Ord. No. 10-08-1945ORDINANCE NO. 10 — 0 8 —19 4 5
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, AMENDING SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE SECTION 20- 5.11(L) ENTITLED "EXPIRATION" IN ORDER TO EXTEND THE
TIME PERIOD AFTER WHICH THE FINAL APPROVAL OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW AND PRESERVATION BOARD SHALL LAPSE AFTER SIX MONTHS IF NO
PERMIT HAS BEEN APPLIED FOR; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY,
ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Land Development Code (LDC) currently provides that final
approvals of plans by the Environmental Review and Preservation Board (ERPB) must lapse
after six months if no permit is issued (Sec. 20- 5.11(L); and
WHEREAS, in many cases involving large scale renovation or new construction there
can be considerable delay in obtaining a building permit and the applicant must request an
extension from the ERPB; and
WHEREAS the Planning Department recommended that the expiration period be
extended or the requirement to obtain a permit be adjusted to read "if no permit is applied for ";
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board at its December 11, 2007 meeting, after a public
hearing adopted a motion by the vote of 6 ayes 0 nay recommending approval of a proposed
amendment to Sec. 20- 5.11(L) of the Land Development Code; and
WHEREAS, the members of the Environmental Review and Preservation Board at its
December 18, 2007 reviewed the Planning Board's proposed modification and unanimously
supported it; and .
WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to accept the recommendation of the
Planning Board and enact the aforesaid amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. That Section 20 -5.11 entitled "Site Plan review approvals" and more specifically
subsection (L) entitled "Expiration" of the City's Land Development Code, is hereby amended to
read as follows:
20 -5.11 Site plan review approvals.
(L) Expiration. Final approval by ERPB shall lapse after six (6) months if no permit
is applied for.
(2)
Section 2 All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this
ordinance are hereby repealed.
F1 F1 1
Ord. No. 10 -08 -1945
Section 3. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, this holding shall not affect
the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
Section 4. This ordinance shall be effective immediately after the adoption hereof.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this/day of ' 2008
ATTEST:
"' omaI]
Y CLERK MA OR
1st Reading: 3/4108
2nd Reading: 3/18/08
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
COMAUSSION VOTE:
5-0
Mayor Feliu:
Yea
Vice Mayor Beasley:
Yea
Commissioner Wiscombe:
Yea
Commissioner Palmer
Yea
Commissioner Beckman:
Yea
(New wording underlined; wording to be removed indicated by strikethrough)
X: \Comm Items\2008\2- 19- 08\LDC Amend Expiration ERPB App Ord.doc
00 2
South Miami
All-America City
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI J.F
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM 2001
To: The Honorable Mayor Feliu and Members of the City Commission
Via: Ajibola Balogun, Interim City Manager,_4k_nO, '
From: Sanford A. Youkilis, Acting Planning Directo A)
"Rf
Date: March 18, 2008 ITEM No.
Background
The Land Development Code (LDC) currently provides that final approvals of plans by the Environmental Review
and Preservation Board (ERPB) must lapse after six months if no permit is issued (Sec. 20- 5.11(L)). The ERPB
may grant an extension not to exceed six months.
In most cases, ERPB approval of plans are obtained for existing structures (renovation, painting, signs, etc.) within
a six month period. This is usually enough time for submittal of plans and a permit to be issued for either
renovation or painting. However, in cases involving large scale renovation or new construction there can be
considerable delay in obtaining a building permit. As a result, the applicant must request an extension to the six
month requirement from the ERPB in order to keep the ERPB approval active. In 2007, there were several
applicants that had to request extension to the six month requirement from the ERPB.
Based on the experience of the Planning Department, the ERPB expiration period needs to be extended or the
requirement that a permit be issued be modified. The Planning Board recommended that the six month expiration
period remain but the requirement to obtain a permit be adjusted to read "if no permit is applied for." It was agreed
that this amendment would be fair to applicants and would -avoid a growing number of extension requests. It was
also felt that there would not be a need for the ERPB to grant extensions.
Specific Amendment
20 -5.11 Site plan review approvals.
(L) Expiration. Final approval by ERPB shall lapse after six (6) months if no permit is
applied for.
Planning Board Action
The Planning Board at its December 11, 2007 meeting adopted a motion by a vote of 6 ayes 0 nays recommending
approval of the proposed amendment. The ERPB, at its December 18, 2008, reviewed the Planning Board's
proposed modification and unanimously supported it.
M75
Recommendation
It is recommended that the proposed amendment modifying the expiration condition for final approvals
by the ERPB be approved.
Backup Documentation:
Draft Ordinance
Planning Department Staff Report, 12 -11 -07
Excerpt Planning Board Minutes 12 -11 -07
Public notices
SAY
X: \Comm Items\2008\3- 18- 08 \LDC Amend Expiration of ERPB Approvals CM Report.doc
W
To: Honorable Chair and Date: December 11, 2007
Planning Board Members
From: Julian P
Planning arector
Re: LDC Amendment- Expiration
of ERPB Approvals
BACKGROUND
The Land Development Code (LDC) currently provides that final approvals of plans by the
Environmental Review and Preservation Board (ERPB) must lapse after six months if no permit is
issued (Sec. 20- 5.11(L). The ERPB may be grant an extension not to exceed the six month.
In most cases ERPB approval of plans are obtained for existing structures (renovation, painting, signs
etc.) the six month period is usually enough time for submittal of plans and for a permit to be issued.
However, in cases involving large scale renovation or new construction there can be considerable delay
in obtaining a permit and the applicant must request an extension from the ERPB. This does occur
several times a year.
Extending the expiration time period for initiating construction after a variance is approved was recently
discussed at a City Commission meeting and a motion was adopted requesting the Planning Board to
initiate a Land Development Code text amendment that changes the six month period to a one year
period. The Planning Department felt that the ERPB expiration period also needed this same adjustment
and the subject text amendment was initiated by the Planning Director.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT
In order to implement this change the following section of the Code must be amended:
20 -5.11 Site plan review approvals.
(L) Expiration. Final approval by ERPB shall lapse after one (1) year (6) .rent_ if no
permit is issued, except as may be extended by the ERPB for a period not to exceed six (6)
months.
LDC Amendment
December] ], 2007
Page 2 of 2
RECONMENDATION
It is recommended that the proposed amendment be approved.
Attachments:
LDC Section 20 -5.11
Public Notices
JP /SAY
Y:\PB\PB Agendas StaffReports\2007 Agendas Staff Reports \12- 11- 07\PB -07- -033 LDC Amend Expiration ofERPB Approvals.doe
20 -5.11 SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
(4) Structures and uses;
(5) Parking spaces, accessways, driveways, sidewalks, wheel stops and curbs;
(6) Curb cuts and median openings;
(7) Lighting and irrigation systems;
(8) Fences and walls;
(9) Storm sewers; and
(10) Dumpster locations.
(I) Proposed Landscape Plan. The following landscaping information shall be submitted:
(1) Proposed trees, shrubs, grass and other vegetation including their location, height,
shape, size and type by both common and botanical classifications.
(2) Proposed berms, water courses and topographic features, including their location,
height, size and shape.
(J) Proposed Buildings and Structures. All proposed structures, fences and walls shall be
shown in elevation drawing reflecting their location, size, color, height and construction
material.
(K) Tabular Summary. A tabular summary, as required by the building and zoning
department, shall be submitted.
(L) Expiration. Final approval by ERPB shall lapse after six (6) months if no permit is
issued, except as may be extended by the ERPB, for a period not to exceed six (6) months.
(Ord. No. 12 -90 -1452, 7- 24-90; Ord. No. 3 -94 -1552, § 1, 3 -1 -94; Ord. No. 12 -96 -1612, § 7,
7- 30 -96; Ord. No. 19 -96 -1619, § 8, 10 -1 -96)
20 -5.12 Planned unit development approvals.
(A) Review Procedures. Upon receipt of a complete application for the approval of a planned
unit development, the building and zoning department shall review the application and
submit its findings and recommendations, to the environmental review and preservation board
within thirty (30) calendar days from receipt of the application. All procedures and require-
ments specified below shall apply to applications for planned unit developments.
(B) Environmental Board Review.
(1) The board shall, within thirty (30) calendar days following receipt of the complete
application and staff recommendations, formally meet and consider the preliminary
development concept plan for the proposed planned unit development.
(2) Prior to such meeting, the board may meet with the applicant to review the request at
a special meeting.
(a) Three (3) working days notice of such meeting shall be given by posting notice at
City Hall.
Errata 118
I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Action.: The meeting was called to order at 7: 40 P.M
Action: The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.
II. Roll Call
Action: Chairman Morton requested a roll call.
Board members present constituting a quorum: Mr. Davis, Mr. Farfan, Ms. Chael, and Ms.
Beckman, and Ms. Young. Board Member Absent: Vice Chair Ms. Yates
City staff present: Julian H. Perez (Planning Director), Sanford A. Youkilis (Planning
Consultant), and Lluvia Resendiz (Administrative Assistant).
Ill. Planning Board Applications / Public Hearing
PB -07 -033
Applicant: City of South Miami
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, AMENDING SOUTH MIAMI LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 20- 5.11(L) ENTITLED "EXPIRATION" IN
ORDER TO EXTENT) THE TIME PERIOD AFTER WHICH THE FINAL
APPROVAL OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PRESERVATION
BOARD SHALL LAPSE IF NO PERMIT HAS BEEN ISSUED FROM SIX (6)
MONTHS TO ONE (1) YEAR; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY,
ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE BATE.
Action: Ms. Young read the item into the record.
Mr. Perez advised that the text amendment relates to the time frame provided to an
applicant in order to secure a permit after obtaining approval from the Environmental
Review and Preservation Board. Under certain circumstances an applicant has taken more
than six months to secure a building permit thus resulting in a request for an extension. The
Planning Board Meeting
December 11, 2007
Page 2 of 2
Planning Department is trying to increase the time frame from six months to one year in
order. to streamline the process. Staff finds that the extension will be of great benefit to the
City therefore staff recommended approval for the text amendment.
Mr. Morton suggested changing the word "issued" to "applied for ". Therefore, once the
ERPB approves the proposed plans the applicant has no reason not to apply for the permit
within the six month time frame. If no permit is applied for, the approval shall lapse and
should a permit be applied for, the permit runs its course hence eliminating the time frame.
The Board agreed with the above noted recommendations that the six month time frame
should not be changed. Mr. Perez reconfirmed the Board's proposal and advised that the
Board recommended the text amendment shall read "Final approval from the ERPB shall
lapse after six months if no permit is applied for" and eliminate "except as may be
extended by the ERPB for a period not to exceed six (6) months."
Motion: Ms. Beckman moved to approve the text amendment request entitled
"Expiration" with the amendments set forth above. Ms. Young seconded.
Vote: 6 Ayes 0 Nays
Mr. Perez advised that the Board's recommendations will be forwarded to the
Environmental and Preservation Board for their review.
xAcomm items12008\2- 19- 081pbmins 12 -11 -07 excerpt Wb.dpc
` ZrOOW W V.!Z LU-0 ` Zr v
oN rxrm¢o�xmz, omzo w z « m N
�nW - Fl- "Cir�rw¢. 0�5'¢kwz D
7 U U N «mm.m�
W Wp Oa�¢U¢tDOQ TAW =¢S�NN4 m Namrnm' m
'z¢h>iW Jp $ cm v me >m rb
p Q r a¢¢¢ Q m.NNZ4OOQLLO
paa¢ m¢Cma" Up:1 U, a 3:?z>W �I{11J . . n v m mU y
0 �0 m _ c
O- W 0 wzr ,, c L) U c vE m ;m
UgaOa U- �mp �WW0Q pFmWWWW E m ?
ry �E5 Z W m¢F- O WSN Q z I-� ¢WNW¢W} m w m¢ . -TOg,
O¢oa¢I-¢US¢m >Zt�i6 0 - -Xow: OJ�p:, a z m of m �n
' Q¢N mtAa OJT >0000m Q WZ�W ¢lQl -C7 m E omm OE i =m.- -°UowZ « y am m E ;m
. 2 oI-WJn.Z rpm(S rcr w2�W`umiJC70 cN > Nm�co dp,
OQUWWU }tgOOU
ILONOILZd�¢I-H -HLL LLOLLV rJp w0.,. m m` �N33o.Em
ON. UWOO f11QYm¢LL OmW °m ¢ '5m m yo9 Ctv y«
LL Z2_.IZ o¢LL W aZU a-ww f.L jm N O N m
. 0y0y0ZCw'J i- �Z.w.�gW7Q ZOOp¢ U--m mV Co gain `odm=
5 ~FZg¢?p�i>+�Q2j(7 SM2WO.mZ > a ocErma3
..rU a g O wa? JU¢aC7gn -¢F- m v ° E m e
¢p [L -Xwg >04a7 W Ln o orm m o
wi W Q >SmW�o1°rF->o Wrm > >AO�W mo �' cm °ami E-nm
¢LLOW OMEE cigLL¢ mLLpwO =1 ) 'CN :: m...oL amc
¢oa ❑Jwaw =ava0m QO LLaUm :< o:E j �; do`tr -
,a
U c •' --fie - ..
• 0 1° mo DO�IDZ OZO Or-�� OZOZQzow2 zozomz ZQO zU' ZOQ O
on tro wo U%FZLL' y 0J - >OZOQ OZO W-� O
o" a U' WpF Oz OZOr W -Z '
$mo .NC700.JU¢p0W .U)ZFmlti yZp Oast �(D0F OWOR< >Q
c > ¢ r ¢ y U. ¢m '�npF-¢rL
im $ fza Um¢¢NZU. iF.¢ ¢' �ww a> 0 tZilW W00Ci0 �zUw QQF
«�mm !U'W� JOtWZ1-pZI- .2J¢muW>p' 0Q00-W0z�'•,O�WppZp�p2¢OOWLL
q� Cm.c° U' W—I-CE6O ❑ 2[CW> U 'O a: W >LL U¢ WV]wx >7 ', O W LL
'�W cy °° .�°CZ�rz Z aya¢W Wmr ¢powZ¢OOZ Qpo =05..�¢Z .U�pz&Rzo
o,m <zaw >.�ah¢o •,�_Up a�¢p °- U00� -,a0 }po• a p
2-2 el '. op 000 UG�S . -0� po¢OOw ESIC ¢rL.o�a p•; UQ mpWQ. 0 F-¢0m 5
om NE ZpNWwQD=�¢1w� pp2u.W -pLL ZSZ¢�¢... p01•: {U..CL F- (]p �WJZ -J:5 LLJ CC .f'aJ U Xa 0. m= .. •¢.LL.Upl W Vlha OLL QIILL CJZ¢ .Q m` XOZ.... �LL�=r¢Q.�Z. z LHOHU
Z`u oU J 2¢ w.'2' -ZO Q a aO�V)} V)
,.;OLLp_F¢F-- WO.:z. 0i8-p..O 000_>- m 'Cri ¢¢t ui .rc�aapWz
®� m °po ,dQpZatn G>O.zo '¢¢ZO¢ >-�W¢2WWWwQ. O W aF'-IC W¢•. oQOa UZF'
��. LdE W'�xWgWVo.SxNOZ. w�¢ay..�x�ii,°¢g(W¢�¢Qa¢� <xZipr[&zaw'��wv =xl�.
®� moN mw
'~p¢•03F�a ~os:.- Iivim _, wpp•G.i �w'=pF w50.a tt�--Haoz�' WJ�.pQOj�l>C in
9oo,.:'W lyi�x¢m�'w LLp n. a,:OyQ..- p.'!paJCWpZgwpLL, L.. co �,z >Z >mlw;
V ,> gyp p w zb z o _o g
.,. .. M'h— 3;•,:zo000 � 0 OU�2,.•UODry,'U _I- ¢��m•'Z. .V p'• �NV 02 ,W, Wck :a
:W!
rcmm °,.Q�roz¢J<N¢,¢:a p¢OzW z�d9FzW >¢��¢ F ^¢d>�¢ Z >�.wavadz
a U' ¢U -w°-z2 ¢-[7 . zaza x t•Q O,>
�° m OW WLLZp } }.N¢U ZUZ Z 22wwcomDz',. ZUgWNy+ MOI-JD QU -CS¢W0
.NW Ha$,: o¢H O.Opa In Drµc7,. a :F- WZ.�2 =2l22WptQ.2: ¢xwx00�•V�JU�p ..•ow
� Qlt O:
FEW m W5Wgzww>Z -. O Zmp...prs�WF -Q¢ >O. 0~5c?U¢W� Mg. p��t pUO >:
E�°'t'.ZLLw_wpz >m O ZLLW_CL,ZLLOoxLLOWwS' ZLLO W W O
OmoE ^c., QO¢U O.�¢OOV)0 QOacO QOWNPomama ¢O'n mrO Fp Na' zLL0°OSZ¢
z2pm8 ¢OmN2 a
m
O C
W N m O m o
_ N r m
CE m d V 0 m N O m w
amid E°im -cNG`o
. /U//) o C N
LU m ro °mm >E mc.c°- mE- �cco'- m zlcz
Z b D L n V L H E n C m m y C` C O N d
° a �aL c�° °c 'm 0`- °o.o�Ed E2- m5 y E =idn
O m v -b . >° M, .°' _ .0U ° m = = v m �-an d .3_ ta ❑ mv mc Uv m L rd v ? r E O Q
rri z U d - Y °
O' m n U m d E m U
E o C 3
g2,i,•,.• �o,,r.J b Fm'`: .
�
v °Zgam U y rondNWyEdEoE °' ->' Y. ^'
.NLJm� =-,m ¢2 a LC°vvxm C °'C D N N
-Jm ¢C? y m m m «mo`c axim m cv�:3> v x n'
a r- z C7 N NO.c 0— mmmv N a
v O c W z b v 2 W
C It Q � CL W •_ 2 w< Q N y m y •m° d 7. ° m m N h Ci
QG� JOB «wtA m2orn 0W XL m tmo`a cLidmco�c" c W
a
U. d¢= @u--� LLx X_ ° �LL �' da�2 c o �a p �. LL
W h m LL W N J C °l >O}- J m °- p C N C a L m V L 'O N E m ¢ LL
h Z > U m 9 =O C I- CO W '> - d V° 'C m d T N ° W 7
F0 O >.¢NUn UCL �3 ° 4It U L LL N odN'w N O c tq o w O
C.7 U
�n uvu i nc nrv�c r[niuv Htr tts uvrn�rl 1 fit tINAL ANPHOVAL OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PRESERVATION BOARD
P SHALL LAPSE AFTER SIX (6) MONTHS IF NO PERMIT HAS BEEN APPLIED FOR
I AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SOUTH° MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 20 3.3(D) ENTITLED " PERMITTED USE:
SCHEDULE AND. SECTION 20 -7.12 ENTITLED !'PERMITTED USES" IN ORDER TO ALLOW ACUPUNCTURIST AS A PERMITTED, USE IN'
THE "SR(HD OV); SPECIALrFY,RETAIL (HOMETOWN. DISTRICT OVERLAY.)'-ZONING DISTRICT
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE_ - SECTION 20 -5 9 EN RIANCE APPROVALS" IN
TITLED "VA
ORDER TO MODIFY THE CONDITIONS AND TIME PERIOD AFTER WHICH AN APPROVED VARIANCE SHALL LAPSE.
A RESOLUTION RELATING. TO A REQUEST PURSUANT TO SECTION 20- 34(B)(4)(b) .OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT, CODE FOR
r SPECIAL USE APPROVAL TO LOCATE A GENERAL .RESTAURANT AS PART OF THE SOUTH MIAMI MUNICIPAL' PARKING FACILI. TY A
PRIVATE- PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT, 5829 8W -13M STREET WITHIN THE . "SR (HD -OV) "SPECIALTY RETAIL (HOMETOWN
DISTRICT :OVERIAY),ZO_IING DISTRICT.ON PROPERTY LEGALLY,DESCRIBED AS LOTS 35, 36,37 48,:49 50, ".W A; LARKINS
SUBDIVISION ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT.BOOK 3 AT PAGE 198 OF THE PUBLIC R- ECORDS:OF MIAMI -
DADE COUNTY .: <..
A RESOLUTION RELATING TO A REQUEST. FOR A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20 3 5(E) OF THE. LAND, DEVELOPMENT CODE. IN ORDER _ TO ALLOW A LOT: COVERAGE-OF 31% (1580 SQUARE.FEET) WHERE A MAXIMUM OF 30% (1530 SQUA..RE FEET) IS. PERMITTED ALL
ON PROPERTYY,LOCATED AT:6321 SW 43 STREET WITHIN AN RS -4, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING USE DISTRICT. -
. If you have any inquiries on the above dems.please contact the City Clerk's office at: 305-663-632C
'ALL interested parties are invited to attend-and
will be heard.
Mat M Menendez CIVIC
City Clerk
I Pursuant to Florida Statutes 286 0105 the City hereby advises the public that •if a person decides to appeal any decision made by this Board, Agency or Commission with.
. respect to any matter considered at its meeting or hearing, he or she will need a record of the proceedings, and that for such purpose, affected person may need to ensure
t' that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal rs to be based