10-07-08 Item 23South Miami
kyAmd
JUWWMCaCfiy
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI t III[,
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM 2001
To: The Honorable Mayor Feliu and Members of the City Commission
Via: Ajibola Balogun; City Manager
From: Ricardo Soto -Lopez MUP, Planning Director
Date: October 7, 2008 ITEM No.
Subject:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION .OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI,
FLORIDA, RELATING TO A REQUEST TO AMEND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY
MODIFYING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 20- 3.6(11)(2)(a) ENTITLED "PHYSICAL BARRIERS/
HEIGHT LIMITS - RESIDENTIAL ", IN ORDER TO PERMIT CHAIN LINK FENCES FACING
STREETS TO BE IN SETBACK AREAS IF LANDSCAPED AND SCREENED; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.. - -- - - -
BACKGROUND
The Land Development Code (LDC) regulations on " physical barriers" (fences /walls) prohibit the placement of
chain link fences in the setback areas if that side of the property is adjacent to a right -of -way. The actual section of
the Code (Sec. 20 -3.6 (H)(2)(a) reads as follows:
"(H) Physical Barriers.
(1) All fences, walls, trellises and hedges may be erected on or, along a property line, but shall not extend into
official public rights -of -way or project on or over adjacent properties.
(2) Height limit. Residential:
(a)ZChain link fences will not be permitted on required yards adjacent to a right -of- way."
The above regulation (a) in bold, does not allow chain link fences in "required yards" which means the required
setback areas on the side and front of a residential property which faces a street.
At a recent City Commission meeting Mayor Feliu advised that several residents expressed to him that if a chain
link fence was properly screened by landscaping its placement along street sides (side yard or front yard) should be
acceptable and would be visually attractive. It was requested that the Planning Board consider amending this
provision of the Code to permit chain link fences along right -of -ways if properly screened.
STAFF OBSERVATION
Research conducted by staff indicates that a number of cities also prohibit wire or chain link fences in setback areas
facing a street (Coral Gables, Naples, Miami Springs). Miami Dade County prohibits all chain link fences in front
of the building line in residential zones. It is possible that with the proper screening a chain link fence facing a
right -of -way could be acceptable. An amendment which responds to the situation is to allow the chain link fence in
the setback areas facing streets, however, the fence must be buffered by a solid visual screen of landscaping. The
proposed amendment is contained in the attached draft ordinance.
2
PLANNING BOARD ACTION
The Planning Board at its September 15, 2008 meeting conducted a public hearing on the proposed amendments
and adopted a motion by a vote of 4 ayes I nay (Mr. Morton) recommending that the proposed amendment be
denied. The Board's recommendation was based on concerns that the gate portions (pedestrian/driveway) could not
be screened and that it would be difficult for code enforcement to continuously monitor to assure that the
landscaping is in place.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the proposed amendment as shown in attached draft ordinance be approved on first reading.
Attachments
Draft ordinance
LDC Sec. 20- 3.6(H)
Planning Department Staff Report 9-15-08
Planning Board .Minutes Excerpt 9 -15 -08
Public Notices - -
RSUSAY
X: \Comm Items\2008 \10 -7 -08 \LDC Amend Chain Link Fence CM Report.doc
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, RELATING TO A REQUEST TO AMEND THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE BY MODIFYING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 20-
3.6(11)(2)(a) ENTITLED "PHYSICAL BARRIERS/ HEIGHT LIMITS - RESIDENTIAL ", IN
ORDER TO PERMIT CHAIN LINK FENCES FACING STREETS TO BE IN SETBACK
AREAS IF LANDSCAPED AND SCREENED; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the Land Development Code (LDC) regulations on "physical barriers"
(fences /walls) prohibit the placement of chain link fences in the setback areas if that side of the
property is adjacent to a right -of -way; and
WHEREAS, at a recent City Commission meeting several residents expressed opinions that
if a chain link fence was properly screened by landscaping its placement along street sides (side
yard or front yard) should be acceptable and would be visually attractive; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board was requested to consider amending this provision of the
Code to allow chain link fences to be located in the setback areas facing right -of -ways if properly
screened; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department prepared an amendment which would allow a chain
link fence in the setback areas facing streets, however, the fence must be buffered by a solid visual
screen of landscaping; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board at its September 15, 2008 meeting, after public hearing,
adopted a motion by a vote of 4 ayes 1 nay recommending that the proposed amendment be
denied; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. That Land Development Code Section. 20- 3.6(H) entitled "Physical Barriers" is hereby
amended to read as follows:
SECTION 20 -3.6,
"(H) Physical Barriers.
(1) All fences, walls, trellises and hedges may be erected on or along a property line, but shall
not extend into off cial public rights -of -way or project on or over adjacent properties.
(2) Height limit.
Residential:
(a) Chain link fences will mw be permitted on requ in required
setback areas adjacent to a right -of -way if a landscape buffer of trees,
hedges, clinging vines or other natural material is installed and
provides an immediate continuous, unbroken solid visual screen
hiding the view of the fence from the right -of -way. The landscape
buffer shall be continuously maintained.
(b) In required yards not adjacent to a right -of -way, fences, walls, and
trellises shall not exceed six (6) feet in height above grade.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
2
(c) In required yards adjacent to a right -of -way, fences, walls, trellises, and
gates shall not exceed four (4) feet in height above grade. Fences and
walls may be increased by two (2) feet in height above grade, and gates
may be increased by three (3) feet above grade, provided that the upper
two (2) feet of the fence or wall surface and the upper three (3) feet of the
gate between vertical supports is designed as a uniform pattern with a
minimum of sixty (60) percent open area "
Section 2 All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance
are hereby repealed.
Section 3 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.
Section 4 This ordinance shall be effective immediately after the adoption hereof.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2008
ATTEST: APPROVED:
CITY CLERK MAYOR
1 st Reading —
2nd Reading —
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
X: \Comm Items\2008 \10- 7- 08\LDC Amend Chain Link Ord.doc
COMMISSION VOTE:
Mayor Feliu:
Vice Mayor Beasley:
Commissioner Wiscombe:
Commissioner Palmer:
Commissioner Beckman:
20 -3.6 SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
(H) Physical Barriers.
(1) All fences, walls, trellises and hedges may be erected on or along a property line, but
shall not extend into official public rights -of -way or project on or over adjacent
properties.
(2) Height limit.
Residential:
(a) Chain link fences will not be permitted on required yards adjacent to a
right -of -way.
(b) In all yards, fences, walls, and trellises (excluding arbors) shall not exceed
six (6) feet in height above grade, except as provided in (c) below.
(c) In the required front setback area adjacent to a right -of -way, fences, walls,
trellises, gates and hedges shall not exceed four (4) feet in height above
grade with the following exceptions:
(i) Wooden fences exceeding four (4) feet in height adjacent to a right -of-
way in required front setback areas shall proved for a minimum of
Supp. No. 11 54
ZONING. REGULATIONS
20 -3.6
sixty (60) percent open area for all portions between four (4) and six (6)
feet in height above grade. The graphic "Wooden Fence Types" includes
an example of both an unacceptable and acceptable prototype.
Wooden Fence Types . .
ACCEPTABLE:
Sine wave pattern yields more than 60 percent open area
UNACCEPTABLE:
Pre - fabricated lattice yields less than 60 percent open area
T61
(Max) m
4f
.lmaxl
—L -
(ii) Masonry wall exceeding four (4) feet in height adjacent to a right -of-
way in required front setback areas shall provide a minimum of sixty
(60) percent open area for all portions between four (4) and six (6) feet
in height above grade. No portion of any solid masonry wall above four
(4) feet in height above grade along rights -of -way shall exceed sixteen
(16) inches in width. This is to provide for vertical support (per section
20- 3.6(H)(2)(c)) of screening material. The remaining balance of open
Supp. No. 11 55
20 -3.6 ' SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
area may be screened by metalwork, lattice or any other non - masonry
screening material. A minimum of sixty (60) percent open area shall be
maintained. The graphic "Masonry Wall Types" includes an example of
both an unacceptable and acceptable prototype.
Masonry Wall Types
ACCEPTABLE:
Vertical supports (columns) do not exceed 14 inches in width
UNACCEPTABLE:
Vertical supports exceed 14 inches in width
(Max)
4'
lax)
"{a�� �' !: ..::4.
.......� ?.�.vs< Y, �. i.:3Y'ib�] a. M".,
vvV haw
.:�CYx"A. :.:.' < -. ✓, w vr.�:= ""°+= �`i'+•;,`<86:.`:ktt ': }.,wc; ^..: ',Y'. .61,,,• .'
a[:a ,xt'c'L<`C',Sl,'^ 4`�: yM`"• \\ _ i• :-:a'L 2"'• :,/ ^;\ >rn:Y>`.: ^}::.': t
Fa;!.. �; 'F ]Y.]S. s:•L, ic>YY ".O t � " :.�:r':o;•.: >'-:a• za., �Y< < {i i3• 6
;: `•• !>v.'Y ON� max „,,,,, > Yrb .Y:..`•�.,.�i,.,,>?�i5.u"�>aY >., D <>v.'+r ff���:... :N :t::..:.:;ZSp,,,. v}.r...' - r.. .�N tl
b...>�.v� .,.; .:.•.. �.. �YYY� .:... w: YC�?IC�:Sy�
V �)•~���� ter.,,,, k.;..^Y'ta {..C.. \x\.`:�
w�:k:k�' � �w'; +�.u�<Hit�w..'i < :k<i . ,-•b. d.2Y` {.. Ly A,Ly..,` aa.,c..�.��cL�.}.Y��' <2;,:
r : -; %. ,3...:. \•'•” ,FO' .h+ ?Y .Y:.t.� -i �>' `�- i' ,,.t Z�:2', <{'r•,'.':Y.
;; � Y }Y,r,;.. '.2 xt%: t,AY�gw. „v] >.:'> r� '•'��n;.ri�!LYS?��Lfy:�.""\•.', G
!:GS`�v,',�'�;�? #� � ?ia:�:.�� : z <,„v�m:.;>..''6„",.:•,1y, i•,.:;..,,,\,..:Y x c;>p
G `ttt33l +. >: v. Yhh, v,�0 <] ;,>:^'••$f >:::.+`y���2:4! N -.w ,,, v.�n,:n'FF,. ?]iYN { }\
,{,Fw:��•, 2 i.,...., �,K \�t ? ?:Y' zY�::� }Y}.� < }'<YC2'i.:. ♦ "Q::.".`.i{, -:. :.. va ., ,r•:�F.:.i.
.✓n. � n }, f,iiv ?Y` �..t•.i}.Y,.:..,v..7- } ... Y ....:.. ...... .... y`.. .: •}:n }}...;v::�.vn:::!....
(iii) Gates may be increased by three (3) feet above grade provided that the
upper three (3) feet of the gate between vertical supports is designed as
-a uniform pattern with a minimum of sixty (60) percent open area..
[(iv)] Trellises cannot exceed four (4) feet in height along rights -of -way.
Freestanding trellises not located along property lines and not in-
stalled to create a physical barrier may extend up to six (6) feet in
Supp. No. 11 56
South Miami
All-America City
1 r
2001
To: Honorable Chair and Date: August 12, 2008
Planning Board Members
From: Ricardo Soto - Lopez, MUP /�;-�— Re: LDC Amendment – Chain Link
Planning Director Fence Screening Sec. 20- 3.6(H)(2)
PB -08 -026
Applicant: City of South Miami
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH
MIAMI, FLORIDA, RELATING TO_.A_REQUEST_TO_AMEND THE.LAND DEVELOPMENT_
CODE BY MODIFYING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 20- 3.6(11)(2)(a) ENTITLED
"PHYSICAL BARRIERS/ HEIGHT LIMITS - RESIDENTIAL ", •IN ORDER TO PERMIT
CHAIN LINK FENCES FACING STREETS TO BE IN SETBACK AREAS IF LANDSCAPED
AND SCREENED; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BACKGROUND
The Land Development Code (LDC) regulations on " physical barriers" (fences /walls) prohibit the
placement of chain link fences in the setback areas if that side of the property is adjacent to a right -of-
way. The actual section of the Code (Sec. 20 -3.6 (H)(2)(a) reads as follows:
"(H) Physical Barriers.
(I) A11 fences, walls, trellises and hedges may be erected on or along a property line, but shall not
extend into official public rights -of -way or project on or over adjacent properties.
(2) Height limit.
Residential:
(a) Chain link fences will not be permitted on required yards adjacent to a right-
of -way.
(b) In required yards not adjacent to a right -of -way; fences, walls, and trellises
shall not exceed six (6) feet in height above grade.
(c) In required yards adjacent to a right -of -way, fences, walls, trellises, and gates
shall not exceed four (4) feet in height above grade. Fences and walls may be
increased by two (2) feet in height above grade, and gates may be increased by
three (3) feet above grade, provided that the upper two (2) feet of the fence or
wall surface and the tipper three (3) feet of the gate between vertical supports
is designed as a uniform pattern with a minimum ofsixty (60) percent open
area. "
LDC Amendment
August, 2008
Page 2 of 2
The above regulation No. (2)(a) does not allow in chain link fences in "required yards" which means
the required setback areas on the side and front of a residential property which faces a street.
At a recent City Commission meeting Mayor Feliu advised that several residents expressed to him that if
a chain link fence was properly screened by landscaping its placement along street sides (side yard or
front yard) should be acceptable and would be visually attractive. It was requested that the Planning
Board consider amending this provision of the Code to permit chain link fences along right -of -ways if
properly screened.
STAFF OBSERVATION
Research conducted by staff indicates that a number of cities also prohibit wire or chain link fences in
setback areas facing a street ( Coral Gables, Naples, Miami Springs). Miami Dade County, prohibits all
chain link fences in front of the building line in residential zones. It is possible that with the proper
screening a chain link fence facing a right -of -way could be acceptable.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT
"(H) Physical Barriers.
(1) All fences, walls, trellises and hedges may be erected on or along a property line, but shall not
extend into official public rights -of -way or project on or over adjacent properties.
(2) Height limit.
Residential:
(a) Chain link fences will nw be permitted in required setback
areas adjacent to a right -of -way if a landscape buffer of trees, hedges,
clinzin-e vines or other natural material is installed and provides an
immediate continuous unbroken solid visual screen hiding the view of the
fence from the riplit -or way.
(b) In required yards not adjacent to a right -of -way, fences, walls, and trellises
shall not exceed six (6) feet in height above grade.
(c) In required yards adjacent to a right -of -way, fences, walls, trellises, and gates
shall not exceed four (4) feet in height above grade. Fences and walls may be
increased by two (2) feet in height above grade, and gates may be increased by
three (3) feet above grade, provided that the upper two (2) feet of the fence or
wall surface and the upper three (3) feet of the gate between vertical supports
is designed as a uniform pattern with a minimum of sixty (60) percent open
area. "
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the proposed amendment to Section 20 -3.6 (1-1)(2)(a) as shown above be
approved.
Attachments:
LDC Sec. 20- 3.4(B)(15)
Public Notices
RSUSAY
X:\PB \PB Agendas Staff Reports\2008 Agendas Staff Reports \8- 12- 08 \PB -08 -026 LDC Amend chain fences.doc
C—SO Tlat
'err+ATED
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
PLANNING BOARD
Action Summary Minutes
Monday, September 15, 2008
City Commission Chambers
7:30 P.M.
Draft
EXEE�2P1T
I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Action: The meeting was called to order at 7:48P.M.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.
II. Roll Call
Action: Chairman Morton requested a roll call. Board members present constituting a quorum:
Mr. Morton, Ms. Yates, Mr. Farfan, Mr. Cruz, and Ms. Chael. Absent: Mr. Comendeiro and Ms.
Young.
City staff present: Ricardo Soto - Lopez, (Planning Director), and Sanford A. Youkilis (Consultant),
and Lluvia Resendiz (Zoning Tech).
III. Planning Board Applications /Public Hearing
PB -08 -026
Applicant: City of South Miami
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, RELATING TO A REQUEST TO AMEND THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE BY MODIFYING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 20-
3.6(11)(2)(a) ENTITLED "PHYSICAL BARRIERS/ HEIGHT LIMITS - RESIDENTIAL ", IN
ORDER TO PERMIT CHAIN LINK FENCES FACING STREETS TO BE IN SETBACK
AREAS IF LANDSCAPED AND SCREENED; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
Ms. Yates read the item into the record.
Action: Mr. Youkilis advised the Land Development Code regulations on "physical barriers"
(fences /walls) prohibit the placement of chain link fences in the setback areas if that side of the
property is adjacent to a right -of -way. The regulation listed in the referenced section does not allow
in chain link fences in "required yards" which means the required setback areas. At a recent City
Commission meeting Mayor Feliu advised that several residents expressed to him that if a chain
link fence was properly screened by landscaping its placement along street sides (side yard or front
yard) should be acceptable and would be visually attractive. It was requested that the Planning
Board consider amending this provision of the Code to permit chain link fences along right -of-
ways if properly screened Staff recommended approval of proposed amendment to Section 20 -3.6
Planning Board Meeting
September 15, 2008
Page 2 of 2
(H)(2)(a) with the agreement that a chain- link fence in the set back area be heavily landscaped.
Mr. Morton questioned if the same would apply for and aluminum fence. Mr. Youkilis replied that
aluminum fences are permitted within the required setbacks unlike a chain link fence.
Mr. Cruz questioned the capability of the City's enforcement in order to ensure that a hedge will be
properly maintained. He further added that by approving the proposed text amendment the Board
will leave the decision making process up to Code Enforcement as to whether a hedge is
continuous and properly maintained. He finds it difficult and believes the City will add an
additional burden to Code Enforcement. Mr. Youkilis advised that it will be enforced by
complaints made by residents. Mr. Cruz advised that on several occasions he has complained about
a 4 -5 inch grass next to his property and he has not seen a response from Code Enforcement
therefore, he does not see there will be reasonable enforcement as to whether a hedge is properly
kept up with. He does not think that chain link fences should be seen and finds that there are other
alternatives. Mr. Youkilis stated that Code Enforcement did participle in the drafting process for
the proposed text amendment.
Ms. Yates stated that chain link fences are old and did not find a reason why a South Miami
resident will erect a chain link fence-when _ more attractive- fences could be erected. - -- - --- – —
Ms. Chael stated that although the hedge may cover the view of a chain link fence it will not cover
the chain link gate. The gate will remain visible and there is no possibility of it being covered.
Chairman Morton opened the Public Hearing.
Name Address Position
Claudia Harry 5752 SW 77 Terrace Oppose
Mrs. Harry advised that the Board should deny the proposed text amendment. She further
added that the situation with the gate is obvious that it cannot be covered. The mechanism
already in place works well and should not be changed.
Chairman Morton closed the Public Hearing.
Mr. Morton stated that if the text amendment were approved the chain link fence would be
concealed with a hedge. He recommended that the text be amended so that the issue relating to the
gate should be covered aesthetically.
Motion: Ms. Yates moved to deny the proposed text amendment. Mr. Cruz seconded.
Vote: 4 Ayes I Nay (Mr. Morton)
XAComm Items\2008 \10- 7- 08 \PB- Min- 09 -15 -08 Excerpt Chain Fences.doc