Ord. No. 11-87-1283-B*
-i*4
ORDINANCE NO.}}-Rl--\?P,?.3
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA,
TRANTING FOUR (4)VARIANCES TO ST.JOHN'S A.M.E.
CHURCH SAID VARIANCES BEING TO ALLOW A CHURCH ON
ALOT'SIZE OF 1.13 ACRES WHERE 2 ACRES IS
RFOUIRED'TO ALLOW 82 PARKING SPACES WHERE 10 6 AREREQUIRED-TO ALLOW A 20'FRONT SETBACK WHERE 25'ISrIqUIrI";AND TO ALLOW A 16'REAR SETBACK WHERE A
20'SETBACK IS REQUIRED ON PROPERTY LEGALLY
DESCRIBED AS:
Lot 40,less the N.10',and Lots 41-46,of Block
1,Lots 32 and 33 of Block 5,and Lot 54 of Block
6,of FRANKLIN SUBDIVISION,as recorded in Plat
Book 5,Page 34 of the Public Records of Dade
County,Florida,a/k/a 6461 S.W.59th Place,South
Miami,Florida.
Planning Board Agenda Item No.87-009.
WHEREAS,on May 26,1987,the Planning Board of South
Miami,Florida,recommended approval of four variances for St.
John'sA.M.E.Church;and
WHEREAS,the Director of the Department of Building,
Zoning and Community Development has recommended approval of all
requests by the applicant.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE
CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA:
Section 1.That the following variances for the St.
John's A.M.E.Church be and the same are hereby granted:
1.Variance to allow a lot size of 1.13 acres where 2
acres is required;
2.Variance to allow a church with 82 parking spaces
where 106are required;
3 Variance to allow 20 foot front setback where 25
foot is required,for that area on plans submitted
by the applicant dated May 22,1987 on file with
the City;
4.Variance to allow 16 foot rear setback where 20
foot is required,for that area on plans submitted
by the applicant dated May 22,1987 on file with
the City.
said property being legally described as:
Lot 40,less theNorth 10 ft.andLots 41,
42,43,44,45and 46,Block 7;andLots 32
and33Block 5;andLot 34,Block 6,all
located in Franklin Subdivision,Plat Book 5,
Page 34 ofthe Public Records of Dade County,
Florida.
*•
Section 2.That this Ordinance shall take effect
immediately atthe time of its passage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st daY of September /1987
ATTEST:
l-oM^I fysMto,
Y CLERK
READ AND APPROVED ASTOFORM:
irmv Amrnr»t>XTT?V O 'CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED ON1st READING:8/4/87
PASSED ON 2nd READING:9/01/87
OCSM62-1
APPROVED:
HENRY FLOWERS
Chr.Steward Board
Wm.Montgomery
Chr.Trustee Board
Rosa Turner
Church Secretary
Rubystine Anderson
Assit.Secretary
May 22,1987
'LOVE MAKES THE DIFFERENCE
ST.JOHNS A.M.E.CHURCH
6461 S.W.59th Place
South Miami,Florida 33143
Phone:667-9985
(.~*
Rev.CE Standlfer,Pastor
Marien Aran-Spinrad
Director/Building,Zoning and Community Develooment
City ofSouthMiami,Florida
Re:RezoningofpropertyforSt.John A.M.E.Church
6461 S.W.59 Place,SouthMiami,FT,
Dear Marien Aran-Spinrad:
We hereby submit to you our application for zoning relief
on the property located at and adjacent to the above
address.In keeping with the spirit of this aDDlication,
we would like to state the following reasons for our case:
1)Lot size:As you know,the chuch has entered agreement
with Dade County HUD to purchase additional property
to the west of our existing church.We are purchasing
the entire tract in order to satisfy as much of the
parking requirement as possible.The"-vacant property
of the site is too expensive for us to purchase.The
1.13 acres is all the church needs at this timeto
satisfy its functional requirement.
2)Parking variance:Since the church is primarily a
neighborhood church,we do not anticipate ever using
more than 50 spaces for even above average attendance.
Mostmembersofthe congregation walktoservices.It
would bea severe financial hardship to the church to
meet the zoned parking requirements,and the empty
parking lot would be a waste of valuable neighborhood
space andan eyesore tothe community.
3)We are asking for a reduced setback in the front of the
church forthe following reasons:
*j>:
HENRY FLOWERS
Chr.Steward Board
Wm.Montgomery
Chr.Trustee Board
Rosa Turner
Church Secretary
Rubystine Anderson
Assit.Secretary
May 22,1987
Page 2
'LOVE MAKES THE DIFFERENCE"
ST.JOHNS A.M.E.CHURCH
6461 S.W.59th Place
South Miami,Florida 33143
Phone:667-9985
Rev.CE.Standifer,Pastor
A)Our building depth is as small as wecan func
tionally afford to make it.
B>We prefer to move the church forward,rather than
toward the residence in the rear.~~~
C)The location ofthe church onthe site is inflex
ible with regard to all of the other requirements
we have.
D)Most of the commercial and residential buildings
in the neighborhood have much smaller setbacks
than the 20 feet we are asking for.
4.Variance to allow a 16 foot rear setback where 20
footsetbackis required.
We appreciate the cooperation you and the City have shown
to us thus far in our efforts and look forward to the
successful conclusion of this matter.
Sincerely yours,
.c.L
Rev.CE.Standifer,Pastor
St.John A.M.E.Church
j4GB33B*±
Marden AranV9pinra<Director -mjilldlni
Zoring &Community development
from:Adcllfo D.[Lbpez
Ten porary/planner
^^L
GENERAL DATA
Applicant:
Represented by:
Location:
Legal Description:
Requests:
BACKGROUND
City of South Miami
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
DATE:May 21,1987
subject:Staff Report on Public
Hearing PB-87-009
St.John's A.M.E.Church
Rev.C.E.Standifer
6461 S.W.59 Place,South Miami,Florida 33143
Lot 40,less the North 10 ft.and Lots 41,42,43,
44,45 and 46,Block 7;and Lots 32 and 33 Block 5;
and Lot 34,Block 6,all located in Frankling Sub
division,Plat Book 5,Page 34 of the Public Records
ofDadeCounty,Florida.
1.Variance to allow a lot size of 1.13 acres where
a2acrelot is required.
2.Variance to allow a church with 82 parking spaces
where106are required.
.3.Variancetoallowa20footfrontsetbackwhere
25 foot setbackis required.
4.Variancetoallowa16 foot rearsetbackwhere
20 foot rear setback is required.
1.On February 1,1983,the Environmental Review and Preservation Board (ERPB)
reviewed an application from St.John's A.M.E.Church for preliminary re
view of anew building and parking lot.
It was stated by the Planning Director that the building was subject to
several zoning approvals which included a rezoning and three variances.
There is an existing one-story frame chruch on the site that was to be
demolished when the new church was built.
•.-V...'..:;
Marien Aran-Spinrad -2-May 21,1987
Staff Report -PB-87-009
Thereweretwomain concerns oftheERPBatthatmeeting:one,whether
theexistingbuildingwouldqualifyornotforhistoricpreservation;
two,the saving and relocation ofan existing ficustreeandoak tree.
Bya4-0vote,thefollowingmotionwasapproved:
"by Mr.Hochstim,seconded by Mr.Borrelli,to approve the preliminary
designofthebuildingwithreservationsabouttheexistingone-story
churchtobeconsideredasapossiblehistoricmonumentbythisBoard,
andinvestigatetheoptionsavailabletomoving it,storingorrefur
bishingit;andtherelocationofthe ficus,oakandpoinciana trees."
ERPB Minutes,page4 2/1/83.
2.UnderResolutionNo.R-78-83dated2-1-83,theDadeCountyBoardof
Commissioners accepted theproposalof St.John's A.M.E.Church,Inc.
forthe purchase and redevelopment ofthe property subject ofthis
Staff Report.(Attached).Onthat date,the then County Managersub
mittedamemorandumtotheCountyCommissionersrecommendingacceptance
oftheabove mentioned proposal.
Therecommendationexplicitlystatedtheuseofthesiteforexpansion
ofa neighborhood church.
TheproposalwaspositivelyrecommendedbytheSouthMiamiPlanning
Department,theSouthMiami Community Development TaskForceandtheHUD
Advisory Board.(Attached).
3.On March 8,1983,the Planning Board heard simultaneously two hearings:
#83-15
CityCommission for'St.John'sA.M.E.Churchrequestingto a-oend theFuture
LandUsedesignationof6501S.W.59Placeand 6456,6470and6484-86
S.W.59 Court,fromLowDensity Residential to Public/Semi Public Use.
#83-2
St.John's A.M.E.Church requesting variance to allow alot size of 1.13
acreswhere2acresisnormally required;variance toallowachurchwith
84 parking spaces where 134 are normally required;variance to allow 20
feet front setback where 25 faet is normally required and Special Use
Permit to allow a church subject to the plans as approved.
At that time,staff recommended approval of request #83-15 asit was "in
compliance with the goals and policies of the South Miami Comprehensive
Plan and has been approved by the South Miami Community Development Board."
Staff also recommended approval of Hearing //83-2.
Marien Aran-Spinrad -3-May 21,1987
Staff Report -PB-87-009
A motion was made to approve both requests.The motion was passed 4/0
withtheabstainedvotesofRev.Standifer andMr.LeePerryfor conflict
of interest.
See Planning Board minutes,pages 1-2 of March 8,1983.(Attached).
4.By Ordinance No.10-83-1170,the City of South Miami adopted the proposals
of St.John's A.M.E.Church regarding the land use,variances and Special
Use Permit as requested to the Planning Board.
5.By Resolution No.73-83-5053,the City of South Miami extended the effec
tiveness of Ordinance No.10-83-1170 from October 5,1983 to October 5,1984,
6.By Resolution No.66-84-6020A,the City of South Miami extended the effec
tiveness of Ordinance No.10-83-1170 through October 5,1985.After this
date,the variances were not requested for renewal by the Applicant,there
fore this variance lapsed and became null and void according to Section
13-4oftheZoningOrdinancereads:
"Lapse of Variance
A granted variance shall lapse after the expiration of six (6)months
ifno substantial construction or change ofusehastakenplacein
accordance with the plans for which such variance has been granted,
or if the Council does not specify some longer period for good cause
shown and the provisions of these regulations shall thereafter govern
extensions of variances may be granted by the Council upon proper
and timely request."
The City Attorney has researched this specific variance and concurs that
the reapplication process is required at this time.
•?On April 77,1987,Rev.Standifer approached the Planning Department re
questing <n application to appear before the Environmental Review and
Preservation Board,in order to obtain approval of a church building design
to be located at 6461 S.W.59 Place.
Uponfurtherresearch,Stafffound that:
a.The variances granted by the City Commission had lapsed.
b.Thechurchdesignhasbeen changed.
c.The change of zoning and the Special Use Permit do not lapse.
d.Rev.Standifer's proposal for the church is different than theone
approvedbytheCity In 1983.
e.In order to get approval for this proposal,St.John's A.M.E.Church
(Rev.Standifer)must apply for four (4)variances,as stated at
thebeginningof this StaffReport.
*.-'
-MarienAran-Spinrad
Staff Report -PB-87-009 -4-May 21,1987
ANALYSIS
1.Staff sees the need of this request as a result of the failure,by the
Applicant,to request an extension of the variances that were granted
in 1983.
2.With the change In the design,another variance (for rear setback)is
nowalsorequired.
3.The general conditions of 1983 with respect to the Comprehensive Plan
requirements for this area,the character of the neighborhood,the suit
ability of land uses and the direction of building development are basically
the same.
4o The site has an irregular shape and is composed of several lots.Lots
42 through 48,Block 7,and Lots 33 and 34,Block 5 are located in the
C-l district (Neighborhood Commercial).The parking,Sanctuary,Choir
andAltarsectionsofthe Church are located inthis district.This
portion ofthe project complies with zoning regulations except for the
front setback (20'proposed where 25'required)and the number of parking
spaces (82 proposed where 106 are required).These are variance requests
#2and#3.
5.The remaining portion of this project's site (Lot 34,Block 6),although
adjacent to the other lots,is located in the RM -18 District (Low
Density Multi-Family Residential).This portion of the project contains
other facilities of the church such as classrooms,overflow seating,
offices,toilets,and service areas.Zoning regulations for this part
of the Church are met except the rear setback (16'proposed where 20'
required).This is variance request #4.
6.The use as church is permitted in both C-l and RM-8 Districts if a Special
Use Permit has been .granted by the City of South Miami.Such a permit
was granted by Ordinance No.10-83-1170.This project complies with all
the Special Use Requirements except total site area (1.13 acres proposed
where 2 acres are required).This is variance request #1.
Variance to allow alotsizeof1.13acre
Based on the lack of available land and the size of the church (including
seating capacity and parking),staff finds that 1.13 acres is sufficient
land area to develop the proposed project.The requirement of 2.0 acres
would create a hardship on the Applicant.The area does have a number
of small neighborhood churches that have been active over 40 years.(See
attached map).
Variance to allow a church with 82 parking spaces where 106 are normally
required.
The Applicant has stated that most of the members walk to church services
and that the seating capacity of 318 is programmed to be reached in the
.
:•'-•''''-''.'"'.""•;•''';'!:^*;"''.w'-'•;.V
•'•'•\v .,;:--i .••:.;'.'-,-Wv.
'Marien Aran-Spinrad
Staff Report -PB-87-009 -5-May 21,1987
future.Nevertheless,the 82 proposed parking spaces will still be
more than sufficient to cover the parking needs of the members.Again,
the request by the City of 106 parking spaces would create a hardship
based on the lack of available land and the character of the pedestrian-
oriented church membership.
Variance toallowa20 foot front setback where 25 foot front setback is
required.
Past Staff recommended approval of this variance based on that itis neces
sary to "keep the existing church operating while the new church is under
construction.Indeed,the location of the new church was entirely dictated
by the location of the existing church."
Staffbelievesthatanother architectural solution canbe found witha
25 foot front setback.However,if the proposed design satisfies the
needs of St.John's A.M.E.Church,then the 20 foot front setback variance
wouldberequired.
Variancetoallowa16footrear setback where20footrearsetbackis
required.
As mentioned in the preceding paragraph,the request of this variance is
also due to the fact that the proposed design seems to be the one that
satisfies the space needs for St.John's A.M.E.Church.If a change in
the architectural design (diminishing the area to have 20 foot rear set
back)creates a hardship on the use of the building,then the variance
is needed.
RECOMMENDATION
As stated previously in this Report,Staff sees the need of this request as
a result of the failure l>y the Applicant to apply in a timely manner request
ing an extension of time for the variances that were granted in 1983.
Also,the general conditions of 1983 with respect to the Comprehensive Plan
requirements for this area,the character of the neighborhood,the suitability
of land and uses and the direction of building developments are basically the same,
Staff recommends the following for the Planning Board consideration:
1.Approval of a variance to allow a 1.13 acre site where 2.0 acres are
required.
2.Approval of a variance to allow 82 parking spaces where 106 are normally
required.
3.Approval of a variance to allow 20 foot front setback where 25 foot front
setback is required,provided a change in the architectural design would
create a hardship on the Applicant.
••>-*•••'
•'•*'•*».-"•"v>.,"•.***'
Marien Aran-Spinrad -6-May 21,1987
StaffReport-PB-87-009
4.Approval ofavarianceto allow 16footrearsetbackwhere20footrear
setback is required,provided a change in the architectural design would
createa hardship ontheApplicant.
5.That special attention be given to the landscaping plan,with emphasis
to (if feasible)preserve the existing trees.
ADL:db
>o
\t
3w o-*'>r
£,w -^T/O «
ttF
i i -jjj ,i ,£-*'c*.
3 ,»n _»*>-
n
TO*?>tt?
-^w
c rV
//KNlVt'HZ
3 AROE W.
!V4,
v<£;
v»>«*$-4z
f?4C?
•-'»
r
——.....,
r.v \s 't or i \
••/•*<
W/.ks
\-\I-i 'r
S T
nw i>j^
j-ir.s
•>..
A Church o4 God k*v Froj.'h-:r/
Bet p t«?t~"'€vK:cnj^h—:
C Ait.is/ebe Bo-p^'s^
Church -•
V
1 ,v
IWV5 (TB«
h ^
..4'"'.
S i
&6 5rf-T-7
/.>•'r:Vf//7
••«•-'...j
C-3.
J
j'H'K^Mi.
:.Z7W2
L.tf^6$*?,?£!j***^:*CM
v-,-..
W m*i ;•/I"
APPLICANT:Rev.C.E.Standifer
OWNER:St*John's AME Church/Dade County
M7-P REFERENCE:6461 S.W.59 Place
COMMENTS:SeeattachedNoticeofHearing
CITY oc SOUTH MIAMI-PLAMWIHG &0&RD
Compass
Scale.1V.T.«*!..
Date..5Ti?T!?....
Drn..-....Chk
Hearing No.?9-$7-009
UBLIC SERVICE
OEPARTMEN-T
THE CITY OF
<^5oi4th <JVilami
6130 SUNSET DRIVE,SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA 331*3
20NI NG PETITION
Property Description,Location and Legal:
Request:The Owners of the above property have made the following request:
..Congregation members
Petition:We,the undersigned property owners,are within 30Cc=££et of the above
property.We understand and approve the above request.
NAME
h^c-4<H<£-'_-jcyte
vo*S££XX V^
MiJJiwn'...[_"_"[\.&/?/ri_
\\Qk\jj_LAU<
dat;e
^//^>7.
ADDRESS
jy/4.JT^jktfSf.r
18/rz
£stt>s,h ^rj e^-,y
4"f_<££-J>>S~f £/•
\\<^\l£^k f^A^.ud?"^§^ue_>
I.$g>&&
(continued on page 2)
-U5<30 js^us-^q PJcrC
Page 1
ZONING PETITION
(continued)
Petition:We,the undersigned property owners,are within 300 feet of the above
property.We understand and approve the above request.
NAME
'Ml.
ZfiMr &
W&fs^*^???-
-'^hT^Aj
jtf&^s&ZM?.
'MX*
-37
-&4te**ii&/-
AMthJ.
ADDRESS
6*3?sij \?9/>?.**•?_
.4^^.<$.&.j&Z f/i
mr^is/j .
fij&t.*$*?jyj/s*??.
£?/?.*&?-A#9t-
t¥4£:/'«J'6'%&*
\G£34.?(<;.£%97-
Page 2
mk:i!ti:s
Regular f-:iu»tinn of t....-1'iannint?U^ird
Hold,pursuant t.>due nor it...-in Commissi <,ti Chambers
S-Mth Miami,Florida
Tuesday,May 26,1987 nam
Presiding:Richard Prentiss,Chairman
Secretary:Doris Bonilla
A'Pied^fn!naS.Called t0 °rdCr at 7s33 p'm-and was Gloved by thePl-'dge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.
B.Present (constituting a quorum)
John Andrews
ThomasCooper
Bruce Hoffmann
Susan Kraich
Larry Ligammare
Robert Myers
Richard Prentiss
In attendance:John Dellagloria,City Attorney;Marien Aran-Spinrad,
Director of Building,Zoning &Community Development;
Danilo Lopez,Temporary Planner;and David Henderson.
Planning Technician.
C.Introduction of new members and staff
The new Director of Building,Zoning and Conauunitv Development,Marien
Aran-Spinrad,was introduced to Llie Board members.*
D.PublicHearingNo.87-OOQ
Applicant:St.John's A.M.E.Church
Requests:1.Variance to allow a lot size of 1.13 acres where
a2 acre lot is required.
*•*\
2*Variance to allow a church with 82 parking spaces
where 106 are required.
3*Variance to allow a 20 foot front setback where a
25 foot setback is required.
*•Variance to allow a 16 foot rear setback where s-
20 foot setback is required.,
Legal Description:Lot 40,less the North 10 ft.and Lots 41,42,43,
44,45 and 46,Block 7;and Lots 32 and 33 Block 5;
and Lot 34,Block 6,all located in Franklin Sub-'
division,PB 5/34 of the Public Records of Dade
County,Florida.
Location:6461 S.W.5<J Place,South Miami,Florida 33143
Planning Board Minutes
May 26,1987
sX^rrthr'Board I?"''^''"::'t"""lW ,lrlck«1J A~.Church.He satethat Tn *Z?V?J'V**'Srand"*r nnd theandtheCommissiontooh.,\J •A|,p\um,t ""*'before the B°*rdagainexce™variance #4 It-,war,",,ce»th"t "'"be-">*requested
The City .ranted th-„V "aS UOt part of t,,e past application.Miami cLprchenfive%iZ t"^'8 "?''*',°-83-II7('*"d Ranged the Southstructed?r»;the fuLrav^K'"a r?°C«T\™""**be con-
the costof construction T.,f\*hey red"COd £he size to reducestructionhadnobeenJniJate",''T*'«™,l°VXplWd bec»<^con-Is Baking a new request and S inftlme'^"efore,the Applicantsnewrequestandaskingforscra.,what less than before.
orthe^irdlhurch^an^1^^"&Ass°clate«"—»*•*a renderingshowedthesetbackstn/Jj 11™Pl™f°r 8»500 SQ-ua"feet «M*h
building with a 231 t '°n8,•.'"*Church WiU be a onc "oryidentica8!to the originll pla6,1:'6'^la"dSCape Plan ls I"--"/
The Chairman asked the Board member.,if they had any questions.
"igSfl'^u.""^,^'^°ir bulldi"«aS c°™»«*d "»'hesetbackvilli<l,,?tlK'••",Jltl«'«>l variance for the rearactual^smaller th^T'th t-l"'K '""«»""•««b""d">8 but isthouehtit™.m "hC orlfilnal <™"hereas Mr.Hoffmann had
that'the varJance^L1,;tl',^^^addreSScd the B-rd to sayapplicationTh»**?"H va'prubably overlooked in the first
"footprint"'howeverCMr r'8 "*f'7M t0 tbe Pla"aS bein*the •—almost til «^rff^1,f'"«™"b*«*"«"<•as occupyingweIooc^ge but wirh a different configuration.
soi/testtog etc Thfvan "8 "?"the eXp0"SeS °f the land.I«i»t.,"for $30o!wo'and^ach lurthlr Eft8*"011'T"6 tC °btaln "nan<*ngchurchisintendedtol?Jt increased up to $450,000.This
*or the younrPt^et0anSdTduac:taoCnrsnpacye.ChUrCh ^faC"itleS
cI;ncy°forthea8S2eparkia Parkln8 "^had b"n do™aM°the •»«!-engineer had beenhlred^n*^^Mr'.CoU responded <*at «°Parking
sufficient and that had not S T^"*S"ff had tbou«ht *«wa*™ost of the members wn 'J*""***^Stfndlfer explained that
will be used so that 82 woulrf k '""V^h°pe that 35 t0 50 «*«*»then questioned tho J-t .^,W>re than enough-Mr-HoffmannstatedthatpresentS"•?"U |,roJectcd «-»cr*lp.Rev.Standifer
was approximately 3ish P ""J!aPPloximately 150.The projectionspaces'were not Lk ng ad0^:?,h"archlte^8 "«ed the parting
increase the number of 1™l*„a"y COn,pact spaces whlch «««"spaces should be adequate atS;h 'SCandl5"stat«d "*at the 82ship.adequate at the present and for the projected member-
Planning Board Minutes •-3 -May27,1987
Mr.Hoffmann questioned if there was another architectural solution
to have a 25 foot setback instead of »:he 20 foot -ethack requiring
a variance.He also inquired if then-wa«any way of shifting the
entire building to eliminate the front and rear i>.?rbacfcs.The archi
tect responded that it sits nicer on the site,and the sanctuary is
a given width.To make it any narrower at this p-int would be a
problem for them.Mr.Hoffmann questioned th.il this would fall under
the category of a "hardship,"Rev.StJimifer responded that this is
the same piece of property and the plans are.almost the same that the
variances were given previously.
The Chairman clarified that the previous variances have expired and
therefore this is a new hearing.The Board should therefore be shown
why these variances should be granted at this time.
Mr.Stuart Cohen of the architectural firm stated that the church could
be narrower,but it would not be an efficient church.The architects
worked from the previous material with a minimum amount of changes for
the client s benefit,and they were not the original architects.
There was considerable discussion as to whether or not a "hardship"
exists which necessitates all of these variances.Alan Gold stated
that in his opinion a hardship was created by the size of the property's
configuration and that while the Board must look on a legal basis,be
asks that the Board also look at this on the basis of a community need
in a very important location in the City of South Miami.He felt that
W&a \?art °f their deliberations because this is a community Board,
and this area desperately needs this kind of positive,very important
commitment from the community.
Mr.Cooper questioned what was located in the southeast corner in the
C-l zoning.and was informed it w.:is a single family residence.He sug
gested that the building be shifted up to the east by 5 feet which would
eliminate the request for a variance on the 25 foot setback,would main
tain about the same setback on the two sides,and would not lose a park
ing place if the standard spaces were changed to compact.
Ms.Kraich expressed the opinion that to make the Applicant go back to
redrawing plans,resubraittal to the Boards,etc.would be a hardship
both financial and in time delay.
The Chairman asked in anyone in the audience wished to speak for or
^tTH the4variances-No one wished to speak so the meeting was movedintoexecutivesession.for discussion.
MOTTDM•
Tom Cooper moved to adopt the variances.
Bruce Hoffmann seconded the motion for the
purposes of discussion.
Planning Board Minutes _/
May 27,i?87
Mr.Anderson was in favor of rhc r..*t irr,;md holi-vc-d t-h-r m,»„-•
that the 20 foot setback was iiot .,pmhlem.;i..observed many otherlessappealingstructuressolr.uoh .•!„.,,r than 20 feet!
wa^"zlllTT.Stat6d fhat hC W0!:"°l al ;,H '*•">"«>to »""iWins thatthisLrf^,Se7e4^,C '•°lui"Ui,it>-«"->«.b«t hi"Problem was with put tin*this particular building on the site and being 'Wl-ed into"zoning
requirements and the lack of a hardship being shown.*
goodMfaithSaat!?v"*!""°P'ni°n 1S that the APP"cant went ahead inCityComaLs^bwln«P»*v*«~»ly received Planning Board approval andCityCommissionapprovalandthatthisfootprintwasappropriateonthis
variances"^!^dlffiCulty in "--cine ond the expiration of the
new and'fre"ue:tedethehCitvhAtr,5Ue'5'iS-"eW ^Sh°Uld be «—«•'-asestan.iv 1 !y Attorney's view as to whether there was anv
vasTesSel ££*A"°rney'^^^-^'"P-—'b«there
P^esentJno ^'hat "'"ay be lcSaily ""ec:that the Applicant is
some Jatifude t„rr^St "!bra"d "*"•but Sh*belleves the *>"<»hasthTlawShefelfJi°U»?SPirlt °f the la"as wel1 as the le»«ofbackandffj?.!j .u Applltant •»*•'v"y effort to prevent comingbackandfeelsthatthevariancesshouldbeaccepted.
S'a^w item'and T^t ?"^the St'ff Kep°rt ls "as °bvi°«'"isifthechurchh^k ^^tr!ated nS a nCW item-Hls «»«»is thatnothLe^eSed botrthf'frfnf '"P"hapS.250 °*2"people,they mayprintisCM??!V ,•and rear ^rlances.He feels the foot-a front and r!heavy °n thif piece «f Property.He is concerned aboutafrontandrearvariancewhichexpandsinbothdirections.
Ttl^Ttl Pr^n"ss requested Staff to read the recordations from theStaffReportdatedMay21,1987,
"rtauest'as^0"^»"H"*Re"°"'Sta"Sees the need °f *»>**I m™,„8UU °f the failure by the Applicant to apply i„
tha^eTr^TS "eXtenSl°n °f ""*^the ™Lce9
"wsiv!hpi!enera\C°ndltionS °f l983 with respect to the Compre-ne?*hw£S "2UlrT"tS f°r thlS i,rca»the character of theofbui^n?J!,sultability of land and uses and the directionotbuildingdevelopmentsarebasicallythesame.
Planning Board Minutes -5 ->jAV 27 1987
"Staff recommends the following for the Planning Board consideration:
1.Approval of a variance to allow a 1.13 acre site where 2.0
acres are required.
2.Approval of a variance to al-i*»v 62 pai>itig spaces where 106
arenormally required..
3.Approval of a variance to allow 20 foot frent secback where
25 foot front setback is required,provided a change in the
architectural design would create a haidship on the Applicant.
4.Approval of a variance to allow 16 foot rear setback where 20
foot rear setback is required,provided a change in the archi
tectural design would create a hardship on the Applicant.
5.That special attention be given to the landscaping plan,with
emphasis to (if feasible)preserve the existing trees."
Mr.Prentiss questioned the reduction in the number of required parking
spaces on this application from the previous one,and Staff and Mr.Cooper
explained that capacity of the sanctuary determines the spaces required,
and the sanctuary in this case was reduced in size.This was item 2.
Discussion followed on items 3 and A and the interpretation of what would
constitute a hardship on the Applicant with regard to architectural design.
Mr.Lopez,the Temporary Planner,was asked the interpretation,lie stated
if they changed the design of the church in order to have only one of the
variances and this change affected the functionability and the efficiency
of the church,that would be a hardship.The Chairman asked if the word
"provided"should be "because"in item 3,and Mr.Lopez said "because"
would be more appropriate.Ms.Aran-Spinrad stated that different archi
tects would come up with different solutions,and the client is satisfied
with the current solution.The requests of the Planning Board are rela
tively small,and the accessibility of the church may bea factor in the
communityawarenessofthechurchandits facilities.
The Chairman called the question,,Robert Myers so moved and Tom Cooper
seconded the motion.
Vote:For:4 Oppose:3
Public Hearing No.87-010 -Withdrawn by Applicant
PublicHearingNo.87-011
Applicant:Fellowship House
Represented by:David Lotz
Location:5712 Progress Road,South Miami,Florida 33143
V
\
RESOLUTION NO.40-82-4040
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA.
INITIATING AN APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO THE
SOUTH MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN THE NAME OF
ST.JOHNS AME CHURCH WITH REGARD TO CERTAIN
DESCRIBED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6501 SOUTHWEST
59TH PLACE AND 6456,6470 AND 6484-86 SOUTHWEST
59TH COURT,SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA.
WHEREAS,St.Johns AME Church has expressed the desire to
construct a new church and related facilities,and;
WHEREAS,the Community Development Board has voted In favor
of allowing the St.Johns AME Church to purchase certain lands acquired through,,
the Community Development process for the purpose of constructing a new church
and related facilities,and;
WHEREAS,the City of South Miami is desireous of cooperating
with and furthering the goals of the Community Development Board as much as
possible,and;
WHEREAS,it is necessary to amend the South Miami Comprehensive
Plan for said proposed new church and related facilities to be built;and
WHEREAS,the St.Johns AME CHurch was not able to file an
application for amendment to the Comprehensive Plan at the nornally scheduled time
due to the need for prior approval of the Community Development Board,
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA:
Section 1.That pursuant to Section 7 of Ordinance No.
13-81-1107,the Mayor and the City Commission hereby initiate an application for
amendment to the South Miami Comprehensive Plan in the name of St.Johns AME Church
asfollows:
Request to amend the Future Land Use designation of
Lots 34,Block 6&Lots 44,4b,46,Block 7,all located
1n FRANKLIN SUBDIVISION,according to the plat thereof
as recorded in Plat Book 5 at Page 34 of the Public
Records of Dade County,Florida,A/K/A 6501 S.W.
59th Place and 6456,6470 and 6484-86 S.W.59th Court,
South Miami,Florida,from Low Density Residential to
Public/Semi-Public Use.
Section 2.The action of the Mayor and the City Commission
initiating said application is not,and shall not be construed as approving said
application In any way.Said application shall be judged upon its own merits at
•+
it
>/v
/
^
the time said application comes before the Mayor and City Coss-.sission for final
consideration after being properly processed according to subsection (f)of
Section 7 of Ordinance No.13-81-1107,heretofore adopted as the South Miami
Comprehensive Plan.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 8th toy of June ,1982.
APPROVED:
,^-/.••,-o4>^
MAYOR
ATTEST:
.OPOLITAN DADE COUNTY,FLORIDA
St.John's A.M.E.Church
6461 S.W.59 Place
South Miami,Florida 33143
Att:Reverend CE.Standifer,
Pastor
DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
1401 N.W.7TH STREET
P.O.BOX 350250
MIAMI,FLORIDA 33135
*306*>e«;e88«:
547-5317
May 19,1987
Re:Lots 40 -46
in Block 7,
FRANKLIN SUB
PB 5/34
Gentlemen:
This letter istoadvise that Dade County,in accordance with County Reso
lution No.R-78-83,adopted on February 1,1983 is committed to sell the
subject property toSt.John's A.M.E.Church,Inc.,for the development
ofa church and/or parking area fora church.
Dade County is holding on deposit One Thousand,Seven Hundred Dollars
($1,700.00)asthe Good Faith Deposit forthe purchase and upon payment
ofthebalanceofthe$17,000.00purchasepricewill transfer the property
to St.John's A.M.E.Church.
Attached herein,isa copy of the Resolution authorizing thesale.Should
you require additional evidence ofthe County's intent of theid^P°|1^lQnofthepropertytoSt.John's A.M.E.Church,please call me at 547-5317.
Sincerely,
Jonald Kirk
Development Officer
DK/SB:cr
Attachment
'*•
Dale.Cou^+y
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL BY flf.JOhN'S AME
<%}M:I-:r;H,INC.,OK flOiH'tl MIAMI F<H<Fii!-»-,iA:E AND
REDEVELOPMENT OF SITE NO.H IN :;oii';'ii M.AMI,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AREA 110.I «i /.].:•'A CHUHCH
ANP RELATED FACILITIES FOR$17,00:);,\]'.o ALSO
ESTABLISHING THE FA IB REUSE VALUE OF THE SITE
AT $17,000 AS INDICATE!'BYAFEE :.1Ki-i.i:APPHATSAL;
AUTHORIZING THE RECORDATION OF iiK«"I.Ai-A,'ION OF
RESTRICTIONS AND THE PUBLICATION Hi'A NOTICE OF
fl'lM TC DISCLOSURE;AUTHOR I/.INC EXECUTION (»F
CONTRACT OF SALE;AND AUTHOR P/l NU OIVVAININC OF
ABSTRACT AND TITLE WORK AS HEgUJR;-,D FOR TRANSFER
OF PROPERTY BY COUNTY DEED
WHEREAS,this Board desires to ac'omp 1J:*.!.i Lo purposes
outlined inthe accompanying memorandum,a cop>ofwhichis
incorporated horein byreference,
NOW,THEREFORE,BEIT RESOLVED BYTHE bO/vi'I,O;COUNTY
COMTflSlONKRS OFDADECOUNTY,FLORIDA,that:
.Section K The proposal ofSt.John's AME Cnurch,Inc.,
•».i\>."pji-chu-and development u!'Sile N«...R in South Ml anil,
.••.•*••:•••*•;•.:i".nt *Target Are*i«J.I'I ,i.».v .<.;..'..<'epted;
and the purchase price of the land Is hereby established at
117,000,as indicated-by afee simple npprn.1 ::.-r».
flection ?•The Director ofthe Departini-i.t <>f iinuiilnr.and
•••..a ,,f.'V-:iopii.'-nt is hereby directed to plnci.-in tin*land records,
••.J>?claratioii of Restrictions for the siteandto place In a news-
s-••;•.of ^cri'.'i'a 1 circulation inDade County,a i'ubii..:Disclosure
lY.-t .co outlining the sale and redevelopment of the :jite.
Section 3.The County Managerishereby authorized toobtain
abstract8 and title wqrjc^s required;execute a Contract for the
•«i *of ha.id for Private Redevelopment,the i'.mih «>r whichhas
previously been approved by this Board with St.John's AME Church,
inc.•
Section 4.The County Manager,the County Attorney andthe
Clock of this Board are hereby authorize!and .1 ir*«-*•i.»<j to proceed
to aeoure the redevelopment of this site asnoon as possible.
V
Af'--r.-i-,"jl .,.„,jgr,#5^b)(1)
The forccolng resolution was offend hy •.•omn.Jr.aioner
"*rbtM H'Cwr*y 'who '""ve«!itr.'.duption.The
motion was seconded by Commissioner B.v.rly ».Phniip.
and upon being put to a vote,the vote war,a,follows:
Barbara M.Carey Av#
Clara Oesterle *£*
Beverly B.Phillips ^!*
.Tame*P.Red ford,Jr.***
Harvey Ruvin *yc
Barry D,Schreiber *!
Ruth Shack 7*
«Torge E.Valdes *ytStephenP.Clark £j*
The Mayor thereupon declared the ,,„llllIon cluly p„oed and
adopted this lth day of February,1983.
PP -oved hy County Attorne y
DADE COUNTY,FLORIDA
BYJTSBOARDOF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
RICHARD P.BRINKER,CLERK
-••'l-r;.i ,rficiency:4#$^'"^!™^»^
deputy Clerk
v^
STATEOF FLORIDA )
)SS:
COUNTY OF DADE )
I,RICHARD P.BRINKER,Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Dade County,
Florida,and Ex-Officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of said County,
DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of
Resolution No.R-78-83 ,adopted by the said Board of County Commis
sionersatits meeting held on February 1 10 83
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I hove hereunto se«t my hund and official seal on
this 2nd (j8y 0f j February A.D.19 83
SEAL
RICHARD P.BRINKER,Ex-OfficioClerk
Board of County Commissioners
DadeCounty,Florida
ry^?ry,
I Deputy Ckrk
V<
102.01-3 *CV.11/72
Board of County Commissioners
Dade County,Florida
y^.MEMORANDUM
Aycndti -item No/3 (b)(1)
Hi-norablo Mayor and Members oatf !-Vi :-i'iry 1,1983
Board of County Commissioners
subject Acceptance of Proposal to
Develop a Churchon Site
Hn in South Miami,CD.
Area No.14
RECOMMENDATION.-
I1 lz recommended that you approve the selection nr t-Ho q*t~u 1AMEChurchI„e.,-6«1 S.W.$9 Place,South Miami ?orthf purchase
2o ?S ^T"^'°£th«Object site in Community Development AreaNo.li|with a church and/or related facilities.p rea^
estaoUshedirn^OOO^Oo"^M*""*'^°f the Slte be
BACKGROUND:
dnvoi^°Unt?,/c2uired thls Pr°Pertv ^connection with its communitvdevelopmentfundedneighborhoodimprovementactivitiesInSouth*
?»?iS?!?«th Mlami Communlty Development Task Force identified the sub-j<-ct site as an expansion area for a neighborhood church.Staff in
E2EH?e °the ?Sk Force action»recommended approval of the deve"i?PS2tiPl5ni an*thls Board by resolution,authorized the advertisingofthelandforthedevelopmentofaneighborhoodchurch?aavertlslnS
n;':rrP?nSe t0 the 8'ollcitation for redevelopment of the site oneproposalwasreceivedfromtheSt.John's AME Church,Inc.
^H:^?0hn,S,an ex*stln6 neighborhood Church,has proposed to demolishtheirpresentoutdatedbuildingandconstructamodernfacilitywithadequateparkingandlandscaping.iacuity with
?IIi»f«?t£.Mia21 Plann*n*Apartment,the South Miami Community Deve-
o?PSt John^P^Cf>,anH th?HUD Advl8ory Board recommend the approvalorst.John'8 as the developer of the site.HF vai
act?onsUtna^°V?i and auti?o***ation,staff will take the necessary
inr ?2«Jk^V**Pf°Perty transferred to St.John's AME ChurchInc.for the sales price of $17,000.00.urcn*
Attachments
/•
ORMNANCI Nil.10-83-1170
AN ORDINANCf 01 THl CITY Of SOUTH MIAMI,Fl ORIDA
AMENDING SECTION 3(a)(3)Of ORDINANCF
NO.13-81-1107,HERETOFORE ADOPTED AS THE SOUTH
MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY:AMENDING FUTURE
LAND USE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY IOCATEO AT
6461 AND 6501 SOUTHWEST 59TH PLACE AND 6456,
6470,AND 6484-86 SOUTHWEST 59TH COURT,FROM
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC
USE;GRANTING VARIANCES TO ALLOW A LOT SIZE OF
1.13 ACRES WHERE 2 ACRES IS NORMALLY REQUIRED,
VARIANCE TO ALLOW A CHURCH WITH 84 PARKING
SPACES WHERE 134 ARE NORMALLY REQUIRED,AND
VARIANCES TO ALLOW A 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK
WHERE 25 FEET IS NORMALLY REQUIRED;GRANTING
A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A CHURCH SUBJECT
TOTHEPLANSAS APPROVED.
WHEREAS,.after Public Hearings the Planning Board has
considered and made recommendaLions on the requests herein,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA:
Section J..That Section 3(a)(3)of Ordinance
N«.13-§l-llf7,heretofore adopted as the South Miami Comprehensive Plan,
be,and the same is hereby amended as follows:Tuturo Land Use Dc-s;jnai.^o;;
of the property at 6461 and 6501 S.W.59th Place and 6456,6470 and 64o4-86
S.W.59th Court,and legally described as:
Lot 40,less the North 10 feet,&Lots 41,
42,43,44,45,and 46,Block 7,and
o?tS 31,32,and 33,Block 5,and Lot 34,
Block 6,all located in FRANKLIN SUBDIVISION
as recorded in Plat Book 5,at Page 34 of
the public records of Dade County,Florida,
be changed from Low Density Residential to Public/Semi-Public Use.
Section 2.That the following variances be and they are
hereby granted intheuseof the above described property:
1.Variance to allow alotsizeof1.13acres where 2
acres is normally required.
2.Variance to allow a church with 84 parking spaces
where 134 are normally required.
3..Variance to allow a20footfront setback where
25 feet is normally required.
r.y
»*r »
Section 3.That a Special Use Permit be,and the same is
hereby granted to St.John's AME Church to allow construction of a new
church structure subject to plans and specifications drawn by
Environmental Planning and Design Group,Inc.,and dated January 25,1983.
Section 4.All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict
herewith be and the same are hereby repealed.
Section 5.This ordinance shall take effect immediately at
the time of its passage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of April y 1983
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
MAYOR
c^^ifiL^i""'
Passed on 1st Reading:3/15/83
Passed on 2nd Reading:4/05/83
-2-
=6'
/
all existing trees shown tobe removed
V :yomon $
Jfi 'tongue
\
^
fwomort
*****
J'V
existingresidenceand
church to remain until
new building completed;\
then removed.
site clearance and
demolition plan
"!"*-V.
'.V «"^v\N$X\
iirtV
north
r»i9o'
landscapecriteria
"•)'*'.Ol\C-t4jit
COT.'<rnorr..
•
&'LI
•+,s.w.59p|ace sireandlandscape_planf=|g'
*>T.J^w^*-.«.?.^or?c>t
i
S
.
W
.
D
y
t
f
i
C
O
U
r
c
-•
^
i
p
l
a
n
t
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
[m
a
r
*
'
qo
o
n
[_
v
a
e
n
t
i
f
.
c
na
m
*
c
o
m
m
o
n
n
a
m
e
M
M
0
L
>
'
^
A
^
^
«
/
-
*
0
r
t
»
?
C
+
4
t
-
W
^
H
.
/
J
^
'
l
t
f
'
t
f
'
'
•J
L
A
I
et
>
c
*
tJ
«
»
<
/
v
2
d
/
V
^
^
U
v
^
«
•
•
—L
.
T
"
•
O
O
h
^
/
'
J
C
W
'
^
a
I
«•
<
>
O
K
t
e
^
/
^
e
o
^
a
?
&
'
*
€
*
,
—-
-
H
_
3
1
A
.
l
t
,
'
•V
K
i
-
«*
>
V
*
VH
L
M
U
$
U
m
M
M
<3
.
W
.
5
9
t
h
P
L
A
C
E
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
y
\
®
3
4.4/1
ft
i
***.
<?.>
>A **
^
%