Ord. No. 14-98-1662ORDINANCE NO.Id-Qft-lfifi?
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH
MIAMI,FLORIDA,RELATING TOAN AMENDMENT OF SECTION 20-3.3 (D)OFTHE
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN ORDER TO PERMIT THE "FRATERNAL ORGANIZATION
ORPRIVATE CLUB"USEASASPECIALUSEINTHE WPI"PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL
ZONING DISTRICT;PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES
IN CONFLICT;AND,PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS,theCityofSouthMiamiadopteda Comprehensive Plan,
whichincludedthe following language concerning Public Institutional
Uses:
The public institutional land use category is intended to
provide for public schools,municipal facilities,utilities,
churches,temples,synagogues,and similar uses.Areas
designated public and institutional should not be used for
other purposes without an amendment to this plan.Zoning
regulations could permit public and institutional uses on
sites not so designated by this plan;and,
WHEREAS,theCityofSouthMiamiadoptedaLandDevelopment Code,
which included thefollowingDistrictPurpose Statement forthe
Public/InstitutionalZoningDistrictinSection20-3.1 (B)(18):
The purpose of this district is to provide for schools,
governmental facilities,utilities and churches and similar
uses,with building heights and intensities compatible with
surrounding districts.This district is appropriate in areas
designated "Public and Semi-Public"on the city's adopted
Comprehensive Plan [this landuse category wasamendedto
Public Institutional in 1997];and,
WHEREAS,theMayorand City Commission believethatmany fraternal
organizations and private clubs may provide charitable and valuables
services,thereby contributing tothepublicgood;and,
WHEREAS,theMayorand City Commission believe thatby
contributingtothepublic good,many fraternal organizationsand
private clubs may fulfill the purpose and intent of the Public
InstitutionallandusecategorydescribedbytheComprehensivePlanand
the "PI"Public Institutional zoning district described by the Land
Development Code;and,
WHEREAS,the Mayor andCity Commission wishto permit such
fraternal organizations and private clubs inall appropriate zoning
districts,whilemaintainingtheabilitytoevaluatethe compatibility
or appropriateness ofsuchuseswiththe surrounding area through the
special use process;and,
WHEREAS,theMayorandCityCommissiondefinethe fraternal
organization or private club use as:
An organization or association of persons for some common
purpose,such as but not limited to a fraternal,social,
educational or recreational purpose,but not including clubs
organized primarily for profit or to render a service which
is customarily carried on as a business.Such organizations
and associations must be incorporated under the Laws of
Florida as a non-profit corporation or organization and such
corporation or organization's major purpose shall not be for
the purpose of serving alcoholic beverages to its members or
others.
WHEREAS,onAugust 11,1998,thePlanning Board voted5:0to
recommend approval ofthis ordinance;and,
WHEREAS,the Mayor andCity Commission oftheCityof South Miami
desiretoaccepttherecommendationofthePlanningBoard.
NOW,THEREFORE,BEITORDAINEDBYTHE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONOF
THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA:
SECTION 1.Section 20-2.3,entitled "Definitions,"is hereby amended to
include the following definition:
Fraternal Organization or Private Club.Anorganizationor
association of persons forsome common purpose,such asbut
not limited to a fraternal,social,educational or
recreational purpose,butnotincludingclubsorganized
primarilyfor profit orto render aservicewhichis
customarilycarriedonasa business.Suchorganizationsand
associations mustbe incorporated undertheLawsofFlorida
asa non-profit corporation or organization andsuch
corporationor organization's majorpurposeshallnotbefor
thepurposeofserving alcoholic beverages toits members or
others.
I
SECTION 2.Section 20-3.3 (D)oftheLand Development Codeishereby
amended to include the following change:
SECTION 20-3.3 (D)
USE TYPE
ZONING DISTRICT
M
CO
to
o o
3
o
§
CO g
fa
H «
M
13
JO
Q
o
^
§
*
PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL USES
Fraternal Organization
or Private Club
S ss ss p p s 27
SECTION 3.Section 20-3.4 (B)(2)is hereby amended toincludethe
following:
(c)No vehicular ingress nor egress shall be permitted along streets and rights-of-way bordering
residentialzoningdistrictsintheCityofSouthMiami.
SECTION 4.Ifany section,clause,sentence,orphraseof this
ordinanceisforanyreasonheld invalid or unconstitutional bya court
of competent jurisdiction,this holding shall not affect the validity
ofthe remaining portions ofthis ordinance.
SECTION 5.Allordinancesorpartsofordinancesin conflict withthe
provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION 6.This ordinance shalltakeeffect immediately atthetimeof
its passage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st dayof September,1998.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK .,,innn1stReading-Augui*4,1998
2nd Reading -September 1,1998
READ AND'APPROVED AS TO FORM
j^/6.£=>a.j/*/2^
CITY ATTORNEY
APPROVED:
MAYOR
COMMISSION VOTE:
Mayor Robaina:
Vice Mayor Oliveros:
Commissioner Bethel:
Commissioner Feliu:
Commissioner Russell:
5-0
Yea
Yea
Yea
Yea
Yea
t
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To:Mayor and City Commission Date:August 27,1998
Agenda Item #
Re:Comm.Mtg.09/01/98
Fraternal Org.Useinthe
PI zoning district
From:Charles D.Scurr
CityManager /(a
REQUEST:
AN ORDINANCE OFTHE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OFTHECITYOF SOUTH MIAMI,
FLORIDA,RELATING TOAN AMENDMENT OF SECTION 20-3.3 (D)OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENTCODEINORDERTOPERMITTHE"FRATERNALORGANIZATIONORPRIVATE
CLUB"USE AS A SPECIAL USE IN THE "PI"PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL ZONING DISTRICT;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT;ANd'
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BACKGROUND
The proposed ordinance would permit the "fraternal organization or private club"use as a special
use in the "PI"Public/Institutional zoning district.Currently,the South Miami Land Development
Code(LDC)classifiesthefraternalorganizationorprivateclubuseasone of the"Publicand
InstitutionalUses."However,theLDCdoesnotactuallypermittheuseinthePublic/Institutional
zoning district.
Thisanomaly of theLDChascreatedasituationwhereausedescribedas"PublicandInstitutional"
cannot be considered asa legal conforming use ina Public/Institutional zoning district.This serves
asan impediment to fraternal organization or private club uses wishing to locate inthePI district and
existing uses seeking to expand their buildings.The challenges created by this situation are
exemplified by the current predicament of the South Miami/Coral Gables Elks Lodge.The Lodge,
located at 6304 SW 78th Street,is a fraternal organization use located in a PI zoning district.Since
the fraternal organization use is not permitted in the PI zoning district,the use is considered a legal
non-conforming use pursuant to Section 20-4.8 of the LDC,and the Lodge cannot construct^an
addition,which is consistent with all other aspects of the LDC,as part ofits plans for renovation and
landscaping.
City Manager's Report:Fraternal Organization or Private Club usein PI district
f'
ANALYSIS
Aspreviously stated,the proposed ordinance wouldpermitthe fraternal organization orprivateclub
useasaspecialuseinthePIdistrict.EventhoughtheLDCcategorizesthe fraternal organization
orprivateclubuseasone ofthe"PublicandInstitutionalUses,"theCityshould confirm thattheuse
is consistent with thepurposeandintent of thePIzoningdistrict.Section20-3.1 (B)(l 8)oftheLDC
statesthatthePI district's purpose"istoprovideforschools,governmental facilities,utilitiesand
churchesandsimilar uses..."Staff believes thatthe fraternal organizationorprivateclubuseis
consistent with thePIdistrictbecauseitisa"similaruse."Forexample,the fraternal organization
orprivateclubuseallowsanorganizationorassociation of peopletoassemblefora common
purpose much likeachurch.Furthermore,throughtheirphilanthropic activities,a fraternal
organizationorprivateclubusecanprovideservicestothepublicand City likeachurch,
government facility,orsocial services agency.
The fraternal organizationorprivateclubuseisgenerallysimilartootherusespermittedinthePI
districtandcanprovideservicestothepublic;however,"can"istheoperativeword.Therefore,it
isimportanttonotethattheproposed ordinance wouldpermitthe fraternal organization or private
clubuseasaspecialuse.ThespecialuseprocessprovidestheCity Commission with amechanism
by which toevaluateeachpotential fraternal organizationorprivateclubuseinordertoensurethat
theusewillbecompatiblewiththe surrounding area andtheCityasawhole.Thespecialuse
process for the fraternal organization or private clubuse already includes the following specific
conditions:
(a)All suchusesshallbelocatedonasite of notlessthanone(1)netacreinarea.
(b)No structure shallbelocatedlessthanonehundred (100)feetfromanyadjacent residential
district.
On August 11.1998,thePlanningBoardandmembers of thepublicdiscussedthe advantages of
includinganadditionalspecificconditionwhichwouldprotectanyneighboringresidential areas:
(c)No vehicular ingress nor egress shall be permitted along streets and rights-of-way bordering
residential zoning districtsintheCity of SouthMiami.
Staff believes thattheabove condition would helpto buffer anyneighboringresidentialareasand
shouldbe added totheLDCasaspecific special use condition.Staff alsobelievesthattheCity
wouldbe further protected from any potential negativeimpacts of allowingthe fraternal organization
orprivateclubuseasaspecialusebydefiningit,therebyprohibitinggroupswhichfalloutside of
the definition from locating intheCity of South Miami.The following definition,whichisa slightly
modified version of theoneused by Miami-DadeCounty,issuggested:
Fraternal Organization orprivate club.An organization or association of persons for
some common purpose,such as but not limited toafraternal,social,educational or
recreational purpose,butnotincludingclubsorganizedprimarilyforprofitortorender
aservice which iscustomarily carried onasabusiness.Suchorganizationsand
associations mustbe incorporated undertheLaws of Florida asa non-profit corporation
City Manager's Report:Fraternal Organization or Private Club useinPI district
or organization and such corporation or organization's major purpose shall notbefor
the purpose of serving alcoholic beverages toits members or others.
On August 11,1998,the Planning Board voted 5-0 to recommend approval ofthe proposed
ordinancewiththe condition that(1)theusebeamendedtoseparatefraternal organization from
private club,allowing fraternal organization asa special use in the PI zoning district;and (2)that
staffdefine the termsfraternal organization and private club for further consideration atthe Board's
nextregularlyscheduledmeeting.
On August 25,1998,the Planning Board and planning staff resolved the issues relating to the
definition and separation ofthe fraternal organization and private clubuseby agreeing onthe
previouslydiscussed definition.
The proposed ordinance would allow quality fraternal organizations and private clubs to locate and
renovate sitesinthePIdistrict of theCityofSouthMiamiwithminimal,ifany,negativeimpacts.
RECOMMENDATION:Approval with thefollowing conditions:
1.Section20-2.3 of theLDC,entitled "Definitions,"beamendedtoincludethedefinition of
the fraternal organization or private clubuse discussed above.
2.An additional special use condition be added to Section 20-3.4(B)(2)ofthe LDC:
(c)No vehicular ingress nor egress shall be permitted along streets and rights-of-way
bordering residential zoning districts intheCityofSouth Miami.
Attachments:
ProposedOrdinancewithamendments
ProposedOrdinanceforfirstreading
ExcerptofSection20-3.3(D)oftheLDC
Excerpt of Planning Board Minutes,June 30,1998,July 14,1998,August 11,1998,and August 25,1998
City Manager's Report:Fraternal Organization orPrivate Club use inPI district
or organization and such corporation or organization's major purpose shall notbefor
thepurpose of serving alcoholic beverages toitsmembersorothers.
On August 11,1998,the Planning Board voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the proposed
ordinance with the condition that (1)the use be amended to separate fraternal organization from
private club,allowing fraternal organization as a special use in the PI zoning district;and (2)that
staffdefine the termsfraternal organization and private club for further consideration at the Board's
nextregularlyscheduledmeeting.
On August 25,1998,the Planning Board and planning staff resolved the issues relating to the
definition and separation of the fraternal organization and private club use by agreeing on the
previously discussed definition.
The proposed ordinance would allow quality fraternal organizations and private clubs to locate and
renovate sites in the PI district of the City of South Miami with minimal,if any,negative impacts.
RECOMMENDATION:Approvalwiththe following conditions:
1.Section 20-2.3 oftheLDC,entitled "Definitions,"be amended to include the definition of
thefraternalorganizationorprivateclubusediscussedabove.
2.An additional special use condition be added to Section 20-3.4(B)(2)of the LDC:
(c)No vehicular ingress nor egress shall be permitted along streets and rights-of-way
bordering residential zoning districts intheCity of South Miami.
Attachments:
Proposed Ordinance with amendments
CityManager's Report,datedJuly30,1998
ProposedOrdinanceforfirstreading
Excerpt of Planning Board Minutes,June 30,1998,July 14,1998,August 11,1998,and August 25,1998
City Manager's Report:Fraternal Organization or Private Club useinPI district
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To:Mavor and Citv Commission Date:Julv 30.1998
From:Charles D.Scurr
City Manager
Agenda Item #
Re:Comm.Mtg.08/04/98
Fraternal Org.Useinthe
PI zoning district
(i
REQUEST:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI.
FLORIDA.RELATING TO AN AMENDMENT OF SECTION 20-3.3 (D)OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE IN ORDER TO PERMIT THE "FRATERNAL ORGANIZATION OR PRIVATE
CLUB"USE AS A SPECIAL USE IN THE "PI"PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL ZONING DISTRICT;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY:PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT;AND,
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BACKGROUND &ANALYSIS
On April 27,1998,Manuel A Cuadrado.the Exalted Ruler of the South Miami/Coral Gables Elks
Lodge,requested that the City of South Miami consider permitting "catering services"inthe "PI"
Public/Institutional zoningdistrictinordertoallowtheLodgelocatedat6304SW 78,h Streetto
operate acatering service onthe premises.Mr.Cuadrado explained that the catering serviceswere
formerly operated as part of the Coral Gables Lodge,which had been sold due tothemerger of the
Coral Gables andSouthMiami Lodges.1 Subsequently,theSouthMiami/CoralGablesElks Lodge
desired tobringthe catering services toits location in South Miami.Through later discussions
between theElksandtheCity,itwasalso discovered thatthe proposed addition of cateringservices
wastobe coordinated with a major remodeling of the South Miami Lodge.
Staffs initialanalysis of the request revealedthatitcouldnotbe permitted underthecurrent
regulations of theLand Development Code(LDC)because the Lodge's principal use,"fraternal
organization orprivate club,"isnotapermittedusewithinthePI district,making theLodgealegal
nonconforming use.Pursuant to Section 20-4.8 of the LDC.a legal nonconforming usecannot
increase its nonconformity through additions,substantial renovations,orexpansionof use.2
1See attached letter addressed to Mayor andCity Commission fromMr.Cuadrado.dated April 27,1998
2 See attached excerpts of Section 20-4.8 of theLDC.
1st Reading August 4.1998:Fraternal Organization Use Ordinance
Priorto 1989.the Lodge was zoned "RM 24"Medium Density Multi-Family Residential District
andpermittedasaspecialuseaccordingtothe zoning ordinance in effect atthetime.OnOctober
25.1989.however,theCity of SouthMiamiadoptedanewzoning code,entitled "The City of South
MiamiLand Development Code.**whichcontained new zoning regulations,including anewzoning
map.basedonthe newly adopted Comprehensive Plan.The Comprehensive Plan'sExistingLand
Use Map and Future LandUse Map depicted theLodge's property as Public/Institutional.'
Surprisingly,althoughthe new LDClistedthe"fraternalorganizationorprivate club**useunderthe
"Public and Institutional Uses**Category,the LDC didnotlist the useasa permitted useinthePI
zoning district.4
In order to enable the Elks Lodge to substantially renovate or request an amendment totheLDCto
permitcatering services,the Elks Lodge must firstbea permitted use within its zoning district.
Therearetwoprincipal methods bywhichtheElksLodgecan become a permitted use:(1)amend
theLDCinorderto permit the "Fraternal OrganizationorPrivate Club"useinthePIzoningdistrict
or(2)amend the LDC inordertochangethe Lodge's zoning districttoa district which permitsthe
"Fraternal Organization or Private Club"use.
Section 20-3.1 (B)(19)of theLDCstatesthatthePI zoning district's purpose ''is toprovidefor
schools,governmental facilities,utilities and churches and similar uses../*The South Miami/Coral
GablesElks Lodge through its involvement with such organizations andprogramsastheSenior
Citizens Home,the After School House,andHabitatFor Humanity conducts many of thesame
services and activities asthe uses for which thePI zoning district is intended.Furthermore,the
Comprehensive Plan's depiction of the subject property's existing andfuturelandusesas
Public/Institutional,as well asthe LDC's categorization of the"fraternal organization orprivate
club"useasone of the "Public andInstitutional Uses,"supports the premise thatthe subject use
should be permitted in the PI zoning district.
Amending the permitted uses of thePI zoning district,however,does have potentialdrawbacks.
Changingthe permitted usesforthePIzoningdistrict would not only affect the Lodge's property,
butall PI zoning districts citywide.5 Although the properties withintheCity's PI districts are
currentlyoccupied by schools.Metrorail.utilities.YMCA.theGirl Scout House,andtheElksLodge
andare unlikely to change,itisimportantto consider longterm implications of zoning changes.
Would thepresence of fraternal organizations negatively impactPIdistricts?There may be fraternal
organizations which are very dissimilar totheotheruses permitted inthePI zoning district,orthere
maybePIdistrictswherea fraternal organizationorprivateclub would notbecompatiblewiththe
existing surrounding uses.
Amending theLand Development Codeinordertochangethe subject property's zoning districtto
adistrictwhich would permit the"fraternalorganizationorprivateclub"use would alsoallowthe
Lodgeto move forward with itsplanstorenovateandrequestforcateringservices.For example.
3The actual terminology differed,as the ELUM used Public/Institutional andthe FLUM used Public Semi-Public,
butthe meaning wasthe same.
4Seeattachedexcerpt of theLDC.Section20-3.3(D),page30.
5 Zoning Mapwillbe available atthe meeting.
1s'Reading August4.1998:Fraternal Organization UseOrdinance
the property could be zoned "RM-24**Medium Density Multi-Family Residential District,as it was
prior to the adoption of the LDC.This approach is advantageous because it would not have any-
city wide impacts:and.perhaps more importantly,if the property were ever sold by the Elks Lodne.
it would provide for more housing in the City and buffer the existing surrounding residential uses
from US 1 and the adjacent "GR**general retail zoning district.
Changing the subject property's zoning district,however,also has negatives.Namely,the Elks
Lodge does not desire a change to the property's zoning district because it perceives the change as
•'down-zoning.**Additionally,due to the underlying land use.as designated by the City's
Comprehensive Plan,the zoning change could not take place without an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan,which is a process requiring a minimum of six months.The Elks Lodge has
reported that a six-month timeframe is too long and would disallow its plans.
City staffbrought the item to the Planning Board for preliminary discussion on June 30.1998.and
July 14,1998.6 On July 14.1998.after speaking to representatives ofthe Elks Lodge,the Planning
Board advised staff to prepare two separate ordinances.(1)an ordinance amending the LDC in order
to allow the "fraternal organization or private club"use as a special use in the PI zoning district and
(2)an ordinance amending the LDC in order to permit a catering service use as an ancillary use to
a"fraternal organization or private club*'use pursuant to special use approval.7
An ordinance amending the LDC in order to allow the "fraternal organization or private club*'use
as aspecial use in the PI zoning district would enable the Elks Lodge to move forward with its plans
to renovate and its request for catering services,provide the mechanism by which similar uses could
be located in the PI district,and ensure that the Planning Board and City Commission review the
appropriateness and compatibility of all such uses with the surrounding area.
RECOMMENDATION:Approval to begin the public hearing process.
Attachments:
Proposed Ordinance for first reading
CorrespondencedatedApril27,1998
Excerpt of Section 20-4.8 of theLDC
Excerpt of Section20-3.3(D)oftheLDC
Excerpt of Planning Board Minutes,June 30,1998,and July 14,1998
6Seeattachedexcerptedminutes.
7 The ordinance directly related to the catering service is included in this aaenda as a separate item See Ord No X
for specific details.*"...
Is'Reading August 4.1998:Fraternal Organization Use Ordinance
South Miami/Coral Gables Elks
Lodge No.1676
6304S.W.78th Street,Miami,Florida33143
Telephone (305)666-2495
Secretary ,..,*,H.RkhardSdutsxerVExaltedRulerTreasurer
April 27,1998
HAND-HFI [VFPrn ^
Hon.Julio Robaina,Mayor 7 ]p^*TP C*T"—:•--•—
Hon.Armando Oliveros,Jr.,Vice-Mayor W^Al*•'•-••'.
Hon.David D.Bethel,Commissioner -3A
Hon.Mary Scott Russell,Commissioner APR 2 tt 1998
Hon.HoraceG.Feiiu,Commissioner
City of South Miami Commission PL^WJG DMSjU.;
6130 Sunset Drive >c
South Miami,Florida 33143 (j 1
Re:Addition To Permitted Use Schedule For "PI"Public
Institutional Zoning District Located At 6304 S.W.78th Street
Dear Commission Members:
On behalf of the members of the South Miami/Coral Gabies Elks Lodge owners of
IdHino -eC!propert*>.1 herefaV respectfully request that the City Commission consideraddingcateringservices"to the permitted use schedule for the "PI"Public Institutionalzoningdistrict.mauiuuuiidi
The nature and extent of the proposed use would be to conduct catering operations "
nrn^H-n Prev,°f,y °Perated ^the Coral Gables Lodge building which would includeprovidnglunchforourmembersandothercateringeventsbothwithinourlodgeandat
other locations.The hours of operation would range from 8 A.M.to 9P M and on
occasions upto seven days aweek.
As you know,the South Miami/Coral Gables Elks Lodge is composed of more than
2£?w h500)membrS d6diCated t0 Charitab,e<Patri°'c and ccJ^ZVSactivities.We have recently appointed committees and are currently formulating plans to
tninr rv,nV0,V*ment with various c^<*South Miami community projects such as the
'SinZa 7?°me'After Sch001 House and Habitat For Huninty.as well the jobtrainingandplacementprograms.
City ofSouthMiamiCommission
April27.IQQJt
above number or at my office,(305)358-7747 Ext 200 if von hI?J 1 ?would want to speak with any of the members of tS Lodge """"*"*qUeSt'°nS °r
Thank you in advance for your kind consider
cc:Charles D.Scurr,
CityManager
Diana Morris,
Deputy City Manager
J Bill Mackey,AICP,
Director of Planning &Zoning
Manuel A.Cuadrado
Exalted Ruler
!
it
APR 2 81998
PLANING DiViiJiO;
20-4.8 Nonconforming usesand structures.
(A)General Regulations.
(1)
(5)
™^i0D *•,**•COde 3haU ^C0n3mied *"•**"*<*"*e in the plans.
^ycntTj"ix:ut^Turrr?-statua -up°°^m^i.,w--i ,<"iigentfy earned out.actual construction being defined to
^2rBent C0D3tniCti0n material3 *"«—«Position and fLtened in apermanentmanner.*«»fcw*c«w «
(2)Expansion,Alteration or Enlargement.
(B)tE^'T^F^."**"t0 ^^—°r bulk ***««*may bei2?f t only if such alteration or extension does not increase thedegreeofnonconformityinanyrespect.
<b)^fr^3 Bbaaua0t bB 6nlarBed'elpanded °r ««".«*be used asgroundsforaddingotherstructuresorusesprohibitedelsewhere.
(C>tinZTfTT*"3e °f 3StrUrtUI,!°r ,and 3haU n0t be **«*«*or enlarged by£££££"""°natU™Which ^*»«»%be prohibited in the
W)o^ofr?"T**T ?'bUadinff "^bG hBreafter ««"throughout thoseuTatiB,,?WhCh WerB IaWfillly •Bd —««fr *™*ed or designed foruseatthetuneofpassageofthisCode.
(e)No noncoiiforming use may be expanded or increased beyond the platted lot or
tract upon which such nonconforming useis located.
(3)Repairs and Maintenance.
(8)lawtSJ^^**Pn!Vent *e stten8thening or restoration to asafe orlawfulconditionofanypartofanybuildingdeclaredunsafeorunlawful
(l>)oeLlTf"T StniCtUre-°r POrd°n thereof-staining anonconforming usebecomesphysicallyunsafe,or unlawful due to lack of repairs and maintenance,
and is declared by any authorized official to be unsafe or unlawful by reason of
physical condition,it shall notthereafterbe rau»<_.•j J •„..„„„<•...'..uo'tnerBaller ne restored,repairedor rebuilt exceptinconformitywithdistrictregulationsandthisCode.
(4)Legalization ofNonconforming Use.
(3)£fe wth^iUega/-U"Sh3il °e d6emed t0 ta~bee»^galized unless such usefallswithinausedistrictwheretheactualuseisaconforminguse
(b>rirg^0eVeealiZed ^C°nf0nnity ShaU ^^n™o*onning uses where
(C>oX^r"^*™l*tioa °f 3Pr0ViSi0n °f ^Code shaU «*"0 validatedbytheadoptionofthisCodeunlesssuchusecomplieswiththetermsofthisCode.
t^pZ7lZa non;onfonning land use sha11 be considered aconftming «»long astheconditionsof approval are met.
Supp.No.2 102
20-4.8
1'•T
for acensus oe^"^Z r^'"5 ^"""*M*VaCant ««a™—•*wU ol Sl*'.6;months,wnether nr nnt rivm**,.»again beused erconr <„„-»*iner or not tixtures are removed,shall
building orTanT"^^rVTa iTti?reeU,ati°nS ^*«-***^const.r.tesanonconfon,!";;va™~T'm"f ««•"Ia»*°r building whichontherightsoftheprope"foZelZ~Z "^'""m°re "**^have ««*«
or more of the gross noorleaThall Z S6Cn°n'***-""^<™Percentmonths,after which period !™a VaCimt ^UnUSed for m°re than six (6)
fomingpurpose and £e1L P°ra°n ^n0t «•*»be «*»«»anonconintoconing«5SS*S^""^^'5—hail be brou^t
"C^^Tro^:;;^^"r UCe"Se-*—ta «^»w^h thisforminguseandiSS^S^^f!**—"aPOTnitted ~prior to the effective date of hTcoJ *^"C""**ta '*"*"lately°ateorthls c°de ana saia fee.as may be amended.
(B>nonconforming Dimensions.
mSZZZSS^z rs vnfeimanC8 ^the •"*—««—--conform to applicaoLointnsT-f Snmm ***»a"A-*™,date fails tointhe^enLonXqu^en«t MqUlremer *"to a^^»the zoning mapusedforanyj££SZZ H ™JT "^^****»**£»°ementsofthissecticT"'"^***IoCated'«»«-***•require-
(2)The following requirements shailapply to such structures-
^SVl^teTsrusttd6 "^"h »•*•*-—*««-«-<.on
'W nottcrZ £££<?'°rrebUiIdin&^rem°de^«—Wl shaUextentofnoncomormitywithanydimensionalrequirement
^Existence of Nonconforming Use.
'"e^ceo^TonlmortlStrse TZf ShaU.make.an initiai determination ofthe exist-to be necessary.*'b""d Up°n «"•«««*"•and affidavits he determines
(2)Wherethereis uncertainty ,„j •.
uncertainty as to the ^S^^T"*™*^^^°f *"""oonforminguse.such
be considered bv the pZTh a"""f0"'"™105 ""ShaU be a"uesrion of fact towith-.his Code ana boaiTS b0ara-***^"^«*hearin*»a«°*anoe
Theintermittent.remDomr-«^,tt -,.to establish th.existence,'nlUegal-USe 0t ^°r buUdin^*»ail not be sufficientcnce0Ianonconiormmguse.
"Is^lZ^^S™°"V™°-i0'or :ract shall not be construedworminguseontheentirelotortract.
3)
4)
103
20'4d SOUTH MIAMILAND PEVEUDPMENT CODE
>D)Nonconforming Lots of Record.
(1)In any district in which singie-famiiy dwellings are permitted,asingle-family dwelling
and customary accessory buildings maybe erected onanysinglelotof record atthe
effective date of adoption or amendment ofthis Code,notwithstanding limitations
imposed by other provisions of this Code.
Such lots must be in separate ownership and not of continuous frontage with
other lotsinthesameownership.
This provisions shall apply even though such lot fails to meet the requirements
for area or width,or both,that are generally applicable inthe district,provided
that yard dimensions and requirements other than for area or width,or both,of
thelot conform to regulations for thedistrictinwhichthe lot is located.
In order to minimize the number of nonconforming lots.i£two or more adjoining
vacant and platted lots and/or parcels with continuous frontage ona public street in
continuous ownership since the time of passage of this Code,and if either or any of
such lots or parcels individually is/are too small in any dimension to meet the yard,
widthandlotarea requirements ofthe district in which they are located,then such
group oflots and/or parcels shall be considered asasingle lot or several lots of such
size as is necessary tomettheminimum dimensional requirements ofthe district.
(a)No portion of said parcel shallbeusedor s«3ld inamannerwhich diminishes
compliance withlot width and area requirenisnts established bythis Code.
(b)No division ofany parcel shallbe made which creates alotwith width or area
below the requirements of this Code.
If any person shall have at any time after passage of this Code created a lot or parcel
which fails to conform withthe dimensional requirements ofthe districtin which it
is located by selling part ofa lot.such sale shall have no effect for purposes of this
Code and the lots and/or parcels shall stillbe considered as part of one <1)or more lots.
(E)Nonconforming Use of Land.
Whereatthetimeof passage ofthis Code,lawfuluseoflandexistswhich would not
be permitted by regulations imposed by this Code,the use may be continued so long
as it remains otherwise lawful,subject to conditions provided herein.
Such nonconforming use of land shall be subject to the following conditions:
(a)No such nonconforming useshallbe enlarged or increased,nor extended to oc
cupya greater area of land thanwas occupied attheeffectivedateof adoption or
amendment of this Code:
(b)No such nonconforming use shall be moved in whole or in part to any portion of
thelotor parcei otherthanthat occupied bysuchuseasofthe effective date of
this Code:
ic)No additional structure not conforming tothe requirements ofthis Code shall be
erectedinconnectionwithsuch nonconforming useofland.
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(a)
(b)
104
(F)Nonconforming Use of Structures
areas,lot coverage height vo^e ■♦i y aaon of "auctions ona5e'nei&nt,yards,its location on the lot nr r*h«.•
concerning the structure q«rh *+-—._*otner requirements
(2,Such nonconforming use of structures shall be subject to the following conditions:
(a)No nonconforming use may be enlarged or altered «»,,„„nonconformity but anv ,f„L,„ar«ea or altered in any way which increase itsnonconformity^"P°m°a ^^'^•»altered to decrease its
(b)In the event that a nonconforming structure ia mnv~j /•
in which it is located after it is moved;and."Rations for the district
(O Any structure in which a nonconforming use is auneRmM h ,.shaU thereafter conform to district^Son^ZEnT^^""?™^notbe resumed.spoons,ana the nonconforming use may
(G)Damage of a Nonconforming Structure or Use.
(U XmenfvTe6 ^ofT'Z******—*-«*<5°>«~"*terminated."^"a no~°n&rming structure or use shall be
(2)If a nonconforming structure or use is damaeed bv lea.th»„«a.,=n,replacement value such at™*™.aa™»gea By less than fifty (50)percent ofits
(60)calendar da^uTd^^°k *??«"**"ahaU be started within sixtydaysofsuchdamageandshallbecompletedwithintwelve(12)months.
(H)Continuation of Nonconforming Use.
("eSvel^:ecr,'ded,herein-*•*"*-°f a«"*•»»existing at thethisclde*"COde "*be C°ntinUed-aith0^fa •**—does not confoL with
(2)Continuation of anonconforming use shall be subject to such «.„,.„•A •comnussion may require for immediate preservation^*J^regUlat,0ns *>the atyultimateremovalofthenonconform^^e™U°a °f adjacent P^rty prior to the
(I)Change in Nonconforming Use.
(V SZZSJ iTSSTr-:a™«"-*«-*"e changed to anotherclassincatJ^"KS^•""-iS "*»a"*-or more restrictive
InoterZct^^^^changed later T^ZlTZ^T^d——'*»«-"«>e
(2)
changed later :o a less restrictive classification.
Supp.So.2
105
20-4.8 SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
(3)Intheevent that a nonconforming useis changed toanother nonconforming useof
more restricted classification,the prior less restrictive classification shall be consid
ered abandoned.
(Ord.No.9-90-1449,6-12-90;Ord.No.4-93-1533,6-1-93;Ord.No.19-96-1619,§§3,4,10-1-96)
20-4.9 Historic preservation standards.
(A)Historic and Archeological Sites.
(1)The Secretary ofthe Interior's Standards for Historic Preservation Projects:with
Guidelines for Applyingthe Standards,1979,orasmaybeupdated,andthe
Metropolitan DadeCountyhistoricpreservationguidelinesshallbeusedbythe board
for reviewing projectsproposedfor designated historic propertiesandsitesor for
properties within historic districts.
(2)Inadditiontotheabove referenced federal andcounty guidelines,the following shall
alsobe utilized asgeneralstandardsby the boardfor detennining structures an^sites
having historic or archeological significance:
(a)Districts,sites,structuresand objects ofnational,stateand local importance are
ofhistoric significance if they possess integrityof location,design,setting,
materials,workmanship,feeling and association,and:
(b)Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of our history;or
(c)Areassociated with thelivesofpersonssignificantinourpast;or
(d)Embody the distinctive characteristics of atype,period,styleormethodof
constructionorworkofa master;or that possess high artistic value,or that
represent a distinguishable entity whose components may lack individualdis
tinction:or
(e)Have yielded,orarelikelyto yield information inhistoryor prehistory;or
(f)Are listed in the NationalHistoricRegister.
(B)Demolition of Historic Structures.In addition toallother provisions ofthis Code,the
board shall consider the following standards in evaluating applications for demolition of
designated historic structures.
(1)Isthe structure ofsuch interest or quality thatit would reasonably meet national,
stateorlocalcriteriafordesignationasanhistoricor architectural landmark?
(2)Is the structure of such design,craftsmanship or material thatit could be reproduced
onlywithgreatdifficulty and/or expense?
(3)Is the structure one ofthe last remaining examples ofitskindinthe area,city,county
or region?
(4)Does the structure contribute significantly to the historic character ofa designated
district?
Supp.So.2 106
20-3.3 SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
SECTION 20-3.3(D)
PERMITTED USE SCHEDULE
P =PERMITTED BY RIGHT
S =PERMITTED AS SPECIAL USE
COND =SPECIAL USE CONDITIONS (See Section 20-3.4)
PARK =PARKING REQUIREMENTS (See Section 20-4.4(B))
x s No conditions were adopted
ZONING DISTRICT
USE TYPE
R
S
1
R
S
2
R
S
3
R
S
4
R
T
6
R
T
9
R
M
I
8
R
M
2
4
R
0
L
0
M
0
N
R
S
R
G
R
I H P
I
P
R
C
0
N
D
P
A
R
K
PLANNED UNIT DEVEL
OPMENT RESIDEN
TIAL USES
s S S S S S S S SS s S SS S S 8
Dwelling,Single-family p 1 p 1 pjp 1 p P|P|P s|1 17 1
Dwelling,Ibwnhouse P P P|P s|PI 17 2
Dwelling,Two-Family P P|P s 1 1 17 1
Dwelling,Multi-Family P P s PI 17 3
Community Resid Home.€or
leas p P P P P P P P p P 1
Community Resid Home.7or
more
P P p P 1
PUBLIC AND ENSnTUnO]SAL,USES
Adult Congreg Living Facil
ity |ss ss 13 1
Church.Temple or Syna
gogue S S s s s s s 1 6
Convalescent Home 1 1 1 I 1 |I 1 1 p I p 1 1 p 1 IP 1 13
Day Care Center
(7 or more children)P p p p p p p p p 10
Fraternal Organization or
Private Club S s s s s p p 2 7
Governmental Administra
tion p p p p p 10
Hospital 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 s 14 |5
Supp.So.2 30
K.Staff argued thata variance didnotseemlikethe answer.
L.Mr.Wiscombc said that new zoning might alleviate Habitat for Humanitv's inconsistent
withthe City.
M.Staff said that the 15-and 20-foot requirements were a good move towards consistency.He
added that Habitat for Humanity provided affordable housing,which the City needs,and always
increases the value of the property they replace.He felt CRA would give adequate time and
attention to this issue.
N.Ms.Chimelis suggested that the Board draft a letter to CRA to make this a priority.
O.Mr.Pages recommended that tonight's minutes and the previous be forwarded to CRA.
VI.Fraternal Organizations in the PI zoningdistrict
A.Staff recommended granting PI zoning to the Elks*Club through a special use approval
because the organization operates much like a church or community organization.
B.Mr.Morton recused himself because he is an Elk and might do architectural work on the
Lodge depending on the outcome ofthe club's request.
C.Mr.Pageshadnoobjection.
E.Mr.Basu asked howthe property was zoned PIand what was there before.
F.Staff did not know.
G.Mr.Basu asked where fraternal organizations were usually allowed.
H.Staff responded that most organizations were granted a special use permit for many zones
includingRM-24and RS-18.
I.Mr.Basu suggested that RM-24 might be a better zoning district for the propertythan PI.His
concern was the use ofthe property if the property were sold.
J.Mr.Pages asked staffto clarify the item.
K.Staff explained that the club existed in the current zone through legal non-conformity ofthe
PI district and that their wish to renovate their building and operate a catering a service was not
permitted under those conditions.
PB Min 06-30-98
L.Because of the large size of the property"Mr.Basu suggested that it be changed to a
residential zoning district.
M.Mr.Pages asked for a clarification of catering.
N.Staff responded that it involved the preparation of food for off-site consumption.
O.Staff said that it would be best to explore changing the property's zoning to RM-24 and asked
forthe Board's opinion onthecateringissue.
P.Mr.Pages saidthatit was a reasonable suggestion.
Q.Mr.Basu was concerned for the impact ofthe catering on the nearby residences.
R.Staff responded that any provisions restricting the catering can be written into the special use
permit.
S.Staff said the special use variance would be written and sent to the Commission for first
reading.
VII.Approval of minutes
A.Motion:Mr.Wiscombe moved to approve the minutes from May 26.1998 as presented.Mr.
Morton seconded.
Vote:Approved:6 Opposed:0
V1IL Remarks
A.Mr.Pagesopenedthepublichearing.
B.;V.-.Tucker,from the audience,spoke on the telecommunication towers and the infringement
onlocalpowerbythe federal government it represents.
C.Mr.Pagesclosedthepublichearing.
D.Staff thanked theBoardfortheir insight when discussing the different items.
1.Mr.Pages wasalso pleased withthe process.
2.Mr.Basu mentioned that traffic calming is another issue that should be discussed with
candor.
IX.Adjournment
PB Min 06-30-98
4.The board brieflv discussed the ordinance.
V.FRATERNAL ORGANIZATIONS IN THE PI ZONING DISTRICT
1.Mr.Pages asked if anyone in the audience was present to discuss the local planning agency,
the Elks Lodge,andthe Telecommunication Towers.
2.Mr.Pages suggested changing the order ofthe agenda and discussing the Elks Lodge.
3.Staff presented the agenda item concerning the Elks Lodge as an item for discussion,not for
vote.
4.Frost Walker signed in for the record to represent the Elks Lodge in their appeal to include
fraternal organizations in the PI zoning and to grant them a catering operation license.
5.Mr.Walker added that since the South Miami Elks Lodge has existed atits present location for
40 years with or without the appropriate zoning,the City might as well make the appropriate
changes to officially include fraternal organizations in the PI zoning district.
6.The Public hearing was opened.No one had any comments.The public hearing was closed.
7.Mr.Basu questioned why fraternal organizations are not included in the PI zone to begin with
if theElksLodge already existswithinthatzone.
8.Staff responded thatthe area was changed from RM-24to PI in 1989.
9.Mr.Basu asked if anyone from the Elks Lodge had any insight on that change in order to
understand the reason behind the change.
10.Mr.Basu also wanted the Elks Lodge to be more specific about the amount of catering that
would take place.
11.Staff pointed out that there are single family residences across the street from the Elks Lodge
that mightbe affected by the operation of a catering service.
12.Mr.Frost said that the Elks Lodge intended to buffer the residences with fencing and
landscaping.
13.Mr.Frost also mentioned that the residential area was on the opposite side ofthe kitchen,
where the catering would be taking place,adding that their only plan is to enhance the area not
become a detriment to it.
PBMin 07-14-98 <
14.Mr.Basu explained that azoning decision was important beyondthe intentions ofthe Elks
because theymightonedaychoosetosellthe property.
15.Mr.Frost said that if the Cityis worried about the property being sold,they should allow the
improvementstobemadeontheirlodge.
16.Mr.Scurr asked why the Elks Lodge considers RM-24 to be down-zoning ifit is less
restrictive than PI.
17.Mr.Frost responded that it would be difficult to sell property surrounded bya Taco Bell and
an Amoco asresidentialproperty.
18.Mr.Basu said that it is in the best interest ofthe City to promote housing through an RM-24
zoning rather than add a category to PI zoning.
19.Mr.Frost asked for the board to restate the status of their application.
20.Staff said that the Elks Lodge had several options in order to obtain their permit.
21.Mr.Frost said that their main concern was the catering permit and that the zoning issue was
somethingthat staff broughtup.
22.Staff said that catering was not permitted in their zoning district.
23.Mr.Basu said that it was important to define the scope of the catering for concern for the
residentsnearby.
24.Mr.Frost responded that the improvements they wanted to make were all with the
community in mind.
25.Mr.Basu was in agreement,but opined that they must take the people living around the lodge
into account.
26.Mr.Pages affirmed that it was the long-term ramifications of a zoning change that concerned
the board.
27.Ms.Chimeiis said that the size ofthe kitchen would dictate the scope ofthe catering if that
was a concern.
28.Ms.Chimeiis also said that the long-term scope ofthe club is important,but that this zoning
question was an impediment to the speed with which the club can carry out its improvements and
that this was probably not the best time to change the long-term zoning.
29.Staff suggested submitting the following to the Mavor and Citv Commission for approval to
PBMin 07-14-98
expedite theElks"request:
(1)Ordinance toadmit fraternal organizationsinthePIzoningdistrict
(2)OrdinancetopermitcateringservicesinthePIzoningdistrict
(3)SpecialUse Resolution toallowthe Elks Lodgetooperatea catering service.
30.Mr.Basusuggestedtoconsiderthe options separatelyandtomaketheproper restrictions on
the catering to keep itin check.
31.Staff reassuredtheBoardthatunderaspecialuserequestalldetailscouldbearticulatedin
order for the greatest amount of restrictions tobein place while still allowing the Elks Lodge to
operate its catering service.
32.Mr.Pages ended the discussion and concluded that thepath was now clearto start working
on both the revision of the zoning code to allow fraternal organizations inthePI zoning district
andthespecialuse permit forcateringthattheElksLodge requested.
V.Approval of Minutes
(A).The Board tooknovoteon minutes atthis meeting.
VI.Remarks
(A).Traffic
1.Mr.Pagesinquiredaboutthe traffic situationaroundShopsatSunsetonBirdRoad.
2.Staff respondedthatagroup of consultants hasbeenworkingonstudiestoalleviatethetraffic
problems in that area.
3.Staffsaidthattheconsultantsare scheduled tomakeapresentationtotheCity Commission
thatwillprovidean overview of somepossiblesolutions.
4.The studies arealso targeted towards residential traffic flow through oneway streets and/or
flashing redlightsforwhichtheyhave received countyapproval.
(B)StaffsaidthatShopsatSunsetare scheduled toopenonDecember4ratherthan October.
(C)StaffsaidthatSunset Drive was scheduled fortheendof August.
VIII.Adjournment
PBMin 07-14-98
/r
SUMMARY MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
Planning Board
Tuesday,August 11,1998
City Commission Chambers
7:30 P.M.
I.Call to order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
A.Mr.Pages,Chairperson,calledthemeetingtoorder.
II.Roll Call
A.Board members present constituting a quorum
1.Mr.Pages;Mr.Huggins;Ms.Chimeiis;Mr.Wiscombe;Mr.Lefley
B.Board members absent
1.Mr.Morton;Mr.Basu
C.City staff present
1.Greg Oravec (Acting Director,Planning &Zoning)
III.Public Hearings
A.ITEM:PB-98-016
Applicant:Mayor &City Commission
Request:AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OFTHECITYOF
SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA,RELATING TO AN AMENDMENT OF SECTION 20-3.3
(D)OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN ORDER TO PERMIT THE
"FRATERNAL ORGANIZATION OR PRIVATE CLUB"USE AS A SPECIAL USE IN
THE "PI"PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL ZONING DISTRICT;PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY;PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT;AND,
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
1.Mr.Huggins readthe request intothe record.
PBMin 08-11-98
2.Staff presentedtheitemtotheBoard,statingthattheordinance would enablea fraternal
organizationorprivateclubtobelocatedinthePIzoningdistrict,pursuanttospecialuse
approval.
3.Staff outlinedimportantpointstoconsider,includingthatonlythePIzoningdistrict would be
affected andthatit would be affected minimally,particularly with thesafeguard of thespecial
use process.
4.InreplytoMr.Lefley's inquiry,discussionwasheldin regard tochangingthePIzoning ofthe
subject property toRM-24zoning,a district thatdoespermit fraternal organization or private
club asa special use.
5.Staff notedthattheapplicantdoesnotconsiderthischangeasaviablealternative,asitwould
involvethetime-consumingprocess of modifyingtheComprehensivePlanandthenupdatingthe
zoning code.
6.Mr.FrostWalkerspokebeforetheBoardasa representative;however,hedidnotsigninfor
therecord.Mr.Walker relatedbackgroundinformationconcerningtheElksClub,including the
club's mission and a desire to become more involved in South Miami.
7.Mr.Walker elaboratedthattheordinance,by amending thecodeto allow this useasa(special)
use,would reflectthereality of theElksClub'sexistenceandintenttobeanactive member of
the community.
8.Public hearing was opened.
a.Mr.David Tucker,Sr.,of 6556 SW 78Terrace,signed inand spoke before theBoard.Mr.
Tucker began by noting that fraternal organizationshavebeen benevolent members of the
community for many years.
b.Mr.Tucker asked thatthe City,duringitsconsideration of theproposedordinance,be
cognizant ofthe future need to handle refuseproduced by the activities of such organizations.
c.Ms.Cathy McCann,of 5820 SW 87Street,signed into speak before the Board.Ms.McCann
opened by statingthatshewasin opposition tothe new ordinance.
d.Ms.McCannrelatedthattheCityshouldconsiderthelong-termimplications of permitting
suchusesinthe City's PIzoningdistricts,andsheopinedthatzoningchangesshouldbe
contemplated fora purpose oruseandnotforanapplicant.
e.Ms.McCann further opined thatthe RM-24 zoning category would better servethe uses and
theCityasawhole,andsheadvisedthatthisconsideration,i.e.,whatisbestfortheCityandnot
foranapplicant,is what thePlanningBoardshoulddeliberate.
PBMin 08-11-98 2
f.Staff clarifiedfortherecordthatitisthePIzoningdistrictbeingconsideredandnottheI
zoning district.
9.Public hearing was closed.
10.The Board continued with review ofthe application.
a.Staff statedthe purpose of thePIzoning district,includingprovidingforschools,
governmental facilities,utilities,churches,and similar uses.
b.Staff relatedthatthecriticalpointtoconsideris whether theusesunder consideration "fallin
line"with the purpose ofthe PIdistrict.
c.Mr.Pagesaskedthat staff identifythe properties locatedinthePIdistrictindividually,and
staff respondedthatthe YMCA,churches,GirlScout,schools,ElksClub,CityHall,Metrorail,
FPL substation,andtheseniorcitizen'scenterJRELeeSchool [note bythe editor]arealllocated
inthePIdistrictandcouldbeimpactedbythechange.
d.In regard todiscussiononthe proposed catering use,Mr.Walker responded that catering
should be considered later,underanotheragendaitem.
e.Staff notedthattheElksClub represents a legal non-conforming useanda legal non
conforming structure.
f.Staff explainedthatalegalnon-conformingusecannotexpandthe area of itsuse.
g.The Board and staff discussed the history ofthe Elks Club property,noting that the property
hadbeenzonedRM-24before adoption of the current Comprehensive Plan andLand
Development Code.
h.Discussion ensued in regard to similarity of uses,particularly involving churches and fraternal
organizations,andtheBoardnotedthattheydo share similar characteristics.
i.In response to the Board's request,Ms.McCann spoke in regard tothe history and the
characteristics,notingthatthezoning change from RM-24to PI mayhavebeendonein error and
thattheinstitutionsand groups,while sharing similar features,alsohaveseveral dissimilarities.
j.Ms.McCann asked the City to be aware of the impact the dissimilarities may have and to
recognize that the history of fraternal organizations in South Miami has not always been
"agreeable."
k.Mr.Pages related that there are a number of issues to explore,including the consideration that
the Elks Club was there prior to the zoning changes and that the obligation exists to find a
PBMin 08-11-98 3
solutiontothe predicament created by thezoningchanges.
I.Mr.Pages continued bynotingthatinstitutionsandorganizationsshareandprovide many of
the same functions and benefits,and not allowing fraternal organizations creates an
"inconsistency"with allowing churchesandother institutions.
m.Discussion continued astothelanguageincorporatingprivateclubsintheordinance.
n.Mr.Pages notedthataconcernmaybewiththe private clubinclusion,andstaffnotedthat
such language maybechanged,including language forspecialuseconditions.
II.Motion:Mr.Pages moved approval ofthe application,(1)with theseparation of fraternal
organization fromprivateclub,allowing fraternal organization asaspecialuseinthePIzoning
district;and(2)with therecommendationthat staff definetheterms fraternalorganization and
privateclub for further consideration attheBoard'snextregularlyscheduledmeeting.Ms.
Chimeiis seconded the motion.
12.Vote:Approved:5Opposed:0
B.ITEM:PB-98-017
Applicant:Mayor&City Commission
Request:AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYORANDCITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA,RELATING TO AN AMENDMENT OF SECTION 20-3.4
OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN ORDER TO ALLOW CATERING
SERVICES AS AN ANCILLARY USE TO A "FRATERNAL ORGANIZATION OR
PRIVATE CLUB"USE PURSUANT TO SPECIAL USE APPROVAL;PROVIDING
FOR SEVERABILITY;PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT;AND,
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
1.Ms.Chimeiis readthe request intotherecord.
2.Staff presentedthe item totheBoard,explaining thattheordinance would allow catering
services asan ancillary use toafraternal organization or private club use,pursuant to special use
approval.
3.Staff noted thatthecateringservicesarespecificto only those fraternal organization orprivate
club uses in the PI zoning district.
4.Staff further notedthat"negativeimpacts"maybe involved withtheinclusion of catering
services,adding that such services area limited useinthe City.
5.Staff askedthattheBoardconsiderwhetherornot enough limitations may be imposed to
sufficiently restrictthe negative impacts of catering services.
PBMin 08-11-98
6.Mr.Wiscombe relatedthathehadconcernsinregardtothe impact catering services would
haveonthequality of lifein residential areas closesttothosedistrictspermittingsuchservices.
7.Staff notedthattherearesafeguardsbuiltintotheprocess,includingPlanningBoardreview,
City .>mmission approval,andpossibleCity Manager revocation.
8.Staff askedthat,astheitemis presented,theBoardconsideritinthecontext of animpact
city wide andnotjustin regard totheElksClub.
9.Mr.Frost Walkerspokebeforethe Board;however,hedidnotsignin for the record.
10.Mr.Walkerelaboratedonthenature ofthe property,notingthatresidentialusesare within
proximity,butnotascloseas commercial uses,including Taco Bell and Amocoon South Dixie
Highway.
11.Mr.Walkermaintainedthat identifying thesubjectpropertyasresidentialwouldnotbe
advisable with commercial uses located nearby.
12.Mr.Wiscombespokein regard to future catering servicestakingplaceattheproperty,and
Mr.Walkerrelatedthattheorganizationdoesnotperceivesuchservicestobea future problem
for the area.
13.Tv-r.Walkerexplainedthatitistheorganization'shopethattheCitywillrelyonits
safeguards astoolstolimitcateringservices,whensuchprotectionswouldbenecessary.
14.A.>review continued,Mr.Pages reiterated thattheBoardconsidertheapplicationona
citywide basis.
15.Publichearing was opened.
a.Ms.CathyMcCann,of 5820 SW 87Street,signedintospeakbeforetheBoard.Ms.McCann
openedby emphasizing thata responsibility of theBoardistopreservethequality of lifein
single-family neighborhoods.
b.Ms.McCannaskedthatasthe Planning Boardhasvotedapprovalonallowing fraternal
organizations intheCity'sPIzoning districts,the Board now consider recommending thatno
ingressandegressoccurinresidentialneighborhoods.
c.Th?Boardand staff noted thatsuchasuggestion would be considered furtherunderthe
remarks section.
d.Ms.McCann continued by opining that the presentation just heard should have been given at
another time,asit related toonlyone property,andthatthe Planning Boardshouldconsiderthe
PBMin 08-11-98 S
item ona citywide basis,with respecttoany business oranycatering service andnot just with
respect tothe Elks Club.
e.Ms.McCann statedthatsheis "vehemently opposed"to allowing a business inPI zoning
districts,andshe questioned the City Manager's ability to revoke an approval.
f.Ms.McCann closed byaddingthatbecauseanorganization wishes tohavea business within
thePI zoning district,suchadesireis insufficient justification to permit it.
g.Priortoclosingthepublichearing,Mr.PagesexplainedthatallowingtheElksClubtoproceed
wasdoneinorderto "flush out"broader issues relatingtocatering services associated with
fraternal organizations.
16.Publichearingwasclosed.
17.The Board continued with review ofthe application.
a.InresponseMs.Chimeiis's inquiry regarding if thelevel of foodservice would be sufficient
for someone without having tocater offsite orto outside interests,Mr.Walker repliedthat
cateringservicesareprobablyeconomicallynecessaryfortheindividualperformingcooking
services at the Elks Club.
b.Mr.Wiscombe explainedthatheisattemptingtoexaminetheiteminregardtoitsimpacton
PIzoningdistricts citywide,ascitizensareconcernedastothenegative effects onsurrounding
residential areas.
c.Inregardtodiscussionontheproposedcateringuse,staff explainedthattheimportant
questioniswhetherornotsuchausewouldbe appropriate asanancillaryuseinPIzoning
districts.
d.The Boardand staff discussed how thePlanningBoard should proceed with the item,and staff
notedthattheCity Commission islookingforinputfromboththepublicandtheBoard.
18.Motion:Mr.Lefley movedto disapprove the application,as presented.Ms.Chimeiis
seconded the motion.
19.Vote:Approved:5Opposed:0
C.ITEM:PB-98-018
Applicant:MayorandCity Commission
Request:AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYORANDCITY COMMISSION OF THECITY OF SOUTH
MIAMI,FLORIDA,RELATING TO AN AMENDMENT OF SECTION 20-9OFTHE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODETOINCLUDE THOSE PARCELS LEGALLY DESCRIBED HEREIN
WITHINTHE COMMUNITY SERVICE OVERLAY DISTRICT;PROVIDINGFOR
PBMin 08-11-98 *
G.Ms.Chimeiissurmisedthat,forpurposes of discussion,acasewouldinvolvean
establishmentwhereeasily-preparedfood,suchassandwiches,wouldbeavailableonatake-out
basis,andyet,withlimited seating,it would be possible toeatin-without being considered a
restaurant.
H.Asdiscussioncontinued,Mr.Pagessummarizedamajorconcern of theBoardasbeingthe
"wateringdown"ofthe specialuseprocessinvolvingrestaurants.
I.Staff responded that additional research could be conducted onthe subject,and added that
therewouldbeno"increasing"or expanding theusetonewdistricts,thatonlythosedistricts
alreadypermittingtherestaurantusewouldbe involved.
VI.Approval of Minutes
A.Minutes from May 12,1998
1.Motion:Ms.Chimeiismovedapproval ofthe minutesfromMay12,1998,aspresented.Mr.
Wiscombe seconded the motion.
2.Vote:Approved:5Opposed:0
B.Minutes from June 23,1998
1.Motion:Ms.Chimeiismovedapproval ofthe minutesfromJune23,1998,aspresented.Mr.
Wiscombe seconded the motion.
2.Vote:Approved:5Opposed:0
C.Minutes from June 30,1998
1.Motion:Ms.Chimeiis moved deferral ofthe minutes from June 30,1998,as presented.Mr.
Wiscombe seconded the motion.
2.Vote:Approved:5 Opposed:0
D.Minutes from July 14,1998
1.Motion:Mr.Wiscombe moved approval ofthe minutes from July 14,1998,as presented.Mr.
Huggins seconded the motion.
2.Vote:Approved:5 Opposed:0
VII.Remarks
A.Remarks from the public
a.Ms.CathyMcCann,of 5820SW87Street,spokebeforetheBoard.Ms.McCannaskedthat
PBMin 08-11-98 11
the Board make recommendations totheCity Commission concerning the special use process in
thePI zoning district.
b.Ms.McCannreiteratedthat,astheBoardhas voted to recommend approvalthatthe fraternal
organization usebe permitted asaspecialusein the PI zoning district,the Board transmit
recommendationsforspecialuse,includingtheprohibition of ingressandegresstoandfrom
residential neighborhoods.
c.Ms.McCannalsoaskedthattheregulationonthelevel of noise,suchasbytimelimits,
reachingintoresidentialneighborhoodsbeconsideredasa recommendation forspecialuse.
d.Duringdiscussionon regulating noiselevels,Mr.Pages suggestedthatthe Planning Board
review andperhaps make recommendations for updating the City's noise ordinance.
e.Mr.David Tucker,Sr.,of 6556 SW 78Terrace,spoke before theBoard.Infurther remarks on
theconsideration of thedeliuse,Mr.TuckercautionedtheCityonexpandingcertainusesin
generalandeateriesinparticularforvariousreasons,including economic concerns.
B.Remarks from the Board
a.In regard to earlier commentsinvolving agenda item PB-98-018,staff related thattheCity's
Building Department believes theapartmentbuildingin question shouldbe demolished dueto
violations of code.
b.Mr.Hugginsnotedthatthebuildinghasbecomea community "eyesore"andshouldbetorn
down.
c.Staff related thatthematterinvolvingthe apartment building,includingany plans for
demolition,had been grantedan extension.
d.Staff questioned the Board on possibly changing itsmeetingday from Tuesday to Monday.
e.Discussionensuedin regard to changing themeetingday,andMs.Cathy McCann,former
mayor,offeredthatthemeetingday for the Planning Board should remain on Tuesdays.
f.Mr.Pages concurred withthe discussions heldinvolving agenda item PB-98-016,fraternal
organizations in PI zoning districts,including the suggestion that ingress and egress not occur in
andout of residential neighborhoods,except during emergencies only.
g.Mr.Pages noted that the representatives for the Elks Lodge had been present during earlier
discussion of thismatter,particularly whenitwasso recorded thatthediscussionwouldcontinue
under the Remarks section,and yetthey had since departed the meeting.
PBMin 08-11-98 12
h.Discussion of the recommendation continued,andMs.Chimeiis emphasized that such a
condition be applied "across the board".
i.Mr.Pagesrespondedthattheconditionwouldapplytoallfraternal organization usageinPI
zoning districts.
j.Staff explainedthatspecificspecialuseconditions,thatareusespecific,arealreadyinplace,
including such conditions for churches andrestaurants.
k.Mr.PagesnotedfortherecordthattheBoardhasunanimouslyagreedthatlanguage,relating
totherecommendationthatingressandegressassociatedwithfraternalorganizationsinPI
zoningdistrictsnotoccurinandout of residentialneighborhoods,beincorporatedintofinal
approvals.
VTIL Adjournment
A.Therebeingnofurther business beforetheBoard,themeetingwasadjourned.
B.Respectfully,
1.
Chairperson
2.
Board Secretary
PBMin 08-11-98 13