PB MINS 04-13-04
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
PLANNING BOARD
Regular Meeting
Action Summary Minutes
Tuesday, April 13, 2004
City Commission Chambers
7:30 P.M.
I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Action: The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M.
Action: The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.
II. Roll Call.
Action: Mr. Morton, Chairperson, requested a roll call.
Board members present constituting a quorum: Mr. Morton, Ms. Yates, Mr. Mann, and Mr.
Comendeiro and Mr. Illas.
Board members absent: Ms. Gibson and Mr. Liddy.
City staff present: Don O’Donniley (Planning Director), Sanford A. Youkilis ( Planning
Consultant), Gremaf Reyes (Video Support), and Patricia E. Lauderman (Planning Board
Secretary).
III. Administrative Matters
Mr. Youkilis informed the Board there were no administrative matters at this time.
IV. Planning Board Application / Public Hearings
PB-04-002
Applicant: Commercial Capital Corporation
Location: 5820 SW 40 Street
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR & CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, RELATING TO A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE
FROM THE “OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENT” PROVISIONS OF
Planning Board Meeting
April 13, 2004
Page 2 of 6
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN ORDER TO PERMIT A NEW OFFICE
BUILDING LOCATED IN THE “GR” GENERAL RETAIL USE DISTRICT
SPECIFICALLY LOCATED AT 5820 SW 40th STREET TO HAVE 12 OFF
STREET PARKING SPACES INSTEAD OF 14 OFF STREET PARKING
SPACES AS REQUIRED BY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 20-4.4
(B); AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Action: Mr. Morton read the item into record and Mr. Youkilis presented the staff report.
He explained that the applicant is requesting approval of a variance from Section 20-4.4 of
the LDC to allow a new two-story office building (mortgage banking use) located at 5820
SW 40th Street to have 12 off-street parking spaces instead of the required 14 spaces.
According to Florida HRS regulation governing required green space over a sewer septic
tank drain field has forced the applicant to remove approximately 1300 square feet of
designated parking area. The applicant is claiming a hardship in that properties in this area
are unable to connect to a sanitary sewer line and are required to put in a septic tank
system.
Mr. Youkilis summarized the history of the previous application of this item. In December
2000, the same applicant filed a LDC amendment application to permit mortgage
brokerage in the “GR” zoning district. The property at 5820 SW 40 Street is in the “GR”
zoning district. The City Commission approved the amendment in February 2001. In July
2002, the applicant received ERPB approval to build a new two story building with the
required parking spaces on the property at 5820 SW 40 Street. Since the requirement of the
parking could not be met due to the fact that the required green space over a septic tank
drain field, the applicant sought to meet the requirement of the parking without re-design
of the building. He sought to use the City’s off-site parking provisions to satisfy the
required parking spaces lost. That provision allows the long-term lease of required spaces
off site but within 1000 feet. The lease document required City Commission approval and
was presented to the City Commission in November 2003. The applicant’s proposed lease
with nearby Wachovia bank did not meet the standards recommended upon by the City
Attorney.
Mr. Youkilis advised that staff would recommend approval of the application subject to the
following conditions: (1) the applicant must submit the appropriate documentation from
the County or State indicating the mandatory need to use septic tank system in this area;
(2) the applicant needed to revise the submitted site plan so that it shows the minimum size
of 18’by 9’ for all parking spaces; (3) the 6 ft wood wall that separates the commercial side
from residential be changed to masonry; (4) that the present size of the driveway (19 feet
width) is to be changed to 22’ wide, so that it meets code.
Applicant: Arturo Abascal
At this point, Mr. Morton opened the public hearing.
Speakers: NAME ADDRESS
Jay Beckman 6520 SW 65 Street neutral
Cathy McCann 5820 SW 87 Street supported application
Planning Board Meeting
April 13, 2004
Page 3 of 6
Luis Arizo 5807 SW 51 Street opposed application
The Board raised a question about the Bird Road driveway exit being limited to 19 feet
wide. The Board felt the driveway is narrow and could be a potential danger to both drivers
and pedestrians. Board member, Mr. Mann was concerned about the non-conforming
issue. Mr. O’Donniley explained that the City’s consistent interpretation has been that the
applicant was “rebuilding” on the same footprint and therefore non-conforming status of
Sec. 20-4.8 (B) was applicable. Mr. Mann felt that the building is new construction and
that the non-conforming status applies only to rebuilding due to natural disaster or
remodeling of the building. The Board members felt that the interpretation of the language
regarding non-conforming and this item should be forwarded to the City Attorney for
clarification. A suggestion made by Mr. Morton regarding a method for creating more
space for the parking would be to reduce the size of the building. The applicant stated that
reducing the size of the building would not be productive for him to do. Ms. Yates wanted
to note that in the future the issue of non-conforming structures must be written with more
clarity.
Motion: Mr. Mann moved to defer the application to allow the applicant the opportunity
to get advise from his architect and to allow staff time to seek an opinion from the City
Attorney. Mr. Illas seconded the motion. The motion was approved by the following vote:
Vote: Ayes 5 Nays 0
PB-04-003
Applicant: Bakery Associates Ltd. And Modern Nails D/B/A Pinkies Nail Spa
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA RELATING TO A REQUEST TO AMEND THE CITY
OF SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, BY REVISING SECTION 20-
3.3(D) ENTITLED “PERMITTED USE SCHEDULE” IN ORDER TO ALLOW A
NAIL AND SKIN CARE USE AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE “SR (HD-OV)”,
SPECIALTY RETAIL (HOMETOWN OVERLAY) ZONING USE DISTRICT;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Action: Mr. Illas read the item into the record and Mr. O’Donniley presented the staff
report. He explained that the applicant was requesting the City to amend the Permitted Use
Schedule of the Land Development Code to include “nail and skin care” as a permitted use
in the “SR (HD-OV). The applicant indicated that if the amendment were approved this
type of use would be placed in the Shops at Sunset Place. The City’s current permitted use
schedule does not allow for the use of nail salon as a stand alone use but only as a special
accessory use, with conditions (location, size, signage). He explained that the City’s
Zoning Task Force in 2002 had recommended that this use be combined with barber/
beauty shops and allowed as an accessory use or as a separate permitted use in all of the
City’s commercial use districts. Mr. Morton asked if anyone was talking in opposition of
this item. At this point no one was in opposition. The Board and staff discussed the
request.
Planning Board Meeting
April 13, 2004
Page 4 of 6
Motion: Ms. Yates moved for approval of the application. Mr. Commendiero seconded
the motion. The motion was approved by the following vote:
Vote: Ayes 5 Nays 0
PB-04-004
Applicant: City of South Miami
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, RELATED TO THE PLANNING BOARD,
AMENDING SECTION 20-6.1(B)(2) OF THE SOUTH MIAMI LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, IN ORDER TO ALLOW SPECIAL MEETINGS OF
THE BOARD TO BE CALLED WHEN CIRCUMSTANCES PREVENT A
REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING FROM BEING HELD; PROVIDING
FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Action: Ms. Illas read the item into the record. Mr. Youkilis presented the staff report.
He explained that the Section 20-6.1 (B) (2) of the South Miami Land Development Code
specifies the organizational procedures for the Planning Board and includes a schedule
setting forth the regular monthly meeting dates for the Planning Board. There are no
provisions for calling a special meeting in the event circumstances prevent a regularly
scheduled meeting from being held. In recent months the Board has had several meetings
cancelled due to quorum problem, holidays, and conflict with meetings of the City
Commission. A delay in recommendations from the Planning Board can be harmful to the
ongoing development of the City and is unfair to the citizens whose applications for
development permits require Planning Board consideration.
The Board members discussed the time and place for special meetings. Some Board
members suggested having the option of holding special meetings as early as 6:30pm.
Other Board members thought that might create confusion and advised to leave it at the
usual time of 7:30pm. Board members discussed if there would be sufficient time for
notices to be mailed out for special meetings. That issue would be looked into by staff.
Finally, the Board inquired about whom would incur the fee for the mail-outs for a special
meeting. The staff responded that it would look into the fee schedule and see what is fair
for the applicant to pay. It was suggested that the word “circumstances” used in the
ordinance be more fully explained.
Speakers: Cathy McCann 5820 SW 87 Street
Motion: Ms. Yates moved to approve the proposed amendment as drafted by staff. Mr.
Illas seconded the motion.
Vote: Ayes 4 Nays 1 ( Mr. Commedeiro)
Planning Board Meeting
April 13, 2004
Page 5 of 6
V. Planning Board Work Program
(A): LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE: New Chapter Reviews
Mr. Youkilis stated that Planning Board meetings of October 14, 2003, January 27, 2004
and March 9, 2004 they had reviewed five chapters of the new LDC. After review and
minor modifications the Board approved all five chapters. For this meeting the Board
would be reviewing Chapter VIII Land Subdivision Regulations (20-8), Chapter IX
Minimum Housing (20-9) and Chapter X Concurrency: Maintaining Adequate Public
Facilities (20-10). Mr. Youkilis explained that three subject chapters had no substantive
changes other then reformatting and updating.
Mr. Commendiero, asked if Ms. Cathy McCann could point out a situation that is related to
one of the chapters. Mr. Morton proceeded to hear Ms. McCann. She directed the Board
and staff to Chapter VIII, page 2, Sec.20-8.4 (A)(2)(b). She inquired if this sentence
dealing with the issue of dedication of required public improvements (streets) was new or
already in the LDC ? The response from the Board was that the section is included in the
code, however, it is in the section pertaining to new plats and subdivisions. Her concern
was related to a house constructed on 58 Avenue and 76 Street and that there had been no
street dedication performed. She felt it was important for this situation not to occur again.
The Board agreed with her on the matter and felt that a similar provision requiring street
dedication on existing lots of record be placed in an appropriate section of the LDC. The
staff would research the best place for the section to be in. Another issue brought up by
Ms. McCann was Section 20-8.5 Unity of Title submittal and procedures. Ms. McCann
spoke about a past situation in which one house was built on three lots without a unity of
title, and the same lots were later administratively split into two buildable sites. She
questioned if this situation would be changed. Mr. Youkilis stated that the section
permitting the lot split to occur (Sec. 20-4.8 (D)(2) was scheduled to be amended to
become a waiver of plat situation requiring a public hearing and Commission approval.
Motion: Mr. Yates moved to approve the LDC amendments for Chapters VIII, IX, and X
as presented by staff. Mr. Mann seconded the motion.
Vote: Ayes 5 Nays 0
(B): COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR).
Planning Director O’Donniley summarized the progress of the Evaluation and Appraisal
Report (EAR). He reviewed the EAR Time Line chart, which spans from contacting DCA
in March 2004 until adoption of the EAR amendments in May 2006. He explained that the
detailed chart would appear on the City’s website as well as a questionnaire for the purpose
of giving the citizens a voice for their comments and concerns regarding issues the city
would need to address. A successful test run of the questionnaire was performed earlier in
the day. Mr. O’Donniley then thanked Mr. Gremaf Reyes the City’s MIS manager for the
Planning Board Meeting
April 13, 2004
Page 6 of 6
great job he did on the EAR website. Mr. O’Donniley then distributed a flow diagram that
was created by the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) in order to show the various
sequential steps in the EAR process. He informed the Board that he has been in contact
with DCA staff for this region in order to assist with the City’s EAR efforts. In addition, he
stated that for the next meeting, staff would bring a draft proposal for the Public
Involvement Process (PIP). He emphasized to the Board members that any comments and
suggestions are more than welcomed.
VI. Remarks
The Board and staff remarks: Mr. Morton informed the Board that at the last City
Commission meeting, Mr. Illas was re-appointed to serve on the Planning Board.
Additionally, Mr. Morton wanted to thanked Board member Ms. Brenda Yates
for making the quorum possible.
VII. Approval of Minutes
Action: The Board duly voted on and approved the minutes of March 9, 2004, as
submitted.
Vote: Ayes 5 Nays 0
VIII. Next Meeting
Action: Mr. Youkilis informed the Board the next Planning Board meeting was
scheduled for April 27, 2004.
IX. Adjournment
Action: There being no further business before the Board, Mr. Morton adjourned the
meeting at 9:45 PM.
DOD/SAY
K:\PB\PB Minutes\2004 Minutes\MINS 4-13-04.doc