Loading...
12-14-1995 Regular MeetingMIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 14, 1995 The regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was held on Thursday, December 14, 1995 1111 in the Chamber of the Village Hall commencing at 7:30 P.M. The meeting was called to order with the following members present: • Present: Cliff Walters, Chairman Robert Blum Frank Hegedus Les Forney Absent: Thomas J. Caldwell Also Present: William Fann, Village Attorney Frank LuBien Lisa Kroboth ITEM #1 MINUTES - NOVEMBER 29, 1995 Mr. Blum asked that on page 1, Item 2, paragraph 3, after "Questions arose regarding items on the landscape plan.", the following be added: "Mr. Blum was concerned that what is shown to be existing sod on the plan is not actually existing and that prior to landscaping being considered complete, the "grassy areas" should be grassy. Mr. Blum also expressed concern that should one or more of the existing three trees along 90 Street be removed or die during construction (as was the case with Walgreens across the street), they should be replaced with similar size and type trees. Mr. Moroz agreed." Mr. Walters asked that on page 2, line 3 after "...as soon as they become available.", the following be added: "for the purpose of expediting issues relating to applications that require Council approval." Mr. Blum moved that the minutes of the November 29, 1995 meeting be approved as amended. Mr. Hegedus seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor. Planning & Zoning December 14, 1995 Page 2 ITEM #2 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF MODIFIED BITUMEN ROOF TO REPLACE GRAVEL ROOF. Hugh C. Allen 1365 NE 105 Street Mr. LuBien explained that the applicant would like to change from a gravel roof to a modified bitumen roof. The roof has a two inch pitch and is on a two story building. Mr. LuBien referred to the section of the Code related to roofs. Mr. Stuart Lipson, Vice President of the condo association was present on behalf of the applicant. He stated that aesthetically, the roof cannot be seen from the street. The bitumen is technologically superior and lasts longer than the gravel roof. Mr. Forney asked if a fiberglass cap could be used on this roof. Mr. LuBien stated that a fiberglass cap is coated with an aluminum -color paint which may not be as aesthetically pleasing. Mr. Blum moved for approval of the application as submitted given that the roof is on a two story building and is considered to be a flat roof. Mr. Hegedus seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor. ITEM #3 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF REVISED LANDSCAPE PLAN. Shorewal, Ltd. 9020 Biscayne Blvd. Mr. LuBien stated that the applicant has asked that the item be rescheduled to the next regular Planning & Zoning Board meeting as the applicant has pneumonia. Mr. Walters asked the item be rescheduled as requested. ITEM #4 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF INSTALLATION OF 5' WOOD FENCE. Patrick L. Duffy, Agent 1460 NE 102 Street Mr. LuBien explained that the property faces both 101 Street and 102 Street. Essentially the property has two front yards. Placing a fence in the rear of the property would put a 5' fence adjacent to the front yard of the neighboring property. Mr. Patrick Duffy, the real estate broker for the property was present. He presented photographs of the property showing both street views. Mr. Duffy stated that there are three reasons for the request of the wood fence. Those reasons being privacy, security and safety. Mr. Duffy noted that the house has been on the market for over a year. The owner has lowered the price several times and feels that he is losing money due to the upkeep of the vacant property. Mr. Walters noted that a variance cannot be granted for financial hardship. Mr. LuBien noted that since the property is considered to have two front yards, a 3 1/2' fence or hedge is allowable. Mr. Forney stated that some homes in Miami Shores do not offer everything a home owner would like (e.g. a backyard). He noted that the house has existed for forty years without a significant hardship. Mr. Duffy noted that as times have changed, security is an important issue. Discussion ensued regarding the options for the property. Planning & Zoning December 14, 1995 Page 3 Mr. Blum moved that the request for approval of installation of a 5' wood fence be denied. Mr. Forney seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. At Mr. Forney's request, a five minute recess was taken at this time. ITEM #5 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF EXTERIOR PAINT COLOR. Dolores Godwin 150 NW 101 St Mr. LuBien stated that the application was received and subsequently denied as the color was deemed inappropriate. The applicant is appealing the decision of the building official. Ms. Dolores Godwin was present on her own behalf She stated that she did not see anything wrong with the color. Mr. Walters asked why the permit was denied. Mr. LuBien stated the color was too bright and too intense. He referred to Section 523 of the Code which reads "all buildings shall be generally harmonious in character and appearance, including exterior color...". Mr. LuBien also noted that the property owner had begun painting the home without a permit. A Code Enforcement officer observed the painting and advised Ms. Godwin to obtain a permit before continuing to paint. Mr. Blum stated that he had driven by the property and noted that other houses on the block are of softer hues. The blue of this house is quite noticeable on first glance. Mr. Forney moved to affirm the Building Official's decision, denying the request for approval of the blue exterior paint color. Mr. Hegedus seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor. ITEM #6 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF EXTERIOR PAINT COLOR Marese Fils-Aime 453 NE 99 Street Mr. LuBien stated that the applicant was also denied a permit as the color was deemed inappropriate. Mr. LuBien noted that the color was too bright and too intense. Bernard and Marese Fils-Aime were present to make an appeal. Mr. Fils-Aime stated that there were several other homes in the Shores painted a similar color, including a home on their block. The Fils-Aime's presented several paint samples to the Board. Mr. Hegedus moved that the Building Official's decision be upheld for the color of Peach Crush and suggested that the color of Peach Candy be substituted. Mr. Forney seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Those in favor: Mr. Blum, Mr. Hegedus, Mr. Forney. Those opposed: Mr. Walters. Mr. and Mrs. Fils-Aime agreed to use the suggested color. • • Planning & Zoning December 14, 1995 Page 4 Mr. Fann left at this time. t'IBM #7 BOARD COMMENTS Ms. Godwin asked to be recognized at this time. She asked how the Board members were appointed and what the length of their term was. Mr. Walters replied that the Village Council appointed the Board members for a two year term. Ms. Godwin stated that a change should be made. Mr. Walters stated that the Council can make any changes that they deem necessary. Mr. Walters gave the Board an update on the Code Review Committee. He stated that it was the consensus of the Committee and the Village Manager to retain the services of a professional planning firm, whose representatives were present. Mr. Blum noted that a pro -active approach must be taken for the future development of Miami Shores Village. He asked that as a brainstorming session regarding the future of the Village (to include Second Avenue, property values, attraction of new businesses) be added as a future agenda item. Mr. Walters commended the Public Works department and the Village Manager for the excellent job at the six corners on Grand Concourse and 96 Street. ITEM #8 ADJOURNMENT The December 14, 1995 meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was adjourned at 9:15 P.M. eth A. Kroboth, Recording Secretary Cliff Walters, Chairman