Loading...
06-11-1987 Regular MeetingMIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING JUNE 11, 1987 The Miami Shares Village Planning & Zoning Board Meeting was held on June 11, 1987, at the Miami Shores Village Hall. Chairman Stobs called the meeting to order at 7:40 P.M., with the following members present: J. Robert Stobs II, Chairman Patrick L. Duffy Larry T. McClure Absent: Thomas Laubenthal Robert J. Rossi Also present: Frank LuBien, Director of Building & Zoning 1. MINUTES - May 28, 1987 Following clarification that only a portion of the Miami Shores Medical Center is empty, the minutes of the meeting of May 28, 1987 were approved, as written, by a motion made by Mr. McClure, seconded by Mr. Duffy, and passed by unanimous vote. 2. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR ALTERATIONS PARRY REAL ESTATE 9701 N. E. 2nd AVE. Mr. LuBien stated that due to some confusion between Parry Real Estate and the Downtown Revitalization Board, he has nothing to present to the Board on this request. Because of the sudden hospitalization of Mr. Grau's wife, he was unable to submit his report and there was no representative from Parry Real Estate present. Mr. Duffy moved to table the request, seconded by Mr. McClure, and passed unanimously. Mr. Stubs instructed Mr. LuBien that all information concerning items coming before the Board should be sent out to Members in their packets before the item is placed on the agenda. In the aforementioned case, there is no information and no plans. Mr. LuBien concurred, he will not be caught in the middle again, trying to accomodate an owner to expedite a request. He will demand that plans are brought into the office a full week in advance of the meeting. 3. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF VARIANCE FOR 6' HEDGE THOMAS PORTER 186 N. E. 106th ST. Mr. LuBien noted that this request for a variance comes as Administrative relief, as a result of Mr. Porter being cited by the Code Enforcement Board. The order of the Code Enforcement Board was that, Mr. Porter pay an Administrative fee of $110.00, and that if the violation is not corrected in thirty (30) days a fine of $10.00 per day will be assessed. Further, Mr. LuBien stated the $50.00 fee for variance has been paid. Members also received in their packet, a copy of Sec 518 of the Miami Shores Village Code of Ordinances, regulating fences, walls & hedges. 174 N.E. 96th Street Miami Shores, FL 33138 DATE: FROM: VILLAGE OF MIAMI SHORES DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION BOARD 23 June 1987 M E M 0 Downtown Revitalization Board *TO: Planning and Zoning Board SUBJECT: REVIEW OF PROPOSED RENOVATIONS FOR OFFICES & STORES AT 9701 N.E. 2ND AVENUE] (305) 754-7660 Project: Partition of 9701 NE 2 Ave ("Mr. J's") into three new stores. Submitted by: Perry Realty, 9701 NE 2 Ave, Mimai Shores, FL. Drawings Prepaired by: Composite Builders Corp. Construction Managment and Architectural Design 1300 SW 126 Place, Miami, FL. Drawings Sealed by: Lorenzo Soto, Engineer (License No. 34924) The following is a list of recommendations based on a review of the three sheets of drawings dated 25 May 1987, submitted to the Village of Miami Shores for the above referenced project. These recommendations were unanimously approved by the Downtown Revitalization Board. 1. All street elevations of above referenced property to include the elevation of the any adjacent store fronts on each side should be drawn on plans. Rear elevation of property should also be included. 5. All existing signage to remain and new signage to be added should be indicated in detail, to include color, size, material and location. 6. Work should include, that existing exterior walls should be scraped to eliminate all existing peeling paint and said area should be repainted to match existing paint colors and/or with new colors to be approved by the Downtown Revitalization Board. 7. Recommend removal of existing shed type metal awing and the addition of a new continuous canvas awning over all entrances and over all glass store fronts. Color of awing to be approved by Downtown Revitalization Board. 8. Recommend that there be lighting under the new awing. libp. Recommend that the parking area for these stores, the parking area lighting and existing utility poles and other obstructions in the parking area be indicated on the plans. Franklin E. Grau, Chairman, Downtown Revitalization Board cc: Downtown Revitalization Board Village Council Village Manager PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -2- JUNE 11, 1987 Mr. Frank Woland, Attorney for Mr. Porter, requested his concerns be cleared before having the case considered by this Board. #1 since three of five Members were present, he wondered if a majority of votes isthe determining factor, even if all five Members are not present. What is a quorum? On this point, he was advised the quorum is present, and the vote must be unanimous. Discussion took place concerning the element of time in case of deferment. He then requested a delay for the presence of the full Board, but after being advised this is not likely during summer months, and discussing this with Mr. Porter, he continued. His #2 concern, since Mr. McClure is a neighbor of Mr. Porters', and since his wife was involved in litigation with Mr. Porter and his dog, Mr. Woland questioned Mr. McClure's objectivity as a Member of the Board. Being satisfied that Mr. McClure would have excused himself if he felt influenced, Mr. Woland proceeded. He presented a petition signed by some neighbors on behalf of Mr. Porter, also Mr. Morton, a neighbor similarly situated, and has been cited because of Mr. Porter's complaint was present. Also he presented a list of other properties in Miami Shores with oversize hedge. Mr. Woland requested the variance on the basis that Mr. Porter lives on N. E. 2nd Ave., a busy street, 3 or 4 doors from a busy bus stop ,,he needs the hedge to prevent theft of fruit from an avacado tree and for the protection of his pet dog, privacy, and against crime. Also Mr. Woland stated,,he feels an exception to the rule should be granted to allow Mr. Porter full use of his property. .In response to query from Mr. Stobs, Mr. Woland noted that, yes there is a wood fence inside the hedge, and at 5'4" to 5'7" it is lower than the hedge. Much discussion continued concerning this case history, other oversize hedges in Miami Shores, and the recommendation to Council that Mr. LuBien be instructed to apply this same code to everyone in violation. Mr. Duffy moved to deny the request for a variance on the basis that the applicant has failed to demonstrate the necessary hardships for a variance do exist, in seconding the motion, Mr. McClure quoted Mr.. Woland, that if the rules are applied strictly, Mr. Porter is not•entitled to a variance and this Board is not known to be liberal with its' application of zoning rules. After further discussion the motion passed by unanimous vote. Discussion continued concerning uniform application of the code, and recommendation to Council to enforce same. Mr. McClure moved that in deference to the applicant, Council encourage the Code Enforcement to be uniform throughout the Village in the enforcement of hedge height, seconded by Mr. Duffy, and passed unanimously. Mr. LuBien instructed Mr. Woland-the process of appeal to Council. He must have a letter requesting appeal before noon tomorrow. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -3- June 11, 1987 Mr. Stobs recognized Councilwoman Marty Stofik, who attended the meeting. Also present was Mr. T. F. Chambers, Jr. 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ROBERT K. SWARTHOUT VILLAGE CONSULTANT Mr. Swarthout summarized progress after four (4) months of collecting data for the Plan. There is a double time table for the Plan. He is 50% to 60% along with information for the required drafts, which he will present for review. No official action is required on:the survey work prior to Septlember. He continues to collect technical data and analysing same. Mr. Stobs requested the Board be apprised of any future limitations to the Village in the survey work. Mr. Swarthout noted that a population projection in a built up Community will be needed to write into the Plan. (North Miami Beach was used as an example). He further outlined information gleaned from the Dept. of Community Affairs Conference he attended on June 10 & 11. Land Use Plan was discussed as a key issue. Community Character was not covered, but was at least on the list. Further he felt DCA is not interested to meddle with a good solid Plan. We must meet with the letter of the law and react to comments, with no need to go beyond. At the next meeting with the Planning & Zoning Board, Mr. Swarthout hopes to focus on Regional Policy. Mr. Stobs noted the South Florida Regional Policy should be reviewed so that Miami Shores can mesh with surrounding Communities. Mr. Stobs requested as much flexibility be written into the Plan as possible and Mr. Swarthout strongly recommends this. Much discussion continued concerning the vacant land owned by the Village north of the Miami Shores Country Club. The verb age in the Plan should indicate that however designated a change can be made. There was also discussion on the recent zoning change to "Z" or parking zone..in the rear of the E & W sides of N. E. 2nd Ave. business district. Mr. Swarthout requested discussion move ahead with the areas important to the Village, by way of responding to the open ended questions on the survey form each Member received earlier. Under the heading 'Transportation', Mr. Stobs noted many areas under juris- diction other than Miami Shores but do affect Miami Shores, such as County and State roads that impact the Village. Mr. Swarthout suggested being as specific as can be in discussions identifying prob lems, and then make the decision on how to document the statement. In response to query from Mrs. Stofik, Mr. Swarthout noted the fact that a ,problem is identified and a recommendation is written into the Plan has impact to the degree that. an issue is in the open and one can refer back that it has been identified. Much discussion continued concerning going on record as identifying traffic and crime problems caused by State & County Roads going through the Village. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -4- 6/11/87 Mr. Swarthout noted that he would need to identify these problems through accident reports, problem intersections and police reports. Problem roadways were listed as; 103rd St. as it intersects N. E. 6th Ave. and N. E. 2nd Ave., North Miami Avenue, Biscayne Blvd., N. E. 10th Ave. at 96th St., and 95th & 96th St. School zone boundaries and the need for school children to cross a busy State road were identified as other problems. Also discussed were the bus service which passes through the Village, and the regulation of speed by the Miami Shores Police. #13. Parking lacking in shopping areas. #14. Parking poorly designed in shopping areasy Was checked as problems on Mr. Rossi's form. (Lack of parking at the Theatre was mentioned) Much discussion continued regarding the parking problem and. Members were advised, it is important to address Parking in the Plan_ especially in light of the recent Supreme Court decision in California. There was discussion on the recent zoning changes for park- ing, Downtown Reviatalization Board effort to spearhead a "Mainstreet" Plan. Mr. Swarthout discussed the options related to the condemnation of land for parking use, the idea of purchasing this land. Are there other approaches to be considered? The Village should consider its options to provide a zoning approach (change of use) or acquisition approach. Further, he added, that under the land use type recommendation, concerning zoning, parking, building heights and uses written under the Unified Development Code, talks must articulate an objective. We must be as explicite as possible in what we want. Mr. Stobs, in further discussion on the parking issue advised that the B-1 and B-2 zone were completely reviewed and changes made last summer. Mr. Swarthout in response to his request, will receive a map of the rezoned areas and a copy of the survey done by the Revitalization Board several years ago. Other subjects discussed were; retail to serve the residents. Offices uses which do not necessarily service residents. Lack of restaurants to serve people working in the area. The problem of no sanitary sewers - restrict- ing building heights. It was suggested that business people could ban to- gether to initiate a sewer program or the possible use of State funds. Another question to be answered, does the Village want the additional impact this service would bring? Under 'Industrial Development' - No need for more industry was checked. In backtracking on the zoning changes, Mr. Stobs emphasized the rezoning was not to pick any one parcel, but the fact that if downtown is to be revitalized to office and/or retail and a vibrant downtown, parking is most necessary and important. If a plot is zoned 'P', it doesn't matter whether owned privately or by the municipality, but if owned privately it could be condemned by the Village if they want to improve it. Mr. Swarthout then felt his instruction is not to address this particular item, at this time. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -5- 6/11/87 Mr. Duffy inquired about adjournment, considering that Mr. Swarthout must drive back to Palm Beach County at such a late hour. Mr. Swarthout responded that, he is willing to maximize his opportunities, and stay as long as necessary to complete this discussion, and questionaire. Mr. Stobs again emphasized the Village wants to maintain its flexibility and its options. Mr. Swarthout discussed Public Hearing requirements and noted his will- ingness to submit survey and meet with other Boards. He responded to Mr. McClure that he will conduct a new survey if the Village requests. (At additional cost to the Village). He was pleased with Mr. Duffy's suggestion that a survey could be accomplished through the Village Newsletter. A Community Survey is a very important toolto accomplish some of the things necessary to list in the Plan. He wants a plan that is more useful than DCA requirements. Means and alternatives provided must be written in. This should be a major use, backup and support Plan in case of challenge. Changes taken place over a period of years was discussed; changes to offices on N. E. 2nd Ave., rental difficulty because of higher rent rates, services being closed because of lack of residents support. Revitalization Grant, the Planner and their focus. Items checked and discussed under 'Residential Development'; #5. The deteriorating condition of older residential neighborhoods. #6. Older housing need repair -sections not kept up -lowering the value scale. The effective approach, discussed at length, to this problem was to require a CO when property changes hands. Health and safetyand welfare are the issues under minimum housing standards. Mr. Duffy noted the concept is great, the implementation starry. Mr. Swarthout will provide examples of implementation. #9. The consensus is, no more apartments are wanted. The Miami Shores Village Recreation program is excellent, and all agreed it cannot be improved upon. The only discussion was that the vacant land north of the Country Club should remain in Village hands. Discussed under the heading 'Services'. Drain improvements, previously discussed. School facilities - poorly located, obsolete and facilities in poor repair were all checked. Referring to the one elementary school in the Village. Mr. McClure indicated that nothing can be done regarding the poor location, but feels the deteriorating condition and lack of proper maintainance must be addressed. Mr. Swarthout indicated he can write it up as a problem, and a potential blighting influence that should be corrected. Also discussed were any other vacant property owned by the Village. Extend- ing the B Zone on Nr; E. 2nd Ave., and discussion of the.R Zone on N. E. 2nd. Mr. Swarthout summarized the strong preference to retain residential profile. Not too enthusiastic for change on N. E. 2nd Ave., and no crying need in the Commercial area. The only concern is the increased tax base. Mr. Swarthout noted that this Planning & Zoning Board is unique in its open-mindedness and interest in protecting the Community. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -6- 6/11/87 Mr. Swarthout will be here for the meeting of July 9th and suggested that he could change to another evening if the agenda is too heavy. Also he requested to receive a copy of the minutes and review of the tapes. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:30 P.M. 1111 eLize,61 $ecre ary