Loading...
03-27-1997 Regular MeetingMIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING & ZONING MARCH 27, 1997 The regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was held on Thursday, March 27, 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: Robert Blum, Acting Chairman Thomas J. Caldwell Frank Hegedus Les Forney Absent: Cliff Walters Mark Ulmer, Village Attorney Also Present: Frank LuBien Ross Prieto Lisa Kroboth ITEM # 1 MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 27, 1997 Mr. Caldwell moved that the minutes of February 27, 1997 be approved as submitted. Mr. Forney seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor. ITEM #2 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF EXTERIOR COLORS AND SIGNAGE Westar Oil Company 8700 Biscayne Blvd. Mr. LuBien presented the previous submittals to show the progression towards the current application. For the record, Mr. Caldwell stated that he has defective color vision. Ron Nevils was present on behalf of Westar Oil Company. He stated that the height of the color tri -band was decreased and the width was limited at the comers Mr. Hegedus expressed some concern in regards to the brightness of the colors as the submittals was significantly subdued compared to the previous one. He also asked for the dimensions of the color bands. Mr. Nevils replied that the current application was hand drawn. However, the colors will be similar to the AutoCAD drawing submitted previously. He also stated that there would be a minimum six inch reveal in white on both the top and bottom of the fascia. The color band decals will be approximately thirty inches total. The approximate dimensions would be 7- 12-6-12-7, colors being white, blue, white, red, white respectively. Planning & Zoning March 27, 1997 Page 2 Mr. Blum inquired as to the color of the roofing materials. Mr. Nevils explained that after the last meeting, Mr. Ulmer, the Village Attorney, spoke with him regarding roofing materials clarifying the Code provisions. The applicant is no longer pursuing a variance. Instead, the owner has decided to place a tile roof on the service station structure (either white or gray in color). The canopies will retain the metal shingles (white in color). Mr. Forney stated that the applicant has made every effort to meet the requests of the Board. He stated that it was necessary for the Board to accept the standard trademarks. Mr. LuBien stated that the Westar logo would appear on both sides of the canopy. He asked if the Food Mart sign would appear on the building. Mr. Nevils stated it would. However, no additional signs for beer or wine would be added. Mr. Caldwell moved that the color scheme be approved as submitted. Mr. Hegedus seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor. ITEM #3 REQUEST FOR APPEAL OF BUILDING OFFICIAL'S DISAPPROVAL OF HOUSE PAINT COLOR John R. Toth 54 NE 102 Street Mr. LuBien presented the color sample submitted by the applicant. He stated that the color was not appropriate for the location as most homes are white or pale in color. Mr. John Toth was present on his own behalf. He agreed with Mr. LuBien in his evaluation of the surrounding home colors. Mr. LuBien presented the Board with color swatches that are used as a guideline when paint permits are obtained. After reviewing the colors, Mr. Toth agreed that Benjamin Moore number 171 is acceptable to him and subsequently withdrew his request for appeal. THEM #4 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF INSTALLATION OF UTILITY SHED Cory H. Gittner 551 NE 102 Street Mr. LuBien stated that the Board must consider several aspects in reviewing this application. The first is whether the property is nonconforming. The second is whether a second accessory building is appropriate. If more than one accessory building is considered acceptable, then the Board must consider the location of the utility shed and its setbacks. Mr. Forney stated that there is a contradiction if the property is considered nonconforming, but is historically designated on the national register. Mr. Gittner was present on his own behalf. He stated all the Code requirements have been met as presented in the application. He noted that there is no other logical location on the property for the shed. Discussion regarding the setback measurements ensued. The shed, as proposed, would have a ten foot side setback, a five foot rear setback and a seven foot distance between accessory buildings. • • Planning & Zoning March 27, 1997 Page 3 Mr. Caldwell asked if a hardship would be created if the shed was not approved. Mr. Gittner stated that due to the increase in family size, there is a need for more storage space. As there was some discussion regarding a variance approval, the clerk asked that the applicant clarify his request in order for the Board to base their decision on the correct criteria. Mr. LuBien stated that the application requires a variance. Mr. Gittner confirmed that his application was a request for a variance. Mr. Caldwell moved that it be a finding of fact that if the shed cannot be placed in the proposed area, it would create a hardship due to the configuration of the property and the age of the home It is therefore a conclusion of law that a variance is appropriate and that it be issued in this case. Mr. Forney seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. ITEM #5 BOARD COMMENTS Mr. Caldwell asked that the Board review the Code regarding setbacks and utility sheds. Mr. Forney asked that the number of utility sheds be included as well as the shed construction. Mr. Caldwell requested that this be placed on the agenda item for the next meeting. ITEM #6 ADJOURNMENT The March 27, 1997 meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was adjourned at 8:25 P.M. Eliz beth A. Kroboth, Recording Secretary Robert Blum, Acting Chairman