Loading...
05-12-1994 Regular MeetingMIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD REGULAR MEETING MAY 12, 1994 The regular meeting of the Miami Shores Planning & Zoning Board was held on Thursday May 12, 1994. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 by Acting Chairman McClure with the following members present: Robert Blum Les Forney Charles Smith Larry McClure Absent: Cliff Walters Also Present: Mr. Frank LuBlen, Director Building & Zoning 1. Minutes - April 28, 1994 Mr. Forney moved to approve the Minutes of the April 28, 1994 meeting with the following amendments: Page 2 second paragraph is to read; Mr. Forney moved to approve the request for variance of height and density stating that the hardship Is the very narrow size of the lot combined with the changed social conditions which force added security measures for parking. Mr. Blum seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Mr. Forney, Mr. Blum, Mr. Smith YES. Chairman Walters NO. The motion passed with a 3 to 1 vote. Also, page 2 last paragraph was added to read; The new information presented was that there are 2 zoning districts, A-1 and A-2 which require density calculation by two different formulas. Page 3 second paragraph Item 1 is to read; Sociological change of the area requiring greater security. Mr. Blum seconded the motion as amended and the vote was unanimous. 2. Request for approval of variance to permit flat roof addition. 1162 NE 105 Street Allen Respondek Mr. Respondek submitted a letter with the four following reasons requesting a hardshop variance: 1. The alleged peculiar and unusual condltlons affecting my property are that there Is an addition, built by the previous owner that has a roof and trellis of flat design. I have to remove the existing trellis which Is now rotten. I want to replace It with a stronger structure that has permanent roof- ing. 2. The alleged reasons why such condltlons make It Impossible to apply this ordinance are in changing the design to a pitched roof structure which would both restrict the line of sight from the Interior of the house, and would limit the head clearance under the beam. The flat roof structure com- plements the house, something which the design change cannot do. Planning & Zoning meeting 3. The variance reasonable use of would completely house with Its 30 my utility bill. dry to Increase weather. - 2 - May 12, 1994 Is necessary In order to enable me to make my property. The proposed new structure shade the rear southern exposure of the feet of sliding glass doors. This will cut Permanent roofing will keep the interior the usefulness of the patio area In any 4. I am of the opinion that this variance is In harmony with the Intent and purpose of this ordinance because it is a modification of an existing structure. It would not be detrimental to the existing use or prospective development of properties In the vicinity because it is an older established residential development. This would not give me an advantage with respect to the use of my property that Is not enjoyed by the owners of similarly situated properties, because this Is a unique situation and should be treated as such. The pro- tect Is located In the rear of the house, and Is not visible from the street. The reconstruction of this structure will make It safer, stronger and an aesthetic Improvement to the property. This will raise the value of my property, and In turn, help to maintain the value of my neighbor's property. With the above reasons stated and the fact that, with no overhang existing, water leaks under and around the doors when it rains, Mr. Blum moved to approve the request for variance. Mr. Forney seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Mr. Blum, Mr. Forney, and Mr. Smith YES; Acting Chairman McClure NO. The motion passed 3 to 1. 3. Request for approval of plans for garage enclosure. 144 NE 99 Street Barbara Ann Reyes Mr. LuBien stated the enclosure of the garage was completed without obtaining a permit. He also stated that a neighbor reported multiple families living In the home. Ms. Reyes stated the enclosure was done prior to their moving Into the home approximately 1 year ago and that only her family lives In the home. Mr. Forney moved to approve the plans as submitted. The motion failed for lack of a second. Mr. Forney stated that the multiple family problem was that of Code Enforcement. Mr. LuBien stated that the area in question is a loft that was constructed Inside the garage area as a play area for the children. Mr. Smith moved to approve the plans with the stipulation that the resident sign an recorded affidavit stating the home Is a single family residence. Mr. Blum seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Mr. Blum and Mr. Smith YES; Planning & Zoning meeting - 3 - May 12, 1994 Mr. Forney and Acting Chairman McClure NO. The motion failed with the results of a tie vote. 4. Request for approval of plans for a 2 story garage and bedroom addition. 533 NE 92 Street Nestor Garcia/Stephanie Marrow Mr. LuBlen submitted the plans on behalf of Mr. Garcia. 110 After thorough consideration, the Board's opinion was deter- mined on the presented plans. Their opinion was that the plans indicated two seperate living areas and their Intent Is not to approve such plans. • Mr. Smith moved to deny the plans as submitted. Mr. Blum seconded the motion. Following a discussion, Mr. Smith withdrew his motion and Mr. Blum withdrew his second. The consensus of the Board was to take no action at this time until the applicant can appear before the Board. 5. Request for approval of plans for carport enclosure. 174 NW 110 St Elizabeth Gaboton Mr. Gaboton spoke for his wife Elizabeth. He stated that his mother -In-law Is staying with him and she Is quite ill. Having the carport enclosed will enable them to be closer to her when necessary. Mr. Forney moved to approve the request for a carport en- closure. Mr. Smith seconded the motion and It passed unanimously. 6. Discussion - Ordinance to Sec 518 (b), Appendix A. Zoning Fences on Corner Lot. The consensus of the Board was to delay the discussion until a full Board was present. Mr. LuBlen stated to the Board that he was still trying to get an Official to attend the Planning & Zoning Board meeting in the future to discuss roofing materials. A motion for adjournment was made at 8:45 P.M. fett44.4... 4). ('/7 Veronica A. Galli, Secretary CII / ' a Iters, Ch- an