LimeBike Memorandum of Understanding

Planning Board Minutes - September, 17, 2015

MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING BOARD MEETING

Village Hall Council Chambers

10050 NE 2nd Avenue, Miami Shores

September 17, 2015

THURSDAY, 7:00 P.M.

In attendance:

Mr. David Dacquisto, Director, Planning and Zoning

Richard Sarafan, Village Attorney

Mariana Gracia, Clerk

 

I) ROLL CALL: Present: Mr. Mac Glinn, Mr. John Busta, Mr. Sid Reese, Mr. Robert Abramitis, Mr. Richard Fernandez.

 

II) BOARD MEMBER DISCLOSURES Mr. Busta disclosed the properties he had visited.

 

III) MINUTES

1) July 23, 2015

Mr. Busta Motion to approve minutes as amended. Seconded by Mr. Reese. Approved Unanimously.

 

IV) SWEARING IN OF WITNESSES

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.”

 

V) TABLED ITEMS TO A TIME CERTAIN

1) None

 

VI) NEW ITEMS:

 

1) PZ-09-15-2015209: 8900 Biscayne Boulevard, (Owner) John Militana, (Applicant) Same, (Agent) None; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 Schedule of Regulations, Sec. 504. (g) (2) and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. Signs, pylon.

Mr. Dacquisto provided information relating to the application which includes a 15 foot tall pole sign. The sign is within the signage allocation for the area. Staff is recommending approval with conditions that are attached in the Staff Report. Mr. John Militana 8801 Biscayne Blvd. was present and wished to present. The Board asked questions about the sign. Mr. Dacquisto answered that the old sign was a pole sign and this is a pylon sign. Mr. Militana said that there has not been a pole sign nor a pylon sign approved since he’s been here. The Board asked questions. Mr. Sarafan explained that Mr. Benton and he had extensive conversations regarding this issue with this Applicant; the Administration does support this application. Mr. Militana says that the pole sign is basically the only option for this property. Mr. Militana provided the Board more details about the property. Previously there was a pole sign there. Mr. Militana explained that his only option is a pole sign because of the sign that the Village will be replacing. If he was to put a monument sign in the back of the Miami Shores sign would be in conflict. The sign that he is proposing is aesthetically pleasing. It has a skirt on it, because it becomes more beautiful with it on. It is harmonious with the building and the other buildings in the area. Mr. Militana mentioned the other pole signs in the areas around where he is proposing. He mentioned that a monument sign is not feasible being that Miami Shores will have theirs approximately 6’ in front of it. Because of the unique characteristics of the property he is asking the Board to consider approval of the pole sign. The Board asked questions. Mr. Busta made a Motion to approve subject to Staff recommendations. Mr. Reese seconded the Motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the Motion.

 

2) PZ-07-15-2015210: 137 NE 105th Street, (Owner) Judith King, (Applicant) Same, (Agent) None; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 Schedule of Regulations and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. Garage conversion.

Mr. Dacquisto provided information relating to the application which includes a garage conversion. The Applicant is proposing to convert an existing garage into an exercise and laundry room. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions specified in the Staff Report. Judith King of 137 NE 105 Street was present and wished testify. Ms. King proceeded to mention that because they have a small house they would like to convert their garage into living space. Their washer and dryer are currently there. Ms. King said that they do have parking for two cars. Mr. Abramitis made a Motion to approve subject to Staff recommendations. Mr. Reese seconded the Motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the Motion.

 

3) PZ-09-15-2015211: 103 NE 99th Street, (Owner) George Fishman, (Applicant) Same, (Agent) None; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 Schedule of Regulations and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. Garage conversion.

Mr. Dacquisto provided information relating to the application which includes a garage conversion. The garage was constructed in 1950. The Applicant is proposing to convert the garage into an exercise studio. There is sufficient space to provide two legal parking outside. Mr. Dacquisto said that Staff is recommending approval with the conditions he read into the record. George Fishman and Ms. Fishman of 103 NE 99th Street were present and wished to present. The Board asked questions. Ms. Fishman pointed out that the garage is wasted space not being used except for storage and the like. She said is also not in good condition. They would like to turn it into an exercise recreation space. Mr. Sarafan asked the Applicant if they understood the conditions set by Staff. Mr. and Ms. Fishman responded that yes they understood and had no problem with it. The Board asked questions. Mr. Busta made a Motion to approve subject to Staff recommendations. Mr. Glinn seconded the Motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the Motion.

 

4) PZ-09-15-2015212: 9490 NW 1st Avenue, (Owner) Eddie Lewis, (Applicant) Same, (Agent) None; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 Schedule of Regulations, Sec. 523.1(6)e and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. Metal roof.

Mr. Dacquisto provided information relating to the application which includes a metal roof. The residence currently has a tile roof. The metal roof is similar in color to the existing white tile roof. The color of the metal roof is bone white which is less reflective. It has a reflective rating as R67. It has a flat finish on it so it will reduce the reflectivity. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions as indicated in the staff report. Eddie Lewis of 9490 NW 1st Avenue was present and wished to present. Mr. Lewis said that he had visited some cities which have metal roofs and he was very impressed. Mr. Lewis said that his roof is due for a replacement. Preferably something that will last another 50 years. The Board made comments. Mr. Reese made a Motion to approve subject to Staff recommendations. Mr. Glinn seconded the Motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the Motion.

 

5) PZ-09-15-2015213: 9055 Biscayne Boulevard, (Owner) Shore Square Properties, (Applicant) Dollar Tree, (Agent) Joseph Ware; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 Schedule of Regulations, Sec. 504. (g) (2) and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. Signs.

Mr. Dacquisto provided information relating to the application for a sign on the Dollar Store. The Village has a master sign agreement with Shore Square Properties. Red Channel letters is what is authorized under the master plan in the original agreement with the owners of the mall. It is specified on the original contract that if one of the Tenants wants a different color they need to come in front of the Board. The Applicant is proposing a green sign with their corporate identifier above it. Staff is recommending approval with conditions as attached. The Board asked questions. Joe Ware of 12010 Lucas Street, Ft. Myers, FL was present and wished to testify. Mr. Ware said that Family Dollar and Dollar Tree are starting to merge. Mr. Abramitis asked Mr. Dacquisto is there any Shores Square monument sign up front that are non-conforming with the master sign agreement. Mr. Dacquisto responds yes and gave some examples of these signs. Mr. Ware points out about the different color signs in the area. Mr. Ware proposed to keep the red on the monument sign and go green on the building signage. The Board asked questions. Mr. Abramitis made a Motion to approve subject to Staff recommendations with the added requirement that the monument sign comply with the master sign agreement which will be red or white. Mr. Glinn seconded the Motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the Motion.

 

6) PZ-09-15-2015214: 13 NW 108th St, (Owner) Read Holdings LLC, (Applicant) Same, (Agent) None; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 Schedule of Regulations and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. Garage conversion.

Mr. Dacquisto provided information relating to the application which includes a garage conversion into a game room, bathroom and laundry room. The game room is accessible from the rear yard. There is sufficient parking for two vehicles. They have met the conditions for two legal parking on site. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions as shown on the staff report. Orlando Cordoves of 1553 Sunny Isles Avenue, Coral Gables, FL was present and wished to testify. Mr. Ralph Diaz of 5741 SW 84 Street, South Miami, FL was also present. Mr. Cordoves testified that they are remodeling the entire interior of the property. They would like to add a bathroom in the garage. Mr. Busta made a Motion to approve subject to Staff recommendations. Mr. Reese seconded the Motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the Motion.

 

7) PZ-09-15-2015215: 440 Grand Concourse, (Owner) Ximena & Edwardo Calle, (Applicant) Same, (Agent) Kevin Smith; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 Schedule of Regulations and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. One story addition.

Mr. Dacquisto provided information relating to the application which includes a one story addition. The Applicant is proposing to add a 600 square foot addition in the NE corner of the residence. The addition is to create a master bedroom suite which will also be accessible through the rear yard. The addition will have white barrel tile roof to match the existing roof. The design of the architecture matches the existing 1940’s residence. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions as attached. Mr. Kevin Smith of 3280 NE 16th Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL said that this is a typical 600 square foot addition with the existing roof to match the new roof. The Board asked questions. Mr. Glinn made a Motion to approve subject to Staff recommendations. Mr. Reese seconded the Motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the Motion.

 

8) PZ-09-15-2015216: 11004 NW 2 Avenue, (Owner) LSP Homes LLC, (Applicant) Kenny Paris, (Agent) None; Pursuant to Articles IV, V and VI of Appendix A Zoning, Sec. 400 Schedule of Regulations and Sec. 600. Site plan review and approval required. New residence.

Mr. Dacquisto provided information relating to the application which includes a new residence. The Applicant decided that rather than renovating the residence they would go ahead and tear it down and build a new residence and start fresh. The Applicant is going to construct a 4 bedrooms 3 baths residence. Mr. Dacquisto read into the record the staff report. The Applicant does have parking on site. Mr. Dacquisto noted that on the site plan there is one thing that is a little deceptive it looks like the circular driveway actually enters at the intersection. But he was out at the site and it actually enters further down from the intersection, hopefully it won’t be of conflict with traffic. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions as attached. The Board asked questions relating to the circular driveway. Mr. Dacquisto responds that if you look at the actual site plan and go by the actual dimensions everything is fine. The way the Architect drew it makes it look like is right off the intersection. It doesn’t really matter because we are going to go by the survey and the site plan and that is going to be accurate. Based on the survey and the site plan there would be no dispute in the future. Mr. Kenny Paris testifies that they are going to build a new residence as mentioned by Mr. Dacquisto. Mr. Paris said that the way they were doing the construction was not good and the house actually caved in. Mr. Paris said that they thought it was actually better to tear it down and build it new. The Board asked questions. Mr. Busta made a Motion to approve subject to Staff recommendations. Mr. Reese seconded the Motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the Motion.

 

VII) ACTION ITEMS: PUBLIC HEARING

1) Village Council request review and recommendation: Recommend to the Village Council that the proposed changes to Appendix A Zoning permitting liquor sales in restaurants and allowing for wine cafés be adopted; or that the proposed changes be adopted as amended; or recommend that no changes be adopted.

Public hearing is now open.

Mr. Fernandez presents the first item in front of the Board which was requested by Village Council for changes to Appendix A in zoning basically dealing with alcohol. Mr. Dacquisto provided information relating to Appendix A in zoning. Mr. Dacquisto said that the Village Council asked the Board to look into allowing hard liquor sale in restaurants and what he originally called wine bars. Since then the Board has discussed it Mr. Dacquisto said he had done some amendments. One of the things to be noted is that he has changed wine bars to wine café. This is something that has been done in other jurisdictions. Mr. Dacquisto said is really trying to fit it under food establishments. It does have limited food sales. In zoning if you look at some other codes wine bars don’t actually have any food requirements. In the Miami Shores code that he is proposing it requires that they have food sales. It does not say what percentage must be food sales as opposed to the liquor sales. Simply put they have to have a menu; they have to have food available at all times when they are open. There are two components to this zoning code. One is Appendix A which this Board has more authority over and also chapter 4 of the code of ordinances which is strictly by Council. Mr. Dacquisto said he has two sets of ordinances one of them deals with the zoning code with the entire requirements that we have to put in place in order to implement chapter 4. One of the things in chapter 4 I’ve taken all of Sec. 610 which said that all Council has the authority to allow special permission for the sale of beer and wine and for restaurants. Mr. Dacquisto took that out of the zoning code section and moved it over to the liquor ordinance. He is trying to keep as much of the liquor regulation as he can in chapter 4 which is alcoholic beverages. From that one section he created 3 sections; one is that the Village Manager may give special approval to restaurants for beer and wine sale. The second one that the Village Manager may give special approval for a restaurant to have hard liquor, beer and wine sales. Then the third one is for a wine café to have beer and wine sales. Mr. Dacquisto wants to start with the zoning code. In order to implement the liquor ordinance you actually have to list wine café under permitted uses. He was trying to see how he can make a few changes as possible in order to implement the changes that are required. Mr. Dacquisto said that what he decided to do is under the B1 and B2. He read that into the record. Mr. Dacquisto said that he added the language “except for restaurants and wine cafés shall be established except in accordance with the site plan approval by the Planning Board and no building shall be erected. Mr. Dacquisto said that what that means is that a change of use to a restaurant or wine bar itself would not trigger Planning and Zoning Board approval or review, only a brand new building, because the building itself would have to come in front of this Board for approval or an addition a significant addition to the building that would have to come in front of the Planning and Zoning Board for approval as do all building additions. The other change Mr. Dacquisto made is under permitted uses. Under food operation we already had restaurants but he added language after restaurants for food operations permitted use restaurants he added “such to chapter 4 alcoholic beverages and section 4-2 special approval is required if applicable” A restaurant is allowed if you want to have liquor in the restaurant then you have to flip to chapter 4 alcoholic beverages you have to meet all of those requirements. Under permitted use and operation he added wine cafés and again subject to chapter 4 alcoholic beverages in section 4-2 special approval required if applicable. So that gives a framework to allow restaurants and wine cafés that were not listed previously. Under B2 adding the language “no use of any kind except for restaurants and wine café shall be established except in accordance with the site plan. Also under permitted uses any food operations restaurant subject to chapter 4 etc. so it basically mirrors what we have in B1. This would then apply to the B1 and B2 no other district. There is another change made to section 501 it was basically outdated and it had to be changed no matter what we did. Because it references an S2 district which we don’t even have. 501 has changed to number 2 the sale of alcohol and beverages as the same as defined in Florida Statutes 55 etc. Mr. Fernandez asked is that a dog track. Mr. Dacquisto affirms yes. He read chapter 4 into the record as provided to the Board regarding alcoholic beverages. Mr. Dacquisto explained what he tried to do by taking the information out of zoning and putting into chapter 4 alcoholic beverages. He goes on to talk about schedule of on street parking. Explaining the requirements of 1 car space per 100 square feet this is not doable downtown. He poses the situation of existing building vs new construction. Then he read the material provided to the Board. He mentioned he had gone down to section 610 and explained what this was. Mr. Dacquisto says that what he is suggesting is to delete the language in 610 and add the term reserved afterwards. That way we retain the sequence in our code. He explained that the next thing he did was not under the jurisdiction of P&Z Board.
Defining restaurants beer and wine sale you are having the total sales 51% from food some jurisdictions call that a bona fide restaurant. Also, create another kind of restaurant which could permit liquor beer and wine not allowing them to sell bottles for takeout. The third category would be wine café where there is no specific requirement for food but in his lists of conditions he is granting he provides they have to have a menu they have to have food on premises. One thing that is different about wine café is that we are allowing sale by bottle for off premise consumption. Mr. Dacquisto mentioned section 4.1 and spoke briefly about it and provided it to the Board. He spoke about the powers granted to the Village Manager which should be reviewed by Village Council. There is a $500.00 fee for an application. Under this code provision there is no annual renewal. He went over what information the Applicant should provide which is stated in 4.4 of the document provided to the Board. Also, the Village should advertise 14 days in advance before is granted giving the public notice. Miami Shores Village Police is granted the authority to do an investigation of the Applicant. This information will be turned over to the Village Manager. There is an evaluation criteria including the report from the Police Department. Mr. Dacquisto read in his report as provided to the Board. He mentioned the proximity from these establishments to the residential area. There is no distance requirement that he can put in the code that would allow this activity. Mr. Dacquisto said that one of the requirements is that the establishments are not allowed to have seating outside in the rear because that would be directly in front of the residential property. Also prohibited is outdoor seating on the side streets. Outdoor seating is limited to NE 2 Avenue frontage in the B1. No outdoor sound system is permitted. No live entertainment allowed. Requiring a detail security plan and Mr. Dacquisto read into the record the remaining requirements. Mr. Glinn read again the portion where it says that the licensee’s gross revenue from the sale of food equals or exceeds 51% of the gross revenue from the sale of liquor wine and beer for the most recent 12 month period. Mr. Sarafan clarifies that it should be 51% of all gross sales. Mr. Dacquisto said that is correct he will change it. Mr. Dacquisto proceeded to read in the document provided. He read in a few conditions under revocation. Mr. Dacquisto read in from the document provided the remaining facts and conditions for wine café. He went over the hours of operation for the different establishments in 4-5. He said he added another section 4-6 and he read the contents for the record. Mr. Fernandez invited the public to make comments if they wished to. Ms. Kim Flower of 245 NE 99 Street asked a question. The Chairman clarifies this is a time for comment not necessarily questions. Ms. Flower states that her preference would be for the sale of wine and beer to be allowed. She mentioned establishments that now allow this to happen. Thank you. No other public comment. The Board commented on the material covered by Mr. Dacquisto. The Board commented that if a restaurant opened in an existing building there would be no parking requirement. Mr. Dacquisto confirms this to be true. Mr. Fernandez posed different scenarios and the parking requirements by each. Mr. Abramitis asked Mr. Dacquisto if there is a way to craft this ordinance so that we don’t end up with a strip of fast food on 2nd Avenue that we did not intend and all else that goes with it. Mr. Abramitis expresses that we may get something that we did not anticipate to make his point. Can you fix it? Mr. Dacquisto says that there are certain ways that you can carve out an exemption and he gave some examples. Mr. Dacquisto poses the issue of restaurants with take out and the ones that don’t. Mr. Fernandez takes a look at the issue from a broader prospective. He mentioned that in looking at it he can see there are a lot of issues that are addressed in the documents provided. Mr. Fernandez is pleased to see the 51% provision. He expressed concern about carving out a provision for restaurants and wine café were no parking is required. He can foresee a lot of cars requiring parking. Is there a traffic plan for the past or in the future seems totally inequitable. Mr. Fernandez spoke about the hours of operation for certain facilities. He asked about restricting the hours of. Mr. Fernandez spoke about the distances between the establishments and the parking area. He believes that operating time should be cutback in the B1 areas. He mentioned that the Country Club and the University are ok. Mr. Fernandez asked Mr. Dacquisto about certificate of occupancy. If someone comes in for a remodel don’t they issue a CO for a remodeling? Mr. Fernandez turned to the provisions provided by Mr. Dacquisto and read it, then asked if a CO would be issued for remodeling. Mr. Dacquisto responds if it is 50% of the value or more. Mr. Dacquisto said that Mr. Sarafan and he can draft the legal language that will get us to where you want to go. Mr. Fernandez expressed concern about the remodeling of these places. Mr. Dacquisto offered to read the intent and said that he can work with Mr. Sarafan regarding the legal language. Mr. Dacquisto explained when a CO would be needed. Mr. Glinn says that he understands the language in the Staff report provided. Mr. Fernandez clarifies additions to be another building. Mr. Dacquisto says that an addition is that you are adding on to another building. Mr. Fernandez offered an example of an addition. Mr. Dacquisto explains how the improvement works. Mr. Fernandez bring in the example of a 10,000 square building and you are putting up a 600 square foot addition does the entire thing have to come up. Mr. Dacquisto says no, not unless is 50% of the value. Regarding Metrix Mr. Fernandez asked a question about the Police Chief ordering an investigation on the Applicant. Mr. Sarafan talks about the delegation from Village Council to the Village Manager of its decision making authority that will only pass legal scrutiny if the delegation is accompanied by objective standards. They meaning the Village Council cannot delegate discretion. Mr. Sarafan gives an example of what the Board can say related to Metrix. He mentioned there is a tension in the Council about the validity or the legality of delegating these Metrix. Mr. Sarafan gave an example of the things that can be considered when doing these investigations. Mr. Fernandez asked what the appeal process is. Mr. Sarafan says that his recommendation to the Council will be not to delegate. Standards for sidewalk café are very standard and very specific. Mr. Sarafan says that he will get from Council what they are looking for over and beyond the liquor license. Mr. Fernandez spoke about his experience with the liquor law and expressed concern. Mr. Glinn says he understands the concerns but he does not see it as catastrophic from his prospective. Mr. Fernandez says that there is certain fragility as far as NE 2 Avenue. He is in favor of the proposal but there are certain parts that remain a problem. He gives an example of an investor coming in and investing on 2nd Avenue. The investor has every good intention of keeping the law then an unruly group comes in and repeatedly misconduct. Then the Council has to revoke their license. Does anybody see any liability here? It is not that easy to draw this back. Mr. Sarafan says that there is a reason why the Code is the way it is. The Board asked questions to Mr. Dacquisto. Mr. Dacquisto responds that parking requirement is one of the reasons why we don’t have more of these establishments, and DERM is the other reason because of the septic system. Mr. Abramitis discussed the parking spaces available and his concern with what is available. He mentioned the tools available to do so. Mr. Fernandez says if we are going to have parking requirement for some places why we are not having it for everyone else. He gave some examples of where parking is available. We have to have some parking resolution. Mr. Glinn says first of all there is the parking issue. One of the requirements is that there will be a parking plan. Although we are waiving the parking spaces under the code one of the requirements for approval in this ordinance is that there will be a parking plan. Then he spoke about some establishments that would love to have any restaurant that would need parking to find a way to better utilize some of those spots. Those are alternative to be considered by the Village Manager. Mr. Glinn suggested the Council should consider some alternative like a table service, prohibit window service, menu boards. He mentioned that due to his experience none of these fast food places would consider opening in these areas. Furthermore, we can limit that interest that is there by the policy makers by requiring table service, getting rid of menu boards, drive through windows adding those as components of the ordinance. Mr. Glinn prefers the closing time to be mid night. The streets adjacent to 2nd Avenue should have a resident’s only parking zone created to keep people off their lawn. Mr. Fernandez asked Mr. Sarafan about taking this discussion and suspending it until our next workshop. Mr. Sarafan expressed that there is no impediment to suspending this discussion and having it another day. However, be aware that most of what you are discussing here is what is in chapter 4. Mr. Sarafan says that the Board would authorize subject to chapter 4. To know what you are doing you need to know what is in chapter 4. Mr. Fernandez expressed that there are a lot of things up in the air. There is a lot of technicality here before us. Mr. Abramitis asked the question why not just require the parking plan before approval. Mr. Glinn refers to Mr. Dacquisto about this and goes on to say that the issue is to create a maximum parking solution. By creating a rigid set of standards that would apply to the number of spots that are required for the number of uses it is quickly to amend those to accommodate the constant evolving nature of the neighborhood. Mr. Fernandez brings up Mr. Glinn’s suggestion of residents only parking. Mr. Glinn final comment on this is that I think there are a lot of ideas offered at the Council my own personal opinion is that the purview of the Board is to evaluate the changes to the zoning code. We are doing redundant work to the work that the Council is already doing. That the Council’s purview is to deal with the nuts and bolts, that we have a pretty good idea of what the Council is proposing. Mr. Glinn says that in his opinion it is appropriate to evaluate the changes to the zoning code. Mr. Fernandez made some clarifications as far as to what this Board does. Mr. Sarafan says that the Council will be next addressing this issue at the October meeting. He then asked who is up for re appointment. Mr. Fernandez responds, Mr. Busta, Mr. Abramitis and me. Mr. Sarafan and the Board discussed having a formal meeting to discuss the issue further. Mr. Dacquisto asked for some direction from the Board. Mr. Fernandez expressed concern about having received the revisions today. Mr. Sarafan says there is a consensus in favor of amending the zoning code to allow these types of uses as always there needs to be more details. Mr. Fernadez says he agrees. Mr. Abramitis says he would like to knock out the fast food problem. He adds he is all for the maximum flexibility of urban planning to solve problems, now how do we prevent it from becoming a problem. Flexibility is how do we account for the parking, rather than getting into the ability to give to the Village Manager I prefer to see if Mr. Dacquisto could put it into the ordinance. Give them any flexibility they want anything that is available under the so called parking plan. Mr. Glinn thinks than an objective standard would make sense in that context. Mr. Fernandez gave an example of the parking and what is not available. Mr. Dacquisto says that is already in the code and explains that if you leave the parking requirement in people will have to secure offsite parking. Mr. Dacquisto asked the Board for direction regarding this. Mr. Sarafan says that in addition to the sewer issue the other issue is there is no parking or such a shortage of currently available parking. Mr. Abramitis turns to Mr. Dacquisto for more guidance regarding parking. He asked why we can’t amend the zoning code to require a parking plan before we approve a use. Mr. Sarafan says what you are saying is we keep the parking requirement and you have to show how you are going to show it with all of these tools at your disposal. Mr. Dacquisto says it is exactly what you have today, you don’t change anything. Mr. Sarafan says the difference is, I guess, it’s an intermediate step you can make these uses lawful. You can have the sewer put on and see if it works if it doesn’t we can always lessen the parking requirements later on. But rather than do it now that might be an intermediate step. Mr. Dacquisto mentioned another option would be not to provide parking. Mr. Dacquisto said what our code says is there is only a parking requirement for incremental difference in the use of a parking. So, retail to retail there is no change. Retail to doctor there is a change of intensity according to our zoning code. If you make it equivalent to our retail then there is no parking requirement. Mr. Abramitis says that does not solve the problem of not enough parking. Mr. Busta, two things the parking plan and the fast foods, if we address the parking plan he thinks it cuts back the fast food. Mr. Busta mentioned a few fast foods places that had opened and then closed. He expressed concern about the availability of parking. He is concerned with the residents around 2nd Avenue. Mr. Fernandez asked Mr. Dacquisto what direction he would like the Board to give him. Mr. Dacquisto explains what a zoning code does. He points out that parking is one the most pressing issue. Hours are actually on the other section of this code and it won’t be voted on by this Board. Mr. Dacquisto says that the Board can make a recommendation. The list of permitted uses becomes an issue. Section 501 as drafted is more a technicality than anything can it go forward. Removal of section 610 that is a technicality and again can be tied in with section 4. Mr.Glinn expresses that it looks like the Board is in consensus in all these pieces. Mr. Fernandez proposes to knock out 610 in approving its removal. All agreed. 2. Dealing with closing time, 12:00 PM? All Board members approve with the exception of Mr. Busta. Mr. Abramitis speaks about Mr. Glinn’s approach about restaurants and fast food places. Mr. Glinn inputs that take out window we don’t want. Mr. Sarafan mentions DERM and that lack of sewer. The Board discusses having a separate meeting to discuss the parking plan. Mr. Glinn there is a consensus by the Board members that they want the wine bars or wine café in NE 2nd Avenue. The Board discusses B1 and B2 uses. Mr. Fernandez requests for a special meeting to be set up two weeks from now to discuss further. Mr. Abramitis says that zoning is written is such a way that parking is accounted for before it gets approval. A parking plan using every available tool like Mr. Glinn said. Mr. Abramitis believes we do have to have parking accounted for. Come up with a Metrix plan the can be approved the Village Manager or someone else. Mr. Dacquisto says that regarding parking 1 per 100 square feet it’s not a lot. The Board asked questions. Mr. Dacquisto responds that every 45 feet its 3 people. Mr. Dacquisto says that what the Board has to do is create an exception in chapter 4. He said that we could just say that we can provide valet parking. Mr. Fernandez requests to take a look at how that would fit in in Mr. Glinn’s parking plan Mr. Glinn says he would support relaxing requirements at a minimum. Mr. Fernandez disagrees with Mr. Glinn and explains why. The Board discusses the allotment of parking on 2 nd Avenue. Mr. Fernandez would like to take a look at a valet parking license. There is a consensus to move on the parking issue at the special meeting. There is a Motion to set a special meeting at a certain date and time by Mr. Reese. Seconded by Mr. Glinn and the vote were unanimous in favor of the Motion.

2) Discuss amending the code to allow alternative materials between driveway pads and ribbons.

Mr. Fernandez asked the public if they were here for this item. Public answers yes. Mr. Johnny Hernandez of 77 NW 101 Street was present and wants to testify. He is more interested on the artificial turf than rocks. He wants to speak in favor of amending the code to allow artificial turf. He pointed out the benefits of artificial turf. Mr. Hernandez points out that the Board can request samples before someone puts in an artificial turf for quality control. He mentioned other cities that allow artificial turf.

Mauricio Cruz of 150 NE 103rd Street advocates putting rocks between the driveway spaces. He would like to put something that looks good and its low maintenance. Mr. Cruz added that his irrigation system is from a well and the water stains. He wants to put rocks that are at least 1” so that it can hold down. Public comment now closed. Mr. Fernandez spoke about the way we notify the public of these meetings.

3) Provide an interpretation of the zoning code regarding the approved location of decks and applicable setbacks. Discuss amending the code as necessary.

Mr. Dacquisto discussed the decks setbacks and its requirements per his Staff report. He discussed what the building official said regarding the setbacks. If it is a detached deck it’s supposed to be 15’ from the back. Mr. Dacquisto says he thinks that we have to eliminate the 15’ separation. Mr. Fernandez says that there is no right to a deck. Mr. Fernandez expressed that they wish to make this Board more lenient on the issue of the decks. The Board discussed the different things that a home owner can build in their back yard.

 

VIII) DISCUSSION

1) None

 

IX) NEXT WORKSHOP – TBA

 

X) NEXT REGULAR HEARING – October 8, 2015. The second Thursday of October.

 

XI) 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.