The URL can be used to link to this page

6815 SW 63 ST_GREEN MISC L 1 ,00'ZOl j I j • I j, I j. I i t J uj i WI p „. F- � A I 6 c N>ta. j –_- •-• p:_:---j---------•--�•-. —1Po4M i•d--- -- Cl) I Koury o1 .�) ENaw� --MA j r IPWO 1°IM3— j h � I I � ,l• IIIIr � I m I � (dp)sumnp0 Mpoeoa�p �� parodold_ I ., ,00ZO1 ----..--- - I v l r CL L.W N a CL o 3 = U= � w CO 0 o c i w i i { NN i O � t ,ay j a o � N vi �•t'� F� o • kh C) j k O 54 J IL Al Ail F 0000 to 11 T-Til 11 i i _.i . s i F� r i c C� 0 2 J � , Vj 00 J a Q C t. 91 IFI I a°`Q a i ILIA Ch i f j • .00zoi 3 3 CASE HISTORY NAME: ADDRESS: CE BOARD DATE DATE VIOLATION ACTION COMPLIED COMMENTS aaaxaass sa=sssa_-- ssasxaa -- a ass===xsssassss_ 9!3AIVAON�- _____= saxasasasaaasx== ssasas�ssszassaxs s sssa-= -s sssssassxssss=ssasx=ssaxs��s=��a= _ wol eA- x==_==-= x=ax=_� pa Ile. saaisaacas �rt�_LU � woocc,E, x==sad asaaaxaas___ssss_ssss=sassasssssss =asasoss==asasasamsssxsc s�aassea:a_aaxsassssa _ I / I, I -=ss-assns==sassassssssassssaas G,y�6�Ge /� s�%C msssaassssaasssmssaaassc ems aa=s=sss=ssassassxsssssss_________ 9 _________=sassasosss oases ss=Dense--__- _ ' s=axa=sas__assaa sass=sss=s ��/�� I I 9 �9� �yS fuLL s__s=sa=assss__a� assa=ssassasssss=aas==s=ascc. /O/ / y I _____assassassassasssssaass-____-L L ie s =_=__________________ &o6.w co%e,-2wrsuaj _____=__= xsaasasassaaassa_== SS 3 Iw9eso.v �/ a= �77/2 alemaaa=sssss=sasses-_-_a____ ss- / mxe�tafs��xsaasoosssasmam - I�� 99�� $ I I a_==s===asa=ss�isasssa=saassaaasssassasassaasxaasr�sasses I I i smsassssa_assssasm=sss=ass=assn=sss=ss=ssasxcsss-- I __sss=sssasssas=assssoasssasscc ' aasasaasaass:ssaxsaasssaass___ssaasxasssssas=sans ___-_ -- I ___ I s c I I as sons-ss�ssaaassaasssasasss�sasssaas ssasaassaaasssasssaass�-�sassssc assasaxsoassasss=as=s=sssassaas ( I ===ssassssas=sa=asaaaasss=aasaassss a===xsxrissasc Copy Current Survey, page 2 SKETCH OF SURVEY SCALE : /" = Z0� /ZZ Go' PW ��,u, ti Fauvo �� 60 ��TiGfrY E!r 5e"fyTi B7's0 A �' jO.S o 90 �0 h <<iood 14o'L ") cowl �rS, r /I•o 57 o' /Orr 40 r2 o Z N / %* h at 0 f.Kri,rs 5 h h f 7, i C,< ; A4ri-vo t �O✓n�0 pi/f n 12:7.60 �Qo.✓ n :s p�rrk war /S D a _ h N W- 63y'� 67 Si�(3.JEGT s'20f�E'r,�' F�pLCS W/rNil/ it avv ZO kl X PB-92-029 Diaz, 6815 SW 63 Street Page 9 of 12 oo DATE: 00 00 00 R/E COLLECTION INQUIRY UPDATED: 00STAT O TXCM5010 LIO: 09 40260240190 REF: 00 0000000000 MI iE: *IN OCTOBER ONLY DELINQ DATA IS L *CURRENT AND P E AND DELINQDATA FOR NOV* ST: 00 )P: VAL 000 0 .00 CNTY: 0.00 0 .00 ATE: 00 0..00 CITY: 0 .00 MAR TOTAL: 0 .00 .CST: . 00 DUE: S: * * * * * D E L I N Q U E N T '\7: 0000000 DATE REG/RECPT AMOUNT CODE* CERT/DEED SEL BUYR AMOUNT * * * * * * DELINQUENT TAXES DUE : .00 FUNCTION: ***» TOTAL TAXES DUE : .00 )99999 T26952 *INQ MSG = 2 1=TXCA;PF3=VALUE;PF4=WRS;PF5=DELINQ PTXM0186 0/28/92 * * * PUBLIC VALUE INQUIRY OLIO 09. 4026 024 0190 PROP ADDR 6815 SW 63 ST MCD 0900 VALUE HISTORY NAME AND LEGAL YEAR 1991 1992 'ABLO DIAZ & W MARIA M LAND 50666 50666 )815 SW 63 ST BLDG 69293 72462 'IIAMI FL TOTAL 119959 123128 331431913 HEX 25000 25000 WVD 26 54 40 CRANQUILITY ESTATES PBB78-64 TOTEX 94959 98128 K LOT 9 NONEX 88128 CO NE 94959 LOT SIZE 12510 SQUARE FEET STATE EXEMPT: OR 13125-1183 1286 1 SALE AMT 1228-0 SALE DATE 12/86 SALE O/R 1.312 SALE TYPE 1 SALE I/V I _)F1-MORE LEGAL PF2-PARCEL INFO PF3-FOL SRCH PF5-TAX COLL PF7-PREV OWNER PF8-MENU, 5�tl � .� 7- ��Go � �l 4026 01�4 0/90 704- �j 1�5-3 CausZ/t77,oc �ucAkvws ca.�gc, or�cfs I �fIP.+�1SE ,�_ �za✓Jlaactt�leS acle- '7=6 T a.�sd J�R�h�wUS �l �L1Clf10n1 ��t e71 YMo , (4PyVkT) Z1E�C6'� Z�2,%6 11,16 7 1Cc RJlo /ROc �i i� arc SECTION 20-3 . 6 SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS (I) Accessory Structures or Uses (1) No accessory structure shall be constructed upon a lot until construction of the principal structure or use has commenced. ( 2) No accessory structure shall be used unless the principal structure on the lot is also being used. (3 ) No accessory structures or uses shall be located within any required yard setback area, except as permitted in subsection ( 4 ) below. (4) Accessory structures or uses may be located in a required rear yard, provided such structures or uses do not occupy more than thirty ( 30) percent of required setback areas and provided further that such accessory buildings do not exceed one (1) story or twelve (12) feet in height above grade." ( 5) Accessory structures or uses shall be located not less than five ( 5) feet from any rear or side lot line. No accessory structures or uses shall be located in the required setbacks that are adjacent to a street right- of-way line; nor shall any accessory structures be located less than five (5) feet from any rear lot line.16 (6 )17 Canvas tents and cabanas, used for temporary shelter and not containing cooking facilities, shall be subject to the accessory structure regulations. (J) Swimming Pools ( 1) Swimming pools which are open and unenclosed, or covered by a screen enclosure or a screen enclosure not covering a swimming pool , may occupy a required rear or side yard, subject to the following conditions: (a) Minimum front setbacks shall be at the front building line. (b) Minimum side setbacks shall be ten ( 10) feet from each side lot line. 16 Revised 12117191 by Ord. # 30-91-1494 16 Revised 12117191 by Ord. # 30-91-1494 1' Revised 1113192 by Ord. # 30-92-1525 delete (6) renumber (7) LDC: UPDATED OCTOBER 1992 7 3 CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI SECTION 20-3 .6 SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS (c) Minimum rear setbacks shall be twelve and one-half ( 12 . 5) feet from rear lot lines. (d) A walk space at least eighteen ( 18) inches in width shall be provided between pool walls and fenc( _: or screen enclosure walls. (e) All setback distances shall be measured from the outside wall of a pool . ( 2) Pool Enclosures (a) Unless a pool is entirely screened in, . it shall be surrounded by a protective wall or fence of at least four (4) feet in height. (b) Chain link fencing shall be at least eleven (11) gauge, with a maximum distance between wires of two ( 2) inches. (c) Any enclosure, other than standard chain link fencing, shall be shown in complete detail on plans submitted for a building permit. (d) Such detail shall include the spacing between the vertical and horizontal wires, spacing and slope of louvers, spacing of posts and such other details as may be required by the City. (3) Gates and Latches (a) Fence and wall gates must close automatically by spring hinges and must be provided with a positive stop at the closed position. (b) The direction for swing of such gates shall be away from the pool during gate opening. (c) Fence and wall gates shall have an automatic latch located so that it is not accessible from the outside by pre-school age children. (d) Automatic latches shall be as required by the South Florida Building(Code. (e) All gates or latches shall be constructed to provide for their use in conjunction with use of a padlock. LDC: UPDATED OCTOBER 1992 7 4 CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI C=TY OF SOUTH M�AP�i� ----- : PERMIT INFORMATION ------ -------- LOCATION INFORMATION --------- Permit Number: < 22 Address : 6815 SW 63 STREET Permit Tvpe : BUILDING SOUTH MIAMI , FL 33143 Class of Work: SLAB/PAVING ---------- LEGAL DESCRIPTION ---------- Constr. Tvpe : N/A Lot : 9 Block : 2 Section : Proposed Use : RESIDENTIAL Township: RNG: 0 Dwellings : 0 Code : 0 Subdivision: TRANQUILITY Estimated Value: $0. 00 Improv. Cost : $1500 . 00 Total Fees : $400 .00 Amount Paid: 400.00 Date Paid: 3/20/91 - G ��2-4 `G (q() Work Desc. : DRIVEWAY & GATES , WOOD DECKING & SLAB ---------- OWNER INFORMATION -------- ---- APPLICATION FEES ----- Name : PABLO DIAZ BUILDING 575 . 00 Address : 6815 SW 63 STREET ELECTRICAL 50 . 00 SOUTH MIAMI , FL 33143 MECHANICAL S0 . 00 Phone: (305) 666-5664 PLUMBING 50 . 00 TREE 50 . 00 ------- CONTRACTOR INFORMATION ------ ERPB 50 : 00 Name:(3v`C\ex- ZONING 50 . 00 Address : RED TAG 5325. 00 SIGN 50 . 00 License: Type: 0 RE-INSPECTION $0 . 00 MISC . FEE $0 . 00 RADON $0 . 00 "FAILURE TO COMPLY W=Tg3 THE MECHJ�N2C8� L=EN LAW CAH RESULT IN Ur*4E PROPERrMY OWNER PAY=NG TW 2 C E FOR SU S LD S NG =MPROVEMEWTS . NOTICE--ALL FORMS AND FOOTINGS MUST BE INSPECTED BEFORE POURING CONCRETE P ERM=T VO=D S =X MONTH S AFTER DATE OF 2 SSLJE SEPARATE PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED FOR BUILDING, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, MECHANICAL, ROOFING, ETC. . ISSUED ACCORDING TO PERMIT APPLICATION AND APPROVED PLANS WHICH ARE PART OF THIS PERMIT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABOVE STATEMENTS AND CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI BUILDING AND ZONING CODES. I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SUPERVISION AND COMPLETION OF THE CONSTRUCTION. CITY OF SOUTH MIC,AMI BUILDING DEPARTMENT 6130 SUNSET DRIVE SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA 33143 694-;: Xll 7 1?1_1/ai �j s =_ CITY OF SOUTH I 6130 SUNSET DRIVI�;'SS 1 BUILDING AND ONING SOUTH MIAMI, rLORIDA 32143 BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION 'FOLIO NO. I� PERMIT NO. OWNER (/` WA A IL TEL NO. G G G zc G L MASL ADDRESS •� v &.a JX7 CSTY�. BTALTE. ZSP%Se % I 1tA'A HUILDSNG TEL NO. Co u r (I V MASL ADDRESS S CSTY, STATE, ZIP 0E�„„�.v x.: s z,« 7r;+Jra n a: ice•. < :tkw.i+" D88t�•��•• OK� ..� ..• �+�. LOT(8) • HLX NO. 6UHDSV26ION STREET ADDREa9 OF .TOE G k I.�+ S uI G 3 a-x �• :.:.:,.:<::::< ....... '..: � ' PRESENT COMMERCIAL RESIDENT2AL VACANT U93M PRoposED wmz "Qw.%nE FOOTI►GE . EBTIMATED VALUE OF CON BTRUCTSON �♦ S o O • bV PROPERTY VALVE �/� Io0• OO .. .� t �.y.%`nA'::�%'<'a ei1L•:i•:;'�:<jyx:.^�3 333'3<!` .e:rz.r :�iu�'r�r ;`�`mc�r•..,.»:. iswr:i�-`r�:�i_i€�:•h-:.,.................`�ti�::.H.....,m„-:'a�iFJxu;a'6�•w.�t6m�Gs•>,�a . :.3bt:t�. .»..� ».s-�`�a:x+r�r� I HEREBY MAKE APPLICATION FOR THE FOLLOWING ( BE SPECIFIC M1- ympai-Mg. & Sl1't2AMca &4TmS, u)Coo 17F.O=06,T. Cx)0• SLA-8. I UNDERSTAND THAT SEPARATE PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING MECHANICAL, ROOFING; AND THAT IN SIGNING THIS APPLICATION, I AM RESPONSIBLE F"' THE SUPERVISION AND COMPLETION OF THE CONSTRUCTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH 'THE PIJU* AND SPECIFICATION AND FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ALL CITY, FEDERAL, STATE AND COUNTY LAW APPLICABLE. (SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR (QUALIFIER) OR OWNER-BUILDER ONLY WITNESS (CLERK) DATE RECEIVED . IIIIIIoto..%L1L LILL toIIIIaaIIIIIaII101 11111111151111 OWNER-HU2 LDER �PRCOF_'OF�+OWNERSZIIPjO'� '' ANY VIOLATION (attscY• corm) -<(sttaotz Dopy) - (o2'�ao>< Coda En or. ap FIRE Road Impact Fsa Conourrarioy (Commaro JLML3. oonmtr.. '=mm. ,oomm.arfd mkny T►aw 1 ivinq spsoa) 93W2MM2NG POOL CONTRACTOR attaort form) ON F2LE CONOSTSONa UNDER WHIC>'!•i APPROVED 29aLJaD .YIfflffA DATE APpIZOV$O DATE DISAPPROVED ZON2IVG ../) 6v STRUCTURAL ' Q'.Qb � PLUME 2 NG ELECTRICAL FEE M ECHAN 2 CAL � P L A N N I N G BOARD Tuesday, December 29, 1992 h4rl Commission Chambers 7: 30 PM I. Call to order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the U.S.A. II. Roll Call. Present Absent Manuel Gutierrez Robert Parr John Lefley Dianne G. Wright Cindy Thorner Paul Eisenhart Jorczak Also present: Bldg. & Zoning Director Lama; Planner Kobola and Board Secretary DeLisa. III. Approval of the Minutes of December 8 , 1992. Robert Parr moved to approve the Minutes of December 8, 1992 as presented. Seconded by Mr. Gutierrez . Vote: Approved: 5 Opposed: 0 Abstained: 2 (Eisenhart) (Jorczak) IV. Public Hearing: P B— 9 2 — 0 2 9 Applicant: Maria M. Diaz Request: Variance from Section 20-3 .6 (H) (2) to allow (two) gates in front of the property of about eight (8) feet high where four (4) feet is allowed. Legal: Lot 9, Block 2 , TRANQUILITY ESTATES according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 78 Page 64, of the Public Records of DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. PB Minutes 12-29-92 1 Location: 6815 S.W. 63 Street South Miami., FL 33143 (A single-family residential property) Mr. Parr read the request. Mr. Kobola reported that the applicant had presented a proposal for gates to the ERPB on 2/5/91. That proposal was approved by the ERPB. However, the gates which were actually constructed are of different design and size than what had been approved by ERPB. In addition, the applicant did not request a final inspection. The gates as constructed do not comply with the Land Development Code height requirement for residential fences because they are higher than four feet. In fact, they are eight feet in height. In order to come into compliance, the applicant must erect a fence around the pool which is located in the front of the house. This fence, too, shall be no higher than four feet. The applicant has applied for a variance to allow the existing gates to remain as constructed and to be incorporated in the future fence. If a variance is granted, the applicant must apply to the ERPB for re-evaluation because the gates as constructed do not follow the original proposed design. Staff does not recommend approval. The Chair asked if there were any questions from the Board to Staff for clarification. Ms. Thorner asked what was the original proposal. Mr. Kobola left the chambers to locate the ERPB files so that the Board can review the original proposal. These files indicate that the ERPB approved a four foot high gate with rectangular designed ironwork, different from the eight foot high artistically designed ironwork. There is no existing wall, only shrubbery surrounding the property so the gate is freestanding with two pairs of columns, one at the walkway and one set at the driveway. There being no other questions by the Board, Chairman Gutierrez deemed the Public Hearing to be open, asking for those present wishing to speak either for or against this request. The applicant, Maria Diaz signed in, presented photographs and explained that she changed the design and height of the gates because this is the only way to make it look pretty and impressive. The problem, according to Mrs. Diaz, is because the pool is located %n front of the house. After everything was approved Mrs. Diaz felt it was a mistake. Mr. Parr asked why the applicant had not tried to get a variance before constructing the gates. To that Mrs. Diaz said that she felt the only way to show how it would look was to go ahead with the construction and "cross that bridge when she came to it. " By that, she knows it is a mistake but, to her, this is the only way *it looks pretty. Also, the gates were to keep anyone from going into the front yard. However, several of the Board members had driven by the location, noting that there is no PB Minutes 12-29-92 2 fence connected to the gates. Therefore, anyone wishing to can enter through the shrubs. Mr. Parr is concerned that there is a finished structure which was "not properly prepared" at the beginning. Because the Board must consider that proper procedures were not followed, they will be considered "the bad guys" . The Chair asked for anyone else wishing to speak for or against this request. Cesar H. deBeche signed in stating that he also lives at the home of Mr. & Mrs. Diaz. Mr. deBeche said that the whole idea is to keep the pool away from people. He said that they did understand that zoning like for them to do what had been approved but that it would not look good for the neighborhood or the property values of the neighbors. Dr. Paul Young, 6825 SW 64 St. , neighbor to the Diaz property signed in, adding his approval for the gates as constructed. Mr. Pablo Diaz signed in, explaining that they wanted to do something to keep people from getting to the pool and enhance the neighborhood. They didn't feel they were doing anything wrong. i There being no one else to speak either for or against this request, the Public Hearing was closed and the Board declared in Executive Session. Mr. Parr fears setting a precedent by approving an already constructed eight foot gate whereby the property owner can return a'nd say that he would like an eight foot wall to go with the eight foot gate. There are procedures in place in the City to be followed if a property owner wished to construct anything other than that allowed by code and that everyone should follow the same procedures. Mr. Parr has been involved in the same process when erecting gates at his own home and he followed the prescribed procedure. He feels uncertain at the lack of understanding on the part of the homeowner. Nis. Wright noted that the height and the total design was changed, i.t was as if they had never appeared before the ERPB. The question is why did they bother to come to the ERPB at all, they did what they wanted to do in the final analysis. Ms. Thorner agreed with Ms. Wright, adding that she sees nothing wrong with the original proposal. Mr. Jorczak is also concerned about the possibility of a later request for an eight foot fence. He feels that the original proposal would have been very attractive had it been installed. Mr. Lefley noted that Mrs. Diaz had implied that there was some PB Minutes 12-29-92 3 i confusion in the permitting process , asking Ms. Lama for clarification. Ms. Lama replied that, to her understanding, the permit was issued based on the four foot gate which was approved by ERPB. Mr. Kobola said that the permit was issued after the change in code to the four foot maximum was adopted. Mr. Gutierrez advised the applicants that the Planning Board must follow the code as adopted. This is the basis upon which this Board exists. They may appeal to the .City Commission who may take other factors into consideration in making a final decision. The Chairman called for a motion. Mr. Parr made a motion to deny the request as presented for a variance under PB-92-029. Seconded by Ms. Wright. Vote: Denial approved: 6 Opposed: 1 (Lefley_) Ms. Wright asked whether or not, should the City Commission grant approval of this request, the applicants will be required to return to the ERPB for final approval of the final design. Ms. Lama said that this would be the case. V. Remarks. Ms. Thorner suggested to Staff, as in the case of tonight's meeting where only one item appeared on the agenda, would it be possible to hold that item over until the next meeting. This would be more convenient, particularly during the holidays. Ms. Lama said that Staff will try to do this whenever possible. Mr. Gutierrez , using the Diaz case as an example, asked Staff why the code was changed requiring four foot height for fences from the previous six foot. Ms. Lama noted that the Commission expressed a concern that the appearance of a six foot fence is overwhelming and that security is more difficult at that height. Mr. Gutierrez is bothered that a four foot fence in front of a house is not realistic from an architectural point of view. He noted that Coral Gables limits the solid part of a fence to four feet but additional height up to six foot can be added with the use of wrought iron. Mr. Lefley asked staff to find out from the Comprehensive Plan why this height was recommended. Ms. Lama noted that at the same time the Commission lowered the fence requirement to four feet in the front, they also prohibited the use of chain link altogether. PB Minutes 12-29-92 4 RESOLUTION NO . A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE \ CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI , FLORIDA APPROVING A REQUEST PURSUANT TO SEC. 20-3 . 6 (H) ( 2 ) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW (TWO) GATES IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY OF ABOUT EIGHT ( 8 ) FEET HIGH WHERE FOUR ( 4 ) FEET IS ALLOWED 13Y MARIA M. DIAZ FROM THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI , FLORIDA FOR THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS 6815 S .W. 63RD STREET, SOUTH MIAMI , FLORIDA 33143 (A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE) AND LEGALLY DLSCRIARD HEREINBELOW WHEREAS, Maria M. Diaz requested the Planning Board of the Cit_v of South Miami , Florida for a variance from section 20-3 .6 (4) ( 2 ) of the Land Development Code of the City of South Miami to i allow ( two ) gates about eight ( 8 ) feet high, where four ( 4 ) feet is allowed, in front of the property known as 6815 S.W. 63rd Strcet, South Miami, Florida 33143 (a gingla family residential Property) , which property is legally described as follows : Lot 9 in Block 2 of TRANQUILITY ESTATES, according to the plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 78 at Page 64, of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida . WHEREAS, on December 29 1992, the Planning Board voted to relcommend approval of the request by a 4 - 3 vote; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI , FLORIDA: i Section I . That the request Of Maria M. Diaz for a variance I from Sec . 20-3 . 6 (H) ( 2 ) of the Land Development Code of the City of " South Miami, to allow (two ) gates about eight ( 8 ) feet high where four ( 4 ) feet is allowed, in front of the property known i as : 6815 S .W. 63rd Street, South Miami, Florida 33143, be, and the same hereby is, approved . PASSED AND ADOPTED this th day of February, 1993 . APPROVED : ATTEST: MAYOR CITY CLERK READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY I am p '_ ,', 7- -1 A fV W O > `^ p r1 n I 1 ,y N IVO LA w c � ' '4% 3 s io � 0 � O s p Ile 0 rp G tr •,e'w v w is 1, ' •� 7 y r L - 9� q r d v o j •+ j w�i ti � p 0 � - M W 0 � �+ .S W � v °p APPLICANT: OWNER: Dl�z • MAP REFERENCE : 1� ski !/f Compass COMMENTS : �V 5mar Scale . (ft 7, Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . Drn . .Chk CITY of MOM MIAMI ft PLANNING a0 A R D Hearing No . . . . . . . C=TY O F� SOUTH M=AM= .aldlEOYr. Building & Zoning Department 6130 Sunset Drive, 2nd Floor Fax #: (305) 666-4591 South Miami, Florida 33143 Phone: ( 305) 663-6325 ZONING PETITION Petition: We, the undersigned property owners, are within 500 feet of the above property. We understand and approve of the following Request(s): PB-92-029 Applicant: Maria M. Diaz Request: Variance from Section 20-3 .6 (H) (2) to allow (two) gates in front of the property of about eight ( 8) feet high where four (4) feet is required. Legal: Lot 9, Block 2, TRANQUILITY ESTATES according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 78 Page 64, of the Public Records of DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. Location: 6815 S.W. 63 Street South Miami, FL 33143 (A single-family residential property) Name ADate Address «-yam 1► F ��✓,S d 0 r4Z 414 M 9 1 5 .w• r. Z I iL 1z w &I 3 o z zL z 8 do sub 63 sr. 3 Z y 9� M 2 N U T E S P L A N N I N G B O A R D Tuesday, December 29 , 1992 Commission Chambers 7: 30 PM I. Call to order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the U.S.A. II. Roll Call. Present Absent Manuel Gutierrez Robert Parr John Lefley Dianne G. Wright Cindy Thorner Paul Eisenhart Rock Jorczak Also present: Bldg. & Zoning Director Lama; Planner Kobola and Board Secretary DeLisa. III. Approval of the Minutes of December 8 , 1992. Robert Parr moved to approve the Minutes of December 8 , 1992 as presented. Seconded by Mr. Gutierrez . Vote: Approved: 5 Opposed: 0 Abstained: 2 (Eisenhart) (Jorczak) IV. Public Hearing: P B— 9 2 — 0 2 9 Applicant: Maria M. Diaz Request: Variance from Section 20-3 .6 (H) ( 2) to allow (two) gates in front of the property of about eight ( 8) feet high where four ( 4) feet is allowed. Legal : Lot 9 , Block 2 , TRANQUILITY ESTATES according to the Plat thereof , as recorded in Plat Book 78 Page 64 , of the Public Records of DADE COUNTY , FLORIDA. PB Minutes f 12-29-92 1 r Location: 6815 S.W. 63 Street South Miami , FL 33143 (A single-family residential property) Mr. Parr read the request. Mr. Kobola reported that the applicant had presented a proposal for gates to the ERPB on 2/5/91 . That proposal was approved by the ERPB. However, the gates which were actually constructed are of different design and size than what had been approved by ERPB. In addition, the applicant did not request a final inspection. The gates as constructed do not comply with the Land Development Code height requirement for residential fences because they are higher than four feet. In fact, they are eight feet in height. In order to come into compliance, the applicant must erect a fence around the pool which is located in the front of the house. This fence, too, shall be no higher than four feet. The applicant has applied for a variance to allow the existing gates to remain as constructed and to be incorporated in the future fence. If a variance is granted, the applicant must apply to the ERPB for re-evaluation because the gatestas constructed do not follow the original proposed design. Staff does not recommend ,approval. The Chair asked if there were any questions from the Board to Staff for clarification. Ms. Thorner asked what was the original proposal. Mr. Kobola left the chambers to locate the ERPB files so that the Board can review the original proposal. These files indicate that the ERPB approved a four foot high gate with rectangular designed ironwork, different from the eight foot high artistically designed ironwork. There is no existing wail, only shrubbery surrounding the property so the gate is freestanding with two pairs of columns, one at the walkway and one set at the driveway. There being no other questions by the Board, Chairman Gutierrez deemed the Public Hearing to be open, asking for those present wishing to speak either for or against this request. The applicant, Maria Diaz signed in, presented photographs and explained that she changed the design and height of the gates because this is the only way to make it look pretty and impressive. The problem, according to Mrs . Diaz , is because the pool is located in front of the house. After everything was approved Mrs. Diaz felt it was a mistake. Mr. Parr asked why the applicant had not tried to get a variance before constructing the gates. To that Mrs. Diaz said that she felt the only way to show how it would look was to go ahead with the construction and "cross that bridge when she came to it. " By that, she knows it is a mistake but, to her, this is the only way it looks pretty. Also, the gates were to keep anyone from going into the front yard. However, several of the Board members had driven by the location, noting that there is no PB Minutes 12-29-92 2 fence connected to the gates. Therefore , anyone wishing to can enter through the shrubs. Mr. Parr is concerned that there is a finished structure which was "not properly prepared" at the beginning. Because the Board must consider that proper procedures were not followed, they will be considered "the bad guys" . The Chair asked for anyone else wishing to speak for or against this request. Cesar H. deBeche signed in stating that he also lives at the home of Mr. & Mrs. Diaz. Mr. deBeche said that the whole idea is to keep the pool away from people. He said that they did understand that zoning like for them to do what had been approved but that it would not look good for the neighborhood or the property values of the neighbors. Dr. Paul Young, 6825 SW 64 St. , neighbor to the Diaz property signed in, adding his approval for the gates as constructed. Mr. Pablo Diaz signed in, explaining that they wanted to do something to keep people from getting to the pool and enhance the neighborhood. They didn't feel they were doing anything wrong. There being no one else to speak either for or against this request, the Public Hearing was closed and the Board declared in Executive Session. Mr. Parr fears setting a precedent by approving an already constructed eight foot gate whereby the property owner can return and say that he would like an eight foot wall to go with the eight foot gate. There are procedures in place in the City to be followed if a property owner wished to construct anything other than that allowed by code and that everyone should follow the same procedures. Mr. Parr has been involved in the same process when erecting gates at his own home and he followed the prescribed procedure. He feels uncertain at the lack of understanding on the part of the homeowner. Ms. Wright noted that the height and the total design was changed, it was as if they had never appeared before the ERPB. The question is why did they bother to come to the ERPB at all , they did what they wanted to do in the final analysis. Ms. Thorner agreed with Ms. Wright, adding that she sees nothing wrong with the original proposal. Mr. Jorczak is also concerned about the possibility of a later request for an eight foot fence. He feels that the original proposal would have been very attractive had it been installed. Mr. Lef ley noted that Mrs. Diaz had implied that there was some PB Minutes 12-29-92 3 confusion in the permitting process , asking Ms. Lama for clarification. Ms. Lama replied that, to her understanding, the permit was issued based on the four foot gate which was approved by ERPB. Mr. Kobola said that the permit was issued after the change in code to the four foot maximum was adopted. Mr. Gutierrez advised the applicants that the Planning Board must follow the code as adopted. This is the basis upon which this Board exists. They may appeal to the City Commission who may take other factors into consideration in making a final decision. The Chairman called for a motion. Mr. Parr made a motion to deny the request as presented for a variance under PB-92-029. Seconded by Ms. Wright. Vote: Denial approved: 6 Opposed: 1 (Lef ley) Ms. Wright asked whether or not, should the City Commission grant approval of this request, the applicants will be required to return to the ERPB for final approval of the final design. Ms. Lama said that this would be the case. V. Remarks. Ms. Thorner suggested to Staff , as in the case of tonight's meeting where only one item appeared on the agenda, would it be possible to hold that item over until the next meeting. This would be more convenient, particularly during the holidays. Ms. Lama said that Staff will try to do this whenever possible. Mr. Gutierrez , using the Diaz case as an example, asked Staff why the code was changed requiring four foot height for fences from the previous six foot. Ms. Lama noted that the Commission expressed a concern that the appearance of a six foot fence is overwhelming and that security is more difficult at that height. Mr. Gutierrez is bothered that a four foot fence in front of a house is not realistic from an architectural point of view. He noted that Coral Gables limits the solid part of a fence to four feet but additional height up to six foot can be added with the use of wrought iron. Mr. Lefley asked staff to find out from the Comprehensive Plan why this height was recommended. Ms . Lama noted that at the same time the ' Commission lowered the fence requirement to four feet in the front, they also prohibited the use of chain link altogether. PB Minutes 12-29-92 4 is. Thorner noted that the increasing number of fences is creating i walled city and she is opposed to any changes which would provide or more fencing 'of any type. 4r. Parr said that , he would have no problem recommending the jranting of a variance for a six foot fence in front of some of the larger homes where the scale would cause a four foot fence to appear out of proportion. Kr. Gutierrez made a motion to recommend to the City Commission to "revise height restrictions on front fences to allow above four feet for two feet to equal six feet, column masonry pilaster, wrought iron or decorative metal up to six feet, columns of gate posts and gates up to six feet." Seconded by Mr. Parr. Vote: Approved: 4 Opposed: 3 (Wright) (Thorner) (Jorczak) VI. Adjournment. Secretary Chairperson PB Minutes 12-29-92 5 There was no representative present. Following review by the Board, Mr. Hochstim moved to table this item due to insufficient information, specifically the survey and the drawing do not match. Seconded by Mr. Hernandez Capote. Vote: Approved: 4 Opposed: 0 4. EB-92-149 Patio Enclosure Applicant: Rita Triana Address: 5971 SW 56 Terrace Mr. Cauetano F. Alfonso, an engineer, signed in representing the applicant. This is a Red Tag for starting work without a permit. After a review of the submitted information, Mr. Hochstim, reluctantly, moved for approval. He considers th application incomplete, the drawings are insufficient in his judgment. Motion seconded by Mr. Greene, adding that the proposed construction is an addition to an existing roof with new loads on the pool deck. The Building Official should be aware of this. Vote: Approved: 3 Opposed: 1 (Wilson) 5. EB-92-150 Pence (Residential Applicant: Pablo and Maria Diaz Address: 6815 SW 63 Street There was no representative present. Mr. Hochstim moved to deny due to the fence is not compatible with the columns, lack of details such as material of the latticework and attachments, etc. Also, aesthetically, the 6 inch spaces between laths is undesirable and it should, perhaps, be wrought iron. Vote: Denial Approved: 4 Opposed: 0 6. EB-92-151 Accessory Building - Shed (Residential) Applicant: Alvaro Sarasola Address: 6561 SW 76 Terrace Alvaro Sarasola signed in. Members of the Board reviewed the proposal. Mr. Hochstim moved to approve. Seconded by Mr. Hernandez Capote. Vote: Approved: 4 Opposed: 0 ERPB Minutes 12-01-92 2 01/04/93 1.1:59 001 UNTVERSrrYOF rrs SCHOOL. OF MEDICINE • Depmuncnt of Medicine Diy6lon of Ccncral mcdEciac Tt•60A P.O.Box 016960 MWni.Florida 33101 DR. FISCHUS OFFICE WOPJCING HARD TO FIND THE CURE.... DAM NO. OF.PAGES (including coversbeet) TO: C . FAX NO.- P FROM 2 FAX NO., Est sas.M s OMCE N0,9 9su CA COMMM s: L, Azl --00- rQ .rift3 3fi. SilE= - a. ._ 46- +..._:_ _�__ -sue _oa le.f' Cat it/Tice- /wit/ /7I Tee lvlwe ,�✓vv c � 4-a',77— fTgz,�t o T .e �o�frt aC774 I . qIr 1-e A// ��D if/oT fig e�-�° YY�e G�// Tli Iry Or "Js _ �j �w�li��/ Gct �?09' it �� /✓i1'`�Q✓l �e�cnJ' G1/er� '/// � �o� �- �?/.eli�P�/1/ /J�O✓T Co�a/rl�✓f eN D -e,9✓�e•f.r//nor` Co/a�r%�%r ��/�4.ce J-Pe ae -07-;IL l 7PiJ 6v/�clin 6 �t/.� �r�Co d�Tvi.�. • . . .. � A n-A' .1 f'�i v/d �a ve i•�c/vd�d . cz Z ie ' �e�►�JoPr �i -�- l�•4/!%t 9� 60 TL �� rniJT�-�� /�� ,Pliies,�, -e �ri6i�✓9-cis, i� -0,,1 y } pe- �50 tit O: w ~7 7e e ' h/L Tee mQe : ,, ✓vv c ,o.. ` • ��• /-R'�/', �i �-e.0 `� /�o�1'e. p 7�ir GYov/c� /�� .. Mao . :/f �� `ia�l Goy e /i,��v� 7� 6oasar/ ;.,E��•� ��_ _ .: fTy-��o � T�.e• Ga�.frat vc�� . � •- - � . An"V ft'/1Ti5t/7o^/� r7V-s-o �� d /yi��fe , oi'� �i-�e��i /� re�e�v'� • � Gee �"'v 7�� A1171v r e c-!° -n e Gd/� J�?,i✓ �i0 iJ.9 DTI�'� , 77 • � Ji�•�/ �l �o cl' .i✓ �� <✓i1`��tf �e G�,.r Gr/er� -v r/ 27Zz_ A1-er7 P4,,o/ mo% Co/aw.✓r1 e.v o 6 ' . -2 4✓�ei(.t/ z,7— Cole A'!,�/1 ��4.�¢. cT.Pe Le `14A-aid/ii w2: ✓7;YLSI 7,e 6GcZ . /Z Te 4/�% D f2TJ` o Co/v�,v r 7Z �e aT ,.r dv t,o7 J'vPV-&-, J � mow/alGe_� 7� ��!•��-e��e s�GA'� �.v/7� .6�e.. .t,�,,E ,, . 7-0 OL ,) el::,`..-r.` cr�r.�.iva, t� '1 �i✓O ,Q-aO,�i✓ .,� vim/ !�y re A/ rye�. ht?,P"/gchtf o 2 9 a . Lv e_ hro �-in 6 PNCQ GI n� .rlx- h/nd l om c 1v /ry tl Gr.-1 LeT C0� A,00�o kl f Tls Gl f ✓//iY Ge, -+L G4 ��-c� /�-j✓p •li�,<e ra ire /-v .� fLr97i�t1. �Cv/�30l.� s � / ;o7771 /-7 e /�y�r776,�rro,d/ ,yam - /11�v�,T �� .,•,— �iy f�/ ,r; JZe Pe7`i�6 /--7. fii!1 c< 77,.e �c� G✓.¢.r Din 6 77� 70" d�Al?6 /r v U�Ti c, a?W_,/ L �`� Co ii,fvree� .�G.�.� ��Ci�-,- 7�e v�/c /2crrin 6 s✓r� �� fl, > . � W / e 10 �✓ ii7o^/ fe /lf/ie U /O A r CZe CP i. d4c// ie"-cT- ci fen ce 4"un.w 1 7.e eoo/-/h, -7777 17 7 .cam T ^.e— our i Cac�i 7f41,KeOe /�- ci !�- i arc c.e_. ✓� 4 lldziv /'A -- `e�itT✓N'6 4,�,eJ 7� ff✓yi a�✓� Ct'f �illTilvcTeo,��c.e ��.�. •� �r.F� J' .77j C�jTC,/ //7TU /l`'�/✓Uft �ce any( 6aie.r� �J�ip.e a./v ..z' �✓>>'iove� �j�yy7`� dr.6ouT 7`Xt _� �LrrO'•L C L'IY�Cd/Z.. GY�t � //yP�-`C :..,:, 4 ar J-'�6s�/ice o %i��e / . /�'k•�/v C (001 � a o .G• � 'v1-- �.e �nG/e �er�,• y /h C/v u 6 �v."N 6AL.Aej , --7Z 12 1 /!pi/#V!i/C4O do� /`1-c �O a�,-�/ O� �vc� 7 lrcuG -� / w Gc/Ho vin/ G�-lG/,fio�✓1 1 Te d et X/,6 q'i.rdu✓61oov a-vi o,2 6 7X e one .4e,,-.r e L-,e7e rem/fGelr4c oC ox &�p v 7%C .��9-/�Y-S/NC.C. �-1/��c �tC//!� !✓'�y G/s.�e i1�-�_G'O(/ �/�Ui�'�j% 11,7/.9-.77v^! l oz- ✓c• a,7,y a'� �v v /fti/�j /�T•��fTep /N Cf/Lev�✓-r✓ i✓�. -G-.svotJ a°�re.✓ qve /y-,r y yo v Cq J7 d=o rev .� !�/e.� Gam, / X-c lei At A4 T` S�°� 4�e. -� o.- 7`Ry/r!6 ,C�r-Het �o a „�6.err �¢/er•� tiroZ e o.. . e / ✓/ d��ur v- ? 7vw �` v7�✓!6 d/�-e C1UY c� /lo 7AI-117, Ak/�/* a ?--rf JoU AO&,IW /Cc, GT 190-tee: "t :Ar`yAr �/OIi7rJ NJ /7✓ 07��r 70 Ae411 Cc Gfi/P vet A✓/ ll 6/v ar U171wow T-/ TTe o.. 6,. /rJ//7;*der, ale OL GeCG/•T/U7✓ �Gf�a/ G71 `d/�/J�• //! O"!"/!�/¢+77. /Y p ,/ D •� G,f/o J o-Ice f' 441moqwf /l o /7 o;- �v pvT Of o�J7v�✓/ /i'J.A9,► 41�N lY � .� 40f,07q �r 12 s7,P*•7 �I' O1/C/ x-6.4-/�✓, -.�/h6 //�7b..:. Gro/�f//��i,�c,%. a-,#777--e .2}/ .dec Lc/ ic/ . �( o� a a4eoe 7`%e 1 JOGfirr! /h?m ee r Gv/ /�i� : crr�/�� tin ivT7el-/p L .rht-,- 7 C /;rte V r a ;.. a; I !-e co~,7 1,v ` Go /A /77- O/c IA.e l�a�s-i4.�c.e. Co�i�iTP� Uh -c 6�9i G�Cc�-�so�✓ �ri.�J frJ �e Ile / /v��✓' �- G,�-Tt r ye dee.✓ -ri-�-�v ��r� Pik tz C =�''''.' (i✓/�`T.r!/T C/h� O/�.!'T/A-C/�,1'/ �r .��.0 /t r7- TY�tlo �/egis+r . •e /r C VIP 7o o .G *-r-f sv/L/t`✓//✓G Co/u.N,�r f 4d a",o - --el o v/ Co rrec.� /h�d��l�-T7o N • • 7tr2 - a i ham- two A/vtct Letter of Intent Statement of Hardship by Applicant, page 2 :4 adz 734�s A�i•Ne•+d�••,a-�r-. G�-.a? e�.a� G .�.�rates : . ... 7Ze Co�sr�t�rioti vv.t._ SC a ,wild TKt .�,4,r�s •u� .� `i Avnf . Q o� Ia 4441-e '� D - :..k f, �:'�: _ ...�!�c••�s'.r ava� ice' f ?'^r �-' - - _ -' - _ _ t ` ■ ■ C } ,r r , Mu-l� Ire. '� i{°..• j`fN. .r s't ir !77 IF xwr s.- �ff i ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ® ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ n Y ° C=TY OF SOUTH M=AM= r Building & Zoning Department 6130 Sunset Drive, 21 Floor Fax #: (305) 666-4591 South Miami, Florida 33143 Phoine:.- (305) 663-63.2. Decemberr' 1 ' ,'1992 ` Pablo and Maria Diaz 6815 SW 63 Street T• South;Miami, FL 33143 . Dear Applicant: This letter is to inform you that your request for the approval of Fence (Residential) was presented to the Environmental Review and Preservation Board (ERPB) at their regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday, December 1,, 1992, and was DENIED 4-0 ° based .on .the following conditions(s) : Due to the fence is not compatible with the columns, lack of details such as material if the latticework and attachments, etc Also, aesthetically, the 6--inch spaces between laths is undesirable and it should perhaps, be wrought iron. Final approval by the ERPB is not authorization to begin construction. You must receive a valid Building Permit after approval by ERPB. All permit applications must observe a fifteen (15) day ERPB appeal period before such permits can be issued. Final decision by the ERPB may be appealed to the City Commission by written request to the City Clerk within fifteen (15) days of said decision. Final approval by ERPB shall elapse after six (6) months if no permit was issued. If you ' have any questions concerning this matter, please, contact the Department between the hours of 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday, at (305) 663-6326. Please refer to file # EB-92-150. ..Thank you; ..Sincerely, Slaven Kobola Planner 777777"77 -w - 004 W� = ---= - -- - - - -----�'..��.• --- -��"�� v �O i� a O f , }i 41 I� i There is no representative present. Mr. Saez moved to approve based on the drawings (as opposed to the photographs) submitted. Seconded by Mr. Jesmer. Vote: Approved: 7 Opposed: 0 The Building Official is asked to monitor this case. G. EB-91-012 SCREEN ENCLOSURE Applicant: ANTHONY QUINN Address: 5555 SW 67 AVE. #102 Represented By: MICHAEL SINNES/NEUMAN AWNING SERVICE, INC. Michael Sinnes signed in. The project is to screen a balcony on a condo. Mr. Hochstim stated his objection to the look of the finished enclosure because it juts above the wall . Ms. Rubin- Wright made a motion to approve. Seconded by Mr. Saez. Vote: Approved: 6 Opposed: 1 (Hochstim) H. EB-91-013 WALL, GATE & LANDSCAPING Applicant: MARIA DIAZ Address: 6815 SW 63 STREET Represented By: R. BLANCO Mr. Blanco signed in. Following a review of the plans, Mr. Hochstim is concerned that the plans indicate a 4" foundation on a 6' post when Code calls for minimum 10" . Mr. Hochstim made a motion to approve subject to verification of the foundations. Seconded by Mr. Saez . Vote: Approved: 6 Opposed; 1 (Jesmer) The Building Official is asked to monitor this project. L_. EB=91-014 ENCLOSING GARAGE Applicant: MR. & MRS. BURT RUSSEL Address: 6091 SW 79 ST. Represented By: MALCOLM WRIGHT Malcolm Wright signed in. Mr. Saez made a motion to approve. Seconded by Ms. Wilson. Vote: Approved: 7 Opposed: 0 ERPB Minutes 02-05-91 3 P L A N N I N G B O A .R D Tuesday, December 29, 1992 R41f Commission Chambers 7: 30 PM I. Callao order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the U.S.A. II. Roll Call. Present Absent Manuel Gutierrez Robert Parr John Lefley Dianne G. Wright Cindy Thorner Paul Eisenhart Rock Jorczak Also present: Bldg. & Zoning Director Lama; Planner Kobola and Board Secretary DeLisa. III. Approval of the Minutes of December 8 , 1992. Robert Parr moved to approve the Minutes of December 8, 1992 as presented. Seconded by Mr. Gutierrez. Vote: Approved: 5 Opposed: 0 Abstained: 2 (Eisenhart) (Jorczak) IV. Public Hearing: P B— 9 2 — 0 2 9 Applicant: Maria M. Diaz Request: Variance from Section 20-3 .6 (H) (2) to allow (two) gates in front of the property of about eight (8) feet high where four (4) feet is allowed. Legal: Lot 9, Block 2, TRANQUILITY ESTATES according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 78 Page 64, of the Public Records of DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. PB Minutes 12-29-92 1 Location: 6815 S.W. 63 Street South Miami, FL 33143 (A single-family residential property) Mr. Parr read the request. Mr. Kobola reported that the applicant had presented a proposal for gates to the ERPB on 2/5/91 . That proposal was approved by the ERPB. However, the gates which were actually constructed are of different design and size than what had been approved by ERPB. In addition, the applicant did not request a' final inspection. The gates as constructed do not comply with the Land Development Code height requirement for residential fences because they are higher than four feet. In fact, they are eight feet in height. In order to come into compliance, the applicant must erect a fence around the pool which is located in the front of the house. This fence, too, shall be no higher than four feet. The applicant has applied for a variance to allow the existing gates to remain as constructed and to be incorporated in the future fence. If a variance is granted, the applicant must apply to the ERPB for re-evaluation because the gates as constructed do not follow the original proposed design. Staff does not recommend approval. The Chair asked if there were any questions from the Board to Staff for clarification. Ms. Thorner asked what was the original proposal. Mr. Kobola left the chambers to locate the ERPB files so that the Board can review the original proposal. These files indicate that the ERPB approved a four foot high gate with rectangular designed ironwork, different from the eight foot high artistically designed ironwork. There is no existing wall, only shrubbery surrounding the property so the gate is freestanding with two pairs of columns, one at the walkway and one set at the driveway. There being no other questions by the Board, Chairman Gutierrez deemed the Public Hearing to be open, asking for those present wishing to speak either for or against this request. The applicant, Maria Diaz signed in, presented photographs and explained that she changed the design and height of the gates because this is the only way to make it look pretty and impressive. The problem, according to Mrs. Diaz , is because the pool is located in front of the house. After everything was approved Mrs. Diaz felt it was a mistake. Mr. Parr asked why the applicant had not tried to get a variance before constructing the gates. To .that Mrs. Diaz said that she felt the only way to show how it would look was to go ahead with the construction and "cross that bridge when she came to it. " By that, she knows it is a mistake but, to her, this is the only way it looks pretty. Also, the gates were to keep anyone from going into the front yard. However, several of the Board members had driven by the location, noting that there is no PB Minutes 12-29-92 2 I fence connected to the gates. Therefore, anyone wishing to can enter through the shrubs. I Mr. Parr is concerned that there is a finished structure which was "not properly prepared" at the beginning. Because the Board must consider that proper procedures were not followed, they will be considered "the bad guys" . The Chair asked for anyone else wishing to speak for or against this request. Cesar H. deBeche signed in stating that he also lives at the home of Mr. & Mrs. Diaz. Mr. deBeche said that the whole idea is to keep the pool away from people. He said that they did understand that zoning like for them to do what had been approved but that it would not look good for the neighborhood or the property values of the neighbors. Dr. Paul Young, 6825 SW 64 St. , neighbor to the Diaz property signed in, adding his approval for the gates as constructed. Mr. Pablo Diaz signed in, explaining that they wanted to do something to keep people from getting to the pool and enhance the neighborhood. They didn't feel they were doing anything wrong. There being no one else to speak either for or against this request, the Public Hearing was closed and the Board declared in Executive Session. Mr. Parr fears setting a precedent by approving an already constructed eight foot gate whereby the property owner can return and say that he would like an eight foot wall to go with the eight foot gate. There are procedures in place in the City to be followed if a property owner wished to construct anything other than that allowed by code and that everyone should follow the same procedures. Mr. Parr has been involved in the same process when erecting gates at his own home and he followed the prescribed procedure. He feels uncertain at the lack of understanding on the part of the homeowner. Ms. Wright noted that the height and the total design was changed, it was as if they had never appeared before the ERPB. The question is why did they bother to come to the ERPB at all, they did what I hey wanted to do in the final analysis. Ms. Thorner agreed with Ms. Wright, adding that she sees nothing wrong with the original proposal. Mr. Jorczak is also concerned about the possibility of a later request for an eight foot fence. He feels that the original proposal would have been very attractive had it been installed. Mr. Lefley noted that Mrs. Diaz had implied that there was some PB Minutes 12-29-92 3 confusion in the permitting process , asking Ms. Lama for clarification. Ms. Lama replied that, to her understanding, the permit was issued based on the four foot gate which was approved by ERPB. Mr. Kobola said that the permit was issued after the change in code to the four foot maximum was adopted. Mr. Gutierrez advised the applicants that the Planning Board must follow the code as adopted. This is the basis upon which this Board exists. They may appeal to the City Commission who may take other factors into consideration in making a final decision. The Chairman called for a motion. Mr. Parr made a motion to deny the request as presented for a variance under PB-92-029. Seconded by Ms. Wright. Vote: Denial approved: 6 Opposed: 1 (Lef ley) Ms. Wright asked whether or not, should the City Commission grant approval of this request, the applicants will be required to return to the ERPB for final approval of the final design. Ms. Lama said that this would be the case. V. Remarks. Ms. Thorner suggested to Staff, as in the case of tonight's meeting where only one item appeared on the agenda, would it be possible to hold that item over until the next meeting. This would be more convenient, particularly during the holidays. Ms. Lama said that Staff will try to do this whenever possible. - Mr. Gutierrez , using the Diaz case as an example, asked Staff why the code was changed requiring four foot height for fences from the previous six foot. Ms. Lama noted that the Commission expressed a concern that the appearance of a six foot fence is overwhelming and that security is more difficult at that height. Mr. Gutierrez is bothered that a four foot fence in front of a house is not realistic from an architectural point of view. He noted that Coral Gables limits the solid part of a fence to four feet but additional height up to six foot can be added with the use of wrought iron. Mr. Lefley asked staff to find out from the Comprehensive Plan why this height was recommended. Ms. Lama noted that at the same time the Commission lowered the fence requirement to four feet in the front, they also prohibited the use of chain link altogether. PB Minutes 12-29-92 4 fences is creating Ms. Thorner noted that a walled city and she is toe pp oincreasing number sed to any changesfwhich would provide for more fencing of any type. Mr. Parr said that he would have no problem recommending the granting of a variance or la four foot fence the to larger homes where the scale would cause appear out of proportion. Mr. Gutierrez made a motion to recommend o to he allow Commission to "revise height restrictions on f a ilasfou, feet for two feet to equal six feet, column masonry p wrought iron or decorative metal up to- six feet, columns of gate posts and gates up to six feet." Seconded by Mr. Parr. Vote: Approved: 4 opposed: 3 (Wright) (Thorner) (Jorczak) VI. Adjournment. Secretary Chairperson 12-29-92 PB Minutes 5 CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT OWNER BUILDER PERMIT AFFIDAVIT I mf�(�T ��►�� S '�. am the legal owner of the following described property: Subdivision Block �- Lots q AKA 6PR EJ S y l ��j S-'.[_. I am applying for a building permit pursuant to the Owner Builder exemption set forth in Florida Statute, Section 489 . 103 . i DISCLOSURE STATEMENT State law requires that construction be done by licensed contractors. You have applied for a permit under an exemption to that law. The exemption allows you as the owner of your property, to act as your own contractor even though you do not have a license. You must supervise the construction yourself. Your request for an owner builder permit acknowledges understanding and compliance with the Dade County Code of Contractors Chapter 10, Section 5 and the Florida Statutes, Chapter 489 , Section 103 . Herewith attached for your review and signature. WORK PERMITTED OWNER-BUILDER: An owner-builder., subject to the foregoing provisions and requirements, is limited to the construction of one single family or duplex residence each year for his own use and occupancy; or maintaining, altering or repairing his own single family or duplex residence; or erecting a one story building of not more than 500 square feet for commercial or industrial use, or adding a first addition of not more than 500 square feet to a commercial or industrial building;or maintenance or repairs and non-structural alterations, not to exceed $5000 on any building which he owns or leases. RESPONSIBILITY OF OWNER-BUILDER: You will be responsible for all work done by you or your day labor employees , and you must either employ a licensed contractor or persons to be paid on an hourly or per diem basis. Any one contracting with you, must be properly licensed, or you will be subject to a fine of $ 500 and/or imprisonment for six months. INSURANCE/WITHHOLDING TAXES etc. . : You are liable if any of your day employees cause any damage to persons or property, or if any employees are injured on the job. You regular home insurance policy ordinarily does not cover this type of liability. You are advised to investigate your responsibility for withholding Social Security, Federal and State Unemployment Insurance Taxes. I hereby acknowledge that I have read the above DISCLOSURE STATEMENT and that I comply with all the requirements for the issuance of an Owner-Builder permit and am aware of my responsibilities and liabilities under my application for such permit. S EPARATE P ERM=T S REQU=RED FOR ELECTR=CAL PLUMB=NG , ROOF=NG AND ME CHAN=CAL WORK c�....� t. � • Fey Property Owner /g / Witness f5ate CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT PLAN REVIEW COMMENT SHEET NAME OF BUILDING: P` I N P!/ 'roe& OWNER: ADDRESS: 0 NATURE OF WORK: GROUP: TYPE: THE FOLLOWING APPROVALS ARE REQUIRED PRIOR TO OUR REVIEW: _ DADE COUNTY FIRE DPT. _ HRS/ HEALTH REHABILITATION SERV. _ DERM/ DEPT. ENVIRONMENTAL _ WASA/ WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRUCTURAL: vp p� �aa t MECHANICAL. ��• � Cc ELECTRICAL: �� .7� S / /!"C �� /�G �/ �• MIT Gy /var jt- � - Pity t � CTED BY: DATE: PAGE 1 OF THE ABOVE COMMENTS DO NOT RELIEVE Y'THE PERMIT HOLDER FROM COMPLYING WITH ALL OTHER CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY COVERED '� BY THIS CHECKLIST OR PLAN DETAILS. BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI IF YOUR PROJECT REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PRESERVATION 'BOARD AND YOU RECEIVE THAT APPROVAL, BE SURE YOU DO NOT BEGIN WORK UNTIL YOU .HAVE APPLIED TO THE CITY FOR ALL OF THE .NECESSARY PERMITS DO NOT BEGIN ANY WORK UNTIL YOU HAVE RECEIVED YOUR VALIDATED PERMIT AND A PERMIT CARD! CONTRACTORS WHO BEGIN WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT WILL BE SUBJECT . TO A QUADRUPLE FEE PLUS A $500 FINE: OWNER/BUILDERS WHO BEGIN WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT WILL BE SUBJECT TO A QUADRUPLE FINE PLUS A $100 FINE! UNDERSTAND THAT:;APPLYING FOR A PERMIT DOES NOT GRANT THE RIGHT TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION. SIGNATURE �X WITNESS TITLE DATE DATE / C=TY OF SOUTH M=AM= Building & Zoning Department 6130 Sunset Drive, 2 n Floor Fax #: ( 305) 666-4591 South Miami , Florida 33143 Phone: ( 305) 663-6325 To: Sonia Lama, AIA Date: December 23 , 1992 Building & Zoning Director Fro®: Slaven Kobola ' Re! Planning Board Planner Packet Information Please, find the attached Planning Board packet in reference to the regularly, scheduled Planning Board Meeting of December 29, 1992. The following items are included: Item Page COVER MEMORANDUM (THIS PAGE) i PLANNING BOARD AGENDA LEAD ;SHEET ii PLANNING BOARD ADVERTISEMENT FOR PB-92-029 iii # of Pages PB-92-029 Lead Sheet 1 Staff Report for PB-92-0291 1 Application for Public Hearing before Planning Board 1 Proof of Ownership 1 1 Letter of Intent and Statement of Hardship by Applicant 2 Supplement Drawings by Applicant 1 Copy of Current Survey 2 Planning Board Advertisement for PB-92-029 1 Area Map Indicating Subject Property and Mailing Area 1 Zoning Petition Signed by Owners of Surrounding Properties 1 Total: 12 � 2 (12 2 Planning Board Packet December 29 , 1992 Lead Sheet Page i of iii A G E N ID A- P L A N N I N G B O A R D Tuesday, December 29 ,1992 Commission Chambers 7:30 PM I. Call to order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the U.S.A. II. Roll Call. III. Approval of the Minutes of December 8 , 1992. IV. Public Hearing: P B— 9 2 —0 .2 9 1. Planning Board Member to read the following: Applicant: Maria M. Diaz Request: Variance from Section 20-3 .6 (H) (2) to allow (two) gates in front of the property of about eight (8) feet high where four (4) feet is required. Legal: Lot 9, Block 2 , TRANQUILITY ESTATES according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 78 Page 64, of the Public Records of DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. Location: 6815 S.W. 63 Street South Miami, FL 33143 (A single-family residential property) 2. Presentation of the Staff Report by a member of staff. 3. Public Hearing. 4. Discussion by Planning Board members. 5. Motion and vote. V. Remarks. VI. Adjournment. Planning Board Packet December 29, 1992 Lead Sheet Page ii of iii City o f S ouch M z am z BU=LD=NG AND Z ON=NG 6130 Sunset Drive, South Miami , FL 33143 NOT Z C E OF PUBL Z C HEAR=NG On Tuesday, December 29, 1992 , at 7:30 P.M. in the Commission Chambers, the Planning Board of the City of South Miami will conduct a Public Hearing on the following matter. On Tuesday, January 19, 1993 , at 7:30 P.M. in the Commission Chambers, the City Commission of the City of South Miami will conduct a Public Hearing on the following matter. PB-92-029 Applicant: Maria M. Diaz Request: Variance from Section 20-3 .6 (H) (2) to allow (two) gates in front of the property of about eight (8) feet high where a maximum of four (4) feet is permitted. Legal: Lot 9, Block 2, TRANQUILITY ESTATES according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 78 Page 64, of the Public Records of DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. Location: 6815 S.W. 63 Street South Miami, FL 33143 (A single-.family residential, property) YOU ARE HEREBY ADVISED THAT IF ANY PERSON DESIRES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING OR HEARING, SUCH PERSON WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS, AND FOR SUCH PURPOSE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. (F.S. 286.0105) PLANNING BOARD AND CITY COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HELD IN THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS IN CITY HALL, LOCATED AT 6130 SUNSET DRIVE, SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33143 , AT THE AFOREMENTIONED TIMES AND DATES. ALL INTERESTED PARTIES ARE URGED TO ATTEND. OBJECTIONS OR EXPRESSIONS OF APPROVAL MAY BE MADE IN PERSON AT THE HEARING OR FILED IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE HEARING. THE PLANNING BOARD RESERVES THE RIGHT TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COMMISSION WHATEVER THE BOARD CONSIDERS IN THE BEST INTEREST FOR THE AREA INVOLVED. BOARD RECOMMENDATION ON THIS MATTER WILL BE HEARD BY THE CITY COMMISSION AT THE TIME AND DATE STATED ABOVE. INTERESTED PARTIES REQUESTING INFORMATION ARE ASKED TO CONTACT THE BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT BY CALLING 663-6325 OR BY WRITING TO THE DEPARTMENT AT CITY HALL, 6130 SUNSET DRIVE, SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33143 . REFER TO HEARING NUMBER WHEN MAKING ANY INQUIRY. TH= S 2 S A COURT E S Y NOT I C E Planning Board Packet December 29, 1992Lead Sheet Page iii of iii P B — 9 2 — O 2 9 PB-92-029 Diaz, 6815 SW 63 Street Page 1 of 12 ff Report for PB-92-029 P E3— 9 2 — 0 2 9 Applicant: Maria M. Diaz Request: Variance from Section 20-3 .6 (H) (2) to allow (two) gates in front of the property of about eight ( 8) feet high where four (4) feet. is required. Legal: Lot 9, Block 2, TRANQUILITY ESTATES according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 78 Page 64 , of the Public Records of DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. Location: 6815 S.W. 63 Street South Miami , FL 33143 (A single-family residential property) S TAF F REPORT The applicant is the owner of the property. The applicant applied for approval of the subject gates at the Environmental Review and Preservation Board meeting on February 5, 1991. The gates were approved; however, the gates were NOT constructed as proposed, that is, according to the submitted plans; moreover, the applicant did not request a final inspection. The gates as constructed do not meet the Land Development Code (LDC) height requirement for residential fences because the gates are higher than 4 feet. Moreover, in order to bring the property into compliance, the applicant shall erect a fence around the pool in front of the property. Such fence shall be not more than 4 feet high. The applicant has applied for a variance to allow the existing gates to remain as constructed, and to be incorporated into the future fence. However, if such variance is granted, the existing gates shall be submitted for the ERPB re-evaluation because the gates as constructed did not follow the proposed design. RECOMMENDATION Staff does not recommend approval. PB-92-029 Diaz, 6815 SW 63 Street Page 2. of 12 iplication for Public He& g before Planning Board City of South Miami 6130 Sunset Drive.South Miami.Florida 33143 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE PLANNING BOARD Applicant: 111n IrL11; 1 • (1 I it i Phone: cJ Property Owner: M,4 Ki E4 ` L�ii4 Z Signature: _LA �q Address:' �/ ty6 Phone Number: Represented By: � � z Organization: Address: Phone: Architect/Engineer: Phone: Owner './ Option to purchase Contract to purchase _ Copy attached? If applicant is not owner, is letter of authority from owner attached? i! LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY COVERED BY APPLICATION Lot(s) Block _.�_ Subdivision >.r• PB Metes and Bounds: Township Section Range APPLICATION IS .HEREBY MADE FOR THE FOLLOWING: Variance _ Special Use _ Rezoning Text Amendment to LDC Text .Amendment to Comp Plan _ PUD Approval _ PUD Major Change Briefly explain application and cite specific Code sections: SECTION: SUBSECTION: PAGE :: AMENDED DATE: SUBMITTED MATERIALS V Letter of intent Statement of hardship Reasons for change: from owner/tenant inherent in the land list justifications �i Proof of ownership Power of attorney _ Contract to purchase v Current survey 7 copies of Site Plan Required fee(s) for within 3 years 1 reduced 0 8.5" x 11" cost of advertising The undersigned has read this completed application and represents the information and all submitted materials furnished are true and correct to the best of the applicant's knowledge and belief. Date Applicant's Signature and title Upon receipt, applications and all submitted materials will be reviewed for compliance with City Codes and other applicable regulations. Applications found not in compliance will be rejected and returned to the applicant. OFFICE USE ONLY DATE FILED ACCEPTED REJECTED DATE PB HEARING COMMISSION PETITION REQUIRED ADVERT DEADLINE, OTHER INFO PETITION ACCEPTED PB-92-029 Diaz, 6815 .SW 63 Street Page 3 of 12 Proof of Ownership --- i i ii iiPi4iE ! i} 3I o This instrument was prepared by: MARSHALL B. FISHER K� 13125 1183 Celle Attorney,South o�;e Hlohwuy 'Warranty deed ( MIAMI, iile6 86--590590 2 STATUTORY FORM—SECTION 689.OY F.S.) '905 Jftbetd=t, Made this 19th day of December 1986 , iiriUlron GEORGE A. ZIMA, a single man, and PERLA Y. ZIMA, a single woman, of the County of Dade State of Florida grantor', and PABLO DIAZ and MARIA M. DIAZ, his wile, L whose post office address is 6815 S.O. 63rd Street, Miami, Florida of the County of Dade , State of Florida grantees, Witntl9Btt4, That said grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of **##*###�'EN DO RS A�TD OTHER GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATIONS 'Dollars. and other goo and vo ua a co nsi erosions to said grantor in hand #*#### acknowled sd, has paid by said grantee, the reciipt whereof is hereby 9 granted, bargained and sold to the said grantee, and grontee's heirs and assigns forever, the following described land, situate, lying and being in Dade County, Florida, to-wit: Lot 9, Block 2, TRANQUILITY ESTATES, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 78, at Page 64 of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida. SUBJECT TO: Conditions, restrictions, easements, zoning ordinances of Record, if any, limitations, and taxes for this year 1987, and all subsequent years. REC040E0 IR OFFICIAL RECORD{COO( C�/ ,AG ftlkf OAOE COUN7Y,n,ORIDA. { Documenbry stamps oolMar RFC9R0 V(RIFIEe Dade County RICHARD P. BRINrKETI nbMrd P.Brinfw C,Ierk,C"c.11 avur"courts C'ERN C!1!CUIT CUUSf Cr lAl Ll4�t�Y,/ ; '2 YG 00 and said grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the some against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. *"Grantor" and "grantee" are used for singular or plural, as context requires. Jn A tnil511 Whifirraf, or has hereunto set grantor's ho d and seal the day and year first above written. Sig and i red in $e ce: G ' f � (scan ZI (Seol) i PERLA M. ZIMA ��-� (Seal) (Seal) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF DADE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me, an officer duly qualified to take acknowledgments, personally appeared' GEORGE A. ZIMA, a single man, and PERLA M. ZIMA, a single woman, to me known to be the person 8 described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged before shot they executed the some. d rn� WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State lost 19 86 glare 19th day of Q@lober r , ` Is My commission expires: e,J' ;"s`I p r cnALI( STATE OF FLORIDA RTD '' '° ':'•R ixP, JAN. 7,1980 BUNUfD ,hAV GENERAL INS. UNO, ;�J V.•Z'' PB-92-029 Diaz, 6815 SW 63 Street Page 4 of 12 Letter Intent Statement of Hari ip by Applicant, page 1 I� s� �i► g/C r�i�'17o.� �y'� 6��> /� '(/�Ls d �i�9T G"a"y'`_ 7 .A Tv Z�Tr�'�d i� �h r� i��o.� �o�►�-T � �. !�.`�„�' ter- .��,A��'e-mac� �p/r.•r��. y�o li�iin v;Iw � PB-92-029 Diaz, 6815 SW 63 Street Page -5 of 12 Letter Intent Statenent of Hari ip by Applicant, page 2 a0z ��S �vMP,�b�e.�?' Gam? G�.��,a � to .�.►.-�7��' /1�1 -0 Y`V 7Zt 7? , i c)v.c- v T •�� s /V �D''CQ � �o•�e-D %ti �l� hs-rte � �.s.,.e_ zu�i K1 ,6&4P.o 0 4-,7.3 T7.4e- la-e~o�J' Owl.v II PB-92-029 Diaz, 6815 .SW 63 Street Page 6 of 12 _ Suppler t Drawings by Applicant 1-9 N 4 I 1 I I 1 I' PB-92-029 Diaz, 6815 .SW 63 Street Page 7 of 12 Copy Current Survey, page 1 LOCATION MAP N. T. S. 1/ • r /10 rat,7 y eil sE'-IE.✓r i22 6a a u h � o 3 V �2 Z•� /z Z by /az 60 —N-- --- S w G3�' z rem r k _ ti LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 9 3�oCA 2 7J/ �a FOR : 1*41),ellP !)/A,Z CERTIFIED T0: F/NH.vc/.sic �ECU,�/TI' _5 Y//6 S !ONE/ GUNTER GROUP, INC. 9350 S.W. 22 TERRACE PHONE:220-0073 MIAMI, FLA. 33165 I HEREBY CERTIFY TO THE ABOVE NAMED FIRM AND/OR PERSONS THAT THE "SKETCH OF SURVEY"OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF AS RECENTLY SURVEYED AND PLATTED UNDER OUR DIRECTION, ALSO THAT THERE ARE NO VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN AND MEETS THE MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS SET BY THE FLORIDA BOARD OF LAND SURVEYORS. SURVEYORS NOTES: R4'ZSV0v/%r To 0G7r10N 472.027 Z/-,4V#4 0,c 7Ne; FC�r�✓H A>N/.v/s rflNliiF Cum • LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS FURNISHED BY CLIENT. • EXAMINATION OF THE ABSTRACT OF TITLE WILL HAVE TO BE MADE TO DETERMINE RECORDED INSTRUMENTS,IFANY AFFECTING THE PROPERTY. • LEGAL DESCRIPTION SUBJECT TO ANY DEDICATIONS,LIMITATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS OR EASEMENTS OF RECORD. • SCALE AS SHOWN. dPAqyc' ii�r✓/�Z NOT VALID UNLESS SEALED WITH AN EMBOSSED SURVEYOR'S SEAL B Rolando Ortiz N• FB. — ISRETCH N wN CHECKED Professional Land Surveyor 4312 State of Florida. PB-92-029 Diaz, 6815 SW 63 Street Page 8 of 12 Planning Board A, ±rtisement for PB-92-029 City of South Miainz BU=LD=NG AND Z ON=NG 6130 Sunset Drive, South Miami , FL 33143 NOT=C E O F PUBL=C H EAR=NG On Tuesday, December 29 , 1992 , at 7:30 P.M. in the Commission Chambers, the Planning Board of the City of South Miami will conduct a Public Hearing on the following matter. On Tuesday, January 19 , 1993 , at 7:30 P.M. in the Commission Chambers, the City Commission of the City of South Miami will conduct a Public Hearing on the following matter. PB-92-029 Applicant: Maria M. Diaz Request: Variance from Section 20-3 . 6 (H) ( 2) to allow (two) gates in front of the property of about eight ( 8) feet high where a maximum of four ( 4) feet is permitted. Legal: Lot 9, Block 2, TRANQUILITY ESTATES according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 78 Page 64 , of the Public Records of DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. Location: 6815 S.W. 63 Street South Miami , FL 33143 (A single-family residential property) YOU ARE HEREBY ADVISED THAT IF ANY PERSON DESIRES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING OR HEARING, SUCH PERSON WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS, AND FOR SUCH PURPOSE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. (F.S. 286.0105) PLANNING BOARD AND CITY COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HELD IN THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS IN CITY HALL, LOCATED AT 6130 SUNSET DRIVE, SOUTH MIAMI , FLORIDA, 33143 , AT THE AFOREMENTIONED TIMES AND DATES. ALL INTERESTED PARTIES ARE URGED TO ATTEND. OBJECTIONS OR EXPRESSIONS OF APPROVAL MAY BE MADE IN PERSON AT THE HEARING OR FILED IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE HEARING. THE PLANNING BOARD RESERVES THE RIGHT TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COMMISSION WHATEVER THE BOARD CONSIDERS IN THE BEST INTEREST FOR THE AREA INVOLVED. BOARD RECOMMENDATION ON THIS MATTER WILL BE HEARD BY THE CITY COMMISSION AT THE TIME AND DATE STATED ABOVE. INTERESTED PARTIES REQUESTING INFORMATION ARE ASKED TO CONTACT THE BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT BY CALLING 663-6325 OR BY WRITING TO THE DEPARTMENT AT CITY HALL, 6130 SUNSET DRIVE, SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33143 . REFER TO HEARING NUMBER WHEN MAKING ANY INQUIRY. TH 2 S Z S A C OURT E S Y NOTICE PB-92-029 Diaz, 6815 SW 63 Street Page 10 of 12 I a Map Indicating Subject :)perty and Mailing Area X > n � I N - W y y' do 70 10 T cn > , 9 ti � � ao I w v Z • > > v y1 'INN�- AV -:Fa. its", \ 0 • r. W'p +' v a -1 O o • _vx i v n a _ Li J I r A v! r. .mob •,10 � o w v W 9 i : I '• w '' 1 PB-92-029 Diaz, 6815 .SW 63 Street Page 11 of 12 zoning eetition Signed by Owners o.L Surrounding Properties i �r?7Ai ItD PB-92-029 Diaz, 6815 SW 63 Street Page 12 of 12 f _.�� ._••-__ - ~,I r ��Ir_iilbltH�!'�M ��MMMMM - � p•- M.� -� t, �� f` A•{�Y"��` is 'f lilt how ' ! • y,�� 1. ` 1. � � M1.t� f.rilf.�' �h �� Y d! '�f�l�•'r;�.(" _y. ,� •.w..', ... :tip "< `1 " it, erg, ,, ,�• . a • 6', r , • s �u _ ';i: �'� 4.: .asd X31 ��,t� ' ,m N� � a y HH ii33 ~4p-* "44 Amp 1v IL c;►