Loading...
08-21-07 Item 13South Miami U -Medca city CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI t I I I I ©' OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM 2001 To: The Honorable Mayor Feliu and Members of the City Commission Via: Yvonne S. McKinley, City Manager " From: Julian Perez, Planning Direc Date: August 21, 2007 ITEM No. Subject: AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY INCORPORATING A NEW SECTION 20- 3.5(H) ENTITLED "SPECIAL DIMENSIONAL AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR TWO -STORY SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES AND TWO -STORY ADDITIONS"; INCLUDING MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND LOT COVERAGE; MINIMUM YARD SETBACK; MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT; MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE; MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE; LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS; ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE PLAN REVIEW; FINDINGS; HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD REVIEW; DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY; ORDINANCE IN CONFLICT, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BACKGROUND During the past year there has been considerable ,discussion and debate regarding the construction of new single family residential structures and additions to existing single family residential structures that appear to be too large for their building sites and contrary to the established small scale "character" of the neighborhoods in which they are located. It is expected that this trend could increase as the older single family residences in the City are sold for demolition or reconstruction. In response to this situation the City Commission requested that a study be initiated in order to prepare an amendment to the Land Development Code. In conjunction with the on -going review the City's Vice Mayor suggested that it would be appropriate to provide a temporary prohibition in regard to the issuance of building permits for two story residences, due to the potential detrimental impact upon the existing neighborhoods. The City Commission on February 6, 2007, adopted Resolution No. 03 -07 -1904 which established a moratorium applicable to construction of new two -story residential structures and additions of a second story to existing single family structures. The legislation did provide a waiver that allowed proposed two -story residences to be reviewed by the ERPB, however, the final approval had to be done by the City Commission. This ordinance was effective for a three month period. In June of 2007, the City Commission extended the moratorium ordinance an additional three months when it adopted Ordinance No. 19 -07 -1920. This ordinance expires on September 5, 2007. It is anticipated that the new regulations contained in the attached ordinance will be adopted and in effect prior to the expiration date. (2) PROPOSED LEGISLATION Beginning in February of 2007, the City Commission assumed a leadership role by adopting the initial moratorium ordinance and establishing a series of separate discussion workshops with stakeholders who had special interest in the impact of second story homes. These groups included the Planning Board, the Environmental Review and Preservation Board, the Historic Preservation Board, property developers, and residents. The end product of this process was a draft ordinance creating a new section in the Land Development Code providing special dimensional and performance standards for two -story single family homes. The draft ordinance was the subject of a joint review workshop on August 6, 2007, attended by representatives of the involved City Boards and members of the City Commission. A number of final revisions were made and it was agreed to start the adoption process. PLANNING BOARD ACTION The Planning Board at its August 14, 2007 meeting, after public hearing, adopted a motion by a vote of 5 ayes 0 nays recommending that the attached ordinance be approved. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the ordinance be adopted on first reading. Attachments: Draft Resolution Planning Board Minutes Excerpt 8 -14 -07 Public Notices JP /SAY\ PAComm Items \2007 \8- 21- 07 \McMansion CM Report.doc 2 I ORDINANCE :NO. 2 3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE 4 CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA AMENDING THE LAND 5 DEVELOPMENT CODE BY INCORPORATING A NEW SECTION 20- 6 3.5(H) ENTITLED "SPECIAL DIMENSIONAL AND PERFORMANCE 7 STANDARDS FOR TWO -STORY SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES AND 8 TWO -STORY ADDITIONS "; INCLUDING MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND LOT 9 COVERAGE; MINIMUM YARD SETBACK; MAXIMUM BUILDING 10 HEIGHT; MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE; MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS 11 COVERAGE; LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS; ARCHITECTURAL AND 12 SITE PLAN REVIEW; FINDINGS; HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD 13 REVIEW; DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY; 14 ORDINANCE IN CONFLICT, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 15 16 WHEREAS, the City Commission has expressed concern with the new 17 construction of two -story residential homes and the addition of a second story to 18 existing one story single family homes which may not be compatible with the scale 19 and massing of their existing residential neighborhood; and 20 21 WHEREAS, it is believed that the aforesaid new construction and additions 22 to existing single family residences are only the beginning of a trend that could 23 increase as older single family residences in the City are sold for demolition or 24 reconstruction; and 25 26 WHEREAS, the City Commission enacted a moratorium on the construction 27 of two -story homes on February 6, 2007, in order to provide sufficient time for the 28 City to study the various issues associated with the development of compatible two - 29 story homes; and 30 31 WHEREAS, the City Commission held a series of workshop with the 32 Planning Board, Environmental Review Preservation Board, Historic Preservation 33 Board, residences, developers and interested stakeholders to discuss the impact of 34 compatible two -story homes on existing residential neighborhood; and 35 36 WHEREAS, on June 5, 2007, the City Commission extended the 37 moratorium to allow the City staff to complete the preparation amended single - 38 family regulation and to schedule the required public hearings; and 39 40 WHEREAS, the City Commission is cognizant and respectful of the rights 41 of the owners of single family residential properties in the City, and have noted in 42 the workshops that they are not against two -story homes provided that such 43 development did not adversely change or alter the character of the neighborhood; 44 and 45 46 WHEREAS, the Planning Board. at its August 14, 2007 meeting, after public 47 hearing, adopted a motion by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays recommending that the 1 I proposed ordinance be approved. 2 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY 4 COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA: 5 6 SECTION 1. The foregoing "WHEREAS" clauses are hereby ratified and 7 confirmed as being true and correct and are hereby made a specific part of this 8 Ordinance upon adoption hereof. 9 10 SECTION 2. That the "Land Development Code of the City South Miami" 11 shall be amended to incorporate a new Section 20- 3.5(H), entitled "Special 12 Dimensional and Performance Standards for Two -Story Single Family Structure and 13 Two Story Additions." 14 15 (A) Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to establish special dimensional and 16 performance standards to regulate two -story single family structures and two -story 17 additions within the residential zoning districts of the City of South Miami. 18 19 (B) Applicability. The requirements of this Section shall be in addition to each and 20 every other requirement of the City of South Miami Land Development Code 21 (Code), and in the case of conflict, the provision of this Section shall control. 22 23 (C) Performance Standards. The performance standard set forth in this section 24 will guide the development of two -story residential ]homes in the single family 25 residential district. The performance standards are necessary in order to address yard 26 setbacks, open space, adequate landscaping, plan review process, and existing 27 character of the residential neighborhoods in the City of South Miami. By 28 implementing these standards the City will be able to preserve and enhance the 29 neighborhood character through architectural designs that are consistent and 30 responsive to the individual context of the City architecturally diverse 31 neighborhoods. 32 33 (1) Building Site. The development of two -story residential homes shall be 34 constructed on a lot that is suitable for residential development, provides adequate 35 setbacks and the necessary infrastructure to support the development. 36 37 (2) Minimum Lot Size. The minimum lot size for residential homes shall be subject 38 to the dimensional requirements set forth in the Land Development Code table 39 labeled "Dimensional Requirements Single- Family District" (Section 20- 3.5(E)). 40 For irregular shaped lots, the average lot width rather than the frontage width shall be 41 used at the discretion of the Planning Director. 42 43 (3) Minimum Lot Coverage. The building coverage for the first floor area 44 permitted for single family residences shall be equal to thirty (30) percent of the 45 building site area. 46 (4) Yard Setback Requirements. No, building or structure, or any part thereof, 47 including covered porches or terraces, but not including uncovered steps, projections 2 I shall be erected at a lesser distance from the front, side or rear line of any building 2 site than the front, side or rear setback distance, respectively, prescribed and 3 established herein for such building site. Nothing herein shall prohibit a building or 4 structure from having more than the minimum required setbacks. 5 6 (a) Side Setbacks (Interior). Refer to Exhibit A: "Proposed Preliminary 7 Minimum Side Yard Setbacks." 8 Exhibit A New Two -Story Single Family Residential and Second Story Additions Minimum Setbacks Requirements (In1•arinr I ntl 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Side Interior Lot Width First Floor Setback Second Floor Setback 40 -44 7.5 7.5 45 -49 7.5 9.0 50 -54 7.5 10.0 55 -59 7.5 11.0 60 -64 7.5 12.0 65 -69 8.5 13.0 70 -74 9.5 14.0 75 -+ 10.0 15.0 Side yards shall be measured from the closest point of the structure's vertical outside wall to the side lot line, on a bearing parallel to the front lot line, at ground level. Cumulative width of both interior side yards shall be not less than 20 percent of total lot width. (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 District" (Section 20- 3.5(E)). (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 District" (Section 20- 3.5(E)). (d) Rear setback. The minimum rear setback of twenty -five (25) feet shall be maintained and required on principle buildings in the single - family 3 I residential district, as reflected on the Land Development Code table 2 labeled "Dimensional Requirements Single - Family District" (Section 20- 3 3.5(E)). 4 5 (5) Building Height Limit. No single; family residential home shall be built in the 6 City of South Miami that is more than two-stories in height. The maximum building 7 height for two -story homes shall not exceed twenty -five (25) feet. 8 9 (6) Maximum Building Coverage/Impervious Coverage. The maximum building 10 coverage and impervious coverage shall be determined for each application by using 11 the dimensional requirements set forth in subsection 11. 12 13 (7) Landscape Requirements. A minimum of fifty (50) percent of the entire front 14 yard area shall be green space. All front yard areas shall be landscaped with trees 15 and drought resistant native vegetation, as necessary, to enhance privacy from 16 abutting properties. The landscaped open space required by this Section shall consist 17 of pervious landscaped area and shall not consist of any paved or otherwise 18 impervious areas. The minimum height of new trees for two -story homes shall be 19 18'.0 ". An inventory of existing trees located onsite shall be prepared and submitted 20 to the Planning Department as part of the Environmental Review Preservation Board 21 (ERPB) application. The required landscaped plan shall be prepared by Florida 22 Registered Landscape Architect consistent with the City's Tree Ordinance. 23 24 (8) Architectural and Site Plan Review. All new two -story homes or second story 25 additions shall be reviewed by the ERPB consistent with Section 20- 6.1(C) of the 26 Land Development Code. The design review must be based on sound and clearly 27 articulated design principles. The architectural plans must be signed and sealed by a 28 Florida Registered Architect. 29 30 (a) The ERPB shall consider and apply the following features as part of the 31 review: 32 33 (i) Scale, color, texture and appropriateness of all proposed 34 buildings and other structures; 35 36 (ii) Quantity, quality and arrangement of all proposed landscaping 37 and open space features; 38 39 (iii) Overall compatibility of the proposed development with the 40 existing and desired character of the property and 41 neighborhood in which ]located; and 42 43 (iv) The installation of sidewalks along all arterial roadways and 44 compliance with the City's sidewalk policies and 45 requirements. 46 47 (b) Designs should use a mix of articulation, architectural elements and Cl I exterior finishes reducing the perceived scale and bulk of buildings, 2 including low to moderately pitched roofs and recesses under roof 3 creating indoor /out door living spaces (terraces). In considering the 4 design of the building, the ERPB shall consider and apply Section 7(a)(i) 5 thru (iii), and render a decision as to the adequacy of the following 6 elements in the design concept: 7 8 Trim. 9 Shutters 10 Awnings and canopies 11 Windows (Fenestration) 12 Doors 13 Texture of surface 14 Colors 15 Roofs (materials, color, slope and overhang) 16 Planters 17 Window boxes 18 Walls, height, location, materials, design 19 Height of building 20 Location of structure on site 21 Site circulation in regard to pedestrian travel, parking, 22 services, grades and landscaping 23 Location of exposed piping, conduits and rain water leaders 24 The impact on adjacent properties of continuous two story 25 walls 26 Decorative lighting (height, location and style) 27 28 (c) A Comprehensive Neighborhood Analysis, photographs of the site, and a 29 statement explaining how the proposed building complies with the 30 architectural style surrounding the site must be submitted as part of the 31 ERPB application. The ERPB shall require changes to the plans to ensure 32 that the design preserves the existing architectural style of the 33 neighborhood, unless specified to the contrary, and promotes design 34 excellence in the community. The ERPB, as part of the its application for 35 review, shall require the submission of photographs of both sides of the 36 street and all abutting properties, on the block where the new two -story 37 home or two -story addition is to be constructed. 38 39 (d) The architectural context includes the height, scale, massing, separation 40 between buildings, and style in regard to how buildings and structures 41 relate to each other within a specified area. Architectural context allows 42 for differences in height, scale, massing, and separation between 43 buildings and style, when such differences contribute to the overall 44 harmony and character of the area. The ERPB shall not take into 45 consideration existing buildings and structure that are out of context with 46 the area when considering whether a new building or structure or a 47 substantial addition to an existing building or structure is in context with I both sides of the street on the block where it is located and surrounding 2 properties. The ERPB shall review the building or structure in the 3 context of that area in which the site is located when a new building or 4 structure or a substantial addition to an existing building or structure is 5 located on a building site that is on the border of two areas that have 6 different character or content. 7 8 (e) The Planning Director shall have the administrative discretion to require 9 the above review process to be accomplished prior to a Planning Board 10 public hearing on the proposed development application. 11 12 (9) Findings. The ERPB shall determine approval or disapproval of the proposed 13 designed plans. The Board shall prepare a written determination in order to state the 14 intent of its decision. The written determination shall be filed with the Planning 15 Department for inclusion in the project record. 16 17 (10) Historic Preservation Board Review. Construction of a two -story home or a 18 second story additions or alterations to existing homes in the City's Historic District 19 shall be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Board and ERPB. The Historic 20 Preservation Board shall review the application for consistency with the City's 21 historic preservation guidelines, requirements set forth in this section, and the 22 standards for the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness set forth in the Land 23 Development Code. The Board shall also determine compatibility with the 24 guidelines in the specific Historic Designation Report. The Historic Preservation 25 Board recommendations shall be submitted to the ERPB for consideration. The 26 ERPB shall give consideration to the findings of the Historic Preservation Board as 27 part of its review for the purpose of determining consistency with the requirements 28 set forth in this section. 29 30 (11) Development Standards. 31 The development standards are based on percentage of lot size consistent with the 32 table provided below. The lot size shall be rounded -off in order to determine the 33 appropriate lot size. 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 10 New Two -Story Single Family Residential and Second Story Additions Percentage Requirements for Maximum Building Coverage, Impervious Coveraae and FAR Lo�EBuilding aximum Coverage Maximum Impervious Coverage Maximum Floor Area Ratio 5,000 0.300 0.450 0.550 6,000 0.300 0.450 0.524 7,000 0.300 0.438 0.498 8,000 0.300 0.440 0.472 9,000 0.300 0.425 0.446 10,000 0.300 0.400 0.420 11,000 0.300 0.400 0.417 12,000 0.300 0.400 0.413 13,000 0.300 0.400 0.410 14,000 0.300 0.400 0.407 15,000 0.300 0.400 0.404 16,000 0.296 0.396 0.400 17,000 0.292 0.392 0.397 18,000 0.288 0.388 0.394 19,000 0.284 0.384 0.390 20,000 0.280 0.380 0.387 21,000 0.276 0.376 0.384 22,000 0.272 0.372 0.380 23,000 0.268 0.368 0.377 24,000 0.264 0.364 0.374 25,000 0.260 0.360 0.371 26,000 0.256 0.356 0.367 27,000 0.252 0.352 0.364 28,000 0.248 0.348 0.361 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 29,000 0.244 0.344 0.357 30,000 0.240 0.340 0.354 31,000 0.236 0.336 0.351 32,000 0.232 0.332 0.347 33,000 0.228 0.328 0.344 34,000 0.224 0.324 0.341 35,000 0.220 0.320 0.338 36,000 0.216 0.316 0.335 37,000 0.212 0.312 0.331 38,000 0.208 0.308 0.328 39,000 0.204 0.304 0.324 40,000 0.200 0.300 0.321 SECTION 3. Applications for construction of new two -story residential homes or for new two -story additions to existing homes filed with the ERPB prior to the enactment of Ordinance No. 03 -07 -1904 shall be grandfathered. SECTION 4. Applications for construction of new two - story residential homes or new two -story additions to existing homes requesting review by the ERPB after enactment of this ordinance shall comply with the requirements of this ordinance. SECTION 5. In case conflicting regulations exist, the requirements set forth in this regulation shall apply. SECTION 6. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION 7. 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 8. This ordinance shall be effective immediately after the, adoption hereof. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 PASSED AND ADOPTED this ATTEST: CITY CLERK READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY day of , 2007 APPROVED: MAYOR Commission Vote: Mayor Feliu Vice Mayor Wiscombe: Commissioner Palmer: Commissioner Birts- Cooper: Commissioner Beckman: JP Z:\IVIcMansions\Draft Ordinance\Mc Mansion Ordinance 8-.14- 2007PIanning Board Hearing.doc 0 CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI PLANNING BOARD Regular Meeting Action Summary Minutes Tuesday, August 14, 2007 City Commission Chambers 7:30 P.M. nT I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag Action: The meeting was called to order at 7: 40 A.M. Action: 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. Davis, Mr. Farfan, Ms. Young, and Ms. Beckman. Board Member Absent: Ms. Yates and Ms. Chael City staff present: Julian H. Perez (Planning Director), Sanford A. Youkilis (Planning Consultant), and Lluvia Resendiz (Administrative Assistant). IV. Planning Board Applications / Public Hearing PB -07 -023 Applicant: City of South Miami AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY INCORPORATING A NEW SECTION 20- 3.5(H) ENTITLED "SPECIAL DIMENSIONAL AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR TWO -STORY SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES AND TWO -STORY ADDITIONS "; INCLUDING MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND LOT COVERAGE; MINIMUM YARD SETBACK; MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT; MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE; MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE; LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS; ARCHITECTURAL, AND SITE PLAN REVIEW; FINDINGS; HISTORIC PRESERVATION Action: Ms. Farfan read the ordinance into the record. Planning Board Meeting Page 2 of 3 Mr. Perez thanked the Board members who participated) in this process. During this process citizens have expressed their concerns regarding two -story homes. At its, February 6, 2007 meeting, the City Commission adopted Resolution No. 03 -07 -1904, which established a moratorium applicable to the construction of new two -story residential structures and additions of a second -story to existing single - family structures. The ordinance was effective for a three month period. On June 2, 2007, the City Commission extended the moratorium ordinance an additional three months when it adopted Ordinance No. 19 -07 -1920. After the moratorium a number of workshops were held with different Boards and stakeholders. All their suggestions were taken into consideration and staff drafted an ordinance. He requested the Board to review the document and provide additional input in order to finalize the draft ordinance and thereafter make it available to the City Commission for final review. Recommendations: Staff recommended that -the proposed attached draft ordinance be approved and forwarded to the City Commission. Mr. Morton questioned whether, page 3 line 18, reflected the current code and Mr. Perez replied with an affirmative. Ms. Beckman questioned whether the proposed ordinance for the two -story homes negates the "wedding cake." Mr. Youkilis responded that the ordinance mandates the wedding cake construction. Ms. Beckman advised the Board that she along with Ms. Cathy McCann requested, from the City Clerk, a list of all the Administrative Waivers that have been issued during the last two administrations. Ms. Beckman also advised that she drove around the neighborhood and documented homes that seemed large compared to their lot size. These homes were crossed referenced with the list and it was determined the oversized homes all had Administrative Waivers with a considerable amount of setbacks rewarded without scrutiny of the neighbors or the City Commission. As examples Ms. Beckman stated that 48 percent impervious coverage was allowed when normally 40 percent is allowed; side setbacks were often reduced from 15 feet to 10.6 feet, and another was reduced from 7.6 to 6.3 percent. She added that after researching the City Charter she found the practice of Administrative Waivers violates the Charter. The City Charter reads there should be a four /fifths vote of the Commission in order "to liberalize land use and development regulations." Ms. Beckman requested the Board support her with the elimination of the Administrative Waivers in order to encourage a balance within the neighborhoods. Mr. Morton questioned whether there was a rule or policy that allows either the Planning Director or the Manager to waive 20 percent of the setbacks or lot coverage. Mr. Youkilis responded that there is a section in the LDC on Administrative Waivers where most residential districts may apply for a Waiver. The applicant does not have to go through a variance procedure if the change he /she proposes is within the limits of the waiver. Mr. Perez added that when an applicant presents their request to the Planning Department, staff evaluates the request and to assure that it has merit. The Administrative Waiver is a tool to help the citizens address a certain issue without having to go through a tedious and costly process of getting a variance and if done properly it benefits the City. Another Planning Board Meeting Page 3 of 3 process required is that applicants must obtain signatures from their surrounding neighbors as a form of approval. He added that staff calls the person to verify the signature and to ensure the addition will not impact them. In addition staff also meets with the applicant twice before the Administrative Waiver application is continued. Staff is attempting to assure the process is not abused but rather used wisely and effectively. If a Board member feels that the Administrative Waiver is something that does not that work for the interest of the City, he /she has the right, as a citizen, to go before the City Commission and ask that the section be either removed or modified. Mr. Morton stated that having recently gone through the exercise regarding lot coverage and setbacks on the two -story homes he believed that the Administrative Waiver process could be contradictory to the direction the ordinance is trying to obtain and therefore he suggested that staff be very cautious. Mr. Davis advised that he personally went through an Administrative Waiver for a client where he found that, although time consuming, staff handled the process very professionally. He witnessed first hand a non - conforming lot that the home owner could not afford to go through the hoops of a variances. The Administrative Waiver was very minor for a non - conforming bungalow where the home was to be enlarged in order to make it more feasible for a family to live however. Without the Administrative Waiver the family would not have been able to build the unit. Ms. Young questioned who she may contact, prior to the Planning Board ,meeting, if she has questions regarding an item on the agenda. Mr. Perez replied that staff may be contacted however Board members may not contact each other to discuss any item on the agenda. Motion: Ms. Beckman moved to approve the ordinance with the following changes: • Page 3, line 19 remove the apostrophe after "abuts" • Page 3, line 24 remove "all" and replace with "principal" • Page 4, line 4 make home plural "homes" • Page 4, line 15 add the word "new" before "trees" • Page4, line 18 add the work "Florida" and capitalize Registered Landscape Architect, and City's • Page 4, line 24 delete the word "by" Ms. Young seconded the motion. Vote: 5 Ayes 0 Nays PAComm Items \2007 \8- 21- 07\PB- Mins- 08 -14 -07 Exceipt.doc