Planning Board Staff Report

 

PLANNING BOARD HEARING

Miami Shores Village Town Hall  Council Chambers  10050 NE 2nd Avenue  Miami Shores

Hearing Date

July 28, 2011

Meeting Time

7:00 P.M.

File Number

PZ-6-11-2011249

Folio Number

11-3205-009-0410

Owner

Stephen Marino, 1249 NE 97th Street, Miami Shores FL

Applicant

Same

Agent

Mario Rumiano, 17100 Collins Avenue, Ste 212, North Miami Beach, FL 33160

Property Address

Stephen Marino, 1249 NE 97th Street

Legal Description

EARLETON SHORES PB 43-80 LOT 15 & W1/2 LOT 16 BLK 3 LOT SIZE IRREGULAR OR 19201-2674 07 2000 1 COC 23248-0198 03 2005 1 OR 23248-0198 0305 00

Property Size-Sq Ft

12,262.50

Building Adjusted Sq Ft

3,368

Flood Zone

AE8

 

Zoning

R25

Future Land Use Designation

Single Family Residential

Existing Use

One-family dwelling

Comprehensive Plan Consistency

Yes

Existing Structure

1-story; 4 bed/3 bath

Year Built

1950

 

Subject

Pursuant to Articles IV, VI and VII. A Variance request from Article IV Schedule of Regulations to constrict a patio 1.5 ft from the side lot line, a 10 ft setback is required.

Action Required

Approve, Approve with Conditions, or Deny the application

Other Required Approvals

Village Building Permits

     

Staff Report

David A. Dacquisto AICP, Director, Planning and Zoning

Report Date

June 28, 2011

                     

 

Background

 

The applicant is requesting an 8.5 foot variance to the required 10 foot side yard setback.

 

The applicant installed an 8.5 foot wide and 18.5 foot long paver patio 1.5 feet from the west side plot line.  No permits were issued for the installation.

 

Analysis

 

The patio intrudes 8.5 feet into the required 10 foot side yard setback.

 

There was a hard surfaced area within the side yard setback previously.  The property records show that a wooden utility shed was located within the 10 foot side yard setback on the west side of the house and garage.  The shed came to the attention of the village in 1990.  According to the owner at the time the shed had been there for 30 years.  The village agreed to allow the shed to remain but ordered that it be removed if “any changes are made or this structure deteriorates.”

 

The shed was subsequently removed however, the foundation may not have been removed and may be the source of the previous hard surface.

 

Pursuant to Sec 702. Hardship variances, of the Miami Shores Village Code of Ordinances, Appendix A, the applicant must provide sufficient evidence to support a finding by the Planning Board that the variance requested meets all four (4) of the required criteria to grant a variance:

 

Variance Criteria

 

(a)                  The alleged peculiar and unusual conditions affecting the property.

(b)                  The alleged reasons why such conditions make it impossible strictly to apply specified provisions of this ordinance to the property.

(c)                  The variance in such strict application that the applicant believes to be necessary in order to enable him to make a reasonable use of the property.

(d)                  The reasons why the applicant is of the opinion that such variance would be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this ordinance, would not be detrimental to the existing use or prospective development of property in the vicinity, and would not give to the applicant an advantage with respect to the use of his property that is not enjoyed by the owners of similarly situated property.

 

The applicant has responded in the application to the criteria upon which the Planning and Zoning Board will consider the application.

 

Staff reviewed the applicants response to the four (4) criteria and Staff finds that the application has not met all four (4) of the required criteria to grant a variance:

 

(a)                  There are no peculiar or unusual conditions affecting the property.

(b)                  There are no peculiar or unusual conditions that would make it impossible to apply the set back requirement, there is no evidence that the previous hard surfaced area was legally constructed.

(c)                  The applicant has reasonable use of the property without the patio.

(d)                  The variance would allow a patio within the side yard setback an opportunity that is denied to others in the community.

 

The proposal is not consistent with the technical provisions of the Zoning Code.

 

Recommendation

 

Planning and Zoning staff recommend to the Planning Board DENIAL of the variance with a finding that the applicant has not met all four (4) of the required criteria to grant the requested variance as required in the Code of Ordinances, Article VII. Errors and Variances; Sec. 702 Hardship variances.

 

However, if the Planning Board finds that the applicant has provided sufficient evidence to support a finding that the application has met all four (4) of the required criteria to grant a variance under Section 702 of the Code of Ordinances and votes to approve the application, staff recommends the following conditions:

 

1)      The applicant may construct an 8.5 foot wide and 18.5 foot long paver patio 1.5 feet from the west side plot line as shown on the submitted plans.

2)      Applicant to obtain all required building permits for work previously undertaken without building permits.

3)      Applicant to obtain all required building permits.

4)      Applicant to comply with all applicable code provisions at the time of permitting.

5)      This variance is valid for a period of one (1) year from the date of approval.  Building permits must be secured and work started within that time or a new variance will be required before work can commence.