Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-75-00732 3 4 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 4 A 1/3/75 RESOLUTION NO. . 751. _....., A RESOLUTION GRANTING A "CONDITIONAL USE" AS PROVIDED IN ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE ?CI, SECTION 1 (5)(b), TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OP DRIVE-IN TELLER FACILITY ON LOTS 1, 2 AND 3, BLOCK 1, SHENANDOAH (8,90), LOCATED AT 1698 Se,W. 8TH STREET, IN CONJUNCTION WITH SOUTHEAST NATIONAL BANK OF CORAL WAY, LOCATED AT 1699 S.W.22ND STREET, ZONED C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the Miami Zoning Board, at its meeting of December 16, 1974, Item #9, following an advertised hearing, adopted Resolution No. ZB 211-74 by a 6 to 0 vote (one member abstained) denying Conditional Use as listed in Ordinance No. 6871, Article XI, Section 1 (5)(b), as hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, the applicant has appealed from the denial of the Zoning Board; and WHEREAS, notwithstanding the denial by the Zoning Board the Commission finds that the use will not be detrimental or injurious to the character of the development of the immediate neighborhood; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: Section 1. That the application for a conditional use as provided in Ordinance No. 6871, Article XI, Section 1 (5)(b), to permit construction of drive-in teller facility on Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block .,. SHENANDOAH (8-90), located at 1698 S.W. 8th Street, in conjunction with Southeast National Bank of Coral Way, located at 1699 S.W. 22nd Street Zoned C-4 (General Commercial) District, be and the same is hereby granted. 1 2 1 s 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 23 JANUARY PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of 1975, MAURICE A. FERt MAYOR ATTEST: H. D. SOUTHERN CITY CLEM< PREPARED AND APPROVED BY: MICHEL E, ANDERSON ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: JOHN S. LLOYD CITY ATTORNEY Honorable City Attention: Mr. City of Miami, Gentlemen: Commission P. W. Andrews Florida December 31, 1974 Re: CONDITIONAL USE - DENIED APPEALED BY APPLICANT 1698 S. W. 8th Street Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1. SHENANDOAH (8-90) Applicant: Southeast Properties, Inc. The Miami Zoning Board, at its meeting of December 16, 1974, Item #9, following an advertised Hearing, adopted Resolution No. ZB 211-74 by a 6 to 0 vote (one abstained), DENYING Conditional Use as listed in Ordinance No. 6871, ARTICLE XI, Section 1 (5) (b), to permit construc- tion of drive-in teller facility on Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, SHENANDOAH (8-90), at 1698 S. W. 8th Street; in conjunction with Southeast National Bank of Coral Way, at 1699 S. W. 22nd Street; Zoned C-4 (General Commercial) . There were no objections received in the mail. A RESOLUTION to provide for this Conditional Use has been prepared by the City Attorney's Office and submitted for consideration of the City Commission. incere y, J David Simpson, Jr„Dector Department of Administration Planning and Zoning Boards jn Z. M. 38 Attached: Minutes cc: Law Department NOTE: Planning Department recommendation: "DENIAL". Tentative City Commission Date: January 23, 1975. ry 9. 1698._S._ W. 8TH STREET Lots 1, 2 anA 3, Block 1, ;, � 5 iEN1'1NDOAIf (8--9p) . '-- , "Conditiohal Use" as listed in Ordinance No. 6871, ARTICLE XI#4 :., Section 1 (5) (b), to permit construction of drive-in teller co facility on above site, in conjunction with Southeast National Dank of Coral Way at 1699 S. W. 22nd Street; zoned C-4 (General Commercial). Secretary filed proof of publicatLon of Legal Notice of. Hearing, and administered oath to all persons testifying at this hearing, PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: "DENIAL" Plans to improve S. W. 17th Avenue provide for the acquisi- tion of approximately sixty (60) feet of the subject property for road purposes. This improvement will effectively negate the utilization of the site for the purposes requrested. Moreover, turning movement restrictions, metered existing parking and City Commission policy to expand S. W. 8th Street's pedestrian qualities suggest seeking another location and site. Mr. Dean: Staff? Mr. Dooney: We have had the opportunity to discuss this matter with the applicant, some week ago, at which time the applicant indicated that he would like to request a deferral. I am not sure that is still in effect. Mr. Mr. Sweeney: No, we would like to go ahead. Mr. Dooney: You want to go ahead, fine. The petition is for a "Conditional Use" of a drive-in facility at the intersection of S. W. 8th, Tamiami Trail, and S. W. 17th Avenue. Ns perhaps you are aware, the Dade County Decade for Progress has approved plans and Right -of -Way acquisition is presently under way for land on the eastern side of S. W. 17th Avenue. The anticipated taking will range somewhere in the neighborhood of fifty to sixty feet off this property. Likewise, on the southern side of S. W. 8th Street, additional Right -of -Way will be needed for the improvement of Tamiami Trail. The applicant has been made aware of these acquisitions, which will minimize the lot far beyond what we feel to be a minimum size, for a drive-in facility. Likewise, as you are all aware, there is a bus stand in front of the site, on S. W. 8th, together with off-street parking.. These restrictions would negate use of the site, as far as egress and ingress off S. W. 8th Street. Similarly, during the past year, the Planning Department, working with the Latin Business Community, is striving to upgrade S. W. 8th Street, and elevate its pedestrian potential. We feel that an additional drive-in type of facility, or, drive-in activity, would offset and alleviate our efforts along S. W. 8th Street. For these reasons, we are requesting that the application tonight, be denied, principally from the standpoint of it being inappro- priate in a manner of its location. Thank you. Mr. Gort: Mr. Chairman. Mr. Dean: Mr. Gort? Mr. Gort: Before we go on, I would like to say that there might be a conflict of interest in here, so I might - I would like to stay out, I've got a business within a half a block from this property. So, I would like to stay out of this - Mr. Dean; Let's find out from out Attorney, Mr. Anderson; I am sorry, I didn't hear what you said? -38- December 16, 1974 Itern #9 Mf1 bean: When you have a conflict, yeu here to state it, and then the Attorney has to advise whether - would you testate it over, ►gain? Mt. Gort: I feel this will be a conflict of interest for me, since l own a business not far from the property there, and request that t would like to stay out of this► Mt. Anderson: How far away is your business from the - Mr. Gort: I am right on the other corner. Right next to the other corner. On the same block. Mr. Anderson: Since you are within the area that is to be notified here, you can abstain from voting. You will have to fill out one of these disclosure conflicts of interest Mr. Gort: I don't own this property, but I don't feel I could be fair to this . . . petition. Mr. Alfonso: I don't see that you are . . Mr. Anderson: Do you feel that your having a business there would any way impair your independent exercise of judgement in this matter? Mr. Gort: The way I feel, I don't think I could be fair to this petition. Mr. Anderson: Okay, that is what I wanted to kncw. Okay. Then, you fill out one of these forms. It's a new - did I pass these out to this Board? I believe I did. Mr. Gort: I don't own the property, I have a business there, and I don't feel that I could be fair to this petition, and that is why I don't like to get involved. Mr. Anderson: I understand what you're saying. You may abstain from voting, however, anytime you abstain under the Conflict of Interest or a Possible Conflict of Interest, you have to fill out one of these forms, now. Mr. Gort: Okay. Mr. Dean: All right. Mr. Campbell? Mr. Campbell: Mr. Chairman. There is - in the matter of sani- tary sewers, there is an existing, rather long four -inch sanitary lateral there, and we would refer that the applicant, on construction of this, in order to take whatever building he has there, I'm sure there will be one, extend the eight -inch sanitary sewer to serve this building. In addition to that, some time ago, when this was apparently in the formative stages, the Architect or Engineer for the Applicant called me, and asked about the location. At that time, there were multiple driveways, and one of the large driveways exiting onto S. W. 8th Street. Also, at that time, I informed him of the impending development, by Dade County, of 17th Avenue, and informed him of the City Requirements, regarding driveways. Since that time, I have heard nothing, except of course, some discussion with the Planning Department on this. I have not been afforded the opportunity of reviewing the plans that they have for this drive-in facility. I seriously question, without being able to review these, the ability to the area which would be required for the stack up of vehicles on the property, and possibly extending into 17th Avenue. I understand this is their entry point. In addition to this, the traffic coming from the drive-in facility, might seriously affect the traffic which is already rather heavy on $. W, 8th Street, This could prove a point of hazard, So, 1 would - personally, I, and speaking for the Department, I would like to have the opportunity to meet with the Engineer and review -39- December 16, 1974 Item #9 their plans, go over this, and get some indication of the feeling also Of the Metropolitan Dade County Department of Traffic and Tr'atspor'tatiOn, Mr. Dean: All right, sir. Mr. Attorney, Mr, Anderson: M. Dean. Would you advise the applicant, that he is entitled to one deferral, ordinarily that wouldn't Mean anything, but l think at the next meeting, or at least, in January it's possible that he could have a full board, because we'll have an alternate. Mr. Dean: You understood the Attorney? Mr. Sweeney: I understand, I think we will go ahead, tonight, we will be happy with this Board. Mr. Dean: All right, if you understand it, sir. Sir, would you state your name and address for the Record. Mr. Sweeney: Yes, Mir. Chairman, my name is James Sweeney, I am an attorney, with offices at 1400 First National Bank Building, I represent the applicant. And I would like to, before we start, pass out some plans for you to look at. Mr. Dooney: I have a question for the applicant, are these the same plans that were transmitted to the Board? Mr. Sweeney: Yes. As you will see, when you get a chance to look at the plans. Mr. Silverman, if you would pass - they're coming along there, all right. What we're seeking to do here, is to construct what is known as a satellite banking facility for the Southeast National Bank of Coral Way. If you will note from the plans, first of all, this property is zoned so as to allow a satellite banking facility. Really, the issue tonight, is the drive-in teller facilities, that requires a "Conditional Use". If you will note from the plans that you see, the building associated with this is extremely small. It is a very limited facility with apparently only four teller facilities, it has only limited banking, that is, there are no loans, mortgages, other normal type of banking transactions, wtlich will take place. You will see that there is a substantial amount of open area, and park, - or what you call it - patio type arrangement, situated around the building, and then, approximately half of the balance of the property is dedicated to the drive-in teller facilities, which will be five lanes of drive-in tellers. Now, first of all, I would like to comment on the recommendations of the Staff. And like to set to rest once and for all, this issue about the taking of fifty to sixty feet on S. W. 17th Avenue. Well, I simply don't think that that has any place before the Board, tonight. If sixty feet are taken, at some time in the future, we will have to deal with that, at that time. This issue was raised approximately a year and a half to two years ago, when I appeared before the Board, in connection with the rezoning, or, in connection with a rezoning of property for the Southeast Bank on Coral Way, and the Staff at that time objected because they said then, that there was going to be a widening of 17th Avenue, and here we are today, and there Still isn't any widening, and perhaps the plans are closer today, than they were then, I don't know, but we have to take the property that we have, and utilize it, in the best way that we can, knowing what we know today, And, today, there has been no suit, as far as I know, filed, to take the property. There has been no one who has come to us, and sought to buy the property, If the property is taken, I would not agree that it would be, at that time, unusable for drive-in teller facilities. I submit to the Board that we would perhaps have to reduce the -40- December 16, 1974 Item #9 number, but it would in no way negate the possibility of using the property at that time, for drive-in tellers. It would simply be a reutiiitation of the property, a redesign, that's all. So 1 think, this really has no place, and 1 would like to set it aside, as being inconsequential, in the discussion that we haVe tonight, one of the other things that was said in the recommendation, was, that this will - it says, "turning movement restrictions, metered existing parking" - these are two •af the objections, apparently, just "turning movement restrictions" and, "metered existing parking", well, as you will see from the plans, there is quite ample space for turning movements, in these plans here. I drove along 8th Street today, and noticed a million of little alleys, there is one right next to the property now, would serve the in and out, egress onto 8th Street from the building that exists there, today, and I would imagine that the alley is no more than ten feet wide. There are cars parked on both sides, it's literally impos- sible to get a car out safely onto 8th Street, as it exists today. This is a completely wide-open area. There is absolutely no reason in the world, why any turning restrictions would effect egress onto 8th Street. As far as the metered parking, there are three parking meters there. If we are not successful in getting the drive-in tellers, we would still hope that those metered parking, those parking meters would be taken down. I don't know what arrangements are made, but I know there are a number of buildings right across the street, is a gas station, that goes along at least as wide as this property, and has absolutely no parking meters, and there are any number of buildings and businesses along 8th Street that don't have parking meters. I assume that some arrangement is made, I don't know what it is, but certainly there is something that can be done, to get rid of the parking meters, if it requires paying the City the anticipated revenue each year, I am sure that my client would be happy to do that, just to get them out of the way, and not have cars parking in front of where I think is going to be a very good looking building. either. So, I really don't think that that has much to do with anything The last thing the Staff said, and this is something that I really am not completely able to talk to, because I don't know what they're talking about. But they say that the City is seeking to upgrade the "pedestrian qualities" of 8th Street. And I think that's - I think that's an admirable thing, if they're trying to do that, I don't know exactly what they mean by that. But I think that any upgrading of pedestrian qualities is certainly a wonderful thing. I question, though, why -• what we anticipate doing here, today, has anything, - has any bearing on upgrading the pedestrian qualities. As I stood on the property today, for approximately five minutes, I would say that - two people - walked by. And that's being very lib- eral to say that, because all they did was come out of a business, and get into their car, there is absolutely no pedestrian traffic at all, there. And, if we're talking about upgrading, I would invite Members of the Board, to simply look at the buildings along S. W. 8th Street, between 22nd Avenue and 12th Avenue, or go even further, go down to Miami Avenue, and what do you find? A proliferation of gas stations, that have ingress and egress, onto the street. Any number of garages, tire shops, restaurants, strip shopping centers, there is no block there that doesn't have far more in the way of ingress and egress, across the street, than our business would be. Than our drive-in tellers would be, It would be wonderful to think that there would he more pedes- trians there, but however many they are would be affected equally, by the gas staions, the used car lots, the tire stores, all of the other -41- December 16, 1974 Item #9 businesses that ate there. Atid certainly, if you will leek at our eland, acid ec rPpare them to wh 3t exi is along that stieet, today, with several tnlhof exceptions ih the Way of new bui dinge, what that street xeeds more that upgrading in pedestrians, is an upgrading in siMply the aesthetics. And this is a very low-key, clean, aesthetically pleasing arrangement, that our archtects have drawn, and I think it would be an absolute credit to the area. It would be so far surperier to anything that is ih that block, or in the several blocks around it today, - really, it's not fair to even compare it. On further point, on the pedestrian angle that the Staff brings up. The last time that I appeared before this Board, I had the opportunity to hear Mr. Page, from Florida National Bank, make a similar request, for drive-in teller parking, at the corner of N. E. 2nd Avenue and 1st Street, in Miami. The Staff raised similar objec- tions, and properly so, about the effect that these drive-in tellers would have, as to pedestrians going or coming across the in and out of the ingress and egress lanes, of N. E. 2nd Avenue. I think the Staff brought out that N. E. 2nd Avenue is the main - is one of the main feeder streets into the East-West Expressway. There was substantial opposition to this, from the Staff, and I don't know what eventually came of it, but I do know that the Florida National Hank is putting in drive-in tellers, so I have to assume that eventually they were succes- sful in their application. Now, I don't use that as an example to say that the decis:.on was right or wrong, but I would submit to the Board this, that if pedestrian traffic, and if vehicular traffic is a problem to drive- in tellers, it is two to three hundred times, or even more, a problem at N. E. 2nd Avenue and 1st Street, than it is in our neighborhood. There is virtually no pedestrian traffic there, today. Now, if it is upgraded, and possibly it will be, how much more pedestrian traffic will there be there? I submit to you, it will never, ever, approximate the traffic - the pedestrian traffic,_ that goes down N. E. 2nd Avenue. And, I suspect very strongly that the vehicular traffic on 8th Street will never approximate the traffic that goes by N. E. 2nd Avenue and 1st Street. So, I really feel that in good conscience, if an approval can be given for the drive-in tellers at N. E. 2nd Avenue, and 1st Street, that it would be equally appropriate, perhaps even more so, to approve it in this position. Thank you. Mr. Alfonso: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Dean: Pair. Alfonso. Mr. Alfonso: Mr. Chairman, we started out as everyone knows, that particular intersection is without any doubt in my mind, I cross this section more than six times daily, we are talking here, not to change the zoning, but to change the nature of the intention. This applicant wants to put a drive-in teller, and the inten- sity of the traffic would be higher, and higher, than it is now. The capacity now, now it is dangerous to go 17th Avenue and 8th, we don't need a drive-in teller there or we need the car wash, we don't need anything that will increase the traffic in that particular place. If.they want to put in other banking facility to upgrade that section I am in favor of that. But I am strongly opposed to allow a drive-in teller in that corner. Kr. Dean; All right, thank you very much. All right, is there anyone in opposition? All right. Have you finished your presentation? Mr. Sweeney: May I comment on that? Is the public hearing closed, or - Mr. Dean: No. You may comment. M. Sweeney; I would say this, we have the right to put a -42- December 16, 1974 Item *9 • banking kng other, and whether they drive through and get their inohey that Way, or Whether they drive and park, and take their money out and walk, they're still going to come. And so, I hardly think that the traffie is ging to be any different, whether we have drive-ins, or not, the people are still going to come to the bank, and will presumable drive iri and out, one way or another. Mr. Alfonso: You have the . . . to you by the Staff, if you put a banking facility, you have to comply with the parking requirements there, you have to comply with the Department, and the difference, the drive-in teller, is that so? Mr. Dooney: That is correct. If they put in a walk-up facility. or a satellite facility, they would have to meet the parking requirements, and it would have to be within the confines of the land in which they're going to build on. I would like to respond to a point the gentleman made earlier. Here again, in speaking with the representatives of Southeast Bank, we would like to applaud them on their attempt to upgrade the area, from the standpoint of aesthetics and appearance. We have no real question on this, nor have we moved along exten- sively to evaluate the plans themselves, with the exception of raising a major point here, of being location, and the appropriateness of this site. We feel that the points that have been raised tonight, are more than adequate, for you to make a decision for denial. One of the key issues here, of course, is the apparent conflict between the motorist and the pedestrian. I also would like to refute the gentleman's point on pedestrian travel along S. W. 8th Street, in conjunction with pedestrian travel; downtown, which we find, perhaps, are in the daylight hours. If you've been out along S. W. 8th Street, from 17th to 15th )\venue, you will find a great deal of travel, both in the evening and during the daylight hours. At present, the pharmacy, I don't believe, is in operation, and this probably is one of the factors, why there isn't much activity at that location, presently. Here again, the plans that we have reviewed, that are on file in the Dade County Public Works Office, as well as the City of Miami Public Works Office, indicate the widening, to the magnitude that. I've disclosed this evening. Further information, can be secured from the Highway Section of the Dade County Public Works Department. It is our understanding that activities are under way to acquire Right -of -Way. The improvement will go from South Dixie Highway, on up to Flagler Street. Here again, if this improvement is made, I think it's going to have a very strong impact, not only on Southeast Bank, with regard to the future operations, but upon both the City and the County. And, I think it would be inappropriate for this hoard tonight, in the face of these plans, the knowledge of them, it would be unfavor- able, and I think unwise, in the face of the taxpayers' confidence in placing these bonds, to its elected officials, to have this improve- ment made, and then to go ahead, and permit a facility to light on it. Mr, Alfonso: Mr. Chairman. If I can comment further? 17th Avenue is only one -lane one-way from the other, it's not dual. What about the cars waiting to go into the drive-in tellers, this is out of my mind, to think of a drive-in teller on that corner, Mr. Dean: All right, Did you conclude your presentation? Mr, Sweeney; Yes, I have. Mr, Dean: okay, we will close- is there anyone in opposition? There being none, we will close the public hearing, and have discussion -43- December 16, 1974 Item #9 WW1/ hoard Meimbers. At this time, we Will hear from Mr. Campbell. Mr. Campbell: The only comment I was going to make was made l believe by Mr. Alfonso, that the existing at this time the existing confirmation of 17th Avenue, the traffic patterns are such that they might lead to considerable congestion, particularly for instance, for sduthbound traffic wishing to turn left into the bank facility. The plans that the County has for l7th Avenue, hold for a raised median, l believe, in l7th Avenue when it is developed, so this would obviate that. In looking at the plan, although there are no dimensions on it, apparently, with the development of 17th Avenue, it would take nearly, if not all, of the employee parking. I realize that the bank would certainly have to readjust their facilities there, but I question whether or not they would want to go into the - go to the expense of removing the - probably expensive, underground facilities they would have to install for this type of installation, or this type of banking in order to provide additional employee parking. I strongly suspect that once that parking goes, that will he it, there will be no more supplied. I again, bring to your attention the fact that this . . . the vehicles exiting from here will be going onto S. W. 8th Street, and to know this is a heavily traveled street, and at all times of the day, it is quite congested. Mr. Dean: All right, thank you. Would any Board Member like to comment? All right, the Chair is ready for a motion. Mr. Alfonso: I move to deny, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Dean: All right, you have heard the motion by Mr. Alfonso, who moved for denial, is there a second? Mrs. Callahan: I second. Mr. Dean: Seconded by Mrs. Gloria., is there any discussion? There being none, call the roll. Mr. Simpson: The motion on Item #9 is to deny. No objections were received in the mail. Mr. Alfonso offered the following resolution, and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. ZB-211-74 RESOLUTION TO DENY "CONDITIONAL USE" AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE XI, SECTION 1 (5) (b), TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF DRIVE-IN TELLER FACILITY ON LOTS 1, 2, AND 3, BLOCK 1, (SHENANDOAH (8-90) , AT 1698 S. W. STU STREET; IN CONJUNCTION WITH SOUTHEAST NATIONAL BANK OF CORAL WAY, AT 1699 S. W. 22ND STREET; ZONED C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) . Upon being seconded by Mrs. Basila, this resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES; Messrs. Alfonso, Johnson, Silverman, Dean. Mmes. Basila, Callahan. NAYES ; None. Ai3STAIN; Mr. Gort. Mr, Simpson; The motion carries, five Mr, Dean; Al]. right, thank you. -44- December 1.6, 1974 Item #9 - one. one abstained