Loading...
02-24-2005 Regular Meeting• MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 24, 2005 The regular meeting of the Miami Shores Planning and Zoning Board was held on Thursday, February 24, 2005, at the Village Hall. The meeting was called to order by Richard Fernandez, Chairman at 7:00 P.M. with the following persons present: ITEM I: ROLL CALL: Richard Fernandez, Chairman Tim Crutchfield Sid Reese W. Robert Abramitis Cesar Sastre (Arrived at 7:55pm) ALSO PRESENT: Al Berg, Planning & Zoning Director Richard Sarafan, Village Attorney Irene M. Fajardo, Recording Secretary Emilia S. Palmer, Training Mr. Sarafan swore in all those participating in the meeting. Mr. Fernandez disclosed that he visited 344 NE 102' Street, 145 NE 101 Street. Mr. • Crutchfield disclosed that he visited 344 NE 102"d Street, 301 NE Street. Mr. Abramitis disclosed that he didn't visited the boat dock at 9275 N. Bayshore Drive, 9101 Park Drive. Mr. Reese visited all the sites except boat dock at 9101 NE 2nd Ave. • ITEM II: APPROVAL OF MINUTES - The January 27, 2005 minutes were moved to the end of the agenda. ITEM III: SCHEDULE ITEMS PZ05-0224-01 John Weaver (owner) Marta Weaver (owner) 344 NE 102nd Street Sec. 401: Schedule of Regulations requesting variance side setback 6' where 10' is required. Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request and the site conditions. Mr. Berg stated there is nothing peculiar to the land or structures that are not applicable to the other properties in the district. Granting of the variance will confer special privilege upon the applicant that is prohibited by the zoning code. The literal interpretation would not deprive the applicant of right enjoyed by other properties in the district. Reasonable use of land can be made without granting the variance. Granting of the variance would not be in harmony Planning and Zoning 1 February 24, 2005 • with the general purpose of the zoning code. The applicants, John Weaver and Marta Weaver, were there to present the case. The applicant is requesting a variance to Sec 400/401, Schedule of Regulation to allow a connection between to the main building and the accessory building. Mr. Weaver stated that the purpose is to expand an existing bedroom and to make a half bath to a complete bathroom, also to add a utility room area. The property is 50' wide by 115' deep. The applicant proposed to have the Board approve a connection between the main building the any accessory building. The proposal will create non -conformity with the side and rear yard setbacks as well as the required distance separation. Mrs. Weaver stated that the proposed site plan reduces the scope of the addition to equal the encroachment of the garage. Mr. Crutchfield moved to approve the variances subject to the same square footage as the current encroachment being removed from the addition. Mr. Reese seconded for discussion. Some members didn't feel that the variance requirements were met. Some members feel the building does- meet oesmeet peculiar conditions. After further discussion Mr. Abramitis moved to deny. Chairman Fernandez seconded. The motion fails (2-2) Mr. Crutchfield and Mr. Reese (voting no). Mr. Crutchfield made a motion to table. Mr. Reese seconded. Case tabled (4-0). PZ05-0224-02 Real Estate One (owner) Shores Village Partnership (owner) 9541 N.E. 2nd Ave • Sec. 604: Site plan approval -window sign • Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and recommended approval of the application. The property is located in B-1 District on the east side of N.E 2" Ave. The applicant is allowed 1 '/2 square feet of signage per foot of tenant space (1 1/2 x 12=18 square feet). The applicant is requesting approximately 9 square feet. The window sign is tastefully decorated with white letters that will be 4", 5", and 7". The sign is in lieu of wall sign. After a brief discussion, Mr. Crutchfield made a motion to approve the request. Mr. Sastre seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0. PZ05-0224-03 Dock Marine Const (agent) Jeffrey Davis (owner) 9275 N. Bayshore Drive. Sec. 604: Site plan approval- new dock Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and recommended approval. The subject property is 83' wide x 167' deep and is located just south of 93'" Street on the bay. There is a dock there now which is deteriorating and is located in the side yard setback. The new dock will be perpendicular to the seawall for walkway and 30' long parallel to the shore. It complies with setback requirements and has received preliminary approval by DERM. The applicant Jeffrey Davis was there to present the Planning and Zoning 2 February 24, 2005 • • • case. The applicant is requesting approval for a T-shaped 10'x20' dock with a boatlift on Biscayne Bay. Mr. Edward (representative for Dock Marine Const) stated that the boatlift is outside the D5 triangle. Mr. Crutchfield explained he wants to keep the boat lift within the D5 triangle to protect resident's interest. After a brief discussion Mr. Sastre moved to approve staff's recommendation with reflectors added to the dock every 32". Mr. Reese seconded. Motion passed 4-1. (Mr. Crutchfield voted no). PZ05-0224-04 James Smith (architect) Simone Mayer (owner) 301 N.E. 101st Street Sec. 604: Site plan approval -garage enclosure, addition, roof; Sec. 523.1: variance - requesting wood/lathe/stucco where code requires cement on exterior walls. Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request and the site conditions and recommended tabling the application for the site plan to be revised. Mr. Berg recommended denial of the variance request for flat roof, stucco and wire lathe. The applicants are requesting site plan approval for a garage enclosure and a second story addition. The applicants are also requesting a variance to erect a flat roof in front where the code require flat roofs to be erected in the rear within the prolongations of the building. The applicant also requesting a variance to use lathe and stucco instead of concrete. The applicants, Simone Mayer (owner) and James Smith, President of Smith & Smith Design, were there to present the case. Mr. Smith stated that the existing house is flat roof. He also stated that wood framing is allowed by Florida Building Code. Parking arrangement can be satisfied with some re -arrangement on the property. After Board discussion, Mr. Abramitis made a motion to deny the variance for wood framing. Chairman Fernandez seconded. Motion passed (5-0). Chairman Fernandez noted that there is not enough information to rule on the site plan. Mr. Abramitis made a motion to table. Mr. Crutchfield seconded. Motion passed (5-0) PZ05-0224-05 Shapar Realty Paul Miller (tenant) 9805 N.E. 2nd Avenue Sec. 604: Site plan approval -awning sign. Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and recommended approval of one sign (Paul Miller Salon) 12" black letters, on the front only. The applicants are requesting the lettering for "Paul Miller" is proposed at 16" and will be gray. The "Hair Studio" will be 4" and be red. "The Paul Mitchell Signature Salon" will have 3" letters. All these signs are proposed for the front. In addition, both sides will have 16" "Paul Miller" letters in gray and 4" red letters reading "Hair Studio". Mr. Berg stated_ the sign and lettering are out of scale for N.E. 2 Avenue. The letters 16" tall and oversized for the size of the store. In addition, the applicant is displaying the sign on 3 sides of the awning for 2nd Avenue awning sign. Other, larger building the codes allows 1 '/2 square feet per lineal foot of frontage (1 1/2 x 17'= 25 1/2 sq. ft.) the proposal is for 38 Planning and Zoning 3 February 24, 2005_ 41 sq. ft. After a brief discussion, Mr. Crutchfield moved to approve application with one sign with 12" black letters and 4" red letters. Mr. Sastre seconded. Motion passed (5-0). • • PZ05-0224-06 Omar Osman, D. D. S (tenant) Modern Displays (agent) Angel Garcia (owner) 9101 Park Drive. Sec. 604: Site plan approval -wall sign. Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and recommended denial of the application. He stated allowing three signs on such a building would be inconsistent with the residential character and what is allowed in the higher use district (B-1, B-2). The subject site is zoned PRO which has no specific sign restrictions in the zoning code. The district is most closely aligned with the C district which allows 1 1/2 sq. ft. per lineal foot of building wall facing a street. Mr. Berg stated the code allows the Planning Board to approve such incidental signs as are necessary for business identification. A sign is on the building identifying the dental office and there is a ground sign also identifying dentistry/orthodontics. The applicant is requesting approval for a wall sign to be erected along Park Drive measuring 192" (16') long and 20" high. Dr. Osman was present to present case. He submitted pictures for sign identification. He recommended smaller signs instead of 3 signs. He will have two signs one on 6th Avenue, removing the telephone number and keeping one of the signs in Park Drive. After board discussion, Mr. Abramitis moved to deny the sign application. Mr. Sastre seconded. The motion passed (4-1); (Mr. Crutchfield voted no). PZ05-0224-07 Michelle Pijuan (owner) 145 N.E. 101st Street. Sec. 701: Administrative appeal -paint. Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and stated that the paint color is not harmonious with the existing house colors and is too dark given the color schemes of the house and the houses in the neighborhood. The applicant is appealing the administrative official denial of a paint permit. Mrs. Pijuan submitted evidence on her behalf for the Board, and submitted pictures of other houses around the village. After discussion, Mrs. Pijuan withdrew her application and agreed to work with staff to come up with a color that they could agree with. Planning and Zoning 4 February 24, 2005 4110 PZ05-0224-08 Heather Romeu (agent) Mark Campbell (agent) 174 N.E. 96th Street • Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and recommended approval of the lettering size for the wall sign be reduced to a maximum height of 18"x 3' feet would be consistent with other signs approved in the area. Mrs. Romeu was there to present the case. The applicant is requesting approval for two signs and one address to be located on the building wall. The wall sign will be brushed stainless steel with back lighting and be 8' long and 3' tall. Another sign, to be located by the door, will be 2' x 1' with word "Metro Spa" with logo. The other sign is for the numbered address. Mr. Berg noted that the subject site is zoned B-1 which allows 1 %z square feet of signage per lineal foot of building wall facing the street frontage (Sec. 504(f)(1)) in the front. Mr. Berg stated that the size of the lettering is the problem. After a brief discussion Mr. Crutchfield moved to approve with a 24" height limit. Mr. Sastre seconded. Motion failed (1-4) Mr. Crutchfield voting yes. Mr. Abramitis made a motion to approve with letters to be 18". Mr. Sastre seconded. Motion passed (5-0). PZ05-0224-09 Richard and Deborah Blinderman (owner) 9330 N.E. 12th Avenue. Sec.521 (b) 2(a): Requesting a variance to allow a driveway width to 20' Sec. 521 (b)2(b): requesting over 32' of paved r -o -w where the code limits paving to 20' and requires P&Z Director Approval Mr. Berg explained the basis of the request, the site conditions, and recommended denial. The application was the same application that came before the Board on September 2004. At the meeting applicant modified his request to address staff concerns. The applicants are requesting approval to install pavers for an existing driveway which is over the maximum width of 20' for residential driveways (sec.521 (b)(2)(a)). In addition, the applicants want an additional curve 11' semi -circle driveway in the front as well as connector of 32' on the right of way. Mr. Berg stated that the property is 112' wide and 94' deep. The width of the property is 112' and the ordinance allows a maximum of 50% paving coverage in both the right of way and front yard. The driveway width may be, at best, a legal non -conforming use. Section 524, non -conforming structures, states that a non -conforming use may be continued to the extent of the floor area or use. Aron Shakton, attorney was there to represent the owners. Mr. Shakton explained the circumstances for approving the variance for a circular driveway is for traffic safety. He argued that the driveway is not an expansion but only a repair and therefore, not subject to a variance. After discussion with staff, the applicant withdrew his request. Mr. Sastre move to table proposed amendment to remove circular driveway and back paved current driveway, and agree to reduce disharmony. Mr. Crutchfield seconded. Motion passed (5-0) Planning and Zoning 5 February 24, 2005 • • ITEM II: APPROVAL OF MINUTES- January 27, 2005 Mr. Sastre made a motion to approve the January 27, 2005 minutes. Mr. Abramitis seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0. V. NEXT MEETING. The next regular meeting will be on April 28, 2005. V. ADJOURNMENT The February 24, 2005 Planning and Zoning meeting was adjourned at 12:00A.M. Emilia Palmer, Recording Secretary Chairman, Planning & Zoning Board Planning and Zoning 6 February 24, 2005