11-01-94 SPECIAL0
T7
Mayor: Neil Carver
Vice Mayor: R. Paul Young
Commissioner:
Commissioner:
Commissioner:
el - C11
Ann B. Bass
Thomas Todd Cooper
Tom Cunningham
CITY COMNIISSION AGENDA
Special City Commission Meeting
Meeting date: November 1, 1994 6130 Sunset Drive, So. Miami, FL
Next Meeting date: November 15, 1994 Phone: (305) 663 -6340
PURSUANT TO FLA STAT. 266.0105, 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. THIS
NOTICE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE CONSENT BY THE CITY FOR THE INTRODUCTION OR ADMISSION
OR OTHERWISE INADMISSIBLE OR IRREVELANT EVIDENCE, NOR DOES IT AUTHORIZE
CHALLENGES OR APPEALS NOT OTHERWISE ALLOWED BY LAW.
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI ORDINANCE NO. 6 -86 -1251 REQUIRES ALL PERSONS APPEARING IN A
PAID OR REMUNERATED REPRESENTATIVE CAPACITY BEFORE THE CITY STAFF, BOARDS,
COMMITTEES AND THE CITY COMMISSION, TO FILL OUT THE APPROPRIATE FORM AND FILE IT
WITH THE CITY CLERK PRIOR TO ENGAGING IN LOBBYING ACTIVITIES.
CALL TO ORDER
A. Invocation
B. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America
C. Presentations
ITEMS FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION
1) Approval of Minutes - October 18, 1994
2) City Manager's Report
3) City Attorney's Report
CONSENT AGENDA
4. A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of
South Miami, Florida, authorizing the City Manager to disburse
the sum of $6,842.47 representing fees incurred for legal
services by Gregory Borgognoni of Ruden, Barnett, ETAL,
regarding the Bakery Centre, Stieglitz, and the Land Use
Comprehensive Litigation and charging the disbursement to
Account Number 2100 -4910: "Comprehensive Plan - Special
Attorney."
(Administration) 3/5
5. A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of
South Miami, Florida, authorizing the City Manager to disburse
the sum of $571.74 representing fees incurred for legal
services by Leibowitz and Associates, P.A., regarding the
Cityls Cable Television Franchise renewal request and for
advice regarding Federal Cable Television Statutes and
charging the disbursement to Account No. 2100 -3420:
"Consultant -Cable TV Franchise."
(Administration) 3/5
6. A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of
South Miami, Florida, authorizing the City Manager to enter
into a renewal agreement with USA Software for Technical
Support and Software for the Police Department Xenix Filesaver
at a cost of $3,200 annually and charge the disbursement to
Account No. 1910 -4620 "Maintenance and Repair Equipment."
(Administration /PD) 3/5
7. A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of.the City of
South Miami, Florida, authorizing the Public Works Department
to purchase the repairs to Trash Crane No. 21 -32A upon the
basis that American Truck Crane Inc ., is the sole source
available to do the work immediately and avoid disruption in
trash collection service to our citizens. Authorizing the
expenditure of a sum not to exceed $1,190.00 for this repair;
charging the disbursement to Account No. 1760 -4680: "Outside
Services."
(Administration) 3/5
8. A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of
South Miami, Florida, authorizing the City Manager to enter
into a cooperative agreement with the United States Department
of State and the South Miami Police Department for
extraordinary protective services.
(Administration /PD) 3/5
November 1, 1994 PAGE 2
9. A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of
South Miami, Florida, authorizing the Police Department of the
City of South Miami to renew the Mutual Aid Agreements between
the City of South Miami and the Cities of Miami and Homestead
and with Metropolitan Dade and Monroe Counties.
(Administration /PD) 3/5
ORDINANCES - SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING
10. An Ordinance of the City of South Miami, Florida, amending
Section 20 -3.3 (D) of the Land Development Code to permit Dry
Cleaning Plants in the GR General Retail Zoning District;
amending Section 20 -3.4 (B)(7)(a) of the Land Development Code
to remove the distance requirement; amending Section 20 -3.4
(B)(7)(b) of the Land Development Code to include all manner
of self - contained Dry Cleaning Units; providing for Ordinances
in conflict; providing for severability; and providing for an
effective date.
(Commissioner Cunningham) 4/5
11. An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of
South Miami, Florida,. amending Section 20 -4.4 (F) of the Land
Development Code to increase distances from off -site parking
to uses served, to permit off -site parking in RM and RO
Districts, and to remove the requirement for lease agreements;
replacing Section 20 -4.4 (G) joint use spaces; amending
Section 20 -4.4 (H) to increase the distance from Metrorail
Station to uses served; creating a new Section 20 -4.4 (I) to
provide valet parking for hotels, hospitals, offices,
restaurants and nightclubs; creating a new Section 20 -4.4 (J)
to provide procedures regarding the approval of shared
parking, valet parking and reduced parking in proximity to
Metrorail Station; amending the numbering of subsequent sub-
sections; amending Section 20 -5.2 to add a new subsection
(14); providing for recommendations from the Planning Board
concerning appropriate distance limitations and nightclub and
restaurant seating threshold(s); providing for severability;
providing for ordinances in conflict; providing for an
effective date.
(City Attorney Gallop) 4/5
RESOLUTIONS
none
November 1, 1994 PAGE 3
r
ORDINANCES - FIRST READING
12. An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of
South Miami, Florida amending Section 20 -3.5G of the Land
Development Code, providing elimination of frontage
dimensional requirements in "SR" District; providing for
severability; providing for ordinances in conflict; and
providing an effective date.
(Commissioner Cooper) 4/5
13. An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of
South Miami, Florida amending Article VII of the Land
Development Code by providing for a special exception process
for development within The Hometown District which does not
strictly comply with the terms and provisions of The Hometown
District Overlay Ordinance; providing for standards and
procedures for such special exceptions, providing for
severability; providing for ordinances in conflict; and
providing an effective date.
(Administration /PB) 4/5
APPEALS
14. Appeal by Zipp Sporting Goods from Code Enforcement Board
order.
(City Attorney Gallop) 3/5
none
REMARKS
TABLED /DEFERRED
I A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami,
Florida, granting a variance to permit the existing chickee but to remain, a
portion (not more than 2 feet) of which is located in the required front setback,
on property located in the RS -3 (Medium Lot Single Family Residential) Zoning
District, and specifically located at 6930 SW 64 Avenue, South Miami, Florida
33143 and providing a local description_
(Planning Board /Aden.) 035
November 1, 1994 PAGE 4
J
To:
From:
Y_
OF SOUTH M =AM=
INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Mayor and City Comm'ssion
W /Aiam F. pton
City Managers
Date: October 24, 1994
Agenda Item 1 4
Re: Comm. Mtg. 11/01/94
Special Counsel -
Greg Borgognoni
Background:
The City has employed Greg Borgognoni for a number of years
to handle the Bakery Centre, Stieglitz, and Comprehensive
Plan litigations.
Recommendation:
1- Advantage to City: - Services by outside counsel will
be paid.
2- Disadvantages to city: None
3- The City Manager recommends approval of this
Resolution.
4- Funds for this purpose are included in the approved
1993 -94 budget.
WFH:er
atAVTpWMi
I
RESOLUTION NO.
2 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION
3 OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA,
4 AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO DISBURSE THE
5 SUM OF $6,842.47 REPRESENTING FEES INCURRED
6 FOR LEGAL SERVICES BY GREGORY BORGOGNONI OF
7 RUDEN, BARNETT, ET AL, REGARDING THE BAKERY
8 CENTRE, STIEGLITZ, AND THE LAND USE
9 COMPREHENSIVE LITIGATION AND CHARGING THE
10 DISBURSEMENT TO ACCOUNT NUMBER 2100 -4910:
11 "COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - SPECIAL ATTORNEY."
12
13 WHEREAS, by Resolution number 75 -90 -9102 passed May 22,
14 1990, the City commission authorized the employment of Gregory
15 Borgognoni of Ruden, Barnett, et al for legal services; and
16 WHEREAS, the City received invoices for legal services
17 rendered pursuant to the aforesaid Resolution regarding the Bakery
18 Centre, Stieglitz, and the Land Use Comprehensive Litigation in the
19 amount of $6,842.47.
20 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
21 COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
22 Section 1. The City Manager be, and hereby is,
23 authorized to disburse the sum of $3,800.50 to Gregory Borgognoni
24 of Ruden, Barnett, et al for legal services rendered regarding the
25 Bakery Centre, Stieglitz, and the Land Use Comprehensive Litigation
26 in the amount of $6,842.47.
u
1 Section
2. That the disbursement be
charged to account
2 number 2100 -4910:
"Comprehensive Plan - Special
Attorney."
3 PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of November, 1994.
4 APPROVED:
5
6 MAYOR
7 ATTEST:
8
9 City Clerk
10 READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
11
12 CITY ATTORNEY
0
f.
C =TY OF SQUTH �Z2AM=
INTER- OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and Cit� 'Cowfri:ssion Date: October 24, 1994
Agenda Item 5
From: William P: a ton Re: Comm. Mtg. 11/01/94
City Manag. Cable TV - Legal
Consultant
CJ
Background.:
In April 1993 the City engaged Leibowitz & Associates to
represent the City in the franchise renewal of Cable
Satellite and to handle the Cable TV Rate Regulation.
Recommendation:
1- Advantage to City: - Leibowitz & Associates will be
paid for the services described above.
2- Disadvantages to city: None
3- The City Manager recommends approval of this
Resolution.
4- Funds for this purpose are included in the approved
1993 -94 budget.
WFH:er
a:cabL,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA,
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO DISBURSE THE
SUM OF $571.74 REPRESENTING FEES INCURRED FOR
LEGAL SERVICES BY LEIBOWITZ & ASSOCIATES,
P.A., REGARDING THE CITY'S CABLE TELEVISION
FRANCHISE RENEWAL REQUEST AND FOR ADVICE
REGARDING FEDERAL CABLE TELEVISION STATUTES
AND CHARGING THE DISBURSEMENT TO ACCOUNT NO.
2100 - 3420: 11CONSULTANT -CABLE TV FRANCHISE."
18 WHEREAS, by Resolution number 67 -93 -9811 passed April 27,
19 1993 the City commission authorized the City Administration to
20 enter into a contract with the law firm of Leibowitz & Associates,
21 P.A. and as Special counsel regarding Cable Television and the
22 Franchise Renewal Request; and
23
24 WHEREAS, the City has now received invoices for legal
25 services rendered pursuant to the aforesaid Resolution in the
26 amount of $571.74.
27
28 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
29 COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
30
31 Section 1. The City Manager be, and hereby is,
32 authorized to disburse the sum of $571.74 to Leibowitz &
33 Associates, P.A. for legal services rendered regarding the City's
34 Cable Television Franchise Renewal Request.
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Section 2. That the disbursement be charged to account
number 2100 -3420: "Consultant -Cable TV Franchise."
PASSED AND ADOPTED this
ATTEST:
City Clerk
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
day of November, 1994.
APPROVED:
MAYOR
City of South Miami
Police Department
INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Ma or 7.///Hampton yty /Co ission
�/ FROM: William/
City Ma a,ger
DATE: October 25, 1994
SUBJECT: Agenda Item # 6
Comm. Mtg. 11/1/94
Annual Software Support Agreement Renewal
Background:
USA Software (formerly FASTCORP) was the original provider for our
Xenix operating system. This operating system is software that
enables the computer (fileserver) to communicate with its software
applications, hardware (printers, fax modem, monitor,etc) and its
users. They have provided technical support for the past four years
for all of the software running on our Xenix fileserver.
Recommendations:
1. Advantages to the City:
The fileserver runs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Its Xenix
operating system is a multi -user, multi - tasking system. It allows
a large number of users to work at the same time. Due to the fact
that the system is running all of the time, problems can develop.
A good technical support program is essential to having a reliable
computer system.
Unlimited telephone technical support on products listed in the USA
Software Support Agreement, Schedule A.
Referral Policy - If another agency purchases a USA Software,Inc.
system as a result of a qualified sales lead furnished by our
agency, we will receive a standard USA Software,Inc. module free
of charge.
Clients under a valid Support Agreement will have priority over
those without an agreement.
r
w
2. Disadvantages to the City:
None
3. The City Manager recommends approval.
4. This Resolution is pursuant to the 94 -95 budget.
esw
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
W.*
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
6
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA,
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A
RENEWAL AGREEMENT WITH USA SOFTWARE FOR
TECHNICAL SUPPORT AND SOFTWARE FOR THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT XENIX FILESAVER AT A COST OF $3,200
ANNUALLY AND CHARGE THE DISBURSEMENT TO
ACCOUNT NO. 1910 -4620 "MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR
EQUIPMENT."
WHEREAS, USA Software has provided excellent technical
support for the past four years for the Police Department Xenix
Filesaver; and
WHEREAS, the software programs provided the Police
Department with word processing; criminal activity research,
personal files, F.I. cards, arrest information; and
WHEREAS, these software programs are vital to the day-
to-day operation of the Police Department.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. That the City Manager be authorized to enter
into a renewal agreement with "USA Software" for software technical
support of the Police Department Xenix Filesaver.
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
V
Section 2. That the disbursement of $3,200 be charged to
Account No. 1910 -4620 "Maintenance and Repair Equipment."
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of November, 1994.
ATTEST:
Rosemary J. Wascura
City Clerk
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Earl G. Gallop
City Attorney
APPROVED
Neil Carver
Mayor
C
To:
From:
.r
INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Mayor and Ci Commis on
ZMam F' mpton
City Man
Date: October 24, 1994
Agenda Item #__Z_
Re: Comm. Mtg. 11/01/94
Repair to vehicle 21 -32A
Background:
It is necessary to have this vehicle repaired immediately so
that our trash collection schedules could be maintained.
American Truck Crane.Inc., is the sole source available to
perform this repair immediately.
Recommendation:
1- Advantage to City: - Vehicle 21 -32A quickly return to
trash collection service.
2- Disadvantages to city: None
3- The City Manager recommends approval of this
Resolution.
4- Funds for this purpose are included in the approved
1993 -94 budget.
WFH:er
anpairvmk
1
Section 1. That the
2
RESOLUTION NO.
3
is, authorized to disburse the
4
$1,290.00 to American Truck
5
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION
6
OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA,
7
AUTHORIZING THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO
8
PURCHASE THE REPAIRS TO TRASH CRANE NO. 21 -32A
9
UPON THE BASIS THAT AMERICAN TRUCK CRANE INC.,
10
IS THE SOLE SOURCE AVAILABLE TO DO THE WORK
11
IMMEDIATELY AND AVOID DISRUPTION IN TRASH
12
COLLECTION SERVICE TO OUR CITIZENS.
13
AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF A SUM NOT TO
14
EXCEED $1,290.00 FOR THIS REPAIR; CHARGING THE
15
DISBURSEMENT TO ACCOUNT NO. 1760 -4680:
16
"OUTSIDE SERVICES."
17
18 WHEREAS, trash crane no. 21 -32A is in need of repair,
19 such as install a new main hydraulic cylinder; and
20
21 WHEREAS, the results of the administration's inquiry have
22 been that American Truck Crane Inc., would do the repair right away
23 and avoid disruption in trash collection service.
24
25 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
26 COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
27
28
Section 1. That the
Public
Works Department, and hereby
29
is, authorized to disburse the
sum of
$1,290.00 to American Truck
30
Crane Inc., for the repairs of
trash
crane no. 21 -32A.
31
32 Section 2. That the disbursement be charged to account
33 number 1760 -4680: "Outside Services."
34
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
7
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of November, 1994.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
APPROVED:
MAYOR
r
To:
From:
Date:
City of South M3.ami
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Mayor and City mmission
William /F, Hampton,
City Manager
October 27, 1994
Subject: Agenda Item # 8
Comm. Mtg. 11/01/94
Agreement for Federal assistance, US State Dept.
BACKGROUND:
The City of South Miami recognizes the need for additional and
expanded resources in cooperation with the Department of State
during early December due to the Summit of the Americas being held
in greater Metropolitan Dade County. The City further recognizes
that under a federal assistance award granted by the Department of
State and in conjunction with rules promulgated by that Department,
certain expenses incurred may be eligible for reimbursement,
subject to State Department guidelines. Those reimbursements can
only be obtained if a Cooperative Agreement has been executed
between the Department of State and the City of South Miami. This
agreement involves off duty personnel only.
RECOM14ENDATION
1. Advantage to City: The execution of this agreement allows for
reimbursement to the City for certain expenses covered under United
States Department of State guidelines. These reimbursements shall
not be available to the City unless this agreement is executed.
2. Disadvantage to City: None
3. The City Manager recommends approval of this agreement.
4. This agreement has no impact on the city budget:
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
ENTER INTO A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND THE SOUTH MIAMI POLICE DEPARTMENT
FOR EXTRAORDINARY PROTECTIVE SERVICES.
WHEREAS, Metropolitan Dade County will play host to the Summit
of the Americas in December, 1994; and
WHEREAS, upon specific request by a designated official of the
Departtment of State, the South Miami Police Department shall
provide (if sufficient resources are available) security services
for visiting foreign government officials; and
WHEREAS, the Department of State shall reimburse the South
Miami Police Department at an agreed upon schedule;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The City Manager is authorized to enter into the
cooperative agreement with the United States Department of State,
which is annexed to this resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1994.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
P,
APPROVED:
CITY CLERK
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE
AND
SOUTH MIAMI POLICE DEPARTMENT
The Department of State, Bureau of Diplomatic Security
(hereinafter referred to as the "Bureau "), and the South Miami
Police Department (hereinafter referred to as "South Miami
P.D. ") hereby enter into a Cooperative Agreement.
The South Miami P.D. shall assist the Bureau in accordance with
the terms and conditions set forth herein:
I. BASIC AGREEMENT
A. Purpose of the Cooperative Aareemen
The services performed by the South Miami P.D. under this
agreement shall be to provide extraordinary protective services
for foreign missions and foreign government officials located
within its jurisdiction. Upon specific request by a designated
official of the Bureau, the South Miami P.D. shall provide (if
sufficient resources are available) security services for
visiting foreign government officials in the form of fixed post
coverage, roving patrols at places of temporary domicile, and
motorcade support.
B. Period of Agreement
This Cooperative Agreement becomes effective when dated and
signed by authorized officials of the South Miami P.D. and the
Bureau. All services required will be requested in a Tasking
Order issued by the Grant Officer's Representative(GOR) of the
Program Office. Each
period not to exceed
(90) days the Tasking
approval of the GOR.
C. Funding
-2-
Tasking Order shall be in effect for a
ninety (90) days. At the end of ninety
Order may be renewed upon review and
The Bureau shall reimburse the South Miami P.D. at the agreed
upon schedule of wages /rates attached as an exhibit to this
Agreement. The schedule of rates /wages shall include personnel
rates, equipment rates, supply rates and any other charges
related to extraordinary protection as approved by the Grants
Officer. The South Miami P.D.'s negotiated, published rates
and changes, resulting from renegotiation or projected
escalation, shall be acceptable without modification to this
Agreement.
All resources to be utilized will be described in a written
Tasking Order format. The skills, labor -hours and estimated
costs shall be agreed to by both parties prior to undertaking
any task assignment or obligating funds therefore. All
expenditures made with funds provided under this agreement
shall be for costs incurred during the validity period of the
Tasking Order. These funds shall be paid and accounted for as
provided in Sections III and IV below.
II. OPERATIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
A. South Miami Police Department
In carrying out the purpose of this agreement, the South Miami
P.D., under the general direction of the Bureau, shall assist
the Bureau by providing extraordinary protective services,
personnel, and /or equipment and /or supplies for foreign
missions, consulates, and /or foreign officials.
"Extraordinary protective service" means protective services
provided or authorized in cases determined under the guidelines
of 22 CFR 2a to constitute an extraordinary protective need.
B. Bureau of Diplomatic Security
The Bureau intends to have substantial involvement in the
review and approval of all aspects of the work to be carried
out as a result of this agreement. The Bureau:
1. Will define the requirement for extraordinary protective
need. "Extraordinary protective need" means the existence
-3-
of a threat of violence, or other circumstance, as
determined by the Bureau, which requires extraordinary
security measures which significantly exceed those which
law enforcement authorities can reasonably be expected to
take.
2. Through its designated representative in the Bureau's
Miami Field Office, and as approved by the GOR, shall
issue Tasking Orders and maintain constant liaison with
the South Miami P.D. during the need for extraordinary
protective services.
3. Will approve and activate these protective services, and
in coordination with the South Miami P.D., determine the
level of protection to be provided and specific
requirements for personnel, equipment, and /or supplies.
4. Monitor the threat and the support activities within the
scope of the above objectives and redirect the objectives
as necessary.
5. Adjust these support services based on the threat level
and /or other extenuating circumstances, and may terminate
the agreement only as provided herein. The Bureau may
take action for noncompliance or terminate the agreement
for convenience as provided in 22 CFR 135.43 -33.
III. EXPENDITURES AND PAYMENTS
A. Expenditures
1. The funds obligated under this agreement shall be used for
the purposes described in paragraphs I and II (A) above.
Charges shall be in accordance with the schedule of wages
and equipment fees attached, as an exhibit, to this
Cooperative Agreement.
2. In applying and accounting for funds made available
pursuant to this agreement, including establishing
allowable costs, the South Miami P.D. shall adhere to the
applicable provisions of OMB Circular A -87, "Cost
Principles for State and Local Governments."
3. No adjustment to the agreed to rates shall be made without
the prior approval of the Bureau Grants Officer. There
shall be no reimbursement for expenses incurred before or
after the period of agreement as described in paragraph
I(B).
-4-
4. The Grants Officer and GOR must be notified at least
thirty (30) days in advance of any changes to the
established hourly wage schedule for South Miami P.D. law
enforcement personnel.
Reimbursement for approved expenses shall be made by U.S.
Treasury check. The South Miami P.D. shall furnish the Bureau
with a mailing address and federal tax I.D. number for the
receipt of payment as specified in this Agreement. Upon
completion of the requested services or each calendar quarter,
but no more than thirty (30) days after the Tasking Order,
invoices should be submitted to the GOR, through the Miami
Field Office Representative. The GOR will certify receipt of
services and forward the invoices through appropriate channels
for payment.
IV. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
A. General
All reports required herein shall be submitted in original and
one copy as follows: original to the Grants Officer; one copy
to the GOR.
B. Financial R
Reports reflecting expenditures of the South Miami P.D. shall
be completed in accordance with the form "Financial Status
Report" SF -269 as identified in the Code of Federal
Regulations, Title 22, Part 135. The form shall be prepared
and submitted on a quarterly basis.
C. Final Performance Report
A final report shall be submitted within 30 days after the
protective services are terminated under the Tasking Order.
This report should summarize the protective service activities,
and site areas of security concerns or recommendations for
improvements in future operations.
D. Financial Records: Inspection
The South Miami P.D. shall maintain financial records which are
supported by documentation in accordance with the provisions of
22 CFR 135.20. Such records shall be subject to audit by the
Bureau, or as directed by the Bureau. All financial records
-5-
required to be kept under this agreement shall be maintained
for inspection for at least three years after the date of
submission of the final financial statement of expenditures.
V. NONDISCRIMINATION IN FEDERALLY FUNDED PROGRAMS
The South Miami P.D.'s performance under this agreement shall
be in compliance with the requirements of Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000(d).
VI. STANDARD CERTIFICATIONS
The following certifications are incorporated herein as part of
this Agreement:
• Certification Regarding Drug -Free Workplace Requirements
• Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Proposed
Debarment, and Other Responsibilitiy Matters
• Certification Regarding Lobbying
VII. AMENDMENTS
This Cooperative Agreement may be modified at any time by a
written amendment. Amendments which reflect the rights and
obligations of either party shall be executed by the Grants
Officer and the South Miami P.D. Administrative amendments may
be issued unilaterally by the Grants Officer.
In the event the South Miami P.D. effects any change to this
agreement at the direction of any person other than the Grants
Officer, the changes will be considered to have been made
without authority and no payments will be made to cover any
increase in cost resulting from work or services performed.
VIII. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Entire Agreement
This agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties
hereto concerning this funding arrangement. It replaces and
renders void any other agreement or understanding, whether
written or oral, existing between the parties concerning any
matter addressed herein.
This agreement will be administered under the provisions of
22 CFR 135: Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and
Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. This
!!m
provision is the controlling reference for the agreement of the
parties hereto. This agreement shall commence upon execution
by both the Bureau and the South Miami P.D., and shall remain
in effect unless amended by mutual consent or terminated.
Notification of the intention of either party to terminate the
agreement will be by written notice to the other party at least
120 days in advance of the proposed date of termination.
B. Resolution of Disputes
In the event of a dispute arising under or pertaining to any
provision of the agreement or the performance thereof, the
South Miami P.D. shall submit a claim in writing to the Grants
Officer. The Grants Officer shall issue a written decision on
the claim within 30 days of receipt, unless the time for such
decision is extended by mutual agreement of the parties. If
the South Miami P.D. is dissatisfied with the Grants Officer's
resolution of the claim, or any part thereof, the Grants
Officer's decision may be appealed to the Assistant Secretary
for Diplomatic Security, within 30 days of receipt. The
Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security, after obtaining
written or oral statements and documentary or other evidence
for the South Miami P.D. and Grants Officer as deemed
appropriate, will resolve the matter with a written
determination that will constitute the final administrative
action on the claim. The final administrative action by the
Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security is not intended to
restrict the South Miami P.D. from pursuing further
adjudication through the appropriate appeals process.
C. Department of State Contacts
1. For communications with the Bureau on overall policy
guidance and program direction, program concerns, daily
issues, and matters requiring the approval of the GOR as
specified in this agreement:
Mr. Theodore Ford (GOR)
3507 International Drive
Room 317
Washington, D.C. 20008
(202) 895 -3607
2. For Tasking Order specifics and guidance on all Bureau
requests for extraordinary protective services:
Miami Field Office
Room 404, Federal Building
51 SW First Avenue
Miami, FL 33130
(305) 536 -5781
-7-
3. For communications with the Bureau on all financial and
other matters, subject to Paragraphs III - VIII above:
Ms. Donna R. Taylor
Grants Officer
DS /ASD /CAP
P.O. Box 3590
Washington, D.C. 20007 -0090
(202) 663 -0011
City of South Miami
Police Department
INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor an& C' fission
FROM: �lliam F.,/ ampton
City Manager
DATE: October 27, 1994
SUBJECT: Agenda Item # 9
Comm. Meeting 11/1/94
Police Mutual Aid Agreements with City of Miami;
City of Homestead; Monroe County Sheriff Dept.;
Metro -Dade Police Department
BACKGROUND:
The City of South Miami recognizes the need for additional and
expanded resources by entering into Mutual Aid Agreements with
Police Departments both within Dade County and• surrounding
counties. The City of South Miami Police Department has shared
Mutual Aid with these agencies. These are to renew the Mutual Aid
Agreements and bring into Florida State Statutes compliance current
Mutual Aid Agreements renewable each five years.
The City of South Miami has shared expertise with these police
agencies, specifically as it deals with vice and narcotics
investigations.
These Mutual Aid Agreements enhance the overall police mission of
the Department.
The proposed Mutual Aid Agreements are in keeping with Florida
State Statutes and endorsed by the Florida Department of Law
Enforcement and coordinated through that Agency.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Advantage to City: The procurement of Mutual Aid Agreements
enhances and expands the resources available to the City of
South Miami Police Department. These agreements have proven
successful and have been of significant importance in our over-
all police mission.
9 2. Disadvantage to City: None
-a-
3. The City Manager recommends approval of these Mutual Aid
Agreements.
WFH /esw
Attachment
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI TO RENEW THE MUTUAL
AID AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI AND THE
CITIES OF MIAMI AND HOMESTEAD AND WITH METROPOLITAN DADE
AND MONROE COUNTIES.
WHEREAS, because of the existing and continuing possibility of
the occurrence of natural and man -made conditions which may be
beyond the control of the services of the City of South Miami
Police Department or a participating law enforcement agencies; and
WHEREAS, the City of South Miami Police Department and the
participating law enforcement agencies are responsible for the
public safety of their citizens by providing adequate levels of
police services to address any foreseeable routine or emergency
situation; and
WHEREAS, the City of South Miami and the participating law
enforcement agencies have the authority under Chapter 23, Florida
Statutes, and Florida Mutual Aid Act, to enter into a mutual aid
agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The City Manager is authorized to renew the Mutual
Aid Agreements between the City of South Miami and the Cities of
Homestead and Miami and Metropolitan Dade and Monroe Counties,
which is annexed to this resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1994.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK ROSEMARY WASCURA
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY EARL G. GALLOP
APPROVED:
MAYOR NEIL CARVER
4
JOINT DECLARATION OF THE CHIE F
SOUTH MIAMI POLICE DEPARTMENT
CHIEF OF THE CITY OF
POLICE DEPARTMENT PURSUANT TO
AID AGREEMENT.
OF THE
AND THE
MUTUAL
k police officer of either of the participating law enforcement
agencies shall be considered to be operating under the provisions
of the mutual aid agreement when:
participating in law enforcement activities that are
preplanned and approved by each respective agency head, or
appropriately dispatched in response to a request for
assistance from the other law enforcement-agency.
In compliance with and under the. authority of the Mutual Aid
Agreement heretofore entered into by the City of South Miami and
it is hereby declared that the following
list comprises the circumstances and conditions under which mutual
aid may be requested and rendered regarding police operations
pursuant to the agreement. Said list may be amended or supplemented
from time to time as needs dictate by subsequent declarations.
1. Joint multijurisdictional criminal investigations.
2. Civil affray or disobedience, disturbances, riots, large
protest demonstrations, controversial trials, political
conventions, labor disputes, and strikes.
3. Any natural disaster.
4. Incidents which require rescue operations and crowd and
traffic control measures including, but not limited to,
large -scale evacuations, aircraft and shipping disasters,
fires, explosions, gas line leaks, radiological incidents,
train wrecks and derailments, chemical or hazardous waste
spills, and electrical power failures.
5. Terrorist activities including, but not limited to, acts
of sabotage.
6. Escapes from or disturbances within detention facilities.
7. Hostage and barricaded subject situations, and aircraft
piracy.
8. Control of major crime scenes, area searches, perimeter
control, back -ups to emergency and in- progress calls,
pursuits, and missing person calls.
9. Enemy attack.
e
it
-2-
10. Transportation of evidence requiring security.
11. Major events; e.g., sporting events, concerts, parades,
fairs, festivals, and conventions.
12. Security and escort duties for dignitaries.
13. Emergency situations in which one agency cannot perform
its functional objective.
14. Incidents requiring utilization of specialized units;
e.g., underwater recovery, aircraft, canine, motorcycle,
bomb, crime scene, marine patrol, and police information.
15. Joint training in areas of mutual need.
Chief
South Miami Police Dept.
ATTEST
City Clerk
Date: Date:—
City Clerk
.m` CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
® INTER- OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor & City Co
i
From: 4WHam ptbfi
City Manager
L
Date: October 11, 1994
10118/94 Commission Agenda
Re: Item #10 Dry Cleaning Facilities
to be Permitted in the GR District
The City of South Miami currently permits Dry Cleaning Substations (no processing) in the NR
Neighborhood Retail, SR Specialty Retail and I Intensive zoning districts. In addition, Dry
Cleaning Substations are permitted by Special Use in the LO Low - Intensity Office and MO
Medium - Intensity Office zoning districts. Dry Cleaning Plants are permitted by Special Use in
the SR Specialty Retail zoning district and are permitted in the I Intensive district.
Dry Cleaning facilities are not included as a permitted use in the GR General Retail zoning
district. The proposed ordinance permits Dry Cleaning Substations (no processing) and permits
by Special Use Dry Cleaning Plants in the GR General Retail district. Dry Cleaning facilities
would thus be permitted in the GR General Retail zoning district in the same manner that these
facilities are permitted in the SR Specialty Retail district. Two Dry Cleaning Plants already exist
in the GR General Retail district. These were permitted under the previous Zoning Code as
Special Uses in the C -3 Arterial Commercial district, and are presently nonconforming uses.
Furthermore, the regulations provided under the Special Use conditions in Section 20- 3.4(B)(7)
require a 100 foot setback for structures from adjacent residential districts. The proposed
ordinance eliminates this restriction and provides for more variety in the kind of equipment
permitted (instead of the previous exclusive provision for a specific name - brand) which again
furthers the City's goal of encouraging economic growth and redevelopment.
The recommended modifications to the ordinance address acoustical and visual buffering
concerns raised during the previous City Commission review, and if approved give the City
Commission clear authority to require adequate buffering of any dry cleaning plant
applications for Special Use Permit throughout the entirety of the SR and GR zoning
districts throughout the City.
1. AV=val , subject to the condition that SECTION 2 of the Ordinance be modified to read
as follows:
(7) DRY CLEANING PLANT
(a) Only nonflammable solvents in self - contained dry cleaning units shall be used.
(b) A decorative wall of masonry, reinforced concrete, or precast concrete, six feet in
height shall be erected along all interior property lines, including the rear property
line, which abut residential districts (RS, RT, RM, and RO). This requirement
may be waived or modified by the City Commission if adequate acoustical and
visual buffering are provided.
(c) Landscaping in addition to that which is required under Section 20-4.5
LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS may be required by the City Commission.
2. Advantage to City: Provides for a more internally consistent Land Development Code,
increases flexibility for the business community, and encourages entrepreneurship.
3. DisadvantaeCs to City None.
4. This Ordinance is sponsored by Commissioner Conn. gbam.
5. This Ordinance amends Sections 20- 3.3(D), 20- 3.4(B)(7)(a) and 20- 3.4(B)(7)(b) of the
Land Development Code.
6. The Planning Board voted 6:0 to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance. The
Planning Board also recommended that provisions be made to require a six-foot high solid
masonry wall and an Areca palm (Chrysalidocarpus lutescens) hedge as a buffer. The
Areca palms must be at least 5 feet in height upon planting, must be allowed to grow to
their foil, natural height (40 feet), and must be spaced tightly enough to create a solid
barrier. Alternate species may be suggested or recommended by the ERPB. This
measure would only be required along property lines which are adjacent to residential
zoning districts (RS, RT, RM, and RO).
1
ORDINANCE NO.
2
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA,
3
AMENDING SECTION 20 -3.3 (D) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
4
TO PERMIT DRY CLEANING PLANTS IN THE GR GENERAL RETAIL
5
ZONING DISTRICT; AMENDING SECTION 20 -3.4 (B)(7)(a) OF THE
6
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO REMOVE THE DISTANCE
7
REQUIREMENT; AMENDING SECTION 20 -3.4 (B)(7)(b) OF THE LAND
8
DEVELOPMENT CODE TO INCLUDE ALL MANNER OF SELF -
9
CONTAINED DRY CLEANING UNITS; PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES
10
IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND, PROVIDING
11
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
12 WHEREAS, the City of South Miami adopted a Comprehensive Plan on January 18,
13 1989, which included the following language concerning the General Retail (Two -Story) Land
14 Use designation:
15 The general retail use category is intended to permit a broad range of retail
16 uses. However, automobile service stations, gas stations, repair
17 establishments, fast-food restaurants and similar uses that are strongly oriented
18 toward the motoring public should not be permitted or should be permitted only
19 with special use approval and only in limited numbers;
20 WHEREAS, the City of South Miami adopted a Land Development Code on October
21 25, 1989, which included the following District Purpose Statement for the GR General Retail
22 Zoning District in Section 20 -3.I (B)(14):
23 The purpose of this district is to delineate areas which permit a broad range of
24 retail uses. Uses that are strongly oriented toward the motoring public are
25 discouraged in this district. This district is appropriate in areas designated
26 General Retail on the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan;
27 WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to encourage a broad range of retail uses,
28 including retail service uses, such as Dry Cleaning, in the GR General Retail zoning district;
29 WHEREAS, the Land Development Code provides for Special Use conditions in the
30 SR Specialty Retail zoning district for Dry Cleaning Plants that include a requirement for a
31 one hundred (100) foot setback for structures from adjacent residential zoning districts;
32 WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to eliminate selected restrictions in the Land
33 Development Code;
Ordinance Page # 9
/0
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
/49
WHEREAS, the Land Development Code provides for Special Use conditions for Dry
Cleaning Plants that are limited to the use of specific name -brand operating systems; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to encourage all kinds of systems and
innovations, especially where environmental safety and efficiency are improved;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1. That Section 20 -3.3 (D) of the Land Development Code be, and is hereby,
amended to include the following changes:
SEC77ON 20-3.3 (D) ZONING DISTRICT
Dry Cleaning Substation (no processing) ISISIPIPIPIPI 16 it
Dry Cleaning Plant I, S P I 1 7`11
S CTION 2. That Section 20-3.4 (11)(7) of the Land Development Code be, and is hereby,
amended to read as follows:
(7) DRY CLEANING PLANT
(b) Only nonflammable solvents in self- contained dry cleaning units e€4he
Pmsperity -eF DietFieh types failu shall be used.
SECTION 3. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, this holding shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
Ordinance Page #
R
L
M
N
S
G
I
H
P
P
C
P
USE TYPE
0
0
0
R
R
R
I
0
A
N
R
D
K
Dry Cleaning Substation (no processing) ISISIPIPIPIPI 16 it
Dry Cleaning Plant I, S P I 1 7`11
S CTION 2. That Section 20-3.4 (11)(7) of the Land Development Code be, and is hereby,
amended to read as follows:
(7) DRY CLEANING PLANT
(b) Only nonflammable solvents in self- contained dry cleaning units e€4he
Pmsperity -eF DietFieh types failu shall be used.
SECTION 3. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, this holding shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
Ordinance Page #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
/a
SECTION 4. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this
ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION 5. This ordinance shall take effect immediately at the time of its passage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 18th DAY OF OCTOBER, 1994.
ATTEST:
xosemary j. w ascura
City Clerk
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Earl G. Gallop
City Attorney
Neil Carver
Mayor
c:lreponsldryciean. ord
Ordinance Page # c
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
® INTER- OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: William F. Hampton
City Manager
From: ean Mimms, AICP
Director of Building, Zoning &
Community Development Dept
Date: October 11, 1994
Re: PB- 94 -012: Dry Cleaning Facilities
to be Permitted in the GR District
On August 30, 1994, the Planning Board voted 6:0 to recommend approval of the proposed
ordinance to permit dry cleaning facilities in the GR General Retail zoning district. The Planning
Board also recommended that provisions be made to require a six -foot high solid masonry wall
and an Areca palm (Chrysalidocarpus lutescens) hedge as a buffer. The Areca palms must be
at least 5 feet in height upon planting, must be allowed to grow to their full, natural height (40
feet), and must be spaced tightly enough to create a solid barrier. Alternate species may be
suggested or recommended by the ERPB.
This measure would only be required along property lines which are adjacent to residential
zoning districts; this measure also assumes that all structures do meet all other required setbacks.
Staff reported to the Planning Board that the exact location and the extent (along the entire
property line or some portion of the property line) of the Areca palm hedge and six foot high
solid masonry wall (if approved as a Special Use condition for the use) would be determined as
a part of the overall site plan review that is required under the Special Use Permit procedures.
At the second reading of this Ordinance before the City Commission on September 9, 1994,
following discussion regarding buffering residential areas from dry cleaning plants, the
Commission tabled the ordinance. BZCD subsequently received (on September 19, 1994) from
park and recreation consultant Tom Alexander written suggestions for such buffering. Mr.
Alexander suggested that an applicant ( "developer") for a dry cleaning plant submit a site plan,
with or without a wall, with landscaping as follows:
with a wall (8" thick wall) - live oak or black olives on side of wall facing
residential area; clusters of sabal palms on side of wall facing dry cleaning plant.
no wall - groupings of trees interspersed with plantings of silver buttonwood,
cocoplum, surinam cherry, and azaleas.
These are useful suggestions which will be considered by departmental staff whenever a site plan
for a dry cleaning plant is submitted to the City in any zoning district a, SR, and GR (proposed
by this Ordinance) }. Each site plan will be thoroughly reviewed on its merits and in full
consideration of any adjoining residential districts. Applications requiring Special Use Permits
will be subject to the requirements recommended below, developed recently by staff, which give
full latitude to the City Commission to implement appropriate buffers (to address visual and
acoustical impacts) between specifically proposed dry cleaning plants and abutting residential
districts. The Ordinance before the Commission only addresses the subject of modifying the
Code in order to allow Dry Cleaning Plants (and Dry Cleaning Substations (no processing),
which will not require a Special Use Permit) in the GR district. The Ordinance will apply
throughout all GR districts and is not site specific. There is no site plan for a dry cleaning plant
before the City Commission at this time, as would be required for a Special Use Permit.
The following language is recommended with respect to Section 20 -3.4 SPECIAL USE
CONDITIONS (B) Special Requirements
(7) DRY CLEANING PLANT
(a) Only nonflammable solvents in self - contained dry cleaning units shall be used.
(b) A decorative wall of masonry, reinforced concrete, or precast concrete, six feet in
height shall be erected along all interior property lines, including the rear property
line, which abut residential districts (RS, RT, RM, and RO). This requirement
may be waived or modified by the City Commission if adequate acoustical and
visual buffering is otherwise provided.
(c) Landscaping in addition to that which is required under Section 20-4.5
LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS may be required by the City Commission
/Q
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: Dean Mimms, AICP Date: August 10, 1994
Director of Building, Zoning &
Community Development Dept
From: Bill Mackey Re: Item #2: PB -94 -012
Planner Dry Cleaners Ord
REQUEST:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, AMENDING
SECTION 20 -3.3 (0) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO PERMIT DRY
CLEANING PLANTS IN THE GR GENERAL RETAIL ZONING DISTRICT;
AMENDING SECTION 20-3.4 ( B)(7)(a ) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO
REMOVE THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT; AMENDING SECTION 20 -3.4
( B)( 7 )(b ) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO INCLUDE ALL MANNER OF
SELF - CONTAINED DRY CLEANING UNITS; PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND, PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
The City Commission has requested review of the zoning districts
where dry cleaning facilities are allowed. Dry cleaning plants
are currently permitted in the I Intensive district and permitted
via special use approval in the SR Specialty Retail'-di.strict.
Dry cleaning substations (no processing) are permitted in the I,
SR and NR Neighborhood Retail districts and permitted via special
use approval in the LO Low - intensity Office and the MO Medium -
intensity Office districts. Staff has proposed an ordinance
permitting dry cleaning plants in the GR district via special use
approval and permitting dry cleaning substations (without any
special use approval) in the GR General Retail zoning district.
The Land Development Code under 20-3.4 ( B)(7)(a ) requires that
any structure containing a dry cleaning facility must be setback
100 feet from any adjacent residential zoning district. Staff
has proposed removal of this requirement for dry cleaning plants.
The previous zoning code (1971) did permit dry cleaning plants in
both the C -3 (GR) and C -2 (SR) zoning districts via special use
permit approval; however, only the C -2 (SR) district required the
100 foot setback from residential districts.
The current Land Development Code (1989) also permitted dry
cleaning plants in both the GR and SR zoning districts via
special use approval upon adoption in 1989; however, the Code was
amended on August 21, 1990, per Ordinance # 11 -90 -1451, deleting
a variety of uses in the GR zoning district. The uses which were
deleted were those considered as not strictly retail in nature.
/0
Under :he previous zoning ..ode :1?71 :he X00 foot setback from
resid �,._ial districts only appi:_-d to dry cleaning plants in the
C -2 (SR) zoning district. Dry cleaning plants were permitted in
the C ( GR) zoning Disc; ;.. via special use approval with a
required setback of 2_0 feet from residential districts (which
applied to any structure in C regardless of the use).
Under the 1971 zoning code, a 100 foot setback from residential
districts was also required for religious structures, bowling
alleys and skating rinks via the special use permit approval
process. Fraternal organizations and private clubs were required
a 50 foot setback from "more restrictive residential" districts.
Under the Land Development Code (1989) the 100 foot setback
requirement was expanded to include used merchandise stores,
fraternal organizations, private clubs, automobile, boat and
recreation dealerships, and autowash operations, as well as
religious structures, bowling alleys, skating rinks, and dry
cleaning plants, all of which require special use approval.
This was apparently viewed as a protection for residential uses.
Staff has reviewed the existing conditions at two dry cleaning
plants. A report has been prepared by our Planning Intern
concerning this research and the report is attached.
RECOMMENDATION.:
That the -fanning Board vote to recommend approval of the
ordinance to the City Commission . -and to suggest at least two
alternatives for the visual and acoustical screening of future:;
dry cleaning plants when such facilities will be adjacent to a
residential.district.
COMPREHENSIVE _PLAN:
The proposed ordinance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
Consideration has been given to the nature of the proposed use in
regards to the Comprehensive Plan language which describes the
General Retail land use designation which reads as follows:
General Retail (Two - Story)
The general retail land use category is intended to
permit a broad range of retail uses. However,
automobile service stations, gas stations, repair
establishments, fast -food restaurants and similar uses
that are strongly oriented toward the motoring public
should not be permitted or should be permitted only
with special use approval and only in limited numbers.
Dry cleaning plants are proposed ; ;o be permitted via special use
approval; this is consistent with the language above.
APPLICABI.E REGULATIONS: Section 20-3.3(D), 20 -3 .4(B)( 7)( a ) and
20 -3 .4(B)(7 )(b) , Land Development Code.
�Q
CITY CDF SOUTH M=2�.IM2
INTER- OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: Bill Mackey Date: August 8, 1994
Planner
From: Brian Soltz 1� Re: Dry Cleaning
Planning Intern Facilities
This memorandum is in consideration of the proposed dry cleaners
ordinance which is scheduled for the Planning Board meeting of
August 9, 1994 (Item 2, PB -94 -012).
Modern dry cleaning facilities are not as problematic as older
establishments. However, dry cleaning plants, both old and new,
cannot be absolutely free of difficulties which may be largely
inherent in the dry cleaning industry itself.
After comparing two dry cleaners, I have come to a conclusion that
the major problems with dry cleaning plants are noise and a slight
odor. This comparison study concerns Dry Cleaners USA on US 1 and
27 Avenue, which is very modern and recently opened. The other dry
cleaners involved is Mr. Joseph's Dry Cleaners, an older and more
worn facility, located on Bird Road and 64 Avenue.
The majority of noise problems comes from two sources: operating
boilers /compressors and leaving rear doors open. The
boiler /compressor problem is a uniform problem of all dry cleaners.
in order for dry cleaning facilities to operate their pressing
machines, they must use a 10 -15 horsepower boiler and a five (5)
horsepower compressor. These machines combine to create a
"moderate" level of noise heard about 100 feet away at ground
level.
The other source of noise is attributed to the practice of leaving
the establishment's rear door open. Leaving the doors open
prevents a buildup of noxious fumes inside the facility. This
practice results in a "small" amount of noise and a slight odor
(ascribed to several sources, including bleach, starch, chlorine,
etc.) within approximately 25 feet of the facility. This problem
was observed at both locations.
As the dry cleaning plant study showed, the 100 -foot setback
requirement from residential districts is desirable and necessary.
To compensate for a reduced 100 -foot setback, an applicant might
erect an 8 -foot wall and plant 10 -foot (or larger) trees every 20
feet; a building should also have a parapet roof. These
amendments would provide adequate visual and acoustical screening.
!L"J
j0
REAL ESTATE GROUP. INC.
BROKERAGE AND MANAGEMENT
BROKER ACE SERVICES
LICENSL'D REAL ESTATE BROKER
July 29, 1994
Mr. Dean L. Mimms
Director of Building and Zoning
City of South Miami
6130 Sunset Drive
South Miami, Florida 33143
RE: Dry Cleaners in the GR Zoning District
Dear Mr. Mimms;
m�B
COMMERCIAL
Local Perapecare Worldwide
FOUNDED IW6
It was a pleasure meeting with you and Mr. Mackey yesterday. I have spoken with the
representatives from One Hour Martuuzing Dry Cleaning concerning your questions.
This dry cleaner wants to lease approximately 2,250 square feet of a 6,000 square foot building
proposed to be built at 6228 S. Dixie Hwy, South Miami, Florida.
They will be using only one (1) self contained dry cleaning machine at this location.
Their usual business hours are Monday -Friday 7:00 am to 7:00 pm and Saturday 8:30 am to
5:30 am.
The dry cleaning machine will not be operated after usual business hours.
The dry cleaning machines do not put out any exhaust, either inside the business or to the
outside environment. They use a closed loop system were the clothes go in dry and come out
dry. All fumes are capture and contained inside the machine.
The machines do not make an inordinate amount of noise during operation. At the end of
operation for the day air pressure build up is released making a sound of "rushing/ escaping
pressurized air" which is the most noise it makes in a day.
r
Please give me a call if I can be of further assistance to you concerning this matter.
Sincerely,
CB COMMERCIAL
REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC.
Vincent Tumiin
Associate
(305) 381 -6466
`°^`^ LL AVENUE. Surm 1000. MIAMI. FLORIDA 33131.2900
B Z C Q.
AUG
-1
1994
B Z C Q.
/0
M X M U T E S
Planning Board
Tuesday, August 30'-h, 1994
City Commissioners' Chambers
7 :30 P.M.
P B— 9 4 — 0 1 2
Applicant: Mayor & City Commission
Request: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA,
AMENDING SECTION 20 -3.3 (D) OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE TO PERMIT DRY CLEANING PLANTS IN
THE "GR" GENERAL RETAIL ZONING DISTRICT; AMENDING
SECTION 20 -3.4 (B)(7)(a) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE TO REMOVE THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT; AMENDING
SECTION 20 -3.4 (B)(7)(b) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE TO INCLUDE ALL MANNER OF SELF - CONTAINED DRY
CLEANING UNITS; PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND,
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mr. Ribas read request. Mr. Eisenhart requested comments by
Staff. Staff recommended approval of the ordinance, to include
suggestions for two alternatives for visual and acoustical
screening.
Mr. Eisenhart opened public hearing.
Motion: Mr. Gutierrez moved to approve request as presented, to
included recommendations as presented by Staff. Mr. Basu
seconded motion.
No vote taken on first motion.
Second Motion: Upon further discussion, Mr. Gutierrez moved to
approve ordinance as proposed. Ms. Thorner seconded motion.
Vote:
Approved: 5 Opposed: 1
(Mr. Ribas)
Board offered recommendations. Ms. Thorner recommended that a
Eureka Palm hedge be placed in rear of property for screening
purposes.
Ms. Thorner moved the suggestion that the property owner erect a
six -foot wall and plant a five -foot hedge at the rear of the
property for screening purposes. Mr. Gutierrez seconded the
suggestion.
Vote: Approved: 6 Opposed: 0
ORDINANCES - FIRST READING
014 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA,
AMENDING SECTION 20 -3.3 (D) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO
PERMIT DRY CLEANING PLANTS IN THE "GR" GENERAL RETAIL ZONING
DISTRICT; AMENDING SECTION 20 -3.4 (B)(7)(1) OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE TO REMOVE THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT; AMENDING
SECTION 20 -3.4 (5)(7)(2) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO
INCLUDE ALL MANNER OF SELF - CONTAINED DRY CLEANING UNITS;
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Moved by Commissioner Cunningham, seconded by Vice -Mayor
Young, that this be considered the first reading of the ordinance
and it be placed on second reading and public hearing after
consideration by the Planning Board.
At the suggestion of the City Attorney, it was moved by
Commissioner Cunningham and seconded by Commissioner Cooper, to
amend the word "arbitrary" to "selected" in the 5th WHEREAS clause
on page 1 of the ordinance.
Motion passed 510: Mayor Carver, yen; Vice -Mayor Young, yea;
Commissioner Bass, yea; Commissioner Cooper, yeaj Commissioner
Cunningham, yea.
Commissioner Cunningham, sponsor, spoke to the ordinance
explaining that the ordinance seeks to enhance the opportunity for
businesses to come into South Miami. The proposed business is good
for the area, and it will increase the tax base. The owner of the
property and the business owner are dedicated to building a new
building and installing quality landscaping on the site'.
Commissioner Bass noted that there are other dry cleaning
establishments, on the North and of the City, which were built
prior to the 100' distance requirement. She would like to know the
reasoning behind establishing this distance requirement which
appears to have bean done after the dry cleaning businesses were
built.
Building & Zoning Director Mimms stated that he has not found
any tangible evidence as to why that might be. He has spoken with
DERM, Metro -Dade County Zoning Department, and Florida Department
of Environmental Protection and he was informed that they do not
involve themselves in distance criteria. Commissioner Bass
explained her concern is how the operation of the necessary
equipment would affect the neighbors, i.e. excessive noiss.
Mr. Mimms responded that he will speak with Mr. Tumlin, who is the
broker for the property on which the dry cleaning plant will be
Located, to obtain information in this regard.
Vice -Mayor Young stated that residents located just behind the
subject property have voiced their concern. Those residents have
been receptive to, and Mr. Tumlin as agreed to, a plan to plant 12
- 15 tress, no less than 1' in diameter and a minimum of 12 feet
high at the rear property line as a buffer. Building & Zoning
Director Mimms noted that if in diameter is sizable, and suggested
about 3 1/2 inches or 4" at breast height and maybe 13 feet high.
City Manager said that Administration will follow up and make
certain that the property is appropriately screened and shaded.
Mayor Carver said the proposed ordinance is to encourage
business in the general retail. in general, so that requirements
for landscaping as visual and sound buffers should be included in
the ordinance or in the spacial use requirements so it would
pertain to all dry cleaning establishments in the GR Zoning
District.
Motion on ordinance, first reading, passed 5/0: Mayor Carver,
yea; Vice -Mayor Young, yea; Commissioner Bass, yea; commissioner
Cooper, yea; Commissioner Cunningham, yea.
el7n7 eu tom" (Sy/ 0 rJ
ro
Removed from consideration at this time.
III ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, AMENDING
SECTION 20- 3.3(D) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO PERMIT DRY
CLEANING PLANTS IN THE "CR" GENERAL RETAIL ZONING DISTRICT;
AMENDING SECTION 20-3.40) (7) (a) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
TO REMOVE THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT; AMENDING SECTION 20-
3.4(8)(7)(b) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO INCLUDE ALL
MANNER OF SELF - CONTAINED DRY CLEANING UNITS; PROVIDING FOR
ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERARILITY, AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Moved by Commissioner Cunningham, seconded by Vice -Mayor
Young this be considered the second and final reading of the
ordinance and it be adopted and assigned the next number by the
City Clerk.
Mayor Carver doomed public hearing in session.
1) Ms. Karen 2ehler, Cambridge House Apartments, 6231 S. W. 78th
Street, voiced concern for the residents in that area that there
will be a lot of noise from patrons and from delivery trucks. She
noted that there is already a large amount of noise from Taco Roll
and Kenny Rogers Chicken.
2) Ms. Joyce Schachter, 6721 S. W. 68th Terrace, voiced concern
with contamination problems and fumes. She urged that before this
ordinance is adopted, there is consideration given to tha
environment.
3) Mr. Vincent Tumlin, realtor, 7362 S. W. 80th Street, said that
the property he has for sale is 6,000 square fast on Dixie Highway,
and the dry cleaning establishment that is proposed will take up
about 1/3 of the building. The system is "closed loop* and self -
contained. Hazardous material is captured and picked up by a
company which handles disposal of hazardous material and is bonded
in that capacity. The dry eleaninq establishment will also put up
sound barriers and cooperate with the surrounding property owners.
No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was deemed
closed.
City Planner Bill Mackay rand that the staff had recommended
approval; Planning Board had voted 610 for approval and also
included their recommendation for placing a masonry wall behind the
property as a barrier and screening the wall with a 51 high hedge
of Luraka Palms.
Discussion was held with regard to landscaping of a barrier
wall and on which side the plants should be placed. Staff noted
that the Land Development Coda is not specific on this issue. When
an applicant comes in with their site plan, as required by the
Coda, the landscaping can be addressed at that time.
Commissioner Cunningham voiced support of the ordinance and
stated that he has spoken with Mr. Tumlin and foals that Mr. Tumlin
has addressed the concerns that have been brought to his attention.
Commissioner Cunningham said that he would like to see the City
work cooperatively with others to bring business into the City.
T
C µ155eo�
.i
Vica -Mayor Young stated that he had concerns, originally, with
the proposal meeting DERM requirements, and Mr. Tumlin has
submitted the appropriate material about meeting requirements of
that agency. Noise is a factor, and he would like to sea a barrier
of higher than 51. However, he would first like the reaction of
Ms. Zahlar with regard to a masonry wall as they can reflect heat
to adjoining properties. Perhaps the plants can shade the wall and
the wall can be painted pale colors.
City Attorney noted that the ordinance addresses dry - cleaning
establishments in OR Districts City -wide.
Mayor Carver noted that there must be enough safeguards built
in to address potential noise and odor problems. DERM does have
new protective controls, but there has been approval of items in
the past, in residential areas, and ,then problems aroma later.
Commissioner Bass asked why the 100f distance requirement from
residential was removed. It must have served some purpose in the
past. This applicant is working very hard, but the ordinance will
apply to other applicants for other establishments.
Commissioner Cooper stated he felt the major concerns are odor
and environmental impact. He would like to see the City have a
clear definition of an acceptable noise level by *a quantitative
method and have this added to the Land Development Code.
Vice -Mayor Young spoke in favor of the ordinance, but would
like to dater the item until Staff has the opportunity to review
and made recommendations on commercial property which interlace
with residential.
Motion on ordinance failed 114: Vice -Mayor Young, yea; Mayor
Carver, nayl Commissioner Bass, nayl Commissioner Cooper, nayl
Commissioner Cunningham, nay.
Commissioner Cooper again noted the noise issue and suggested
contacting OSHA for noise impact information. City Attorney stated
that the City should establish a noise standard which would provide
for study by decibel to see what is excessive and to permit expert
testimony.
Moved by Vice -Mayor Young, seconded by Commissioner Cooper,
that the ordinance be reconsidered.
Motion to reconsider passed 4/1: Vice -Mayor Young, ya;a
Commissioner Bass, year Commissioner Cooper, yea; Commissioner
Cunningham, yea; Mayor Carver, nay.
Moved by Vice -Mayor Young, seconded by Commissioner Cooper,
/ this itsm be tabled.
!/ Motion to table passed 4/1: Vice -Mayor Young, yea;
Commissioner Bass, yea; Commissioner. Cooper, yea; Commissioner
Cunningham, yea; Mayor Carver, nay.
!d
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
INTER- OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor & City Commiss' n__...
' ?F.4�ppton From: -� am
City Manager
00 s
Date: October 11, 1994
11/01/94 Commission Agenda
Re: Item #/h Ordinance to Amena
Provisions for Off -Site Parking
The Land Development Code contains regulations which allow business owners to lease parking
spaces from other establishments, in order to provide for required parking; however, current
legislation requires a minimum twenty -year lease. This places a great burden on prospective
business operators, because most property owners are not willing to encumber their land for the
minimum required twenty years.
:_ • .
1. Advantage to City: Provides for increased flexibility for the business community.
2. Disadvantages to City: None.
3. This Ordinance is sponsored by the City Attorney.
4. This Ordinance amends § 20-4.4 of the Land Development Code.
5. The Planning Board voted for approval of each Section in the ordinance separately; the
Planning Board included recommended amendments which are presented below from the
BZCD Director's report.
That Section 1 (F) (2) (a) be amended to read as follows: "Off -site parking spaces shall be
permitted in RM, RO, LO, MO, NR, SR, GR, I, H, PR, and PI districts, with provision that if
off - street parking is adjacent to residential zoned properties, and/or RO zoned properties, special
use process would be applicable for approval."
That 600 be inserted at the appropriate location at Line 10 on Page 2 and that 1000 be inserted
at the appropriate location at Line 11 on Page 2, as recommended by the Planning Board and that
1500 be inserted at the appropriate location at Line 30 on Page # 3 as recommended by the
Planning Board.
That the first sentence contained in Section 20 -4.4 (G) at Line 29, 30 and 31 on Page # 2 be
amended to read as follows: "Two or more uses may be permitted to share the same required off -
street parking spaces in a common parking facility, according to the following table:"
That the figure in the third column (WEEKENDS; 6 AM thru 6 PM) at Line 15 on Page 3 for
"Theaters" from 50% to be 60 %.
That the language in Section 20-4.4 (I) be amended to read as follows: "Up to 50% of the
required parking for hotels, hospitals, offices, nightclubs, restaurants, and retail establishments
may be satisfied through the provision of valet parking spaces via special parking permit
approved by affirmative vote of the City Commission. The number of required parking spaces
that are not provided on the same property as the use approved for valet parking shall be
provided via the off -site parking provisions in Section 20-4.4 (F)(2), or the City Commission may
approve the use of on- street parking spaces to provide for a portion of or all of the required
parking spaces. In no case shall vehicle stacking or double parking be permitted to supply the
required parking spaces for the valet special parking permit."
N
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
A
® INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: William F. Hampton
City Manager
From: Dean Mim ms, AICP
Director of BZCD
Description of contents:
Date: October 26, 1994
Re: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Off -Site Parking Ordinance
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OFF -SITE PARKING ORDINANCE
Executive Summary
City Manager's Report for Second Reading
Proposed Off -Site Parking Ordinance
BZCD Director's Report
BZCD Staff Report
South Miami Code of Ordinances Excerpt
City of Coral Gables Zoning Code Excerpts
City Commission Minutes from First Reading
City Manager's Report from First Reading
City Attorney's Inter - Office Memorandum
City of Miami Beach Zoning Code Excerpts
City of Miami Zoning Code Excerpts
City of Coral Gables Zoning Code Excerpt
Planning Board Minutes Excerpts
Section 1: Off -site parking lot location and procedures
Section 2: Shared parking facilities for different uses
Section 3: Reduced parking required for uses related to Metrorail
Section 4: Valet parking established as an option for parking
Section 5: Special Parking Permit procedure established
H
No. of Paaes
3
2
5
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
3
2
1
5
-3
SUMMARY ANALYSIS
OFF -SITE PARKING ORDINANCE
Section 1. OFF -SITE PARKING LOTS (REVISES OLD REGULATIONS)
• Permits off -site parking lots to be located in the RO and RM
districts (currently allowed in commercial districts only)
• Increases the distance limitation for off -site parking lots from the
uses that are served by the parking lot
• Removes the 20 year lease requirement for off -site parking lots and
allows a "covenant" agreement to satisfy the City
• Gives the City Manager the power to revoke licenses if parking is
not provided (currently a Commission power)
Section 2: JOINT USE "SHARED" PARKING (REPLACES OLD REGULATIONS)
• Establishes the option for "shared" parking. Different uses are
permitted to share parking spaces when the different uses will
generate parking demands at different times.
• Decreases the parking for retail, restaurant and theater uses FOR
ALL TIMES (100% parking not required at any time); creates a
strong incentive for more of these specific uses.
• Permits property owners to pool parking and thus reduce the
required parking for existing buildings in the City; creates potential
for new or additional uses in existing buildings.
Requires City Commission review for approval.
Section L METRORAIL PARKING REDUCTION (REVISES OLD REGULATIONS)
• Increases the City's statutory distance from Metrorail that the City
considers acceptable to allow uses that are served by the Metrorail
to request a reduction in parking spaces.
Requires City Commission review for approval.
Sectian 4: VALET PARKING TO BE ALLOWED IN CITY (NEW REGULATIONS)
• Establishes the option of "valet parking" for specific uses.
• Gives the City Commission power to allow the use of parking
meters to provide for valet parking spaces (see the proposed staff
amendment in the City Manager's Report, second page).
Requires City Commission review for approval.
Section • SPECIAL PARKING PERMITS PROCEDURES (NEW REGULATIONS)
• Establishes procedures for the JOINT USE, METRORAIL and
VALET PARKING approvals by City Commission.
Follows the existing procedures for Special Use Permits.
1
ORDINANCE NO.
2
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
3
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, AMENDING § 20 -4.4 (F) OF THE
4
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO INCREASE DISTANCES FROM OFF -
5
SITE PARKING TO USES SERVED, TO PERMIT OFF -SITE PARKING IN
6
RM AND RO DISTRICTS, AND TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR
7
LEASE AGREEMENTS; REPLACING § 20 -4.4 (G) JOINT USE SPACES;
8
AMENDING § 20 -4.4 (H) TO INCREASE THE DISTANCE FROM
9
METRORAIL STATION TO USES SERVED; CREATING A NEW § 20 -4.4
10
(I) TO PROVIDE VALET PARKING FOR HOTELS, HOSPITALS,
11
OFFICES, RESTAURANTS AND NIGHTCLUBS; CREATING A NEW §
12
20-4.4 (J) TO PROVIDE PROCEDURES REGARDING THE APPROVAL
13
OF SHARED PARKING, VALET PARKING AND REDUCED PARKING
14
IN PROXIMITY TO METRORAIL STATION; AMENDING THE
15
NUMBERING OF SUBSEQUENT SUB - SECTIONS; AMENDING SECTION
16
20 -5.2 TO ADD A NEW SUBSECTION (14); PROVIDING FOR
17
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD CONCERNING
18
APPROPRIATE DISTANCE LIMITATIONS AND NIGHTCLUB AND
19
RESTAURANT SEATING THRESHOLD(S); PROVIDING FOR
20
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT;
21
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
22 WHEREAS, the City of South Miami adopted a Land Development Code on October
23 25, 1989, via Ordinance No. 19 -89 -1441, including provisions for off -site parking under §
24 20 -4.4, and more specifically, Location and Ownership of Spaces under § 20 -4.4 (F), Joint
25 Use Spaces under § 20 -4.4 (G), and MetroRail Usage Considerations under § 20 -4.4 (H);
26 and,
27 WHEREAS, upon review of these regulations, Administration finds that § 20-4.4 does
28 not adequately address location and ownership of spaces, joint use spaces, MetroRail usage
29 considerations, valet parking and special parking procedures;
30 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
31 COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Orr-am P or6aamic. PW / l
// 6
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
SECTTON 1. That Section 20 -4.4 (F)(2) be, and hereby is, amended as follows:
(F) Location and Ownership of Spaces
(1) All off -street parking spaces shall be located on the same lot with the structure or use
served, except as may be permitted below.
(2) Spaces Located Off -Site
(a) Off -site parking spaces shall not be permitted in RS-; -RT, RM, and RO, LO.
MO_ NR. SR, GR. I, H_ P$ and PI districts.
(b) e- therre- 6 ,afr- erea 44ie- mmmber- a€ s- p� -eodec y-oF
used - joindy -by- two- (-2)-or- •mere - uses -eF -e: ishment&, [R]equired off - street
parking spaces may be located and maintained up to X feet from a residential
or institutional use served and up to X fees t ee- huaditd*300) -€eet from an
non - institutional and non - residential use served a-tq�- to- - €eve- huudFe�3QA)
€ee -fte n F- nomesidefitial- afid- ins6tutioAel- we- serNed
(c) Off -site parking spaces shall be on land either held in common ownership with
the lot on which the principal use will exist under a unity of title insuring that
the required Ong will be provided_ or held -uRdef a. lease with a F i tieg
tef o €- kweety-E20)- }�esFS ' h4e lessee ys- dw- ewaer- e€-the
let eff -w el3-- e-pc -i =ip6 use ill exist. hi either- ease; as a condition of the
issuance of the building permit for the principal use, the owner of the off -site
parking shall record a covenant in form and substance satisfactory to the City
Attorney and City Commission providing record notice of the commitment of
that land to parking purposes for the principal use. If at any time such off -site
parking ceases to be under the same ownership or control as the principal use
or ceases to be used for parking for the principal use, Certificate of Use and
Occupancy for the principal use shall be subject to revocation by the City
Manager , after notice and hearing.
SECTION 2. That Section 20-4.4 (G) be, and hereby is, replaced in its entirety as follows:
• .• • rr• - rr. •• ••err �•• • r. r- n- •+ •+ •� �• •. ,.r� y•. • r .
r. • r+ r• elmins I MR, re .+
oHair PatWg OrAmow Pop f 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
WEEKDAYS WEEKENDS
USES
6 AM
thru
6 PM
6 PM
thru
6 AM
6 AM
thru
6 PM
6 PM
thru
12 AM
12 AM
thru
6 AM
OFFICE OR BANK
100%
5%
10%
5%
5%
RETAIL
60%
20%
60%
60%
5%
HOTEL
50%
60%
60%
100%
75%
RESTAURANT
50%
75%
75%
90%
10%
THEATER
10%
70%
50%
90%
10%
NIGHTCLUB
5%
50%
5%
100%
90%
APARTMENT OR TOWNHOUSE
10%
100%
75%
100%
100%
OTHER USES
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
SECTION 3. That Section 20-4.4 (H) be, and hereby is, amended as follows:
(H) MetroRail Usage Considerations via Special Parking Permit
30 When all or a portion of a proposed structure or use is to be located within X feet five
31 l Fed- (SWeet of the South Miami MetroRail Station, as measured from property line to
32 property line, four (4) affirmative votes of the City Commission may reduce the number of
33 required off - street parking spaces for such use by up to fifty (50) percent, depending upon the
34 nature and type of use and its potential user relationship to rapid transit facilities, LaEm ided
35 for-under- 20 .4___()1.
OK•ie Posidag Oman= PM s
1 SECTION 4, That Section 20 -4.4 (I) be, and hereby is, created as follows:
2 kil valet Parking via Special Parking Permit
3 Reguired_parkin_g for hotels. hospitals. offices. and nightclubs or restaurants fin excess of
4 seat may be satisfied through the provision of valet parking spaces Multi- family residential
5 b1jildings may provide up to but not more than one -half of the required spaces as valet
6 parking spaces-
7 SECTION 5. That Section 20-4.4 (J) be, and hereby is, created as follows:
TO 77M. NOWMI ' '' M
9 Special Parking Permits may be approved, disapproved or approved with conditions by the
10 affirmative vote of four members of the City Commission. Special Parking Permit
11 procedures shall follow those procedures established for Special Use Permits as set forth in
12 Section 20 -5.8, § (B),(C),(D),(E),(F) & (G) and shall follow those procedures for Public
13 Hearings set forth in general in Sections 20 -5.1, 20 -5.2, 20 -5.3, 20 -5.4, 20-5.5 and 20 -5.6.
14 SECTION 6. Section 20 -5.2 of the Land Development Code is amended to add,
15 (14) Off- -site Parking
16 SECTION_ 7._ The Planning Board is requested to recommend appropriate distance limitations
17 and nightclub and restaurant seating threshold(s) for the proposed ordinance as
is it relates to valet parking.
19 SECTION 8. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason
20 held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, this
21 holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
22 SECTION 9. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this
23 ordinance are hereby repealed.
24 SECTION 10. This ordinance shall take effect immediately at the time of its passage.
Off-** Put ns OWE= Pte¢ f 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 18th DAY OF OCTOBER, 1994.
Neil Carver
Mayor
ATTEST:
Rosemary J. Wascura
City Clerk
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Earl G. Gallop
City Attorney
cAreportsloff- site.ord
W -*A ftWng Od� Pais 0 3
To: William F. Hampton
Liim ager
From: , AIC
Director of BZCD
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Date: October 10, 1994
Re: PB- 94 -014: Ordinance to Amend
Provisions for Off -Site Parking
#1) On September 27, 1994, the Planning Board voted 6:0 to recommend that whenever off -site
parking lots are to be located adjacent to RO zoned or residential zoned property that a special
use permit be required for approval of the parking lot.
That Section 1 (F) (2) (a) be amended to read as follows: "Off -site parking spaces
shall be permitted in RM, RO, LO, MO, NR, SR, GR, I, H, PR, and PI
districts, with provision that if off - street parking is adjacent to residential zoned
properties, and/or RO zoned properties, special use process would be applicable
for approval."
(Staff agrees with this recommendation, because it provides for notice to property owners and
input from the residents who live near such properties.)
#2) The Planning Board also voted 6:0 to recommend that off -site parking may be located up to 600
feet from residential and institutional uses (e.g., churches and synagogues) and to recommend
that off -site parking spaces may be located up to 1000 feet from other kinds of uses (e.g.,
commercial and automotive).
"That 600 be inserted at the appropriate location at Line 10 on Page 2 and that 1000 be
inserted at the appropriate location at Line I 1 on Page 2, as recommended by the
Planning Board."
(Staff agrees with this recommendation.)
#3) The Planning Board voted 6:0 to recommend approval of the remaining portion of SECTION
1 which is contained in Section 20-4.4 (17)(2)(c) as presented.
SUGGESTED AMENDMENT FOR COMMISSION MEETING:
That the first sentence contained in Section 20 -4.4 (G) at Line 29, 30 and 31 on
Page # 2 be amended to read as follows: "Two or more uses may be permitted to
share the same required off - street parking spaces in a common parking facility,
according to the following table:"
(Staff agrees with the recommendation; the present language is unclear as to the intent.)
#5) The Planning Board voted 5:1 to amend the figure in the third column (WEEKENDS; 6 AM thru
6 PM) at Line 15 on Page 3 for "Theaters" from 50% to be 60 %.
(Staff agrees with the Planning Board recommendations. The Planning Board thoroughly
reviewed the allocations as set forth in the Joint Use table and found them acceptable.)
#6) The Planning Board voted 6:0 to recommend that MetroRail parking considerations be extended
up to 1500 feet from the station.
That 1500 be inserted at the appropriate location at Line 30 on Page # 3 as recommended
by the Planning Board.
(Staff agrees with this recommendation; this distance can be walked in just over five minutes.)
#7) The Planning Board voted 6:0 to recommend that the language in SECTIOkJ 4 be amended to
include retail establishments and not to require any seating threshold for restaurants.
That the proposed language in Section 20 -4.4 (I) be amended to read as follows: "Up to
50% of the required parking for hotels, hospitals, offices, nightclubs, restaurants, and
retail establishments may be satisfied through the provision of valet parking spaces via
special parking permit approved by affirmative vote of the City Commission."
(Staff agrees with this recommendation and sees no reason for a threshold for restaurant seating.)
#8) The Planning Board discussed different scenarios for the provision of valet parking spaces, but
made no motion. Staff recommends that the City Commission adopt specific language to address
the method that parking will be provided for valet parking in the City.
That language be added to Section 20-4.4 (I) to read as follows: "The number of required
parking spaces that are not provided on the same property as the use approved for valet
parking shall be provided via the off -site parking provisions in Section 20 -4.4 (F)(2), or
the City Commission may approve the use of on- street parking spaces to provide for a
portion of or all of the required parking spaces. In no case shall vehicle stacking or
double parking be permitted to supply the required parking spaces for the valet special
parking permit."
#}) The Planning Board voted 5:1 to recommend approval of SECTION 5 and voted 6:0 to
recommend approval of the remaining Sections of the ordinance.
// i3
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: Dean Mimms, AICP
Director of Building, Zoning &
Community Development Dept
From: Bill Mackey
Planner �a
REQUEST:
Date: September 9, 1994
Re: Item #3: PS-94 -014
Off-Site Parking Changes
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, AMENDING 20 -4.4 (F) OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE TO INCREASE DISTANCES FROM OFF -SITE PARKING TO
USES SERVED, TO PERMIT OFF -SITE PARKING IN RM AND RO DISTRICTS,
AND TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR LEASE AGREEMENTS; REPLACING
20-4.4 ( G ) JOINT USE SPACES; AMENDING 20-4.4 ( H ) TO INCREASE
THE DISTANCE FROM METRO -RAIL STATION TO USES SERVED; CREATING A
NEW 20 -4.4 (I) TO PROVIDE VALET PARKING FOR HOTELS, HOSPITALS,
OFFICES, RESTAURANTS AND NIGHTCLUBS; CREATING A NEW 20 -4.4 (J)
TO PROVIDE PROCEDURES REGARDING THE APPROVAL OF SHARED PARKING,
VALET PARKING AND REDUCED PARKING IN PROXIMITY TO METRO -RAIL
STATION; AMENDING THE NUMBERING OF SUBSEQUENT SUB - SECTIONS;
AMENDING SECTION 20 -5.2 TO ADD A NEW SUBSECTION (14); PROVIDING
FOR RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD CONCERNING
APPROPRIATE DISTANCE LIMITATIONS AND NIGHTCLUB AND RESTAURANT
SEATING THRESHOLD(S); PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BACKGROUND:
The City Commission desires to modify existing regulations
regarding off -site parking to provide for a simplified approval
and renewal process that is more user - friendly.
In addition, the City Commission desires to implement new
regulations which will provide for more options to business
owners, property owners and residents for off -site parking.
ANALYSIS:
The City Commission has requested that the Planning Board
recommend appropriate distance limitations and nightclub and
restaurant seating threshold(s). The following information is
provided to assist the Planning Board in their determination:
Estimated five minute walk, as provided by the consulting firm of
Dover, Kohl & Partners, is approximately 1/4 mile or 1325 feet.
Distance from Bakery Centre parking facility to the farthest
exterior edge of Hometown District is approximately 1800 feet.
Distance from the Metro -Rail Parking garage to the farthest edge
of the I (Intensive) zoning district is approximately 1200 feet.
Seating threshold for City of South Miami for nightclubs serving
alcoholic beverages is 200 seats (see attachment).
Seating threshold for City of Coral Gables for restaurants,
cafes, cafeterias and delicatessens serving alcoholic beverages
is 200 seats if certain conditions are met (see attachment).
Seating threshold for City of Coral Gables for retail beverage
stores in bona -fide restaurants is 50 seats if certain conditions
are met (separate list, see attachment concerning this category).
Seating threshold for City of Miami Beach for restaurants under
off -site parking provisions is 200 seats (attachment see below).
Off -site parking distance regulations for City of Miami Beach,
City of Miami and City of Coral Gables are included in the
Memorandum, dated July 20, 1994, by the City Attorney (attached).
Also, included for the Board's information is a copy of the
Planning Advisory Service (PAS) Memo, dated July, 1989, which is
entitled "Parking Standards - Problems, Solutions, Examples ".
This is followed by an except from the Highland Park (Illinois)
Zoning Ordinance which was selected PAS as an example regulation.
These two items are packaged separately for easy readability.
• M _0101M
That the Planning Board vote to recommend approval of the
proposed ordinance.
The proposed ordinance is consistent with the Goals, Objectives
and Policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Sections 20-4.4 ( F),(G ) & (H); creating
Sections 20-4.4 ( I ) & ( J ) and modifying
Section 20 -5.2 to add (14) to the LDC.
§ 4 -6 . SOUTH MIAMI .CODE § 4.7-
(3) Nightclub means any building, room or rooms or other
places where the principal business shall be to provide
food, refreshments and entertainment, and:
a. Where accommodations for the service of meals to at
least two hundred (200) persons is provided; and
b. Where a band, orchestra or some other form of musical
entertainment is provided for dancing; and
c. Where sufficient space, free from tables and chairs or
other obstructions, is provided to enable one hundred
(100) persons to dance.
lb
CITY OF CORAL GABLES ZONING CODE SECTION 3 -5 (d) (50)
Restaurants, Cafes, Cafeterias and Delicates-
sen. Retail liquor store licenses may be
issued limiting the -number of permitted
licenses for the sale -of alcoholic beverages
and intoxicating liquors subject to the fol-
lowing minimum conditions, restrictions and
limitations:
(a) Accommodations for service of two- hundred
or more patrons at tables at one setting
shall be provided. -
(b) The gross floor area of the restaurant
(outside wall dimensions) including din-
ing room, kitchen•area, rest rooms, and
any other enclosed area used for opera-
-. tion of the restaurant shall be not less
than four thousand (4,000) square feet.
(c) The sale of alcoholic beverages or in-
toxicating liquors-from bars shall not be
permitted.
(d) The serving of or consumption of alcoho-
lic beverages or intoxicating liquors
shall be at restaurant tables only (no
counters) from an area not visible from
the dining room at which food is regular-
ly served.
(e) No such licenses may be issued except to
places of business where the principal
and primary business consists of dispens-
ing and serving of food.
(f) The sale of alcoholic beverages and in-
toxicating liquors shall be only an inci-
dent-to the sale and consumption of food.
(g Alcoholic beverages and intoxicating
liquors shall only be consumed at tables
in conjunction with the service of meals.
(h) Total receipts from the sale of alcoholic
beverages and intoxicating liquors shall
not exceed forty (40) percent of the
total annual gross receipts of such
restaurant.
(i) Nightclub or lounge type entertainment or
a musical organization of more than three
musicians and /or- vocalists shall not be
permitted.
(j) The restaurant shall carry stock of food
sufficient to serve regular full- course
meals to a maximum of two hundred (200)
patrons at all times, excluding so- called
"frozen dinners."
(k) Restaurants, qualifying and holding a re-
tail liquor store-license shall always be
subject to inspection by -the City Manager
or his designee for the purpose of deter-
mining that such restaurants are comply-
ing with the aforementioned requirements.
(1) The restaurant shall have no signs ad-
vertising such retail liquor store, or
the sale of alcoholic beverages or in-
toxicating liquors therein, upon the ex-
terior, or to be visible from the ex-
terior of any such restaurant.
(m) The retail liquor store license shall not
be severable, from the restaurant license
in conjunction with which,it is issued.
(n) The distance requirement . for -such retail
liquor store license shall be in accord-
ance with Section 21-6 hereof.
IQ
CITY OF CORAL GABLES ZONING CODE SECTION 3 -6 (d) (51)
Retail beverage store. Retail beverage li-
cense may be issued to bona -fide restaurants
of fifty (50) seats or over subject to the
following conditions, restrictions and limi-
tations:
(a) The number of such licenses shall be as
permitted by the Charter or state law;
(b) The sale of alcoholic beverages from bars
shall not be permitted.
(c) The serving of or consumption of alco-,
holic beverages shall 'be at restaurant
tables or counters at which food is regu-
larly served.
(d) No licenses may be issued except to
places of business where the principal
and primary business consists of dispens-
ing of food;
(e) Food shall. be prepared, offered and ser-
ved during all business hours in all re-
tail beverage stores;
(f) No. retail package beverage store license
shall be issued to any holder of a li-
cense for a retail beverage store;
(g) The restaurant shall have no signs adver-
tising the sale of alcoholic beverages
upon the exterior, or to. be visible from
the exterior of any such restaurant;
(h) The distance requirement for such retail
beverage store license .shall be in ac-
cordance with Section 21 -6 hereof.
r9
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
AUGUST 16, 1994
ORDINANCES - FIRST READING
#12 ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, AMENDING SECTION 20- 4.4(F) OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE TO INCREASE DISTANCES FROM OFF -SITE PARKING
TO USES SERVED, TO PERMIT OFF -SITE PARKING IN RM AND RO
DISTRICTS AND TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR LEASE AGREEMENTS;
REPLACING SECTION 20- 4.4(G) JOINT USE SPACES; AMENDING SECTION
20 -4.4 (H) TO INCREASE THE DISTANCE FROM METRORAIL STATION TO
PARKING FOR HOTELS, HOSPITALS, OFFICES, RESTAURANTS AND
NIGHTCLUBS; CREATING A NEW SECTION 20- 4.4(J) TO PROVIDE
PARKING AND REDUCED PARKING IN PROXIMITY TO METRORAIL STATION;
AMENDING THE NUMBERING OF SUBSEQUENT SUB - SECTIONS; PROVIDING
FOR SEVERABILITY, ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
Moved by Commissioner Cunningham, seconded by Vice -Mayor
Young, this be considered the first reading of the ordinance and it
be placed on second reading and public hearing after consideration
by the Planning Board.
City Attorney Gallop explained that the City's Land
Development Code restricts off -site parking in the City and some of
the restrictions are unfeasible; i.e. a 20 year lease for parking.
He has compared the City's Code with others and has prepared the
memorandum from which Bill Mackey and others in the Building,
Zoning and Community Development Department drafted the proposed
ordinance.
Commissioner Cooper addressed Section 4, u, Valet Parking,
wherein it states the valet parking via special parking is for
nightclubs and restaurants ... "in excess of 200 seats ".. He
stated that even restaurants with only 100 seats might be
successful enough to need to have valet parking and suggested this
number be left blank until the Planing Board has had a chance to
make their recommendation.
City Attorney concurred with the suggestion and the place for
the number will be a blank. Mayor Carver asked if the ordinance
can be passed on first reading without the number being filled in.
City Attorney said that to fill in the number is not a requirement.
Commissioner Cooper asked why the off -site parking is not
permitted in the RT District; City Planner Mackey explained that
there is some single family residential in that area also, and off -
site parking may not be appropriate. Mr. Mackey explained the
parking chart which is part of the ordinance and noted that the
parking requirements are determined as to the usage for a
particular time of the day. This would permit others to park in
the spaces when they are not used by the building occupants.
City Attorney Gallop read his memorandum for appropriate
amendments:
1) Section 1. ss (2) (a) (R}equired off - street parking spaces may
be located and maintained up to feet from a residential or
institutional use served; up to feet from non - institutional
and non - residential use served.
2) Reverse positions of subsections (2)(a) and (b)
3) Amend subsection (2) (c) by adding "under a unity of title
insuring that the required parking will be provided" after the word
"exist" in the second line.
4) Change the word "ceased" to "ceases" in both places.
5) Amend last line of subsection (2)(c) by changing word
"Commission" to "City Manager ".
6) Amend Section 2. (G) Joinincr Use Spaces via Special Parkincr
Permit by changing "shall" to "may ".
7) Amend Section 4. (T) Valet Parkincr via Special Parkincr-Permit
by adding "and" between offices and nightclubs and removing 11200
seats" and making a space " seats."
8) Amend Section 5 (J) Procedures for Special Parking Permit by
changing the word "modifications" to "conditions ".
9) Add a new Section 6. Amending Section 20 -5.2 of the Land
Development Code to add
10) (14) off -site parking
11) Add a new Section 7. The Planning Board is requested to
recommend appropriate distance limitations and nightclub and
restaurant seating thresholds(s) for the proposed ordinance as it
relates to valet parking.
12) Renumber Section 8. and Section 9.
Moved by Mayor Carver, seconded by Commissioner Cooper, that
all amendments be added.
Motion passed 5/0: Mayor Carver, yea; Vice -Mayor Young, yea;
Commissioner Bass, yea; commissioner Cooper, yea; commissioner
Cunningham, yea.
Motion on ordinance first reading, as amended, passed 5/0:
Mayor Carver, yea; Vice -Mayor Young, yea; Commissioner Bass, yea;
Commissioner Cooper, yea; Commissioner Cunningham, yea.
-11
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor & City Commission
From: William F. Hampton
City Manager
Background:
Date: September 29, 1994
Re: Item # : Ordinance to Amend
Provisions for Off -Site Parking
This item appeared for first reading on July 26, 1994. Upon the request of the Administration
the item was deferred to August 16, 1994, so that staff could include certain proposed elements,
as set forth in the City Attorney's Memorandum, dated July 20, 1994.
The Land Development Code contains regulations which allow business owners to lease parking
spaces from other establishments, in order to provide for required parking; however, current
legislation requires a minimum twenty -year lease. This places a great burden on prospective
business operators, because most property owners are not willing to encumber their land for the
minimum required twenty years.
The City Attorney has requested that the Administration prepare the attached amendment to the
Land Development Code to amend regulations regarding off -site parking. The Administration
has relied upon the City Attorney's Memorandum dated July 20, 1994, for the substance of the
proposed amendment. The memorandum is attached for your information.
Recommendation:
1. Advantage to City: Provides for increased flexibility for the business community.
2. Disadvantages to City: None.
3. This Ordinance is sponsored by the City Attorney.
4. This Ordinance amends § 20-4.4 of the Land Development Code.
�1
City of South Miami
INTER — OFFICE MEMORANDUM
T0: Bill Hampton, City Manager
Dean Mimms
Bill Mackey
FROM: Earl G. Gallop
RBI Propoeed amendments to parking requiram®nts
DATE: July 20, 1994
Some of the downtown businesses have insufficient on -site
parking and municipal parking. For instance, the Akashi restaurant
cannot serve lunch because. of insufficient parking. Although the
restaurant is located in proximity to the south xi.ami Matromovsr
station, and adequate parking is available off -site at the
Mstromover public garage and at the Bakery Centre garage, the
restaurant cannot operate because of restrictions in the land.
development cods.
A. City of-south Miami restrictions.
The land development code requirements make leased parking
commercially impractical, does not adequately allow for shared
parking, and limits the benefit of being located near the
Retromover station.
The code allows off -Bits
parking
only
if the parties eater
into a parking lease for more than
20
years. Section 20-
4.4(F)(2)(c) requires.. (1) the
owner of
the
property on which the
use is located to enter into
a lease
"with a remaining torn of
twenty (20) years or more....0
and (2)
the
owner of the off -site
parking to record a covenant
concerning the commitment of the
property to the parking.
The benefit of shared parking is extramaly limited. Suction
20- 4.4(G) allows for shared parking by specified uses, such as.
theater use of retail use parking. The. section ezeludeo.
restaurants. Tha. same requirements for a long -term lease and
covenant apply.
Off -sits parking must be located within 300 feet of an
institutional use and 500 feet of another nonresidential use.
/02—
p
5 20- 4.4(F)(2)(a). Some cities allow greater distances between
noninstitutional uses and off-site parking.
Off -site parking is not permitted in residential and
residential office districts. 5 20- 4.4(F)(2)(b).
A reduction in off- atreet parking requjxomaents for uses
located near the Metromover station is spatially restricted.
Section 20- 4..4(H) authorizes up to a 50% reduction of off - street
parking requirement for uses located within 500 feat of the
Metromover station.
B. Coral Gables, Miami and Miami Beach restrictions.
The cities of Coral Gables, Miami and Miami Beach have more
liberal off -site requir=enta, in some regards. Coral Gables
allows off -site parking. for residential. uses in commercial. and
industrial areas. S 13 -3(b), City of Coral Gables Zoning Code. It
also allows- for off -cite parking for residential, commercial and
industrial uses _ A** a caQn an without regard to duration al the
agreement. S 13-3(b)- an
The city of Miami allows for use of off -site parking, by
special exception, to satisfy up to 251 of the nonresidential
parking requirements. A grant of a special eueption requires a
finding of practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship. 8.919,
City of kiami Zoning Code. The maacimnma distance between off -site
parking and the -use, measured-by normal pedestrian routes, in-600
feet. S 918.1, However, within the central business district;'a
special use permit may allow otf -site parking without limitation on
percentage -of parking spaces or. distance from the. principal use.
S 615.7.2. and, no.damonstration of difficulty or hardship is
required where the off -site parking is within 1, 000 feet of the
use, or 600 feet of the Metromovor station, or where provision is
made to transport patrons from parking to the use.
The city of Miami. Beach allows for off -site parking to be
located within 1200 feet at the use. S 7.3, Miami Beach Code.
Surplus and under - utilized parking can be leased.. The lease-must
be recorded and the owner of the burdened property must demonstrate
that there is adequate-parking to obtain.a building permit or an
occupational license. The code provides a matrix for shared
parking. S 7 -10. The, uses include offices,. banks, retail, hotel.,
restaurants, theaters, nightclubs and. other uses. Additionally,
hotels, *nightclubs and. restaurants in excess of 200 seats can
satisfy all of their off = street parking requirements by valet
parking. Multi - family residential buildings can similarly satisfy
up to 50% of their parking requirements. S 7 -I1.
Amend the land development code, as f allows I
2
IM
:. Amend S 20- 4.4(F)(2)(a) to allow off - street parking
within 600 feet of •a residential use, and within
1000 feet of other noninstitutional and
nonresidential uses;
2. Delete 5 20- 4.4(F)(2)(b), prohibiting off -site
parking in residential and residential office
districtal
3. Amend S 20- 4.4(F)(2)(c) to delete reference to a
lease. requirement while retaining the covenant
requirement;
4. Amend S 20- 4.4(G)(1) to provide expanded shared parking
in a manner substantially similar to 5 7 10,
Miami Beach Code;
S. Amend S 20- 4.4(G) (1) to increase the distance between the
Me.tromover station and the use to 1200 feet;
S. Create a now S 20- 4.4(l) and renumber subsequent
paragraphs to provide for valet parking to satisfy up to
50% of the. parking requiremient. for hotels, restaurants
and nightclubs; and,
7. Make conforming amendments, or create a now
paragraph (J.), to require a finding of practical
difficulty or unnecessary hardship, and an.
affirsaative vote of 4 Mealbers of the city commission
to authorize a reduction in the parking requirements
when shared parking, valet parking,. or proximity to
the Metromover••atation are used.
Please call me about your comments.
EGG /egg
cc: Nei! carver, xayor
0667P"F..MM
3
--:TYXB1 MIAMILB -ACli
S. A2ILiou net4tutienr. Sc, hacls`turiinzHnffieo • As Per Section M.A. 70
C. 7-0kelnt Qistr4ate cuoynated frare frevtd lima Prrkinl- Thors$hall be no rsquirad-
parking f% any Use loafed in the Dune OverlaY Dlstriet or ylsterwaY
District 14
A. All parking spaces roquiread harcin shall bo loosted an tbs. sam&:Lat with the
Building or Use served. or within a distance.--not.-to exeted 1200 fast froth such
Lot. TM dlstases eepsration-shall be measured by following a straight lint from
the Lot on which the main permitted Use is located to the Lot where the Parking
Lot or gas age is located.
S. Where the required Pgrida; spaces arc no kmted--oo the some Lot with Cho
WNW or Uses served and Used u allowed In paragraph 7 -3.A above, a unity
of Tltle gall be ormw ed for the oaf vase ol.lasaring that the required parking
is provided.. Said Unity of. Title shalt be executed by oween of the properties
cosesseed, approved u to form by the City Attorney, recorded is the public
MOWS of Dade COZ;oty as a ooveaant messing with the load -and shall be filed
with the appil atioa for a Building Permit.
C. Temporary Parking Lot -facilities shall be pennant to Seetioa 7.6,H of thla
Ordinance.
1,5r -4 . r. - :r .. . W.4 wj
A. The pultittp required basin In in addition to space lot sterols of tracks or othar
vokletes and in connection with a bueittesa. Commercial. or indasuiai Use.
a. wM14re [motional "no" rswlef the number of repaired parking spaces MIGired
shall be roaodod to the nonnot whole number. tt
C. The puking space requirements for a Use not specifically listed in this Section
shall be the teases as for a listed Use which generates s similar level of parklne-
dMasd.
D. In the than of musd Ulna, uses-with different parkin$ regairesents occupying
ths'tutne Building or lromins. the parking Spaces required shall :qua$ the sum
at 11114 requinu ate of the Tarim UM eosapoted separately"41ceps rhos tbs
tasMM of required parkin$ souse is comptttod under the Shared Parkin;
provisiose u an forth In ieotioa 7.10.
E- W14"M a Building or Use, trowtructt d or established alter the Bffeativo Cate
of thin ardiasaoe, It Changed or esl:;rlad -in Floor At*14.aumbtf-d Aparttnattt
or Noe! Units, sash$ eapaeity or otherwise. to create a. requirement for an.
loo+resse in the number. of required panting awes, such ttlam chill 1:4-provided,
Or the impact- tee pall, .whichever is permitted under this Ordinance. on the
balk of the astargement or chasten.
F. Wksuvee a pt'opoud Use do" not indicate the specific number of Ponce to
ompy euoh•um. the required parklnp shall be computed on the basis of one
7.6
11.
4y tens
/I
satiafiod the ;Orkin$ requirement through paoticipatica in the
Pariclag Inupaot Fes Program may have its Parting Impact Fee
tdjustad.for parking ctadlta at the moat des data far paytaant. N&
reimbursement or prorating shall be allowed. 13.130
7.9 $ST Lelt AbiSZ«DZR.LM 1e PARKING SPAQ8
A. 4ugawt p2gkie�it Sal=
Wbsa a ay.bpmac►s.GO■talma parkins spaces in excess of the number required
by this Ordinance, such spaces shall be coasidered as survius parkins. ?hae�
surpiss.speaes•may be•icaeed to another propanyr for Use as required Parking.
spaces, it the surpies spaces we within .17fl0 ft of the Dsvoicatment lassiag.such,
space. ?be least asresesaas sJul4 bs. approved by the Planning and Lomas`
Meow and the City, Attormay's Office prior -to its execution and it stall W.
1100, Id in the Public. rsGerda:ot Dade Coanty. for sack of the affected'•
mope t" prior to the iumace of a Building Permit or Occupational Llama.
vbiohovor. U emriler. When dw. Development that contains- the-surplus panting,
ebasses to a Uaa that requires additional parkins, aucb Use shall not.recaive a.
Building hrmit or Oaaupationai License natal the Clty receives documentation
thava, positing shortfall has not ban mated for any other Use that may have
been Utilizing, the survive parklag.
• .
WW& a Ruildla3 Or Daysloomiateontsiaa required parkiag spaces that are $slap.
aadar vtltlsaaIWO Spaces MSS be leased to another party. However such epsest
chap not be considered as ReaWred Parking spaces of the lease.. In ordar to,
detamins if a Daeeloptneat has under- otilisad spaces, the Applimt sW.
submitso annual report to the deeming and Lasing Director substantiating thb
findiap.• TM-Dirsotor shall appr6Fo or daay the rapan buW uOost.eho.repo :e of
the City d nsOSt verityine. tlti,i -Moots of MA aaawhrspon. As applicatim
to of 3100 plus 32 per space shall be. paid for.purposes of attuning the Goer of
tdmial"ratiag thin 3sadoa.14
7.17
7.101 SHA�,D PAalXINd
Two or men Usa shall be permitted to ghats the same required Off - Strout Parking•
Soma is a woman parking facility as the utae Lot if the noun or days of posit..
parking for the Uses arc to differeat that a lower total will provide as adequate,
number of spaces for ail Uses served by the facility, according to the following mb1e:,
WSIXUAYd WE[KENDA
a.- Method of calaalatioa -
Uo I » For sack of the five tine periods. muitiply -the minimum number of
pa itias apsm required by !action 7.2, parking Rssviatims,
Mop 2 — Add.tbe malls of each *c* m. TM regaired aatabet at parkins spaces
span equal the kighat.00iutna total.
'. T1te land ttaeseervod by the shared parking facility shall be in single ow8en4lp
or unity of tills or loaf term lease.
7.11 VALET PAAtt't]�iQ
Requirod parking for now or rabstandally reoa.ated•HOM'Suildinga, Hotel Accessory {
User, NigRe Ibs or Aeatsuraab la eZ=U of 200 sea may. be satisfied through the
Droviaioae of rtiist parking spare: (Sea. kation 7 -5,2 for Design stsadardsl. Multi-,
Family laildhtgs may provide up to but not more than one half of the required spaces
as valet parJdag apasoe. is
7.12 es
A. Wbosever the City Masa=ar deterexissea that- there is inadequate available
psu'klag to aaoataMOdate aorlelgsttd parking needs, for a particular ovour
scksdalsd for the 09711 CosVeatlaa Center, the City. Manew shalt authorize the
lsatisesa at $499istasstaty COavoatioa Cancer Parking Permits allowing the
ogsratloo of vaaaat IM is the RW, RM•2, t:D•l, CD -2 and MS Zoning
7.19
Daytime
(QI M -6PINO
Eveaias
(0144AK
Mytlma
(6AM -6PbQ
Evening
(6P*
midnisht)
Nishttime
(midaltRt-
GAM)
Office or
Banks
100%
Retail
209i
s0%
60%
5%
Hotels
5011
60W
do%
IN%
7S%
Restaurast
30%
75%
-75%
W%
10%
Theater
10%
70%
20%
90%
10%
Ni Atciuba
i%'
50%
911
100%
"%
Other Uses
100%
10011
10011
r,00%
10091
a.- Method of calaalatioa -
Uo I » For sack of the five tine periods. muitiply -the minimum number of
pa itias apsm required by !action 7.2, parking Rssviatims,
Mop 2 — Add.tbe malls of each *c* m. TM regaired aatabet at parkins spaces
span equal the kighat.00iutna total.
'. T1te land ttaeseervod by the shared parking facility shall be in single ow8en4lp
or unity of tills or loaf term lease.
7.11 VALET PAAtt't]�iQ
Requirod parking for now or rabstandally reoa.ated•HOM'Suildinga, Hotel Accessory {
User, NigRe Ibs or Aeatsuraab la eZ=U of 200 sea may. be satisfied through the
Droviaioae of rtiist parking spare: (Sea. kation 7 -5,2 for Design stsadardsl. Multi-,
Family laildhtgs may provide up to but not more than one half of the required spaces
as valet parJdag apasoe. is
7.12 es
A. Wbosever the City Masa=ar deterexissea that- there is inadequate available
psu'klag to aaoataMOdate aorlelgsttd parking needs, for a particular ovour
scksdalsd for the 09711 CosVeatlaa Center, the City. Manew shalt authorize the
lsatisesa at $499istasstaty COavoatioa Cancer Parking Permits allowing the
ogsratloo of vaaaat IM is the RW, RM•2, t:D•l, CD -2 and MS Zoning
7.19
CITY OF MIAMI
ZONING § 618
',,'here parking requirements relate to number of seats and seating is in the form of
undivided pews, benches, or the iika, twenty (20) lineal inches shall be construed to be equal
to one ; ii seat. Where parking requirements relate to movable seating in auditorium& and
other assem'vly rooms, ten (10) square feet of net floor area shall be construed to be equal to one
;1) seat except where otherwise specified. Net floor area shall be the actual area occupied by
seating and related aisles, and shall not include accessory unoccupied areas or the thickness
of wails.
9I7.12. Limitations of use ofyofatreet parting and loading areas; restrictions on storage of
vehicles not in operatingcondition.
No required offstreet parking or loading area shall be used for the sale, major repair, or
dismantling of any vehicle or equipment, or for storage of materials or supplies, and no other
area on a lot shall be used for such purposes unless permitted tinder regulations applying
within the district. No vehicle not in operating condition shall occupy unenclosed parking
space or any loading space on any lot for more than seventy -two (72) hours, except as permitted
under regulations applying to the permitted principal use within the district.
917.13. Reduction of required offatraet parking or of grret loading space prohibited.
No oNtrest parking or of xeet loading spare now exiating or hereafter provided which
meets all or part of the requirements of this zoning ordinance for such space shall be reduced-
or eliminated by privata action, or unless no longer zequired by these regulations, except
where approved alternative offetreet panting or oftreet loading space meeting such require-
manta is provided.
(Ord. No. 10771, § 1, 7.26.60; Ord. No. 10888, § 1, 3- 28.91; Ord. No. 10978, § 1,'4.20.92)
Sec. 918. Offsite parking.
'a the genoral intent of these regulations that required ofistreet perking be provided on
the same lot with the principai use or structure it serves, e=pt as otherwise specifically
authorized. Unless otherwise specifically provided in special districts, offsits parkdnir shall be
permitted only by SpecialFxception and only for nonresidential uses and up to twenty -five (25)
percent cf the required number of spaces and as authorized by the provisions of this section in
districts more or equally permissive as where the principal use to ba served is located, or as`t
otherwise specifically permitted under the terms of this zoning ordinance, and in any event
only where there are practical difficulties• or unneoassary hardships involved in providing
r equk ea parking on the site.
918.2.: Jaximum distance limitsationa.
Unless otherwise specifically provided in special districts, the maximum distance from a
principal entrance of any paring facility permitted to provide required or excess offsite
parking to the principal entrance of the use served shall not exceed six hundred (600) feet, with
distance measured by normal pedestrian routes;
.a:, Solfieernee parking for visitors, clients, or customers of the principal use.
auop. No. 2 357
ZONDzu---- *-w - -... .. _v....._.____.___ j76i6.7 _.
are as follom; and; in addition, offstreet parking and loading, and- offsite parking. shall be as
required in sections 917, 918, 922 and 923, except as-modified below:
615.7.1. Minimum and maximum o ffetreet parking limitations.
1. For dwelling units, there shall be•a minimura.of ona C1.)' parking space and a maximum•
of two (2) parking spaces per dwelling unit.
For hotel or motel. uses, there shall be a minimum of ona (1) psrkin4.apaae, for. every
four (4) lodging units• and a maximum of . two (2) parking - spaces for every -three (8)
lodging units.
I For business andAfeasional office uses, :including :medical clinicsethem- ahall••be:a
minimum of one (1) parking space per eight :hundred•(80%.agaarefeatiof floor: erearand.
a maximum of one (1) parking apace per four hundred'4400) aquaraileet4of. floor•mars.
4. For retail and service uses, there shall be a minimum of one (1) parking spaee•percne,
thousand (1,000) square feet of floor area and a•maMMu; of one (1) parking :spaceper
three hundred (800) square feet of floor area.
o. For restaurants, bars, nightclubs and the liks,.theta shall- be r a minimum-numbez-af
parking apace- required, and there shall be a -m ucimum..of. one 11) .perkingspaor.Vw
one hundred (1001 square feet of door arse.
S. For zhester uses, there shall be no minimum:number of parking spaces required~ and
there shall be a maximum of one (1) parking apaoa:per. four M: seats...
For all other uses, there shall be a< miniraum.of a f lIpar)dng apace pat onm :thousand'
(1,000) square feet of floor area and a meudmum.Af one (1): apace perms .hundred :(600).
square feet of floor area.
615.7,2. Special offstrat parking requirements; offi*e.parkh4, limes.
i. Notwithstanding the limitations of section 918, . oUte parking shall-be permitted
within the toning district by Cis" II Special Permit without limitation on parentage.
of the required number of space - or maximum•.distaaee. from :rhv principai use, fiuv
thermors, there shah be no required deanonstntiaa or -i nding;dpraddosldim.wity
or unnecessary hardship in providing required parking on the site,.prnvided that thdy,
location of the of dte- parking is within one thousand (1,000) feet radius. of the priii-
cipal use, or within six hundred (600) feet radiva•of aUstromoveg atstiaA o3therRSre
permanent provisions made to transport the oflaite parking•patrona•ta and -from the
principal site at the property owner's expense.
2. No residential dwelling unit shall be sold or leased.without the right to utilise at least
ons 111 onsite parking space•
515.7.3. O f fatreet loading requirements.
1. For buildings in excess of twenty-five thousand. (25;000) square feet and' up to five
hundred thousand (600,000) square feet of gloss building area:
Berth minimum dimension to be twelve (121 by thirtrfive.M) feet;
269
30
SECTION 13' - 2 CORAL GABLES SECTION 13 - A
(j) 'All lights anall be* deflected,: shaded: and fa-
cueed away from. adjacent 'propartiea, and
lighting ansll be accomplishe& -in such a man..
ner•sa not to be disturbing to passing vehi-
cular traffic and• to the uaor. of adjacent
properties.
(k) Nothing in this ordinances'shill be construed
as Yntanoing to•'prevent,.the common use of
driveways as access to parking areas-an ad-
joining aites; praMing, however, that the
property owner or owners shall submit to the
City Clerk a restrictive covenant in record -
abla form reaming: unto . thi toselves, their
heirs,, perscrmV .vipreeentatives• and assigns
the, -use c sucW property for said, driveway
ti) '
1} PavinNgr surfacing for access,aialee; drive•
ways an off - street.. arkingsas ,f4p singla
family, rs Qaaaes: a�iaial s', duplexes-and
apartments Ylog t: oser• than-,eighteen
(19)•inches liho,
(m). The percentact car spaces in an
individual parking facility shall
be ea follo
1. A maximfive (35) percent for
parking �f • onar (1) thru fifty
(50) sp�-
2. A msximu�k—' forty •(40) ' �aent fbr.: park-
ing facUlties of fifty =One 51)' or mots
spaces. ✓
(n), The minimum size required for a,fres finding
carport- shall be nine. (9) feet wids.:.asi mea-
. sured between suppbrts by nineteen (19):' feet
long • an measured . from. the • outside 'edge of
eupports. The' :mtililstWs• size required ..ffor• a
'..tiro 'car free st4nding. carport ehtll be. eigh-
'tion and one -hat 1/2).'• feet - wide as ones..
cured between supports by nineteen (19) fast
long• as measured .,from. the outside edge of
supports. : f' ttv ,.aids 'of . a: carport is at-
tached to the. ands: of ;e building, -add one and
one -nalf (1- 1' /.2T•.reot to the width. Ir the
and of a earoort.'is- attached tb the end of a
building, add one• and one -halt' (1 -1/2) feet
to the length. '
(o) . The minimum size.:rsquitod for a one (1) car
garage anall be-twelve (12) Feet wide by
twenty -two (221 fast long,, inside dimensions.
The. minimum sizs.,ra ad - for a two (2) car
garage enall be• tdentiiv (22) fact wide by
twenty -two (221 ' feat, long, inside diman•
aicne•.
SECTION 13 -3 LOCATION•- GENERAL.
(a). -Generally, parkilpge fdr.. special ueeb, duplexes
and aoartments *hail be- located in. the rear
yard, area. (not. including the, side••atreet set-
back). cr. • betMan the - building, and the side.
interior prope;.ty,.lica. or a combination of
tbe•two above - mentioned aress.•The said park-
ing ;hall be provided • -in s meaner so as to
prevent the beekim• of vehicles- into the
street traffic.,, •.
No parking for Rpooi►al uasv; duplexes,• and
apartments ahwil ..bP- permitted. in • the . front
astbank Great- Unlr "At. is in. addition to the-
minimum parking requirements and' is approved.
ae-,provided in this section.
Any- deviatian - from the above must --:be- recom-
mended by the'• Bawd• b f ° Architscte• ` and' sp-
proveq by the City' Commivaion'kithout iW -'re-
quirement of • *appearing before' the '$card: of
Adj ctwnt, provided, however; that' iri� ell
case wnere a change of zoning or a viaiwe
to the "Zoning Coda" shall be required. in
.corumction with construction of'''epsMdl'vsas;
d�Mlexea or apartments; :'the . City ; Conrad ion
stall take no . action upon- the reanmman'd aticn
of 'the Board of ''Architects until ouch ;tithe• as
the:Plan acid Zoning Boiird has-,subeAtted a
reoomEnendat on upon 'tiuch propgsed' ° et�arigb of
inning , and/or• ' the: Board' of Kdjaktaent, has
taken final' action an - that:requtstdd vari•.
(b) Fifty t50)°• p of the 1106drid "W- 0treat
parking. for special uses* duplsW,,, t.11
ments• or for living. unite' in':'' fill yr
iiiduatrial,.arse*' may be..loosted• Ufflikite sun-
jRc • tc the:, tp2TWing cond�ti0iisr
1. Thq off - street ppark1hg must. commence
; dthin three : hundtltd : (30 )` 'fast of the
..' bullttinq.sitir: .
2. '"TWowner • *hail'' iub4t' to the City Clerk
a_.rakc.4aCive covenant; 'in iiandsble
fb�r;••: bskry ng� the`.roff iittsii • pa;kinq
sits '•fbr ' otf-'h bit, parkip ''` for the
b ing fibr as ; xonc ae, th0 osrkinq shall
(c) Parking-for commsrd ai or Sndusfritl uses may
be located ofraits.• eubjeet. to tt1s, following
conditionsu
.1. • It. most:. Conaati•*cs ...within; , rift . hundred
(500) ' feetti of , tbe. huildinq• #U*.
2.' The.': opnir • ehikrl OWU to the•: City Clark
a .datsiatiVa , covsns�%t; . in ' recordable
F � xsesrvinq!.1 i' a&.4ttast parking
siCi. fcr Off street. parking, for the
buiidin%Jdi ve Ibnq se. the. peaking shall
be required.
SECT ION 13wA LANRSCAP INC ... REGU- 1- RENENT S
F01.:CERTAYN'• YAW AREAS'.. AND+ .OFF- STRIET
PARXINC AND 0TF1ER•• VENICd1M- ,PS&;- AREAS.
All cress used• far the display or• pwJt1r ';of any and
all types of vehicles, boats or heavy construction
equipment., whether such vehicles ,.• but*, or.equipnt
are; ms
•self swelled or :not, std all' lend upon which
46icles traverse tho- property as ■. (unction of the
pcia� -y use?: h" inafier ..ri,ferradAc,.as..gather vehi
cular.tiaesn, inaludinQ;but,not . llmitad . to activities
of: s • drive -in nature such • es t. -but, . not. rlimitsd to,
f�,iting sc
atatiens,. q ;ary. -and •decry stosss, banks,
rsstsurntte*�.,and-- the like., i shall. odnfW=,to the min -
imum'.,l- andscaping• requirsmenta hersinaMer provided,
asvi and:, except. arsai- ussd,•for ,parking -or other ve-
htouisr..uses:under,.on! or. within• buildings, and
parking• areas. serving.. single.: family, and - two.. family
ysss.
ItskelLtions. All: landscaping: :shall be
installed -in a sound: alike manner
and ,ecoording.•.tos ,aoampted good, Planting pro -
eaduree with the quality of plant materials
ast-harsinifter.desor# bed All',alswente of
�ondac wing -;sxalunive; of•,Aset.MskWial ox
•
,t hedges shell, ;be .inetsLlsdwsa se. to mast
m other applicable ordinsnose end code re-
1'17: � �1Nw1
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
INTER- OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor & City-Commission Date: October 11, 1994
/L zz�% A /01/94 Commission Agenda
12 From: illiam F. H pton Re: Item. # Ordinance to Amend
City Manager Frontage in Hometown District
Back rog und:
Dover, Kohl & Partners, the City's Urban Planning Consultant, has requested that a proposed
change be made to the adopted Land Development Code, in order to further encourage
redevelopment of traditional retail establishments in the Hometown District. The ordinance
proposes eliminating the requirement for lot frontage for properties located in the Hometown
District. This change will affect future land divisions only.
Recommendation:
1. Advantage to City: Provides for increased flexibility for the business community.
2. Disadvantages to City: None.
3. This Ordinance is sponsored by the Commissioner Cooper.
4. This Ordinance amends § 20 -3.5G of the Land Development Code.
/a
1 ORDINANCE NO.
2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
3 OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA AMENDING SECTION 20 -3.5G OF THE
4 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, PROVIDING ELIMINATION OF FRONTAGE
5 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS IN "SR" DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR
6 SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND
7 PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
8 WHEREAS, the City of South Miami enacted a Land Development
9 Code on October 25, 1989; and,
10 WHEREAS, the Land Development Code contains Section 20 -3.5G,
11 which provides minimum frontage requirements for nonresidential
12 districts; and,
13 WHEREAS, the minimum frontage requirement for all uses in the
14 "SR" Specialty Retail District is 50 feet; and,
15 WHEREAS, a 50 foot minimum frontage requirement for retail
16 commercial uses discourages traditionally scaled redevelopment and
17 discourages variety and texture that smaller buildings provide;
18 and,
19 WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission desire to eliminate the
20 minimum frontage requirement in the "SR" Specialty Retail District.
21 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT. ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
22 COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
23 Section 1. That Section 20 -3.5G is amended by (a)-
24 inserting a "c" designating a footnote to the right of 115011, which
25 is located in the row identified as "Frontage (ft)" and the column
26 "SRI' and by (b) adding footnote c at the bottom of page 62 to read:
27 c The frontage requirement does not apply to
28 grade level retail uses in the SR District;
29 provided, however, that the grade level retail
30 use occupies not less that 1200 net square
31 feet. The frontage requirement applies to all
32 other grade level uses and to all above grade
33 level uses.
34 A copy of Section 20 -3.5G, as amended, is annexed and made a
35 part of this ordinance.
36 Section 2. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of
37 this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional
38 by a court of competent jurisdiction, the holding shall not affect
39 the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
1 -4% �.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
III
Section 3. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in
conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed.
Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect immediately at
the time of its passage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1994.
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
lroat.ord
0)
MAYOR
SECTION 20 -3.5 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Section 20-3,5G
DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
RO LO MO NR SCR GR 1
Min. Lot Size
Net Area (sq ft) 7,500 7,500 10,000 7,500 5,000 10,000 5,000
Frontage (ft) 75 75 100 75 50° 100 50
Min. Setbacks (ft)
Front
25
20
15b
25
10b
20
20
Rear
20
15
10
15
10
15
a
Side (Interior)
10
10
10
-
-
-
-
Side (Street)
20
15
10
15
10b
15
15
Adj. Res. Dist.
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
Side (w /driveway)
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Between Buildings
20
20
20
-
-
-
-
Max. Building Height
Stories
2
2
4
2
4
2
2
Feet
25
30
50
25
50
30
30
Max. Building
Coverage (o)
30
-
-
-
-
-
-
Max. Impervious
Coverage (o)
75
80
85
75
90
85
85
Max. Floor Area
Ratio (FAR)
.25
.70
1.60
.25
1.60
.80
.80
a 5' setback with wall opening adjacent to rear property
line; no setback if no openings in wall.
b Applies to ground floor only; columns are permitted
within the set -back. Columns shall not be greater than
24 inches in diameter; columns on the property line shall
not be closer to each other than 10 feet.
The frontage requirement does not apply to grade level
retail uses in the SR District; provided, however, that
the grade level use occupies not less that 1200 net
square feet. The frontage requirement applies to all
other grade level uses and to all above grade level uses.
rL
DOVER, KOHL & PARTNERS
Urban Design
Memorandum
Date: September 1, 1994
To: Commissioner Tom Cooper, AIA
City Attorney Earl Gallop, Esq.
Planner Bill Mackey
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
From: , Victor Dover, AICP 1le?-
AS U
E P - 2 19 9�
............. .............0
Subject: Minimum Frontage requirements in the Hometown District
I recommend that the Land Development Code be amended to eliminate the minimum Frontage
(width) requirements for Minimum Lot Sizes in the Hometown District. See page 62 of the Code.
Presently the required lot width in the underlying SR District is 50'. Some existing lots do not comply
with this requirement. In other locations desirable subdivisions of existing parcels would not comply.
This amendment is consistent with the intent of the Hometown Plan to encourage traditionally- scaled
redevelopment and the variety and texture that smaller buildings provide. This amendment also
reflects the input of citizen participants in the 1992 charrette, many of whom expressed that they
disfavor large buildings and favor filling in the neighborhood with more, smaller buildings.
Two ways occur to me for how to do this:
1) Add a footnote (presumably "c ") that indicates that the Frontage requirement "Does not apply
within the Hometown District' to those categories found within the Hometown District. This will
primarily affect the SR category but small areas within other underlying categories will also be
affected. OR
2) Alternatively, insert language within the section relating to the Hometown District Overlay
Ordinance, providing that "there shall be no minimum lot width requirement within the Hometown
District." The Overlay Ordinance prevails where there is conflict between the overlay ordinance and
the underlying zoning.
It appears to me that option 1 above is preferable and less confusing.
11
SECTION 20 -3.5 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Sc�cti.on 20 =3 . 5G
D = MEN S 2 ONAL REQU =REMENT S
NONRE S =DENT = AL D 2 S TR= CT S
REQUIREMENT $Q
W
KQ
ViiR
S$
I
Min. Lot Size
Net Area (sq ft) 7,500
71500
10,000
7,500 5
000
10,000 51000
Frontage (ft) 75
75
100
75
100
50
Min. Setbacks (ft)
Front 25
20
15°
25
10b
20
20
Rear 20
15
10
15
10
15
`
Side (Interior) 10
10
10
-
-
-
-
Side (Street) 20
15
10
15
10b
15
15
Adj. Res. Dist. 25
25
25
25
25
25
25
Side (w /driveway) 20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Between Buildings 20
20
20
-
-
-
-
Mar.. Building Height
Stories 2
2
4
2
4
2
2
Feet 25
30
50
25
50
30
30
Max. Building
Coverage (%) 30
-
-
-
-
-
-
Max. Impervious
Coverage 75
80
85
75
90
85
85
Max. Floor-Area.
Ratio (FAR) .25
.70
1.60
.25
1.60
.80
.80
5' setback with wall opening adjacent to
rear
property
line; no setback
if no openings
in wall.
b Applies to ground
floor
only.
SE - 2 19 P 9 !J
LDC: UPDATED JUNE 1993 6 2 CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
12.
- C2TX a� S4UTH 1�Z�AM=
INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and City Co
From:
illia ton
city M anag e
)3
Backar_ound:
Date: October 27, 1994
Agenda Item 1 13
Re: Comm. Mtg. 11/01/94
Hometown Overlay Ordinance -
Special Exceptions
The attached Ordinance was developed in seven hours of
meetings with the Bakery Centre developer and attorneys, City
Attorney, City Building & Zoning Director, City Manager and
Victor Dover.
Accordingly the attached Ordinance meets the approval of all
those listed above.
This Ordinance would authorize the City Commission to grant
special exceptions for development within the Hometown
District.
Recommendation:
1- Advantage to City: - This Ordinance will permit
acceptable alternative design proposals which are not
in strict compliance with all Hometown District
regulations.
2- Disadvantages to city: None
3- The City Manager recommends approval of this
Ordinance.
4- This Ordinance amends Article VII of the City Land
Development Code.
WFH:er
aNxuetnwn
1 ORDINANCE NO.
2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
3 OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA AMENDING ARTICLE VII OF THE LAND
4 DEVELOPMENT CODE BY PROVIDING FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION
5 PROCESS FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE HOMETOWN DISTRICT
6 WHICH DOES NOT STRICTLY COMPLY WITH THE TERMS AND
7 PROVISIONS OF THE HOMETOWN DISTRICT OVERLAY ORDINANCE;
8 PROVIDING FOR STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES FOR SUCH SPECIAL
9 EXCEPTIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
10 ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
11 WHEREAS, in 1992 and 1993 the City of South Miami through a
12 joint effort, including an extensive design and analysis process,
13 which involved the City government, property owners, residents,
14 homeowners, merchants, consultants, committees, and South Miami
15 Hometown, Inc., determined a desired future for the City's downtown
16 district; and,
17 WHEREAS, the City Commission has adopted development
18 regulations known as the Hometown District Overlay Ordinance to
19 foster that desired future for the downtown area; and
20 WHEREAS, that Ordinance contains detailed criteria for
21 development of land within the district covered by the regulations;
22 and
23 WHEREAS, the City Commission recognizes that there may be from
24 time to time acceptable alternative design proposals for given
25 sites which are not in strict compliance with some provisions of
26 the Hometown District regulations; and
27 WHEREAS, the City Commission is desirous of providing a public
28 hearings mechanism for considering such design proposals, and for
29 granting relief, if deemed appropriate, from the strict application
30 of the district regulations.
31 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
32 COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
33 Section 1. That Article VII of the Land Development Code
34 is hereby amended to add the following sections:
35 20 -7.51 SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
36 A. The City Commission may by special exception waive strict
37 compliance with the provisions of the Hometown District
38 Overlay Ordinance. In granting a special exception, the
39 City Commission must find by substantial competent
40 evidence that:
13
1
1. The proposed development contributes to, promotes
2
and encourages the improvement of the Hometown
3
District and catalyzes other development as
4
envisioned in the Hometown District regulations.
5
2. The proposed development is compatible with the
6
land uses and development intensities prescribed by
7
all applicable city regulations.
8
3. The proposed development must possess integrity of
9
design compatible with the design criteria
10
established for the Hometown District and with the
11
overall image of the City.
12
4. The proposed development shall be designed in a
13
manner that provides for effective management of
14
traffic (vehicular and pedestrian), parking,
15
lighting, noise and waste generated by the
16
development, and management of the impacts of the
17
development on public facilities and services.
18
5. The proposed development does not expand the
19
permitted uses within the Hometown District.
20
6. The proposed development will not have an
21
unfavorable effect on the economy of the City of
22
South Miami.
23
7. The proposed development, when considered
24
cumulatively with other development, both present
25
and future, within the Hometown Distrrict, will not
26
create excessive overcrowding or concentration of
27
people or population.
28
B. The City Commission, in granting any special exception,
29
may prescribe any reasonable conditions, restrictions,
30
and limitations it deems necessary or desirable, in order
31
to preserve and promote the intent of the Hometown
32
District Overlay Ordinance.
33
C. Special exceptions, if granted, shall be valid only for
34
the specific design shown in the plans and exhibits
35
submitted as part of the special exception application,
36
as provided in Section 20 -5.2 of the Land Development
37
Code. All deviations from the requirements of the
38
Hometown District Overlay Ordinance incorporated within
39
and reflected on the site plan and exhibits shall be
40
considered a part of the application. Approval of the
41
site plan and exhibits by the City Commission shall
42
constitute approval of the non -use deviations identified
43
on the site plan and exhibits unless the City Commission
44
approves a motion to the contrary. No further individual
2
1
or separate application for deviations approved by the
2
City Commission shall be required. If the applicant
3
wishes to make material changes to the design subsequent
4
to receiving a special exception, the applicant must
5
apply for a new special exception following the procedure
6
set forth herein.
7
D.
Special exceptions, if granted, shall be valid if
8
development, as defined in Section 380.04, Florida
9
Statutes, commences within 24 months from the date of
10
final approval and is substantially completed within 5
11
years from the date of issuance of the first building
12
permit. The time for substantial completion may be
13
extended by the City Commission upon application filed
14
prior to the expiration of the substantial completion
15
period and upon demonstration of good cause.
16
20 -7.52 PROCEDURE FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
17
18
A.
Special exceptions under this Ordinance may be granted
19
only after two public hearings. The first public hearing
20
shall be before the Planning Board, at which time the
21
Planning Board shall review the project and provide to
22
the City Commission an advisory recommendation regarding
23
approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval. The
24
second public hearing shall be held before the City
25
Commission and shall be held no sooner than seven
26
calendar days following the Planning Board hearing.
27
Public notice requirements as specified in Section 20-
28
5.5(C) and (G), Applications Requiring Public Hearings,
29
shall be followed.
30
B.
Requests for special exceptions under this Ordinance
31
shall be in a form acceptable to the City Manager and
32
shall include each exhibit required per Section 20-
33
7.3(B), Application for Development Permit, and per
34
Section 20 -7.4, Site Plan Requirements. In addition, the
35
City Commission at its discretion may require additional
36
exhibits and may defer approval of the special exception
37
application or schedule an additional public hearing or
38
hearings to review those exhibits.
39
C.
The City Manager shall have authority to require
40
additional review and approval by the Environmental
41
Review and Preservation Board for developments involving
42
special exception, which review shall follow the
43
procedure set forth in Section 20 -5.11 of the Land
44
Development Code.
45
D.
The City Commission may grant a special exception upon
46
four (4) affirmative votes of its members.
3
/3
R
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
13
Section 2. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of
this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional
by a court of competent jurisdiction, the holding shall not affect
the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
Section 3. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in
conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed.
Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect immediately at
the time of its passage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1994.
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
hometown.ord
4
MAYOR
It
MORRIS ROSENBERG
DONALD S. ROSENBERG
JOSEPH B. REISMAN
STEPHEN H. REISMAN
GARY M. STEIN
VIA HAND DELIVERY
LAW OFFICES
RosENBERG, REISMAN & STEIN
SUITE 2600
ONE SOUTHEAST THIRD AVENUE
MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131
October 12, 1994
Mayor Neil Carver
Vice -Mayor Paul R. Young
City Commissioner Ann B. Bass
City Commissioner Tom Cunningham
City Commissioner Thomas Todd Cooper
6130 Sunset Drive
South Miami, Florida 33143
Re: Zipp Sporting Goods, Inc.
Dear Mayor, Vice -Mayor and City Commissioners:
TELEPHONE 358.2600
AREA CODE 305
TELECOPIER (305) 375.0328
Attached is a Memorandum regarding the appeal of Zipp Sporting Goods, Inc. from the Code
Enforcement Board Order of Violation which is scheduled to be heard by the City Commission on
October 18, 1994. Your review of the Memorandum will be appreciated.
Very truly yours,
/0
JBR:tlh
C.
cc: Earl Gallop, Esquire (w /copy of enclosure)
MEMORANDUM RE: ZIPP SPORTING GOODS INC.
APPEAL FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD ORDER OF VIOLATION
FILE NO. 93 -800: COMPLAINT NO. 93-956
RE: 5734 S.W. 72nd STREET, SOUTH MIAMI. FLORIDA
History
In June 1993, the Zipp's store was broken into through the store front and more than $9,000 in
merchandise stolen. Following this burglary, 3 -M security film was installed on the store front,
notwithstanding which the premises were again broken into through the store front in July 1993, and
approximately $1,500 in merchandise was stolen. In August 1993, an attempted break -in occurred
which was prevented by South Miami police happening on the scene. After the attempted break -in,
Zipp contracted with Advance Hurricane Shutter Company of South Miami for hurricane /security
shutters. Advance filed application for building permit and proceeded to install the shutters in
October 1993. Unknown to Zipp, the application had not been pursued by Advance and had not
been granted.
Since installation of the shutters, which are closed at night, there has been no break -in nor any
reported attempted break -in. Apparently, the shutters provide the needed security.
Subsequent to the filing of the application by Advance and the installation of the shutters,
Ordinance No. 19 -93 -1545 was enacted which would prohibit the use of the security shutters for
nighttime protection. On February 1, 1994, the Environmental Review and Preservation Board
denied Advance's request for the approval of the shutters it had installed. On February 15, 1994,
Martin Hochman, President of Zipp, brought the matter to the attention of the City Commission
and it was the sense of the City Commission that store front security in downtown South Miami and
the ordinance required further study and consideration. (See extract of Commission meeting
attached).
On August 18, 1994, the Code Enforcement Board found Zipp to be in violation of "Section: 301
SFBC Work Without Permit."
This appeal is taken under Section 20 -6.2 of the South Miami Code, Section (F) of which confers
upon the City Commission broad authority in considering appeals to "vary or modify any regulation
or provision of the Code relating to the use, construction or alteration of buildings or structures or
the use of land, so that the spirit of the Code is observed, public safety and welfare secured, and
substantial justice done." (emphasis added).
Zipp respectfully requests the Order of the Code Enforcement Board be reversed, and that the
Ordinance be reviewed and amended to permit reasonable store front security for businesses
particularly at risk of break -in and burglary, such as sporting goods stores. Zipp is willing to
participate with any committee appointed for such review.
Factors for Consideration:
In the past 18 months, sporting goods stores have been targeted by burglars. In addition to the
Zipp's break -ins and attempted break -in, burglaries have occurred at 3 other sporting goods
locations in South Miami and nearby locations. The locations outside of the City of South Miami
are now protected by hurricane /security shutters. The total cost to date to Zipp for restoration and
repair after break -ins, loss of merchandise, application of security film and shutters is in excess of
$19,600. Although, after careful review of alternatives, it is Zipp's opinion that hurricane /security
shutters provide the best and most reasonable protection, in an effort to extend every possible
cooperation with the City's objectives, Zipp has employed 3 contractors to file applications for
interior security shutters, interior roll-down grills and an interior grid of security bars, respectively,
so that these may be considered by the City.
r
/4/
EXCRAGT FROM MP]UI'ES OF
REGULAR CITY COMMISSICI MEETING ON FEBRUARY 15, 1994
3) Mr. Martin Hochman, Zips's Sper;,ing Goods, 5734 Sunset Drive,
addressed the Commission with racard to the ERRS -'s denial of
shutters for his storefront.. He expiained that he had been
burglarized on two occasions and a : =os= burglarized on two other
occasions. Fie feels that the shutters are very necessary. The
recommended material, Lexar., does not provide the same protection
and it is his opinion that shuttars are the only viable solution to
the Crime Situation.
Discussion was helms. wit. _acard to t -_ South Miami Hometown
Plan which preferred to keep windows uns;.uttared in the downtown
area at night. if there is a problem, the Hometown Plan Consultant
needs to address the problem and solutions can be discussed.
Commissioner Hass stated her Feeling that the at;.ampt of the
Hometown Plan was to make the down=cwn area comfortable and safe
for walking with the w .dows uns u=tered in the evening. However,
it is not the desire cf the Hometown Plan not to have the downtown
area secure.
Vice -Mayor Young stated tha- th.a ccncent of the hometown Plan
may be good, but may not be realistic. He would like a specific
tLme frame of one week in which this can be resolved. The City
Manager should work with the ccnsu:tarts on the Hometown Plan to
address the matter.
Commissioner Cunningham stated than his business had numerous
break -ins until the shutters were instal-led. Now the business is
secure. The City needs to come tc some conclusion of how to secure
the downtown area.