HomeMy WebLinkAboutM-80-0063•
LOCATION/LEGAL`
OWNER/APPLICANT
ZONING
REQUEST.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Z
ZONING FACT SHEET
3590 Crystal View Court
Lots 11 and 12, Block 2
CRYSTAL VIEW (12-47)
Jeffrey Tardiff
3590 Crystal View Court
Miami, Florida 33133 PH:
R-1 '(One Family)
854-8.383
Variance to allow an existing fence, on above
site, as per plans or. file, 9'10" at the
highest point (8' 'allowed), , and also with an
arch'8' 1T" at 'the highest point` (8' allowed);,'
and a pillar 10'5" high (8' `allowed)
.
PLANNING:.
DEPARTMENT DENIAL. There is no hardship which justifies.
the granting of this variance. A maximum
height ofeight feet was established for walls
along a property line in order to assure •that'
neither adjacent property owners nor the public
are deprived of their rights to light and air.
Since the subject wall exceeds these maximums;
it likewise infringes on others' rights.
ONING BOARD Denied on December 17, 1979.
0
O p 1
0`- 6 3
i t II .i t c %, .0 "i T� a
L•
.1
December 31, 1979
Mayor and City Commission
Attention:- Mr. Joseph R. Grassie
City of Miami, Florida
re: VARIANCE - DENIED BY ZONING BOARD
APPEALED TO CITY COMMISSION BY
THE APPLICANT: Jeffrey Tardiff
3590 Crystal View Court
Lots 11 and 12, Block 2;.
CRYSTAL VIEW (12-47)
Gentlemen:
The. Miami Zoning Board, at its meeting of December 17, 1979, Item #2,
following an advertised Hearing,'; adopted.:Resolution No. ZB 249-79
by a 6 to 0 vote DENYING Variance from Ordinance 6.871, ARTICLE IVY,"`;
Section.1.7(1) (2), to allow an existing fence on Lots 11 and 12,: Block
2; CRYSTAL VIEW (12-47), being 3590 Crystal view Court, as per plans
on file, 9'10" at the highest point (8' 0"' allowed), and also with an
arch 8'11"' at the highest point (8'0". allowed) , and a pillar 10' 5"
high (8'0" allowed); zoned R-1 (One Family).
One objector was present at the
present at the meeting
A RESOLUTION to provide for. this Variance has beer: preparedby the
City Attorneyoffice
and submitted for consideraLion of the City
Commission.
cm
Z. M. 45
cc: Law Department
Planning Department
Pi 1NMI `iG DEPARTMENT .RECOMLMENDATIO*T;
Tentative City Commission` date:
ur'el io � r ugon
Acting Director
Planning and Zoning Boards
Administrat ion
Januar
P E T I T 1 0 is;
CLTY OF MIAMI BOARD OF COMMISSLONERS
The following below,personally signed,Homeowners whose residence
lies within 375 feet of residence 3590 Crystal View Court owned
by Jeffrey Tardiff hereby request that: the City Commission grant
to petitioner Jeffrey Tardiff a variance as applied for on the s..
reverse side of this sheet of paper.
NaMe Homeowner'
...,
. ss-cls---, - L6- \c"..) •
•-___,-, • I, \A i, 7
kJ/di (10-6 elt.>-V '-----
°->•• <74. it - .. c...„ , •
....-
Address
Telephone Number
6'Yi
-
8 0
Variance
Lots 11 and 12`Block ;
CRYSTAL `,VIEW; (12-47)
This is to certify that there; are 20 property owners on the
certified list for the above application. There are 7 property'.
owner's signatures on the appeal petition. This constitutes over
10% which is required for an appeal.
Aurelio E.PerezhLugon,s
Acting Director
Planning. and Zoning Boards
Administration
3590 CRYSTAL VIEW COURT
Lots 11 and 12, Block 2;
CRYSTAL VIEW (12-47)
Variance from Ordinance 6871, ARTICLE IV,
Section 17(1)(2),to allow an existing
fence on above site, as per plans on
file, 9'10" at the highest point (8'0"
allowed),and also with an arch 8'11" at
the highest point (8'0" allowed), and
a pillar 10'5" high (6'0" allowed):
Zoned R-1 (One Family).
Secretary filed proof of Publication of Legal Notice of Hearing
and administered oath to all persons testifying at this Hearing.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: DENIAL
There is no hardship which justifies the
granting of this variance. A maximum height
of eight feet was established for walls along
a property line in order to assure that neither
adjacent property owners nor the public are
deprived of their rights to light and air.
Since the subject wall exceeds these maximums
it likewise infringes on the rights of others.
Ms. Susan Groves, Planning Department: Mme. Chairman, Members of
the Board, the application before you tonight is for several variances
for an existing wall. While it is true that a permit was obtained from
the Building Department for a maximum of an 8' wall, this wan several
months back, it is my understanding that the applicant or his contractor
modified the walls and fences on the site without the knowledge of the
Building Department and without the consent of the Building Department
and it wasn't until final inspection was made that it was discovered by
the building Department that incorrect modifications, illegal modifications
had been made, modifications which do not meet the Zoning Ordinance. At
this time the applicant was required to come to seek a variance, several
variances, from the Zoning Board. Now with regards to the variances, the
Planning Department is recommending denial. We feel that there is no
hardship that has not been self-imposed by the applicant which would warran
the granting of the variances. We feel that the granting of the variances
would impose an undue hardship on the citizens of Miami. It would block
the air and light travelling between this property and the adjacent right-
of-way and between the visual corridors to the nay. It would greatly
restrict it. So for these reasons we feel that the variances should be
denied.
Mr. Tardiff: My name is Jeffrey Tardiff. My address is 3590
Crystal View Court. Mme. Chairman, I brought a group of slides. Would
it be possible that I stand at that podium so that I could show them?
They're very germane to our discussion.
Ms. Callahan: Alright, the only thing'is you can't leave the speaker
over there either. Perhaps you can take it with you.
Mr. Tardiff: When I had recently come to the Zoning Board to
obtain a building permit to build the wall under discussion, I presented
a set of plans which were approved; which had a covenant that allowed me
-31- December 17, 1979 Item 2
ZB
80-6S -
to place this wall on the property line. I went through the standard
procedures and I obtained that covenant. I; have -with me -a-copy of the
original of that particular Plan. This plan is not able to be projected
and so I would like to give the plan to the Board to review while I
speak and discuss the modifications that I conducted on the original plan.
On the plan you will notice that it was my original intention to
create a wall that would go from the waterfront, as I point with my pen,
(projection map) down the property line all the way . . (audio difficulty
Continuing from this particular point, the wall was going to be 8' tall
all the way to the very end right here where there would be an opening
14' wide for cars to enter. The wall was then going to start up again and
go across the west property line all the way to the back to adjoin and
abut the 8' tall wall that the'L'Ilermitage has erected. You'll note on
the plan that this was to be a masonry wall with a stucco facing. The
plan that you're looking at right now, represents the original. I had
contracted with contractors to create this wall and at the request of some
of my neighbors, I modified it at the last minute. I'd like to switch
projections and show you the modifications if I may. I think you can see
the water to your left. You can see the wall continue down to the arch-
way. As you can see. we have the waterfront right. down here. This wall
wall
at this point is 7'4". On the plan that you're looking at, it was pro-
posed to be 8' not 7'4". The continues up until the arch which is
right here. This arch, right at the break in the arch at this point is
8'. This. is 7'4". The plan calls for 8'. This arch from this point
across this arc violates .the Code and goes up about 1' above. This pillar
breaks the Code and goes from 8' to above which is designated on my request
for a variance.
You will notice a tennis court fence. Some o£"my neighbors . I
com-
olained thatdidn't,think a masonry wall wasn't so;;beautiful
tended to agree`weyith them after they descrihd some of the lovely walls in
Coconut trove and'. so "I modified it to make it aesthetically' more pleasing
and �I. think you'll agree; thati that'`Coral Rock wall is . a Mot better than
a masonry stucco' wall 'though it's quite a bit more expensive.
We °are now standing ;close down towards the waterfront and looking
west - this overlooks my tennis' court. This .is the arch once again.
That's the break point at 8'. This is the violation zone where it goes
over about 11".just for the cap. I created that difference just to make it
aesthetically beautiful instead of having a solid, one piece, non-stop
8' G.B.S.' wall which would not' have had this interruntion; would have had
no Coral., Rock; would have been: taller than this wall and would have con-
tinued te full property line.'' This is another'.closeup of the arch. I
think it's particularly beautiful and adds a lot more grace and grandeur
to the Grove, `;toCrystal View Court than the original masonry
wall would
have given the street.
This is another closeup,of the wall. This wall is beautiful. I
wanted to please my neighbors. I didn't want to set up an eyesore for them
with a C.B.S. wall 235' long. And ;,in`.discussing with several of them,
Judge Lieberman who's one of my neighbors on the block and several other
neighbors, I`` went and looked at what` I' thought was the best looking wall
in the Grove opposite theCoconut Grove'Playhouse. And this is a copy of
it. This`is King Neptune and°it was my intention to either place him on
top of the pillar so he'd be in full view of the street, or to create a
slight lift right here and elevate him about 3' and place him in front of
this Coral Rock pillar. I wanted the. rose bushes to grow at his feet up
this Coral Rock wall to adorn the top.
I modified the plans further by this tennis court fence at the
request of several of my neighbors. They felt that if I created the 8' wall
from the waterfront all the way down the property line, that it would very
substantially block airflow to the rest of the street. And they considered
that I was psychologically creating a castle with everything around it
December 17, 1979 Item 1
ZB
80-63
except the moat. I agree with them that such a wall 8' tall for 235'
gives kind of a prison effect and though I paid the architect handsomely
for it, I agreed with some of my neighbors that it was better to have
this change -of approach. At this part of the tennis court there are two
thicknesses of the wire. This opens up and closes across my carport so
that when you're playing tennis, it closes one end of the tennis court
so that the balls will not hurl down towards the waterfront. This
area of the tennis court has been coated within the last month with con-
crete stain by . . . This is the playing area, it's green with the
traditional white lines and the out-of-bounds area is tennis court red.
The whole area is now colored. I should point out that I have my office
in my home. I use this tennis court, actually, as a parking lot. I get
to play about onceevery two weeks' for an hour on a Saturday.
Mr. 'Carner:`,:Mme. Chairman „'excuse me, we're not planning on buying
the house and..really,.I think ;we,,could>address;ourselves to.the'excess
heights 'of , the wall above 0' . It ' s kind of late and`: we're only. on the
second Item and it's almost ten. o'clock.
Mr. Tardiff: I would like to point out the intention for my
modification. This modification was at the request` of a number of my'
neighbors. It was not my original plan. You're looking at the plan that
I gave to you.
Callahan: Go` ahead.
Mr. Tardiff: These vines are now up to about this level. The
original C.B.S. wall non-stop was to be this tall with no opening in
this area except this is where the walkway was to he, about 40" wide.
The opening was to be down at the, end and that opening was to be recessed
5'<and was going to be solid, iron doors. I nut in a tennis court fence.
I used the elevation of a tennis court fence because it is a tennis court,
-and when you make it 8' tall it doesn't look appropriate. You can't cut
these particular fences down, You have to take it all off and replace it
with an 8' strip. I'll tell you directly that because of one of my
neighbor's objectionsto this, oftaking this fence down and replacing it
with a Coral Rock wall a' tall. It would increase the value of my
house. It would cost me $6,000 to $8,000"and increase the value of my
house `$60,000 to $80,000. However, I.have to respect the wishes of my
neighbors of which one gentleman here,; Marvin Dunn, will later testify
that it is rny desire to go along with ;what the neighbors would consider
to be the most beautiful way to handle; my. particular parking lot, tennis
court set-up. The vines are very pretty and by this time next year they
should go right to the top of this fence.
These are security liqht posts and do not involve this particular
variance. They're not tennis court lights. Judge Lieberman, a neighbor,
called me and told rye if his testimony would help in a favorable decision
that he would like a decision to be postponed to a later time because he
would like to speak on this particular subject.
This is from the street looking west. Here are two more statues.
Vines are now growing up towards my neighbor, Sylvia (oldstein's property.
If I modify this and am turned down for this variance it would be my
intention to take down this fence the entire length and revert to my
original plan. however, I've been requested by my neighbors to ask for
this variance. I have found this fence has tut down my break-in and
entering rate strikingly but I have found people have banged into the
gate and brbken the lock as you see right here and I do know that an 8'
high wall would give me better security.
This is where my cars park. That's one_of_my_ patient's cars.and ___
this is a 4-car garage platform. The tennis court net is right on that
white line. This is a closeup to show you the nature of the particular
vines to beautify the street. This is Alamanda. This is a statue which
I haven't decided where it, should be placed but I'll probably take the
recommendation of my neighbor.
The first person who asked me to modify my Plan is here tonight,
my neighbor, Mrs. Goldstein. She told me she didn't like that wall at
all. She considered it would block all her ventilation. She insisted
she would do anything to stop it at the time. At primarily her request,
I modified this plan asking her personally if she would like a tennis
court fence instead. She said yes, she thought it would be much better.
She later complained that the tennis court was ugly because it was plain
concrete. That has been changed now; white lines, green playing area,
red, out-of-bounds. I could go along with her request to take down that
fence, to tell you it only cost $2,000; 1 could use it on my other property
line by my 4-car garage. My neighbors don't want me to do that. A number
of VeoPle have asked me to appear and request thin variance because they
would rather have that tennis court fence and my little arch which goes
11" above and that Pillar with Hing Neptune on it, rather than looking at -
an 0' high wall extending 235'. It is for these reasons that I have come
tonight. I've asked Dr. Marvin Dunn if he would say a few words as to
his personal reaction to the wall.
Dr. Dunn: Mme. Chairman, Marvin Dunn, 3530 Crystal View Court.
I will not impose upon the Board's patience but I would like to say that
having lived on this street now for about a year -and -a -half, this is kind
of an unusual street. The people on this street know each other. It's a
very short street. People talk to each other and everyone has been aware
of the development of Dr. Tardiff's property. Quite frankly, we were
among those who were not satisfied with the idea of an 8' wall extending
the length of that prooerty. We were very pleased when Dr. Tardiff modi-
fied his plan and placed a fence instead of a wall on the property. Most
of the neighbors that I have spoken to have not been in opposition to this
and have, in fact, been supporters of Dr. Tardiff's efforts to please the
neighbors. 1 think it should be said on his behalf that at every point
where he has made the changes of major development of his nroperty, he
has gone out of his way to check with all of the neighbors to get our re-
action to his intentions. I think he has done more of that than some of
us have done with others of us. We certainly see nothing wrong with what
he intends to do and support him fully in his intention to improve his
property. We would hope that this Board would favorably grant the modi-
fications of his plans.
Ms. . . . : I'm Lisa . . . I live at 941 North Venetian Drive.
We used to live at 3590 Crystal View Court. One of the reasons we sold
this property to Dr. Tardiff was there wasn't a day we didn't have to
call the police. We made an application to Rose Gordon to please do
something that we just couldn't take it any more. We told Dr. Tardiff
when we sold him the property was that the first thing you should do is to
make a wall all around it because it is a terrible thing what people do to
you there.
Ms. Callahan: She says she complained to the police twice a week
when she lived there.
Ms. . . .: Mr. Haggard from the Zoning Division came and tried
to help us find a solution to this. He says that the only way to keep
people out of there was to build a wall and it was the only way we would
have peace.
Mr. . . I live at 941 North Venetian Drive. I've lived there
for three years. The only point I think is obvious here is that the City
of Miami, in front of his house, has created a park that is open 24 hours
a day. Unlike some City parks that are closed at sundown or 10:00, this
park is open 24 hours a day; you're permitted to camp there, to park there,
-34- December 17, 1979 Item 2
ZB
or to barbecue there 24 hours a day. And this has created not only a
problem of people passing on your property but their noise, their pollution
from a barbecue fire in the middle of the night. Or, a radio playing at
2:00 in the morning, or their dancing in the street, but this is permitted.
I think this man should be permitted to defend himself against this City's
recreation area it has created and has refused to do anything about.
Mr. Gort: Which park are you talking about?
Mr. . . .: Do you see where the street narrows? From that down,
parking theoretically is not permitted. I say 'theoretically' it is
permitted if You go down to Picnic, it is Permitted. You're not permitted
to park overnight. When you call the police and tell them there are
campers there, they'll ask 'How big is the fire?'
Mr. Gort: Where is the park you're talking about?
Mr. . . Right there. The end part of the street that is
separated off; that is not available to automobiles.
Mr. Gort: You're saying that is a City park?
Mr. . . The City says that it is. The City says you cannot
prevent people from camping there; barbecueing, picnicing or partying
there.
Ms. Basila: There's no facility for that there is there?
Mr. •: That's right. The man from Sanitation refused to walk
itfilthy.this
out there necause was so But is something that the City
.
has maintained for year now and they refuse to do anything about it.
I told Dr. Tardiff when he bought the property that if I was going to
stay there, I'd build myself an 8' wall all the way around this thing.
Ms. Callahan: Anyone else to speak in favor? Opposition?
Mrs. Goldstein: My name is Sylvia Goldstein. I live at 3560 Crystal
View Court. My property adjoins Dr. Tardiff's. I've lived in my home
for 22 years. My lot is 75'X 80'. This lot is only 80' deep also. I
have approximately 6' or 7' between my home and his property line. I
asked him, when he first bought the property, and he spoke of putting up
a high wall, I said 'Do you mean to tell me you'd put an 8' wall within
6' of my house?' I told him I wouldn't get air circulation. I have an
8' wall now between me and L'Hermitage in the back. I asked him if he
would put an 8' wall there too? He said he had an alternative, he'd put
up a fence. When he pulled the permit, I told him it would be nice.
But when he put up the fence, he put up a 10' fence. Now the laws says
you have to pull a permit in a certain area for a certain height. Why
do we give him a permit for one thing and he builds another? Now, he
says he's planting all these beautiful vines which, when grown, well -
I looked at that fence yesterday and it comes up to the top of my house -
the house itself; maybe the roof is higher. When those vines are grown
on the 10' fence, any air in that area will be blowing over my house not
into the yard in any way. That is my objection to the fence. I like Dr.
Tardiff as a neighbor. He has tried to improve his property. But I
cannot go along with a 10' fence. I think it is unfair. It's not in
consistency with the neighborhood. Nobody has a fence that high or would
even ask for it. He put cement all over the property which, in the summer-
time, makes a hot glow from the earth but that's his business; that's his
eroperty and that's what he wants to do with it. Fine.
When Mr. . . . owned that property - prior to him, the . . .
owned it. They built a seawall that was beyond the City's street - they
made theirs wider. When the . . . bought the property, they put up
a wall towards the end so no one could come over but they put it up the
- December' 17, 1979 Item 2
ZB
•
whole distance. So he put-up the fence and solid cement - you cannot
even see the ocean on the right hand 'side. They blocked the view but
it was a short wall sonobody complained. I rarely walk down that end.
It's a dead-end street to the ocean but all the other neighbors who walk
their dogs say that now that Dr. Tardiff Put the whole wall that way,
there's no view. Before, you could look through the'. . yard. I mean
there's one thing added on to another thing. Soon we will have no one -
family residences. He bought the propertyand has his practice there..,_
Fine. The man is making a living" and we go along with that. At night
I hear a 10' gate opening and I hear a clanking out of a sound sleep. It's
like a prison. The . do not live on that street. A lot of the
neighbors > on that block object to the looks of it because the " fence goes
right up to the sidewalk. It's just not as beautiful as he portrays it.
I'd like to have Dr. Tardiff show you a picture of my house.
(M
. Goldstein ` hour;e Shown on 'slide)
Mrs. Goldstein: There it is. no you see the height;of the fence?
The back `: has an 8' wall. • Ilis fence goes , up; to the ton of my ,house.
When all ' those- vines :ar.e grown, there will be no air: next" to =me. At
least an 8' fence would come below the roof of my house; the eaves of the
house so at least sorne air would pass down into that area - that 7' area.
Jis.' Callahan: Thank you. Anyone else opposed? Alright, we'll
close the public hearing and have discussion among the Board Members.
Tardiff: May I:make `a closing comment? If Mrs. Goldstein would
like, I would readily agree to plant no' vines on the fence. next to her
home. The fact that the fence is 10' tall and not .8,,'"Protects those
windows that vou saw facing that fence. When playing tennis, they will
readily .. go. over . an 8' wall and less so, over the 10' wall. We can main-
tain the ventilation for not having any; vines. There are no vines on
that fence by her house right now. `: Actually, the coverage is exactly the
same. If the variance is denied, the other`. alternative is a solid, 2'
thick, 8' high wall and that will really stop ventilation. I'd like to
make a suggestion to ;the. Board. I °personally would like to do what the
people on the street would prefer. I could, go either way with this; either
the solid wall or the fence as it is. I'm not at all opposed to the
people on this street taking a vote as to which of the two options that
they would prefer. And I would like the Board to consider if they're in
favor of the fence as it is, alright fine - if you're not in favor of
the fence, would you kindly consider that a petition be taken of the
people on the street considering what they would prefer for that. Because
if it's denied, then I'm forced to erect the 8' wall and it was my origi-
nal plan.
Mr. Carner: Mme. Chairman, I have a copy of the . from the
Building Department. First, for clarity's sake to the Board because I
know I was terribly confused, the, stone wall is not a contention here at
all. It's under 8'. The, only area that comes into any kind of disagree-
ment is the arch ;which, extends over 8' which could readily be removed if
we should deem so. And the top of the pillar not the whole pillar -
lop off part of it which also could easily be removed. The fence is above
the allowed height. To lower a chain link fence does not mean taking it
out of the ground. It means you take a hack saw or cutter - you lop it
off at 8' and you either put fresh wire at 8' or you cut down the existing
wird and twist it together. I: also note that the . . plan calls for
a 5 high fence next to Mrs. Goldstein's house;'7. think he's allowed 8'.
Dr. Tardiff: You're reading that plan incorrectly. The original
plan is an 8' high solid wall.
t•1r. Carner: Well, I'll tell you, it calls for an 8' high wall at
the corner turning 5'._rand ,thenit calls for a 5'high wall going all the
way back = parallel to Mrs. 'Goldstein 's house. You may. not have recalled
that, but.
Dr.
that's what the plan calls for.
Tardiff: I'11 check it again later..
Mr. Carner: So the fact that he has chain link there is a very
easy thingto modify; the fact that he, has two areas of violation in
Coral, also an easy, thing to modify, and very" frankly. I resent the
intimidation that somehow by our attempting to enforce the Zoning Code,
we will somehow be contributing to destroyjnq the neighborhood by forcing
him to build quote 'A 2'"thick ;8' high stone wall.'
Mr. Rolle: I'd like to ask Dr. Tardiff a question When You
ermit, were pulled the p you informed of the height limitations?
Dr. Tardiff: Yes I was.
Dr. Tardiff: I ::wanted the original Plan. My modification " was at
the request of, my`neighbors. You don't think that I would pay an
architect to make the plan you're looking at and change it. I changed it
at the request of my neighbors, specifically Mrs. Goldstein and then the
others.
Mr. Rolle: I don't want to belabour this matter but the infractions
against the rules were not committed by the neighbors. I can appreciate
your reference to the neighbors but I think that what the rule calls for
still stands regardless of the feeling of the neighbors. I think if we
were operating from the existing rules, then of course, you're obligated
to be in compliance. If the neighbors said to build a 3' high fence or
a 16' high fence,`I think you'd have to make a determination as to what
you could: legally do. I think, legally, you had an obligation to be in
compliance and I think youanswered in the affirmative as to your being
informed as to what the height limitations were.
Ms.` Callahan:
motion.
motion.
Mr.__Carner Mme. Chairman, I, move the recommendation,of_ the
Planning :':Department and hope. that the Doctor wiU continue to show the.
desire to.be"a""good ne"ighhor.
Ms. I3asila: I second i
Mr. Perez -Lugones We have
and seconded byMs. fasila.
by Ear. Carner
80-63 1