09-18-07 Item 17South Miami
AN- a�risac�y
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI 1111.
�� 192�oP OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
o R INTER- OFFICE MEMORANDUM 2001
To: The Honorable Mayor Feliu and Members of the City Commission
Via: Yvonne S. McKinley, City Manager ,WM?, .
From: Julian Perez, Planning Director j -,
Date: September 18 2007 ITEM No.
Subject:
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI,
FLORIDA PURSUANT TO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 20- 5.19(E)(3) REQUESTING THE
ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
LOCATED AT 6202 MILLER ROAD WITHIN AN RS- 3(HP -OV), RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY
(HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY) ZONING DISTRICT (CAMBRIDGE LAWNS HISTORIC
DISTRICT) IN ORDER TO PERMIT EXTERIOR RENOVATION AND EXPANSION OF SECOND
FLOOR; AND PURSUANT TO SECTION 20- 4.11(D) IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CERTIFICATE
OF APPROPRIATENESS A REQUEST TO: (1) GRANT A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20- 3.5(E) TO
ALLOW FOR LOT COVERAGE TO BE 33% WHERE A MAXIMUM 30% IS PERMITTED; (2) GRANT
A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20- 3.5(E) TO ALLOW A SIDE STREET SETBACK OF 7 FEET ON
THE FIRST FLOOR AND 13 FEET ON THE SECOND FLOOR WHERE 15 FEET IS REQUIRED FOR
BOTH FIRST AND SECOND FLOORS; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Background:
Pursuant to Section 20 -5.8 of the Land Development Code (LDC) the applicant has submitted a Certificate of
Appropriateness (COA) application requesting approval of a renovation plan for a residential single family home at
6202 Miller Rd. The property is located in the Cambridge Lawns Historic District.
The applicant is proposing renovation which will upgrade the structural system, roof, windows, doors, fagade
materials, porch, and includes exterior painting. In conjunction with the COA, the applicant is also requesting
approval for two variances which are needed to allow the renovation work. The renovation work includes a major
expansion of both the first and second floors.
Applicable Legislation
All exterior renovation and remodeling involving a designated historic site requires a recommendation from the
Historic Board. In addition, the Land Development Code provides that the Historic Preservation Board will review
any necessary variances which are needed in conjunction with requested COA. The review procedure (notices,
ads, public hearing) for variances is the same as if the item was before the Planning Board. The Historic Board's
recommendation on the COA and the variances is forwarded to the City Commission for an additional public
hearing and final decision. Section 20- 4.11(D) (4), Land Development Code also provides that a variance request
associated with a Certificate of Appropriateness does not require a finding of hardship.
Application History
The City Commission at its June 5, 2007 meeting conducted a public hearing on the initial COA application which
was recommended by the Historic Preservation Board. At the Commission meeting concerned was expressed by
Commissioners and several speakers that the request for variances of this magnitude would have a negative impact
on the historic neighborhood. The Commission advised the applicant to reduce the magnitude of the renovation
work and remanded the item back to the Historic Preservation Board
(2)
Applicant's Revised Plans
The applicant has now revised the original application by reducing the size of both the first floor addition and the
second floor expansion. The revised plans were submitted to the Historic Preservation Board. The current
renovation plans the following variances:
(1) The first variance would allow for an increase in the maximum permitted lot coverage (building foot - print)
which in the RS -3 District is set at 30 %. The applicant is proposing to add 410 square feet to the first floor.
This will result in 2420 square feet at the ground level which is 33.6 %, exceeding the 30% maximum
permitted.
(2) The second variance is a result of the expansion of the second floor from 517 square feet to 1242 sq. ft. This
additional square footage expands the east side of the structure at both the first and second floors and results in
the need for a variance. The current RS -3 side street setback requirement is 15 feet for both the second and first
floors. The applicant's current setback is 7.2 feet and the applicant is requesting that the first floor setback be
approved at 7 feet and that the second story setback be approved as 13 feet.
(3) The applicant's revised plans indicates that the original proposal of 4,420 square feet has been reduced to
3,662 square feet, a decrease of 752 square feet.
(4) It is important to note that the applicant's revised plans will change the total building square footage from the
current 2,527 square feet to 3,662 square feet, or an overall increase of 45% in building size.
Historic Preservation Board Action:
The Historic Preservation Board at its August 27, 2007 meeting adopted a motion by a vote of 4 ayes 0 nays
recommended approval of the COA with the two variances as described above. The Board also conditioned its
approval with the requirement that the applicant: (1) revise the plans to show a hipped roof line over the rear
addition; (2) revise the plans to eliminate the first floor side street bump -out (increase). The applicant agreed and
has submitted revised plans which reflect the adjustments requested by the Board.
Recommendation:
The two requested variances are being made in conjunction with a Certificate of Appropriateness and are necessary
for the renovation, remodeling and upgrading of a very visible designated historic residential site. The renovation
plans appear to be sensitive to the Tudor architectural style of the structure.
It is recommended that the application /plans (dated 8- 30 -07) for a Certificate of Appropriateness and the two
requested variances be approved with the following condition: (1) the applicant must install in a visible location at
the front of home a City provided historic plaque at the completion of the renovation work and prior to the issuance
the certificate of occupancy.
Backup Documentation:
Draft Resolution
COA Application
Renovation Plans 8 -30 -07
Planning Department Staff Report 8 -27 -07
Historic Preservation Board Meeting Excerpt 8 -27 -07
Public Notices
JP /SAY
PAComm Items\2007 \9- 18- 07 \HPB -07 -001 COA Var CM Report.doc
2
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
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH
MIAMI, FLORIDA PURSUANT TO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 20- 5.19(E)(3)
REQUESTING THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR A
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 6202 MILLER ROAD WITHIN AN RS -3(HP-
OV), RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY (HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY) ZONING
DISTRICT (CAMBRIDGE LAWNS HISTORIC DISTRICT) IN ORDER TO PERMIT
EXTERIOR RENOVATION AND EXPANSION OF SECOND FLOOR; AND PURSUANT TO
SECTION 20- 4.11(D) IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CERTIFICATE OF
APPROPRIATENESS A REQUEST TO: (1) GRANT A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20- 3.5(E)
TO ALLOW FOR LOT COVERAGE TO BE 33% WHERE A MAXIMUM 30% IS
PERMITTED; (2) GRANT A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20- 3.5(E) TO ALLOW A SIDE
STREET SETBACK OF 7 FEET ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND 13 FEET ON THE SECOND
FLOOR WHERE 15 FEET IS REQUIRED FOR BOTH FIRST AND SECOND FLOORS;
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, applicant Abisola DubeX has submitted Historic Preservation Board Application
No. UPB -07 -001 requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness approving a renovation plan for a
residential single family home at 6202 Miller Road which property is within the Cambridge Lawns
Historic District which is an "HP -OV" Historic Preservation Overlay Zone; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 20- 5 -19(E) (3) of the Land Development Code, a "Certificate
of Appropriateness" is required for applications affecting the exterior (renovation, repair, painting,
demolition or landscaping); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 20- 4.11(D) of the Land Development Code, variances for
designated historic sites which are associated with the issuance of certificates of appropriateness shall be
reviewed and recommended upon by the Historic Preservation Board prior to final approval by the City
Commission: and
WHEREAS, Section 20- 4.11(D)(4) of the Land Development Code also provides that a variance
request associated with a Certificate of Appropriateness does not require a finding of hardship; and
WHEREAS, Section 20- 5.19(E)(3) of the South Miami Land Development Code requires the
City Commission to conduct a public hearing on certificates of appropriateness and to approve, deny,
approve in modified form, or defer a subject application; and
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Board at its August 27, 2007 meeting adopted a motion
by a vote of 4 ayes 0 nays recommending approval with certain design modifications and a condition
of a Certificate of Appropriateness application and two variances for the renovation of a residential
single family home at 6202 Miller Road; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami desire to accept the
recommendation of the Historic Preservation Board.
1
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
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT :RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA THAT:
Section 1. The Certificate of Appropriateness application and the following two variances: (1) a
variance from Section 20- 3.5(e) to allow for lot coverage to be 33% where a maximum 30% is
permitted; and (2) a variance from Section 20- 3.5(e) to allow a side street setback of 7 feet where 15 feet
is required for the first floor and a side street setback of 13 feet where 15 feet is required for the second
floor; all needed for the renovation of a residential single family home at 6202 Miller Road as shown on
plans entitled Site Plans dated 8- 30 -07, are ]hereby approved with the following condition: (1) the
applicant must install in a visible location at the front of home a City provided historic plaque at the
completion of the renovation work and prior to the issuance the certificate of occupancy.
Section 2. This resolution shall be effective immediately after the adoption hereof.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
P:\Comm Items \2007 \9- 18- 07 \COA 6202 Miller Rd Resol.doc
2
, day of , 2007
APPROVED:
MAYOR
COMMISSION VOTE:
Mayor Feliu:
Vice Mayor Wiscombe:
Commissioner Palmer:
Commissioner Birts:
Commissioner Beckman:
o� so U� South Miami
F
All- AmericaCiiy
INCORPORATED
1927
R11
2001
To: Honorable Chair & Date: August 27, 2007
Historic Board Members
From: Julian Pereg, �! Re: COA Approval and Two
Planning Director Variances- 6202 Miller Rd.
HPB- 07- 001 (Revised)
Applicant /Owner: Abisola Dubey
Location: 6202 Miller Rd (Cambridge Lawns Historic District)
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA PURSUANT TO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION
20- 5.19(E)(3) REQUESTING THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF
APPROPRIATENESS FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 6202
MILLER ROAD WITHIN AN RS- 3011P -OV), RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY
(HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY) ZONING DISTRICT (CAMBRIDGE
LAWNS HISTORIC DISTRICT) IN ORDER TO PERMIT EXTERIOR RENOVATION
AND EXPANSION OF SECOND FLOOR;; AND PURSUANT TO SECTION 20- 4.11(11)) IN
CONJUNCTION WITH THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS A REQUEST
TO: (1) GRANT A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20- 3.5(E) TO ALLOW FOR LOT
COVERAGE TO BE 33% WHERE A MAXIMUM 30% IS PERMITTED; (2) GRANT A
VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20- 3.5(E) TO ALLOW A SIDE STREET SETBACK OF 7
FEET ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND 13 ]FEET ON THE SECOND FLOOR WHERE 15
FEET IS REQUIRED FOR BOTH FIRST AND SECOND FLOORS; PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
APPLICANT'S REQUEST
Pursuant to Section 20 -5.8 of the Land Development Code (LDC) the applicant has submitted a
Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) application requesting approval of a renovation plan for a
residential single family home at 6202 Miller Rd. In conjunction with the COA, the applicant also is
requesting the approval for two variances which are needed to allow the renovation work. The property is
located in the Cambridge Lawns Historic District.
APPLICABLE LDC REGULATIONS
All exterior renovation and remodeling involving a designated historic site requires a recommendation
from the Historic Board. In addition, the Land Development Code provides that the Historic Preservation
Board will review any necessary variances which are needed in conjunction with requested COA. The
review procedure (notices, ads, public hearing) for variances is the same as if the item was before the
Planning Board. The Historic Board's recommendation on the COA and the variances will be forwarded
to the City Commission for an additional public hearing and final decision.
6202 SW 56 Street
COA /Variances
August 20, 2007
Page 2 of 2
APPLICATION HISTORY SUMMARY
The applicant was before the Board on several occasions during the January- March, 2007 period. The
Historic Preservation Board at its April 30, 2007, meeting adopted a motion by a vote of 6 ayes 0 nays
recommending approval of the COA with the variance for lot coverage at 38% and the variance for
setback on the ground floor as seven feet and on the second floor a variance of 12 feet setback where 15
feet is required; with the suggestion of the hip roof covering the expanded side of the building. The City
Commission at its June 5, 2007 meeting conducted a. public hearing on COA application. Concerned was
expressed by Commissioners and several speakers that the request for variances of this magnitude would
have a negative impact on the historic neighborhood. The Commission remanded the item back to the
Historic Preservation Board
APPLICANT'S REVISED PROPOSAL
The applicant is proposing renovation which will upgrade the structural system, roof, windows, doors,
fagade materials, porch, and includes exterior painting. The renovation work includes a major expansion
of both the first and second floors, which requires the approval of two related variances:
(1) The first variance would allow for an in crease in the maximum permitted lot coverage (building foot-
print) which in the RS -3 District is set at 30 %. 'The applicant is proposing to add 410 square feet to
the first floor. This will result in 2420 sq. ft. at the ground level which is 33.6 %, exceeding the 30%
maximum permitted. This previous plans were to add 802 sq. ft. to the first floor, which resulted in a
38% lot coverage.
(2) The second variance is a result of the expansion of the second floor from 517 sq. ft. to 1358 sq. ft. (
previous plans increased second floor to 1609 sq. ft.). This additional square footage expands the east
side of the structure at both the first and second floors and results in the need for a variance. The
current RS -3 side street setback requirement is 15 feet for both the second and first floors. The
applicant's current setback is 7.2 feet and the applicant is requesting that the first floor setback be
approved at 7 feet and that the second story setback be approved as 13 feet.
(3) The applicant's revised plans compared to the Plans reviewed in April, indicates that there is an
overall reduction in building square footage of 642 sq. ft. or 15 %. (4420 sq.ft. — 3778 sq.ft.)
Attachments:
COA Application
Location Map
Letter from Applicant 8 -14 -07
City Commission Meeting Excerpt 6 -5 -07
Site Plan / Renovation Plan
JP /SAY
P:\HPB Historic MHPB Agendas Staff reports\2007 \8- 27- 07 \HPB -07 -001 COA Variances Report.doc
City of South Miami HPB -07 -001
Certificate of Appropriateness / Variances h
6202 SW .56th Street WE
S
5331 5330 5325 5330 TER
"
- 5375 5353 N
5353 �
N
5400 5349 5432
�I W
Q 5401 6001 °
5421 5420 W 5440
w 5411
a —
fO 5451 '' o
o° 5448 o
n 5445 co 5445
to N _ sso5 N
5500 6235
5509 F-
5575 U
o Cit of South Miami
r q PROPI�RT Boundary
O b b N
b b 6161 �?
W
' • ■ ■ SW 56TH ST MILLER Dh
1
5990
6620 h v �, A a Ate-' SW 56TH TE
ills f� o to N b 0 5 562 5625
•K'3�_' b 561
5650 50A 5620
°"4"� � 5fi34 0
N,.�, SW 57TH S 1 ss3 nJ
5 sset
't67L",j y f. w 5} • }• �•' �.T �! t .'a +t.�....�'; 4Rr -.! �. r5^ H 5660
5700- � � ai 1r SzF 3.. :t `r %'• °"" ^•� `�::?:= �
LO
asr },� .. • ,� SW 57TH DR slot s7o s�0s 9721 s7oo
5730 5jS�'7..��•c�`'"'. f {ff •, °° ° 9 -
.: .nom.•- , N %
•`° y 5789
• � fi101
5795 6 sago SW 58TH ST 5150 579 `raD
�� � 4:eti• 1 57
5820
_ � '��� •vti b t0 b � � N r1
c f %f }"ti �:f'..•*'d' c ; __ - i N ,n .S m 5974 5958 N o
f
h ..7 t r 5833 0 ' °
I e SW 59TH ST 5885
o ,fir a
All" Q t 59TH ST f — ssas 5959
--•� t,Sn:.- + --�.- $ °0 1� �� 5908 5901 'r`�7� 5901
w 59TH S
;I~. • - h / L2 O 5917 5920 5911 5916 = 5917 5974 5958 5942
5941 . 's ' U) z - -- j! fry' ' f 5941 n
j :.•�',f,C• 5960
5960 1f 5961 e b 2. 5933 5936 5933 5932 5933 5975 5959 'R M
•4;�• 6000 6001 SW 6000 5952 5949 5948 60TH ST
I' m m e 5230 6004 = 6001
g I 6013 % �. SW 60TH TER
6030
6061
6060 -6D61 1 6060 \r -- poi b I 6029
--{ 5975 b N
Made by City of South Miami Engineering 6 Construction, 4/1942007. GIS Data by Miami -Dade County (2004), b
0 100 200 300 600 900 1,200 1,500
Feet
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI HISTORIC PRESERVATION
PLANNING DEPARTMENT BOARD
6130 Sunset Drive, South Miami, Florida 33143
305- 663 -6326
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATIO
(The. Historic Preservation Board will act on completed applications only.)
SECTION I
PROPERTY ADDRESS �� `:�= W • rJ L�.., _HISTORIC NAME (IF ANY) Q)MBP!.li
1— 111 [l Lou< a (Z O V 1,5ED r L fk T OV C) 00 K G i �S D �� F 6 R nn (3 R I D CE -
LA w ILs
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (1l.A7' 1- lCf'F "F7%' f1S F 6? of
i�aE C'!IjllG F�Ec.�,� i>S C r MIAMI- DAfk CC,-(tjiY, Fj_CjQL - PoM �/ Drr -IC,& ✓
OWNER (��iS,�c�t Di1?�F f —PHONE NUMBER _(3C5) )-141/-1- 66r, / 6-a6yg
ADDRESS R19 k;M 6i�"LAzt #fCE C�G��r��ir rl- 33i33
APPLICANT W I S > Lf [- - _PHONE NUMBER
ADDRESS 4Z Qq R I r'S nk,1
L!,i_ � 1U C CCt C Iv "(f (k O Vc- i FL
ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER, Vr V-kD G -A.iV `� _ � ;1 i . PHONE NUMBER
SECTION 2
PLEASE INDICATE THE CATEGORY WHICH BEST DESCRIBES THE WORK TO BE PERFORMED
(SEE ATTACHED SHEET)
type
mark
below
type mark
below
type
mark
below
MAINTENANCEIREPAIR
REHABILITATION
NEW CONSTRUCTION
RESTORATION
DEMOLITION
OTHER
SECTION 3
DESCRIBE THE PROPOSED WORK (A BRIEF NARRATIVE):
SECTION 4
ATTACH THE FOLLOWING SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION (IF APPLICABLE):
site plan floor plan elevations(s) photo(s)
survey color sample material sample
other (describe)
(2)
SECTION 5
PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING:
• Applications will be accepted by the Planning Department only in completed form.
• Applications will be scheduled for a Board hearing when received by 12:00 noon on the second Monday of the
month.
• Applicant(s) or representative(s) must attend the hearing and present the proposal to the Board.
• Decisions made by the Board may be appealed to the City Commission no later than 60 days after the ruling.
• If there is no appeal or City Commission action, the Historic Preservation Board's decision shall be final.
The Certificate of Appropriateness is valid for a period six months after date of approval.
SECTION 6 �E .� .A T i AC 11 ttILa f.17`
BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE PROJECT'S IMPACT ON THE FOLLOWING BUILDING FEATURES:
Structural systems -
Roofs and roofing -
Windows and doors -
Materials (masonry, wood, metal, etc.) -
Porches, porte cocheres, and steps -
Painting and finishes -
I, S_0L1) Lx 1 C���% J - "� x ` �y?...___...._._. AS OWNER OF THE ABOVE- REFERENCED
PROPERTY DO HEREBY AUTHORIZE THE iLING OF THIS APPLICATION ON MY BEHALF.
Oct.2004
r-MDR i d nnrnnrio4anncc A nnl rinn
HPB USE ONLY
DATE RECEIVED:
HPB MEETING:
PERMIT N0.
City of South Miami
Planning & Zoning Department
City Hall, 6130 Sunset Drive, South Miami, Florida 33143
Telephone: (305) 663 -6326; Fax: (305) 666 -4591
Application For Public Hearing Before 4d & City Commission
AS THE APPLICANT, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO THIS PROJECT:
_Owner _Owner's Representative Contract to purchase _Option to purchase —Tenant/Lessee
APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE FOR THE FOLLOWING: SUBMITTED MATERIALS
PLEASE CHECK THE APPROPRIATE ITEM: PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY:
_ Text Amendment to LDC it--Variance " Letter of intent
—Zoning Map Amendment ,Special Use, 7 Justifications for change
_ PUD Approval _Special Exception ship
_ PUD Major.Change —Other 'Proof of ownership or letter from owner
Briefly explain application and cite specific Code sections:
vARIArJG6 APPLkCATIO14 TOP— 5-T2EC-r" SID f
T l6ftck "t) LOT C0Q1&1ZAGE>
Section: Subsection: Page #: Amended Date: —
_ I�+aercrfattarrrey
_ CoA4F&e44vTaMEhase
_ Current survey (1 original sealed and
signed /1 reduced copy @ 11 "x 17")
15 copies of Site Plan and Floor Plans
1 reduced copy @ 11" x 17"
20% Property owner signatures /I° son
i/Mailing labels (3 sets) and map
(s)
The undersigned has read this completed application and represents that the information and all submitted materials are true and
correct to the best of the applicant's knowledge and belief.
--- 0 Wn/ER.
Applicant's Signature an title
4 /l11, -004-
Date
Upon receipt, applications and all submitted materials will be reviewed for compliance with the Land Development Code and other
applicable regulations. Applications found not in compliance4viil be rejected and returned to the applicant.
OFFICE USE ONLY:
Date Filed Date of PB Hearing_ Date of Commission
Petition Required Petition Accepted
Method of Payment
8/2/00
LETTER OF INTENT
Abisola L DUBEY
2829 Bird Avenue #106
Coconut Grove, FL 33133
April 11, 2007
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI PLANNING BOARD
HISTORICAL PRESERVATION BOARD
6130 Sunset Drive,
South Miami, FL 33143
Dear Sir or Madam:
Subject: Public Hearing Application For Variance on Subject property at 6202 Miller Drive
I am hereby notifying the relevant authorities of the CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI of my intent to
renovate the degraded property located at 6202 Miller Drive, South Miami
Extensive renovations are required due to:
• serious dilapidation of the structure and interior caused by years of neglect on the part of
the previous owners;
• multiple additions that are not compliant with city code added on over the years; and,
• the desire and need to return the facade of the house to its original historic appearance.
I am therefore requesting a street side setback variance to permit us to connect disjointed walls,
which are already "grandfathered" into the site. I am additionally requesting a lot coverage
variance, following the current footprint of the house, with minor. changes to allow for a more
organized form and flow of the house as opposed to the current haphazard appearance of the
house caused by the poorly planned additions by the previous owners. This will bring the house
to current building code for the protection of the current occupants and would also have the
additional benefit of protecting the truly historical portion of the building from any further
devastation from intense tropical storms or hurricanes.
I respectfully, request your approval of these 2 variances whose detailed descriptions are
contained in the requisite application package.
Faithfully,
f-�
Abisola I. DUBEY
JOHN & ABISOLA DUBEY
To: The City of South Miami Planning Department
Historic Preservation Board
Date: August 14, 2007
RE: Dubey Residence
6202 S.W. 56TH Street
South Miami, Florida
Application for Certificate of Appropriateness; Application Variances
As the direct result of a gross and cynical misrepresentation by one Maria C. CHAEL, a
former member of the Historic Preservation Board, our application to the City Commission
of South Miami for a Certificate of Appropriateness was remanded to the Historic
Preservation Board for further consideration. This incredible action has effectively nullified 4
months of hard work and continuous consultation on the part of all concerned: family,
architect, City professional staff and this Board, to say nothing of significant financial. loss to
our family.
The simple fact of the matter is that we have been singled out for victimization by this Maria
C. Chael for not firing our architect and allowing her effectively to determine the design of
our private residence. What started out ostensibly as neighborly innocent discussion and a
request for suggestions, at least in our view, suddenly devolved unbidden and unwanted
meddling in the design process. Immediately after our first appearance before the Board,
Maria C. Chael gave us her business card offering to help. We e- mailed Maria C. Chael,
requesting suggestions with a copy of the e-mail to our architect, she submitted
architectural designs directly to us (with a copy to Mr. Youkilis and a mailing group named
'Marice Chael' which we suspect is this Board), purposely bypassing our consulting
architect in an egregious breach of professional ethics. This issue will be pursued
separately with the appropriate State authorities by our architect and ourselves.
As a result, we are hereby submitting a. revised plan to address the "problems"
manufactured by Maria C. Chael in a fictitious; cartoon of our actual residential plan which
she was somehow empowered to distribute personally to Commission members on the
dais — despite our most vocal objections.
And this, after an open admission of authoring two separate emails to City Commission
members on the eve of the meeting in knowing i and reckless contravention of the Jennings
1 of 8 6202 Miller Drive - Owners: John & Abisola DUBEY
Rule on Quasi - Judicial hearings by an appointed City official. This also will be separately
addressed with the appropriate State oversight authorities.
With this latest submission to the Historic Preservation Board, we are requesting that our
absolute right to a fair hearing be respected -- particularly by any Board members who may
seek to consult with Maria C. Chael ex parte. The Minutes of previous Historic
Preservation Board deliberations on our issue clearly contain warnings by Mr. Sanford
YOUKILIS regarding the inappropriateness of such actions. These are public hearings and
any citizen who wishes to voice an objection or offer an opinion has the inalienable right to
do so — but openly and factually. The demonstrable fact that we have obtained the virtually
unanimous support of our new Cambridge Lawns neighbors for the design and dimension
of our home seems to have made little impression in the wake of a one -woman crusade to
deny our family's desire to finally live in peace and comfort in a house whose financial
burden we have been supporting for three years.
We additionally request that this Board assiduously avoid any discrimination in its
application of the existing ordinance establishing the Cambridge Lawns Historical District.
Specifically, we expect the same standard that was applied when examining the
deliberately confusing design presented as the "Chael -Dover Cottage" be applied to the
examination of our application. If the Board did not find the massing of the absurdly -named
"Chael -Dover Cottage" on a 6,000 sq. ft. lot objectionable (even with its introduction of an
un- historic and decidedly un -Tudor balcony looming over the adjoining rooftops), then our
tasteful addition of a modestly - proportioned dormer section upon a 7,200 sq. ft. lot,
carefully not exceeding the grandfathered and /or voluntarily neighbor- sensitive setbacks
but allowing sufficient sleeping and closet space for a 5- persons family, should surely be
deemed equally acceptable.
2 of 8 6202 Miller Drive — Owners: John & Abisola DUBEY
We respectfully request that this Board eschew any attempt to enforce retroactively, the
historic overlay ordinance, which was not in effect when the property was repeatedly
modified by previous owners. The Chael -Dover objections appear to mimic the recent
arguments under eminent domain whereby one person's private property can be
expropriated for another individual's benefit. Their spurious claim is that compensation for
past mistakes must be exacted upon us such that "neighborhood integrity" is maintained
because our house is "on a corner lot." This convoluted reasoning is fantastic. We believe —
as do apparently all but two persons in the neighborhood - that the house's corner location
is the precise fact that renders our modifications completely appropriate. In virtually any
neighborhood in any community in America, the largest proportioned homes are generally
situated on corner lots — not wedged toweringly between modest (actual) cottages. It was
never our intention to build the largest house in the neighborhood — neither is it our
intention to silently acquiesce in preserving one driven neighbor's apparent need to claim
that distinction to the detriment of our 5- person family - regardless of the much - vaunted
"neighborhood integrity" which can somehow be conveniently overlooked for interior lots.
In point of observable fact, there is no design "integrity" whatsoever in Cambridge Lawns
nor is there much proportionality. Indeed, there is little if any evidence of the whimsically
designated "Tudor revival" architectural style. The houses range from ante- bellum to 5Os
ranch to dilapidated cottage to "ill- conceived carbuncle" (that would be ours). The only
consistency is the almost total absence of continuity — that having been sacrificed over the
decades to uncountable additions constructed to adapt to changing family size, household
basics, home offices, wardrobe and toilette demands, etc.
This Board should be cognizant of the fact that the entire neighborhood is closely following
this soap opera that our case has become. While their increasing space addition needs are
likely more modest — an additional bedroom for a new baby, increased kitchen space to
accommodate standard 21St century lifestyles, larger windows to lighten up these terribly
dark rooms, etc. they are all acutely aware of the travails, both honest and dishonest,
visited upon us by well- intentioned officials and one single- minded, mendacious neighbor. If
it can happen to us it can surely happen to them. This may even cause some to petition to
rescind the historic designation on their house.
When the 6202 Miller Drive house was charitably designated "historic," it should have been
obvious to the Chael -Dover team and any others clamoring to include this sad structure in
the designation, that the house was indeed an "ill- conceived carbuncle" (to quote the
Chael -Dover team). The victim of multiple modifications„ structural additions and deletions,
it was sorely and inexcusably disrespected and allowed to deteriorate structurally through
years of malignant neglect, mildew assault and massive termite infestation. And now, three
different decades -long residents in the immediate area cannot even agree on the exact
original composition of the long- destroyed front fagade. Yet, we readily agreed to abandon
our own desires and incorporate the far more expensive and space- depriving design in
order to satisfy the insistence of one of these disagreeing neighbors.
This Board knows full well the irreparable condition of this blighted house. This Board is
fully aware that we continually consulted with City professional staff since before even
closing on the property. This Board is cognizant of the original procedural and design errors
we made out of simple inexperience and which we hastened to correct. This Board is fully
aware of the size of our family and the reasonable space imperatives thereby occasioned.
3 of 8 6202 Miller Drive Owners: John & Abisola DUBEY
This Board is most of all cognizant of our good -faith efforts to incorporate every single
expensive modification, roof angle, appointments addition, etc., requested over the course
of various meetings by the individual members. We do not understand how this Board's
long- studied and unanimously approved recommendation, supported by professional staff,
unobjectionable to the overwhelming majority of our neighbors, could be disregarded by
City Commission as a result of an onslaught by a one -woman wrecking crew.
We therefore request that in deliberating over this new design you keep in mind the Section
A of the preamble to the Charter of the City of South Miami as adopted from the Dade
County Charter...
SOUTH MIAMI CITY CHARTER AMENDED 2/8100
PREAMBLE TO THE CHARTER FOR THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
MIAMI -DADE COUNTY'S CITIZENS' BILL OF RIGHTS
(A) This government has been created to protect the governed, not the governing. In order
to provide the public with full and accurate information, to promote efficient administrative
management, to make government more accountable, and to insure to all persons fair and
equitable treatment, the following rights are guaranteed°
1. Convenient access.
2. Truth in government. No County or municipal official or employee shall knowingly
furnish false information on any public matter, nor knowingly omit significant
facts when giving requested information to members of the public.
3. Public records.
4. Minutes and ordinance register.
5. Right to be heard.
6. Right to notice.
7. No unreasonable postponements.
8. Right of public hearing.
9. Notice of action and reasons.
10. Managers' and attorneys' reports.
11. Budgeting.
12. Quarterly budget comparisons.
13. Adequate audits..
14. Regional offices..
15. Financial disclosure.
16. Representation of public..
17. Commission on Ethics and Public Trust.
Respectfully,
John & Abisola DUBEY
4 of 8 6202 Miller Drive — Owners: John & Abisola DUBEY
Proposed Work
The work that is being proposed to the existing residence necessarily covers virtually every
construction category. Basically, the rehabilitation and improvements of salvageable part of
the historic structure and a dormer addition in the rear. The existing residence includes a
number of additions introduced into the structure through the years and all of them,
unfortunately completed in a less than professional manner. The scale and scope of the
proposed design has been developed with the original design of the structure in mind.
Based on feedback provided during previous Board meetings and after searching all
available archives, Dade Heritage Trust, Miami -Dade County files, etc. and we're still
unable to obtain any photo or archived floor plan showing us what the house may actually
have looked like in 1928, we used the cuirrent floor plan of the house and the 1948 plan in
the files of the City of South Miami as our starting point. (Archived floor plan, which is a
single sheet of paper in the almost 50 -year file is shown below)
This allows us to understand what is truly original and what has been changed. Based on
the layout in the 1948 floor plan, the current kitchen was a garage, the south bedroom did
not exist and the 1948 garage addition later became part of the south bedroom. The current
garage and the entire West wall were added sometime later, with no record on file in the
City of South Miami archives. We also found that the gabled wall in the center front of the
house is the only part of the house that truly is original. The flat roof front of the house was
replaced after a hurricane years ago. The roof„ and all the other walls are not original. The
front door is also not original.
We also found that:
1. The arches of the flat roof section had been closed (as shown in the picture below).
We will restore the arches and fit new hurricane - resistant windows to them.
5 of 8 6202 Miller Drive — Owners: John & Abisola DUBEY
2
We will also restore the chimney that was unfortunately destroyed. We will replace
chimney and the fireplace exactly as they were originally. There is a clear
demarcation in the house showing whore the fireplace /chimney used to be. We will
use the measurement of the existing chimney at 6142 Miller Drive as our model.
In short, when working with the historical section of the house, we will restore whatever was
original to the very best of our ability while building to current code, re -using whatever
materials can be salvaged and replace unsalvageable materials.
We are submitting the following items:
• A copy of the 1948 floor plan found in the City of South Miami archives
• Existing and proposed front elevation - the proposed front facade restores the
arches of the flat roof section and replaces the missing chimney
• Existing and proposed east side elevation, which restores the east side arches the
flat roof section.
• Existing and proposed ground floor plan
• Existing and proposed second floor plan
• A site plan showing:
1. total percentage ground coverage of proposed versus existing;
2. total a/c area of the proposed versus existing;
3. the front, rear, east and west side setbacks of the proposed versus the existing
(please note that the proposed east setback on the ground floor is in three stage;
the setback of the front part is 7' -2" (or 7.1667') exactly as it currently stands, the
middle setback back is 15 ft also as it currently stands and the back portion of the
east setback is 13 ft. Compared to the current setback, we've actually moved the
setback farther west away from 62nd avenue which is an improvement over the
already grandfathered setback.
The Front facade
The front fagade is a replica of the current house, updated to meet all County safety and
building codes. The only changes to the appearance involve restoring the chimney and
the arches of the flat roof portion. The front fagade also shows second floor addition,
which is barely visible from the street.
The Eat Side facade
The ground floor fagade on the East side of the house is exactly the same as the
current structure with the exception of the restored arches and an improved setback of
the section where the garage currently sits. The shape of the ground floor windows is
6 of 8 6202 Miller Drive — Owners: John & Abisola DUBEY
only designed to complement to the restored arches. We can make the windows
rectangular if the board wishes.
The second floor expansion, following the suggestions from all previous meetings,
breaks down the volume into three stages thus creating a more uniform look. The
addition blends the historic structure in front into the first stage of the second floor
expansion in the back and to further breakdown the volume we blended in an east -west
structure similar to the one approved by this board in the so- called "Chael -Dover
Cottage" renovation (see next page). This "east- west" version of historic gabled front will
"maintain the character of the neighborhood'
we are making all our changes in the non - historical back of the house while following the
current footprint of the house and straightening out the indentations on south and west
sections of the house which are not visible frorn the street.
SW 62nd Avenne
�o
.. ■ ■... ■ ■ ■.■
Existing
- ---- -- i footprint
>
A
4 -- Proposed
footprint
Structural System — The structural system is presently in very_,poor condition. We propose
to upgrade and reconfigure the structure to current code. The structural system upgrade
would include new foundations and new c.b.s. walls.
7 of 8 6202 Miller Drive — Owners: John & Abisola DUBEY
Roof and roofing - The existing roof is a compilation of ad hoc additions and modifications
executed with very poor workmanship and poor materials. We propose to upgrade the roof
system including new trusses and new finishes executed in the original spirit of the "Tudor'
style.
Windows and doors — The windows and doors will be upgraded with the same attention to
detail but with current wind resistant protection.
8 of 8 6202 Miller Drive — Owners: John & Abisola DUBEY
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
Monday, August 27, 2007
City Commission Chambers
3:30 PM
EXCERPT
I. Call to order
Action: Ms. Clyatt, Chair called the meeting to order at 3:37 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Roll call was performed. Board members present. constituting a quorum: Ms. Clyatt, Ms. Lahiff,
Ms. Dison, and Mr. Kurtzman. Board members absent: Ms. Shelley, Mr. Charles Ruiz de
Castilla, and Mr. LaMonica.
City staff present: Julian Perez (Planning Director), Sanford A. Youkilis (Consultant), Lluvia
Resendiz (Administrative Assistant), and Ellen Uguccioni (Preservation Consultant)
V. Certificate of Appropriateness Applications / Public Hearings
HPB -07 -001
Applicant / Owner: Abisola Dubey
Location: 6202 Miller Road (Cambridge Lawns Historic District)
Request: COA and Two variances
Mr. Youkilis advised the item was revised. after it was remanded back to the HPB by the City
Commission. There are two variances involved with the renovation work. They relate to lot
coverage, previously it was 38 percent above the maximum 30 percent and now it is 33.6 percent.
The proposal, which triggered the second variance, expands the east side of the structure needed
for the side -yard setback. The variance requested is for 7 feet on the first floor and 13 foot on the
second floor. The reduction is 642 square feet.
Action: Ms. Dubey stated she did not come back to the HPB because immediately after the item
was remanded, the HPB regular meeting was held and simultaneously the project architect was
out of the country therefore not allowing her ample time to resubmit the project on time. It was
understood that there was an issue with the design and the scale of the house and those issues
have been addressed. The setback variance requested is for what is already in existence. There is
a seven foot section which is historic and it cannot be moved. The second -story setback was
HPB Minutes
August 27, 2007
Page 2 of 4
moved further back from 9 feet to 13 feet. The sections being covered are the sections which are
not visible from either the east or the north side.
Ms. Clyatt questioned if the plans were constructed by the same architect and whether the plans
must be signed and sealed by the architect. Ms. Dubey responded with a negative and added that
she redesigned the plans herself with an architectural computer program. She added that, to her
knowledge, the plans must be sealed only before the construction initiates. She will submit her
final plans signed and seal by the architect before she starts building.
Mr. Kurtzman stated he has concerns with the southern elevations and the middle part of the
second floor on the southern elevation.
Ms. Clyatt questioned staff if the Board may arrive to a decision if the plans were not designed
by a registered architect. Mr. Youkilis advised that the plans do not have to be sealed and /or
certified when coming before the HPB. But after they get approved by the City Commission they
have to go to the Building Department for a permit and at that time they must be signed and
sealed. Mr. Perez added that there are many applications in final construction and inspections
where a minor change has been made and the applicant was asked to return before the
Environmental Review and Preservation Board for review. He added that he will not accept any
changes to previously approved plans.
Mr. Kurtzman questioned whether the end gable over the garage could be a hipped roof. He
stated it would look better and provide the same volume that the applicant is looking for but
would reduce massive the impact. Ms. Dubey stated whatever roof is approved would work.
She added that she read the minutes and Mr. Kurtzman stated she should replicate the front gable
on the side and she followed his recommendation. Mr. Kurtzman stated he was referring to
replication of the hipped roof on the side. What he suggested was to reduce the area and that the
gable over the garage is hipped on the fagade which is over the existing original part of the
house.
Ms. Dison commended Ms. Dubey for her perseverance and desire to keep the historic look
however she stated it was incumbent for the Board to agree so that the Dubey's can proceed with
their project. Mr. Kurtzman and Ms. Lahiff disagreed. Ms. Lahiff added that it must be a design
which fits the appearance of the historic district and does not feel that the proposed design is the
best it could be.
Mr. Youkilis advised that Mr. Whitman, a neighbor, mailed a letter to the department expressing
his concerns. He read the letter into the record.
The Chair Person opened the public hearing.
Speakers:
NAME ADDRESS. SUPPORT /OPPOSE
Pat Shields 6218 SW 56 Street Support
HPB Minutes
August 27, 2007
Page 3 of 4
Ms. Shields stated she is bothered with the amount of time it has taken for the Dubey's to get this
application approved because the house is very visible. The applicants have been trying to get
their plans approved for months making numerous appearances before the Historic Board and
one before the City Commission. She stated she is in favor of the addition and the proposed
changes. The approval of this work to the house can only better the neighborhood. There are
residents, Commission, and Board members who have previously spoken stating that if the owner
wanted a large home they should have bought one somewhere else. She feels those remarks are
uncalled for in a public atmosphere and does not know what the alternative would be for the
Dubey's if the request is not approved. Regarding Mr. Whitman's letter, Ms. Shields replied
indicating that an addition was made to his home before he lived there therefore, he would have
no need for further additions. Because of current ongoing remodeling of the house on 57 Street,
she asked that the Dubey's, if approved, keep the noise to a minimum especially during the
weekends. She requested that adjoining homeowners be notified in advanced of any extremely
noisy work such as demolition, roofing, foundation digging or any major noise issues prior to the
work being done.
Annick Stepnberg 6243 SW 57 Street Neutral
Ms. Stepnberg stated she appreciated the fact that pictures have been offered for her to see what
the project would look like. However, she wondered about the trees and the landscaping around
the house. She questioned how the house and the landscape would fit together.
The Chair Person closed the public hearing.
Ms. Dubey stated she will have trees into her landscaping plan. There are plenty of trees that do
not have extensive roots that are native to Florida and grow very tall. With regards to noise it
will always be present. She stated she already spoke to Mr. Whitman on the issue. She
understands his concern and for that matter they will work Monday through Friday and work only
on the weekends if necessary. She added that should there be a need to work on weekends, the
neighbors will be notified.
Mr. Dubey stated that Mr. Whitman has a problem with the property across the street which has
turned into a "McMansion." He also has a problem with the noise however he had no answer
with regards to Mr. Whitman's concern with the noise level. He reiterated that construction
during the weekend will take place only if necessary.
Mr. Perez advised that the Board has three options;
• Must make a motion and vote on that motion with conditions.
• Defer the item until the Board has an architect as a member of the Board.
• Deny the variance.
If option one is taken staff will forward the decision to the City Commission with the Board's
conditions.
Ms. Lahiff stated that precedence would be set and does not believe that making a sympathetic
decision would be good enough. She added that Mr. Kurtzman is very involved in that
HPB Minutes
August 27, 2007
Page 4 of 4
neighborhood and has the best input to make suggestions on additional ideas. She feels that the
east plan looses the original look of the house although it is falling apart.
Mr. Kurtzman stated he was also concerned with the bump -out and suggested shifting the roof
gable. The same roof line should follow the roof on both the east and west side with a double
front gable.
Ms. Dison stated that the commission remanded the item back to the HPB for two
considerations; to reduce the lot coverage and reduce the setbacks on the east facade. The
applicant has met both requirements. Mr. Kurtzman replied that the second - story- setback has not
been met.
Ms. Dubey agreed with the Board's recommendations.
(1) Motion: Mr. Kurtzman moved to approve the first variance pertaining to the lot coverage as
submitted. Ms. Dison seconded.
Vote: 4 Ayes 0 Nays
(2) Motion: Mr. Kurtzman moved to approve the setback variance with the following
conditions:
• The roofing structure over the rear addition shall be hipped on both sides.
• The second floor bump -out on the east facade shall be eliminated and the current
roofline applied as it exists.
• As a suggestion shift the gable copying some examples of homes in the Cambridge
Lawns district.
Ms. Lahiff seconded.
Vote: 4 Ayes 0 Nays
COURTESY N OTICE
s
.. f
CITY. OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA
CD
I�
On Tuesday, September 18,, 2007, beginning at 7:,30 p.m., in the City Commission
' m
,Chambers, 6130 Sunset Drive, the. City Commission will hold Public Hearings to con-
i
�sider the following items:
N
A' RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE `ISSUANCE OF A. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
o
PURSUANT,; T0: SECTIIINe 20�- 5.1'9(E)(3), OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR THE
PLACEMENT OF RESTAElRAIVT "SIGNAGE ON THE SHELLY BUILDING A DESIGNATED HISTORIC
N
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5837 SUNSET DRIVE.
i —
A RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A "CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
-
PURSUANT TO SECTION 20- 5.19(E)(3) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR THE
INSTALLATION OF AN OOLITIC LIMESTONE WALL AND GATES AT THE FRONT OF A RESIDENCE
a
_ Z
LOCATED AT 6227 SW 57th STREET WITHIN THE CAMBRIDGE LAWNS HISTORIC DISTRICT. _
A RESOLUTION PURSUANT TO LAND DEVELOPMENT' CODE SECTION 20- 5.19(E)(3)
REQUESTING THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR A SINGLE
r
FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 6202 MILLER ROAD WITHIN AN RS- 3(HP -OV), RESIDENTIAL -
SINGLE FAMILY (HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY) ZONING DISTRICT (CAMBRIDGE LAWNS
- HISTORIC DISTRICT) IN ,ORDER TO PERMIT EXTERIOR RENOVATION AND EXPANSION OF
SECOND FLOOR; AND PURSUANT TO SECTION 20- 4.11(D) IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
t z
I
CERTIFICATE OF, APPROPRIATENESS A , REQUEST TO: (1) GRANT A VARIANCE FROM
SECTION 20- 3.5.(E) TO ALLOW FOR LOT COVERAGE TO BE 33% WHERE A MAXIMUM 30% IS
i E
o
PERMITTED; (2) GRANT A VARIANCE FROM, SECTION 20- 3.5(E) TO ALLOW A SIDE STREET
SETBACK OF 7 FEET ON THE .FIRST FLOOR AND 13 FEET ON THE SECOND FLOOR WHERE 15
!
FEET IS REQUIRED FOR BOTH FIRST AND SECOND FLOORS.
If you have any inquiries on the above items please contact the City Clerk's office at: 305- 663 -6326.
:E
`
ALL interested parties are invited to attend and will be heard.
L
- Maria M. Menendez, CIVIC
Y
City Clerk
Pursuant to Florida Statutes 286.0105, the City hereby advises the public that If a person decides to appeal any decision made by
this Board, Agency or Commission with respect to any matter considered at its meeting or hearing, he or she will need a record of
i
the proceedings, and that for such purpose, affected person -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.
i
l
i
I
t
�s
1
i
l
- I
fall trait.. a kq e
i
f
I
I
o Sale
i
'
- >Irtcludes•
• 7 Portrait Sheets
--FREE Black & White ordy
i
FREE Sepia
FREE Tinting.
• Portraits Printed ' Yousaveover$43
j
Immediately
Capnuiii<zgMei)ior°ies to fast a.Uetirne
I *Special package price available thru 09/30/07. Visit www.kiddiekandids.com or call .
1- 888 - 503 -5336 for studio locations near you.
MIAMI DAILY BUSINESS REVIEW
Published Daily except Saturday, Sunday and
Legal Holidays
Miami, Miami -Dade County, Florida
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF MIAMI -DADE:
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared
O.V. FERBEYRE, who on oath says that he or she is the
VICE PRESIDENT, Legal Notices of the Miami Daily Business
Review f /k/a Miami Review, a daily (except Saturday, Sunday
and Legal Holidays) newspaper, published at Miami in Miami -Dade
County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement,
being a Legal Advertisement of Notice in the matter of
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
PUBLIC HEARINGS - SEPTEMBER 18, 2007
in the XXXX Court,
was published in said newspaper in the issues of
09/07/2007
Affiant further says that the said Miami Daily Business
Review is a newspaper published at Miami in said Miami -Dade
County, Florida and that the said newspaper has
heretofore been continuously published in said Miami -Dade County,
Florida, each day (except Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays)
and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post
office in Miami in said Miami -Dade County, Florida, for a
period of one year next preceding the first publication of the
attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he or
she has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation
any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose
of securing t>ig advert* for publication in the said
newspape. 11 A
Sworn to and subscribed before me this
07 day of SEPTEMBER , A.D. 2007
loe-
(SEAL)
O.V. FERBEYRE personally known to me
, g� Cheryl H Mamw
My Commission D0338559
s` Expires July 18, 2008 F
, CITy,_OF SOUTH MIAMI
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS .
NOTICE IS HEREBY given that the City Commission of the City of South
Miami, Florida will conduct Public Hearings ,during its regular City
Commission meeting on Tuesday, September 18,' 2007, beginning at
7:30 p.m., in the City Commission Chambers, 6130 Sunset Drive, to
consider.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE, CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA RELATING TO THE
ISSUANCE _ -OF A :CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
PURSUANT. TO .,SECTION 20- 5.19(E)(3) OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT•` CODE FOR THE PLACEMENT OF
RESTAURANT SIGNAGE ON THE SHELLY BUILDING A
DESIGNATED , HISTORIC PROPERTY , LOCATED AT 5837
SUNSET DRIVE, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY :OF• SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA RELATING TO THE
ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
PURSUANT. TO SECTION -1 20- 5.19(E)(3) OF THE - LAND .
DEVELOPMENT ,CODE FOR.. THE INSTALLATION OF AN ? `
OOLITIC LIMESTONE WALL AND GATES AT THE FRONT OF•
.,A RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 6227 SW 57th STREET WITHIN
THE CAMBRIGDE -LAWNS HISTORIC DISTRICT, PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION.
OF, THE CITY OF SOUTH -.MIAMI, FLORIDA PURSUANT TO
LAND DEVELOPMENT ,CODE SECTION 20- 5.19(E)(3)
REQUESTING THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE,OF .
APPROPRIATENESS FOR -A SINGLE--FAMILY7 RESIDENCE -
LOCATED AT 6202 MILLEFL ROAD WITHIN AN RS -3(HP OV),
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, (HISTORIC PRESERVATION
OVERLAY) ZONING ;DISTRICT ::(CAMBRIDGE LAWNS
HISTORIC DISTRICT) IN 'ORDER TO PERMIT EXTERIOR
RENOVATION AND EXPANSION OFSECOND.FLOOR; AND
PURSUANT TO SECTION 20- 4.11(D);IN CONJUNt,' I IUN VVI un
THE CERTIFICATE OF:.. APPROPRIATENESS sA REQUEST
TO: (1) GRANT A VARIANCE, FROM SECTION 20- 3.5(E) TO
ALLOW FOR :LOT COVERAGE TO BE 33% WHERE A
MAXIMUM 30% IS PERMITTED; (2) GRANT A VARIANCE '
FROM SECTION 20- 3.5(E) TO ALLOW A SIDE STREET
SETBACK OF 7. FEET ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND. 13 FEET
ON THE`SECOND FLOOR WHERE' >15 FEET. IS REQUIRED
FOR BOTH FIRST AND SECOND FLOORS; PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Inquiries concerning this item should be directed to "the Planning and ;
Zoning Department Office at 305 - 663 -6326.
ALL interested parties are invited to attend and will be heard.
Maria M. Menendez, CMC
City Clerk
City of South Miami
Pursuant to Florida Statutes 286.0105, the City hereby advises the public
that if a person decides to appeal any, decision made by this Board,
Agency or Commission with respect to any matter, considered at_ its
meeting or hearing, he or she will need a record of the proceedings, and
that for such purpose, affected person 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.
9/7 07-3- 63/886342M