12-16-1982 Regular Meeting•
MIAMI SHORES' VILLAGE
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING
DECEMBER 16, 1982
A regular meeting of the Miami Shores Planning and Zoning
Board was held at 7:30 P.M., December 16, 1982, at the Miami Shores
Village Hall, with the following members present:
J. Robert Stobs, Chairman
Kevin P. O'Connor
Roberta Johnson
Robert J. Rossi
Absent: J.S. Palmer
Also Present: Frank LuBien, Building Director
1. MINUTES:
Minutes of the meeting of November 11, 1982 were approved
as.written by motion made by Mrs. Roberta Johnson, seconded by Mr.
Kevin O'Connor and carried.
2. PUBLIC HEARING -- CHANGE OF ZONING FROM X TO 0
J.M. MUNCIE, 150 N.E. 96STREET
Jo Ann M. Muncie, owner of property at 150 N.E. 96th Street
filed petition requesting change of zoning. Property now in the
X or Parking Zone. Mrs. Muncie requests zoning change to 0, Professional
Office Use.
Mr. Stobs read a brief history with reference to the property and
also placed on record letters from Mrs. Clover B. Apelian, Mr, & Mrs.
William Johnson and Mrs. Mary Newman, all opposed to rezoning this
residence. They all .expressed concern with reference to parking
congestion and the belief that the value of their homes is based on
single family residences and this rezoning will encroach on the single
family concept.
For clarification, the Chairman read the definition of an 0 Zone.
Mr. John Gerken, attorney.for Mrs. Muncie, addressed the Board.
He noted this property was at one time a four unit apartment residence.
He felt it should either revert to a four mit apartment building; or
to a professional office building; or that the City should purchase
same and tear it down and convert the property to a parking area.
Mr. Gerken advised it was virtually impossible and the cost prohibitive
to convert the building to a single family residence.
•
•
- 2 - December 16, 1982
Mr. Stobs and Mr. LuBien visited the property (11/16) and
noted there are two baths and two separate apartments on the
second level and a professional office on the main level.
Following discussion by the Board the floor was opened for
public comments. Approximately forty residents attended the
Hearing and statements were given by the following:
Mr. & Mrs. George Apelian, 124 N.E. 96 Street - Opposed -
.citing further congestion re parking and the effect on a strong
residential area.
Mr. Paul Youngren, 100 N.E. 96th Street - Opposed - He stated
it would change the character of the residential area and cause parking
congestion.
Mr. Robert S. Mortonson, 40 N.E. 95th Street - Opposed - He also
was concerned about parking congestion and the effects on the integrity
of the residential area.
Mrs. Dorothy Schneider, 145 N,E. 95th Street - Opposed - She stated
a zoning change would cause further parking problems in the residential
area.
Mrs. Helen C. Shutterly, 139 N.E. 96th Street — Opposed - A zoning
change would result in further parking problems and constant traffic
in a strict residential area.
Mr, Louis B. Riney, Jr., 150 N.E. 95th Street - Opposed - Wishes
to maintain residential integrity of the district.
Mr. John Romanik, 95 N.E. 95th Street - Opposed - Change of zoning
will create additional parking problems.
Mrs. Alfred Caballero, 160 N.E. 95th Street - Opposed - Parking
congestion in area already. suffering parking. difficulties.
Mr. Carl L. Boyson, 117 N.E. 95th Street - Opposed - He believes
the value of his property will go down due to parking congestion and
change of the residential quality of the area.
Mrs. Carolyn P. Santos,. 136 N.E. 96th Street - Opposed - Cites
parking difficulties.
Mrs. Mary T. Newman, 140 N.E. 95th Street - Opposed - Also concerned
about parking congestion.
•
- 3 - December 16, 1982
Following comments from Village residents, the Board briefly
expressed their views.
Mr. Robert J. Rossi - The impact would be great on the residential
ares specifically traffic -wise and a nuisance to the existing Village
residents.
Mr. Kevin P. O'Connor - We should maintain the residential nature
of this areaand confine retail functions. to N.E. 2nd Avenue's business
district.
Mrs. Roberta Johnson - Mrs. Johnson stated she noted the feelings
of the residents and they were very persuasive.
Mr. J. Robert Stobs, Chairman - Mr. Stobs noted that in reviewing
the documents presented to the Board, there is no hardship evident on
the present owner by its present zoning. He feels that the property
is open to use and the Board has no wish to set a precedent.
Motion was made by Mr. Rossi to deny the change of Zoning from
X to 0 of 150 N.E. 96.Street. Motion was seconded by Mrs. Johnson.
Mr. O'Connor made note that we are not allowed to consider the
property purchaser in arriving at a decision. What we are deciding
is whether or not to allow a residential area to become professional.
The question was then called and the motion to deny zoning change
was passed with a unanimous vote.
A recess was called at 8:30 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 8:40.
The Board advised the attending residents that the zoning change
request will go to Council next Tuesday (12/21/82).
3. REVIEW OF SITE PLAN
BARRY UNIVERSITY, N.W. 111th Street & N,W, 2nd Avenue
This was before .the Board for approval of fence size, location,
restroom facilities and parking plans.
Mr. Jackson M. Ahlstedt, Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff,
Architect and Engineer for Barry University presented three exhibits
to the Board. The proposed facility will consist of two regulation
softball fields, a soccer field, a 400 meter running track with
bleachers and a structure containing rest rooms and storage area.
He advised that parking will be in the main paved areas of the University,
Considerable--landscaping-is:planned and an 81. chain link fence will enclose
the facilities.
Due to the residential area adjacent to the University the Board
7' 4
Peeep}ber 16? 1982
requested the 8chain link fence be buffered by landscaping. Mr.
Ahlstedt stated this would be no problem to Barry. He advised the
restrooms would be of concrete block and stucco with a tile roof.
Discussion was held relative to platting. Mr. John Eagan,
of Howard Needles Yemen & Bergendoff, advised that .the platting
issue is not pertinent as,it is not in the interest of the University
to subdivide this piece of property and limit its potential fiexability
in the future,
Following further discussion by the Board, Mr. O'Connor moved
that we grant a variance to erect an 8' chain link fence, a minimum
of 5' from the property line on the South and West side. Motion was
made on the basis that the facilities constitute an attractive nuisance,
necessitating a fence, and that the fence permits a reasonable use of
the property. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rossi.
Mrs. Johnson offered an amendment to the motion that the 5'
contain an appropriate hedge to screen the fence. The amendment
was accepted by Mr. O'Connor, seconded by Mr. Rossi and carried
unanimously.
The original motion as amended was then carried unanimously.
4. REVIEW OF SIGN PLAN
MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, BIS.CAYNEBLVD. & N.E. 6 AVENUE
Mr. Rossi excused himself from action on this item.
Plans were presented to the Board for a new Village entrance
sign and input was.requested from the Planning &Zoning Board as to
location of the sign which is considered "public improvement",
Following examination of the plans, Mrs. Johnson moved for
approval of location of the "public improvement" per plans submitted,
seconded'byMr. O'Connor, and carried 3/1, with Mr. Rossi abstaining.
5. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF FABRIC COVERED CARPORT
TOM KOKENGE, 138 N.E. 92 STREET
This application is for a fabric covered carport, in the rear
of the house. Mr. LuBien notes there is no problem as far as setback
is concerned; it will be 5' from the rear property line, and unit
appears to comply with section 225 (c).
Mr. Tom Kokenge.submitted sealed plan which states the structure
will withstand 120 m.p.h. winds. There was adiscussion on the anchoring
details and the color of the fabric for harmony purposes.
After further discussion of the structure, Mr. O'Connor moved
that we approve the request for erection of the fabric coveree carport
based upon the submission to the Building & Zoning Department, within
ten (10) days,sealed drawings showing concrete footings, Motion was seconded
•
•
December 16, 1982
by Mr. Rossi and carried 3/1, with Mrs, Johnson opposed.
6. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS TO ENCLOSE GARAGE
MARY LICAUSI, 10317 NORTH NIAMI AVENUE
Garage enclosures must be approved by the Planning & Zoning
Board.
Plan was submitted for enclosed garage and alternate offstreet
parking facilities which will be.provided. There is no problem
with the plan as submitted and no intent to use as rental.
Mr. O'Connor moved for approval of enclosed garage per plans
provided to Board, seconded by Mrs. Johnson and carried unanimously,
7. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR DETACHED SIGNS
BORIS MOROZ,'9301 N.E. 6 AVENUE
Site plan was submitted indicating location of the proposed
free-standing signs-. At present no signs exist at this location.
It was determined the signs would be harmonious with the
existing structure. Mr.. Rossi noted that this property has been
improved by Mr..Moroz and is now an asset to the area.
Mr. Rossi moved.that we approve plans for the signs as
submitted, seconded by Mr. O'Connor, and carried unanimously,
8. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR ALTERATION
AMERIFIRST FEDERAL, 9640 N.E. 2ND AVENUE
Mr. LuBien advised that the front elevation will be altered
for installation of equipment which will be utilized by the public
from the Village sidewalk. The Board determined this hadno impact
on the public.
Mr..Stobs referred the Board to the Council meeting of December
7, 1982, page 3, paragraph (b) under Ordinances.
Mr.. Jack Wilkens, in charge of design construction for Amerifirst
Federal discussed Amerifirst'swish to complete plans for alteration
for automatic teller before final Ordinance is passed relative to
operating hours. The, purpose of this request is for approval of
the alteration as presented.
Mr. Rossi moved for approval of alteration as per plans submitted,
seconded by Mr. O'Connor and carried 3/1, with Mrs. Johnson opposed.
This requires action by Council.
•
•
- 6'- December 16, 1982
9. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR ADDITION
JAMES A LAUB, 10200 NORTH MIAMI AVENUE
Mr. LuBien advised that the existing building is non-
conforming in that it is wood structure built in 1930.
Mr. Randy Shropshire, contractor, explained that the addition
is an open porch; the roof is presently asphalt shingle and the
roof area is approximately 300 sq. ft.
Owner agreed to use masonry in lower section of the porch
instead of wood frame.
Mr, 0/Connor moved that we grant.variance (under section 225)..
with respect to the material for the roof, and we approve application
for asphalt tile on the basis of harmony. Motion was seconded by
Mrs. Johnson, and carried unanimously. This item goes to Council.
10. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS, TO ENCLOSE GARAGE
JOHN BRADY, JR. 1297 N.E. 100 STREET
Planning Board approval is required for garage enclosure.
Mr. Brady proposed to enclose garage for use as bedroom
for one of his daughters, and not for rental purposes.
Following examination of plans and discussion, Mr. O'Connor
moved for approval of garage enclosure, seconded by Mr. Rossi,.
and carried unanimously. .
11. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR FLAT ROOF ADDITION
BARBARA JOZYA, 166 N.W. 93 STREET
Plans were submitted for flat roof addition which is visible
from the street. In all other respects it complies for a flat
roof addition to a pitched roof structure.
Mr. Victor Bezdek, 56 N.W. .93 Street represented Mrs. Jozya.
He advised that the roof could not be tile due to financial hardship.
The Board advised that the roof can be done in tile and
it is visible from the street and financial difficulty is no
grounds for hardship for a variance. (section 225 (3)).
Mr. O'Connor moved that we deny application for a variance
for this fiat roof addition, seconded by Mrs. Johnson, and carried
unanimously.
Al - - - -- -
Mr. Bezdek wishes to appeal decision of Planning Board to Council.
•
- 7 - December 16, 1982
12. REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO STORE OVERSIZE BOAT
H.C. ALLEN, 1365 N.E. 105 STREET
Mh. Allen states he wishesto store for approximately 3 or
4 months, during the winter, a 24' boat. The maximum length
allowed by the Village is 20'. Variance to section 501 is required.
After discussion, Mrs. Johnson moved that the request for
variance to store the oversized boat be denied, under Ordinance
312 (r) (1), seconded by Mr. Rossi, and carried. unanimously,
Mr. Allen was advised he could appeal the decision of
the Planning Board with Council. Mr. LuBien advised Mr. Allen
to call him early the day following our meeting.
Mr. O'Connor wished it to be recorded that he thinks our
Code is archaic and unnecessarily restrictive in this respect.
The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
•
Secretary
16MAL 11
Approved .,
IRMAN