Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppeal to PZAB - 2KIRK D. DE LEON NEIL A. DE LEON MORGAN D. MINDELL GREGORY T.M. SALOMON VIA HAND DELIVERY LAW OFFICES DE LEON & DE LEON A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION THE CONCORD BUILDING 66 WEST FLAGLER STREET SUITE 800 Mums, FLORIDA 33130-1887 July 17, 2015 Planning and Zoning Appeals Board City of Miami Planning and Zoning Dept. 444 SW 2nd Avenue Miami, Florida 33130 Re: Appeal of Warrant Approval and included Waiver 5599 Biscayne Blvd Dear Sir/ Madam: W a kkondeleon . wrq TELEPHONE: (305) 374-5494 FACSIMILE: (305) 374-5498 The following is an appeal by Kirk De Leon with address 465 NE 56 Street, Miami, Florida 33137 of the issuance of a warrant and waiver for 5599 Biscayne Blvd pursuant to Section 7.1.2.4(e) of the Miami 21 Code ("Code") and any other applicable appeal provided by the Code. Introduction The Applicant proposes a restaurant use for what was originally a single family home in the Morningside neighborhood. The property is now outside the Morningside boundary but is directly adjoining Morningside lots and is across the street from and impacts multiple Morningside lots. The Applicant seeks to increase the footprint of the existing structure to include a much enlarged terrace for outdoor seating. The warrant for this expanded use to outdoor seating should be denied because of the negative impacts to the existing neighborhood created by the expanded use and additional traffic created. Further, the special conditions do not minimize or negate the negative impacts suffered by the adjoining neighborhood and lots. The warrant also encompassed a waiver pursuant to Article7.2.8 to allow non -conforming parking. The allowance of the non -conforming parking is another basis to reject the Warrant as the expansion of the footprint of the building will increase the traffic and use where there is already insufficient parking to accommodate the parking needs of the restaurant allowing additional negative impacts to the adjoining neighborhood. Warrant Not Authorized by Code The approval of the Warrant is erroneous as it violates Miami 21 Code Section 7.2.8(a) and (b). Those sections only allow approval of the Warrant if the changes result in the same or a reduced degree of non -conformity. The property does not meet the parking requirement of the Code but qualifies for a waiver as an adaptive re -use. However, nowhere in the Code is there an allowance to increase the non -conformity permitted by the Warrant. Granting the Warrant for r Gil � 2 C_ Z rn «� •' 3 N CA m 2 The following is an appeal by Kirk De Leon with address 465 NE 56 Street, Miami, Florida 33137 of the issuance of a warrant and waiver for 5599 Biscayne Blvd pursuant to Section 7.1.2.4(e) of the Miami 21 Code ("Code") and any other applicable appeal provided by the Code. Introduction The Applicant proposes a restaurant use for what was originally a single family home in the Morningside neighborhood. The property is now outside the Morningside boundary but is directly adjoining Morningside lots and is across the street from and impacts multiple Morningside lots. The Applicant seeks to increase the footprint of the existing structure to include a much enlarged terrace for outdoor seating. The warrant for this expanded use to outdoor seating should be denied because of the negative impacts to the existing neighborhood created by the expanded use and additional traffic created. Further, the special conditions do not minimize or negate the negative impacts suffered by the adjoining neighborhood and lots. The warrant also encompassed a waiver pursuant to Article7.2.8 to allow non -conforming parking. The allowance of the non -conforming parking is another basis to reject the Warrant as the expansion of the footprint of the building will increase the traffic and use where there is already insufficient parking to accommodate the parking needs of the restaurant allowing additional negative impacts to the adjoining neighborhood. Warrant Not Authorized by Code The approval of the Warrant is erroneous as it violates Miami 21 Code Section 7.2.8(a) and (b). Those sections only allow approval of the Warrant if the changes result in the same or a reduced degree of non -conformity. The property does not meet the parking requirement of the Code but qualifies for a waiver as an adaptive re -use. However, nowhere in the Code is there an allowance to increase the non -conformity permitted by the Warrant. Granting the Warrant for Appeal 5599 Biscayne Blvd. - Warrant & Waiver Application Page 2 outside seating increases the size, use, traffic and normal resulting parking requirements and thus the non -conformity of the property with the attendant negative impacts to the adjoining neighbors. This would be an abuse of the parking waiver for an adaptive re -use if an applicant can undertake changes that in the normal course would require greater parking but then rely upon the Code's waiver to avoid the increased parking requirement. Granting this warrant will increase the size of the restaurant and the number of patrons the restaurant will be able to accommodate and thus increase the parking issues suffered by the adjoining neighbors. The property currently has three parking spaces, even though a plan for six spaces has been submitted. Without even considering the patrons for the moment, where will the staff and management for this restaurant park? The only potential parking is within Morningside and specifically on 55th Terrace and 56th Streets. These impacts were observed even with an office use for the property, but offices tend to be week -day only operations thus the parking impacts for an office use ensured that residential neighbors had no impact, or significantly reduced impact, during the evening and weekend hours when the residential need for on -street parking is highest. Given the 7 -day per week lunch and dinner service use proposed, there is no doubt that this will put increased and consistent strain on the ability of residents and their invitees to park in -front of their homes as those spaces will be used by the staff and patrons of the proposed restaurant. Thus, a Warrant that increases the number of patrons and put greater pressure on limited parking is not appropriate for approval. Additionally, the configuration of the ingress and egress patterns of some of the other homes within Morningside that are close to Biscayne Boulevard requires specific consideration as increased parking impacts from the increased use caused by the Warrant could potentially block driveways and thus ingress and egress to residential properties. For example on 56th street there is a block -off that prevents thru-traffic east off of Biscayne into the neighborhood. There is also a median running the length of 56th Street, thus the ability to enter and exit driveways on 56th Street requires that cars are not parked for at least one car length to the east of a driveway or the resident will not be able to get in or get out due to the sharp turn needed to exit properties because of the median. The proposed use's increased parking impacts will increase this problem. It is not hard to imagine that the dishwasher or waiter running late for work will not be concerned with a homeowner's ingress and egress but will simply need to park their car and run to work. This already happens with the establishments on the west side of the boulevard, and these establishments have parking. This applicant has taken no steps to mitigate the negative parking impacts approval of the Warrant will cause. The conditions for the Warrant also fall far short to avoid the impacts to the neighborhood. The first condition requires that parking be heavily monitored to avoid impacts to neighbors. However, there is no parking plan that addresses employee or staff parking or who will monitor parking and what remedy the residents have if the parking is not addressed as called for in the Warrant approval document. Appeal 5599 Biscayne Blvd. - Warrant & Waiver Application Page 3 Regarding parking by patrons, the applicant at a meeting with the Morningside Civic Association ("MCA") disclosed that it intended to use a valet service to mitigate parking impacts by its patrons. However, the city's Waiver and Warrant file and the application itself does not reflect more than the promise to obtain a valet service and it does not disclose whether staff will be required to use the valet service. Further, given the physical location of the property a valet service will not work. There are no parking facilities within 1000 feet from the property that will be able to serve the lunch and dinner, i.e., day and evening, parking needs of the applicant. Additionally the traffic pattern, i.e., a median on Biscayne Blvd., the congested intersection at Biscayne and 54th Street and 4th Court, and the blind corner going north on Biscayne at 56th street all make it clear that even if a valet parking facility is found close to the property, physically getting the cars to and from the valet facility will take so long that patrons for their own convenience will ultimately use Morningside as the property's defacto parking lot. Further, the portion of 56th Street in front of the property is so short that the potential of cars entering and leaving the property especially if a valet is employed will most likely have cars backed up into Biscayne Blvd just after the blind curve that would create a real public safety issues. The median and fire hydrant on 56th street in front of the property coupled with the reality that only a north- bound turn onto Biscayne is possible from the property further demonstrates that the high level of traffic the proposed use will create is not well suited for the physical location of the property given the right-of-way conflicts it creates and thus denial of the Warrant due to the increase in the property's non -conformity is appropriate. Property Description The basis for the Warrant is also erroneous as set out in the Warrant document. Only 8 feet of the property fronts onto Biscayne Boulevard. The remaining 123 feet of frontage are on 56th Street. The property is not on a true cul-de-sac. The cul-de-sac is formed by the block -off that prevents thru traffic from Biscayne Boulevard east on 56th Street. What this means is that the home in Morningside adjoining the restaurant is only 28 feet from the applicant. Thus, it is erroneous to say that this is a cul-de-sac as this term does not adequately demonstrate that there are a multitude of neighbors to this facility, as it is not at the end of the street by itself. Findings The Findings of the Director are also devoid of any facts to support the finding that the application was sufficient. Specifically, given the physical layout of the property and its surroundings, the findings fail to lay out any facts that show how the impacts from the Warrant result in a reduced or similar level of non -conformity as required by the Code for approval. The findings also fail to show any facts supporting that the conditions imposed will reduce impacts to neighbors that are only 28 feet away. Conditions The conditions also fail to meet the Code's requirement to reduce or keep the same level of non- conformity required for approval of the Warrant. For example, there is no requirement to build a Appeal 5599 Biscayne Blvd. - Warrant & Waiver Application Page 4 fence to protect the Morningside homes from this highly intensive commercial use. The requirement that parking is to be monitored is so vague as to have no real meaning or method of enforcement. An additional condition relates to sounds from the restaurant. Music is already heard from the Soyka Lounge in the evenings and that property is on the west side of the Boulevard. If the proposed restaurant closes its kitchen at l Ipm, there will likely be patrons on that patio until lam along with the attendant sound/noise impacts this late-night use would create. Code Enforcement IS NOT an answer to this issue as the City's Code Enforcement department is not rigorous and the procedure to advance such a complaint is also not designed for speedy relief. The Soyka Lounge is evidence that code enforcement on these issues do not work and if this is the remedy that is seen as appropriate then it is clear that the remedy is illusory. Approval of the Warrant application only serves to increase the impacts created by the proposed use and there is no plan in effect or proposed that will adequately mitigate the impacts of the increased traffic, both automobile and human, that will be caused if the warrant is approved. It is also important to note that neither landscaping nor the proposed picket style fence that is to enclose Morningside is a mitigating cure. There is already lush landscaping at the Morningside boundaries and this does not stop the noise of loud music from the Soyka Lounge location. Given the next -door -neighbor status of the applicant, no amount of Ficus will stop or reduce the noise this expanded capacity for outdoor seating will create from impacting the residential neighbors. Also, the proposed Morningside fence is picket style and will not block the sidewalks thus doing nothing to stop sound or the increased parking pressure that the applicant's proposed use will create. Amendment The undersigned appellant reserves the right to amend the grounds of this appeal. Conclusion and Request for Denial of Application Granting the Warrant and included Waiver is contrary to the Comprehensive Plan that requires supporting neighborhoods in the City of Miami. Given the original use of the property and its location directly next to single family homes, the approval of the Warrant for outdoor seating and included parking waiver is inconsistent with Miami's Comprehensive plan as its advances the commercial applicants interests above that of the single family home owners without any effective plan to mitigate the impacts that would be caused. An office use has been successfully demonstrated to be the best use for these types of properties as this use balances the impacts that result from commercial use next to single family homes. The waiver and warrant application serves to further expand the impacts that this new use as a restaurant would create and should be denied as a result. Appeal 5599 Biscayne Blvd. - Warrant & Waiver Application Page 5 Sincerely, ,f Kirk De Leon cc: Francisco Garcia - City of Miami HA002 ta\Zoning Appealtappeal-pd