Loading...
19THE CITY OF PLEASANT LIVING CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM To: Chairman & Members of the Planning Board VIA: Steven Alexander, City Manager FROM: Date: SUBJECT: Jane K. Tompkins, AICP, Planning Directo~ August 16, 2016 Agenda Item NO.:~ An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami amending the Land Development Code, Article III, "Zoning Regulations," Section 20-3.5, "Dimensional Requirements," to amend and clarify the setback requirements for side street first and second story facades of structures on corner lots, and for side interior setbacks for additions to structures with a five foot setback, in the RS-l, RS-2, RS-3, RS-4 and RS-S zoning districts; and Section 20-3.6, "Supplemental Regulations," subsection (F)(4), to correct the title of the director responsible for determining which streets are frontage and side streets. BACKGROUND: This ordinance was first presented to the Planning Board at the May 10, 2016 meeting at the request of Vice-Mayor Welsh. After much discussion, the item was ultimately withdrawn. Planning staff were directed to provide additional information and return the item to the Board. The concern this ordinance is intended to address is the lack of symmetry on a block face when the house on the corner lot is positioned at a right angle to the other houses on the block. When this occurs, that property's side yard is aligned with the front yards of the remainder of the block. Because a required side yard street setback is less than a required front yard setback, the house on the corner may be closer to the street than the other houses on the block. In an effort to prevent this arrangement, the City is proposing amending the side street setback requirements for single-family residences as provided in Sections 20-3.5(E)&(H) of the Land Development Code (LDC). Further, a new requirement for a second-story street side setback is proposed. It was thought that adding this requirement would create a less bulky appearance along the side street. Side Street Setback Text Amendment August 16, 2016 Page 2 of 3 ANALYSIS: The side street setback requirements are provided in Sections 20-3.5(E) for one-story structures and (H) for two-story structures. Both one-story and two-structures currently have a side street setback of twenty (20) feet in RSl and fifteen (15) feet for RS2 -RS5. There are no separate setback requirements for the second story; in other words, the two stories may be flush with one another. The proposed amendment increases the side street setback for the first floor and creates a greater setback requirement for the second floor for the RS-l through RS-4 districts. Figures 1, 2, and 3 (attached) depict, for a typical lot, the buildable area, current setbacks, and proposed setbacks for corner lots. There is currently a thirty (30) foot difference between the side street and front yard setback in RS1. The proposed amendment will reduce this difference by five (5) feet by increasing the side street setback requirement. However, these are larger lots (minimum 40,000 square feet) so the difference is less likely to be noticeable as the houses will likely be spaced farther apart (please see Figure 4). A separate second story setback is not proposed. With the current RS-2 requirements, there is a twenty (20) foot difference between the front yard and side yard setbacks. With proposed changes in RS2, there will be a fifteen (15) foot difference between the front yard and fi~st floor side street setbacks. These are also larger lots (minimum 15,000 square feet). RS3 and RS4 properties currently have a ten (10) foot difference between front yard and side street setback. With the proposed changes, they will have a five (5) foot difference between the setbacks. The proposed twenty-five (25) foot second floor setback will be aligned with the front yard setback of the adjacent house (please see Figure 5), but the second floor may be stepped back or recessed from the first floor. In RS5, there is a ten (10) foot difference between the proposed first floor side street and front yard setbacks, both existing and proposed. Under the proposed amendment, the second floor will be setback five (5) feet farther, and will be more closely aligned with the neighboring house (please see Figure 6). The proposed changes seem to have the greatest impact on RS5 properties. Given the size of these lots (minimum 6,000 square feet and 50 foot frontage), the new setbacks result in a narrower house for a corner lot, perhaps as narrow as 22.5 feet in width on the second floor. This can impact the design of the house and the efficiency of the floor plans. However, the house can still be built to the maximum FAR of .525 by providing a twenty (20) foot side street setback for both floors. The proposed draft also corrects minor typographical errors such as the title of the director responsible for determining which' str~et is considered to be the front of a corner lot property. PLANNING BOARD ACTION: After the public hearing held on the item at the Planning Board's July 21, 2016 meeting, the Board recommended that PB-16-016 not be approved, with a vote of 5-1. JKT Z:\Commission Items\2016\08-16-2016\Side Street Setback Text Amendment\PB-16-016_Side Street Setback Text Amendment Report.docx Side Street Setback Text Amendment August 16, 2016 Page 3 of 3 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Commission consider this item on first reading. Attachments: • Figures 1 through 6 • Draft Ordinance • Excerpt of May 10, 2016 Planning Board meeting minutes • Excerpt of July 21, 2016 Planning Board meeting minutes • Petition and Map JKT Z:\Commission Items\2016\08-16-2016\Side Street Setback Text Amendment\PB-16-016_Side Street Setback Text Amendment Report.docx First Floor Side Street Setback: Current: 20'-0" / Proposed: 25 1-0" Second Floor Side Street Setback: Current: 20'-0" / Proposed: 25'-0" Front Setback: 50'-0" CURRENT: PROPOSED: (First and Sec. Floor Side Street Setback 20'-0") (First Floor and Sec. Floor Side Street Setback 25'-0") ~1. __ ~~p-~~" •• ____ •• ",~----"_~~~,, •••• ~----. 1~~~"~ __ .···1 __ .1~" •• ______ ~ (Lot Frontage: 125'-0") PLAN ELEVATION (Maximum Building Height: 25'-0") .. ..... \' . .:., • ,'. :'," :. ,';; . .;..... .• '. c-' .. ·RIiSJDE~"I~I.Sll\ldl-~cf~~jLy·ssr'~~KS.····. . ····FIII\1rEi: .. ·· >~iri~~~~fh1i~~5~1~[tf~rfl'11~;iQ~·s~i:'h.· .... First Floor Side Street Setback: Current 15 1-0" / Proposed: 20"-0" Second Floor Side Street Setback: Current: 15 1-0" / Proposed: 25'-0" Front Setback: 35 1-0" / 25 1-0" /25 1-0" CURRENT: {First and Sec. Floor Side Street Setbpck 15'-0"} PLAN ~ • , I ELEVATION (Maximum Building Height: 2S'-O") f • PROPOSED: {First Floor 20'-0" and Sec. Floor Side Street Setback 25'-0"} .·-~otir ... , " ,; ,. RESIDENTIALSINGLEFAMILYSETBACKS , .' "Zpning[)istrict:RS-S" , Minimum Lot Size:6,000~quare feet Minimum Frontage: SO feet' First Floor Side Street Setback: 15'-0 11 Second Floor Side Street Setback: Current: 15'-0 11 / Proposed: 20'-0 11 Front Setback: 25'-0 11 CURRENT: PROPOSED: ,0" 0, ':: •• ° 'Fi'~r~:'i., (First and Sec. Floor Side Street Setback 15'-0") (First Floor 15'-0" to remain and Sec. Floor Street Setback 20'-0") (Lot Fro tage: 50'-0") PLAN f • r4 ELEVATION (Maximum Building Height: 25'-0") -s~~,.----.~~~- «L I I ,,, p., ,,' " ',:,,':: ,. ," .• i ,,"'f . . • :"'> .',', ,< ;i;::.!I.::i>lI'i,'H,'i'):,";ii ':1·,:,.:"1,,. ,:': ": Mirl!,n~HJr;n·~Q~.$~~e~.4"~Qqq ~,~~~,r~ :fe~t, :":',' i ",',.,.: •• :'., •• ',' ......• "'''i';l''~l'''f ',:",.::,:.<,;'\:: :(i:'>; '·t:': ! ' '.'': .:' ' .: ,Mi'ni.ltl,prtJ' ·~r¢ntag~·: l~S, ,f~et ",;, ." ;;,; ·':'!/;:>;·l·,···~,}::};:,;.>'i,·tr:.·:: ';;;,a);;:i."i .• imim!;,f';;'.ii;;;,;i.;·;~;;::,,!;,,';);iii~:;;::;:i;):;~[:;/.r?:,'.::",·);,'.:;\:,"f.:k;':i·')~.:;).::r,C,·.;, ::';,'.,;,:,,:; ,.",,: ':·;i.::'>:"\,,,;'. ,:", """" :,;.,." ',,;:', .. ,:'.:;:",;, .. ;" •... ,' First Floor Side Street: Current: 20'-0" / Proposed: 25'-0" Second Floor Side Street Setback: Current: 20'-0" / Proposed: 25'-0" Front Setback: 50'-0" CURRENT CORNER CONDITIONS -;~ '.; ti ... ~ .. -- PROPOSED CORNER CONDITIONS --... -~ .... I . . ~ ~.. . ......... ····~I ~r , ....... ~. __ .' A. "~ , .. .iSltJl~'§'r~~r PROPOSED: (First Floor and Sec. Floor Side ~tre.et Setback 25'-0") . ,'. , " . . . ' . "RESIDENTIALSINGLEFAMILYSETSA<:KS . . .. ioning ~isttict: RS-2IRS-~ t~$-4.. .. .... ". ' . Minimum Lot$ize: 15,9905(1'. ft./1o,OOO'$q.ft.IG,OOO sq. ft. . M!hin1umFrontal$e:l.oPft~lj5'ftI60 ft. . . . First Floor Side Street Setback: Current 15'-0" / Proposed: 20"-0" Second Floor Side Street Setback: Current: 15'-0" / Proposed: 25'-0" Front Setback: 35'-0" / 25'-0" /25'-0" CURRENT CORNER CONDITIONS cd ... ..-... .... ~ "'~~~P-tv PROPOSED: . .' fi~Ul'e.:;.··.· F i (First Floor 20'-0" and Sec. Floor Side Street Setback 25'-0") RESIDENTIAL'SINGlE FAMILYSETI3ACKS FigUre:~ Zoning District:RS~5 , , Minimum LotSize: 6,000 square feet Mihimum Frontage: 50 feet First Floor Side Street Setback: 15'-0" Second Floor Side Street Setback: Current: 15'-0" / Proposed: 20'-0" Front Setback: 25'-0" CURRENT CORNER CONDITIONS +-"·~'II-~"-·;""""-""'-"5-I~"· ~~---.. ~.....­ PROPOSED CORNER CONDITIONS ........ , .. ___ Ht ... ___ ..... ___ ~.,.. ",~--.~l12lSt~ PROPOSED: (First Floor 15'-0" to remoin and Sec. Floor Street Setback 20'-0") 1 Ordinance No. ---------------- 2 An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami amending 3 the Land Development Code, Article III, "Zoning Regulations," Section 20-3.5, 4 "Dimensional Requirements," to amend and clarify the setback requirements for side 5 street first and second story facades of structures on corner lots, and for side interior 6 setbacks for additions to structures with a five foot setback, in the RS-1, RS-2, RS-3, 7 RS-4 and RS-5 zoning districts; and Section 20-3.6, "Supplemental Regulations," 8 subsection (F)(4), to correct the title of the director responsible for determining which 9 streets are frontage and side streets. 10 WHEREAS, the development of corner lots with respect to which are the front or side streets of 11 the lot are sometimes confusing; and 12 WHEREAS, the Land Development Code provides in Section 20-3.6(F)(4) that "In determining 13 which streets are the frontage and side streets, the director of building and zoning shall be guided by the 14 existing development pattern[;]" and 15 WHEREAS, the present setbacks in the RS-1 through RS-5 districts do not have a category 16 called Second Story Side Street Setback; and 17 WHEREAS, in the RS-2, RS-3, RS-4 and RS-5 zoning districts, in Section 20-3.5E for one story 18 structures, and in Section 20-3.5H for two story structures, the Side Street Setback (for both the 1 st and 19 2nd floors) is 15 feet; and 20 WHEREAS, for interior lots in single family residential zoning districts, in Section 20-3.5H, Table 21 1, the Side Setback (not the Side Street Setback) ranges from 7.5 to 10 feet, and the 2nd Story Side 22 Setback ranges from 7.5 to 15 feet; and 23 WHEREAS, there may be a long line of houses on non-corner lots in the single family zoning 24 districts observing 25 feet, or more, front setbacks and at the end of the street may be erected a house 25 with a 15 feet setback (either built with one or two stories) that gives the appearance like it is sticking out 26 from the setback line that the rest of the houses have to observe, like a "sore thumb;" and 27 WHEREAS, the South Miami Commission desires to create the requirement for "Second Story 28 Side Street Setback," and establish for corner lots the criteria of 25 feet in the RS1 through RS4 29 cate~ories and 20 feet in the RS5 category as the distance that the side second story facade must be set 30 back from the property line of the lot on the street declared as the side street, and desires to further 31 create the requirement First Floor Side Street Setback, with the criteria of 20 feet as the distance the side 32 first story facade must be set back from the property line of the lot on the street declared as the side 33 street, for both one and two story structures, except in RS-5, which may remain at 15 feet because of the 34 50 feet wide lots; and 35 WHEREAS, the Planning Board reviewed this ordinance on July 21, 2016 and recommended 36 denial by a vote of 5 to 1. 37 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE 38 CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA: 39 Section 1. Article III, "Zoning Regulations," Section 20-3.5, "Dimensional Requirements," of the 40 Land Development Code, City of South Miami, Florida, is hereby amended andshall read as follows: Page 1 41 20-3.5 Sec. -Dimensional requirements. 42 (A) Residential Districts. In residential districts, the maximum density, minimum lot area and frontage, 43 minimum yard setbacks, maximum coverage and maximum building heights for the permitted uses in 44 each district shall be determined from the Dimensional Requirements Table for either single-family 45 residential districts one-story (Section 20-3.5(E)) or single-family residential districts two-story 46 (Section 20-3.5(H)) or multi-family districts (Section 20-3.5(F)). 47 (8) Nonresidential Districts. In nonresidential districts, the minimum lot area and frontage, minimum yard 48 setbacks, maximum floor area, maximum coverage and maximum building heights for permitted 49 uses in each district shall be determined from the Dimensional Requirements Table for 50 nonresidential districts (Section 20-3.5(G)). 51 (C) Dimensional Requirement Tables. 52 (1) The use of land and the erection of buildings and other structures on land shall be subject to the 53 dimensional requirements of the applicable zoning district, as reflected on the four tables 54 labeled "Dimensional Requirements, Single-Family Residential Districts, One-Story" (Section 55 20-3.5(E)) or "Dimensional Requirements, Single-Family Residential Districts, Two-Story" 56 (Section 20-3.5(H):), "Dimensional Requirements, Multi-family Districts" (Section 20-3.5(F)) and 57 "Dimensional Requirements, Nonresidential Districts" (Section 20-3.5(G)). 58 (2) There shall be no variation or deviation from such dimensional requirements except where 59 expressly allowed by this Code. 60 (3) Minimum and maximum dimensional requirements for permitted uses within a PR or PI use 61 district shall be the same as those listed in the following tables for uses within the most 62 restrictive use district located adjacent to the subject PR or PI property. 63 (D) Properties Abutting Single-Family Zoning Districts. 64 * * * 65 Section 20-3.5E 66 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS 67 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS -ONE-STORY r I I I Min. Lot Size RS-1 RS-2 RS-3 RS-4 RS-S i, 1 Net Area (sq. ft.) 40,000 15,000 10,000 6,000 6,000 l -I Frontage (ft.) I 125 I 100 I 75 I 60 I 50 I r I I I I ~ I Min. Yard Setbacks (ft.) j I I Front 50 35 25 25 25 , I ! i- I Rear I 25 I 25 I 25 I 25 I 25 I I Side (Interior)a I 12.5 I 10 I 7.5 I 7.5 7.5 i I Page 2 Side (Street) I ~25 I ~20 1 ±§-20 1·~20 15 Max. Building Height I 1 1 1 Feet 25 25 25 25 25 Max. Building Coverage (%) First floor 20 30 P-PT~- Max. Impervious Coverage (%)_·1 Pl4Df4oT45 45 1 68 69 a Cumulative width of both side yards shall be not less than 20 percent of total lot width. 70 Except that additions to existing structures that are not being demolished, except for the 71 grandfathered side facade built closer to the interior side property line than presently permitted, may 72 have 5 feet first story interior side setbacks where any portion of the building already has a 5 feet 73 interior side setback. 74 * * * 75 Section 20-3.5H 76 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS 77 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS -TWO-STORY RS-3 RS-4 RS-5 i REQUIREMENT 1 RS·l 1 RS·2 I L-M~i~n.Lo_tS~ize -=-1 ~~~===I =1 =1==1 = ! . Net Area (sq. ft.) 1 140,000 liS,oDO 10,000 6,000 6,000 Frontage (ft.) 125 100 75 60 50 I I :~l M--in-.-Y-ar-d-s-e-tb-a-c-ks~(-ft-.)~--~----~----~----------~~~-----~I----~I----~I~--- Rear Side (Interior)a For structure 12' or less in height, as measured from the first floor finished 25 25 Refer to Table 1 25 25 25 25 25 Page 3 78 I I Iloor elevation ~ I r~~--~--------~--po-~r-t-io-n-o-f-st-r-u-ct-u-re~ab-o-v-e-1-2-'h-i-g--h-a~s fl~---OO_--4-----~---r--~ 1 Refer t 1 0 Table j measured from the first floor finished i 1 floor elevation I Side (Street)-First I· i ~25 ~r ~ ! ____ S_to_r_y _____ --1-_______________ J -]l2i l2 [---- 15 1 Side {Street}: ! ! Second Story Max. Building Height ! Stories I I 2 I 2 T I 2 I 2 i--l-----F-ee-t----,o------o---------rs •• psr 25 25 25 i--I-----------'---------------jefer t 2 0 Table Max. Building Coverage (%) First floor I 1 t .---~--~--~--~ i Max. Impervious Coverage (%) Max. Floor Area Ratio (%) Second floor Refer to Table 2 Refer to Table 2 79 a Cumulative width of both side yards shall be not less than 20 percent of total lot width. 80 81 82 Special dimensional requirements and performance standards for two-story single family structure and 83 two story additions. Page 4 84 (A) Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to establish special dimensional requirements and 85 performance standards to regulate two-story single family structures and two-story additions 86 within the residential zoning districts: "RS-1" Estate Residential, "RS-2" Semi-Estate 87 Residential, "RS-3" Low Density Single-Family Residential, "RS-4" Single-Family Residential 88 and "RS-5" Single-Family Residential (50' lots) of the City of South Miami. 89 (B) Applicability. The requirements of this Section shall be in addition to each and every other 90 requirement. of the City of South Miami Land Development Code (Code), and in the case of 91 conflict, the provision of this Section shall control. 92 (C) Performance Standards. The performance standard set forth in this section will guide the 93 development of two-story residential homes in the single family residential districts: RS-1, RS-2, . 94 RS-3, RS-4 and RS-5. The performance standards are necessary in order to address yard 95 setbacks, open space, adequate landsca'ping, plan review process, and existing character of 96 the residential neighborhoods in the City of South Miami. By implementing these standards the 97 city will be able to preserve and enhance the neighborhood character through architectural 98 designs that are consistent and responsive to the individual context of the city architecturally 99 diverse neighborhoods. 100 (1) Building Site. The development of two-story residential homes shall be constructed on a lot 101 that is suitable for residential development, provides adequate setbacks and the necessary 102 infrastructure to support the development. 103 (2) Minimum Lot Size. The minimum lot size for residential homes shall be subject to the 104 dimensional requirements set forth in the Land Development Code table labeled 105 "Dimensional Requirements Single-Family Residential District Two Story" Section 20- 106 3.5(H). For irregular shaped lots, the average lot width rather than the frontage width shall 107 be used at the discretion of the Planning Director. 108 (3) Yard Setback Requirements. No building or structure, or any part thereof, including 109 covered porches or terraces, but not including uncovered steps, projections shall be 110 erected at a lesser distance from the front, side or rear line of any building site than the 111 front, side or rear setback distance, respectively, prescribed and established herein for 112 such building site. Nothing herein shall prohibit a building 'or structure from having more 113 than the minimum required setbacks. 114 (a) Side Setbacks (Interior). Refer to Table 1: "Proposed Preliminary Minimum Side Yard 115 Setbacks." 116 Side yards shall be measured from the closest point of the structure's vertical outside 117 wall to the side lot line, on a bearing parallel to the front lot line, at ground level. 118 TABLE 1 119 New Two-Story Single Family Residential. and 120 Second Story Additions 121 Minimum Setbacks Requirements 122 (Interior Lot) Existing Lot Frontage (ft.) First Floor Second Floor Interior Side Setback a Interior Side Setback b 40-44 I 7.5 7.5 45-49 I 7.5 9.0 Page 5 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 , , 1 \ • I : 50-54 7.5 10.0 55-59 7.5 11.0 7.5 12.0 65-69 8.5 13.0 70-74 9.5 14.0 15.0 a Except that additions to existing structures may have 5 feet interior side setbacks at the first floor, where any portion of the building already has a 5 feet setback. b For pre-existing improved lots of record in the RS:3 or RS:4 districts, that are 50 feet or less in lot width, the second floor setback shall be the same as the first floor setback. (b) Front Setback. The minimum front setback shall be consistent with the dimensional requirements reflected on the Land Development Code table labeled "Dimensional Requirements Single-Family Residential District Two Story" (Section 20-3.5(H)). (c) Side Setbacks (Street). The minimum side setback (street) for structure that abuts a street shall be consistent with the dimensional requirements reflected on the Land Development Code table labeled "Dimensional Requirements Single-Family Residential District Two Story" (Section 20-3,5(H)). (d) Rear Setback. The minimum rear setback of twenty-five (25) feet shall be maintained and required on principle buildings in the single-family residential district, as reflected on the Land Development Code table labeled "Dimensional Requirements Single- Family Residential District Two Story" (Section 20-3.5(H)). * * * Section 2. Article III, "Zoning Regulations," Section 20-3.6, "Supplemental Regulations," Subsection (F), "Roadway Dedications, Improvements and Setbacks," of the Land Development Code, City of South Miami, Florida, is hereby amended and shall read as follows: 20-3.6 -Supplemental regulations. * * * 146 (F) Roadway Dedications, Improvements and Setbacks. 147 (1) Public road rights-of-way shall be dedicated and paved to the minimum widths set forth in the 148 city's adopted Transportation Element or as follows, whichever is greater: 149 (a) One hundred (100) feet for: Bird Road (SW 40 Street), Miller Road (SW 56 Street) and 150 Sunset Drive (SW 57 Avenue). 151 (b) Eighty (80) feet for Kendall Drive (SW 88 Street). Page 6 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 (c) Twenty-five (25) feet for Progress Road (from SW 70 Street to SW 68 Street). (d) Seventy (70) feet for section and half section line roads. (e) Fifty (50) feet for all other roads, unless required otherwise herein. (f) Thirty-five (35) feet for all private roadways. (g) Twenty (20) feet for all alleys. (2) All dedicated public roadways shall be improved by the abutting property owner to the specifications of the city or county. (3) No structures, other than utility poles, shall be located nearer to the centerline of an abutting roadway than a distance equal to one-half of the official right-of-way width plus the minimum required yard setback. (4) In determining which streets are the frontage and side streets, the QGirector of building the Planning and ~~oning Department shall be guided by the existing development pattern. (5) Required yard setback distances shall be measured from the official right-of-way line, regardless of whether such rights-of-way have been dedicated. * * * Section 3. Codification. The provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made part of the Land Development Code of the City of South Miami as amended. Section 4. Severability. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, this holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance or the Guidelines adopted hereunder. Section 5. Ordinances in Conflict. All ordinances or parts of ordinances and all sections and parts of sections of ordinances in direct conflict herewith are hereby repealed. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective upon enactment. PASSED AND ENACTED this __ dayof _____ , 2016. ATTEST: CITY CLERK 1st Reading 2nd Reading READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM: LANGUAGE, LEGALITY AND EXECUTION THEREOF CITY ATTORNEY APPROVED: MAYOR COMMISSION VOTE: Mayor Stoddard: Vice Mayor Welsh: Commissioner Edmond: Commissioner Harris: Commissioner Liebman: Pag~ 7 CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI PLANNING BOARD Regular Meeting Minutes Excerpt Tuesday, May 10, 2016 CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS 07:00 P.M. The City of South Miami Code of Ordinances, Section 8A-5, requires that all lobbyists, as defined in that section, must register with the City Clerk before engaging in any lobbying activities and in most cases pay an annual fee of $500.00 and an additional $100 for each additional issue. This applies to all persons who are retained with or without compensation to influence any action, decision, recommendation of someone with the city, including the city manager, city attorney, department heads, city personnel, or members of the city commission or members of any city board, concerning a matter that could foreseeably be address by the city commission or a city board. There are some exceptions and exemptions. The following are not considered to be lobbyist: a representative of a principal at a quasi-judicial hearing, experts who present scientific or technical information at public meetings, representatives of a neighborhood association without compensation and representatives of a not-for-profit community based organization for the purpose of requesting a grant who seek to influence without special compensation. Individuals who wish to view or listen to the meeting in its entirety, audio and video versions of the meeting can be found on the city's website (www.southmiamifl.gov). I. Call to Order Action: Mr. Greiner called the meeting to order at 7:10 P.M. II.· Roll Call Board Members Present Constituting a Quorum: Mr. Greiner (Chairman), Ms. Fischer (Vice- Chairwoman), Dr. Philips, Ms. Glavey, Mr. Basu, Ms. Kahn, and Mr. Melow. Board Members Absent: None. City Staff Present: Ms. Shari Kamali (Deputy City Manager), Mrs. Jane Tompkins (Planning Director), Mr. Marcus Lightfoot (Senior Planner/Zoning Administrator), and Gary M. Held (Land Use Attorney). City Staff Absent: None City Attorney: Mr. Thomas Pepe III. Administrative Matters Ms. Kamali introduced the Board to Jane Tompkins, the new planning director for the city. Mrs. Tompkins then gave a brief presentation on her qualifications. 1 Ms. Kamali informed the Board that the applicant for PB-16-00S has requested to pull their item and to have it appear before the Planning Board at a future meeting so that they could meet with the City Manager to discuss their item. Because of that, PB-16-00S was not reviewed by the Board. IV. Public Hearings 1. PB-16-011 Applicant: City of South Miami An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami amending the Land Development Code, Article III, "Zoning Regulations," Section 20-3.S, "Dimensional Requirements," to amend and clarify the setback requirements for side street first and second story facades of structures on corner lots, and for side interior setbacks for additions to structures with a five foot setback, in the RS-l, RS-2, RS-3, RS-4 and RS-S zoning districts; and Section 20-3.6, tlSupplemental Regulations," subsection (F)(4), to correct the title of the director responsible for determining which streets are frontage and side streets. Ms. Fischer read the item into the record. Mr. Lightfoot presented the PB-16-011 to the Board. Ms. Fischer asked who came up with the idea process for this item. Staff informed the Board that this ordinance was created by Vice Mayor Welsh. Motion: Dr. Philips moved to invite Vice Mayor Welsh to the podium in order to speak before the Planning Board. Mr. Greiner seconded the motion. Vote: Yes 7, No 0 (None) Mr. Basu: Yes Ms. Glavey: Yes Mr. Greiner: Yes Ms. Fischer: Yes Ms. Kahn: Yes Dr. Philips: Yes Mr. Melow: Yes Vice Mayor Welsh clarified that the second story side street setback be twenty-five (2S) feet on properties that are zoned RS-1 through RS-4, and for RS-S to have a second-story side street setback of twenty (20) feet. Ms. Glavey stated that she is uncomfortable with this ordinance as it is the equivalent of spot zoning. She then stated that if it the regulations are increased, then the footprint of what can be built will be reduced. Vice Mayor Welsh responded that if the side street setback is reduced, there is a higher probability for there to be more trees on the property. She then stated that this type of change would make more sense if it were part of the LDC rewrite. As it is now, the proposed change will make smaller homes than what is currently allowed. Vice Mayor Welsh responded that if the change is added to the LDC now, chances are high that it will be part of the LDC rewrite as well. Furthermore, there is a maximum buildable area of 3,000 S.F. per 10,000 S.F. of land for properties in the RS-3 and RS-4, shifting the house would not place that large of a burden on coming up with a plan that is acceptable to the owners of the property. 2 Mr. Held stated that corner lots are typically larger lots that allows for greater maneuverability on the lot. Mr. Held then explained the concept ofthe proposed ordinance. Mr. Melow asked if there were some properties that exhibited the types of characteristics that Vice Mayor Welsh described. Vice Mayor Welsh gave the following examples: • The house on the NW corner of SW 58 th Place and SW 80 th Street; • The perspective of the houses along the south side of SW 81 st Street, at the corner of SW 81 st Street and SW 61 st Avenue; and • Looking westward towards the corner house on the SE corner of SW 61 st Avenue and SW 81 st Street. Ms. Glavey clarified that it may be better to review this item during the LDC rewrite because there would be a larger amount of people looking at the proposed change. The Chairperson opened the floor to public comments on PB-16-011. • Christopher Cooke-Yarborough -Support Mr. Cooke-Yarborough added an additional example to Vice Mayor Welsh's list which was: • The corner of SW 69 th Street and SW 64th Avenue, across from All America Park. The Chairperson closed the floor to public comments on PB-16-011. Ms. Glavey stated that after hearing that the new structures that are out of character with the existing structures, she understands Mr. Cooke-Yarborough though process. She then stated that she doesn't know what the existing conditions are for each of the residential corner lots in South Miami, but it may be better to have those corner lots match the existing setbacks. She then suggested taking a look at each of the corner lots in order to determine if they each have twenty-five (25) feet of frontage. Vice Mayor Welsh then gave the Board the proposed side street setbacks that are listed in the ordinance for the RS-l through RS-5 zoning district. Ms. Fischer asked what the deciding factor was in determining the side street setback of twenty (20) feet. Vice Mayor Welsh responded that because the second story was twenty-five (25) feet for all properties that are zoned RS-l through RS-4, he felt that it wouldn't be that much to ask a developer to increase the side street setback from fifteen (15) feet to twenty (20) feet. Also, to require a twenty-five (25) foot side street setback so that the structure doesn't have a sheer wall fifteen (15) feet from the property line. Ms. Fischer added an example to Vice Mayor Welsh's list of properties. • The vicinity of the corner of SW 83 rd Street around SW 58 th Avenue. Ms. Fischer then stated that 'if the City waits on the LDC rewrite to address this issue, a greater amount of these types' homes could be built before it is changed. Mr. Greiner stated that because there typically are fences and walls that are placed along the property line, the setback may not matter for those types of properties since the hard edge is a 3 fence. He then added that he was in agreement with Ms. Glavey in that this item needs additional study. Vice Mayor Welsh stated that there are provisions in the ordinance that take grandfathered setbacks into account when doing additions on the property. Mr. Basu stated that while he supports the intent of the ordinance, he feels that a volumetric study should be done in order to determine which types of setbacks are appropriate. He then asked if Staff could do sketches of typical lots in the city with the proposed setbacks. Vice Mayor then asked if the item could be split into two (2) separate items of which the City Attorney responded that the Board can make any recommendation that they feel is necessary. Ms. Fischer suggested that there be an amendment to the ordinance, stating that this ordinance shall only apply to corner lots that are larger than the lots that are abutting the corner lot on each roadway. Ms. Glavey stated that making a unilateral rule without studying it further or hearing from residents that live on corner lots would make her uncomfortable. The Chairperson re-opened the floor to public comments on PB-l6-0ll. • Christopher Cooke-Yarborough -Support Mr. Cooke-Yarborough stated that the size of a corner lot is irrelevant. This ordinance was made to address corner lots that are closer to the ROW than other single family residences on the same block face. The Chairperson closed the floor to public comments on PB-l6-0ll. Mr. Held suggested that there may be a text change that could be imposed that requires that an applicant follows the setback on a block face unless it is approved by the Environmental Review & Preservation (ERPB) to follow the setback that is typical to the lot as set forth in the LOC. By doing so there would be a case by case review corner lots. Mr. Greiner responded that it isn't good practice to develop text changes at the last minute. He then recommended that this ordinance warrants further study by staff. He then suggested that it be added to the comprehensive study of the LDC. Motion: Mr. Basu moved to direct staff to study with special emphasis to RS-4 and RS-5 in terms of the impact of the setback in three dimensions (3-D), not just word and see if those setbacks make sense. Ms. Fischer seconded the motion. Mr. Held asked if the second story side street setback for RS-l through RS-4 should be twenty- five (25) feet, of which Vice Mayor Welsh stated yes. Ms. Glavey pointed out that this item should be part of the LDC rewrite. Mr. Basu stated that the rewrite process could take up to two (2) years and may not pan out. Mr. Basu also stated that when staff performs their study, they should also determine the extent of the need for this type of ordinance. Mr. Greiner added that Staff should determine the extent of the need and what impact it would have on design standards. 4 The Board recessed for approximately five (5) minutes. Mr. Greiner recommended that Mr. Basu withdrew his original motion and then restated the motion with some of the requirements for the research. Mr. Basu withdrew his motion. Mr. Greiner seconded it. As requested, Mr. Basu restated the motion. Motion: Mr. Basu moved to direct Staff to return PB-16-011 to the Board with the following conditions. 1. Sense of what the extent of the need is 2. Provide some volumetric studies with moreemphasis on RS-4 and RS-5 Ms. Kahn seconded the motion. Mr. Greiner stated that the Board would be denying the motion. Mr. Pepe asked if the Board were denying the item and sending it back to Staff for further study, of which Mr. Greiner stated yes. Mr. Held stated that if the Board makes a recommendation, it can then be forwarded to the City Commission for review. Mr. Held asked if there was a time limit in the LDC for the Board to review items. Mr. Lightfoot read Section 20-6.1(B)(4)(a)(iii) into the record, which states: Recommendations on all items before the board shall be transmitted to the city commission within forty-five (45) calendar days of the time that the item first appears on a regularly scheduled board agenda. if the board has not reached a decision on the item before it during said period, then the item shall be transmitted forthwith to the city commission with a "No Comment" recommendation. Ms. Fischer asked if Vice Mayor Welsh could withdraw the item and then he take the initiative to bring it to staff for further study. Mr. Pepe stated that there wouldn't be anything preventing the Vice Mayor from withdrawing his motion. After discussing the item, Vice Mayor Welsh elected to withdraw his item so that he could ask the City Manager to direct Planning staff to further study it. Because of that, no action was taken on the item. V. Public Comments/New Business The Chairperson opened the floor to public comments and any new business. Public Comments Section No comments from the public. New Business Section 5 The Chairperson closed the floor to public comments and any new business. VI. Approval of the Minutes 1. Planning Board Minutes of April 12, 2016: Motion: Mr. Greiner moved to defer the meeting minutes as amended. Ms. Glavey seconded the motion. Vote: Yes 7, No 0 (None) Mr. Basu: Yes Ms. Glavey: Yes Mr. Greiner: Yes Ms. Fischer: Yes Ms. Kahn: Yes Dr. Philips: Yes Mr. Melow: Yes VII. Future Meeting Date: A) June 14, 2016 at 7:00 P.M. VIII. Adjournment Mr. Greiner adjourned the meeting at 9:28 P.M. 6 CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI PLANNING BOARD Regular Meeting Minutes Thursday, July 21, 2016 CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS 07:00 P.M. The City of South Miami Code of Ordinances, Section SA-5, requires that all lobbyists, as defined in that section, must register with the City Clerk before engaging in any lobbying activities and in most cases pay an annual fee of $500.00 and an additional $100 for each additional issue. This applies persons who are retained with or without compensation to influence any action, decision, with the city, including the city manager, city attorney, department heads, city personnel, or of the city commission or members of any city board, concerning a matter that could foreseeably be.. city commission or a city board. There are some exceptions and exemptions. The following are no . ... be lobbyist: a representative of a principal at a quasi-judicial hearing, experts who present ... information at public meetings, representatives of a neighborhood association with tatives of a not-jor-profit community based organization· for the purpose of. influence without special compensation. Individuals who wish to view or I'., .. "· ... " .. ,. meeting can be found on the city's ns of the I. Call to Order II. Roll Call City Staff Absent: City Attorney: Mr. Thomas Pepe III. Administrative Matters None at this Time. IV. Public Hearings (Chairman), Ms. Fischer {Vice- Tompkins (Planning Director), Mr. Marcus Lightfoot {Senior nd Mr. Gary M. Held (Land Use Attorney). 1 1. PB-16-016 Applicant: City of South Miami An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami amending the Land Development Code, Article III, "Zoning Regulations," Section 20-3.5, "Dimensional Requirements," to amend and clarify the setback requirements for side street first and second story facades of structures on corner lots, and for side interior setbacks for additions to structures with a five foot setback, in the RS-l, RS-2, RS-3, RS-4 and RS-5 zoning districts; and Section 20-3.6, "Supplemental Regulations," subsection (F}(4), to correct the title of the director responsible for determining which streets are frontage and side streets. Dr. Philips read the item into the record. , 0- /.)['i!it~~·';···· Mrs. Tompkins presented the PB-16-016 to the BoarcjA;I;\;l.:' /:::P;·tfj}T ~ <::\:.:>;~ ,.~.:::->: .. :>::: .. ::,:: ':<:.:'-::;':>;:::: Dr. Philips stated that the 20 foot setback forlp7~rh~lIer h6'u~~,~~at is on an irregular lot is not in any of the diagrams but is mentioned )?;;~~~~}report paCk~g~;'.~rs. Tompkins clarified and stated that Figure 3 shows the diagram(r~~i(~S~5. Dr. Philips stat~d·;~\1.?t the diagram does not show the 20 foot setback for the first aha~'~~cond floor. Mrs. To~~RiD~ stated that she was trying to answer a question posed by a boafa·fQ;j~.rnber ~n~nthis item 0~!~;t~~iewed at the May 10, 2016 meeting. She stated th\:lJ after review~'t6~~;\ge~Jgoihrthe house col.lld-;Stlll be maximized. Mr. Basu stated that this a:.)~:"uses :~li~~essary hardship o:)'the RS-S zoning district. He then stated that du~{l~;.)th~§(~~~)Bl~the RS~l~f~e~ing district, the setbacks could be amended and a via~l~house couldSfiH.be bnilt~i~y~hangingi;th~.setbacks for the smaller lots in the City, it wil,:~1~~~~::'nglY d~';: :~;~~i:,:~e property. Ms. Glavey ask¢d;~hat thet:.91l1plaint waS,t~attriggeredtfte creation of this item. Ms. Fischer stated that ho~e~~Peing co~~¥:ructed noJ'j~re being positioned in such a way that they are C~iJt~r~i;:t';-'~ht',eaks up the harmony of the neighborhood . • j.~~.;jGlavey stat¢~.~;~~?t triH:lJti.Rral neignbc(tlj.q,gds are platted in a way that the corner property "'t~tl~~s out a bit further. tharii,ttfe .. pther hontes on the block. Ms. Glavey then stated that she ""~~'~;:~::::". ' .... ;.::;:.::-:~:.:. '»"~':-:':i::':<f' w'(jq'j,~.;prefer that thls4~'rr be ~~i~W~d with a larger amount of people present in the audience. She Ht~n;~.tated that th~~q!)se woTIlij;be more expensive if the second story were setback. > \;:~i~:}\::'" {~~tt:·· ... ,'" Mrs. Tom'~krQ's.informedl~~~ Board that the City Manager entered into agreement with the consultants W"~ing the LOC rewrite. Dr. Philips asked forCl~.rification on the following statement: ':"<s' "Except that additions to existing structures that are not being demolished, except for the grand fathered side fm;ade built closer to the interior side property line than presently permitted, may have 5 feet first story interior side setbacks where any portion of the building already has a 5 feet interior side setback. /I Mr. Held explained that the statement means that a variance would not be needed to maintain the setback on house with a 5 foot setback that is partially demolished. Mr. Greiner echoed feelings similar to Mr. Basu in that this ordinance is in search of a problem. 2 Mr. Held stated that this ordinance is only for new construction and would not be retroactive. Mr. Held stated that this ordinance is trying to fix the irregularity in the symmetry of the positioning of the houses along a street. All streets have this issue. The Board then held a discussion on the positioning of homes along a block. The Chairperson opened the floor to public comments on PB-16-016. ~ • None at this Time The Chairperson closed the floor to public comments on Motion: Dr. Philips moved to deny PB-16-016. The Vote: Yes 5, No 1 (Fischer) Mr. Basu: Yes Ms. Glavey: Yes Mr. Greiner: Yes Ms. Fischer: No Ms. Kahn: Yes Dr. Philips: Yes .<@'~,:<,' <'iiii\ 3 " We the undersigned want side street first and second story setbacks increased from their present 15' setback. When a house with 2 stories is built to within 15' of the setback line it is 10 feet closer than houses on interior lots are permitted to be anc;l may give the appearance of "sticking out like a sore t.humb" 4. )~ ;7l11~ ;?tfill ADDRESS -; 360 s u..~ 0..<S ''f' tlve- 'tIft1 6tt) <t5tl *C'/Jl{e We the undersigned want side street first and second story 'setbacks increased from their present 15' setback. When a house with 2 stories is built to within 15' of the setback line ,it is 10 feet closer than houses on interior lots are permitted to be ,and may give the appearance of "sticking out like a sore thumb" 4. 5. 6. r-<i 3/ c;)r 14) S5s~ ~;~"." \ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ______ ~o.~1~~~~~~~.~e~~~~ ./ ~~'?7 ~'c..u<.'.?.-?_~#b? s-tfCo sw $ / sr-srZ olu :5 C()C(Y-~~ \ ??f 0S;ff/ 211/ Sf- sf<60 SvJ 8'\ Sl. l We the undersigned want side street first and second story setbacks increased from their present 15 r setback. When a house with 2 stories· is built to within 15 r of the setback 'line it is 10 feet closer than houses on interior lots are permitted to be ,and may give the appearance of "stic)ting out like a sore thumb" 12. 5&]1(/ -iw ~0 Sf-Ht1ft I., SJ<j YJ ~)w o:~ Sr. Jig </:3 r;; We the undersigned want side street first and second story setbacks increased from their present 15' setback. When a house with 2 stories is built to within 15' of the setback line it is 10 feet closer than houses on interior lots are , permitted to be ,and may give the appe~rance of "sticking out like,a sore thumb" PRINT NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1. \) I~~} ~ ~~. \~tJe..~ [\~'? j'\(L S~ ~lV\J S-~~\ 2. ....., -t..J ~ 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 113. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 213. t1&111 ' 1521 1531 \) I ................. I iii "~I ' i, " ,~ J I i I 8026, eQ20 ~ aoa& 803C" . , i 804i 1040 :. 'Mll~ 88401 81:0.1 81. = 8125 ,81'20 r" l131 !t ~ I " ~ 18140 '--~ -/ . aoo e2.05 1206 eaol --8210" ~1.5 sao 8216 e_ 8215 8220 '. 8225 U«J '. 1226 8230 -,., 8.22.5 8230, 8236 _01 I .1 8300 .,1 aaoo _1 8SOf) r 8315 8110 81,6 8810 8.3~US '310 .5 8. 832. -8325 , 8401 \ .1~J 8336 e340 "'"'-..J 1730 10 i p i Ii ,:.-~.: 1. ! •. fO# 820.1 8226 ~ If I 8U5 I I'. _1 8325 8371 Ifill 7131 I I j Ii I 'I 1'1 \ I' l!J' III i ,-! •• I i I; II II I /1 I i 1I1I1 iii ~ I i III j .....- II i 11111 IIIII~ 1111/111 Ie. -IPI-I""PI" i iill I 16.01 -7800 7621 -1637 7620 1630 --7140 -o - Q E o -7720 !I~~ :Il " III, 11 -1,\ ~~ ill I 8391 I g \ 1111 iii I -. I I~' I I f{IJ), ~~ . .' ... " .... , ... '.,.., til I I I -I I I I! 15\101 I flIP' I, ., J I ' , } .." .7·, 6981 :$8.41 _1 _1 .. I II r ,., '1 -I i. 16.980 ! I·· 'II f-,I Wtl-I 1Ii1 I lit&" .717 , 87'74 i \ I .7M I ''182 t,.· i III j Iii i ! II iii j i I I L 'I , R~6 I " i \ i \ iIi' m~' -~ 7821 I M84 ~ 7830 7631 n .lilillil.lgl~ illllllllil 7801 I 7810 7821 , I J>.. I II, i I \ Ii 1M -----'--..l....- I I 5870 I 68iO I !L i i it I i (i" ! ! it i'ir~ Ii ~ .. I· , SI ... ~ -11') Illil,111 \ Iii i i Ii j i t:::-i b '1621 -1531 ~ I I I II iii 1,,1 /" '-, , II ,... I I ms.rrr~ ., 80.30 -' 8840E 8025'· eq20 r; 8036 eoao i'!'" ~ 8046 1040' t 81:01 8100 i: 8125 .8120 r-' l131 f I !l ~ I 1206 .. e-B'1' r . B2DO elO5 l21,1 GIO &216 0_ 8215 8220 1226 -. , I 1-$240 8.22.5 .30 8235 8240! 8225 040 ,- 91 aaoo 8301 aa.oo 830.1 8300 .. 816 &810 8315 8310 8111 1120 ~25 8. 832.& 8.320 18326 , ; f.01 vJI$l -&340 \. , 840, ,~ ---'" .. I = II I \ I , , I j III Ii i ~11161111 -l mil 't'hui I, ,.;1.1111 1601 -1.1 1601 1 7_ t': t 76311 782CJ 1630 7140 -o - o E o -7720 .- ~ 7111 I .. r 1721 7730 7131 SMO 5829 I , ". 820.1 8226 I I 88li. I 801 11 '1,\ Bf2D tIll 8325 8891 1~\11It i Ii I 8371 .. : ... I I' ·1 I ~ i •• ; !P I~ ~ I~ r I ~ .. I 5 .,' _ I § 5101 ..,.... ,I II, I '1 1'1 e ....... to co " .. I! fiP' I, ,I I I . ., . " . '. . .. -..... ·i iii ~ t: . i -, _71' 81 :_1 I.·t _" , , R'P-6 i\i\ili 5882 7810 7621 5S84 7620 -7830 ---7040 7631 il~liliflll' 5801 . I , & Ii IIII \ I \ I \, 7801 I 7810 ( .. i., ~ I 6870 6.860 I I e iii i i' II i -- II I Ii Ii I ~ I i ., I ~ ~ " . .--T I I 11111,11 ~iiiiii . . '. iT' ~ I 1& III I Illr I I-Ii I~tll' r-II#! I I. 11 .]-, ,'1!I8f ! fi°.;..t;" II I \·1 8111 , &.774 I \ 18.731 I tM •• . i,ll' :1 iIi f II I. t .!, t :1