Loading...
08-11-1988 Regular MeetingMIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING August 11, 1988 The Miami Shores Village Planning & Zoning Board convened on August 11, 1988, at the Miami Shores Village Hall at 7:40 P.M.. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Rossi, with the followingmembers present: Robert. J, Rossi, Chairman Terrell F. Chambers, Jr. Richard M. Fernandez, P.A. Thomas Laubenthal Larry T. McClure Also present: Frank LuBien, Director of Building & Zoning 1. MINUTES - July 28, 1988 Mr. Laubenthal moved to approve the minutes of the meeting of July 28, 1988, as written, seconded by Mr. McClure, and passed unanimously. 2. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL. OF. PLANS FOR ALTERATIONS & ADDITION G. HOFFMAN & R. MARTINEZ 9306 N. E. 9th AVE. Mr. LuBien presented the plans, stating a variance is required, as the structures are non -conforming. There are several options the Board can review. The original house was built approximately 55 years ago and.there is only a 15' set back from: -the front property line. The house is on 9th Avenue, and on the corner of 93rd Street. 93rd Street is dedicated, but unpaved. Mr. Hoffman explained the plot plan and the structures as they exist after work done by the previous owner. He pointed out a small shed they wish to demolish. On page 3 of the plans he outlined their plans for a garage and laundry area, in line with the front of the house. The site plan also indi- cated an alternative. Mr. Hoffman pointed out the placement of an oak tree he wants to save. Much discussion ensued, concerning, a change of address and the entry to N. E. 93rd Street. This suggestion was made along with alternate proposals, in the effort to find solutions within the Code, so.that no variance would be required. Members concurred, there was no problem with the flat roof area.with built up gravel. Mr. Hoffman wondered if the address were changed to 93rd Street, how would the Board look at a swiuming pool in the front? Also, he doesn't want to screen the pool in. This is not a particular problem, with Members, so long as all Codes are complied with. In reply to query as to how the wall or fence is measured, since the grade is so varied, Mr. LuBien explained, it is measured from grade, or from the lowest.point. Mr. Rossi advised him that technically the request cannot be granted, as is, and the desire to wire lathe and stucco the outside is an upgrade, and also more harmonious, Mr. Hoffman determined he could accept the alternate proposals offered, and look into the procedure forchanging, his address. Since no variance is re- quired, he withdrew his application. A permit will be pulled for the wood deck, swimming pool, surrounding wall, and roof line all comply. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -2- 8/11/88 3. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS. FOR DECK & TRELLIS JAMES JORGENSON 560 N. E. 107th ST. Mr. LuBien indicated he had included in Member's packet a small detail of the area of concern, On this sketch he hilighted the side property line along the existing CBS wall, The applicant indicated.,to him there will be no problem in removing the trellis, so. that the request is for a deck of approximately 10' wide, which may be considered a service walk to the rear yard. In reply to a question from Mr. Rossi, Mr, Jorgenson indicated there is a 5' high CBS wall around the rear of the property. Members reviewed a larger set of -the plans, a, small portion of the -deck is in the side setback. Following discussion, Mr. Laubenthal moved to approve the request on the basis, the deck is a walkway, seconded by Mr. Chambers, and passed 4/1, with Mr. McClure voting No. He commented the Board has requested removal of small portions of deck under very similar circumstance. 4. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR ADDITION ROBERT VISCOUNT 640 GRAND CONCOURSE Mr. LuBien noted this is a request for an addition which exceeds the allowable flat roof area by 66 sq ft., and encroaches on separation between accessory building and main building, There should be a 15' seperation. Included'in Members packet was a letter from Mr. Viscount outlining the appeal, a sketch of the plot plan, and a sketch showing interior changes to the kitchen for a proposed eat in area. Mr. John Quirino of Quirino Construction Co. was present with Mrs. Viscount to make the appeal. He noted the addition will not be visible from the front or from the rear, as it is planned. At Mr. McClure's request, Mr. LuBien pulled the existing set of plans from the file. These plans were carefully reviewed. Mr. Quirino agreed the pitched roof would be better for the interior design, but more aesthetically pleasing from the outside, with the flat roof.. Much discussion took place. Mr. LuBien explained the method in calculating flat roof area. Discussion continued. Mr. Fernandez inquired, as noted in the letter from Mr. Viscount, the peculiar and unusual conditions is variance requirement. as applied to.lots (size and location), and wondered if this is being expanded to include structures? He further noted that Members have always been staunch concern- ing setback -requirements during .his time on the Board. The necessity appears to.be one of of aesthetics. He is not particularly in favor of setting a precedent by granting this variance. The applicant may appeal to Council should this Board deny the request. Discussion continued, and measurements taken onthe interior remodeling, step down, space,. etc. Alternatives were also discussed. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -3- 8/11/88 Mr. LuBien advised, the proper action is to accept or deny the request, and advise Mrs. Viscount of her right to appeal to the Village Council. ed Following further discussion, Mr. McClure preceedA his motion, with a statement, that the charge of the Board is to arrive at decisions as they comply with the Ordinance, there is no way a variance can be granted in this case, even though he would like to, the motion is to deny the request. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fernandez, and passed unanimously. 5. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PAINT COLOR KATHLEEN MC KELVY 444 N. E. 93rd ST. Mr. LuBien advised that this house was partially painted without a permit, with a color not in harmony. He gave Members a sample of. the new color sample. Mr. & Mrs. (McKelvy) Whitney were present. Mr. Whitney stated the Board previously denied his color request, and requested he tone the color down by 1/5, but he diluted it further by mixing 1/3. Mr. Whitney will need to paint white over the previous deeper tone. Mr. Rossi noted the color is considerably toned down. Mr. McClure request- ed clarification, that it wasnot part of the motion, but a request that the original color be diluted. Mr. Laubenthal moved to approve this color request, seconded by Mr. Chambers, and passed unanimously. Mrs. McKelvy advised Mr. LuBien she will be in tomorrow (Friday), for her permit. 6. DISCUSSION - LANDLORD ORDINANCE Mr. Rossi explained that each Member had received a copy of the Gainesvilla Landlord Ordinance, it has been read and given much thought. Mr. Rossi has reviewed in depth the Planning & Zoning Board Ordinance and could find no place where a matter of this nature is within their perimeter. The Village Council Ordinance and the Administrative Ordinance likewise have been looked at. Further, it is the consensus of the Members that this is an Administra- tive matter, to come. under Occupational License Enforcement. Mr. McClure made a motion that Mr. Rossi report to the Village Council as the reportwas given to the Planning & Zoning Board, seconded by Mr. Fernandez, and carried unanimously. 7. PROPOSED.LANDSCAPE•ORDINANCE Mr. Fernandez requested a report on comments and view of the proposed Land- scape Ordinance as it wasreviewed by the Village Council. Mx. Rossi noted that he and Mr. Laubenthal attended the meeting. He gave an overview of the events of the meeting concerning this item. He explained • PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -4- 8/11/88 that there was a young. lady at the meeting with a petition for a referendum to increase the hedge heights in Miami Shores. She withdrew her petition following comments from Mr. Fann, Village Attorney that the Referendum supersedes the existing Ordinance. Mr. Laubenthal commented that before a Public Hearing is set he wants to get input from Public Works Department and from the Downtown Revitalization Board. The concept of format should be addressed. The proposed Ordinance will be reviewed as to form, before coming back to the Planning & Zoning Board. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M. 0'2l creiz a _ ) eXieed ry