LimeBike Memorandum of Understanding

Planning Board Minutes – January 23, 2014

JANUARY 23, 2014

THURSDAY, 7:00 P.M.

 

 

In Attendance:

David Dacquisto; Planning and Zoning Director

Karen Banda; Clerk

Jesus Suarez: Acting Village Attorney

 

 

I)        ROLL CALL

 

Steve Zelkowitz, John Busta, Sid Reese, Robert Abramitis, Richard Fernandez

 

II)     BOARD MEMBER DISCLOSURES

 

III)    ACTION ITEMS: PUBLIC HEARING

 

1)     None.

 

IV)   MINUTES

 

1)     December 12, 2013

 

Motion: Approve minutes subject to corrections.

Action: Accept, Moved by Robert Abramitis, seconded Sid Reese

Minutes approved unanimously.

 

 

V)    SCHEDULED ITEMS

 

1)     SWEARING IN OF WITNESSES BY VILLAGE ATTORNEY:

“Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”

 

VI)   TABLED ITEMS

 

Motion to lift from Table

Moved by Sid Reese, seconded by Steve Zelkowitz (check to confirm second)

 

 

1)     PZ-11-13-201364: 9099 Biscayne Boulevard, (Owner) Shore Square Properties LLC, (Applicant) Burger King Holding Inc., (Agent) Carlos Cardoso; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning. Sec. 400 and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. Commercial building, freestanding fast food restaurant, remodel and site improvements. Sec. 504 Signs and Sec. 600, Site plan review and approval required. Wall sign.

 

Mr. Dacquisto provided background information, summarized the information on the staff report and read the staff recommendation and conditions of approval into the record. Mr. Cardoso was present as agent. Mr. Zelkowitz asked about LED lighting band presented on plans. Staff mentioned it has been removed from plans. Mr. Zelkowitz asked if LED lighting is allowed in Miami Shores, staff answered that under the Miami Shores code you are allowed a neon tube at the top of the building but nothing that moves. Mr. Cardoso gave presentation and stated he met with Burger King Corporation and addressed boards concerns. LED ban was never a scrolling lettering but a lighted band and was removed after boards concern. Lighting will be increased for the area as per a condition of approval. Mr. Chairman asked about color that would be replacing black and color samples were presented. Mr. Chairman also addressed existing lighting and an increase in lighting as per staff’s report. Mr. Cardoso mentioned actual entrance of building will have more light in addition to left and right of building and drive thru area. Light poles would look like what are currently in place now in shopping plaza. Chairman asked why there isn’t a trash can outside of drive-thru area because of garbage that ends up on streets and requested that a garbage can be placed in that area.

 

Motion: Approve subject to staff recommendations with additional condition that a garbage can be included by the drive-thru.

 

Moved by Steve Zelkowitz, seconded by Sid Reese.

Motion approved unanimously. 

 

 

Motion to lift from table.

Moved by Steve Zelkowitz, seconded by Sid Reese.

Motion approved unanimously.

 

2)     PZ-11-13-201365: 1420 NE 103rd Street, (Owner) Marc Litzenberg, (Applicant) Same, (Agent) Mark Campbell; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 and Sec. 600, Schedule of Regulations, Site plan review and approval required. New residence. Sec. 523.1 (f) (5). Metal roof. Sec 518 (2) Fence in the front yard.

 

Mr. Dacquisto provided background information, summarized the information on the staff report and read the staff recommendation and conditions of approval into the record. Height of the crown of the road is explained by staff and explanation is included in new staff report. Mark Campbell was present. Mr. Abramitis asked about staffs report under the heading Analysis, the 3rd line states that proposal is consistent with code except as noted. Mr. Abramitis asked specifically what are the parts of the code it violates, if any. Staff stated that he was referring to the deck extending to the seawall. In the code from the deck to the seawall there must be 5ft. Mr. Abramitis confirms with staff that a variance would be required to change that. Chairman asked about ornamental metal fence that will surround pool and staff stated wiring is for gates that lead to pool. Attorney read code 518B for ornamental fence requirement as per code. Chairman states that design could comply using the traditional approved materials and architect Mark Campbell agrees to eliminate material and change to solid.   Mark Campbell gave presentation and addressed issues that were brought up before and stated fence was something that had to me moved back because there was a drainage easement that ran from the street to the existing canal. The wall was set back aside from that easement 2ft. The front elevation was changed to add new windows; aerobic sewer system was explained and solar panels were eliminated. Color of roof was changed to Dove Gray. Mr. Abramitis asked about seawall that was changed and asked what drive way was made out of and Mr. Campbell stated that applicant changed plans regarding deck and seawall to be in compliance and the driveway is made up of concrete panels and garage doors are made out of glass that cannot be seen through them but looks like window. Mr. Abramitis asked Mr. Campbell if he knew what percentage of the front façade would be glass versus masonry and Mr. Campbell stated it is probably well over 30% on the front and 60% on the back. Mr. Chairman asked if glass door was a structural element and Mr. Campbell answered, no. Mr. Chairman addressed aerobic septic system and asked about size of system and possible problems with smell because of the gray water application.  . Mr. Campbell stated the two tanks hold roughly 1500 gallons each and has does not have answer about the smell and stated system has to be maintained on a regular basis. Chairman stated a smell is usually associated with system, usually in the summer. Tank is made out of fiber glass tank. Mr. Chairman addressed wire gate and Mr. Campbell stated gates will be changed to solid.

 

Public Hearing Open.

 

Albert Toussaint 1421 NE 103 Street, stated his concern was the front wall and is happy that the wall was removed from plans.

 

Carlos Herrieta 1431 NE 103 Street is thankful for the changes and concerned about flooding in the front because he has had problems with flooding in a previous home. Mr. Herrieta is concerned about construction with having a family and baby in their home and possible change of working hours on Saturday’s. Mr. Herrieta is very concerned about demolition process so that the neighbors’ homes are not affected with all types of particles.

 

Mr. Chairman asked architect Mark Campbell about time possible construction time frame and Mr. Campbell stated about 9 months to a year of construction. Chairman mentioned building official would have to be addressed that could probably help with other concerns and contractor can also be addressed.

 

Mr. Abramitis asked about what provision was now made to keep the water on property, now that the front wall was removed.  Mr. Campbell stated they have a French drain system that is 50ft long and 12 feet deep where all the water will drain before it goes off the property.

 

Public Hearing Closed.

 

Mr. Abramitis made comment about masonry construction to almost glass construction that will change the look in Miami Shores. Not really concerned about this particular construction because glass construction is mostly in the back but is concerned about future proposals.

 

Motion: Approve subject to staff recommendations with the additional condition that the gates that are shown as the wire gates are changed to conform with the code requirements.

 

Moved by Steve Zelkowitz, seconded by Sid Reese.

Motion passed unanimously.        

 

 

 

 

 

NEW ITEMS

 

1)     PZ-12-13-201367: 555 NE 93rd Street, (Owner) Veronica Molina, (Applicant) Same, (Agent) None; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. Garage conversion attached garage.

 

Mr. Dacquisto provided background information, summarized the information on the staff report and read the staff recommendation and conditions of approval into the record. New information is presented into the record after staff’s report is read. Staff analyses new information submitted. Fred Sullivan owner of property asked about code parking requirements and staff answered that if you do not have any parking on the property the city does not make you provide parking but if you do not have parking it is not allowed to pave the boulevard because you have to provide two legal parking spaces on your property . Staff stated that zoning code states that if you are in compliance you are not allowed to be out of compliance, if you have two parking spaces you can’t come out of compliance by having one. Mr. Abramitis asked about storage shed in the rear was a legally constructed building and staff answered yes. Mr. Abramitis asked staff if the swale was already paved and staff answered, no except for driveway entrance. Mr. Zelkowitz asked staff about what solution would work for applicant. Staff stated one solution is that they could have an 18 foot wide pad and there is enough room on the existing driveway for one car so if you add another 9 by 18ft pad there will be enough room for two cars.  There is a concrete in the back if they would put in a finish. Staff is requesting an interpretation from board on whether or not the back is a legal parking space.  Mr. Chairman asked about a permit for slab in the rear and staff stated he could not find a permit in our records. Staff is requesting that board decide if back is a legal parking space based on their interpretation of the code. Mr. Chairman states that part of that it becomes part of a non-conforming expansion structure. Mr. Abramitis asked about requirement in staff’s report with regards to analysis that states the parking in the rear is not consistent with the zoning requirement and should it require a variance. Staff stated it could require a variance or an interpretation of the board whether or not it is applicable. Veronica Molina and Mr. Sullivan gave presentation and addressed pad in the rear. Mr. Chairman asked attorney if he could to possibly answer board’s question and Attorney reads code 518b2 Mr. Zelkowitz asked applicant about possible solution as to having a possible second lane of parking in the front and applicants agreed to recommendation. Board comments on application and Mr. Abramitis, cannot support plan if it is calling for a variance. Mr. Zelkowitz agrees with Mr. Abramitis and if board is asking to make a code interpretation he cannot support that the parking space in the back be considered a parking space for zoning compliance because code states that you have to be 10ft away from the property and does not believe a variance would be granted because it is a self-created hardship.  Mr. Chairman agrees with Mr. Zelkowitz and adds that problem can be fixed and remedied by proposing another place to park. Mr. Reese agrees with board members and guides applicants to speak with staff for a possible solution. Mr. Busta agrees that this is a self-created situation and would be in favor to see the second option proposed and agrees with Mr. Abramitis statements.

 

 

Motion: Table item.

 

Moved by Steve Zelkowitz, check second.

Motion approved unanimously.

 

2)     PZ-12-13-201368: 5 NW 105th Street, (Owner) Deborah Leone, (Applicant) Gary Shear, (Agent) Thomas Iglesias; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. Addition.

 

Mr. Dacquisto provided background information, summarized the information on the staff report and read the staff recommendation and conditions of approval into the record. Mr. Iglesias present and did not have questions for board.

 

Motion:  Approve subject to staff recommendations.

 

Moved by John Busta, seconded Sid Reese.

Motion passed unanimously.

 

3)     PZ-12-13-201369: 9301 N Bayshore Drive, (Owner) Guy Kurlandski, (Applicant) Same, (Agent) Robert Rossi; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 and Sec. 600, Schedule or Regulations, Sec. 534. Site plan review and approval required. Dock.

 

Mr. Dacquisto provided background information, summarized the information on the staff report and read the staff recommendation and conditions of approval into the record. Mr. Rossi was present on behalf of owner and stated project was already approved by Derm.

 

Motion: Approve subject to staff recommendations.

 

Moved by Sid Reese, seconded by Steve Zelkowitz

            Motion passed unanimously.

 

Contractor stated he will amend plans to show reflectors as per conditions.

 

4)     PZ-12-13-201370: 370 NE 101st Street, (Owner) Victor Bruce, (Applicant) Same (Agent) None; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. Addition.

 

Mr. Dacquisto provided background information, summarized the information on the staff report and read the staff recommendation and conditions of approval into the record. Board did not have any questions.  

 

Motion: Approve subject to staff recommendations.

 

Moved by Robert Abramitis, seconded by Sid Reese.

            Motion approved unanimously.

 

5)     PZ-12-13-201371: 374 NE 95th Street, (Owner) Marc Adler, (Applicant) Same, (Agent) Mike Finkelstein; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. Addition.

 

Mr. Dacquisto provided background information, summarized the information on the staff report and read the staff recommendation and conditions of approval into the record. Board members did not have any questions.

 

Motion:  Approve subject to staff recommendations.

 

Moved by Sid Reese, seconded by Steve Zelkowitz

Motion approved unanimously.

 

6)     PZ-12-13-201372: 9301 N Bayshore Drive, (Owner) Guy Kurlandski, (Applicant) Same, (Agent) Mark Campbell; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. Façade alteration.

 

Mr. Dacquisto provided background information, summarized the information on the staff report and read the staff recommendation and conditions of approval into the record. Mark Campbell addressed pool deck and issues since house is in a VE11 zone but pool will be built at a later date and Chairman stated staff will address issues administratively.

 

Motion:  Approve subject to staff recommendations

 

Moved by John Busta, seconded by Sid Reese

Motion approved unanimously. 

 

7)     PZ-12-13-201373: 82 NW 98th Street, (Owner) Nyce Daniel, (Applicant) Same, (Agent) Rufus Orindare; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. Garage conversion attached garage.

 

Mr. Dacquisto provided background information, summarized the information on the staff report and read the staff recommendation and conditions of approval into the record. Board did not have any questions.

 

Motion:  Approve subject to staff recommendations

Moved by Steve Zelkowitz, seconded by Sid Reese

Motion approved unanimously.

 

 

 

DISCUSSION ITEMS –  

 

David Dacquisto discusses with board future items that will need to be addressed. Board discusses what has been done in the past regarding contracting outside help or having staff prepare report.

 

  1. According to Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes, "...each local government shall adopt an evaluation and appraisal report (EAR) once every seven years assessing the progress in implementing the local government's comprehensive plan."

 

The next EAR update is due to the state by June 2015.

 

The State Growth Management Act requires that local governments periodically review and update their adopted Comprehensive Plans according to a schedule established by State statute.  The update begins with the preparation and adoption of an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) and ends with the adoption of EAR based plan amendments.

 

The purpose of the EAR is to evaluate how successful a community has been in addressing major community issues through its Comprehensive Plan.  Based on this evaluation, the report suggests how the plan should be revised to better address community objectives.

 

The Comprehensive Plan covers ten major topics, each known as an element: Future Land Use, Transportation, Housing, Infrastructure, Conservation and Coastal Management, Intergovernmental Coordination, Recreation and Open Space, Economic Development, Capital Improvements, and Public School Facilities. Only the goals objectives and policies are adopted by ordinance.

 

Board comments:

 

Mr. Zelkowitz gives comment on workshop and items that should be addressed such as the FEMA issue.

 

Staff requests that FAR, Green space, open space is completed at the next workshop meeting and board members can discuss future calendar dates at the next P&Z meeting for the Village Height limit.

 

Mr. Zelkowitz will gather information to present at the next meeting from other municipalities with regards to height limitations.

 

Mr. Abramitis asked staff if there have been any comments from architects on which way they would like to work with, FAR or green space or Open Space.

 

Chairman believes that the architects have expressed that they would prefer FAR.

 

 

8)     NEXT WORKSHOP – January 30, 2014.

 

  1. FAR, Green Space, Open Space and Village Height Limit.

 

9)     NEXT REGULAR HEARING – February 27, 2014.

 

  1. Regular agenda.

 

10)  ADJOURNMENT

 

Pursuant to Chapter 286.0105, Florida Statutes, if person decides to appeal any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based.

 

Miami Shores Village complies with the provisions of the American with Disability Act.  If you are a disabled person requiring any accommodations or assistance, including materials in accessible format, a sign language interpreter (5 days notice required), or information, please notify the Village Clerk’s office of such need at least 72 hours (3 days) in advance.