Loading...
10-23-1986 Regular MeetingMIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 23, 1986 A regular meeting of the Miami Shores Village Planning & Zoning Board was held on October 23, 1986, at the Miami Shores Village Hall. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Stobs at 7:30 P.M.,.with the following Members present: J. Robert Stobs, II, Chairman Patrick L. Duffy Thomas Laubenthal Larry T. McClure Robert J. Rossi Also present: Frank LuBien, Director of Building & Zoning 1. MINUTES There were two corrections to the minutes of the September 25th meeting. In the first paragraph Thomas Laubenthal made the motion to approve the minutes of Sept. 11, 1986. In the last paragraph Mr. Laubenthal recommend- ed Mr. Rossi moved to approve the minutes of September 25, 1986, as corrected, seconded by Mr. Laubenthal and passed unanimously. 2. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF DIVISION OF LAND WITHOUT PLAT ROBERT A. KOPPEN Lots 13, 14, & 15 Blk 55, Miami Shores Sec 2 Mr. LuBien presented a set of plans for the Board's review, he described and explained the changes to be made. A portion of the existing structure will have to be removed to abide by (within 3/10 of a ft.> the set back requirement. Christine M. Moreno, Atty. was present to represent Robert Koppen, and to answer questions. She stated that the entire one story addition will be removed, and the new windows and wall will be in place. Discussion followed concerning the legality of the property line, any interior alterations to the house, the purpose of the one story CBS accessory building in the rear. The changes, subject to meeting the same harmonious architectural standards of Miami Shores and the existing house will be upheld. Mr. Laubenthal moved to approve the request for division of land without plat as submitted, subject to harmony standards being upheld. Motion was seconded by Mr. Rossi. Mr. McClure requested that the motion be more clearly defined. Mr. Laubenthal then restated the motion: To accept the division of land without plat into two 75' wide lots, including the commitment to remove the single story addition as well as the patio, allowing the house line to retreat to within .3' encroachment of the 10' side yard set back, and parallel to the existing structure. Further that the CBS single story accessory structure on the otherwise vacant second lot be allowed to remain at this time. The motion carried unanimously. Ms. Morino was advised that this request will be considered by Council at their meeting on November 4th. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING -2- 10/23/86 3. REQUEST FOR GARAGE ENCLOSURE Howard Rich 10658 N. E. 10th Ct. Members reviewed prints for this request. Mr. LuBien noted it is a simple enclosure, but the plans are somewhat complex, but thorough. Mr. Rich noted the enclosure is for the purpose of creating a storage 1111 room, also he is willing to cut back the driveway ribbons and landscape. Following brief discussion, Mr. McClure moved to grant the request as submitted, seconded by Mr. Rossi, and passed unanimously. Mr. Rich was commended for supplying so .complete a set of drawings. 4. Memo from Mr.. Forney, Village Manager, concerning. attendance at meetings Resolution adopted by Council 10/21/86, was reviewed by Members. 5. A letter regarding the Charter Amendment on the November 4th ballot t4dhhich affects Miami Shores residents was also called to Member's attention, they were urged to vote "Yes". • 6. AMENDMENTTTO. SEC 523' of APPENDIX A. Mx. LuBien read several memos from Mr. Forney outlining the need for a Color Ordinance in Miami Shores. Mr. LuBien wrote an Ordinance amending Section 523 of Appendix A. Members reviewed this Ordinance and discussed it at length. Mr. Stobs questioned the need for such an ordinance considering that there is a harmony clause already in place. To which Mr. LuBien responded with current examples of apparent flagrant violations of the harmony clause where color is involved. He felt there is a real need for such an ordinance from a code enforcement standpoint. Members had many questions concerning what an amended ordinance could accomplish. Is the harmony clause too vague to pursue from a code enforce- ment point? If no permit is issued, there is no control. Colors can be subject to review, but not forbidden. Mr. Stobs noted that in the case of new construction a color scheme of house and roof could be requested, in addition to the plans, also color swatch could be requested on permit application; otherwise specific colors would have to be dictated. Such an ordinance could lead to an Architectural Review Board. He is not in favor of an ordinance. Mr. Rossi felt that color is a personal taste and difficult to legislate. He did not feel it the duty of the Planning and Zoning Board to legislate colors, but the job of an. Architectural Review Board. Further, Mr. Rossi is in favor of a request for color swatch be included on the permit application. • • PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -3- 10/23/86 Mr. Duffy stated he is not enthused about the issue. Presumably an ordinance can be written legislating that a black & white house is ok. It would be difficult to dictate color and its harmonious effect. He felt that to see a sample of colors on new construction could be considered. Mr. Laubenthal sympathized in particular with the situation that Code Enforcement needs this tool to regulate an item not clearly defined. He is not convinced that not having an ordinance or some strong stated reference other than a form stating definite color gives direction or limitation as to define harmony. He concurred that the permit application form could include a choice of colors permitted, and handled administra- tively through the application. Mr. McClure felt that since this Board is qualified to judge most items as to harmony, they are certainly qualified to judge color harmony. For a person to declare the use of the color pink means nothing without a sample of the color being submitted at the time an application is applied for. He further recommended that an insertion of the words 'including exterior color' in the existing Ordinance without rewriting the whole Ordinance. i.e. 'All buildings Shall be generally harmonious in character and appearance "including exterior color" with existing buildings in the neighborhood The final unanimous decision of the Members was torecommend to the Administration insertion,}in Section 523 Appendix A of the words, including exterior color, andthe addition of a color clause on the permit application. Mr. LuBien will relate this recommendation to Mr. Forney and Mr. Fann. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 8:45 P.M.