12-05-1995 Workshop MeetingMIAMI SHORES VILLAGE
COUNCIL WORKSHOP
DECEMBER 5, 1995
A Miami Shores Village Council Workshop was held on Tuesday, December 5, 1995, in the
Village Hall Council Chambers, commencing at 6:35 P.M. The following members were
present:
PRESENT:
Mayor Imburgia
Cesar Sastre
Michael Boyle
Mary Ross Agosta
ALSO PRESENT: Michael R. Couz7o, Jr.
Mark Ulmer
Barbara Fugazzi
ABSENT: William Heffernan
ITEM #1 DISCUSSION REGARDING STATUS OF LITIGATION - 969 N.E. 92nd
STREET.
Village Attorney, Mark Ulmer, indicated for the record that the property located at 969 N.E.
92nd Street, was known as the Kurland Property. Mr. Ulmer stated that a settlement had been
proposed by Mr. Kurland's attorneys and there would be an Executive Session of the Village
Council held in order for him to elaborate on the settlement proposals to the Council.
ITEM #2 DISCUSSION REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OF BISCAYNE
KENNEL CLUB PROPERTY AS IT RELATES TO THE MIAMI SHORES
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
Mr. Ulmer stated that Attorney Cliff Schulman and Ms. Kay Spitzer were in attendance
representing the Biscayne Kennel Club. Mr. Schulman explained to the Council the particulars
of the Administrative Appeal. He stated that the Dade County zoning designation for the Kennel
Club property which lies within Dade County is BU -3, the highest density business use
designation. Mr. Schulman indicated that the Kennel Club site contains approximately 30 acres
within the Miami Shores Village limits and that a Village zoning designation of single family
homes would not be consistent with the County's zoning. The Biscayne Kennel Club has
proposed a zoning change to PUD (Planned Unit Development). Mr. Schulman outlined the
specifics of the PUD zoning, stating examples of municipalities utilizing the PUD designation.
Mr. Schulman indicated the pros to PUD zoning and the cons of either single family residence
zoning, or allowing the current zoning to remain status quo, as the future of the Kennel Club is
questionable.
Mr. Boyle questioned the current zoning and asked for clarification regarding properties
surrounding the Kennel Club site. Mr. Sastre inquired about "first rights of refusal". Mr. Ulmer
stated that more detailed information would be discussed during the Executive Session.
Mr. Sastre moved to adjourn the Council Workshop Meeting. Mrs. Ross Agosta seconded the
motion and the vote was unanimous in favor.
Mayor Imburgia indicated that the Council Workshop was adjourned at 7:15 P.M. Under the
provisions of Florida State Statute 286.010 (8), a closed, Executive Session would convene for
approximately 30 minutes to include the following individuals:
Mayor Imburgia
Councilman Boyle
Michael R. Couzzo, Jr.
Vice Mayor Sastre
Councilwoman Ross Agosta
Mark Ulmer
A Court Reporter will be present within the Executive Session and a record of the Session will be
available upon the conclusion of the litigation.
/1/Aiwa.
Barbara A. Fugaz7a, Villa e C ei?
Page 2
Louis S. Imburgia, Jr., Mayo
BREEMBER 6
ATTOANKTI A T L A •r
iNflUNl6
Transmittal Cover Sheet
TO Barbara Fugazzi
Company Village of Miami Shores
Fax Number 756-8972
Phone Number 795-2208
FROM Clifford A. Schulman, Esq.
File Number 13169.0105
Comments Per your request.
Date December 6, 1995
Time 10:56am
No. Pages Including this cover sheet 4
Please notify us immediately if not received properly at 305-579-0715
or 305-579-0716
The information contained in this transmission Is attorney privileged and oandtlentist, It is Intended only for the use
of the individual or entity named above. It the reader of this massage Is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination. distribution or copy of this carnmunlcaton Is atrlatiy prahtb tad. If you have received
Shia cammtmication In error, please nottfy us immediately by telephone collect and return the astginai message to us
at the address below via the U.S. Postai Service.. We will reimburse you far your postage. Punic you.
1221 Bricked Avenue, I.ewni, Florida 33131 306-67940600 Fax 30$.S194717
Requirements of PD -MU
• Unified Ownership or Control
• Minimum Property Size- 10 acres
• Preapplication Conferences
• Advertised Public Hearing Before Planning Board for Site Plan
• Advertised Public Hearing Before Council for Site Plan
• Consistency with Master Plan of Village
• Buffers for Residential Uses
• Transitions from Residential to Commercial Uses
• Density and Height Limitations
• Limited Commercial Uses
• Minimize Traffic on Local. Streets
• Greater Open Space Than Lot by Lot Development
Settlement vs. Later
Amendment
♦ Timing of Settlement: 2-3 Months
♦ Timing of Later Amendment: 12 months
• Single Family Unmarketable
♦ No Purchase of Properly Without Zoning and
Planning in Place
♦ No Financing of Property Without Zoning and
Planning in Place
• Tax Value of Land as Planned is Less than as PD-MU
♦ .Longer Time to Sell = Less Tax Value to Village
♦ Longer Time to Self = .Land Fallow and [..mused
Benefits of PD -MU
Unified Development Plan
D Permits Mixture of Residential, Office, Institutional,
Service and Light Retail Uses
D Allows for Economical and Efficient Land Use
D improved Levels of Amenities
El Promotes Creative Design
0 Encourages Harmonious Development
❑ Protects Nearby Neighborhoods
0 Provides for Security