02-25-1988 Regular MeetingMIAMI SHORES VILLAGE
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING
February 25, 1988
The Miami Shores Village Planning & Zoning Board meeting convened on
February 25, 1988, at the Miami Shores. Village Hall, at 7:30P.M.. Mr. Rossi,
Chairmancalled the meeting to order with the following members present:
Robert J. Rossi, Chairman
Terrell F. Chambers, Jr.
Richard M. Fernandez
Thomas Laubenthal
Larry T. McClure
Also present: Frank LuBien, Director of Building & Zoning
Elly F. Johnson, Village Manager
Spero Canton, Mayor
1. MINUTES - February 11, 1988
Corrections to the minutes, were made as follows:
Pg 1 under the heading Definition - word construct should be propose, and
on pg 3, end of line 8 should not be a colon (:), but semicolon (;).
Mr. McClure moved to approve the minutes as corrected, seconded by
Mr. Laubenthal, and passed unanimously.
2. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF VARIANCE TO PERMIT FIBERGLASS SHINGLES
Harriette Lefler
9353 N. E. 9th Ave.
As noted by Mr. LuBien, this is a request for a variance to Sec 225 of the
Zoning Ordinance. The existing roof is wood shingles and Mrs. Lefler is
requesting approval to change to composition fiberglass shingles. Included
in Members' packet was a signed and sealed letter from Consulting Engineer,
indicating the roof structure will not support tiles.
Mrs. Lefler showed a sample of the product she proposed to use. The color,
as yet, has not been decided upon. She indicated this isnot the original
roof. The original was of wood shingles in 1938, but she feels this is a
better product than the wood.
Discussion ensued concerning historical significance of the house, and the
use of composite fiberglass shingles, cost, etc.
Mr. Fernandez moved to approve the request for fiberglass shingles on the
basis of the letter from the consulting engineer, seconded by Mr. Laubefthal.
In continued discussion, Mr. McClure felt that a precedent is,being set and
the aesthetics are important. The vote was called and failed by 4-1 vote.
Mr. Laubenthal said he could approve the wood shingles if Mrs. Lefler would
agree to using them, rather than fiberglass. Mrs. Lefler agreed to use the
wood shingles.
Mr. McClure moved to allow the wood shingles, seconded by Mr. Laubenthal,
and passed by unanimous vote.
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
-2- 2/25/88
Extending courtesy to all in attendance who came to hear the discussion on
item 4 on the agenda, Mr. Rossi skipped over #3 at this time.
4. DISCUSSION RE: MODIFIED RESIDENTTAT, USE DISTRICT
To open discussion and update Members on the issue, Mr. Rossi stated he
had attended the last Council meeting atwhich time three ordinances
(Creating Modified Residential District, amdendent to the Comprehensive
Plan, Rezoning Ordinance) received a great deal of discussion. They
failed to come back to the Planning & Zoning Board for lack of a second.
A later motion was made to request. Planning & Zoning to aggressively
evaluate those areas that would serve as buffers around the community,
and to begin that evaluation with the area on 2nd Ave. south of the
commercial business area. The motion passed with the amendment, 'and
giving preference to no one specific proposal'. It is for this purpose
then, that the Board is addressing this issue to create a buffer, look
at use for the area. Village Council see a lack of attention to the
N. E. 2nd Ave. area through ordinance not being followed, or maintenance,
etc., this creating a need for buffer between El Portal and Miami Shores.
Mr. Fernandez announced, at the last Planning & Zoning meeting Members
concurred with his proposal which centered around three issues concerning;
evaluation of need, aesthetics, and change of character. These he feels
are the central issues concerning any of the proposals.
Mr. Laubenthal commented that this Board has no history of pursuing zoning
changes, which is not to say there is no responsibility for looking at
any change on the horizon. There has been, and will continue to be an
increase in traffic as we have varying density of development in El Portal
to the south and Dade County on the north. These must be recognized as
patterns and do have an impact, but do we want to use same in our own
community? Do we need to create a new use? Modified Residential is not
a buffer, it is a use. Buffer is an element to keep two opposing uses at
bay. Do we need to upgrade this intensity of development? There is a
market for the varied types of properties, and we are not denying use.
The area may be stagnant at present, but it can be a successful residential
market.
Mr. Rossi noted the Council suggested Planning & Zoning look at the issue
as Progressive Planners rather than passive Planners. It is largely because
Planning & Zoning efforts to maintain standards, that Miami Shores is
keeping its' character. We dohave to think of all options.
Mr. Chambers agreed with much of what had been said. None .the less, his
concern is for: the people in the immediate area. He strongly feels there
should be a Public Hearing where all the people living within 500' of the
area have an opportunity to express their views, and we should use these
views as our guide.
Mr. Fernandez noted there had been discussion in the past concerning aesthet-
ics and Mr. Laubenthal and Mr. Grau have convincing. arguments, it can look
good. The solemn charge of the Board to the citizens is to maintain the
character and we have a pledge to keep it residential.. A change to commer-
cial has significant impact to all, especially within 500' as previously
stated. The need factor is a most important consideration. We should not
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
-3- 2/25/88
be concentrating so much time on the Modified Residential Use District
when the charge from. Council is to look at other alternatives.
Mr. McClure opened his remarks by expressing appreciation for the turn out,
indicating people are interested in the subject. He has no real opinion,
and feels the only way to develop an opinion is to hear input from the
citizens of Miami Shores at a Public Hearing. He has interpreted the charge
from Village Council to write an ordinance or proposal to aggressively
evaluate buffer zones. Mr. McClure then made a motion to start evaluation
with N. E. 2nd Ave south of the commercial business area. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Fernandez, and passed unanimously. To clarify, Mr. McClure
indicated his intention is the property that has been discussed, and is in
question.
Comments are not normally open to the public since this is not a Public
Hearing, however, in deference to people who came to discuss the issue,
Mr. Rossi advised he would hear brief comments.
Barbara North Burton revealed she is interested in the consideration of
Modified Residential Zone, and has an option to purchase the property at
215 Grand Concourse. She introduced her law partner, legal assistant,
and Joe Weil, City Attorney for the City of Sweetwater, representing her
in this rezoning request, and drafted these Ordinances. She gave a history
of the property, outlined the problems in El Portal, and showed photographs
of surrounding home/offices. Mrs. Burton noted that her lease is up in
April and she wants to exercise her options for the property in question
before that time. Further she does not feel her interest is a conflict of
interest. There has been considerable discussion on the matter both in
Council and Planning & Zoning, and she urges schedule of Public Hearing
at this time. Mr. Swarthout, Comprehensive Planner for Miami Shores has
agreed to come and support her position. Also there is the tax base increase
to be considered.
Mr. Rossi advised this is not a Public Hearing, and not the time to express
sentiment for or against the issue. We are asking for input.
Mr. Joe Weil, Attorney, 12955 Biscayne Blvd., noted that El Portal has many
problems on N. E. 2nd Ave. area extending to Miami Shores business district.
He has talked with Mr. Swarthout also, and he is willing to come to Miami
for a public hearing, and express himself.
Joe Dugoni, 166 N. E. 92tikl St., has lived in the house for 23 years. His
home is adjacent to the Church and he has never had a problem. He wants
to see professional officepeople in the spaces and sees an urgent need to
consider Modified Residential property for attorneys, doctors, professionals.
Dr. Henry De Stefano, 265 N. E. 92nd St., objects to the clean, vacant lots
being referred to as stagnant area. He is a home owner and when he purchased
he felt he had moved into a single family residential area, and feels this is
being taken away. The only people interested in the property, at this time,
are those who want to make money.
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
-4- 2/25/88
Dr. Thomas James a former home owner in the area, Mr. Jerry Grimes of
161 N. E. 92nd St., and Mr. Don McIntosh, 313 N. E. 92nd St. each
commented concerning the immediate property area.
Mr. Rossi advised all that a Public Hearing cannot be held without an
ordinance. The Village Attorney and the Village Code Sec 1001 has ad-
vised this.
Members were advised that we do need time to evaluate alternatives, as
Council has instructed, however it would be virtually impossible to do
so immediately, in light of the fact that this information was received
less than an hour ago, after walking in the door tonight. Tiiue and the
opportunity is needed to study plans.
Members did discuss at length possible alternatives that might and might
not be viable. Whatever is done must be of value to the residents.
Members seemed to concur that a.Public Hearing may be necessary.
Mr. Fred Astor, Thomas Lee, and Mr. Dtgoni questioned why. Planning &
Zoning did not act before when it came from Council. They were advised
that an Ordinance was not received and further that instruction from
Council failed for lack of a second, and direction from Council was not
forthcoming before tonight.
Mr. Elly F. Johnson, Village Manager, stated that in 21 years of working
in Municipal Government he has learned there is no ordinance presented
for Public Hearing which cannot be modified. An ordinance can be changed
by Council from first to second reading. He further gave examples of
problems where he presently lives and a solution to a problem in Gainesville,
Ga. where he had served as Manager.
Much give and take continued. Action or inaction was discussed. Again it was
mentioned planning cannot take place in a thirty (30) minute presentation,
before a one sided audience, the charge just received must be evaluated and
pondered. Realistically a change must be made or forgotten. Residential/
office and professional office alternatives were discussed. And there are
yet many items to be considered if change is take place.
Mr. LuBien advised that in his opinion the consensus is that, this Board
should take action, the code provides the method in Sec 1001, (b) by a
resolution of intention to propose an amendment adopted by the Planning
Board. At thistime action is in order to request the Village Attorney to
prepare a resolution .to that end. This would implement getting official
action started. This item is on the agenda through no instruction from
anyone. To clarify opinions, Mr. LuBien further noted the code provides
for a three (3) choice method to amend this code: 1. Resolution by Council,
2. Resolution by the Planning Board, 3. Petition from the surrounding
property owners.
Mr. McClure moved to amend our zoning ordinance to include the Modified
Residential Zoning District, Mr. Chambers seconded the motion for discussion.
Mr. LuBien advised the motion is out of order as it does not conform to
provisions of the code.
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
-5- 2/25/88
Following further discussion, Mr. Weil advised that Mr. LuBien's opinion
is well taken. You have no resolution, but a vehicle before you. The
motion was then withdrawn by Mr. McClure.
Mr. Laubenthal made a motion to submit a resolution of intent for the
purpose of amendment to our zoning ordinance, this document to be sub-
mitted to Staff for review in preparation as an Ordinance. This motion
was seconded by Mr. Mr. McClure, and carried unanimously.
Mr. Fernandez requested the minutes reflect that he is agreeing at this
point and time for the purpose of drawing to a Public Hearing. It is in
his opinion not been the charge of Council, but an item ramrodded through
in a manner in which we have not met our responsibilities, but it will be
the ultimate voice of the citizens of Miami Shores to express their
opinions, and it is wise to let it go forth for this reason.
Mr. Rossi then requested that Mayor Canton instruct Village Council that
this Resolution be received by Village Manager and by the Village Attorney,
and returned for the purpose of setting a Public Hearing. This is an
important issue and all legal procedures must be followed.
A five minute recess was taken.
Mr. Grau remained for the discussion on Dish Antenna.
5. DISCUSSION RE: COMMERCIAL DISH ANTENNA
Members agreed that Staff had done a marvelous job on the beautiful presen-
tation. The book "Regulating Satellite Dish Antenna" by Harry B. Roth, is
an excellent, comprehensive, informative guide. Mr. McClure commented,
those who wrote the Miami Shores Village Ordinance are to be commended,
and he is surprised our Ordinance is not in this book.
Mr. Rossi noted the book has an overview of FCC rul ings. It addresses
pros and cons of transmission and reception, size and shapes, color, location,
setback requirements, height restrictions, landscape and screening, mounting,
and number per use. Sample ordinances were also included. Also the book
details the free reception window, and reflects mostly on dish antennas
mounted at ground level.
Mr. McClure noted his concern is if we can consider the commercial roof mount
as an accessory building. Can we add Commercial mount to our existing
ordinance?
Mr. Rossi advised the intent of discussion is to address the Commercial Use
Dish Antenna which must be allowed. There are several options open, but first,
the Village Attorney must be asked if it should be included in the accessory
building use, if should be in a separate section or should a new ordinance
be created. 'it
Mr. McClure suggested at this time the Board list the points to be considered
and have the Village. Attorney prepare a resolution or ordinance to reflect
the intent of the Members, for their review. If he cannot do so the Board
will request Village Council provide a legal consultant for this purpose.
•
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
-6- 2/25/88
1. All Members agreed they are in favor of Commercial Dish Antenna.
2. That it be for the purpose of reception only. (Reason being noise and
radiation, health standards).
3. Location. In response to query, Mr. McClure noted the hardship by allow -
ground mount only, is that somebusinesses would not be able to have an
antenna. The solution is to be as restrictive in the commercialinstalla-
tion as. residential.
4. Ground or Roof Mount. Screening/Landscapping, whichever is used the
antenna should be appropriately screened. As much screening as possible
without interfering with reception. Screening is addressed in the book
on page 21, #4.
5. Number of Dish Antennas per Building. One dish antenna per structure.
6. Size. Much discussion took place, and it was determined the mamimum size
should be no larger than 12' in diameter. (Reference in book page 21,
B. (b) Height not to exceed 16' above grounding level.
7. Color. Dish Antenna should be neutral in color. (Reference page 27,
upper left hand corner.
Mr. Laubenthal made a motion to draft a resolution of intention to propose
an amendment to the existing ordinance to have the Village Attorney draft a
Commercial Satellite Dish Antenna Ordinance following the guidelines as set
down by the Board. Mr. Rossi passed the gavel and seconded the motion, which
passed unanimously.
3. DISCUSSION RE: AMENDMENTS TO THE VILLAGE CODE TO ASSIST HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
Since Margo Newton was not present, and Mr. Rossi just received a copy of her
Definition (What is Historic Landmark?), this evening, and also a copy of
the Historic Preservagion Board Ordinance, Mr. McClure moved to table this
item, seconded by Mr. Fernandez, and passed unanimously. Mr. Fernandez dis-
tributed copies of Sec 703 with his proposed adjustments for Members to review.
Mr. Rossi requested the Secretary make copies of the Difinition and Historic
Preservation Ordinance, as received, and mail copies to each Member.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned
at 10:40 P.M.