##VIDEO ID:neKyUIMhfqI## good evening and thank you for coming thanks uh welcome to the Planning and Zoning Board meeting I'm going to call the the meeting no order it is uh 6:39 p.m. a call roll please board member the laer present board member Julia present board member leonio present Vice chairperson senra is absent today chairperson Fernandez present you have quum okay please stand for the pledge allei allegiance I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America to the Republic for which it stands one nation God indivisible with liberty and justice for all thank you approval of a minute of the minutes has anybody everybody had a chance to review them yes I'll make a motion to approve them and I'll second that motion okay all in favor I I all opposed none the motion passes uh public comments do we have any that are here to speak I'm just gonna really quick for I don't see anybody online but if anybody were to be online you just need to raise your hand to speak everybody that is going to be speaking today you have three minutes just state your name and address for the record good evening Alejandro Sanchez 145 31 Cedar Court Miami Lakes Florida 33014 just a short public comment it's an honor to be here in the presence of you all I am looking forward to being nominated to be placed on the Planning and Zoning Board by Brian Mora and to see how the process is during today's meeting pleasure to meet you all congratulations any anybody here would like to speak that is not related to an item if there is no in-person public com Ms I just wanted to State for the record that there are two pre-recorded public comments that the office of the clerk received for tonight's meeting this is regarding hearing number Zone 202 [Music] 24-062466 zoning code section 33 to 311 this designation allows for various uses including residential development our property initially divided for zoning purposes to enable the adjacent house construction holds full legal property status eight our gu property has significant value and potential just like any other recognized property it's unacceptable to underestimate its worth or our rights as Property Owners you1 we will take a quick look and explain the history of this property and our legal due diligence to support the proposal that we believe is feasible and fair for everyone initially this property was a large single piece later split into two Parcels the previous owner divided the property when submitting a resoning application as evidenced by a boundary survey according to public records the parcel with folio number as shown is 17772 square feet our due diligence confirmed that the subdivision was formally rezoned approved and completed in 2007 the deed indicates the frontage roads RightWay as the easterly RightWay line of the frontage road for State Road no 826 specific exclusions for the RightWay include it excludes the East 17.0 ft it also excludes the north 25 ft for road right of way as outlined in right of way deed recorded in official records book 11575 age 1026 this means the East 170 ft and the north 25 ft are excluded for right of way purposes only public easement and right of way it's important to address the town's claim of a public easement and right of way from our property documents confirm a right of way implying that if the town asserts this area as a public road the city must contribute to its maintenance per Florida Statutes chapter 335.40 this statute states that if a roadway is designated as public the local county is responsible for its maintenance thus the town should contribute to any necessary maintenance or improvements if claiming this easement as a public road the information given alongside of public easement and right of way to clarify the septic tank installation requirement we have to calculate the square footage of the property the property measures approximately 1,742 59 ft based on its size of 0.473 Acres there is a discrepancy in the plating concerning a 25t frontage road right of way which is owned by us but it was excluded from previous surveys and the ordinance we are legally permitted to install a septic tank based on findings from the deed and Miami Lake City code chapter 4 section 4 to 142 we aim to ensure compliance with all local state and federal Reg ulations including zoning laws and Environmental Protections we propose amending ordinance 07- 91 to resolve plating issues and align with legal surveys and ordinances promptly we received this email from a public official from Miami Dade County confirming our findings at the time of purchase we had this information in hand our proposal includes Road improvements and commits to enhancing existing infrastructure specifically in the frontage area of our property this approach encourages Community participation we are committed to ensuring that our project not only meets regulatory standards but also enhances the neighborhood and contributes to the overall prosperity of the community Through thoughtful infrastructure improvements two precedent for residential development there are already four houses built on the street in every side of the street not three like Mr kobia stated previously and our lot is the only one we were told we can't build on it indicating a clear precedent for residential development despite the current gu zoning three zoning ordinance reference according to Miami date ordinance section 33 to 282.30 regulatory application in summary we aim to conduct an environmental assessment aligned with resoning plans leverage existing precedent for residential development and adhere to zoning ordinances to ensure Equitable treatment and uphold our property rights our storm water management plan surpasses Miami Dave County and Miami Lakes ordinances chapter 24 article 8 exceeding AE 6 ft flood zone requirements this plan has been developed in consultation with Abdul War's a civil engineer and District drainage engineer at the Florida Department of Transportation ensuring that all measures align with both local and state guidelines would you play the second aligning with Miami Dave County and Miami Lake cdmp and Florida Statutes chapter 335.40 our resoning request aligns with the comprehensive development master plan meets regulatory standards and benefits the community Through environmental stewardship and infrastructure enhancement based on the ordinance of resoning from 2007 we have identified several sections and studied them to outline the conditions in this ordinance and requirements for the proposed resoning and development below I have summarized the Key conditions and provided information of our compliance for each condition condition one one consistency with Comprehensive plan condition proposal must align with the comprehensive plan including infrastructure standards and concurrency management compliance the ru1 resoning request conforms to the comprehensive plan's low density residential designation and infrastructure standards the site plan ensures development in accordance with these requirements two conformance with code requirements condition proposal must meet all code of ordinances and Land Development code requirements compliance the submitted site plan meets Ru one size and Frontage parameters full compliance with relevant ordinances and codes is confirmed three changes in land use and development conditions condition proposal must reflect changes in land use and development patterns compliance the area has transitioned to residential use supporting the resoning to ru1 amidst single family home surroundings four compatibility with surrounding uses condition proposal must be compatible with neighboring land uses compliance Rue one zoning is compatible with nearby single family homes an FPL substation and Canal rights of way five impact on public facilities and services condition proposal must not strain Public Services Beyond capacity compliance the development integrates within existing infrastructure capacity for water power and other services given the established right-of-way Road the city has provided a dedicated utility line for the water supply as evidenced by the asilt drawings six environmental impact condition proposal must avoid adverse effects on environmental features compliance anticipated minimal impact on aquifers wildlife habitats and vegetation due to non-use of hazardous materials seven impact on property values and general welfare condition proposal must not diminish property values and should benefit Community welfare Fair compliance Ru one resoning is expected to enhance the residential character and property values of the area eight orderly land use pattern condition proposal must contribute to a cohesive land use pattern compliance ru1 resoning supports orderly residential development consistent with existing Trends nine public interest condition proposal must align with public interest and the Land Development Code Compliance Ru one resoning supports less intensive land use in line with Community interests and infrastructure capabilities 10 recommendation and conditions condition maintain conditions of previous resolution number four Zab 1882-83 unless modified compliance proposal adheres to approved conditions following specified survey and subdivision requirements condition two setback requirements condition setbacks for the main building and pool must meet specific distances supporting site plan details detailed measurements on the site plan ensure adherance to specified setbacks condition three maximum lot coverage condition maximum lot coverage is 35% of the net lot area compliance the proposed building area covered by the roof is 3,976 Ft which is 26% of the net lot area of 15, 34.5 ft within the 35% limit condition for flood zone compliance condition the property is located in flood zone AE with a base flood elevation BFE of 6.0 compliance proposed construction includes a raised foundation with a finished floor elevation set at 17.00 foot ngvd29 exceeding the BF by 11 ft to mitigate flood risk effectively supporting site plan details the site plan specifies the elevation details ensuring adherence to flood zone requirements the certified local appraiser utilized comparable properties in the vicinity to assess our proper resulting in an appraisal value closely aligning with the purchase price as detailed in their appraisal report our property has an independent folio number duly recorded in the public records we are working together for any requirements pertaining to our portion of the property any agreements or Arrangements involving other parties should be directed to that party would you move on to our qual judicial part of the agenda are there any further public comments public comments closed you can move on to the quazite items the first item U Mr chair excuse me I think we may have a public comment Mr chair I believe that the person who's about to speak did give his public comment is the video just stating if you want to extend the time this is in regards to that we we have a limit of the time that we that we allow for each public comment right so the first item uh please be advised that the following items on the board's agenda are quasa judicial in nature an opportunity for persons to speak on each item will be made available after the applicant and the staff have made their presentations on each item all testimony including public testimony and evidence will be made under oath or affirmation additionally each person who gives testimony may be subject to cross-examination if you do not wish to be either cross-examined or sworn your testimony will be given its due way the general public will not be permitted to cross-examine Witnesses but the public May request the board to ask questions of Staff or Witnesses on their behalf persons representing organizations must present evidence of their authority to speak for the organization any person presenting documents to the board should be provided the clerk with a minimum of 10 copies further details of the quasa judicial procedure may be obtained from the clerk this is with regards to variance matter 2024 -203 um before we move forward with this item Mr chair I think anyone that has had any ex party uh communication should disclose it at this time so out out don't an abundance of caution um I do want to disclose that um the applicant in this case is someone that I worked with in the past and uh I did say hello in the parking lot but other than that I'm not I don't think that'll influence my decision or anyone else's decision on this site thank you member Julia anyone else Mr chair uh that being the case uh the applicant is ladies herandez and we can move forward with the town presenting its case I do have to swear everybody first do you want me to swear in for both cases So for anybody providing testimony for the two public hearings coming Forth please rise and raise your right hand do you swear to say the truth and only the truth shall help you God yes I do you may be seated all right so about case v 2024 o 203 for latus Hernandez um this is a resident seeking a variance to allow a canopy to project 12.8 feet into their rear yard where a maximum of 10 feet are allowed in this case um the applicant is requesting to retain an existing 16.85% um so they're requesting that 2.8t variance um we're recommending denial for this process or for this um variance they do not comply with enough of the um items on this they do comply with items um B and D that it would be compatible with development patterns of the town as this v as this canopy is only 215 Square ft so it's not it's under the 350t maximum so we said it complied with that item as well as that it could be approved without causing substantial detriment to the adjoining properties as the canopy still allows for a 7.28 rear setback which is greater than the required 3T and it is on the side of the property facing the street as this is a corner lot so those are the two that we said they complied with but we are recommending denial for this item thank you yeah you're okay um question so course for as a clarification the code in this case um basically says the rear setback has to be more than than the Ft because this is an attached canopy versus a non-attached can canopy yes so it's not about the rear setback in this case because it is attached normally they're allowed to protrude about 7 and 1/2 ft from the home however when you have a rear lot that is less than 25 feet in length the canopy is allowed to protrude half of the length of the lot from the home so in this case this canopy is 12.8 ft from the attachment to the home to the end and they're only allowed to have 10 ft so the rear they do comply with the rear setback they're allowed to have that um it's about the length of the canopy itself that they're getting a variance for and if if if we were not attached to the home um it would there would be no need for a variance if it was nonattached I don't believe so no they comply with the square footage requirements and they comply with setbacks so if it was not attached it would be allowed correct correct so it in the case it would be not attached it would be considered an accessory structure an accessory structure uh has to be in this district 6 feet away from the main structure MH and it's then allowed to be 5T from all property lines um varant would still be needed because that would only be too close to the house to the home correct um so this is an example of um an ordinance that we passed last 20 and some of you were here at the time around 2018 because we were seeing a lot of smaller yards which with difficulty for having uh detached accessory structures and parolas uh so we sort of gave them a little bit of a um half of one and 2third of the other by allowing them to keep a larger attached structure instead of having a detached per perola so that they can at least have the same amount of shaded space in their yard uh but without having to have those six feet or 10 feet in the case of iu1 of space between this the structure and the and the house um so this is one of those applications uh but in this case again uh the minimum the the number that we reached at was to be able to like sort of span half the distance of that existing rear yard which in this case is 20 ft half that distance would be 10 in a larer if they had 22 ft it would be 11 ft if they had 25 ft would be 122 thank you any other questions for staff yeah through the chair you said that this is existing at this time it was done without permits yes this is existing and it was done without permits they're here as a result of a code compliance violation trying to correct that and bring it into compliance so it's work that was not allowed if they were to come to the city the city would never allowed them to do it it would not comply with it would not comply yeah it would not compli they would have needed a variance to get this done ahead but they so they did not get the variance or the permits yeah all right thank you thank you would the applicant like to speak come up yeah state your name and address for the record please good evening uh my name is ladies lyanna Hernandez and I'm at the address of 14925 Northwest 90th Court um I have a few signatures I picked up from my neighbors regarding the roof and I would like to turn them in you need if you can submit it to me please do you have 10 copies by chance I do thank you yeah go ahead is there anything else you wanted to add to that I'm aware I did uh without permits I wasn't sure if I need it or you know if I needed the permit for that um I truly need that space to be covered because my patio it's all open um there's not much space and in order to enjoy a little more you know that area of my yard backyard which is basically the the only area I have in the pool I would truly need your help to get that variance um I don't have that protruding like over anything into my neighbor or anything you know there's there's a space back there um it's very minimal the area I have there to enjoy the minimal space I have next to the pool so question thank you thank you I if you may stand yeah stay for just one second go ahead yeah I'm looking at the uh at the photograph that you have included here and it seems to be a uh aluminum roof it's Alum insulated aluminum roof yes and then the uh the support that you have to the outside looks like bolt down columns to the concrete yes those are bolt down Columns of the concrete yes well not it's it's in in the ground actually not bolted to to the Pavers it's not bolted to the p goes through past the pavers yeah it goes past the pavers uhhuh okay M thank you thank you do we have any other questions for the applicant okay so I mean for discussion I'm going to make a motion that I think I'm I'm going to turn down the the request for variance just for discussion can I get a second I'll second it okay so I'm just uncomfortable with uh with the the amount of feed that they need that they're taking up and they're the how close they are to the neighbors and to the property line well here's what I here's what I see in the discussion and that's why I asked the question from the applicant uh being a uh insulated panel roof it in fact they could in fact move that uh support in and comply with the 10 feet and we could give them the ility to go ahead and continue without having had permits they would have to have full permits to make that change but it's not a change that would be totally crazy I mean it's only a foot and a half or two feet two feet difference because they could still have um if they' moved the if they moov the column if they move the column and the beam back to 10 ft then they would comply and then they could have a bit of an overhang they would have to cut it all off they would have they would just lose basically two feet right and they they wouldn't need a variance for that right they would just need to pull permits and go through the not proper channels in anything that you decide today whether it is to make it 10 feet or approve it as is she would have to go and get permits um to get this finaled yes so the permitting process would have to go on and there would be reviews as to whether or not it's properly attached to what and all those things yes we'd have to open up again for for comments uh I'll make a motion to open if it's all right with you second okay yes you have to my front neighbor uh she has a same aluminum roof uh it's almost basically the same situation that I have in my patio if you want to take a look at no we we can only look at this okay we can only look at what you we have before us another neighbor is beyond our ability here right now okay thank you thank you have to close it again yeah we we will close um I'll make a motion to close public comments I second it okay all in favor all in favor I opposed no okay so do we have any more discussion I mean I I did drive a by and I will make a note that there are several homes in that area that are in a same situation um and I guess it's something that the the town is going to have to somehow or another either revisit how we write the code whether we go by a rear stepback or there's going to be several people with that situation I don't know if the new code violations require like the town can just go to a property um or how that new state statute it it's the problem with you know with with this issue you know in particular uh is whenever you're looking at something that's in the rear of a house is how do you get access to it no uh as as an attorney you know that you know you can't just barge in you can't take a look over somebody else's house and you know we're limited as far as what we can do to verify what's going on back there unless the uh homeowner invites us you know and then we're able to to view it uh the the um inspector can only see what's in in plain sight no in plain view the Plain View Doctrine uh and so that's that becomes a challenge for for any code enforcement now that's on the side street there's a side street also just the front there's a side street there you can see correct so if it's in the plain view you can see View if it's not right if no further discussion I'm ready to all right so the motion I have is to turn down or deny the request all right board member De Sierra yes board member leonio yes board member Julia no chairperson Fernandez yes the motion passes okay we're going to move on to variance 2024 d0274 attorney yes next matter um again I'll I'll read the uh same disclosure please be advised the following items on the board's agenda arequa a Judicial in nature and opportunity for persons to speak on each item will be made available after the applicant and the staff have made their presentations on each item all testimony including public testimony and evidence will be made under oath or affirmation additionally each person who gives her testimony may be subject to cross-examination if you do not wish to be cross-examined or sworn your testimony will be given its due we the general public will not be pres permitted to cross-examine Witnesses but the public May request a board to ask questions of Staff or Witnesses on their behalf persons representing organizations must present evidence of their authority to speak for that organization any person presenting documents to the board should Prov provide the town clerk with a minimum of 10 copies further details of the quasa judicial procedure may be obtained from the clerk this matter is variance 2024 0274 the applicant is Gary Reid and Candace spear hello again so yes as he stated for this variance um they are looking to allow a swimming pool to encroach by 8 feet and 1 in beyond the ti line of their property um this is a s single family home on Lake Valerie it's 65 feet from the wa Waters is its furthest point and 54 ft at its nearest um they're again I said they're requesting variant to allow an 8ft encroachment and the encroachment would leave 38 ft of unencumbered slope area beyond the pool um we're recommending in favor of approval for this proposal um U according to our analysis the only item we found they did not comply with was item a they had not received uh we didn't receive any letters of support from their neighbors but we did feel that this would be compatible development patterns um in the town due to their open space beyond the pool as well as the essential character of the neighborhood um and detriment to adjoining neighbors um as well as doing substantial Justice they do other homes in the neighborhood do have pools and other variances have been approved for this type of amount of length and um they do have some unique circumstances in their property it's very it's cited unusually close to the ti line in this case so they don't really have additional room to create a pool on this property um and the the conditions and circumstances exist are U are results of actions beyond the control of the applicant as stated they the this is the way the home was built back in the 80s so yes thank you any questions for staff just a point of clarification because I was going through the plans the pool itself is is a looks to be like a 12 by 24 foot uh yes that's the total area yeah they haven't done any they haven't made any plans to do any Paving around the pool at this point just the little bit of coping around the edge but yes it is a 12 x 24 in pool okay thank you any other questions thank you of course will the applicants like to speak state your name and address for the record please my name is Candace Spears I'm at 8001 Northwest 166 Street Miami Lakes Florida 33016 um feel very new to this but um yeah we just we're like probably one of only three houses in our whole neighborhood that doesn't have a pool it was kind of our plan when we bought it two years ago to install one we've actually been rebuilding the whole house like not rebuilding the whole house but like it's it's an 80s classic so we've been doing little by little um the backyard was is very big and we did go ahead and measure with a um laser level if it would how far it would come out of the ground and it was less than um 12 in so um there isn't like a large part there um and the edge of the pool is further back than the neighbors pool deck um on the other side thank you any questions for the applicant thank you okay I know the home and I know the the backyard from visiting it C president in that area there's the survey tieline I didn't realize it was so I it's it's interesting but they're definitely uh a number of homes that that are further than what I guess what what happens too is that in this area most a lot of these homes were built prior to incorporation into the town and I guess myate County doesn't have this survey TI line issue I guess no the tieline exists for everybody but being able to encroach on it right you're not allowed to encroach on the ti line the ti line was the original um setback line for construction at the time so you could build your home all the way to the thail line um that obviously didn't leave a lot of room for pools most of the times if they had a pool it was because there was an L-shaped home so they would put the the pool in the L in the void of the L uh for lack of a better uh Whenever However many of these houses had um because they they didn't come with pools originally right um they filled in with additions that L shaped portion uh and then that leaves them with literally but these are all things that happened through you know the last 40 years as as these homes have been U going through several ownerships um so that sometimes leaves the home without room for a pool um in some cases when there's a lot very long distance from that thail line to the water's edge um it's it's almost okay to encroach a little um it's not okay in all instances because if you're leaving like a really large um that's that's why we were comfortable um you know um recommending in favor of this one because there is such a large span from the Tha line to the water's edge uh in other cases is is a lot tighter so if you have like only 20 ft to the water's age you're literally taking up half of that um and then maybe the slope is very inclined this one is a very gentle slope which is why they're able to not protrude more than 12 in even at the edge of the pool um so that's why it's kind of this is a sort of a unique situation in that so in this case we only the only variance would be the encroachment quotequote onto correct because the the elevation at the end is is not necessary yes for discussion sake i' I'd make a motion to approve the variance as requested I'll second that motion like I stated I'm comfortable with with the the request and I think they've actually narrowed the size I mean we see typically 15 ft in width and and many times above that 17 18 even sometimes even higher but I think they've gone to 12 and I think they're they're trying to do their part in in and complying so I'd like to hear everyone else's opinion if unless you're okay with yeah I think they that's what I was thinking that's why I was when I noticed it looked to me like 12 by 24 but I went like maybe I'm wrong but it does seem to be minimal yeah I looked at the pool and if they moved it further back they could get it more into the property but I mean if you look at the at the drawing of it showing the pool if you move the pool towards the left side of the property that don't see it North East or South there I believe it's East because of the way it's sitting on that Lake if you move the pool a little bit more to the east than they could move it in because they have um substantially have like 8 ft it's hard to tell from this drawing here yeah they have 8 feet to the edge of the B so they could go closer to the residents and have less feet but it's not that much of that big of a difference I don't think it is oh I see what you're say moving more to the west of the property towards the east it would be towards the east I was just it on my phone it would move it a little bit more towards the east and they could come further into the property into that 8ot area uh rather than into into the jog out of the of the house but they would have to probably move it like8 feet that way though no to still be 5T away from the other uh 3 feet it's 3et of the difference yeah but if they move it 3 feet then they move it back is it going to will touch that that protruding part of the property so they would have to move it further I think no yeah they have 15 ft to the side yard and it's 3 feet that that goes past into that joged out out area so they would have to probably go six feet in order to to be able to get through there and come further in but I mean it's it's not really a big deal yes suanne said there's a lot of room there the only thing I notice there's a tree are they going to be removing that tree that's in the yard we I'd like to open it up just for for the applicant to come and and I'll second the motion all in favor I I'll oppose no yeah you please come up for one second yeah I noticed that there's a tree there what type of tree is that that would have just a I don't know what no there's a big tree there's I saw several Palms but in the oh that is not there anymore it was um diseased when we moved in and um it started falling down in the next storm so it's has not been it was a stump after the first hurricane that we had here okay it still shows it on the latest photographs from above oh really I don't think they've been updated since what the photographs from like above right on the phone if you look at on the pH Google proper got Google has you look at on any computer and you can open it up and you see the tree is there okay yeah it hasn't been there in almost two years um but I can Prov we did get new pictures taken but they're not on Google no no I just I see the tree there no not there any yeah okay anything else no okay thank you any further discussion I'm good want to take Aina Aina do you have any any comment okay would you call the RO please yes board member leonio yes board member Julia yes board member deerra yes chairperson Fernandez yes the motion passes congratulations moving on to I think we're at a director's report yes based off our discussion I'm going to give the floor to you for a moment of personal privilege and then after I'll take it back for elections so I I'd like to First say that um I have to resign uh effective 900 PM this evening I've turned in my resignation letter to the town it's been an honor serving with every all the board members you guys serve with integrity with fairness I know that uh you don't there's there's nothing that comes before us that is that is done in haste and uh there's a lot of pensiveness that that goes into it so I appreciate I'm honored to serve with you and if I don't have an opponent by noon tomorrow I I'll be on the council so congratulations JC you've done a great job here thank you thank you so I think we have to so at this time as per 9:00 P p.m. we won't have a chairperson so staff is proposing for you guys to have an election just for chairperson to fulfill the term up until April cuz you guys have elections every April so this is going to be from August to April it's just chairperson you can okay never mind proced because you're going to be just to put us in the right Pro posture you're the chairman today you're not resigning after today's meeting you're I'm resigning at 9:00 p.m. this evening okay according to my resonation letter so I was hoping to get some some direction from from you so it's better that we do not vote now well your your resignation doesn't occur until after right right I mean if if you're resigning effective mediately I see then we can because there is vacancy There's No Vacancy to fulfill I see that's a very good point but that's week for Fred to be the next at the next meeting Fred can be here and could have another board member Fred can actually run Fred is the vice and he can run the chair that's that's exactly okay perfect so we will beine yeah so if nothing further the meeting is adjourned that's right I already did it no but you