought not to stop it. We don’t’ know how Mr. Powell wants, maybe he’s not as strong as I am but it’s gonna be defeated I can see now. I would think we would also say in our recommendation that it’s up to the Council to overrule us if they so choose to. - Mr. Sarafan: Oh, they know it. - Chairman Fernandez: Now the circumstances are one that there is a circumstance that has brought this before council this is an item that we could turn down they could pass and we could come back again under our code revision and say nay to it again and there could be a window of opportunity to an applicant that way. But that would be the elected officials preview I think we are limited by what the code says and whether or not we choose to divert from the hasty of what’s been going on with this item. - Mr. Sarafan: The question before you currently is whether based on the evidence and the arguments that you’ve heard the majority of this board feels that its in the best interest of the village to recommend a change of the code or not. - Chairman Fernandez: Simply stated, is there a motion gentlemen? Mr. Sarafan, could you articulate a motion to recommend not to do this? - Mr. Abramitis: I would like to make a motion. My motion would be staff prepare a report summarizing the testimony noting the positive testimony and evidence supporting this, if any, and the negative. The amount of public comment received, if any, and I include a recommendation that in view of the forgoing this board recommends that council not amend the code to permit these things based on the weight of the evidence that is contained in this Planning and zoning November 13, 2008 12 report I think in fairness to the board: note how much interest the community expressed in having these things and what, if any, and I don’t believe there was any evidence, that they are a positive addition to the community. - Chairman Fernandez: If we could add to that motion to reflect upon the six points we discussed. The harmony issue the disproportion of size and scale the fire hazard no building material standards, the breakup during the storms insects and vermin issues and continuing maintenance issues. Is there a second? - Mr. Powell: Second. The vote was in favor of the motion 4-1, Mr. Reese voted no. MINUTES a. September 25, 2008 Mr. Reese moved to accept the September minutes. Mr. Powell Seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. 5-0 NEXT MEETING The next regular meeting will be on December 3, 2008 ADJOURNMENT The November 13, 2008 Planning & Zoning meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M. __________________________ ____________________________ David Dacquisto, Director of Planning Chair, Planning & Zoning Board