02-02-88r
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
FEBRUARY'2ND, 1988
PAGE 2.
ORDINANCES - FIRST READING:
none
REMARKS:
Commissioner E. Danny Brown: Commission discussion and determination
of workshop meeting dates for selection
process re: City Manager
DEFERRED AND /OR TABLED:
A Resolution denying a variance to allow a 13'6" rear setback where
25' is normally required on property legally described as the
Lot 48 less the*-EAst 27.5' of Block 8, FRANKLIN - SUBDIVISION, as
recorded in Plat Book 5 at Page 34 of the Public Records of Dade
County,. Florida, a /k /a 6516 S.W.59th Court, South Miami, Florida.
City Commission 1/19/88 (1)
NOTICE IS HEREWITH GIVEN TO ALL INTERESTED PARTIES THAT IF ANY PERSON SHOULD
DECIDE TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE AT THE FORTHCOMING MEETING FOR WHICH THIS
AGENDA CONSTITUTES NOTICE, SUCH PERSON WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS
CONDUCTED AT SUCH MEETING AND FOR SUCH PURPOSE MAY NEED TO 'ENSURE THAT A
VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORDS INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
0
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, AMENDING
SECTION 8 -6 -2.01 OF ARTICLE VIII OF CHAPTER 20
OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES BY ELIMINATING THE
HEIGHT LIMITATION FOR HEDGES IN RESIDENTIAL
ZONES AND CREATING SECTION 8 -6 -2.03 REQUIRING
PROPER MAINTENANCE OF HEDGES.
WHEREAS, the City's Zoning Code currently imposes a height
limitation of six (6) feet above grade on hedges in residential zones of the
City; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission deem it in the public
interest to allow property owners to exercise their right of privacy and
enjoyment of home ownership by eliminating such height limitation, while
insuring that the hedges are properly maintained.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Thft Section 8 -6 -2.01 of Article VIII of Chapter 20
of the City's Code of Ordinances is hereby amended as follows:
8 -6 -2 Height
.01 Fences and walls and- hedges higher than six (6)
feet above grade are prohibited on or abutting on
property zoned or used for residential purposes.
Section 2. That Section 8 -6 -2.03 is hereby created:
8 -6 -2 .03 All hedges shall be maintained in conformity with
the City "s existing regulations of this article
regarding vision and the requirements of Chapter 12 of
the Code of Ordinances addressing health and sanitation.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1988.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
Passed on 1st Reading: 11/17/87
Passed on 2nd Reading:
Additions shown by underlining:
Deletions shown by ------- - - - - --
y
APPROVED:
MAYOR
i
Minutes- Planning Board - 12 -
F. Public Hearing PB -87 -036
December 29, 1987
An -Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of
South Miami, Florida, amending Section 8 -6 -2.01 of Article
VIII of Chapter 20 of the Code of Ordinances by eliminating
the height limitations for hedges in residential zones and
creating Section 8 -6 -2.03 requiring proper maintenance for
hedges.
MOTION: Larry Ligammare moved for approval.
Thomas Cooper seconded the Motion.
Chairman Prentiss asked if there was anyone present who
wished to speak on the Motion. Seeing none, the Public
Hearing was closed.
Mr. Myers asked if this was approved would height limitations
be lifted on hedges, only, and whether or not fences would be
affected. Ms. Aran - Spinrad- -said that---height - li- mi-tations
would be lifted and fences would not be affected:
Chairman Prentiss asked if under the proposed ordinance a 20
foot hedge would be permitted.
Ms. Aran - Spinrad replied yes.
Mr. Myers said that it was his understanding that this
application would not affect fences, walls or hedges on
commercial property and would only apply to residential
property, and that, basically, all the Board would be doing
is eliminating the word 'hedges' in Section 8 -6 -2.01 of
Article VIII of Chapter 20 of the City's Code of Ordinances.
Ms. Aran - Spinrad said that is correct.
Mr. Ligammare was concerned with the question of safety at
intersections where hedges were out of proportion and made it
difficult to see.
Ms. Aran - Spinrad said there was an ordinance in the City that
states "within the triangle of visibility" which is 30 feet
from the intersection of both lines of the sidewalk or the
right -of -way, and there is an area between the height of
three feet and six feet within that 30 foot line that cannot
be obstructed by any kind of material that cannot be seen
through.
Mr. Hoffmann agreed with Mr. Ligammare's concern about
visibility. He said that during the discussion on this
matter at the Commission meeting, it was mentioned briefly
about the visibility problems. The response from the
Commissioners, who spoke to its was that they wanted to
encourage greenery, as much as possible, without any type of
4
Minutes- Planning Board - 13 - December 29, 1987
s
restriction whatsoever. He said that the homeowners that
spoke that night talked about the issue of a height
limitation, specifically in the front, as it was safer and
better for law enforcement. He said that he did not remember
anyone from the audience speaking in favor of no limitation,
nonetheless, after several homeowners spoke in favor of a
limit of four feet in height in the front, the Commission
voted in opposition to that saying that they were encouraging
greenery. Mr. Hoffmann said that he thought that they may be
creating a monster by taking the cap off. He asked who was
to make the determination as to proper maintenance of the
hedges.
Mr. Cooper and Mr. Ligammare agreed with Mr. Hoffmann.
Mr. Cooper said that he thought the height should be kept low
in the front, as it allowed the neighbors to partially police
their streets..
Ms. Aran - Spinrad said that ;the issue is whether-hedges vou'ld----
be allowed to go from six feet and up.
Mr. Cooper said that he would like to .see the Board modify
the proposed ordinance to limit hedges, walls and fences not
to exceed four feet in height on the front of the property.
Mr. Myers asked Staff if there had been some type of
enforcement problem with this issue.
Ms. Aran - Spinrad replied there had been some complaints
regarding hedges over six feet in height.
Mr. Hoffmann said that he was a little confused procedurally,
and he would like a ruling from the Chair as to how the Board
is going to go about this, because what the Board is
proposing seems to be flying in the face of what the Board is
being presented. He said that amendments could be made to
motion, but negative amendments could not be made that would
gut the whole proposal. He said that he thought that what
the Board was talking about, and that is what he would like a
ruling on, is saying no to this as proposed and then putting
together another proposal.
Chairman Prentiss asked Staff what the procedure is for the
Board to accomplish this.
Ms. Aran - Spinrad said that she thought the Board has the
flexibility to make any recommendations on what is being
proposed.
Chairman Prentiss said the problem he has is that what is was
advertised stated the Board is having a hearing on the
removal of limitations, and some people might have come for
that reason. He said that other people might have come, if
.... _.... _..... ....... ...__. .... _. _ . ......... .... . . . - -- __ _. _ -rte.. - . ,._... . _..._.._
Minutes- Planning Board - 14 - December 29, 1987
r .987
the advertisement had stated the Board was considering
limiting the height. He was wondering what the Board's
position is, if one item is advertised, and the Board comes
up with a different product.
Me. Aran - Spinrad said that she thought the Chairman was
correct, but that the public would be' able to speak when the
Item appeared before the Commission.
Chairman Prentiss said that not having legal counsel at the
meeting, he did not fee qualified to give a legal
Interpretation, Therefore, he said that he would like the
Board to vote on the motion as it is, and to allow the Minute
to reflect that the Board is interested in limiting the
height in the front of the property while not limiting the
height in the rear and sides of the property.
Mr. Hoffmann said that he. did not think that there was
anything binding upon the Commission by the Board defeating
this application as it stands and putting together a proposal
and sending it to the Commission through the Minutes. Re
said that as far as not having complied with the advertising
procedures, he did not think that anyone is bound by what the
Board does as long as the Book took an advisory role on that
particular item. He said that he thought this would be the
appropriate way to proceed.
Vote: Approve: 0 Oppose: 7
The Motion failed.
MOTION: Thomas Cooper moved to modify the Agenda
by adding an amendment to the previous
item.
Bruce Hoffmann seconded the Motion.
Vote: Approve: 7 Oppose: 0
MOTION: Thomas Cooper moved to amend the
Ordinance by modifying under Section 8 -6-
2 Height .01 "Fences and walls higher
than six (6•) feet above grade are
prohibited on or abutting property zoned
or used for residential purposes."
Renumber .02 which deals with industrial
and commercial use to number .03.
Create a new .02 to read that "on the
front setback the height of such fences,
walls and hedges shall be no greater than
four (4) feet."
Vote: Approve: 7 Oppose: 0
e1
i
RESOLUTION NO. 54 -85 -7019 B
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA,
AMENDING PRIOR RESOLUTION 54 -85 -7019 BY PROVIDING
FOR A REVISED SCHEDULE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR S.W.
73RD STREET FROM 1985 TO WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM THE
PASSAGE OF THIS RESOLUTION.
WHEREAS, on June 4th, 1985, the Mayor and Commission of
the City of South Miami passed Resolution 54 -85 -7019 to permit a
Planned Development - Hospital District (PH -HD) in favor of South
Miami Hospital; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 16-7 -3 of Article XVI of
the Zoning Ordinance of the City of South Miami, Florida, South
Miami Hospital has made formal application to amend the final
plans approved by the above - referenced resolution; and
WHEREAS, after review of the Acting Director of
Planning, Zoning & Community Development, the Environmental
Review & Preservation Board and the Planning Board, approval has
been recommended for the proposed change by South Miami Hospital,
with the Planning Board recommending an extension of 90 days for
said construction.
• NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE
CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. That the Special Use Permit granted by
Resolution No. 54 -85 -7019 be and the same is hereby amended to
allow a building permit for the construction of S.W. 73rd Street
to be obtainned within one year from the passage from this
Resolution.
Section 2. That the new'date for the issuance of the
building permit for the construction of S.W. 73rd Street, as
amended, shall also amend the phasing requirements of the street
in regard to the original special use permit resolution "Phase
C."
Section 3. That Section 3(v), the null and void
provision of Resolution No. 54-85-7019 is hereby amended to pro-
vide for the new dates, as reflected in Sections 1 and 2 above.
Section 4. That in its exercise of quasi-judicial
authority, the Mayor and City Commission makes as a finding of
fact supporting this amendment to the original resolution, that
the re-staging requested by the applicant, South Miami Hospital,
will accomplish the objective of providing necessary egress and
ingress to the Hospital facilities.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of 01 1988.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
N
APPROVED:
MAYOR
A
0
5
Ms, Aran- Spinrad said that Staff recommends that the
hospital accelerate the plan with all the proposed
changes, so that this Board, the Commission and Staff can
ascertain -what will be done in the future in' order to
determine if the road is necessary or not. She said that
with the information, of the changes the Applicant is
proposing that Staff has at their disposal, it is
somewhat premature to determine if the road should be
postponed.
Mr. Hoffmann asked Staff what is the timeframe for the
closeout period.
Ms. Aran-Spinrad said the building permit will.expire
March 9, 1988.
Attorney Gold said that the hospital has to build the
road; it was just a matter of when.
Chairman Prentiss said that he had no problem with
granting an extension of 94 days. He said that he was
hesitant about granting a full year's extension.
Mr. Ligammare said that he agreed with the Chairman.
Mr. Hoffmann said that about a year ago, one of these
items came before the Board and he asked Attorney Gold if
this was an isolated incident or whether there were a lot
of changes that were in the planning stage. He said, at
that point, both Bill Enright and Attorney Gold answered
there would be an overall revision that would be
forthcoming in a matter of months. He said that since
that time there have been a few more minor changes
brought before the Board. He asked if there really was a
plan that would be forthcoming in a matter of months.
Bill Enright of South Miami Hospital signed in and
addressed the Board. He said that there is a plan that
will be ready this spring. He said that things were
changing in the hospital industry so fast that they were I
having to adjust to this as well as they could. He said
that the necessity to build the road is dictated by the
timing of building north of the current hospital and on
the existing right of way of 74 Street.
Mr. Hoffmann asked if there is a possibility that the
Applicant will return with the overall plan and say that
they would not build 73 Street.
Mr. Enright replied no, because the hospital must grow to
the north and in order to grow to the north they have to
build 73 Street as 74 Street has to be closed.
Mr. Hoffmann asked why the hospital was reticent to build
the road now.
Mr. Enright said the bottom line in cash flow is not what
it was a year ago in the hospital industry, and they just
did not have the income.
MINUTES
Regular Meeting of the Planning Board
Held, pursuant to due notice in th12Ci1988 mmission Chambers
Tuesday,
7:30 P.K.
Public Hearin s.
1. PB -$8 -001.
Applicant: South Miami Hospital
Location: 7400 SW 62 Avenue
Request: Amend the Planned Unit Development Resolu-
tion x`54 -85 -7019 in its section 3.d by
rescheduling the construction of Phase "C"
SW 73 Street form 1985 to a date one year
after approval of the requested amendatory
resolution.
Alan Golds
addressed Attorney
the Board. Applicant's signed in ntheApplicant had
and
previously appeared before the Board on a matter relating
to the approval of the conversion of the warehouse to
He
office use and to establishing g of educational center. City
said, at the suggestion
Commissioners, the Applicant had postponed that item
until they could submit their full revised application.
He said when the hospital received their original
approval, it was required under one paragraph of the
conditions to accomplish three items within two years
after the passage of the resolution. He said those items
included the construction of the west parking lot, the
construction of the north parking garage, for which the
Applicant obtained an amendment to construct the south
parking garage instead and the third item was the
construction of SW 73 Street. He said that SW 74 Street
currently exists and serves the needs of the City and the
hospital. He said that there were approvals by the City
that would allow for the eventual closing of SW 74 Street
and the substitution of that road with a new SW 73
Street. He said that this is part of the approved plan.
Attorney Gold said that the problem is that South Miami
Hospital is coming through with a proposed revision to
the hospital P.U.D. He said that part of this relates
to SW 73 Street in that the timing that the hospital
needs to build the street will be dictated by the results
of the study which should be completed by the end bf
first quarter of this year. He said that the Applicant
has submitted a letter from David Plummer & Assoc., their
traffic engineer to the effect that there is no need, at
this point, to build SW 73 Street since 74 Street is
amply serving the traffic circulation. He said it to a
matter of the hospital's timing which necessitated SW 73
Street to be constructed. He said that once the south
parking garage was substituted for the north parking
garage, 73 Street was no longer required as part of the
overall construction.
Attorney Gold said that basically the hospital was
requesting an amendment to the resolution to give the
hospital an additional year to obtain another permit for
the construction of SW 73 Street, and during that time,
the Applicant will have brought before this Board and the
City Commission a revised application where they could
put the timing of the road construction in conjunction
with the other proposed development of the remaining part
of the hospital.
Recommendation
In order to make any decisions on postponing the construction of
73rd Street, the updated
version of the P.U.D. needs to be
completed. Staff recommends
requesting of the hospital that they
accelerate the completion of
this document before the expiratton
of the lbt} day extension on
the permit.
,
•
a >.•t.
i i1
^�"4 ����C �'i'M
.•.�
«1.4 the ,"f �(y-f'"! Mr. T�.
.i
^a.°�r "A
a.+,v *
{'. xe .i.L'� 6�1 is i ♦
d w�"F +��p';, y`1% ��`
7 rrt
01
Mr. Hoffmann said that he felt ill at ease having items
come before the Board piece by piece rather than having
an overall view of what is to be accomplished. He said
that he felt inclined to go along with the 90 day
extension.
Mr. Enright said that the hospital wanted• to have as good
a plan and as quickly as possible for everyone's benefit,
but that they had to protect the limited resources of the
hospital.
Mr. Hoffmann said that he did not understand why this
particular street has to be delayed; as it is a minor
piece of the entire concept.
Attorney Gold said that the. next time they return that
they will have the overall.
MOTION: Larry Ligammare moved to grant South Miami
Hospital a 90 day extension of their
building permit and within that time, the
Applicant should complete the overall
revisions of the P.U.D.
Bruce Hoffmann seconded the Motion.
Vote: Approve S
Oppose: 0'