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 After much discussion, the item was ultimately withdrawn.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