Loading...
05-23-1985 Regular MeetingMIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING MAY 23, 1985 A regular meeting of the Miami Shores Village Planning & Zoning Board was held on May 23, 1985, at the Miami Shores Village Hall. Mr. Stobs called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m., with the following members present: J. Robert Stobs, II, Chairman Patrick L. Duffy Thomas Laubenthal Robert J. Rossi J. Leslie Wiesen Absent: None Also present: Frank J. LuBien, Director of Building & Zoning 1. MINUTES Mr. Wiesen moved to approve, as written, the minutes of the meeting of April 25, 1985, seconded by Mr. Duffy, and passed unanimously. 2. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF 6' FENCE IN SIDE AND REAR YARD CONTINUED FROM APRIL 25, 1985 THOMAS D. PORTER 186 N. E. 106th ST. Mr. LuBien reported, this is a request for variance to Sec.518 (a). The case was continued from the April 25, 1985 meeting at the re- quest of Mr. Steven DeLuca, to allow additional time to prepare his request. Neither Mr. DeLuca nor Mr. Porter was present. 3. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR PAVING MICHAEL PAHL 83 N. E. 100th ST. Mr. LuBien outlined the request as a variance to the Schedule of Regulations. The side setback required is 10', but the setback provided for is 2' to 3'. Included with the application were 10 waiver of objection forms from adjoining neighbors. Mr. Pahl stated he is requesting the variance so that he can use the garage in the rear and not have to park all his vehicles in' front of his residence. He further noted he is putting up a shadow box fence to hide any unsightlyness and for protection. He further noted that he is making the request on hardship basis. Much discussion followed concerning, the problem of drainage and other alternatives toward a solution to the parking and less hazardous entry in and out of the garage. Mr. Wiesen moved to approve the request for variance, but then withdrew the motion. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING -2- 5/23/85 Mr. Stobs outlined the four criteria for a variance, and noted that, there are no grounds for a variance. Following further discussion, Mr. Laubenthal moved to deny the request on the basis, the request does not qualify for a variance according to the Code, seconded by Mr. Rossi, and carried unani- mously. Mr. Stobs advised Mr. Pahl that, he does have the right to appeal to Council. He was further advised the request must be in writing, and in the office in ten days, to be heard by the Council at its' first meeting in June. 4. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR WOOD DECK DAVID & RIAN FIKE 18 N. W. 100th ST. Mr. LuBien reported the side set back provided for is 4', but a 10' side setback is required by code. Therefore, the request for variance to the Schedule of Regulations is to a non -conforming structure. David Fike, father and owner and Rian Fike, stated the wood deck would be situated so as to allow easy access to and from the dining, recreation area. Mr. Fike was advised, .the house is already encroaching into the side setback, making it non -conforming. Discussion followed concerning the depth of the lot and alternative solutions. Mr. Duffy moved to deny the request as presented, seconded by Mr. Wiesen, and carried unanimously. Mr. Fike was advised of his right to appeal. 5. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR GARAGE ENCLOSURE EDWIN W. EBY 242 N. W. 93rd ST. Members reviewed Plot Plan, floor plan, and front elevation sketch included with the request. Mr. Eby indicated that the driveway ribbons will be cut back and there will be landscaping. Members concurred they have a problem approving the request as presented, with the two rear doors, because of the potential habital or rental area. Following discussion, Mr. Laubenthal moved to deny the request as presented, seconded by Mr. Rossi, and carried unanimously. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING -3- 5/23/85 Following further discussion, Mr. Laubenthal moved to approve, contingent on resolving the second rear door access to the enclosure. Motion was seconded by Mr. Duffy, and carried unanimously. Mr. Eby was then informed that he has the right to appeal either motion to Council. 6. MEMO FROM MR. FORNEY, REAL ESTATE SIGNS Mr. LuBien read a memo from Mr. Forney, Village Manager, re- questing that the Planning & Zoning Board schedule a workshop regarding, Real Estate Signs. Mr. Stobs outlined the comments from Council Members concerning the proposed Sign Ordinance and indicated the reasoning for the request for a Workshop. Mr. Stobs also indicated that, he will address a letter to Mr. Russ Marchner, Political Consultant to the Real Estate Action Council of Dade, requesting further input and recommenda- tions from the Real Estate Community. A second Public Hearing was scheduled for Thursday, June 27th. Mr. Stobs requested that Mr. LuBien be prepared with some'.specific wording for the amended sign ordinance. 7. DISCUSSION - FEE TO ACCOMPANY REQUEST FOR VARIANCE Mr. LuBien recommended, the Planning & Zoning Board charge a fee for the request for variance which come before the Board. He noted that a fee might help to eliminate frivolous or vengeful requests which come before the Board. He cited the example of three items on this evenings agenda, which are strictly against the Codes. Mr. LuBien further outlined the fee cost for surrounding Municipalities, (Coral Gables, Bal Harbor, Dade County, Hialeah, Sweetwater and North Miami Beach). The opinion of Members was requested. Mr. Stobs advised Members that, the Planning & Zoning Board can- not administer such fees, this decision must be left to Council. Mr. Stobs further stated, he objects to a $200.00 fee, this sum being exorbitant and punitive. $25, to $50. is not unreasonable. Mr. Rossi indicated that, he is certainly in sympathy with the work involved in preparation of cases to come before the Board, but feels it is the right of residents and applicants to appeal to the Board and Council for variance requests. Mr. Rossi feels no fee should be charged. Mr. Duffy, is in favor of some kind of a fee structure, primarily for meeting the expenses involved. • • PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING -4- 5/23/85 Mr. Wiesen agreed with Mr. Stobs that, a $25.00 - $50.00 fee is reasonable. Mr. Laubenthal concurred that, a fee of $25. to $50. based on overhead is reasonable. Refunds might be made in certain in- stances, at the discretion of the Board. Mr. LuBien noted that, he outlines to each applicant any code restrictions or violations in their request, if the resident then wishes to pursue the request, a fee should be charged. The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m.. ecre