Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-10-0220Vop City of Miami Legislation < U R �O Resolution: R-10-0220 File Number: 04-01208 City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33133 www.miamigov.com Final Action Date: 5/27/2010 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), DENYING THE APPEAL BY MORNINGSIDE CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC. AND ROD ALONSO, RON STEBBINS, SCOTT CRAWFORD AND ELVIS CRUZ; AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD, THEREBY APPROVING THE CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION NO. 03-0309, ISSUED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR ON JULY 21, 2004, TO ALLOW NEW CONSTRUCTION, SUBJECT TO THE MODIFICATIONS AS ARE PROVIDED HEREIN, LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 5101 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, an appeal of the Zoning Board decision of October 4, 2004, which denied the appeal challenging the issuance of the Class II Special Permit and granted the Class II Special Permit for the proposed project to be built at 5101 Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Florida, filed by the Morningside Civic Association, Inc. and Rod Alonso, Ron Stebbins, Scott Crawford and Elvis Cruz; and WHEREAS, the City Commission, after careful consideration of this matter, including, legal argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the evidence presented at the Zoning Board, finds the application for Class II Special Permit does meet the applicable requirements of Zoning Ordinance No. 11000, as amended ("Zoning Ordinance"), and deems it advisable and in the best interest of the general welfare of the City of Miami and its inhabitants to deny the appeal and affirm, subject to certain conditions and modifications provided herein, the decision of the Zoning Board and the Planning Director and deny the appeal of Class II Special Permit as hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, the City Commission has made certain written findings and determinations based on the provisions of §1305 of the Zoning Ordinance, which provide, in part, that conditional approvals may be made when certain conditions are required in order for special permits to be found in compliance with all applicable criteria, and they have been used to approve the Class II Special Permit for this new construction, subject to the conditions and safeguards set forth in Section 1305 of the Zoning Ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: Section 1. The recitals and findings contained in the Preamble to this Resolution are adopted by reference and incorporated as if fully set forth in this Section. Section 2. The decision of the Zoning Board to deny the appeal by Morningside Civic Association, Inc. and Rod Alonso, Ron Stebbins, Scott Crawford and Elvis Cruz, of Class II Special Permit application no. 03-0309 issued by the Planning Director on July 21, 2004, to allow new construction for the property located at approximately 5101 Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Florida, as legally described in attached "Exhibit A," is affirmed, and to allow the Class II Special Permit is affirmed and City of Miand Page I of 4 File Id. 04-01208 (Version: 12) Printed On: 7/28/2017 File Number: 04-01208 Enactment Number: R-10-0220 approved; providing however, it is subject to the modifications, conditions and safeguards set forth herein. Section 3. Section 1305 of the Zoning Ordinance, as it existed in 2003 when this application was filed for this Class II Special Permit for this Project, to be located at 5101 Biscayne Boulevard, as proposed by the Applicant are among the applicable regulations for this Project. The City Commission takes notice of the provisions of §1305 in their consideration of this appeal based on the record received from the Zoning Board (this decision is based upon the record from the Zoning Board and argument of counsel). The City Commission takes notice of the following sections of the Zoning Ordinance as it existed in 2003: (Ord. No. 10863, § 1, 3-28-91; Ord. No. 10976, § 1, 4-20-92) Sec. 1305. Considerations generally; standards; findings and determinations required. As appropriate to the nature of the special permit involved and the particular circum -stances of the case, the following considerations and standards shall apply generally, in ad-dition to any other standards and requirements set forth concerning the class or kind of permit being considered. City agents, agencies, or boards charged with decisions concerning special permits shall make, or cause to be made, written findings and determinations concerning such of the following matters as are applicable in the case, shall reflect such considerations and standards specifically in the record, and shall be guided by such considerations and standards in their decisions as to issuance of permits, with or without conditions and safeguards, or denial of applications. 1305.1. Ingress and egress. Review for adequacy shall be given to ingress and egress to the property and structure and uses thereon, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or other emergency. 1305.2. Offstreet parking and loading. Review for adequacy shall be given to offstreet parking and loading facilities as related to adjacent streets, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and conve-nience, internal traffic flow and control, arrangement in relation to access in case of fire or other emergency, and screening and landscaping. 1305.3. Refuse and service areas Review for adequacy shall be given to the location, scale, design, and screening of refuse and service areas; to the manner in which refuse is to be stored; and to the.manner and timing of refuse collection and deliveries, shipments, or other service activities, as such matters relate to the location and nature of uses on adjoining properties and to the location and character of adjoining public ways. 1305.4. Signs and lighting Review for adequacy shall be given to the number, size, character, location, and orienta-tion of proposed signs, and of proposed lighting for signs and premises, with particular refer-ence to traffic safety, glare, and compatibility and harmony with adjoining and nearby prop-erty and the character of the area. 1305.5. Utilities. Review for adequacy shall be given to utilities required, with particular reference to availability and capacity of systems, location of connections, and potentially adverse appear-ance or other adverse City of Miand Page 2 of 4 File M. 04-01208 (Version: 12) Printed On: 7/28/2017 File Number: 04-01208 Enactment Number: R-10-0220 effects on adjoining and nearby property and the character of the area. 1305.6. Drainage. Review for adequacy shall be given to provision for drainage, with particular reference to effect on adjoining and nearby properties and on general drainage systems in the area. Where major drainage volumes appear likely and capacity of available systems is found marginal or inadequate, consideration shall be given to possibilities for recharge of groundwater supply on the property, temporary retention with gradual discharge, or other remedial measures. 1305.7. Preservation of natural features. Review for appropriateness shall be given to provision for the preservation of existing vegetation and geological features whenever possible. 1305.8. Control of potentially adverse effects generally. In addition to the review of detailed items indicated above, as appropriate to the particular class or kind of special permit and the circumstances of the particular case, review for appro-priateness shall be given to potentially adverse effects generally on adjoining and nearby properties, the area, the neighborhood, or the city, of the use or occupancy as proposed, or its location, construction, design, character, scale or manner of operation. Where such potentially adverse effects are found, consideration shall be given to special remedial measures appro-priate in the particular circumstances of the case, including screening or buffering, land-scaping, control of manner or hours of operation, alteration of proposed design or construction of buildings, relocation of proposed open space or alteration of use of such space, or such other measures as are required to assure that such potential adverse effects will be eliminated or minimized to the maximum extent reasonably feasible, and that the use or occupancy will be compatible and harmonious with other development in the area to a degree which will avoid substantial depreciation of the value of nearby property. Sec. 1306. Conditions and safeguards. The agent, agency, or body of the city designated by this zoning ordinance as having responsibility for issuance or denial of each of the classes of special permits set out in this article 13 shall have authority to attach to the grant of any such special permit such conditions and safeguards as may be necessary for the purposes of this zoning ordinance in the particular case. The City Commission also takes notice of § 907.3.1 and § 907.3.2 of Zoning Ordinance 11000 as it existed in 2003 as follows: 907.3. Setbacks and heights regarding abutting lots. 907.3.1. Rule concerning setbacks where abutting lots have different zoning designations. In - this type of case, the most restrictive condition applies to all development on both sides of the district boundary 907.3.2. Rule concerning height of buildings abutting residential districts. Where districts allowing building heights over forty (40) feet abut residential districts on the rear, such additional height shall set back one (1) foot in the horizontal for every two (2) additional feet in the vertical dimension. Section 4. Based upon the applicable provisions of Zoning Ordinance 11000 in effect in 2003 City of Miand Page 3 of 4 File M. 04-01208 (Version: 12) Printed On: 7/28/2017 File Number: 04-01208 Enactment Number: R-10-0220 discussed by the counsel for the Applicant/ Developer and for the original Appellants inclusive of the Morningside Civic Association, Inc. and further based on the record distributed to the City Commission for this appellate hearing in conjunction with arguments of counsel for the respective parties identified above the following findings of fact and determinations set forth below are made by the City Commission with respect to the subject property: (1) The Zoning Board in its 2004 decision referenced in §2 of this Resolution did not apply the correct law or misapplied the law, i.e. did not observe the essential requirements of law in its 2004 decision, failing to require any setback at all for the Project on this Property in that, the Property abuts the Morningside Neighborhood, a single family residential district, the most restrictive setback was required under § 907.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance then in effect, or alternatively, the set back should have been included for the Project as required by § 907.3.1; (2) The Zoning Board in its 2004 decision did not apply the correct law , i.e. did not observe the essential requirements of law in its 2004 decision, in failing to consider the § 1305 considerations relative to this Project on the Property, notably in falling to address or consider the Control of Potentially Adverse Impacts under § 1305.8 of a ninety (90) foot wall directly adjacent to single-family homes; and (3) On appeal the City Commission may affirm, reverse or modify the decision of the Zoning Board and in light of the foregoing the City Commission denies the Appeal but modifies the decision of the Zoning Board to require a thirty-five ( 35) foot height limit for this Project on the Property. These findings have been made by the City Commission to approve this project, as modified, with conditions stated in this Resolution. Section 5. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption and signature of the Mayor. {1 } Footnotes: {1} If the Mayor does not sign this Resolution, it shall become effective at the end of ten calendar days from the date it was passed and adopted. If the Mayor vetoes this Resolution, it shall become effective immediately upon override of the veto by the City Commission. City of Miami Page 4 of 4 File Id. 04-01208 (Version: 12) Printed On: 7/28/2017