Loading...
P&Z Minutes - Workshop 02-18-15 MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 10050 NE 2nd Avenue Miami Shores, FL 33037-2304 www.miamishoresvillage.com Main Number: 305-795-2207 Fax Number: 305-756-8972 David A. Dacquisto AICP, CFM, Director MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING BOARD WORKSHOP Village Hall Conference Room 10050 NE 2nd Avenue, Miami Shores FEBRUARY 18, 2015 THURSDAY, 7:00 P.M. I) ROLL CALL: Robert Abramitis, Sid Reese, Richard Fernandez, David Dacquisto – Present. John Busta, Steve Zelkowitz - Absent II) DISCUSSION ITEM – Mr. Fenrnandez re-arranged the items to be discussed in the following order – All present Approved. 1) Village Council Request: Planning Board to review the current zoning code provisions for fences and consider amending the code; to permit 6 ft. fences in the side and rear yards; to allow board on board wood fences and other options on corner plots, to allow gate and post ornamentation in excess of the height limit; to allow additional building materials including solid boards of pvc and plastic-composite and metal plate. Fence – Building Material. Mr. Reese suggested plastic fences were not a good idea, as they were not suitable to Florida weather.. Mr. Abramitis asked for more information regarding materials. Mr. Fernandez informed the Board that this is the second time in two years that this has come before the Board. The Board agreed that installation is key. He mentioned that Ismael Naranjo had mentioned that pastic is not a structural nmaterial in and of itself. Well water stains are very prominent in plastic material. Mr. David Dacquisto discussed the materials that are allowed under the code right now. Board on Board fences – The Board looked at the pictures of different fences that Mr. Dacquisto provided them. They discussed that the Board on Board fences were not allowed on corner lots. They looked at page 6 & 19 to see what is allowed under code. The Board discussed Board on Board fences v Picket fences- Agreed to keep the 5’ maximum fence height and said that with taller solid fences there is no air flow and reduced sunlight therefore the dead spots in the yard. The Board discussed the fact that solid fences fences get a lot of graffiti and vandalism as opposed to Shadow Box fences. It was suggested to go take a look at N. Miami/Biscayne Garden section. Stockyard fence (board on board) – The Board pointed out do we really want them in Miami Shores. Shadow Box can be done by a carpenter. Please go to the other communities where these are in place. Not in the Shores. The one in the Shores where in place prior to the ordinance coming into place. Shadow Box fences if allowed on corners would be a change to the code. Mr. Abramitis said that Miami Shores traditionally does not allow Shadow Box or Board on Board where all you can see is fence. He would move to keep it open. P&Z Minutes – Workshop 02-18-15 2 Mr. Fenandez spoke about North Miami and the Graffiti problem they have, something to keep in mind. The Board discussed corner picket fences on page 13 & 19 as compared to page 1 4 & 19 which is allowed now. Mr. Fernandez suggests to have the Shadow Box fence made. A wall looks better – page 9 of 19 contrast with wooden fences – in the end the Board does not want a lot of houses behind walls, Mr. Abramitis suggested. In reference to nonconforming fences Mr. Dacquisto said that they were old fences that predated the last code change. Materials- Plastic or PVC Vinyl (dull appearance) PVC is more expensive. It can be solid. The Board referred to Page 16 of the package provided. Top not a good representative. They last 20 years. PVC Vinyl is different than regular Vinyl. Page 17 Metal fences v picket fences. Page 18 Metal fences (Top), Bottom Metal panels – non rusting aluminum. Option of Metal fences on pages 17 & 19. Metal material – not a good idea. Think of the aesthetic. Don’t like the wall look. There has to be the ability to look behind the fences. Crime goes on over any fence. -Board concluded no material change at this time. -Height – The Board discussed the issue of allowing Ornamentals over the 5’ fence to be no higher than 6’ tall, including ornamental lamp. There has to be a height limit. Not just for the individual or privacy. Take a look at 6th Avenue 3 ½ - 5’ fences with hedges. Tiering of materials can be done for privacy – Fence/hedge behind rather than 6’ fence. Privacy can be done without fencing. Board considered the submittal from the Miami Shores Police Chief. All Board members present agreed to adding ornamentation on top of gates ,gate posts and on fence corners. Chair noted that no petition had been submitted to requesting change in fence height.. The Board noted that there was no one present from the public. Change fence height to allow Ornamental Gates allow – 1’ of ornamentation in addition to 5 ‘ fence height in side and rear and 3.5’ fence height in front. Gate Posts and fence corner posts allow – 1’ ornamental in addition to 5 ‘ fence height in side and rear and 3.5’ fence height in front. Ornamentation on gate posts and fence corner posts may include lights. Mr. Dacquisto to draft code language with changes as requested by Board for the March 26 meeting as discussion and action item. Recess at 7:59PM - Back at 8:04PM 2) Increasing frontage requirement and/or square footage requirement for newly subdivided plots. Mr. Dacquisto said that the question came up about splitting lots – 2 ways to split up lots – where 2 legal size original platted lots can remover residence, and with approval or village, seek a release of unity of title and the 2 lots now may be buildable as individual lots. Current Min lot width 75’ and 7,500 square feet original. -Other way is an actual subdivision through the village and Miami Dade. P&Z Minutes – Workshop 02-18-15 3 -Considered a re-plat – requires tentative plat approved – and final plat approval by both Miami Shores and Miami Dade. Final Plats cannot be approved conditionally.. In past the minimum plot width was raised from 50 to 75’ – Do we want a higher number – more people – densely populated. Subdividing lots is a problem. What if we raise it to 80’ width for lots. Make it 95’ lots per Board suggestion. Mr. Dacquisto suggested 100’ lots – as we have originally platted lots of 50’ and this would allow combinations of existing plots. Discussion on keeping the density down. Waterfront would be overpopulated by splitting plots and creating additional residences. 100’agreed by Board. Vacant lot separate ownership is still buildable. Existing homes on existing lots can be replaced. Prevent overpopulating. Board asked for the opinion of the village attorney on raising the minimum plot width to 100’ Mr. Dacquisto will bring this to the March 26 board meeting as another discussion and action item The 7’ hedge height was not in code until it was rediscovered that a referendum had taken place and the vote was to increase hedge height in the side and rear to 7 feet. This is now in the code. The referendum did not mention the front yard and hedge height there remained 3 1/2 feet. Board asked the village clerk to provide a copy of this referendum for P&Z Board members. Mr. Abramitis said that more and more people run their hedges to the street and it’s a hazard when they are backing out of their driveway. Mr. Dacquisto stated this is already covered in the Code and is an enforcement issue. 3) Village Council request for Planning Board to review the current zoning for the annexed area and to consider comprehensive plan, zoning code and map amendments for the area. The Board discussed changes to the zoning code to accommodate the westerly annexed area. RU1/RU2 Illegal uses have no standing, however staff tried to form a code that would create as few nonconformities as possible. The process would be to: 1. Change the comprehensive plan to show the desired land uses. 2. Create new zoning districts if necessary, may come before comprehensive plan amendment. 3. Amend the zoning map to rezone land in conformance with the comprehensive plan and utilizing the new zoning districts if necessary or existing zoning districts. P&Z Minutes – Workshop 02-18-15 4 RU1, RU2, RU3 zoning currently on the Barry University land and this does not allow university uses however a separate agreement between Miami-Dade and the university does allow university uses there. The current Comp Plan Institutional Designation and current S-1 zoning would work for Barry University. RU1, RU2 – no way to eliminate existing Duplex – it also provides a type of housing not otherwise present in Miami Shores. Miami Shores does not have a duplex zone. Mr. Dacquisto has incorporated Miami Dade rules and Miami Shores rules to create a new RO1 district for single family homes and an RM2 district for duplexes No need to zone out current legal uses in this area. State requires low income housing – it serves a purpose. Board agreed- try not to create non conformity but use Miami Shores zoning rules to the greatest extent possible. Mr. Dacquisto stated applying Miami Shores setbacks is problematic. Driveways – cannot apply our 10’ side yard setback when current requirement under Miami-Dade is 1’ and given current development on the plot. At 8:45 Board agreed to discuss the issue 5 more minutes. Mr. Fernandez – Barry Univeristy – Approved Duplex Use – Approved Setbacks and specific zoning regulations will take more time to look at. Mr. Dacquisto along with Mr. Flores will take any board member wanting to visit the annexed area, on a tour. All Board members present agreed they would like to go take a look. Code enforcement is getting people to comply. The annexed area is greatly improved. Positive reasons why the area is better work by Code/PD/PW . III) NEXT WORKSHOP – TBA. IV) NEXT REGULAR HEARING – FEBRUARY 26, 2015. 1) Regular agenda. V) ADJOURNMENT – Meeting Adjourned at 8:55 PM.