HomeMy WebLinkAboutClass II Special Permit No. 09-0107CITY OF MIAIMI
CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT
FINAL DECISION
File No. 09-0107
To: Carlisle Group I Development, LLC
1000 NW 1st Avenue
Miami, FL. 33136
From: Ana Gelabert, Director
Planning Department
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT A FINAL DECISION HAS BEEN REACHED -DN THE FOLLOWING MATTER:
Title: New Construction (Metro Apartments)
Address: 1000 NW Vt Avenue, Overtown
Final Decision:
E7 Approval
Q Approval with conditions
Q Denial
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS
The subject proposal has been reviewed for Class II Specia Permit pursuant to Article 6, Section
616.3, 923.2, and 1612 of Ordinance 11000, as amended, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami,
Florida. Section 616.3 states explicitly that a Class 11 Special Permit shall be required prior to approval
of any permit affecting the location, relocation or alteration of ainy structure, sign, awning, landscaping,
parking, area or vehicular way visible from a public street or waterfront walkway. Section 923 states
that reduction in stall dimensions shall be by Class II Special Permit. Section 1612 states that unless
otherwise required by the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, the Code of the City of Miami, as amended
or the South Florida Building Code, as amended, all City of Miami Design Standards and Guidelines,
incorporated herein by reference, may be waived pursuant to a Class 11 Special Permit.
Pursuant to Section 1301.2 of the above cited Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Department has made
referrals to the following Departments and Boards.
• Zoning Department.
• Overtown NET Office, Neighborhood Enhancement Team.
• UDRB, Urban Development Review Board.
Their comments and recommendations have been duly considered and are reflected in this final
decision, In reviewing this application, pursuant to Section 1306 of the Zoning Ordinance, the following
findings have been made;
FINDINGS:
• It is found that the proposal consists of a new building for affordable housing (94 units) with
commercial areas (4,000 sq ft) at ground floor and parking garage.
• It is found that that the Internal Design Review Committoe initially reviewed the proposed project
on January 20, 2009. The committee recommended sending it back to the architect to respond to
the Committee's comments.
• It is found that the Internal Design Review Committee reviewed a modified project on March 3 and
March 10, 2009 and was recommended approval.
• On May 20, 2009 the Urban Development Review Board reviewed and recommended approval
with conditions the subject proposal.
• It is found that the applicant is requesting a reduction of size of the three (3) required loading dock
from 12' by 35' to 10' by 20
• It is found that that the applicant is requesting a waiver of guides and standards which consist of a
waiver of the required backup space from twenty three (23) feet to twenty two (22) feet.
• It is found that the landscape plan submitted with this application complies with the Miami -Dade
Landscape Ordinance.
• It is found that with regard to the criteria set forth in Sec. 1305 of the City of Miami Zoning
Ordinance, the application has been reviewed and found sufficient except for the issues listed
above and contained in the conditions.
Based on the above findings and the considered advice of the officers and agencies consulted on this
matter and pursuant to Section 1306 of the Zoning Ordinance, the subject proposal is hereby
approved with conditions subject to the plans submitted by the applicant and on file with the
Planning Department and further subject to the following conditions;
1. The applicant shall provide the Planning Departmeni: with a temporary construction parking
plan, with an enforcement policy and a construction noise management plan with an
enforcement policy.
2. The Class II approval is conditioned on a full review by the Office of Zoning, any substantial
changes that arise due to zoning comments will require a new Class II Special Permit; minor
changes due to zoning comments shall be considered substantially in compliance with this
approval.
NOTICE
The final decision of the Director may be appealed to the Zoning Board by any aggrieved party,
within fifteen (15) days of the date of issuance by filing a written appeal and appropriate fee
with the Office of Hearing Boards, located at 444 S.W. 2"'' Avenue, 7i" Floor, Miamill., FI. 33139.
Telephone number (305) 416-2030 1
Signature / Date kdeZ'
Ana Gelabert, Nowtor
Planning Department
DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA
(1) Respond to the physical
contextual environment taking
into consideration urban form
and natural features;
(2) Siting should minimize the
impact of automobile parking
and driveways on the pedestrian
environment and adjacent
properties;
(3) Buildings ion corner lots
should be ori�nted to the corner
and public street fronts.
(1) A project shall be designed
to comply with all applicable
landscape ordinances;
(2) Respond to the neighborhood
context;
(3) Create a transition in bulk
and scale;
(4) Use architectural styles
and details (such as roof lines
and fenestration), colors and
materials derivative from
surrounding area;
(5) Articulate the building facade
vertically and horizontally in
intervals that conform to the
existing structures in the vicinity.
(1) Promote pedestrian
interaction;
(2) Design facades that
respond primarily to the
hurnan scale;
(3) Provide active, not blank
facades. Where blank walls
are unavoidable, they should
receive design treatment.
APPLICABILITY COMPLIANCE
I) Site and Urban Planni
Yes, Yes.
Yes. Yes.
Yes, Yes,
11) Architecture and Landscape Architecture:
Yes
Yes.
Yes,
Yes,
Yes,
III) Pedestrian Oriented Development,
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
3
Yes
Yes.
Yes.
Yes,
Yes.
Yes,
Yes.
Yes,
(1) Provide usable open space
that allows for convenient and
visible pedestrian access from
the public sidewalk;
(2) Landscaping, including plant
material, trellises, special
pavements, screen walls, planters
and similar features should be
appropriately incorporated to
enhance the project.
(1) Design for pedestrian and
vehicular safety to minimize
conflict points;
(2) Minimize the number and
Width
(1) Provide landscaping that
screen undesirable elements
(2) Building sites should locate
service elements away from
street front where possible or
screened from view
(3) Screen parking garage
structures with program uses.
IV) Strectscape and Open ;Space:
N/A N/A
Yes Yes
V) Vehicular Access and PE rk� ina:
Yes. Yes.
Yes. Yes.
VI) Screening
Yes Yes
Yes Yes.
N/A
4