Loading...
Miami Shores 04PS1MIAMx SHORES O4PS1 e� ac e ryrgg IN P- 10050 N.E. SECOND AVENUE �LQRIDp' MIAMI SHORES, FLORIDA 33 138-2382 TELEPHONE (305) 795-2207 FAX (305) 756-8972 THOMAS J. BENTON VILLAGE MANAGER April 23, 2004 Mr. Ray Eubanks, Plan Coordinator Bureau of Local Planning Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 Re: Transmittal Letter Miami Shores Village Comprehensive Plan Amendment #04-0 1 Relating to School Location Criteria an Intergovernmental Coordination d Dear Mr. Eubanks: 6 ,004 Miami Shores Village held advertised public hearings regarding the proposed Comprehensive Amendment, 04-01 (CPA 02-01) before its local planning agency, the Planning & Zoning -Bo Plan February 26, 2004, and the Village Council on April 6, 2004, at which time public co solicited and he amendment was approved for transmittal to the Florida De g Board on Affairs. The Village Council of Miami Shores transmits CPA 04-01 to the Floridacomments were Community Affairs with a request that the Department review the Department of Community da Department of proposed amendments. The Village amends. the Future Land Use Element and Intergovernmental Coordination Comprehensive Plan to address the following Planning needs: Elements of the 1 • Objectives and policies were added or amended to the Future La school siting and coordination, consistent with section 163.317(6)(a),dUse Element to address public The plan amendment is available for public inspection at the Florida Statutes. during normal business hours, Village Clerk's office at the Village Hall The Village's current schedule for the month of October, 2004. processing of CPA 04-01 has adoption current ly proposed no later than The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan: - is not applicable to an area of critical state concern, - is not exempt from the twice per calendar year limitation on the adoption of comprehensive plan amendment; - is not directly related to an intergovernmental coordination element, but the proposed amendment does include revised objectives and policies regarding such coordination; is not an amendment related to the location of a state correctional facility; - does include as part of the proposed amendment an objective and policies pertaining toschool . siting; - is not solely related to an amendment to the Capital Improvements Element, but does include as part of the proposed amendment modifications to this Element; - is not an amendment related to an economic development project pursuant to subsection 163.3187 (1) (0, Florida Statutes; - is not an amendment changing school concurrency service area boundaries, which the Village is not required by Section 163.3187 Florida Statutes, to establish such standard; is not an amendment directly related to a proposed redevelopment of "brownfield" areas; is not related to port transportation facilities; is not related to an urban infill or redevelopment area under Section 163.2517, Florida Statutes, and; - is not part of a joint planning agreement. One copy of the amendment CPA #04-01 has been mailed to each of the following agencies at the time it was mailed to the Florida Department of Community Affairs: South Florida Regional Planning Agency; Miami -Dade County Department of Planning and Zoning; Department of Environmental Protection; Department of Transportation District VI Office; South Florida Water Management District; and the Florida Department of State. A copy of the letter addressed to each agency, .as signed by the Village Clerk, is attached to. certify that the proposed amendment was mailed to each of these agencies. This transmittal letter is accompanied by a copy of each of the public hearing notices published for the Land Planning Agency and the Village Council hearings. The following items are enclosed: - Three copies of the proposed Future Land Use and Intergovernmental Elements. (Goals, Objectives, and Policies). - Minutes of the Land Planning Agency transmittal public hearing of February, 2004. Minutes of the Village Council transmittal public hearing of April, 2004. - Copy of published advertisements for each public hearing. Transmittal Letter. Comments or questions regarding the proposed amendments shall be directed to Barbara Estep, Village. Clerk, at the address appearing in this letter or by calling 305-795.2207. Sincerely, Tom Benton Village Manager Mgr-1325 ORDINANCE NO. 643-04 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL, AUTHORIZING TRANSMITTAL OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE "MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN", FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT, TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS PURSUANT TO STATE STATUTES. WHEREAS, the Village Council and the Local Planning Agency (Planning & Zoning Board), have considered the proposed amendments to the Village's Comprehensive Plan, to include provisions regarding the siting of schools as required by the State Department of Community Affairs (DCA) according to amendments to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 163.3187 of the Florida Statutes, the Local Planning Agency and the Village Council have held public hearings at which all interested persons were afforded an opportunity to be heard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IF ORDAINED by the Miami Shores Village Council that: Section 1. The Village Manager is hereby authorized to transmit the proposed amendments attached hereto to the Comprehensive Plan to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for their review and comments, pursuant to provisions of Chapter 163.3184 (3) of the Florida Statutes. Section 2. The Village Clerk is hereby directed to transmit copies of the proposed amendments to the following organizations for their review: South Florida Regional Planning Agency; Miami -Dade County Department of Planning & Zoning; Department of Environmental Protection; Department of Transportation District VI Office; South Florida Water Management District, and the Florida Department of State. This Ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption. Approved on first reading this 16t" day of March, 2004. Approved and adopted on second reading this 6t" day of Aril 2004. ATTEST: Barbara A," -ep, C C Village Clerk APPROVED -AS TO FORM y --x- Richard Sarafan/ V7lage-`,Oorney PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS: SCHOOL SITE AND FACILITIES PLANNING VILLAGE OF MIAMI SHORES I. Proposed Amendment to the Future Land Use Element: Recommend that the Future Land Use Element be revised to read as follows: [Underlined words are proposed additions and words that contain strike -through markings are proposed deletions.] Objective 11. Criteria for School Siting and Collocation of Schools, Libraries, Parks, and Community Centers: The Village shall allow for public schools on sites designated "Institutional" and "Mixed Use Residential/Institutional" on the Future Land Use Map. In addition the Village shall Eencourage the collocation o f s chools, I ibraries, p arks and c ommunity centers. T his o bj ective s hall b e m easured b y t he implementation of its supporting policies: Policy 11.1: The Village shall support and facilitate coordination of planning with the Miami -Dade County School District for the location and development of public education facilities in accordance with appropriate District capital plans where proposed public school facilities are compatible with adjacent existing land uses and the standards of this Comprehensive Plan. Policy 11.2: The Village shall encourage the collocation of schools, libraries, parks, and community centers. These facilities shall be presumed to be compatible and may be located on the same site or nearby in the absence of a compelling reason that they should not be in a particular instance. Policy 11.3: Proposed schools sites shall be consistent with the Village Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use M ap, s hall b e c om atible w ith a d' acent 1 and a ses and s hall b e l ocated awayawqy from h eavy Indus railroads and similar land uses to avoid noise,_odor, dust and traffic hazards. Similarly, site planning for schools shall into orate a ro riate landscLaping and buffers in order to minimize adverse impacts on adjacent neighborhoods. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Re School Site and Facilities Planning Page 1 of 2 Third Draft by Solin and Associates, Inc., December 8, 2003 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS: SCHOOL SITE AND FACILITIES PLANNING VILLAGE OF MIAMI SHORES II. Proposed Amendment to the Intergovernmental Coordination Element: Recommend that the Intergovernmental Coordination Element be revised to read as follows: [Underlined words are proposed additions and words that contain strike -through markings are proposed deletions.] Objective 1: Coordination with Dade County and other agencies. In general, coordinate the Village of Miami Shores Comprehensive Plan with the plans of Dade County School Board, Dade County, and adjacent municipalities. In particular, achieve maximum feasible levels of consistency between the plans for Miami Sores, Biscayne Park, Dade County, the Dade County School Board, El Portal and the City of Miami. This objective shall be measured by implementing its implementing policy. [9J-5.015 (3) (b) (1)] Policy 1.2: The Village shall maintain an active dialogue with the School Board staff relative to any plans for schools which will serve local residents, including schools within the Village and nearby. Pursuant to requirements of Section 1013.33 Florida Statutes the Village shall undertake the following activities in concert with the School Board to ensure a ro riate coordination in school site and facilities planning as needed to address school land and facilities needs within or near the Village: a. Coordination of Land Use and Demo ra hit Information for Consistency. The Village shall maintain Village population and land use data and shall meet with the School. Board and/or its staff to review and exchange demogEahic and land use information in order to ensure consistency in data projections, and plans germane to: population and student enrollment projections, needs for school sites or expansion of e xisting sites collocation and joint use opportunities, potential infrastructure needs to enhance access and safety, and related funding needs. b. Coordination of Comprehensive Plan Rezoning Amendments and Development Applications Impacting Schools. The Village shall coordinate proposed amendments to the C om rehensive Plan and/or the zoning ma with the School Board and/or its staff when such amendments materiall im act student enrollment projections or school land and facilities planning. In addition the Villa e shall notif the School Board of proposed land developmentproposals that ma materially affect student enrollment projections, or school site and facility needs. The Village shall promote collocation of school and neighborhood facilities such as parks, libraries community centers and similar facilities compatible with school activities and adjacent land uses. c. Planning Board Representation. In accordance with the re uirements of and to the extent re uired b Section 163.3174 1 Florida Statutes the Village shall invite a staff representative appointed by the School Board as a non -voting member, to attend Planning Board meetings at which proposed Corn rehensive Plan amendments and rezonin s that would if gapproved, increase residential density. d. Dispute Resolution. If the Village and the School Board are unable to resolve disagreements surrounding land use and school facility planning, the Village and the School Board will ern to dispute resolution procedures pursuant to Chapter 164 or Cha ter 186 Florida Statutes as amended from time to time or ?Lny other mutually acce table means of alternative dispute resolution. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Re School Site and Facilities Planning Page 2 of 2 Third Draft by Solin and Associates, Inc., December 8, 2003 MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE Page 1 of 5 MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 2004 The regular meeting of the Miami Shores Planning and Zoning Board was held on Thursday, February 26, 2004 at the Village Hall. The meeting was called to order by Richard Fernandez, Chairman at 7:00 P.M. with the following persons present: ITEM I: ROLL CALL: Richard Fernandez, Chairman Cesar Sastre, Vice Chairman (Arrived at 7:50PM) W. Robert Abramitis Donald Shockey (Arrived at 7:18PM) Tim Crutchfield ALSO PRESENT: Al Berg, Planning & Zoning Director Irene M. Fajardo, Recording Secretary Richard Sarafan, Village Attorney Chairman Fernandez explained the procedures in regards to the Planning and Zoning Board and the appeals made by the residents. Mr. Sarafan swore in all those participating in the meeting ITEM II: APPROVAL OF MINUTES -January 22, 2003 Mr. Abramitis made a motion to approve the January 22, 2004 minutes. Mr. Crutchfield seconded the motion. Motion passed 3-0. (Mr. Shockey and Mr. Sastre had not arrived yet). ITEM III: SITE VISITING DISCLOSURE Chairman Fernandez stated he visited all the sites and had conversations with Jack Rengstl, David Batcheldor, and Mr. Harke in regards to the proposed lighting on the tennis courts. He also had conversations with attorney Christopher Kelley in regards to 1255 NE 93 St. and conversations with Mary Ellen and Dave French. Mr. Abramitis disclosed that he visited all the sites and had conversations with David Batcheldor and Jack Rengstl in regards to the lighting on the tennis courts. Mr. Crutchfield disclosed that he visited all the sites and that he also had conversations with David Batcheldor in regards to the tennis courts. When they arrived, Mr. Sastre and Mr. Shockey disclosed that they visited all the sites. ITEM IV: SCHEDULE ITEMS Case: PZ04-0115-08 Owner: Bank of America Address: 9499 NE 2nd Ave. Sec. 504(f)(l)(g)(2): Sign approval -wall sign. Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and recommended denial of the request. Bank of http://www.miamishoresvillage.com/VillageBoards/P&ZB/02-26-04P&ZMIN.htm 4/22/2004 MIAMI -SHORES VILLAGE Page 2 of 5 America was proposing a new sign that would face the street frontage. Mr. Berg believed that the current signs on the building and the ground sign are sufficient for identification purposes. Dan May, a representative for Ferrin Sign Company, was there to present the case. Mr. May explained that that they wanted the sign for identification purposes. He stated that the bank did not have any current sign facing NE 2,d Ave. The Board discussed the existing signs on the building and the ground sign. Some of the Board members stated that the current signs were sufficient, but that the proposed signage would fall below what is allowed by the code. After a brief discussion, Mr. Crutchfield made a motion to approve the proposed sign. Mr. Abramitis seconded the motion. Motion passed 4-0. Case: PZ04-0226-03 Owner: Machado Investment Address: 469 NE 91 St. Sec. 604: Site plan approval -new house. Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and recommended that the site plan be tabled. The applicant is seeking site plan approval for a new, two story, single, family residence at the site. The landscaping is a concern and an improved plan and tree survey are needed. The elevations could improve with additional windows and more architectural details. Simon Rodriquez, a representative from D.1~ . Builders and the contract owner of the property, was there to present the case. Mr. Rodriquez stated that he would add all the additional windows that are needed. The Board expressed the concerns stated by staff. They also expressed their concerns in regards to the oversized window in the front elevation and the garage. The applicant stated that he liked the look of the garage in the front as shown on the site plan. The Board inquired about having the appropriate person before them presenting the case. Orlando Machado, the property owner, was not present. After a brief discussion, Mr. Crutchfield made a motion to table the case until staff s and the Board's concerns have been addressed and the appropriate person is before them. Mr. Abramitis seconded the motion. Motion passed 4-0. Case: PZ04-0226-04 Owner: Claudio and Maria Rodriguez Address: 10090 NE 12 Ave. Sec. 604: Site plan approval -new house. Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and recommended tabling the application until the issues of design, structure, height and location, landscaping, and setback requirements have been resolved. The applicant is seeking site plan approval for a new, two story, single family residence. The Board inquired about the setback requirements. The Board discussed the dimensions of the house and the facing of the property as they pertain to the setback requirements. The Board also discussed the architectural design of the property and the need for a landscaping plan. Several trees on the property are specimen oak trees and there is no plan for their protection or destruction. The Board also discussed the proposed aluminum fence, and the existing chain link fence in the front yard. The property owners, Claudia and Maria Rodriquez, were there to present the case. Mr. Rodriquez addressed the concerns stated by the Board. Mrs. Rodriquez stated that they would submit the necessary landscaping plan. She also explained that they own a construction company that develops big houses. The Board requested that the applicant restudy the design and elevation, submit the landscaping plan, and comply with all the setback requirements. The hearing was open for public comments. Steve Kurton, a resident at 1168 NE 101 St. welcomed the Rodriquez's to the neighborhood and asked for their consideration with the surrounding neighbors in regards to the new house. Public hearing was closed. After a brief discussion, Mr. Crutchfield made a motion to table the case until all of staff s and the Board's concerns have been addressed. Mr. Sastre seconded the motion. Motion passed 5- 0. Case: PZ04-0226-05 Owner: Miami Shores Country Club/Tennis Facility, Howie Orlen Address: 825 NE 100 St. Sec. 604: Site plan approval -tennis court lighting Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and recommended approval of the site plan. The proposal was initially heard in April 2003. The applicant made changes to the site plan which addressed all of the http://www.miamishoresvillage.com/VillageBoards/P&ZB/02-26-04P&ZMIN.htm 4/22/2004 MIAMI-SHO S VILLAGE Page 3 of 5 previous revi'ous concerns. The submitted sigh plan shows the location of the 24 twenty foot poles with the Lithonia Lighting. A photometric submitted by Fisk Engineering details the light spillage which is less than '/z foot candle at the property line of the surrounding houses. This complies with Dade County standards. Additionally, the applicant submitted a proposed landscaping plan which includes bushes and trees at the property entrance and between the wall and the tennis courts. The applicant has provided a suitable landscaped buffer. No light spillage is predicted for the neighborhood. Lance Harke, the attorney representing Miami Shores Country Club, was there to present the case. Mr. Harke made his presentation showing the changes that were made to the site plan including the light spillage and the proposed landscaping plan. Mr. Harley stated that the tennis courts will be closed at 9:OOPM as the Board previously requested. He also stated that there will not be increased traffic in the area and that there was sufficient parking in the rear of the facility. The Board discussed the proposed changes and made inquiries about the landscaping plan. They discussed the proposed trees and bushes on the property and mentioned several alternatives that might better suit the facility and the surrounding neighbors. The hearing opened for public comments. Residents in the surrounding properties had different opinions in regards to the lighting. Vincent Schaf mister at 848 NE 100 St, Daniel and Josephine Robbin at 810 NE 100 St, and Jack Rengstl at 665 Grand Concourse, spoke against the proposal. Stanley Whitman at 1234 NE 94 St, Johnny Pinero at 19588 East Country Drive, Charles Mennes at 317 NE 104 St, Burt Fond at 105 NE 95 St, James McCready at 1399 NE 103 St, Christopher Kelley at 1237 NE 99 St, Seth Seper at 1050 NE 91 Terr, Bernie Dreger at 3014 Quayside Lane, Melinda Fletcher at 8824 NE 10 Ct, Linda Venice at 3.17 NE 100 St, Lavar Ford at 1156 NE 88 St, and Steve Picha at 1210 NE 91 Terr. were in favor of the proposal. The hearing was closed for public comments. The Board then continued to discuss the proposed landscaping plan. After further discussion, Mr. Crutchfield made a motion to approve the site plan subject to installing a continuous hedge of 6' clusia trees along the south and east side of the tennis courts at a spacing to be determined by staff to effectuate a solid hedge, installing a 24' cocoplum hedge along the entrance way and on the outside of the walkway, and a closing time of the facility including lights out at 9:OOPM. Mr. Sastre seconded the motion Motion passed 5-0. Case: PZ04-0226-07 Owner: Thomas and Barbara Jenkins Address: 46 NE 92 St. Sec. 604: Site plan approval -garage enclosure Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and recommended approval of the request. The applicant is requesting site plan approval to enclose an existing 13' x 25' garage into a bedroom and bath. Staff recommends approval if the exit door in the rear of the building is removed, a Declaration of Use is filed, the floor level is raised, the driveway in the setback is removed, and a new driveway is installed connecting to the existing garage. The Board discussed all the recommendations made in the staffs report. They spoke about the needed driveway, the paved swale, the required street trees, the current floor level, and the exit door in the rear of the garage. The applicant, Thomas Jenkins, was there to present the case. Mr. Jenkins stated that he had not intentions in renting the converted garage. He agreed to submit a Declaration of Use if necessary. He also explained that his intentions for being there were to legalize an enclosed garage that was already done by a previous owner. He has no intentions of making it a rental unit. He only wants to make it legal. The Board appreciated Mr. Jenkins efforts and stated that their concerns were for future owners that might want to use the space as a rental unit. Some of the Board members were not comfortable with allowing an exit door in the rear of the property even if it leads to the backyard and not the side yard. After further discussion, Mr. Crutchfield made a motion to approve the garage enclosure provided that the applicant submit a Declaration of use and that he would raise the floor level to FEMA standards. Mr. Sastre seconded for discussion. The Board continued to discuss the issues regarding the exit door, the current paved swale, and the need for street trees. After a brief discussion, the vote passed 3-2. (Mr. Abramitis and Mr. Shockey voted no). Case: PZ04-0226-08 Owner: Shofar Inc./Ari Sklar, Agent Address: 9450 NE 2nd Ave. Sec. 604: Site plan approval -commercial retail building. Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and recommended tabling the application.. The applicant is requesting site plan approval for a one story, retail/commercial building with approximately 12,000 sq. ft. http://www.miamishoresvillage.corn/VillageBoards/P&ZB/02-26-04P&ZMIN.htm 4/22/2004 MIAMI-SHO S VILLAGE p � Page 4 of 5 of retails ac7The existing building will be demolished. The Board inquired about the different site plans that were before them. The applicant, An Sklar, clarified that he will give a presentation for Proposed Plan Option ##1. Mr. Sklar explained the various changes that he intends to submit with the Proposed Plan Option #1: 1. Additional landscaping throughout property. 2. Coordination with tree expert to try to save the existing oak trees. 3. Guaranteed replacement trees for the ones removed. 4. Signs that will identify the building. 5. A sign agreement with the Village where the tenants would have to comply with the agreement in order to obtain approval for requested signs 6. Decorative lighting fixtures with foot candle survey. 7. Dropping of the walls on the corner of the property for better vehicle visibility. 8. Clarification of the tenants that would occupy the facility. 9. Rainwater maintenance. The Board discussed the type of restaurants that would be located on the building and the outdoor seating for those restaurants. They also discussed the design of the building in proposed plan option #1 and the awnings on the building above each tenant. The Board stated that they liked the new design of the building and might approve the plan on that basis alone. The Board would need to see the other mentioned proposals provided by Mr. Sklar. After further discussion, Mr. Crutchfield made a motion to approve the elevations, the building citing on the proposed Plan Option 41 dated 02/25/04, and the proper submittal of all other factors related to the final approval of the site plan conditional upon and subject to subsequent approval of a sign plan, a detailed landscaping plan, a light plan with foot candle survey, and a drainage plan. Mr. Sastre seconded for the discussion. Mr. Sastre emphasized the submittal of a foot candle survey for the light plan which will show the light spillage from the property. After a brief discussion the motion passed 5-0. Case: PZ04-0115-08 Owner: Orestes and Sheryl Padilla Address: 1255 NE 93 St. Sec. 701: Appeal of Admin Official -paint color Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and recommended that the paint color be denied. The attorney, Christopher Kelley, was there to represent the owner and present the case. Mr. Kelley submitted several pictures showing the different paint colors that exist in the Village. A petition was signed by neighbors stating that they approved with the color. Mr. Kelley's argument was that the color chosen by Mr. Padilla was harmonious with the neighborhood. The Board reviewed the pictured that were submitted and discussed the various paint colors in the neighborhood. They discussed the architectural design of the house and how the color matches the design. The applicant stated that he thought the contractor had obtained an approved permit to paint the house. After further discussion, Mr. Crutchfield made a motion to overturn the administrative decision to deny the paint color. Mr. Abramitis seconded the motion. Motion failed to pass 2-3. (Mr. Fernandez, Mr. Sastre, and Mr. Shockey voted no). V. PUBLIC HEARING- Comprehensive plan Amendment- To adopt an amendment to the plan to provide for co -location of schools and school sitting requirements. The Village attorney, Richard Sarafan, explained briefly the memorandum by the Village Clerk, Barbara Estep. Chairman. Fernandez opened the hearing for public comments. No one spoke in regards to the memorandum. Chairman Fernandez closed the hearing for public comments. After a brief discussion, Mr. Crutchfield made a motion to approve the Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Mr. Abramitis seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0. VI. NEXT MEETING. The next meeting will be on March 25, 2004 http://www.miamishoresvillage.com/VillageBoards/P&ZB/02-26-04P&ZMIN.htm 4/22/2004 MIAMI •SHO S VILLAGE V11. ADJOU MENT Page 5 of 5 The February 26, 2004 Planning and Zoning meeting, was adjourned at 11:15PM. Irene M. Fajardo, Recording Secretary Richard Fernandez, Chairman http://www.miamishoresvillage.com/VillageBoards/P&ZB/02-26-04P&ZMIN.htm 4/22/2004 ,. '. ::'tn.,1�:4,p��.�.:�..',,.:.,D:;;,�,,,O�,�ui,':cn,..�:�.,. �(,a) :,'�:�:���.,in,�::�''�:,.,.,— V.� Z.�N :�,., •.::'�'.,�,. :,,T}•�i.,i:,..'.��...,...,...';:',Cl::i;::r.„.�.j0,',,��..:�,�:`Y�� Ln �G•Ttri�S�.p.., cn a:*7:c';:.,'o`'�'w ''°. ,� ',m a..'�':.�. a' . a a �:a'. :'.> �:. D:'•C3:.�.�.:.:'.. . �. ,,:,�a••,.7LL...6_1QZ,Q�.LLZ.�,I-':.Q7: .v�.a):'�:ui.'N:p,:iN� .:...�.:'. X, N'�' G D Ul ."AD, Q)..�.'L':'�:"* .'�`C1'J�: L•.M';Q1. '.. z J. C, ow L�Cl) z LU �W:rcn L) Cr z L22 O M L) Z cn .0 0 Z C Z 4 cc an a9 cn .E ai CV uj ZE Co LO 0 O LO-0C3)N0 W E - N0 EZ O= N O U } 00 c � U LO C) 0-C:O- �j � p 76 U) 70 E �`V L . i Q�O� o�C3)cz>� 0 � � 0 -o g>c6 SQ� N a) (f) cn C)L-c O�Co ON Oo=cz-0oN a) CZ 0E��, � UL cI U (n co (n=�a)Oa) �n oo�o' QO (� ct O�> U D - C) Q a M CM050 COO•-0�.--- a) C�� �O O s. _� O CFE N � � + Co > O L]_ a)C=`�--Q _Qwa)a) o C U I� r- O = f� O -0 CO CV E = CZ C) -T co �000 Cam.). ) U —'Z)(ZCZ0 U) OcuE J 0 a) a) N �73 � � •� NLLNCVN E O� � U CZ N O Cz - O U) C`') C N �L ! 4- 0 cn IL C:U O 0 (z N E� U �� 7� I Oc�O C }Cry �N O OTC] c� QD > 0 U— +j Qb a) E O Co O 5(.0 U 0 LEI en �. U 'C�j r - 00- °6L Aavn6a3�:i ,AvaEdnH1 I (I-1 Vd3H 3Hl'1 LUO-) P le'Ll"MM N Page 1 of 3 Council Minutes - 04/06/04 MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING The Miami Shores Village Council held their regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday, April 6, 2004 in the Council Chambe of Village Hall. The Meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM with the following individuals present: PRESENT: Jim McCoy ABSENT: Al Davis, Councilman Herta Holly Richard Sarafan, Village Attorney Ed Quinton Gregg Ullman ALSO PRESENT: Tom Benton,Village Manager Barbara Estep, Village Clerk ONSIDERATIONS 1) CONSENT AGENDA Barbara A. Estep Ms. Estep read the items under consideration on the Consent Agenda. Mayor McCoy requested that the items contained on t Consent Agenda be addressed individually. A) APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 16, 2004 COUNCIL MEETING & WORKSHOP MINUTES. Mrs. Holly moved approval of the Minutes as submitted. Mr. Ullman seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor. B) REQUEST FOR APPROPRIATION AND EXPENDITURE OF FORFEITURE FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,000 TO THE INFORMED FAMILIES OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY ORGANIZATIO] Chief Masten offered a brief explanation of the Informed Families organization and the Village's obligation to expend a port of the forfeiture funds received. Mr. Ullman moved to approve the.request to appropriate and expend $5,000 from Forfeitur( Funds for the Informed Families organization. Mr. Quinton seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor. C) REQUEST APPROVAL TO WAIVE BID PROCEDURE AND ENGAGE THE FIRM OF PETRO-HYDRO, INC., FOR $28,785 TO PREPARE A SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT OF OUR CHIPPER FIELD FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY DERM. Mr.Benton provided information regarding the request to waive the bid procedure, summarizing the information contained it the Council Agenda Packages. Mrs. Holly moved to approve the request to waive the bid procedure and engage Petro -Hydro for $28,785 to prepare a site assessment report. Mr. Quinton seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of th motion. PRESENTATION Mr. Al Berg, Planning & Zoning/Code Enforcement Director, presented David & Edith Payen with the House of the Month award for April, 2004. http://www.miamishoresvillage.com/CIerkIRecent Council Mecting_Minutes/O4-06-04MIN.htm 4/22/2004 Oouncil-Minu es - November 19, 2002 2) VILLAGE CLERK Barbara A. Estep Page 2 of 3 A) AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL, AUTHORIZING TRANSMITTAL OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE "MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN", FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS PURSUANT TO STATE STATUTES. Ms. Estep read the caption of the Ordinance into the record and offered information related to the proposed ordinance. May( McCoy opened the floor for the Public Hearing and having no one come forward to speak, closed the Public Hearing. Mrs. Holly moved to adopt the proposed transmittal ordinance on second and final reading. Mr. Ullman seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor. 3) VILLAGE COUNCIL A) DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE ANNEXATION PROPOSALS. Mayor McCoy Mayor McCoy introduced his item, outlining his reasons for wanting to annex the two areas that have previously been discussed; namely a parcel of land adjacent to BarUniversity and the location of the new charter school, and the 103rd Stre ry corridor, and requested Council comments. Individual Council members offered their views and opinions on the proposed annexation areas, stating whether or not they were in favor of the proposals. In addition, Council members suggested other means to accomplish what they felt was the primary goal for 103rd Street which they believed to be cleaning up and beautify the corridor area. Following these discussions, Mr. Ullman expressed his opinion that the two areas should be discussed and voted upon separately. Mr. Ullman then moved to authorize staff to proceed with the process of annexing the unincorporated area referr to as the "Barry" parcel which runs from the north side of NW 11 lth Street north to the south side of NW 115th Street, and from the west side of NW 5th Street west to the west side of NW 6th Avenue. Mrs. Holly seconded the motion. Following a brief discussion regarding public comment procedures, Mayor McCoy opened the floor for the public to speak e either of the annexation proposals. Leon Newman Mr. Newman stated that he felt that the two areas should be handled separately and his hope that as three Council Members expressed their opinions that 103rd Street not be annexed, the matter would no further. William Fann Mr. Fann voiced his opposition to annexing 103rd Street, stating that good intentions do not always work out when it comes to code enforcement issues. Mr, Fann indicated his belief that annexing 10' Street would not benefit the Village. Bekky Leonard Ms. Leonard stated she is in favor of annexing the Barry parcel but not 103rd Street. She stated that t appearance of the homes along the corridor is what matters most. Alice Burch Ms. Burch spoke about cherry picking revenue producing areas of the County. David Payen Mr. Payen expressed his opinion that annexing 103rd Street is a good idea. Mayor McCoy closed public comment and invited Council discussion. Council Members reiterated their views on the annexation proposals and the reasons for their opposition or support. Following these discussions, Mayor McCoy called for vote on Mr. Ullman's motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of moving forward with the Barry parcel annexation proposal. As a follow-up to the discussions regarding 103rd Street, Mr. Ullman moved to direct staff, and the Planning & Zoning Boar, to work with the County to see what can be done about improving the appearance of the 103rd Street corridor, and to report their findings back to the Council. Mrs. Holly seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. B) DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING EXPANDING THE http://www.miamishoresvillage.com/ClerkIRecent Council_Meeting_Mlnutes/04-06-O4MIN.htm 4/22/2004 Council Minu s - November 19, 2002 ANNEXATION STUDY AREAS. Greg Ullman Page 3 of 3 Mr. Ullman provided information regarding a request to have staff review the unincorporated area to the southeast of the Village and his rational for raising the issue at this time. Mr. Ullman clarified the area in question which is NE 91st Street south to NE 87th Street and from Biscayne Boulevard east to the Bay. Council discussion centered around the changes the ai has undergone since the last time research was done and how a feasibility study would provide important data to assist in making a decision as to whether or not to pursue an annexation proposal. Mr. Ullman moved to authorize staff to investigate the feasibility of annexing the parcel of unincorporated Miami -Dade Cou (from NE 90 Street south to NE 87th Street and from Biscayne Boulevard east to Biscayne Bay), to have the Planning & Zoning Board review the possibility of annexing this area, and for the Council to receive a report regarding the Staff s and & Planning & Zoning Board's study results within a six month period. Mr. Quinton seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor. 4) ANNOUNCEMENTS The Clerk read the announcements. 5) PUBLIC COMMENT TF Chambers Mr. Chambers asked that another area of the County be considered for annexation. 6) COUNCIL COMMENT Greg Ullman Mr. Ullman thanked the Council for their consideration and discussions of the night and wished everyone a Happy Easter and Passover. Ed Quinton Mr. Quinton expressed his condolences to the Heffernan family on the death of their mother. Herta Holly Mrs. Holly also expressed her sympathy to the Heffernan family. Mrs. Holly thanked those residents in attendance for their involvement. Mayor McCoy Mayor McCoy thanked the residents for their attendance at the meeting. 7) ADJOURNMENT The April 6, 2004 Council Meeting was adjourned at 8:50 PM. Barbara A. Estep, CMC Village Clerk Jim McCoy, Mayor H.p.m.....e A.. ft nistra,tio,n, Fg4j c_Sai..ety, Pu..blic Works Recreation &Culture Community gey_0Ippment Jlaae Boards Links http://www.miamishoresvillage.comICIerkIRecent Council_Meeting_Minutes/04-06-04MIN.htm 4/22/2004 W Q � J dWJ CC Zleai L2=WZ 4caotj0m,cJ F WZWZW IL Z �� " . -- caCOE� zca•- a) o 0 0)c�mo zi Ca CD (a 7 7�cm m U -0 u-i c m°z°-0U �14-Q >C\j0 0 N[OT � U o-- � Ca-0 m )Q Q2 68 Epc�m `u rn `a c (D CO a) N a)v H- E�cno w U O Ir ozo O p W P: Z W Z Z z F- Z �ry0�CL CL <Mw< ZOw pw-wwp0w LuP-a-(ALUVwa 2�OwZJ.< �QLC=ww�F-� w aF-=wZ(n— O-LLOwcnwwQ w00E-IrD�=►wiU)' P ~ F- Ow w pZ�0) mowoolroCwmw 0-j��-JD~JOIQ— Q5:F-Q5;wzwUrq — o U — �a o cam �-0 a) U�UC� w Va-+op-0 cn--- ��.ca cam--U,aas E r� .c ma o a) v W u) Uk)-a6M0U� 00(D,cn � ca0 cNEcO»,pUli �".— 0 mi0 -0 CO) C) 4- (,).cm(�cco ca�-.�LU��0a) CO U_Vm�Qcy)W(D L Q75mmaca-0--0m o�+.m�.—,ca--� Uo.S*SQ>>Ea)V U U 0- a) w� �U N 2ca- m> E �a o qE c co O N (�/ C �% C m 60 7� �^^ C EU J [ J am QEa 1- c^' am d Cm Noo E m Ai mE Who �m EO 21 Z c!] o = �2 QQ ;�; a •LLJ .E Q55 C� QNQEO7 �� ZN c° �O> mUQ Qa Co aN 0 U `\J`% >.-. >.a 0.O L L O i..1 O m a' Q " c m -0 t 7 N w m m m� L6 ci W [(� � �� mt D� a )z (D a N a E3 �$ �. o m FesCL - a I ■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ■ Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. I. Article Addressed to: N c,�ess �,5uce�C A. Signature X P(Agent ❑ Addressee B. Received by (printed Name) C. Date of Delivery D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑ Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No 3. Service Type bk Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail ❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.p.O. 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes 2. Article NumberO� �-y�y�, 0005 (Transfer from service label) c5010 . 4 Q PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595.02-M-1540 M Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete A. Signature item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. Agent X ■ Print your name and address on the reverse Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by (Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: :)(A Ro( �a Ua TiU 3�Soi Gor\ Qub PA u)e& �&(m GCOL� i-C- 3346 D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑ Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: I-1] No 3, Service Type KI Certified Mail © Express Mail ❑ Registered E7 Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes 2. Article Number COOS' (Transfer from service label) 70Q3 � JS Q (O 4 �" q PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540 ■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ■ Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: Pc ci CSC' DO y t000 Nib ffI+�A OV, A. Signature X kAgent ❑ Addressee B. Received by ( Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑ Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No 3. ��S,,eerrvice Type b(Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail ❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.D.D. 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes 2. Article Number ��``cc��'' OD cam, (Transfer from service label) ���� u �JIJ I JL/��1 �a PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540 ■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ■ Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: OL dude dCC� R ; . q(o-q Luc ld�19 Sc� s . �rc�v�oUc�h Vs0 A. Signature X .gent ❑ Addressee B. Received by ( Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery D. Is delivery address different from Rem 1? ❑ Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No 3. Service Type Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail ❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2. Article Number n (Transfer from service label) UV OSCTcyj S S V c) q oS PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540 • Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete A- Signature item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. �SLAgent X ■ Print your name and address on the reverse 0 Addressee so that we can return the card to you. ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, B. Received by (Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: Ccg6l V\ 4 - DeMe— . ExeWho-e- Ixot b— l SoJ�k HW&RPO P `c m nca_ Rqe 3y\40=fl6tWOIo Ua � 1 "0 �Q R- 33Cli'A D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑ Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No 3, Service Type Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail ❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.C.D. 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 2. Article Number �7r`�� /� �y� l r�y� (Transfer from service label) / C)GS osOv OOOE SO (c) ` 0 PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt . 0 Yes 102595-02-M-1540 ■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete A. Signature item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. K.Agent X Is Print your name and address on the reverse ❑ Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by (Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1- Article Addressed to: b'�1iCl l oCap- ll+1\ FlCDC �31aL D- Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑ Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No 3. Service Type Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.o.D. 4, Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2. Article Number ���C- OG �S SQ tGi (Transfer from service label) 71�-�C1� L fJ PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540 INTERGOW NMENTAL COORDINATION IN'MODUCTION The purpose of this element is to assess the other elements in terms of trey policies or programs that require interaction with another governmental agency. The analysis is intended to facilitate implementation of recommendations that are beyond the sole responsibility of Miami Shores Village officials. The matrix on the next page provides a summary inventory of these issues and the jurisdictions involved. The Village's coordination with these agencies is informal, using the telephone and meetings when necessary. This is in addition to formal contracts and other operating agreements. The analysis section concentrates upon those intergovernmental coordination items that are most important for implementation of this plan, pinpointing ways to improve coordination. - 4-7451►M Road Widening Issue Description: The County highway plan calls for the further widening of North Miami Avenue to five lanes from N 103rd Street to N 167th. The Village opposes this widening due to its adverse impact on the community character. Responsible Offices: The Village Council, Manager and Public Works Department wonting with the Miami Dade Public Works Department and Metropolitan Planning Organization. Analysis and Recommendation: Village officials should continue to work with County officials to maintain this project as a low priority or have the proposal dropped from the plan. The Village has formally communicated this to the MPO. It is not in the 1988 County Comprehensive Plan Traffic Element improvement list. HOUSING Substandard Housing Issue Description: Substandard housing in the unincorporated area seems to result (in part) from lack of code enforcement; it adversely impacts adjacent housing in the Village. The Village administration assists Miami -Dade County code enforcement efforts by informing the proper officials when Village residents call the Village with complaints about violations in unincorporated Miami -Dade County, The Village is considering annexation of properties to the southeast and commercial properties to the northeast. Responsible Offices: Village Manager (and Attorney) working with County Attorney and County Planning Department. Analysis and Recommendation: Continue processing of annexation application and joint study and code enforcement along the perimeters of the Village. INFRASTRUCTURE Water Lines Issue Description: The Village utilizes the County for its water supply- The distribution system is provided by both the County and the City of North Miami The Village is not involved in billings. Responsible Offices: The Village Manager working with the Miami -Dade Water and Sewer Department and the North Miami Utilities Department. Analysis and Recommendation: The existing service agreements are proving satisfactory. No need for changes are foreseen - Solid Waste Issue Description: The Village relies upon the County to contract for the disposal of solid waste generated by Miami Shores and other Miami -Dade County, municipalities. Reliance on Miami - Dade County is not a problem now nor will it be in the foreseeable future_ The Village has entered into a contract with Miami -Dade County to formalize Village use of the Miami -Dade County transfer and landfill system. Responsible Offices: The Village Department of Public Works working with the Miami -Dade Public Works Department. Analysis and Recommendation: The Village should monitor the transfer facility capacity and generally assure themselves of the future ability to utilize the County transfer and disposal functions at reasonable rates. The Public Works Director maintains such a dialogue with the County in addition to the formal service agreement. COASTAL MANAGEMENT Storm Evacuation Issue Description: Miami Shores Village is an important hurricane evacuation "receiving station" from the barrier island ie. provides evacuation routes and shelters. Responsible Office: Village Manager and Police Chief working with the County Office of Emergency Management Analysis and Recommendations: Continue to closely coordinate the Village's written evacuation plan, particularly traffic over the two nearby causeways plus related feeder streets and shelters. Periodic County -convened meetings now achieve this. The Village also has a 1987 contract with DCA under the Post -Disaster Redevelopment Rule. RECREATION Supplemental Recreation Facilities Issue Description: Although the Village has extensive park facilities, it also counts upon elementary, school grounds for supplemental facilities. It is important that these facilities remain available. Responsible Offices: Village Recreation Department working with Miami -Dade County School Board. Analysis and Recommendation: Consider a joint use agreement with school officials for use of the school grounds. SOUTH F ORiDA REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION POLICY PLAN There are no provisions in the SFRPC plan that are in conflict with the Miami Shores plan. Ill � e m�a � ��55$ 3��Q 's Oa q 3 jb.C�a ���Se • spc c'� �E ai aml5�d�S pm$�.a �91 $Q2FsoF Gas—HI aro C o op 8 4 m mAU 8 woG 8 a oiix 8 a`oO� 8# aCGc7d-c or=icC m � cd n ice± ��Gb aa3p "d'a c'v 29 ti c 32 C •�� R� tlStl. � O 8 � F p u qS a3 ^5-2 9 gm�yw ESE YQ i.m U m o' a''ceca€ �� �O� r a esFF 2� GL c�g SEmso gb Cmp� �gg`e c4'?`o Q ?t6•. rrriP� - x S mu�. 9 c �� ^&y7 C�� e � _c.���'�ao _�•°g�p•�3g� hem FF� c�V� _��4 Z �2XGM m 21 49�'S 3 �4w3G 8 sS PW 8 SG i3cj ��m Wax e3E� b a �s-� x z EHA I a � c X C� � � m 4 � C 'C7 CL c Om oa A tlm ao m o a uw C � w � 0 r Exhibit 8.2 Regular Intergovernmental Coordination Meetings Attended by Miami Shore Village Staff el9° f ottemdeeforPillage A M South Florida Regional Planning Council Quarterly Director of Commumw Development Metropolitan Mannuag organization Monthly Wage Manager Department of Environmental Reswmca Management Quarterly Florida Department ofTruasportation Director of public warka Quarterly CommunityDirector ofDevelopment South Florida Building Officials Couaw Monthly Budding Off lcial FMoaida Redevelopment Amwdatioa Quarterly Director Of Community DevelaDmea! hfabutreet Monthly Director of Community Development Dade/Bzvward County Building Officials Meociatian Quarterly Building Official Team Metro Quarterly DirecWr' Of Community Development Florida Association for Code Enforcement Monthly Code Enfnra went 113