Loading...
07-29-1982 Regular MeetingMINI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING JULY 29, 1982 A regular meeting of the Miami Shores Planning and Zoning Board was held at 7:30 P.M,, July 29, 1982, and Public Hearing on Game Machines Ordinance, at the Miami Shores Village Hall, with the following members present: J. Robert Stobs, Chairman J. S. Palmer Kevin O'Connor Kenneth Cutchens Roberta Johnson Also present: Frank LuBien, Building Director & Code Enforcement Director Leslie R. Forney, Jr., Village Manager 1) MINUTES: On Item 2, page 2, paragraph 2, correction was made to minutes by Mr. Stobs, Chairman, to wit: amendment to original motion was passed 4/1, with Mr. Stobs dissenting; page 2, paragraph 3, the original motion as amended was passed 4/1, with Mr. Stobs dissenting. The minutes were then approved as corrected by motion made by Mr. O'Connor, seconded by Mrs. Johnson, and carried. 2) PUBLIC HEARING - GAME MACHINES'ORDINANCE Due to the withdrawal of several items from the agenda, the Chairman recommended the Public Hearing be held at this time as it was advertised for 7:30, therefore item 11 was moved up on the agenda. Mr. Stobs recited the two proposals. Proposal A lists the exclusions to Article V, Supplementary Regulations, Section.501 (c), namely, "billiard rooms, pool halls, electronic video game rooms, and similar places of amusement, including "penny arcades" and electronic or mechanical machines", not be allowed in Miami Shores Village. Proposed amendment B to,Article V, Section 501 of Ord. No, 270 reads: "billiard rooms, pool halls, electronic video game rooms, and similar places of amusement, including"penny arcades", except that not more than two electronic game machines may be installed as an incidental operation to primary commercial enterprise. Payment of a license fee of $30.00 per machine." - 2 - July 29, 1982 Mr. Stobs expressed that what is under consideration is either exclude completely the use of electronic game machines in the Village or allow up to two per use as an incidental operation to primary commercial enterprise on payment of $30.00 license fee per machine. The discussion was then opened to the floor. Mrs. Judith Bialy, 10286 N.W. 1st Avenue, has been a Village resident for eleven years. Mrs. Bialy is in favor of the maximum of two machines in establishment who pays the fee. With no further opinions offered from the audience comments were requested from the Board by the Chairman. Mr. Kevin O'Connor expressed disagreement with other members of the Board relative to the clarity and definition of this issue in our prior ordinance. He is in favor of proposed amendment B and believes two electronic game machines is not unreasonable. Mr. Robert Stobs, Chairman, introduced a letter addressed to the Village Manager from Mrs. L. Dean expressing disapproval of Main Street designation for the Village. Mrs. Dean also is against electronic game machines in Miami Shores. Mr. Kevin O'Connor reiterated his opinion that the present Ordinance requires definition and commended the Village Manager, Mr. Les Forney for presenting to the Board and the Building Department various Ordinances for review. Mr. J.S. Palmer stated he is against game machines in any form declaring that if the Village allows two machines, it will eventually result in three, four and five electronic game machines, and the effect will consequently be a regular amusement center. Mr. Kenneth Cutchens signified that he is against electronic game machines in Miami Shores Village. He feel the present ordinance definately covers the exclusion of one, three or ten machines. At this point, Mr. Stobs, Chairman, interpreted for clarification, Supplementary Regulations, Article V, Section 501 (c) as to use definition. He stated that what the Board is considering now is whether or not to allow a maximum of two video gam -machines as an incidental, as spelled out in the amendment - and not allow it as a primary use; a definition is all we are asking for. July 29, 1982 Mrs. Johnson moved for acceptance of proposed amendment B to Article V, Section 501 of Ordinance No. 270, the incidental, which allows two game machines per business organization, with payment of license fee of $30.00 per machine. The motion was seconded by Mr. O'Connor. Discussion followed. Mr. O'Connor inquired of the Village Manager if Mr. Fann, Village Attorney had some input. into these amendments specifically relative to the $30.00 license fee. Mr. Forney replied that the amendments were checked by Mr. Fann. Mrs. Johnson's motion for acceptance of proposed amendment B was then passed 3/2 with the following vote: Mr. Stobs Yes Mr. O'Connor Yes Mrs. Johnson Yes Mr. Palmer No Mr. Cutchens No 3) REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SIGNS EXXON CORP., 9020 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD This case was before the Board at the last meeting, July 8, 1982 at which time the Planning & Zoning Board requested the Building Director to obtain all pertinent data relative to square footage of all existing signs on property. Mr. LuBien presented the Board with a copy of his survey showing total square footage of existing signs. Discussion was held by the Board of Section 504 (f) 1 & 2, to view what limitations exist relative to signs in this district; whether it is strictly interpreted as being in a parking lot or not. Mr. LuBien notified the Board that three other service stations in Miami Shores Village have similar gas price signs, one larger than the one requested by Exxon. Mr. Forney, Village Manager, noted that this was before the Board as the Code Enforcement Board requested the elimination of free-standing/sandwich type signs. Following discussion with Mr. Sam Mizrahi of Exxon, Mr.Stobs recommended that he limit the size of the sign which is in excess of limitations. Mr. Cutchens then suggested Mr. Mizrahi reduce the verbiage__and thereby reduce the size of the proposed sign, and Mr. Mizrahi replied he had no objection to a sign of lesser size. Mr. Stobs cited—S-3' width -fit he ght, allowing gas prices to be limited to 12 sq.ft., which size is not excessive. Mr. Mizrahi consented. 4 :July 29, 1982 Mr. O'Connor moved that this application for signs be approved with the amendment that it be 2 - 3' x 4' signs, rather than 2 - 4' x 5' signs, seconded by Mr. Palmer and carried unanimously. 3) REQUEST FOR APPROVAL• OF PLANS FOR. ADDITION & ALTERATION HOWARD BARWICK, 620 N.E. 101 STREET Mr. LuBien advised that there is an existing flat roof area on this structure that almost uses up all permitted under our Ordinance. Mr. Barwick proposed to add a new section of flat roof that has a tile pitched area. Following study of the plans submitted and discussion with Mr. Barwick, the Board referred to Masonry Ordinance, Section 2 (e), 1, 2 & 3. Mr. Stobs noted that the problem lies with Sec. 2(e) 2, namely, "The addition shall not exceed 15% of the ground area of the existing building." The Board all agreed that no hardship existed and alternative solutions were available to Mr. Barwick. Mrs. Roberta Johnson moved that this request for variance be denied, based on 403-78, Section 225 (e), 1 & 2, Masonry Construction. Motion was seconded by Mr. O'Connor and passed unanimously. 4) REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR WOOD DECK RICHARD WESTLAND, 90 N.W. 110 STREET Plan was presented to the Board for approval of wood deck on 75' lot in R-15 Zone, with a 7'6" setback requested'•, the required setback is 10'. Following discussion with Mr. Westland relative to the in- advisability of building a structure around an existing large avocado tree, the Board examined the plans and determined there was no grounds for a hardship variance. Mr. Westland then agreed to bring the wood deck back to the 10' setback. Motion was made by Mr. Cutchens to deny the variance for side setback, seconded by Mr. O'Connor, and carried unanimously. 5) REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SUBSTITUTE MASONRY FENCE PROVINCIAL REALTY -ASSOCIATES INC:,9900-10-20'N.E: 2 AVE. This is the property formerly owned by Sam Rabin, with existing violations. The new owner requests permission to install concrete louver fence in lieu. of C.B.S. wall as indicated on the approved plan. The louver fence will be the same as fences recently installed on Village owned parking lots. - 5 - July 29, 1982 The Board concluded that no problem existed. Mr. O'Connor moved for approval of the substitute concrete louver fence, seconded by Mrs. Johnson and approved 4/1, with Mr. Palmer abstaining. At 8:50 Mr. Stobs turned the gavel over to Mrs. Johnson. 6) REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF DETACHED SIGNS BARNETT BANKS, 9190 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD Mr. Bill Castle of Barnett Bank, Jacksonville, Mr. William Shives, Vice President, Barnett Bank, Fort Lauderdale and Mr. Ed Monahan of Acolite Sign Company, Inc. represented Barnett before the Board. Planning & Zoning Board and Council action is required under Section 504 (f) 1 for this request for detached signs. It was noted that the 0 Zone designation was changed to B-1 Zoning. Two illuminated signs are requested at 92nd St. parking entrance and Biscayne Boulevard primary entrance. A study of plans was made by the Board and Mr.. O'Connor was concerned the illuminated signs would disturb or inconvenience nearby apartment house dwellers. Barnett advised that the signs would be turned off at 10:00 P.M. Mr. O'Connor moved that we recommend to Council approval of the application for signs as submitted on site plan with the caveat they be illuminated no later or not past. 10:00 P.M. The motion was seconded by Mr. Palmer and passed 4/1, as Mr. Stobs was not present. Mr. O'Connor stated he is not relying on that portion of the Ordinance that addresses itself to signs in parking lots, as we do not find that to be the case in this particular situation. Barnett representatives questioned the 10:00 P.M. shut-off limitation noting that all other signs on Biscayne Boulevard are illuminated many hours after 10:00 P.M. Mr. O'Connor clarified the action of the Board by advising Barnett the other properties do not abut residential areas. At 9:10 Mr. Stobs returned to the Chair. 7) REQUEST FOR APPROVAL'OF PLANS FOR WOOD'SCREEN PHILLIP SPENCER, 381 N.E. 98 STREET Mr, LuBien noted that this was before the Board because of unusual elevation and the use of wood. The Building Director. advised that there was an existing 6' redwood fence at this location. The request is for a wood screen enclosure in front of the pool to give architectural appeal to the front elevation. This residence has existing wood construction, Mr. Spencer was previously before the Planning and Zoning Board but since no specific plans or drawings were supplied at r • - 6 - July 29, 1982 that time, he returned for consideration of his request and examination of site plan. Mr. Cutchens moved for approval of application for wood screen as presented in site plan submitted, on the grounds that it is in harmony with the structure aesthetically. Motion was seconded by Mr, O'Connor and passed unanimously. Mr. Stobs advised the Board that item 12 was dropped from the Agenda at the request of Mr. Fann, Village Attorney. With reference to Set -back requirement of Miami Shores Village Zoning Ordinance, Mr. Fann noted "Reconsideration of my observations with reference to a possible needed change in our set -back requirements has. led to the conclusion that I was in error. Any change along the lines I indicated at the Council meeting of July 13th (special meeting) might in fact jeopardize the existing ordinance. Therefore, I am requesting that the matter be dropped and that the ordinance be left intact," The meeting adjourned at 9:25 P.M. 727 Secretary Approved:`.. 1 CHAT' liiP