08-03-04 Item 9CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
To: Honorable Mayor, Vice Mayor & Date: August 3 2004
Commission Members
ITEM No.
From: Maria Davis Re: Variance Request
City Manager '" 6230 SW 70th Street .
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR & CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH
MIAMI, FLORIDA, RELATING TO A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE
FOLLOWING TWO PARKING VARIANCES IN ORDER TO PERMIT PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 6230 SW 70TH STREET IN AN "RO" RESIDENTIAL OFFICE ZONING
USE DISTRICT TO BE USED AS A COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING: (1)
VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20- 4.4(B)(10) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
TO ALLOW FOUR OFF - STREET PARKING SPACES WHERE THE REQUIRED OFF -
STREET PARKING IS FIVE SPACES; (2) VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20- 4.4(F) (3)
OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW REQUIRED PARKING TO BE
LOCATED IN THE FRONT SETBACK AREA WHICH IS PROHIBITED IN THE RO
ZONING USE DISTRICT: AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant, Dr. Arthur Kolsky is requesting approval of two parking variances from
the provisions of the Land Development Code to allow a single family residential
building at 6230 SW 70th Street to be used for office use. The property is located in an
isolated "RO" Residential Office Zoning Use District.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS (See ATTACHMENT)
• Land Development Code Section 20- 4.4(B) " Parking Requirements "
• Land Development Code Section 20 -4.4 (F)(3) "Location /Ownership of Spaces"
• Land Development Code Section 20 -5.9 "Variances Approvals "
Land Development Code Section 20-6. 1 (B)(3)(h) "Planning Board Duty"
BACKGROUND
(1) The subject property is a single family residential building which is a legal non-
conforming structure (dimensions substandard). The property may continue to be
(2)
used for a permitted use in the RO district as long as the parking requirements are
met and the dimensional non - conformity is not increased.
(2) The property is located on a narrow street with opposing one way traffic. North of the
property (RS -3) are single family homes; east of the site (RO) is the parking lot of a
large office building; west / south of the site (RM -24) is an apartment building and a
tennis court.
(3) The parking variances are being requested so that the number of off - street parking
spaces provided would be sufficient to permit the structure to be used for commercial
offices. The type of offices in an RO district is very limited and at this site would be
further limited by the number of off - street spaces provided. Based upon the size of
the structure (1162 sq. ft.) a total of five parking spaces would be required for most
professional and business offices at a formula of one space for each 250 sq. ft of
gross floor area. Offices such as medical, dental or other health related uses would
not be able to locate in this building due to a higher number of spaces required.
The applicant is proposing to save several of the large oak trees currently located in
the front yard of the property. This action will limit the number of spaces on the site
to four, resulting in the first variance request to waive one required parking space.
(5) The configuration of the site and the location of the structure will require parking
spaces to be placed in the front yard including the front setback area, which is
allowed in all but one zoning district. The RO zoning district does not permit
required parking to be located in the front setback area, thereby resulting in the
second variance request.
STAFF OBSERVATIONS / RECOMMENDATION
• The applicant's claim of hardship states that the size and shape of the property
prohibits its use for commercial offices as permitted in an RO zoning district.
• The applicant states that in order to use the property, the small size of the property's
frontage requires the variance requested to provide a more effective parking layout.
• The applicant also points out the the requested will allow for the protection of two
mature oak trees.
• The applicant's site plan shows preservation of the large oak trees and the addition of
landscaping materials which will improve the appearance of the property and reduce
the visual impact of the front yard parking spaces.
• The variances requested are necessary to relieve a particular condition relating to a
C &A
specific property, and the strict application of the City's parking requirements would
result in peculiar hardship upon the owner of the subject property.
• The proposed variance, if granted, would not confer on the applicant a special status;
there are no other properties in the immediate vicinity which have this hardship.
The approval of the variances should recognize that certain type of commercial
offices will not be permitted due to their increased parking requirement.
It is recommended that the two requested variances for 6230 SW 70th Street be
approved subject to the following condition: commercial offices including but not
limited to medical, dental, health related uses and any other similar use which has the
same required parking are prohibited from locating in the subject building.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION
The Planning Board at its July 13, 2004 meeting adopted a motion by a vote of 4 aye 1
nay to approve the requested variances with the following conditions:
(1) Commercial offices including but not limited to medical, dental, health related uses,
day care centers, and any other similar use which has the same required parking are
prohibited from locating in the subject building.
(2) The parking surface shall be constructed of a pervious material.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the variances requested be approved with the conditions
recommended by the Planning Board:
(1) Commercial offices including but not limited to medical, dental, health related uses,
day care centers, and any other similar use which has the same required parking are
prohibited from locating in the subject building.
(2) The parking surface shall be constructed of a pervious material.
Attachments
Draft Resolution
LDC Applicable Regulations
Location Map
Application
Letter of Intent /Justification
Survey,
Proposed Site Plan
Planning Board Minutes 7 -13 -04 Excerpt
Copy of Public Notices
MD/DOD /SAY ; C
E: \Comm Items \2004 \8 -3 -04 ce 6230 SW 70 Str Report.doc
1
2 RESOLUTION NO.
3
4 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR & CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI,
5 FLORIDA, RELATING TO A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING TWO
6 PARKING VARIANCES IN ORDER TO PERMIT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6230 SW 70TH
7 STREET IN AN "RO" RESIDENTIAL OFFICE ZONING USE DISTRICT TO BE USED AS A
8 COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING: (1) VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20- 4.4(B)(10) OF THE
9 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW FOUR OFF - STREET PARKING SPACES WHERE
10 THE REQUIRED OFF - STREET PARKING IS FIVE SPACES; (2) VARIANCE FROM SECTION
11 20- 4.4(F) (3) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW REQUIRED PARKING TO
12 BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT SETBACK AREA WHICH IS PROHIBITED IN THE RO
13 ZONING USE DISTRICT: AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
14
15
16 WHEREAS, Application No. PB -04 -011 was submitted to the Planning Board by the
17 applicant Dr. Arthur Kolsky, said application requesting approval for : (1) a variance from Section
18 20- 4.4(b)(10) of the Land Development Code to allow four off - street parking spaces where the
19 required off - street parking is five spaces and: (2) a variance from Section 20- 4.4(f) (3) of the
20 Land Development Code to allow required parking to be located in the front setback area which
21 is prohibited in the RO zoning use district; and
22
23 WHEREAS, the approval of a variance requires a recommendation from the Planning
24 Board and the approval of the City Commission after a public hearing; and
25
26 WHEREAS, on July 13, 2004 the Planning Board, after public hearing, adopted a motion
27 by a vote of 4 ayes 1 nays to recommend approval of the variances with conditions;
28
29 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
30 THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
31
32
33 Section 1: That the subject application submitted to the Planning Board by the applicant
34 Dr. Arthur Kolsky requesting approval for : (1) a variance from Section 20- 4.4(b)(10) of the
35 Land Development Code to allow four off - street parking spaces where the required off - street
36 parking is five spaces and: (2) a variance from Section 20- 4.4(f) (3) of the Land Development
37 Code to allow required parking to be located in the front setback area which is prohibited in the
38 RO zoning use district is hereby approved with the following conditions:
39
40 (1) Commercial offices including but not limited to medical, dental, health related uses, day care
41 centers, and any other similar use which has the same required parking are prohibited from
42 locating in the subject building.
43
44 (2) The parking surface shall be constructed of a pervious material
45
46
47
1
(2)
2
3
4
Section 2. That resolution shall be effective immediately after the adoption hereof.
5
6
7
PASSED AND ADOPTED this , day of
52004
8
9
10
11
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
12
13
14
CITY CLERK
MAYOR
15
16
Commission Vote:
17
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mayor Russell:
18
Vice Mayor Palmer:
19
Commissioner Wiscombe:
20
Commissioner Birts- Cooper:
21
Commissioner Sherar:
22
CITY ATTORNEY
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
E: \Comm Items \2004 \8 -3 -04 \6230 SW 70 Variance Resol.doc
ATTACHMENT
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
• Land Develonment Code Section 20 -4.4 (B) Parking Requirements
Space Requirements. The minimum number of off - street parking spaces required for each
permitted or special use shall be as set forth below and referenced in Section 20 -3.31).
Where fractional spaces result, the number of spaces required shall be the next highest
whole number.
(1) Two (2) spaces per dwelling unit.
(2) Two (2) spaces per dwelling unit, provided that at least one (1) space per
unit shall be enclosed.
(3) One and one -half (1.5) spaces per efficiency or studio unit and two (2)
spaces per unit with one or more bedrooms, plus an additional visitor
space for every ten (10) units.
(4) One (1) space per guest room, plus two (2) spaces for the reception office.
(5) One and three- quarters (1.75) spaces per bed.
(6) One (1) space per three (3) seating spaces in the main assembly room.
(7) One (1) space per one hundred (100) square feet of gross floor area.
(8) One (1) space per one hundred fifty (150) square feet of gross floor area.
(9) One (1) space per two hundred (200) square feet of gross floor area.
(10) One 1) space per two hundred fifty (250) square feet of gross floor area.
(11) One (1) space per three hundred (300) square feet of gross floor area_
(12) One (1) space per four hundred (400) square feet of gross floor area.
(13) One (1) space per five hundred (500) square feet of gross floor area.
(14) One (1) space per one thousand (1,000) square feet of gross floor area.
(15) One (1) space per four (4) seats or seating places.
(16) Five (5) spaces per alley or five hundred (500) square feet of rink area.
• Land Development Code Section 20 -4.4 (F)(3) Location /Ownership of Spaces
(F) Location and Ownership of Spaces.
9
(3) Parking shall be permitted in yard setback areas, except in required front
yard setbacks in the RO district.
(4) Parking of commercial vehicles of one (1) ton or greater capacity shall not
[be] permitted in all RS, RT or RM districts.
(5) Parking structures shall not be located within required yard setback areas.
(6) No off - street parking space shall be located within ten (10) feet of any
street curb or so as to permit any portion of a parked vehicle to extend
across a property line.
• Land Development Code Section 20 -5.9 Variances Approvals
(A) Expiration of Variance Approvals. A variance approved pursuant to
Section 20 -5.5 shall lapse after six (6) month if no substantial
construction or change of use has taken place in accordance with
the request for such variance and if the city commission has not
specified a longer approval period for good cause shown.
(B) Extension of Variance Approvals. Four (4) affirmative votes of
the city commission may grant an extension to a previously
approved variance if a proper and timely request is made by the
applicant prior to the expiration of the six (6) month period.
(C) Hardship Statement. All applications for a variance shall include
a letter of intent indicating the specific nature of the hardship
upon which the request is based.
(D) Property Survey Required. All applications for a variance shall
include a current property survey prepared by a registered
surveyor.
(E) Neighborhood Concurrence. All applications for a variance shall
be accompanied by a map which reflects all properties and the
names of all property owners within a five hundred (500) foot
radius of the subject property. The applicant shall obtain and
(F) submit the signatures of at least twenty (20) percent of such
property owners, indicating their awareness of the proposed
variance request.
(F) Proposed Site Plan Required. A site plan shall be required
showing all proposed buildings and setbacks and any other
features relating to the variance request.
(G) Permitted Variance Requests. Applications for variances shall be
restricted to only the following:
(1) Yard setbacks
(2) Lot size
(3) Lot coverage
(4) Building height
(5) Fences and walls
(6) Impervious coverage
(7) Off- street parking
(8) Open space
(9) Signs
(10) Landscaping
• Land Development Code Section 20 -6.1 (B) Planning Board Duties
(B) Planning Board.
(3) Powers and Duties.
(h) The board shall review and make recommendations on all
applications for variances from the requirements of this Code for
yard setbacks, lot size, lot coverage, building height, fences and
walls, impervious coverage, off - street parking, open space, signs
and landscaping. Recommendations for a variance shall be made
only when necessary to relieve particular hardships or
extraordinary conditions relating to a specific property, and when
the strict application of a particular regulation would result in
peculiar and exceptional hardship upon the owner of such property
as distinguished from reasons of convenience profit or caprice.
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
SUPERVISOR, Legal Notices of the Miami Daily Business
Review f /Wa 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 HEARING - 8/3/2004
FOR THE CREATION OF TWO BUILDABLE LOTS, ETC.
in the XXXX Court,
was published in said newspaper in the issues of
07/23/2004
Affiantfurther 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 is adv ' ment for publication in the said
newspap .
-1
Sworn to and subscribed before me this
23 LY -B. 2004
(SEAL)
Maria I. its
O.V. FERBEYRE personal * ExOres ftt�.tmmission DD293855
March 04e 2008
guffkodyr Maxing cSalonfor A(en & Momen
27
Fm
PSAT, ACT, SAT H, and individual tutoring 305-529-3999
DIMION OF CONTMMG!
3:
sl
City of South Miami
PB -04 -011 Special Use Approval
6230 SW 70th Street
6
6611
6610
6611
6610
6611
6610
6621
0
6616
6621
6620
6620
6621
6620
U
6631
U
6621
0
V
6632
Q
6631
6630
6631
6640.
6631
6630
p
6701
6700
_
6641
6700
�
6700
6701
6700
N
0
"
CO
6701
6701
N
N
6711
6710
6711
6710
6711
6710
6721
6718
�
0
07
6720
6721
6720
6721
6720
o
w
�
6721
6731
6730
6731
6730
6731
6730
6731
ro
SW 68TH
ST
6802
6801
6800
6801
6800
3
WCzet).
6815
6810
6825
6825950
M
6825
6820
C°
6841
41
p
a
�3
�
o
�`�
69
6910
rn
CO
6g 0,
���� 6917
`t
0
v
°�
o
°°
o
0
6930
0
0
69 2 5
6912
6240 6230
M
CO
co
co
cfl
6929
0
°
N
6931
N
°'
6950
�o
�p
°
1 0
�
v
m
o
°
°m
�
gg41
co°j
m
6940
6941
co
`°
co
`°
6970
6941
70TH
ST
D
7000
7001
0
�0
o
rn
7009
m
E7001
M
_
>
^
`°
"0
7040
7011
7020
7021
m
7010
Q
7015
7000
U
7021
7030
7041
7030
fy
7101
�--
7109
7031
M
CO
7105
N
O
7051
W
7090
7040
0
7040
io
t0
7101
7110
7111
7110
7107
SUBJECT
�
>
Q
7171
7110,
r
7115
7114
7111
PROPERTY-
o
F--
07
n
7111
7120
co
0
M
o-,
6'�
O,
7121
_
N
ro 6201
z
El
6101
0
"
not
co
m
w CND
SW 72ND ST
_—
CD
I-CS-41,
0
633 32
6310
46180-_-
��
7223
N
J
N
7230
7231
0
7231
�O
CL
N
C°
o
7243
7240
�
ti
N
'
7251
Z
o
7240
7301
7248
N
w
CO
7311
CN
7311
7340
7310
7313
7320
7300
7321
7320
:,->
7321
7331
7330
07
73331
7330
ro
�o
7341
7340
6331
7340
ch
r
w
0
m
® 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 Planning Board & City Commission
Address of Subject Property: Z30 y -70 S
Lot(s) Block Subdivision
PB -
— —
Meets & Bounds:
Applicant:
Phone:
Representative:
Organization:
Address:
Phone:
Property Owner: /i � .j� w
i'@ �9
Signature: -
Mailing Address:
Phone:
3 740 1
Architect/Engineer: r _
Phone '
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 Variance
Letter of intent
_ Zoning Map Amendment _Special Use
_Justifications for change
_ PUD Approval _Special Exception
Statement of hardship
_PUD Major Change _Other
Proof of ownership or letter from owner
Power of attorney
Briefly explain application and cite specific Code sections:
_ Contract to purchase
Current survey (1 original sealed and
signed /1 reduced copy @ 11 "x 17"
5 copies of Site Plan and Floor Plans
A W ha"11-
-
'g r�
1 reduced copy @ 11" x 17"
_ 20% Property owner signatures "
Section: '20 Subsection:" Page Amended Date:
Mailing labels (3 sets) and map
Required Fee(s)
The undersigned has read this c mpleted application and represents that the information and all submitted materials are true and
come the esb of the a lica ti's k Algg�,'e and belief.
A __ '4 A 9W r / 21' U
App icant's Signature and title Date
Upon receipt, applications and all submitted materials will be reviewed for co Hance with the Land Development Code and other
applicable regulations. Applications found not in compliance will be rejected andpreturned to the applicant.
OFFICE USE ONLY:
Date Filed °�k:Lo Date of PB Hearing -0 Date of Commission
Petition Required Petition Accepted aJ
Method of Payment,
Skin Source Inc.
8220 SW 52 Ave
S. Miami, FL 33143
305- 740 -6181
Application for Zoning Variance
Date: May 23, 2004
Location: 6230 S.W. 70" Street, South Miami, Florida 33143
Legal Description: 25 54 40.10 AC W54FT OF N88FT OF E137FT OF N150FT OF
W1 /2 OF SE I/4 OF SE 1/40F SW 1/4 LOT SIZE 4750 SQUARE
FEET OR 10160 -2164 0600 1
Variance Requests for the above referenced property:
1. to allow for parking in the front set back zone.
2. to allow for one less parking space than currently designated
Hardships.
Whereas:
I. The inherent lay of the land and existing improvements directly interfere with
available space for off street parking.
a. The configuration of the footprint of the preexisting structure does not
accommodate sufficient space for parking in the rear or on either side of
the improvement.
b. The presence of old growth oak trees centrally located within the
perimeter of the property directly interferes with available grounds
available for parking space construction.
c. The size and shape of the land presents a peculiar hardship by interfering
with the design necessary to accommodate parking space requirements.
d. The resultant lack of available off street parking directly interferes with
the allowed use of the property in its current R -O zoning classification as a
commercial office,
Justification:
Whereas the subject property:
1. contains a preexisting structure;
2. is subject to zoning requirements that do not allow for parking within the front
set back;
3. occupies a unique configuration that presents a peculiar hardship;
4. will necessitate demolition of the existing structure in order to achieve
sufficient set back for parking space design;
5. contains old growth oak trees which occupy coordinates critical for parking
space design
And whereas:
1. preservation of the existing structure would maintain the residential character
of the property;
2. use of the front set back for off street parking is in keeping with similar use of
the front set back zones of the neighboring residential properties;
3.. preservation of the existing old growth oak trees would be accomplished
4. the requested modification in the number of parking spaces only represents a
fractional reduction in the currently designated five spaces per 250 ft2 to the
fractional difference of one space for every 279 ft2.
Granting of the above requests for variances will cure the existing hardships and allow
for use of the property in its current R -O zoning classification as a commercial office.
For these considerations,
1. any claim to use the property for a more intensive commercial use, such as a
medical office, will be relinquished;
2. a comprehensive landscaping plan presented herewith will provide
enhancement of the current vegetation and natural beauty of the property;
3. such landscaping would further camouflage the proposed parking spaces in
the front set back.
Thank you for your co iderat' n of the ab ve requests for variance.
Arthur S. Colsky
LOCA11ON MAC' (N.T.s.)
f
el
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 6230 S.W. 70th Street, Miami, Florida 33143.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The West 54.00 feet
of the North 88.00 feet
on the East 137.00 feet of the North
150.00 feet of the West
2 of the Southeast J, of the Southeast
of the Southwest 4
of Section 25, Township 54 South, Range 40 East, lying and
being in Dade County, Florida..
FOR: MARTA MILLIAN GONZALEZ.
CERTIFY TO: MARTA MILLIAN GONZALEZ.
UNION TITLE SERVICES, INC,
STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, INC.
&RVEYOR RS NOTES:
PFEPAFED BY:
1) This survey was Conducted for tie purpose of a'Bo ndafy S~ ony, and a not tnberlded to delineate the OIQUIR ( jUrWhctOn
f®deraf,
^.' t♦ �� GROUP INC
GUN ER GROUT' NN
of try state. regional or loc agency, board. commissiorh orcmar erhtty.
2) The accuracy otm by mdaaunernerne and ralouliibons on this arrvev, maple and esc epda the Ms rnum Tearncal standards
wwAramente Rr a Suburban area (t foot In 7.668"as specified In Chapter 81G17 -8. Florida �dms4stirative Cope.
1 LH 4507
LAIC SURVEY�K3 —LAND P-:Z- �fdG
3) This Survey does not reflect or determine owners ".
9350 S.W. 22nd TERRACE
4) Leyetdeacelpgdn autdadtlo any de idatloro, Ifine®tionii. restncecns reservadc ns or easernanta of record.
bl ExamMtatldn of the Abstract of TWO Nid:have to be made to determine recorded Ineturnents. it any affaotrhp the properly, Marc-)
MIAMI, FLORIDA 33165
n/.r mat r car
305)
of Public 'Records not performed by this office:
La) usw9uam ( 220-0073
6) NO fel was made by this Office t0 ldc®Ge any underground undies ar4or stnroturm wsvn or aouitthp its artlleo prhaperp...
lc:�,) c 11tn
8) Thy atrvey has Doan- prepared for the excarsN a use of the ernes named henaon drily and the c9difi aaorre hereon do not
M FMM adr w+t
rag Pcao X_aur
BrRar9d'EOarT,, hrhnernad pantos.
Std- LPBisj facisses vrielifa UtRry'E66errheftBS rwf rhdtacd as violations
rlr POtra:Qau, dell
r s r -1i1
t( o pdr�One tfia. wi1M Roadways not noted ae violations of OnCrpabhrrwtnls
9�
rya aloof a+ham
11) Foundstdns and/or lodtngs undameseh the Wound surface that mey crass bsydnd the bfwndery Ilnes of the herein described
") rwrca
Parcel are not shown
12) Ali Yon F10" Or Ra' W found and shown On the eke" of Survey have no Ceps untees Otherwise stated.
t p tt U19
13) Faroe ownership O t mine tar vbuW means only N anyi; Le" ownership not (Iefarri"ad. -
14) Nyltaetoh d records was made try" Nm beside the record Plat; tharalcm we do not ImpN or ameot respoarabiltr ku any
aa. alofswa,
ftr. no n UM FUME
Eamemeft, Dedication or LMntatlan for which Information was not furnished.
151 CePltecf the appropriate xrthorltea Par to arty design work on the nareon- aoscrmad Parnal to &akY1g, also Zoning uaorrnatvn
cure Oc"W7E
� ,,,*
16):TofBSeioal tend Burwsyor and Mapper In responsible charow Rolando Ordz LS 4312. Slate of Florida.
r u wlel enrr /
1 T) TFhM purvey Is not valid -wthmd the slgrisk" and tiro raised Sea} of a Florida Licensed Land Surveyor and Mapper
u-00) P�a.i B'f: R LAtipO ORT1Z LS 43f 2
I hmaby �y to the :above named firm and" persona t» the Sketch of Surveys the described property a rnre and correct to
P:CP PdYANrtr1 COF1HOl Pasir OR:. RICARDO ORTtZ LS 5629.
Pr. Pan a• 7wfamecnw
Pe Poem or ecmahua PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR
mabeal of my fmowle�e and belie!. as reemisy surveyed and OW00 under
Standards set rn t�h my alrection: stag flat meets d1e NY w"Um Technical
spier 61p17 -6. Flddda Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 4-72.027 Florida Btataas.
P.' PPM t" T!"�* k MAPPER. -STATE OF FLORIDA.
DA
JOB Cie..
WETCCH
[7RA
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
PLANNING BOARD
Regular Meeting
Action Summary Minutes
Tuesday, July 13, 2004
City Commission Chambers
7:30 P.M.
EXCERPT
I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Action: The meeting was called to order at 7:47 P.M.
Action: The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.
II. Roll Call.
Action: Mr. Morton, Chairperson, requested a roll call.
Board members present constituting a quorum: Mr. Morton, Ms. Yates, Ms. Gibson,
Mr. Comendeiro, Mr. Liddy, and Mr. Illas.
Board members absent: Mr. Mann.
City staff present: Don O'Donnile
Consultant), Gremaf Reyes (Video
Secretary).
PB -04 -011
Applicant: Dr. Arthur Colsky
Location: 6230 SW 701h Street
y (Planning Director), Sanford A. Youkilis ( Planning
Support), and Patricia E. Lauderman (Planning Board
Request: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR & CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, RELATING TO A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE
FOLLOWING TWO PARKING VARIANCES IN ORDER TO PERMIT PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 6230 SW 70TH STREET IN AN "RO" RESIDENTIAL OFFICE ZONING
USE DISTRICT TO BE USED AS A COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING: (1)
VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20- 4.4(B)(10) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO
ALLOW FOUR OFF - STREET PARKING SPACES WHERE THE REQUIRED OFF -
STREET PARKING IS FIVE SPACES; (2) VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20- 4.4(F) (3) OF
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW REQUIRED PARKING TO BE
Planning Board Meeting
July 13, 2004
LOCATED IN THE FRONT SETBACK AREA WHICH IS PROHIBITED IN THE RO
ZONING USE DISTRICT: AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Note: At this time, Mr. Illas informed the Board with regards to Item PB -04 -011, he would
recluse himself from voting. He explained that as a realtor he had assisted in the closing for
the purchase of the property. Mr. O'Donniley concurred that it was appropriate for him to
recluse himself.
Action: Mr. Morton read the item into the record. Mr. O'Donniley presented the staff
report. He explained that the applicant is requesting approval of a two parking variances
from the provisions of the Land Development Code to allow a single family residential
building at 6230 SW 70th Street to be used for office use. The property is located in an
isolated "RO" Residential Office Zoning Use District.
Additionally, Mr. O'Donniley stated the parking variances are being requested so that the
number of off - street parking spaces provided would be sufficient to permit the structure to
be used for commerical offices. The type of offices in an RO district is very limited and at
this site would be further limited by the number of off - street spaces provided. Based upon
the size of the structure (1162 sq. ft.) a total of five parking spaces would be required for
mist professional and business offices at a formula one space for each 250 sq. ft. of gross
floor area. Offices such as medical dental or other health related uses would not be able to
locate in this building due to a higher number of spaces required.
He also noted that the applicant is proposing to save several of the large oak trees currently
located in the front yard of the property. This action will limit the number of spaces on the
site to four, resulting in the first variance request to waive one required parking space.
The configuration of the site and the location of the structure will require parking spaces to
be placed in the front yard including the front setback area, which is allowed in all but one
zoning district The RO zoning district does not permit required parking to be located in the
front setback area, thereby resulting in the second variance request.
Planning staff recommended that the two requested variances for 6230 SW 70th Street be
approved subject to the following condition: commerical offices including but not limited
to medical, dental, health related uses and any other similar use which has the same
required parking are prohibited from locating in the subject building.
At this point, Mr. Morton opened the public hearing.
Applicant: Arthur Colsky (Owner)
The Board, staff, and applicant discussed the request. The applicant stated that the property
will not be used for medical purposes, instead it will be used as an office. He plans on
improving the appearance of the property with landscaping materials and will save the two
large oak trees, which are shown on the site plan. Furthermore, Mr. Colsky stated that he
Planning Board Meeting
July 13, 2004
had no objection to adding turf blocks to the property. Mr. O'Donniley commented he had
an e -mail which he needed to enter into the record. This email was written by Beth
Schwartz, who is a neighbor located two houses away from the 6230 SW 70th Street. She
indicated in her email that any consideration of the variance request should be based upon
requiring the implementation of the Parking Study for the street.. She further explained in
her e -mail that neighbors would like to request a small raised and landscaped culdosac
which could be placed adjacent to the newly relocated do not enter signs. This culdosac
would allow for commerical parking on the east side in a semi circular fashion as to
provide for maximum parking spaces, and a moderately landscaped greenspace area on the
west side for the many residents who walk.
Speakers:
NAME ADDRESS
Dean Whitman 6259 SW 701h Street Opposed application
Mr. Whitman strongly opposed the application. He provided the Board with an article from
the Miami Herald. Furthermore, he voiced his opinion about traffic problems in the area
and his disagreement with the requested variance.
After hearing a summary of Ms. Schwartz's email Ms. Yates recommended that in the
future the Parking Study be further review by Planning Staff. In addition, Board member
Ms. Gibson informed the Board that the property was formally used as a day care center
classroom. Mr. O'Donniley stated perhaps that it was for that reason that the "RO" zoning
was designated. Board member, Mr. Comendeiro was concerned of the possibility of a day
care being opened on that property. Mr. O'Donniley asked the applicant, Dr. Colsky if he
had any objections to specifically eliminating day care as a potential use. Dr. Colsky had
no objection. Therefore, the following amended motion was passed.
Motion: Ms. Gibson moved and Ms. Yates seconded a motion to approve the requested
variances with the following conditions:
(1) Commercial offices including but not limited to medical, dental, health related uses,
day care centers, and any other similar use which has the same required parking are
prohibited from locating in the subject building.
(2) The parking surface shall be constructed of a pervious material.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Vote: Ayes 4 Nays I( Mr. Liddy) Recluse 1 (non- voting) (Mr. Illas)
EAComm Items \2004 \8 -3 -04 \Excerpt PB Mins 6230.doc
a�
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
PLANNING BOARD
Regular Meeting
Action Summary Minutes
Tuesday, June 15, 2004
City Commission Chambers
7:30 P.M.
I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Action: The meeting was called to order at 7 :35 P.M.
Action: The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.
II. Roll Call.
Action: Mr. Morton, Chairperson, requested a roll call.
Board members present constituting a quorum: Mr. Morton, Mr. Illas, Mr. Liddy, Mr.
Comendeiro and Mr. Mann.
Board members absent: Ms. Yates and Ms. Gibson.
City staff present: Don O'Donniley (Planning Director), Sanford A. Youkilis (Planning
Consultant), Gremaf Reyes (Video Support), and Patricia E. Lauderman (Planning Board
Secretary).
TTI_ Administrative Matters
Mr. O'Donniley stated that since the City Commission approved the amendment to the
LDC, which related to the Planning Board calling for special meetings to take place,
tonight's meeting was possible due to that action. In addition, he informed the Board that
the next meeting would be held on July 13, 2004.
Planning Board meeting
June 15, 2004
Page 2 of 6
IV. Planning Board Application / Public Hearings
PB -04 -007
Applicant: Said Almukhtar
Location: 5850 Sunset Drive
Request: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, RELATING TO A REQUEST PURSUANT TO
SECTION 20- 3.4(13)(4)(b) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR A
SPECIAL USE APPROVAL TO LOCATE A GENERAL RESTAURANT
"NATURAL CHICKEN GRILL" IN THE "SR (HD -OV)" SPECIALTY RETAIL
HOMETOWN DISTRICT OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT SPECIFICALLY
LOCATED AT 5850 SUNSET DRIVE.
Action: Mr. Morton read the item into record and Mr. O'Donniley presented the staff
report. He explained that the applicant is requesting a Special Use Approval to operate a
general restaurant named Natural Chicken Grill in part of the ground floor of an existing
two story building located at 5850 Sunset Drive. A general restaurant is permitted with
Special Use Approval. The proposed use is located in the "SR(HD)," Specialty Retail
Hometown Overlay Zoning District. The proposed use must meet the requirements for
special uses contained under Section 20- 3.4(B)(4)(b) General Restaurant and Section 20-
5.8 Special Use Approval of the LDC.
Mr. O'Donniley stated that the first floor was previously operated as a restaurant called
Koo Koo Roo. The space has been vacant for the past two years. The LDC specifies in
Section 20 -3.4 (11)(4)(d) that a restaurant in the SR district may only occupy a maximum
of 25% of the ground floor area of the building. Based upon a review of the survey, the
restaurant would exceed the limitation; staff felt that this provision might not be applicable
to this property.
It is also noted that the Hometown Overlay Zoning District Regulating Plan (map)
designates this building as a "contributive building" (having historic / architectural merit),
and therefore it is exempt from providing required parking spaces. (LDC Section 20 -7.6
(C)(3))•
Mr. O'Donniley advised staff would recommend approval of the application with the
following conditions: (1) the applicant shall provide a floor plan for the restaurant interior
to be submitted prior to the application being forwarded to the City Commission; (2) If the
subject general restaurant is, in the future, determined by the Planning Director, to be
adversely affecting the health or safety of person residing or working in the vicinity of the
proposed use, to be detrimental to the public welfare or property or improvements in the
neighborhood, to be not in compliance with other applicable Code provisions, the special
use approval may be modified or revoked by the City Commission upon notification and
public hearing.
Applicant: Said Almukhtar 5850 Sunset Drive
At this point, Mr. Morton opened the public hearing.
Planning Board meeting
June 15, 2004
Page 3 of 6
No speakers spoke in favor or against this item. Mr. Youkilis informed Mr. Almukhtar that
he needed to submit floor plans. Additionally, he stated to the applicant that this item could
possibly be in front of the City Commission at the meeting of July 20. Mr. Morton
requested that at the next Planning Board meeting of July 13, the Planning staff provide an
update on this item.
Motion: Mr. Morton moved to recommend for approval, subject to the following
conditions:
1) review by the City Attorney of the special use provision applicable to
restaurants in the SR to determine if it is not in conflict with the code;
2) make a provision for a refrigerated garbage storage, prior to routine pick -up,
and that be coordinated with staff;
3) incorporate both staff recommendations.
Mr. Liddy seconded the motion. The motion was approved by the following vote:
Ayes 5 Nays 0
V. Planning Board Work Program
(A): ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ORDINANCE: Report on the status of
proposed ordinance
Mr. O'Donniley first provided some background information on the issue. He stated that
the City Commission at its June 1, 2004 meeting approved on first reading a proposed
amendment to the Land Development Code that would permit adult entertainment
establishments as a permitted use in TODD (LI -4), Transit Oriented Development District
(Light Industrial -4) Zoning Use District. The ordinance approved also provided for
distance requirements between adult establishments and churches, schools, parks,
playgrounds and residential uses, and between individual adult establishments.
During discussion it was felt that the maximum number of establishments that could be
located in South Miami should take into consideration the location of these uses in
surrounding jurisdictions. Staff was requested to estimate the cost of doing this type of
study including an estimate of the distance from the city, which should be included in the
survey.
Mr. O'Donniley stated that a limited portion of the survey and data collection can be
carried out by in house staff, however, the bulk of the research including field studies will
require an outside consultant to assist. He informed the Board members that the City
Commission accepted a cost of up to $5,250 for the hiring of consultants to assist in the
field and research work. The Planning Department will report the findings obtained by the
consultants, as well as the data gathered from the in house staff and present all the
information to the City Commission.
Planning Board meeting
June 15, 2004
Page 4of6
Board member Mr. Mann, on a separate issue, commented about the signage of BT
Gentlemen's Club. He stated that the sign appeared to him more pronounced and called
more attention to the business. He suggested that the signage be reviewed.
(B): LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE: New Chapter Reviews
Mr. Youkilis stated that the Board at its October 14, 2003, January 27, 2004, March 9,
2004, April 13, 2004, May 11, 2003 meetings reviewed and approved a total of nine
chapters of the new LDC. There are now 2 chapters remaining for review. Mr. Youkilis
explained that for this meeting, the Board would be reviewing Part I of Chapter II "Zoning
Districts / Permitted Uses ". The special committee of the Zoning Task Force prepared this
chapter. The chapter was presented to the Task Force in January, 2003 at which time the
Task Force adopted the proposed draft. Mr. Youkilis notified the Board that the whole
Chapter II will not be presented tonight. For the meeting in July, the remaining part of this
chapter will be discussed.
Mr. Youkilis stated the major revisions to the chapter being presented. This chapter places
together all of the City's zoning districts into one chapter whereas, the current LDC has
certain zoning districts as individual chapters (CS -OV, TODD, Hometown). On page 4
Section 20 -2.16, he directed the Board's attention to a new format displaying on one page
the zoning use districts, development standards, and uses permitted. On the following
section (Section 20- 2.17), he called their attention to the three different categories of
permitted uses with their respective definitions, as permitted by the Task Force. The three
uses are permitted, conditional, and special. Next, he spoke about the new format being
used for all residential, office, and commercial zones. The new format has the following
headings: district purpose, uses allowed, development regulations, and supplemental
requirements. This new format, for the zoning districts, is found from pages 5 -24. At
tonight's meeting, pages 22 -66 were not included in this Part I review. These pages belong
to the Mixed Use - Hometown District and the TODD regulations, which will be reviewed
separately at a future meeting. In regards to regulations for special purpose districts (pp 67-
84): H, PR, PI, PUD, PUD -R, PUD -M, PUD -H, and the CS -OV districts, all were
converted to the new format.
The section that pertained to Historic Preservation Overlay was changed so that the current
preservation regulations that were scattered throughout the LDC, are now consolidated in
one section (pp.85 -87). Also new provisions have been added to clearly show that the
designation process is a zoning map change, requiring formal public hearings and Planning
Board review.
On the last pages 88 -97 Mr. Youkilis spoke about the changes to the Permitted Use
Schedule. It contained changes recommended by the Task Force, as prepared by the
Permitted Uses subcommittee. The current use schedule format is maintained; uses
permitted in the GR expanded; reduction of uses designated as special uses requiring
hearings; the actual parking space formulas are shown on each page; and a new MU
district is shown for possible placement in area other than Hometown.
Planning Board meeting
June 15, 2004
Page 5 of 6
During the review of the Permitted Use Schedule, Board member Mr. Comendeiro
inquired as to why parks were not required to have required parking available to the
citizens. The Board and staff discussed Mr. Comendeiro's concern.
Board member Mr. Mann inquired about the permitted use being allowed in the TODD
(LI -4) for public warehousing and storage. He thought that the storage and public
warehouses were not allowed in the TODD (LI -4). Furthermore, he stated that it seemed to
him that having a 4 -story wall storage building might diminish the movement of people
and /or development. Mr. O'Donniley responded with the possibility of making the public
warehousing /storage a special use, where it would require City Commission approval.
On a different note, Mr. Liddy asked who handles the on- street parking requirements and
regulations. Mr. Youkilis answered that he believes Public Works along with the Parking
consultant handle those requirements and that they follow the City Code. Furthermore, Mr.
O'Donniley added that that the Planning Board had specified the minimum size for the on-
street parking when the Board reviewed the Parking Chapter of the LDC. Board member
Mr. Illas had a question pertaining to off - street parking enforcement. He asked who
enforces the regulations for a business that has off - street parking spaces but chooses to
park cars outside their designated parking spaces. Mr. O'Donniley responded that the Code
Enforcement Department regulates these issues and if the cars are parked in a public right -
of -way then it is the police who would enforce the law. However, Mr. Illas said that a
concern he has is that much of the businesses are parking outside their designated parking
spaces after the Code Enforcement Dept is closed which is at 5:00 p.m. Finally, Mr.
Youkilis commented if the Finance Department receives a complaint about businesses not
parking in their designated off - street parking spaces, then the Finance Dept notifies the
Parking Consultant to watch the parking spaces to see if they are obeying the regulations.
VI. Remarks
No remarks were said.
VII. Approval of Minutes
Action: The Board voted on and approved the minutes of May 11, 2004, as amended.
Vote: Ayes 5 Nays 0
VIII. Next Meeting
Action: Mr. Youkilis informed the Board the next Planning Board meeting was
scheduled for July 13, 2004.
Planning Board meeting
June 15, 2004
Page 6 of 6
IX. Adjournment
Action: There being no further business before the Board, Mr. Morton adjourned the
meeting at 9:15 PM.
DOD /SAY /pel
K: \PB \PB Minutes\2004 Minutes \MINS 6- 15- 04.doc