Loading...
10-27-1988 Regular MeetingMIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING OCTOBER, 27, 1988 The Miami Shores Village Planning & Zoning Board regular meeting was held on October 27, 1988, at the Miami Shores Village Hall at 7:30 P.M.. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Rossi, with the following.members present: Robert J. Rossi, Chairman Terrell F. Chambers, Jr. Richard M. Fernandez, Esq. Thomas Laubenthal Larry T. McClure Also present: Frank LuBien, Director of Building & Zoning 1. MINUTES - OCTOBER 13, 1988 The minutes of the meeting of October 13, 1988 were approved, as written, by a motion made by Mr. Fernandez, seconded by Mr. Laubenthal, and passed unanimously. With Members approval ,Mr. Rossi added to the agenda... 112.3143 VOTING CONFLICTS- Statue. Because of the unfortunate happening at the last meeting that no action could be taken on an item for lack of a quorum, (only.two Mwmbers were allowed to vote, two abstained because of a conflict of interest), and because there was some controversy about the lack of a vote, Mr. LuBien included this section of the Statue in Member's packet. Since Mr. Fernandez had discussed this with Mr. Fenn, Mr. Rossi requested that he clarify the interpretation. Mr. Fernandez noted his phone conversation with. Mr. Fenn centered upon the abstinence from voting citing conflict of interest, Mr. Fernandez is Council for the Contractor, and Mr. Laubenthal, Landscape Architect for the Applicant. Mr. Fann indicated.they were correct in not voting. It is not correct that every member should vote. If there is a representative or financial interest associated with the issue at hand, it must be identified. Not only in the minutes, but also by memorandum from the abstaining member, within fifteen (15) days after the vote occurs, disclosing the nature of his interest. The con -.L flict or potential should be expressed up front, before discussion begins. This abstinence does not prevent one from participating in discussion -with good judgement. Mr. Fenn further suggested that if a problem is ever anticipated he may be called in advance. Mr. Rossi requested the minutes reflect, this item was discussed with Mr. Fann, Village Attorney, and the consensus is that Members were correct in abstaining. 2. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF. 4' WROUGHT IRON FENCE IN FRONT YARD Thomas B. Chaille 352 N. E. 98th St. Mr. Fernandez indicated he must abstain since he maintains an Attorney/ Client relationship with the Contractor. Mr. Laubenthal was retained as the Landscape Architect, he indicated1he will participate in discussion, but will abstain from voting. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -2- 10/27/88 Mr. Chaille stated he bought the house about a year ago. He has done extensive repairs, and had a pool installed. He is requesting approval to .replace a rusted.metal wire 4' fence with a 4' wrought iron fence. The 4' fence is the minimum required to protect the pool area. Also the house has been designated a historic landmark, and to move the fence back or use other materials would not be harmonious nor be original. Mr. Rossi advised Mr. Chaille that, because of the new Historic Landscape Ordinance 516-88, amending Ord #270, his request can be heard. Mr. Laubenthal stated.that no work. had begun when he became involved. The property has a zero (0) lot line which has been in existance since 1926, trees have been displaced by the pool construction, the fencing material dates back to the 20's. The hedge will remain, it has been in place as long as the fence. It was Mr.-Laubenthal who advised Mr. Chaille that the fence change required a variance. Mr. McClure noted, the Certificate of Appropriateness included with the information, had not been signed by the Chairman of the Historic Preservation Board and he wondered if there was a reason. He would like some input from that Board, this is their area of expertise. Much discussion continued, concerning the .architectural suitability as may be determined by the Historic Preservation Board. Mr. LuBien advised Members this Ordinance was passed to allow for hardship variance for Historic Landmark Properties. The question here, is the wrought iron fence in place of a wire and pipe fence architecturally or historically significant to maintain the integrity of the location. Mr. McClure stated the request is well within the scope of the Ordinance, the fence was there, it was over 4' tall, it is not feasible to replace with the same kind of fence, further to use wrought iron will upgrade the property. Mr. McClure then moved to approve the request, pending approval of the Historic Preservation Board, as to the suitability of the wrought iron. The motion was seconded by Mr. Chambers, and passed 3/2. Mr. Fernandez abstained because of the conflict of interest (Attorney/'Client relationship), Mr. Laubenthal abstained citing conflict of interest, because he was retained as the Landscape Architect. Mr. Chaille was advised that this request will be reviewed by Council at their meeting on Tuesday, November 1. Also the Certificate' of Appropriateness should be signed by that time. 3. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF VARIANCE TO CONVERT DETACHED GARAGE TO. LIVING FACILITY Augustin Metayer 10504 N. W. 2nd Avenue Mr. Metayer waspresent and advised Members that he has several children who become pretty noisy in the daytime when he needs to sleep, because he works nights. It is for this reason he is requesting the conversion. He stated he bought the house about eighteen months ago. Mr. LuBien indicated it is a large garage, apparently built for two cars, it has been converted to a one bedroom living facility. He read from Sec 516 of PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -3- 10/27/88 the Code.. Also he stated he .had advised Mr. Metayer of his right to appeal his ruling that this must be changed back to a garage. Mr. Fernandez noted, the Code clearly indicated, this is not a permitted use, and he moved to deny the request, seconded by Mr.. Laubenthal for discussion. Mr. Metayer was advised, this is an area which might easily be rented by another owner, this Board must maintain control of the evolution process, this is a single family residence, and the detached.g.arage as a living facility is not an acceptable use. The vote was called and the motion to deny, passed unanimously. Mr. Metayer was advised of his right to appeal to Council. His request must be in the office by noon tomorrow. 4. DISCUSSION: COMMERCIAL DISH ANTENNA:— COUNCIL COMMENTS Mr. Rossi explained to Members that this item is back on the Agenda because of rejection of the Commercial Dish Antenna Ordinance by Council. It has been requested that this Body re-examine the Ordinance with the idea of making some changes. The discussion.was tabled from the last meeting because of the absence of Mr. McClure and Mr. LuBien. There was considerable discussion on the setback requirements for roof mount antennas. Concerning this item it was determined that on page 3, b. (2) the following statement will be added, 'with a minimum setback from the building perimeter at the roof not less than the height of the dish antenna'. Screening also was discussed at length. It was decided that on page 3, 4. b. Roof mounted. the paragraph should read: 'Where permitted, shall be screened in a manner'so as to preclude observation thereof from ground level, and must be harmoniouswith the existing structure as per intent of Sec. 523. Color was discussed, it was generally agreed this item will remain as is. Number was discussed, no action was taken.. Mr.. Fernandez moved to continue this discussion.and further develope the Ordinance to have it Absolutely correct. Mr. Rossi noted he will agree to this only if the changes made and concrete developments are forthcoming. Mr. Fernandez indicated.he will obtain a copy of the minutes:of this meeting and have something for: the next meeting. Mr. LuBien stated there is no Crying need or public outcry.for this Ordinance, and it should be right. The motion was seconded.by Mr.-Laubenthal, and passed by a 4/1 vote, with Mr. McClure voting No. There was a b rief discussion concerning the. Gulf Station violation at N. E. 95th St. and 2nd Ave. Mr. LuBien had talked .with the contractorand advised him that work must cease. The barriers are not a fence, and there is no criteria for this. Also a permit must be applied for, and in that case: it will need to come before the Planning & Zoning Board. • • PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -4- 10/27/88 Discussion took place concerning a letter from Mr. Swarthout who prepared our Comprehensive Plan. This was in regardto a Grant which might be available for services to employ a ProfessionlPlanner to aid in looking at the other areas of the-Village.which the Council wants reviewed. Specifically Biscayne Blvd, & N. E. 105th St., Miami. Shores Preparatory School. Mr. Rossi indicated this will be referred to the Village Council. The Comprehensive Plan has been submitted and so far as is known, it has been approved, with the exception of a few minor items. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:45 P.M.. • • MEMO ANDD `9 TO: Clerk, Miami Shores Village Planning & Zoning Board FROM: Richard M. Fernandez, Esq. SUBJECT: Abstaining From Voting IN RE: Meetings of October 13 and October 27, in that certain matter regarding a request for variance by Thomas B. Chaille, 352 NE 98th Street, Miami Shores, Florida. In the meetings on the subject referenced above, 1 abstained from voting citing a conflict of interest based upon my representation as an attorney of a contractor involved with the job.