02-14-1985 Regular MeetingMIAMI SHORES VILLAGE
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING
February 14, 1985
A regular meeting of the Miami Shores Village Planning & Zoning
Board was held on February 14, 1985, at the Miami Shores Village Hall.
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Stobs, at 7:30 p.m.. The
following members were present:
J. Robert Stobs, II, Chairman
Robert J. Rossi
Patrick L. Duffy
Thomas Laubenthal
J. Leslie Wiesen
Also present: L. R. Forney, Jr., Village Manager
1. MINUTES
Mr. Wiesen moved to approve, as written, the minutes of the
meeting of January 24, 1985, seconded by Mr. Duffy, and carried
unanimously.
Mr. Stobs relinquished the chair to Mr. Rossi, because of a possible con-
flict of interest, concerning the next item on agenda. Mr. Stobs left
the meeting at this point.
2. REST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR DORMITORY
BARRY UNIVERSITY
11300 N. E. 2nd Ave.
Mr. Tim Czerniec, Vice President of Business Affairs for Barry
University,,. stated that! he has come to propose a new student
resident hall, which will enhance and improve the existing
buildings. The architects will present the parking issue as
well as the site plan. He introduced the Architects, Mr. Jose
Feito and Mr. Jose Rodriguez, from the firm of Frago & Feito.
Mr. Feito stated that he is appealing for the site plan approval,
and briefly outlined the building plans.
Mr. Rodriguez recapped in detail the parking issue in S-1 District.
The Code requires 1 space per each classroom, there are 65 class-
rooms, and 65 parking spaces. There are 3,000 students, therefore
requiring 300 spaces, which are allocated. There are 398 parking
spaces for the Auditorium, as required by the Code. Existing
parking provided on Campus in all areas, at this time, total 500.
This he stated is in excess by 102 spaces. In extending the com-
putation, unmarked, unpaved, temporary parking spaces total 238,
for an overall total of 738 on campus spaces, bringing the figure
to 340 excess parking spaces over all.
Mr. Rodriguez referred to other focal points to be outlined. The
relation of the old to the new two story building. The use of the
same type materials and colors and the attempt to center activity
in the Courtyard. Also the landscaping.
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING -2- 2/14/85
In reply to query by Mr. Rossi, Mr. Rodriguez stated that, the
projected new building will house a 96 bed dormitory unit. The
2nd Ave. side will be an outside corridor, the units being
back to back.
Mr. Rossi expressed concern for residents on 111th St., that
this could create added noise level and student level, and felt
that more detail for buffer area should be considered. A sound
barrier is definitely needed.
Mr. Czerniec replied that, this is the purpose of the two structures
situated as they are, the aim is to localize noise and activity
into the Courtyard area.
Mr. Laubenthal offered suggestions for continuous tree type canopy,
more trees along 111th St., as well as along the building, a more
effective buffer line outside the property line will be created.
This, he stated,will minimize maintenance and provide an efficient
shade cover for the parking on the 111th St. side. Some level
of landscaping is also needed along N. E. 2nd Ave. side, but this
is less residential and it is more important on 111th St. He
further suggested the mahogany tree is most favorable to solve the
noise problem and also for maintenance purposes.
Discussion continued regarding landscaping.
Mr. Duffy inquired about the equipment in the Common area and fear
that this area could become a hub of activity twenty four hours
per day.
Mr. Feito stated, it is anticipated there will be four washers
and six dryers, including vending machines and possibly mail
boxes in the enclosed speciality building. An attempt is being
made to screen the air conditioning units with the wall in this
area. Mr. Czerniec noted that, access to the machines will not
be permitted after the 11:00 p.m. closing time.
Further discussion concerning noise level occured.
Mr. Edward P. Swan, Esq., Attorney for Barry, stated that, the
University has the same concerns as the Board. It is their desire
to get along with the neighbors, because they must live in such
close proximity.
Mr. Forney outlined the question, as raised by Mr. LuBien, re-
garding the minutes of the meeting of August 11, 1983, and of
August 25, 1983, referring to the Site Plan for Barry University
Classroom Building approval. However, the West portion of the
parking lot has never been paved, ther.eforeeis incomplete. The
question being raised is, should a permit be issued for this new
building, when the previous site plan is not complete as had been
approved?
Mr. Rossi expressed the view that, he was on the Board at that time,
and he recalled the issue, the site plan was approved and its.cer-
tainly expected to occur as approved. He inquired if it is the
intention of Barry to pave this section as approved on the site plan.
1
1
PLANNING 4 ZONING BOARD MEETING -3- 2/14/85
Mr. Swan and Mr. Czerniec stated, it is not the intention of
the University to pave the West area, at this time, there is
sufficient parking in the S-1 District to meet the code require-
ments. It was further stated, the matter of budget, and priority
are issues. A Bond funding issue will take place this summer, to
raise funds to pay for the new building, which must be completed
for occupancy by August. This paving area is not a priority item.
Mr. Rossi stated that, while this item is not the issue before
the Board today, approval of the current Site Plan is, and he wants
it made clear that, all areas shown for parking are there, and
further that they will be paved.
Extensive further discussion took place regarding the paved parking
matter and the point that, when a site plan is approved it is ex-
pected to be carried out as approved.
Mr. Laubenthal moved to approve the Site Plan as submitted, seconded
by Mr. Wiesen.
Mr. Rossi commenting that the Board should be more specific about
landscaping, offered an amendment that, the Site Plan be approved,
subject to approval by the Planning & Zoning Board, of a landscape
plan to be submitted prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being
issued.
Mr. Laubenthal and Mr. Wiesen accepted the amendment, and the
motion carried by a 4-0 vote. Mr. Stobs did not participate, be-
cause he is possibly submitting a bid for the construction.
3. APPROVAL OF RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE BUREAU OF STATE
LAND PLANNING TO THE EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT OF MIAMI
SHORES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
Mr. Forney speaking to the Board, as the Local Planning Authority,
introduced the rewritten Miami Shores Village Plan for approval.
He recapped that, five years ago the Board submitted a plan to
Council, to be the Comprehensive Plan. Last year the State re-
turned the submitted plan, for an appraisal on its five year
anniversary. The State noted the plan deficient in two areas.
The objections were subsequently noted. The second attempt was
also returned with objections, as indicated in letter dated,
September 19, 1984.
The new amended Ordinance is again presented and subject to
approval by the Board will go to Council for a first reading.
Discussion followed various points.
Mr. Wiesen then moved to approve the Plan as written, seconded
by Mr. Duffy and carried unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
4
yreiry