Loading...
02-08-1990 Regular MeetingMIAMI. SHORES VILLAGE February 8, 1990 A regular meeting of the Miami Shores Village Planning & Zoning Board was held on February .8, 1990 at the Miami. Shores Village Hall.. The meeting was called to order at 7;30 P.M, by Chairman. Fernandez, with the following members present; Ri..chard.M. Fernandez, Chairman Terrell F. Chambers, Jr. Robert E. 'Cook. Thomas Laubenthal Larry T. McClure Also present: Frank LuBien, Director of Building .& Zoning 1. MINUTES - January 25, 1990 There was a correction on Pg 3 - 3C., Mr. Fernandez is opposed to the Group,Hore concept in a single family residential. district. It is morally wrong that the Federal Government, shoves it down our throat. GMr. Fernandez then clarified the Group Homeconcept for those present). The minutes were accepted, as corrected, by a motion made by Mr. Laubenthal, seconded by Mr. McClure, and carried unanimously. A motion was made by Mr. Laubenthal, seconded by Mr. McClure, and passed by unanimous. vote, to add 5. Discussion - Sewers to the agenda. 2. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR POOL, DECK & CABANA Mr. & Mrs. Beisel 1238 N. E. 98th Street Mr. LuBien introduced the request. Members received in their packet drawings of the request. He brought it to the Board for approval because it is a quasi situation where the building is attached, but yet it isn't, it is an accessory building., but yet not, the cabana is attached to the main house by a roof. In his opinion it is not part of the main structure but an accessory building governed by other specifications, and needs Planning & Zoning Board approval. It was designed this way because it is the only way to have a bath area contiguous to the pool to avoid going through the house. Max. Sturman, Architect for.Mr. & Mrs.. Beisel(who were present) noted, no roof is being added, but the existing tile roof is being extended and becomes a part of the main structure. There was much discussion, concerning a breezeway, a modified garage attached to the main structure enclosed, the roof continuing from the main building to form part of the structure. The bathalone is not habitable, and nothing prohibits a bath facility. The 15" rear setback requirement was emphasized. Clarification of the roof structure, and the south elevation was made by Mr. Sturman. Mr. Laubenthal moved to approve the request as submitted, seconded by Mr. McClure, and carried unanimously. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -2- 2/8/90 3. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF HOUSE COLORS D. J. Williams 229 N. W. 111th Terrace Mr. LuBien stated he made a note on Members' packet to go by and take a look. The house has been painted a deep rose color, which is darker than the sample submitted, with purple brick trim. The application for permit, after the act, was rejected because the colors were not in harmony with it- self, nor with the surrounding property. Mr. Fernandez noted, Mr. LuBien's opinion is being challenged, the signed letter of appeal by Mr. Williams is made a part of the record. Mr. Williams indicated, as in his letter, he was not aware a permit was needed to paint his house. Mr. Williams challenged Mr. LuBien's right to make the decision concerning color and rejecting his application on this basis. Further he stated, Home Depot paint department advised him the two colors do coordinate. It is his opinion the colors are in harmony with other houses on the block. He submitted pictures of his house and others in the neighborhood. Members reviewed color samples submitted of the proposed colors and the house and the trim. The house painting was mostly completed when observed by Mr. Wilson. The color was rejected because of the harmony issue. Mr. McClure noted that Mr. LuBien is doing his job in rejecting the color and bringing it to the Planning & Zoning Board for approval. Further he advised, when reviewing something of this nature he does not look at the address, but drives by and picks out the house in question, this indicates to him that there is some sort of problem. The brick in this case does not harmonize, the house color is not flourescent, but is much, much darker than the pictures. Generally pastel colors are accepted. In discussion, Members concurred the two very dark tones are not harmonious. Mr. Laubenthal moved to deny the request for approval of house color, as submitted, seconded by Mr. Chambers, and passed. unanimously. Mr. Fernandez explained to.Mr. Williams his right to appeal to the Village Council. He must submit a letter requesting appeal within ten days for Council to hear the request on the 6th or the 20th of March. 3 A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF DIVISION OF LAND WITHOUT PLAT Maher Salem Lots 3, 4, & 5 BLK 23 Miami Shores Sec 1 AMD Mr. Salem was present at the meeting. Mr. LuBien indicated Members' packet included a cut down version of the actual documents,. both parcels do comply with minimum requirements of the code. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -3- 2/8/90 Mr. Fernandez noted there is not opinion from attorney as to proof of owner- ship of the lots, nor a certified survey. In order to expedite the matter action can be taken this evening, contingent on these two items being produced. Mr. Laubenthal moved to approve the division of land without plat contingent that the owner produce a certified survey, and attorney opinion as to proper proof of ownership. Mr. McClure seconded the motion, which passed by a unanimous vote. A five minute break was taken at this time, 4. PUBLIC HEARING ADDITIONS & REVISIONS -TO ZONING CODE TO ACHIEVE A LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE Mr. Pitkin of Robert K Swarthout, Inc noted, he will touch on the highlights of the Zoning Code with additions and revisions. This is required by the Growth Management Act, with the notion: 1. to make sure that development codes of a municipality carry out the Comprehensive Plan, which was approved in the past year. 2. that all developmental regulations are assembled in a single'document, streamlining where possible for efficient review and development. The existing zoning code of Miami Shores Village has been spliced into with items required by the Comprehensive Plan and State Statue. The principle new provisions are 1. placing within the district regulations what is now termed as a planned residential office district or PRO District, to replace the old office district. This applies now, only to the small area by the railroad which has the potential to be applied to other sections of the Village either by initiation of the developer or by this Board and the Council, to achieve redevelopment in these areas. On. Pg 3, Sec 406 an inviron- mental provision has been added. Mr. Pitkin explained the floodplain provision as noted on Pg 4, Sec 507 and Pg 7, Sec 534. In reverting back to the PRO District, he explained.this not only permits office buildings of a scale that is residential as is now the case in the 0 District, but by special approval of the Village Councilafter review by the Planning & Zoning Board, 25% of the office building can be in retail. (Mentioned on Pg 5, 4.) On Pg 3, he also mentioned, is specific information in Sec 228.A and Sec 245A. on Plating and Subdivision processing and standards. Mt. Pitkin mentioned also the State mandated Community Residential Home. As promised he has obtained a copy of the State licensing requirements, and they are rigouous. Extensive discussion ensued concerning Unity of Title being obtained in.order to meet requirements. Mr. LuBien responded, he had never heard of :this being done in his 12 years with the Village. Mr. Pitkin further stated there are about 20 pages of regulations to be met, including educational requirements, the resi- dents, etc, a wheeler deeler cannot just come in and set up shop as a Group Home, There are limitations. Inhabitants, distances between homes, length of block, etc. Mueh_discussion continued on the subject, it was the con- sensus of the Members that on Pg 6, Div.13, Sec 5.32 the distance between homes show the maximum allowed by the State, (2,500 ft if possible) since we must deal with the reasonable amount. On Pg 4, Sec 504(hl, Mr. LuBien recommends that a period be placed after the word repair, since it is his understanding he cannot go on private property. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -4- 2/8/90 There was considerable discussion concerning Pg 5 - 1. and especially 4. Also discussed was the sale of books and newstands. It was finally de- termined to leave this Section as is with retail not to occupy more than 25% of floor space of the office building. Mr. Pitkin went on to Pg 7 and the inviromental requirements which have been added, Div 15. On Pg. 8, Sec 906 <-,Concurrency:Management which looks complex but it meets all Level -of -Service items, Mr. Pitkin replied to query in this section. Impact items are met and questions axe answered. Mr. Pitkin in closing his review noted, these are essentially the highlights. Mr. Everett nor Mr. Frix, present for the Public Hearing had comments. Mr. Fernandez requested Mr. Pitkin to remain for Discussion -Sewers 5. on the agenda, Nr. Fernandez then noted the two areas presently under consideration for rezoning are areas of Biscayne. Blvd. in Miami Shores,, and the area north of Village Hall to 103rd Street. Mr. Pitkin reported he had submitted a map to Mr. LuBien however, Mr. LuBien has not, had the opportunityto review same. Mr. Pitkin emphasized, the map does not show the rezoning area. In reply to query, Mr. LuBien noted there have been no requests for rezoning. Mr. Fernandez reminded Members there are a series of questions and areas to look in, in terms of zoning considerations. Rezoning was briefly addressed, Mr. Laubenthal raised a questionregarding the Tables on Page 15, The meeting recessed for a few minutes. The Public Hearing was closed. Mr. McClure made a motion to approve the Land Development and Zoning Code with the amendments as noted, seconded by Mr. Laubenthal, and passed by unanimous vote. Great appreciation was expressed to Mr. Pitkin for all his work. 5. DISCUSSION - SEWERS Mr. Fernandez noted that Mr. McClure, Mr. Laubenthal and he were at the last Council meeting when the issue of sewers was brought up, vis-a-ve, a resolu- tion on the agenda to approve a specialtaxing district for the purpose of installing sewers along N. E. 2nd Ave Business District. Considerable dis- cussion took place among property owners and interested parties present. The resolution was amended, to create a non-binding intent, dealing with the sewersto request the County agency which handles such matters to prepare various figures that would be included. There are three basic plans for the figures to cover,, a N. E. 2nd Ave routing, an alley routing, and routing of the outer edges east and west, of the business district. He also reported that there was a report by the Business Development Committee dated 1,60/90, and given to Council on 2/7/90 with much input by Mx.. Laubenthal. PLANNI.NG & ZONING BOARD -5- 2/8/90 There are a number of recommendations from this Committee, he guessed that 2/3 of the recommendations will fall within Planning & Zoning. There was also discussion as to creating a matrix of responsibility versus tasks, and to prioritize as the Committee sees it. Mr. Laubenthal noted, it is not necessary to wait for the next meeting of the Business Development Committee for Planning & Zoning to act. Mr. Fernandez further emphasized the task is monumental. Much time is needed to get organized for the issue, a variety of factors must be assessed, the Comprehensive Plan must be amended and potentially some zoning. He is con- cerned by the pressure and responsibility placed on Planning & Zoning re- garding an issue which is perceived by many as an easy and simple solution. It is an issue which cannot be dealt with quickly. Many who live in Miami Shores will contribute expertise gratis, but additional professional support is needed, arial photos, maps, charts., drawings, plans, and money will be needed. Many determinations must be made. The issue of money for these services was raised at the Council meeting. It is not a 4 to 6 week project. (He will make sure Members receive copies of the sewer report as drawn up by Barbara Witte). Mr. Fernandezrequested a General Discussion in terms of getting organized be on the agenda for the next Planning & Zoning meeting. Maybe, at that time, responsibilities in various areas would be divided, and then plan for a work group outside of regular Board meetings. Mr. McClure noted several things are needed, he wonders at what point must the Village Manager be approached to request these items? He expressed interest in knowing what properties in Miami Shores are tax exempt. It was requested that Mr. LuBien provide this information. In reply to the first question, he was advised we are not yet in a position to know all the needs. Mr. Cook as a Project Planner opinioned that we must focus on the objectives of the meeting, and come up with a list of our plans and needs, etc. Two meetings may be required - to think, prioritize andfinalize plan of attack of the project. Mr. Laubenthal concurred. this is not the time to request an inventory of any kind. Mr. Pitkin also agreed with Mr. Cook, the Members must decide precisely what is needed. Also the Swarthout company has already.undertaken studies of Miami Shores Village and has plans, and maps, and aerial photos. Mr. Cook for the record read from the Miami Shores Village Comprehensive Plan, as adopted by the Village Council on January 3, 1989, Page 4.3 - Needs Assessment, the whole paragraph should be read carefully. The one sentence he took out of contex was 'sanitary sewer system would place a severe financial burden on the:Village single family neighborhoods and is not warranted by the existing conditions'. Mr. Cook also mentioned under finance plans the total revenue and expenditures are very tight, and in consideration of the financial burden on the community, there is no place for sewer im- provement. Mr. Cook also read excerpts from Pg 9.4, 1988-1994, Table 9.4 on Page 9.9 and on Page 9,7 Policy 1,2,1, He also reviewed the Schedule of improvements. All resources must be looked at. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD -6- 2/8/90 Mr. Frix, owns the property 9713-9750 N, E, 2nd Ave, Mr, Frix distributed a copy of Critical Analysis of Zoning and Synopsis of Recommended Zoning Code Modifications from the Miami Shores Village $usiness Property Owners, He noted, these documents were submitted to Government office in Miami Shores since 1982. The problem is not with the need for sewers in Miami Shores but with the zoning restrictions, N. E. 2nd Ave is virtually overbuilt, because of the existing code and that is the reason for the proposed requested changes. He said he is speaking for a majority of the business property owners. In reply to query from Mr. Fernandez, Mr. Frix envisions N. E. 2nd Ave moving to an upper and middle class combination professional and multi family condo- minium atmosphere. The retail market cannot and will never survive here. This is his professional opinion as a real estate broker and appraiser. Mr. Henry Everett resides at 9650 North Bayshore Drive and owns 9600 - 9640 N. E. 2nd Ave. Retail businesses cannot survive on. N. E. 2nd Ave without improved zoning. Retail business must pay exorbitant rents for a reasonable return on the improvement property. N. E. 2nd Ave as it is today is an office/ medical building type area. We need no more vacancies on N. E. 2nd Ave. Zoning changes is seen as the only relief for property owners and to increase the tax base. He pointed that the Business Development Committee Report, Pg 4, paragraph 3, is incorrect, in that the code calls for 1 story, though there are some 3 story buildings, the parking ordinances as written will not allow for expansion. Also Mr. Everett read on Pg 5, item 6, of the same report. This report further states it is desirable to keep N. E. 2nd Ave as is, and Biscayne Blvd, from 87th St to 90th St be rezoned for higher office buildings. Mr. Everett, in reply to query noted, he would envision a successful. character for N. E. 2nd Ave as stated by Mr. Frix, if zoning is changed it could be an upward mobile combination professional and multi- family condo atmosphere. Mr. Fernandez brought up the discussion guidelines as submitted by the Downtown Revitalization Board. He had discussion with Barbara Witte concerning this, and she will propose a form for fill in comments, feed back from Planning & oning Board to be presented at Council meeting, in order to expedite matters for them. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M. • • FEBRUARY 05, 1990 LETTER OF APPEAL TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: ON JANUARY 29q 1990 WE RECEIVED A "NOTICE OF VIOLATION" FOR PAINTING THE HOUSE WITHOUT A PERMIT LOCATED AT: 229 M.W. 111th TERR. WE WERE UNAWARE THAT A PERMIT WAS NEEDED TO PAINT THE HOUSE. ON JANUARY 71, 1990 WE WENT TO THE BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT AND TALFED WITH MR. JACK WILSON AND MR. FRANK LUBIEN TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE OF CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD. IT WAS EXPLAINED TO US THE COLOR USE TO PAINT THE HOUSE MUST COMPLY WITH THE COLOR COORDINATION OF THE SURROUNDING HOMES, WHICH WE HAD NO PROBLEM WITH. BOTH GENTLEMAN LOOF:ED AT THE COLOR SAMPLES WE SUBMITTED AND PHYSICALLY CAME OUT TO THE PROPERTY TO EXAMINE THE COLOR USED. WE WERE TOLD BY MR. LUBIEN THAT THIS COLOR WAS NOT ACCEPTABLE AND WE WOULD HAVE TO EITHER - CHANGE THE COLOR BY REPAINTING THE WHOLE HOUSE AGAIN • - PAY FINES, IF THE VIOLATION IS NOT CORRECTED - APPEAL AND TAKE THIS MATTER UP WITH THE COUNCIL, IF WE WERE NOT SATISFIED WITH HIS DECISION WELL, WE DECIDED TO APPEAL. IT'S UNDERSTOOD THAT LAWS, STATUES AND ORDINANCES ARE NEEDED TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF BOTH THE HOME OWNER AND THE COMMUNITY, HOWEVER THERE IS FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM WHEN GOVERNMENT IMPOSES TOO MANY RESTRICTIONS IN ITS COMMUNITY. IN OUR CASE WE FIND PROBLEMS WITH - AN INDIVIDUAL MAKING THIS KIND OF DECISIONS BASE ON HIS/HER TASTE, RATHER THAN STANDARD PROCEDURES. WE BELIEVED THE COLOR THE HOUSE BEEN PAINTED IS WITHIN THE COLOR COORDINATION OF OTHER HOMES AND IT HAS OR WILL (WHEN FINISHED) INCREASE THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY. ATTACH IS A SAMPLE OF THE COLOR USED AND NOTICE OF VIOLATION (COPY). WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO MR. JACK WILSON, MR. FRANI.: LUBIEN AND THE SYSTEM, PLEASE ACCEPT THIS LETTER OF APPEAL FOR YOUR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION. AITERLY ANTOINET E ANESTIN DARRION J. WILLIAMS (HUSBAND)