07-09-1987 Regular MeetingMIAMI SHORES VILLAGE
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING
July 9, 1987
The Miami Shores Village Planning & Zoning Board Meeting was held on
July 9, 1987,at the Miami Shores Village Hall. The meeting was called to
order by ChairmanStobs, at 7:30 P.M., with the following members present:
J. Robert Stobs, II, Chairman
Thomas Laubenthal
Larry T. McClure
Robert J. Rossi
Absent: Patrick L. Duffy
Also present: Frank LuBien, Director of Building & Zoning
1. MINUTES - June 25, 1987
The minutes of the meeting of June 25, 1987 were approved, as written,
by a motion made by Mr. Laubenthal, seconded by Mr. McClure, and passed
unanimously.
2. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF WOOD FACING & TRIM
MIAMI SHORES PREP SCHOOL
9221 BISCAYNE BLVD.
Mr. LuBien, in introducing the request reminded Members of the letter
from Dr. Neal Klar, Headmaster, outlining the changes requested, but
which have already been made. A color sample that the new wood trim
would be painted was presented. Mr. LuBien indicated he had sent
Dr. Klar a copy of Sec 225 of the code which deals with the type of
construction allowed, and trim.
Dr. Klar was present to answer questions for the Board, He noted the
changes are to give the school a very rustic look. The changes are
ornamental. The present trim is a russet red and the new color will
serve to lighten things up. It was also noted that a CBS wall is behind
the cedar wood siding on the West elevation. The cedar will be treated.
Mr.. Rossi in commenting on the work observed several problems. The cedar
will turn grey in three months. Cedar strip will shrink and the applica-
tion is butted boards rather than tongue and groove, and further it is
far from architecturally harmonious.
Mr. Stobs concurred with Mr. Rossi. Also, it does not comply with the
Miami Shores Village Ordinance and to remain consistant in enforcing the
code it would not be allowed. He has no problem with the window trim,
however, the West side is completely out of character. He is sorry that
it was not brought to the Board before the work was done, in good conscience
he cannot vote in favor of it.
Discussion continued concerning the application of harmony with Miami Shores
Village. The appearance, the effort to minimize upkeep, maintenance, and
longevity of material.
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING -2- July 9, 1987
Mr. Laubenthal moved to deny the request on the basis that it does not
conform with the code as it is written, and there is not sufficient
reason to consider a variance or deviate from the Ordinance. Mr. Rossi
seconded the motion.
After further discussion, Mr. Laubenthal modified his motion to state that
the board on board wood siding on the West elevation must be removed, as
it is inconsistent, however, the wood trim around doors and windows which
is purely the nature of trim is acceptable, the color sample for the trim
also is acceptable. Following further discussion, Mr. McClure clarified
that the white of the building will remain white (this includes the West
elevation if the request is denied), the trim will be orangewood as the
color swatch shows.
The question was called and the motion passed unanimously.
Mr. LuBien explained the process of appeal to Council to Dr. Klar.
Council's next two meetings are July 21 and August 4.
3. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR GARAGE ENCLOSURE & BATH ADDITION
DAYLE PECK
29 N. E. 107th ST.
Mr. LuBien indicated the present building is 1531 sq ft (1090 sq ft pitched,
and 441 sq ft flat). The area with the proposed addition is 1647 sq ft.(a
flat roof addition of 116 sq ft). The required set back and parking
spaces are provided for. Mr. LuBien also noted this house was designed
originally as a partially flat and partially pitched roof, it was not
designed as a pitched roof structure. An alternate design for the addi-
tion was submitted by the applicant, showing what that section would be
like if done as a pitched roof structure.
Mr. Stobs noted that this does require a variance on the side
elevation, since the flat roof area exceeds the 15% allowed.
alternate elevation does not require a variance, but would be
aesthetically.
Mr. Laubenthal stated that to
case is easily accomplished.
Mrs. Peck advised Members that
seemed to be the most workable
preferred
The West
viewed
acheive a solution for a pitched roof in this
in working closely with the Architect this
plan.
Discussion continued concerning use of the alternate elevation with windows,
whether stationary or not, for a more aesthetically pleasing look. Also
providing natural light and perhaps ventilation.
Mr. Laubenthal submitted a sketch of an idea to Mrs. Peck, using the alter-
nate pitched roof plan with clerestory windows, making the; addition more
consistant with the rest of the house.
Mr. Rossi moved to approve the alternate elevation, as redrawn by Mr. Laubenthal,
along with the owners approval of the sketch submitted. Mrs. Peck agreed
to accept the idea. Motion was seconded by Mr. McClure, and passed unanimously.
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING -3- July 9, 1987
4. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR ALTERATION
PARRY REAL ESTATE
9701 N. E. 2nd AVE.
Mr. LuBien noted that the new plan has been modified as the Board
requested at the last meeting. The new plan shows retail 1 & 2. In
describing the parking plan, Mr. LuBien noted the lot is used for the
entire building which consists of a second story which is residential
use over the retail stores or offices at the ground level. Computa-
tion is far below what is required for the entire building. Much ids-
cussion continued concerning the parking area.
Mr. Parry, Management Agent, advised the Board that the building is on
two lots. There is a vacant lot in the rear with separate title, but
he does not want to incorporate it with the existing land parcel of the
building. The Chamber of Commerce and the Shoemaker will occupy the
new space and require less parking need.
Much discussion continued. There is no parking site plan, no survey, and
no elevation.
Mr. Fred Astor and Mickie Connolly, Manager, representing the Chamber of
Commerce, requested an explanation of the problem, believing there is no
change of use, and not understanding the requests of the Board. They
were advised, the Board has a duty to look at N. E. 2nd Ave. with re-
vitalization in mind, and when there is a change of use it is time to
address all aspects of the code.
Mr. Parry, following much more discussion indicated he will provide a
site plan and meet with Mr. LuBien to try and determine whatever else
the Board wants. He withdrew the request and asked to be on the next
meeting agenda.
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
ROBERT K. SWARTHOUT
Mr. Swarthout introduced his Vice President and Associate, David B. VanHorn.
The Board was then advised by Mr. Swarthout that the first draft is 90%
complete, and he hopes that before the next meeting it can be delivered
to Mr. LuBien, and copies to Members for review.
He asked if anyone had any comments or questions relating to material
covered at the last meeting.
A major concern seemed to be a minimum standard housing code, and
Mr. Swarthout presented each Member with a copy of the Basic Property
Maintenance Ordinance, a part of the Building Code of Grosse Point Park,
Mich.. Much discussion took place on the Ordinance, and the process of
implementation. All agreed it is an excellent idea, and unanimously
voted to send a copy to Mr. Fann, Village. Attorney for review, and the
requirements for adoption. Mr. Swarthout advised Members, if the Village
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING -4- 7/9/87
agrees, a policy of this nature can be written into the Master Plan.
Mr. Stobs advised Mr. Swarthout we should know by the end of August,
and this idea will reinforce our own housing ordinances. Also it can
be one of the most important things to.come out of these talks.
Zoning...
Mr. Stobs again mentioned the property northof the Country Club, and
noted that it must remain in Municipal hands and should a change occur,
every aspect should be carefully thought out. Any change in zoning or
land use classification will require scrutiny and time. It was also
noted that the B-2 on Biscayne Blvd is more liberal, and B-1 on
N. E. 2nd Ave. a bit more restrictive. Mr. Swarthout indicated that
the Master Plan language must be asflexible as possible. Density or
'floor area ratio' regulation can be silent or written into the Plan.
Much discussion continued, and it was determined that a statement should
be specific in restricting buildings to four stories, not expanding
East or West into the residential, thereby drawing a line somewhere.
Increased revenue...
Moving into the area of increased revenue, Mr. Stobs stated the present
tax base rate is approximately 7 mill. The Village provides garbage and
police services. The County furnishes fire and fire rescue services.
Even with a 10 mill cap he feels the Village is competitive with other
Municipalities, and in good shape. Mr. Swarthout agreed there does not
appear to be a problem. Also we should not charge after land uses that
areincompatible with the community. Increased revenue can, in the long
run, be realized through preservation of property value. Further, it
is important to a. community to understand what it is, and what it wants
to be, and if it has closely acheived the later, there is no need to
replace that. Discussion continued concerning increase/in revenue, and
the suggestion made to stick with the basic character of the Village.
South Florida Regional Plan:..
Mr. Swarthout advised that we must be in conformance with, and advance
the Plan. The Regional Plan Policies are in the back of the book, and
there ate approximately. 77 of the Plan elements which must be examined.
All must be addressed in one way or another. Of the 77 - 20 were selected
as most definitely to be discussed.
Policy 16.1.7 - Housing for, and care of the elderly...
This would be extremely difficult to ignore. In reply to Mr. Rossi's
question, could we join with the surrounding community, Mr. Swarthout
noted he could try this, if that is what the Board wants. Language must
be written in to meet minimum requirements. Also .the size of the
municipality does not dictate the size or number of facilities provided,
but must be in a residential area or areas of residential character. In
reply to other questions, Mr. Swarthout replied, the smaller units could
be in the residential zone and the larger type units restricted to the
commercial area. Under the letter of the law we are being liberal as
possibleby allowing , in a small facility, minimum care for say 6-8
residents per house, and no closer than one house every 5,000 ft. If
necessary we can examine commercial locations.
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
-5- 7/9/87
Policy 16.1.10 - This item being a repetition of the previous, fully
discussed element, was passed over.
Policy 19.1.1 - Miami Shores already meets this requirement, providing
adequate amounts of moderate priced homes. The character of the Village
is pretty well set as a built up community.
Policy 35.1.1
destruction or
this is single
Policy 35.1.21
Policy 35.1.32
- Replacement Development - In the event of hurricane
disaster in the flood zone area. Mr. Stobs advised that
family, low density area so that no change is feasible.
- Same as discussed above.
- Does not apply.
Policy 37.1.2 - There was a brief discussion concerning the aquifer, but
it does not apply to Miami Shores.
In discussion, at this point, Mr. Swarthout replied to Mr. Rossi's
question that this Plan can be accepted or rejected. All State funding can
be halted, others can write your Plan, and you could loose your autonomy.
Cluster Title #43: Protection of Natural Systems. The section deals with
hardwood hammock, and does not apply to Miami Shores.
Policy 56.1.2 - Dealing with Comprehensive Plans, zoning ordinances to
ensure property rights. The policy complies with the existing Plan.
Policy 57.1.2 - There are no areas in need of redevelopment.
Policy 57.1.1 - This policy is in line with earlier discussion on density.
Since Miami Shores is serviced by septic tanks rather than sewers this
issue can take care of itself. New development must be approved by DERM
and HRS.
er
Policy 57.1.4 - Clus1 places of employment requirement in place.
Policy 57.1.5 - Requirement covered.
Policy 57.1.6 - Using roadway as an example this is not an issue at this
time. Only if Dade County changes its plan could it become so.
Policy 58.1.1 - Land uses surrounding natural recreational areas is not
an issue for Miami Shores Village. Biscayne River Canal has good water
quality.
Policy 58.1.2 - This element is not a critical issue for Miami Shores.
Policy 58.1.3 - No major issue.
Policy 58.1.5 - This issue has been covered. Biscayne River Canal does
have a sea wall.
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
-6- 7/9/87
Policy 59.1.3 - This area is covered by our Redevelopment Board which has
received a State Grant, and has hired a Consultant to aid in administration
of their programs.
Mr. Swarthout again noted that, though there are 77 elements, some are
very marginal, but he is obliged to say something about each of them.
A draft will be presented for review very shortly.
• There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:00 P.M.
•