12CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: The Honorable Mayor Stoddard and Members of the City Commission
South Miami
bOd
fijir
2001
Via: Steven Alexander, City Managey'
From: Christopher Brimo, AICP ~
Planning Director
Date: January 22,2013 ITEM Noo_-,-I_Ot __
SUBJECT
An Ordinance amending Section 20-3.5(D) of the City's Land Development Code establishing
additional setback requirements for new buildings or vertical additions to an existing building
abutting single family residential zoning districts.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
This item came about following the recent approval by the City Commission, of the rezoning
request of properties within the Community Redevelopment Area, including the Madison Square
property assemblage. These properties were rezoned from Neighborhood Retail "NR" to
Specialty Retail "SR", to allow the development of a mixed use affordable housing project
known as the Madison Square Development. Additionally, a companion resolution unifying the
property assemblage for development is also pending Commission approval.
Since the Madison Square project area abuts single family zoning districts on the North, West
and South, any proposed new construction or vertical addition must adhere to the requirements
of Section 20-3.5(D) below.
Section 20-3.5 (D) Properties Abutting Single-Family Zoning Districts.
(1) Notwithstanding the dimensional requirements of the zoning use district in which a
property is located, if that property is abutting (common border or separated by a right-
of-way) to a single-family zoning district the maximum height of any new building or any
vertical addition to an existing building on that property is limited to two stories,
however, additional height may be obtained via the special use permit process as set
forth in Section 20-5.8.
During the Commission deliberation of the unity of title for the Madison Square project,
it was felt that the requirements of Section 20-3.5(D) were somewhat vague since it did
not stipulate a reasonable distance from the abutting single family zoning district, nor did
Page 2 of3
it take into account large development sites or ones that were unified for development.
Staff was asked to investigate possible amendments to this requirement,
The following zoning districts allow buildings in excess of 2-stories:
RM-24 (Medium Density Multi-Family Residential District) -up to 4 stories;
MO (Medium-Intensity Office District) -up to 4 stories;
SR (Specialty Retail) -up to 4 stories;
TODD MU-5 (Transit Oriented Development District Mixed Use 5) up to 8 stories.
Currently the only 4-story zoning use districts that are adjacent to single family zoning
districts, are the RM-24 and the recently adopted SR district (Madison Square). The
following amendment is proposed to allow a gradual transition from two, to four stories
by increasing the minimum setback requirements for third and fourth floor vertical
additions.
20-3.5 -Dimensional requirements.
* * *
(D) Properties Abutting Single-Family Zoning Districts.
(1) Notwithstanding the dimensional requirements of the zoning use district in
which a property is located, if that property is abutting (common border or
separated by a right-of-way) to a single-family zoning district the
maximum height of any new building or any vertical addition to an
existing building on that property is limited to two stories, unless there is a
transitional setback.
ill Transitional Setback. In order to promote a gradual transition from single
family zoning districts to an abutting non single family zoning district
allowing heights greater than two stories or 25 feet, third story vertical
additions shall be setback fifty feet, and fourth story vertical additions
shall be setback seventy-feet. however, Aadditional height greater than
two stories may also be obtained via the special use permit process as set
forth in Section 20-5.8.
(2) Properties or projects constructed under a city approved Planned Unit
Development Site Plan or projects subject to Development Agreements
during the period that the Agreement is in effect, shall not be subject to the
provisions of this section. In no case shall a project be rebuilt which
exceeds the height, setback or density that was set forth in the
Development Agreement or applicable Planned Unit Development Site
Plan.
Z:\Commission Jtems\20 13\1-22-13\20-3.5(0) Amendment\PB-13-002 20-3.5(0)\20-3.5(0) amendment_ CM Report.dOCX
Page 3 of3
(3) Properties presently existing and actually built on the effective date of this
ordinance shall be grandfathered in and exempted from the provisions of
this section and allowed to be rebuilt to the same height if they are
destroyed by an act of God or other natural disaster.
Existing Dimensional Requirements
REQUIREMENT RO
Min. Lot Size
Net Area (sq. ft.) 7,500
Frontage (ft) 75
Min. Setbacks (ft.)
Front 25
Rear 20
Side (Interior) 10
Side (Street) 20
Adj. Res. Dist. 25
Side (w/driveway) 20
Between Buildings 20
Max. Building Height
Stories 2
Feet 25
Max. Building
Coverage (%) 30
Max. Impervious
Coverage (%) 75
Max. Floor Area
Ratio (FAR) 0.30
Section 20-3.5
DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
LO MO NR
7,500 10,000 7,500
75 100 75
20 25
15 10 15
10 o
15 10 15
25 25 25
20 20 20
20 20
2 4 2
30 50 25
80 85 75
.70 1.60 .25
GR
10,000
100
20
15
15
25
20
2
30
.80
a 5' setback with wall opening adjacent to rear property line; no setback if no openings in wall.
5,000
50
20
15
25
20
2
30
85
.80
b Applies to ground floor only; columns are permitted within the setback. Columns shall not be greater
than twenty-four (24) inches in diameter; columns on the property line shall not be closer to
each other than ten (10) feet.
C The frontage requirement does not apply to uses in the SR District.
Z:\Commission Itcms\20 13\1-22-13\20-3.5(D) Amendment\PB-1 3-002 20-3.5(D)\20-3.5(D) amendment_ CM Report.docx
Page 4 of3
This proposed amendment was presented to the Planning Board on January 10,2013, and
following a public hearing on application PB-13-002, the Board recommended unanimously to
deny the proposed amendments that would allow a transitional setback for additional building
height, in favor of the special use review and approval process.
It was also discussed that it may be more appropriate to use the "special exception" process
rather than the "special use" process for this type of review and approval. If the Commission
concurs, the amendment will be taken back to the Planning Board for review and
recommendation.
Z:\Commission ltems\2013\1-22-13\20-3.5(D) Amendment\20-3.5(D) amendment_ CM Report.docx
1 ORDINANCE NO. ______ _
2
3 An Ordinance amending Section 20-3.5(D) of the City's Land Development
4 Code establishing additional setback requirements for new buildings or
5 vertical additions to an existing building abutting single family residential
6 zoning districts.
7 WHEREAS, Section 20-3.5(D) requires maximum building heights of two-stories adjacent to
8 single-family residential zoning districts; and
9
10 WHEREAS, Section 20-3.5(D) does not prescribe any additional setback requirements in order to build
11 higher than two-stories, but defers to the special use permit process set forth in Section 20-5.8; and
12
13 WHEREAS, at the December 18, 2012 Commission meeting staff was requested to look at alternative
14 setback requirements to accommodate buildings greater that two-stories in height; and
15
16 WHEREAS, on January 10, 2013 application PB-l3-002 was reviewed by the Planning Board and
17 following a public hearing, voted unanimously to recommend denial of the proposed amendment in favor of the
18 existing special use permit process; and
19
20 WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to accept the recommendation from the Planning Board.
21
22 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
23 CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
24
25 Section 1: Section 20-3.5(D) of the City of South Miami's Land Development Code shall hereby be
26 amended to read as follows:
27
28 20-3.5 -Dimensional requirements.
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
* * *
(D) Properties Abutting Single-Family Zoning Districts.
(1) Notwithstanding the dimensional requirements of the zoning use district in which a
property is located, if that property is abutting (common border or separated by a
right-of-way) to a single-family zoning district the maximum height of any new building or
any vertical addition to an existing building on that property is limited to two stories, unless
there is a transitional setback.
Transitional Setback. In order to promote a gradual transition from single family zoning
districts to an abutting non single family zoning district allowing heights greater than two
stories or 25 feet, third story vertical additions shall be setback fifty feet, and fourth story
vertical additions shall be setback seventy-feet. however, Aadditional height greater than
two stories may also be obtained via the special use permit process as set forth in Section
20-5.8.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
(2)
(3)
Properties or projects constructed under a city approved Planned Unit Development Site
Plan or projects subject to Development Agreements during the period that the Agreement
is in effect, shall not be subject to the provisions of this section. In no case shall a project be
rebuilt which exceeds the height, setback or density that was set forth in the Development
Agreement or applicable Planned Unit Development Site Plan.
Properties presently existing and actually built on the effective date of this ordinance shall
be grandfathered in and exempted from the provisions of this section and allowed to be
rebuilt to the same height if they are destroyed by an act of God or other natural disaster.
Section 2: Codification. The provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made part of the Code of
Ordinances of the City of South Miami as amended; that the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or
re-Iettered to accomplish such intention; and that the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section" or other
appropriate word.
Section 3. Severability. 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. Ordinances in Conflict. All ordinances or parts of ordinances and all sections and parts of
sections of ordinances in direct conflict herewith are hereby repealed. However, it is not the intent of this section to
repeal entire ordinances, or parts of ordinances, that give the appearance of being in conflict when the two
ordinances can be harmonized or when only a portion of the ordinance in conflict needs to be repealed to harmonize
the ordinances. If the ordinance in conflict can be harmonized by amending its terms, it is hereby amended to
harmonize the two ordinances. Therefore, only that portion that needs to be repealed to harmonize the two
ordinances shall be repealed.
Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective upon enactment.
PASSED AND ENACTED this __ day of _____ , 2013.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
1 sl Reading
2nd Reading
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
LANGUAGE, LEGALITY AND
EXECUTION THEREOF
CITY ATTORNEY
APPROVED:
MAYOR
COMMISSION VOTE:
Mayor Stoddard:
Vice Mayor Liebman:
Commissioner Newman:
Commissioner Harris:
Commissioner Welsh:
CITYOFSOUTH MIAMI
PLANNlNGBOARD
•.• ·.i:.:Regular.·Meeting .. Minutes
:.[l'flUfsday, JanuarxlQ,201}
.C~tx Commissi()~Fh~l1l~ers ......... ··7:30RM.······ ..
City of South Miami Ordinance No. 08-06-1876 requires all lobbyists before engaging in any lobbying activities
to register with the City Clerk and pay an annual fee of$500 per Ordinance No. 44-08-1979. This applies to all
persons who are retained (whether paid or not) to represent a business entity or organization to influence "City"
action. "City" action is broadly described to include the ranking and selection of professional consultants, and
virtually all-legislative, quasi-judicial and administrative action.
I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Action: The meeting was called to order at 7:35 PM
Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison
II. Roll Call
Action: Dr. Whitman requested a roll call.
Board Members present constituting a quorum:
Dr. Whitman (Chairman), Mr. Cruz (Vice-Chairman), Dr. Philips, Dr. Hauri, Mr. Fernandez and
Mr. Vitalini.
Board Member absent: Mr. Dundorf.
City staff present: Mr. Christopher Brimo (Planning Director) and Ms. Tiffany Hood (Office
Support).
City staff absent: Mr. Marcus Lightfoot (Permit Facilitator)
City Attorney: Mr. Thomas Pepe.
III. Administrative Matters
The number of members that constitute a quorum is now four members.
IV. Public Hearings
2. PB-13-002
Applicant: City of South Miami
An Ordinance amending Section 20-3.5(D) of the City's Land Development Code,
establishing distance requirements for new buildings or vertical additions to an existing
building abutting single family residential zoning districts.
Applicant: City of South Miami
Mr. Vitalini read the item into the record.
Z:\PB\PB Minutes\20l3 Minutes\PB Draft Regular Meeting Minutes -01-1O-l3 Excerpt PB l3-002.docx Page 1 of2
Mr. Brimo presented the item to the Board.
The Chairman Opened the Public Hearing.
There was no discussion.
The Chairman Closed the Public Hearing.
The Board held a discussion on the proposed amendment.
Mr. Fernandez stated that the three story density abutting the single family home is not that bad
but it would work even better with an alley separating them, it would act as a good transitional
buffer. Mr. Brimo stated that the way the existing ordinance reads is that a developer would only
be allowed to build a property up to two stories regardless of the separation. Dr. Whitman stated
that he is in agreement with the ordinance as it reads in relation to this item. Dr. Hauri concurs
with the current ordinance. Mr. Brimo stated during the review of the Section 20-8.9 of the Land
Development Code that the City as sort of a catch all, rather than having a development review
process just utilized what was in place for the special use permit. He then stated that special use
is not the right mechanism under these circumstances; he believes that it is the special use
permitting process which will serve as the right mechanism.
Motion: Dr. Whitman motioned to deny the item. This motion was seconded by Mr. Cruz.
Vote: Approved: 6 Opposed: 0
Dr. Whitman: Yes
Dr. Philips: Yes
Mr. Vitalini: Yes
Mr. Cruz: Yes
Mr. Fernandez: Yes
Dr. Hauri: Yes
V. Future Meeting Dates: Tuesday, January 29,2012
VII. Adjournment: Dr. Whitman adjourned the Planning Board meeting at 8:50 PM.
Z:\PB\PB Minutes\2013 Minutes\PB Draft Regular Meeting Minutes -01-10-13 Excerpt PB 13-002.docx Page 2 of2