Loading...
02-13-1997 Regular Meeting• MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1997 The regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was held on Thursday, February 13, 1997 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 Thomas J. Caldwell Frank Hegedus Les Forney Absent: Robert Blum Also Present: Mark Ulmer, Village Attorney Frank LuBien Lisa Kroboth ITEM #1 MINUTES - JANUARY 23, 1997 Mr. Caldwell moved for approval of the January 23, 1997 minutes as submitted. Mr. Hegedus seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. ITEM #2 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLACEMENT OF A DISASTER MEDICAL ASSISTANCE UNIT. Miami Shores Village Mr. Tom Benton, Assistant Village Manager, explained that the Village Manager was seeking the Board's opinion on the placement of a disaster medical assistance unit. The unit is stocked with medical supplies and maintained for five years with the provision that a corporate sponsor be allowed to advertise on the outside of the unit. Mr. Benton noted that the Code does not address the zoning of such a unit. However, Mr. Ulmer noted that the Code is specific as to advertising/ billboards. As the unit must be accessible by air rescue, it is recommended that the unit be placed on the five acre field to the north of the Country Club. There was discussion regarding the purchase of the unit without the corporate sponsorship and the cost associated with the upkeep. Mr. Forney questioned the liability implications of the unit. He also noted that the area recommended for the unit placement may be in a flood zone which would not be useful in the event of a hurricane. Mr. Forney suggested that the unit be located closer to the fire station. He also stated his reservations for the community need of such a unit. Mr. Hegedus concurred stating that since the sole reason for the unit is to advertise, it would not be viable situation. • Planning & Zoning February 13, 1997 Page 2 Mr. Walters suggested that the unit would be an asset to the community in the event of an emergency and the need should not be underestimated. He expressed concern in regards to the location of the unit since the Board has tried to maintain the single-family integrity of the area on Biscayne Boulevard. Mr. Ulmer clarified the land use designation of the suggested location. Mr. Caldwell moved that the request for approval as submitted be denied and asked that the Village further investigate the cost of the unit without corporate sponsorship. Mr. Forney seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. ITEM #3 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR FLAT ROOF ADDITION Margarita Owens 798 NE 98 Street Mr. LuBien noted that the flat roof addition is within the prescribed limitations as per the Code. He noted that the roof is not visible from the street as it is in the rear of the residence. Mr. Hegedus moved for approval of the plans for flat roof addition. Mr. Caldwell seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor. ITEM #4 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS FOR CARPORT AND COVERED DROP-OFF AREA. Archdiocese of Miami 9401 Biscayne Blvd. Mr. LuBien explained that the applicant is requesting approval for two additions. He noted that both additions are within the setback requirements and there is no effect on the available parking spaces. There is merely an enhancement to the use of the building. Mr. Caldwell moved to approve the request as submitted. Mr. Hegedus seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor. ITEM #5 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CHANGE TO PLANS FOR EXTERIOR RENOVATIONS. Henry Everett 9600-40 NE 2nd Avenue Mr. LuBien explained that there is a problem with the structural integrity of the mansard located on the southeast corner of the building. Mr. Gene Parry, agent for the Everett building, was present on behalf of the applicant. He stated that the "eyebrow" of the building cannot support the proposed mansard. He asked that the "eyebrow" be left as is, without a mansard. Mr. Franklin Grau, the architect, stated that the parapet on that portion of the building is frame construction. However, the detail for that portion of the building was for masonry construction. The engineer provided a letter which stated that the weight of the roofing material would collapse the parapet. Mr. Grau concurred with the engineer. Mr. Walters expressed his concern for the Planning & Zoning February 13, 1997 Page 3 requested changes which reduce the design of the building. Discussion regarding alternative roofing materials ensued. Mr. Grau noted that the detail could be redesigned with no aesthetic change. Mr. Parry stated that the changes would increase the cost of the project as well as delay it. Ms. Sally Hensen was also present on behalf of Parry Realty. She stated the engineer reported that the whole corner would have to be rebuilt to support the tile roof. Mr. Ulmer noted that the Code specifies the materials for roofs and mansards and the Board must consider this in making their decision. Mr. Caldwell asked if there would be a incongruous look to the building if the change was approved. Mr. Grau replied that aesthetically, the building would suffer not having the roof as it was designed as this is a prominent corner in the Village. Mr. Hegedus expressed his approval of the appearance of the corner as it now stands. Mr. Forney noted that the architect has estimated that the corner could be completed as designed with a minor detail change and without a major delay. He stated that he would like the building to be completed as originally designed. Mr. Hegedus moved to approve the request for a change to the exterior renovations. The motion died due to a lack of a second. Mr. Caldwell moved that the request for changes to the exterior renovations be denied. Mr. Forney seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Yes - Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Walters, Mr. Forney. No - Mr. Hegedus. ITEM #6 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF VARIANCE TO PERMIT A DRIVEWAY IN THE SIDE SETBACK AND CONSTRUCTION OF A WOOD FRAME STUCCO ADDITION. Barbara Labourdette 58 NE 92nd Street Mr. LuBien explained that the driveway is already in place and is located in the side setback. The addition is stucco on wood frame, which is not a permitted material. The Board reviewed the considerations for a hardship variance presented by the applicant. Manuel Martinez, the applicant's husband, was present. Discussion regarding pursuing the contractor for negligence ensued as no permit was obtained for the work performed. Mr. Martinez provided photographs of the driveway for the Board's perusal. Mr. Walters inquired as to where the off street parking would be located should the driveway be removed. Mr. Martinez stated there was an asphalt area in the swale. Mr. Forney noted that there is a basis to grant a variance based on the unusual shape of the property. Mr. Caldwell expressed his opposition stating that there are other locations on the property for the driveway. Mr. Forney moved to grant a variance for the driveway and deny the variance for the wood frame addition. Mr. Hegedus seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Yes - Mr. Walters, Mr. Forney. No - Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Hegedus. Planning & Zoning February 13, 1997 Page 4 Mr. Caldwell moved that both requests for a variance be denied. Mr. Hegedus seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Yes - Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Hegedus. No - Mr. Forney, Mr. Walters. Due to the split decision of the Board, the requests were considered individually. Mr. Caldwell moved to deny the request for a variance to permit a driveway in the side set back. Mr. Hegedus seconded the motion. Mr. Forney noted that a tie vote would defeat the motion under the parliamentary procedure of Roberts Rules. This motion was not voted on nor was it rescinded. Mr. Caldwell moved to deny the request for a variance for the wood frame stucco addition. Mr. Forney seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. Mr. Forney moved to approve the variance for the driveway. Mr. Hegedus seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Yes - Mr. Forney, Mr. Walters. No - Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Hegedus. The motion was defeated. Discussion regarding the consideration of reasonable use of the property as a requirement of a hardship variance took place between the Village Attorney and the applicant. ITEM #7 BOARD COMMENTS Mr. Hegedus asked that the Village pursue avenues for stopping unlicensed contractors from operating within Miami Shores. Mr. Ulmer noted that the property owner is ultimately responsible for obtaining the correct documentation when performing work on the property. Mr. Ulmer noted that the Board should hear from the applicants if they are present to provide testimony. ITEM #8 ADJOURNMENT The February 13, 1997 meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was adjourned at 9:05 P.M. eth A. Kroboth, Recording Secretary Walters, Chairman ADDENDUM: Per Section 19-18 of the Village Code of Ordinances, Board action can be taken only by a majority vote. Per the Village Attorney, applicant, Barbara Labourdette must be reheard in reference to the request for a variance to permit a driveway in the side setback.