97-3069 ORD
ORDINANCE NO.
97-3069
An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of
Miami Beach, Florida, Amending Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance No. 89-2665, By Amending Section 6, Entitled
"Schedule of District Regulations", Amending Subsection 6-1,
Entitled "RS-1 ,RS-2, RS-3, RS-4 Single Family Residential
Districts" by Amending Subsection 6-1A, Entitled "Purpose and
Uses" by Listing Parking Lots in the RS-4 District Which Are
Located Immediately Adjacent to the CD-3 Commercial High
Intensity District as a Conditional Use; by Amending Subsection
6-1B, Entitled "Development Regulations" by Establishing
Development Regulations for Parking Lots in the RS-4 District
Which Are Reviewed as Conditional Uses; by Amending the Title
of Subsection 6-1C Entitled "Setback Requirements" by Adding
the Phrase" for a Single Family Detached Dwelling" to the Title;
Providing for Inclusion in the Zoning Ordinance; Providing for
Repealer, Severability and an Effective Date.
WHEREAS, the City of Miami Beach wishes to permit a buffer between the RS-4 Single
Family District and the CD-3 High Intensity Commercial District; and
WHEREAS, the City believes that a landscaped parking lot would be an appropriate use of
the property and would provide the desired buffer between the RS-4 and CD-3 Districts; and
WHEREAS, to ensure that a parking lot serves as a buffer between properties located in the
RS-4 District which immediately abut properties located in the CD-3 District, the right to establish
and utilize a parking lot in such locations should be reviewed pursuant to the Conditional Use and
Design Review procedures; and
WHEREAS, the amendment set forth below is necessary to accomplish the above objectives.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1. That subsection 6-1, entitled "RS-l, RS-2, RS-3, RS-4 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS", of Section 6, entitled "Schedule of district Regulations" of Zoning
Ordinance 89-2665 of the City of Miami Beach, Florida is hereby amended as follows:
*
*
*
6-1 RS-l. RS-2. RS-3. RS-4 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
65,135
A. Purpose and Uses
1. District Purpose 2. Main Permitted 3. Conditional Uses 4. Accessory Uses
Uses
Nefte
This district is designed Single Family detached At-grade Parking Lot in Those Uses customarily
to protect the character Dwelling. the RS-4 District when associated with Single
of the single family located immediately Family homes. (See
neighborhoods. adiacent (without a gap Section 6-21)
due to alley. road.
waterway or any other
cause) to a CD-3 District.
(See Subsection 6-I.B.6.
below.)
B. Development Regulations 65.81
1. New construction, alterations or additions to existing Structures shall be subject to
review for consistency with the criteria listed below regarding the appearance and
compatibility of the proposed construction with the Site and the surrounding
properties:
a.
The construction of an addition shall be architecturally appropriate to
the original design and scale of the Building; the Structure may be
architecturally redesigned, but in a manner which is consistent in
design and material throughout.
b.
Exterior bars on entryways, doors and windows shall be prohibited on
front and side elevations which face a Street or right-of-way.
c.
At least 20% of the front yard area shall be sodded or landscaped
pervious Open Space with the exception of driveways and paths
leading to the Building, paving may not extend any closer than five
(5) feet to the front of the Building.
d.
The painting of 75% of a Building or Structure shall be in one of the
colors on the Miami Beach Facade Review Color Chart or a lighter
shade of one of the colors on the Color Chart; colors not on the Color
Chart may be utilized only for purposes of emphasizing architectural
elements of a Building.
2
2. Min. Lot 3. Min. Lot Width 4. Min. Unit 5. Max Bldg.
Area (feet) Size Height
(sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) (feet)
RS-I = 30,000 RS-I = 100 1,800 33
RS-2= 18,000 RS-2 = 75
RS-3= 10,000 RS-3 = 60
RS-4= 6,000 RS-4 = 50
Except those lots fronting
on a cul-de-sac or circular
Street as defined in Lot
Width.
6. An application for a Conditional Use approval for a Parking Lot pursuant to subsection 6-
I.A.3 above. shall be subiect to the following requirements:
a.
Only an at-grade. surface Parking Lot shall be permitted pursuant to this
subsection. A Parking Structure. Building or Garage shall not be permitted.
b.
An application for a Parking Lot submitted pursuant to this subsection shall
be subiect to the Design Review procedures. requirements and criteria and
the landscape requirements and criteria as set forth in subsection 18-2 and
8-6. respectively. ofthe Zoning Ordinance. (These review criteria are in
addition to the required Conditional Use procedures and criteria set forth
in subsection 17-4.)
c.
For puposes of this subsection only. a Parking Lot within the RS-4 District
shall not exceed 10.000 square feet in area and 65 feet in width. inclusive
of all paved and landscaped areas.
d.
Permanent surfaces of a Parking Lot reviewed pursuant to this subsection
shall meet the following minimum setbacks:
I. Front 2. Side. Interior 3. Rear
20 feet Side Yard immediatley adiacent to 5 feet
the RS-4 District 10 feet. otherwise
o feet.
e.
No variances shall be granted from the requirements of this subsection 6-
I.B.6.
3
C. Setback Requirements for a Single Family Detached Dwelling
1. Front 2. Side, Interior 3. Side, Facing a Street 4. Rear
20 feet The sum of the Side Yard width shall be at least 25% ofthe Lot 15 feet minimum 15% of the Lot Depth, 20 feet
Width, but not to exceed 50 feet; anyone Side Yard shall have minimum, 50 feet maximum.
a minimum of7.5 feet. When an existing Building has a
minimum 5 ft. Side Yard setback, the setback of new
construction in connection with the existing Building may be
allowed to follow the existing Building line. The maintenance
of the minimum required Side Yard setback shall apply to the
linear extension of a single Story Building or the construction
of a second floor addition to existing single Family Buildings.
*
*
*
SECTION 2. INCLUSION IN ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 89-2665. It is the intention
of the City Commission, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become
and be made part of the City of Miami Beach Zoning Ordinance No. 89-2665 as amended; that the
sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such intention; and that
the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section" or other appropriate word.
SECTION 3. REPEALER. That all Ordinances or parts of Ordinances in conflict herewith
be and the same are hereby repealed.
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, clause or provision of this
Ordinance is held invalid, the remainder shall not be affected by such invalidity.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect on the ~ day of
Februar~ 1997.
PASSED and ADOPTED this Q day of
ATTEST:
J(o~6' p~
CITY CLERK
MHF/mhf/f:plb/octl1276ordl. wpd
hJitM APPROVEiJ
!
LEC/,l,PffT". '1
By LJt1 ~
[:.-; .JJ/~J.I%~
4
1st and final reading 1/22/97
CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH FLORIDA 33139
TO:
FROM:
SUB.JECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM NO. ~
Mayor Seymour Gelber and
Members of the City Commission
DATE:
January 22, 1997
Jose Garcia-Pedrosa A."J
City Mana,,, !flf
Public Hearing - An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City
of Miami Beach, Florida, Amending Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No.
89-2665, By Amending Section 6, Entitled "Schedule of District Regulations",
Amending Subsection 6-1, Entitled "RS-l ,RS-2, RS-3, RS-4 Single Family
Residential Districts" by Amending Subsection 6-1A, Entitled "Purpose and
Uses" by Listing Parking Lots in the RS-4 District Which Are Located
Immediately Adjacent to the CD-3 Commercial High Intensity District as a
Conditional Use; by Amending Subsection 6-1B, Entitled "Development
Regulations" by Establishing Development Regulations for Parking Lots in
the RS-4 District Which Are Reviewed as Conditional Uses; by Amending the
Title of Subsection 6-1C Entitled "Sdback Requirements" by Adding the
Phrase" for a Single Family Detached Dwelling" to the Title; Providing for
Inclusion in the Zoning Ordinance; Prl[)viding for Repealer, Severability and
an Effective Date.
RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission adopt the proposed amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance which would list parking lots in the RS-4 District, when located immediately adjacent to the
CD-3 Commercial High Intensity District, as a conditional use.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Board is a sponsor of the subject amendment to the Zoning Ordinance at the request of Lucia
Dougherty, Esq., representing the Balogh family. The Baloghs own the properties at 777 Arthur Godfrey
Road (41st Street) and 4117 North Meridian Avenue (the property immediately to its north) which would
be singularly effected by the amendment (see Exhibit 1, attached).
On November 26, 1996 the Planning Board held a public hearing regarding the amendment and voted
unanimously (7-0) to recommend approval of the amending ordinance.
PAGE 1 OF 5
~6A
1-22-Q'7
AGENDA ITEM
DATE
On December 18, 1996 the City Commission set today's required single public hearing.
ANALYSIS
Currently there is ~ one lot within the City limits where a CD-3 Commercial district immediately abuts
an RS-4 Single Family Residential district, 4117 North Meridian Avenue. Typically, commercial and
residential zoning districts are separated by a street, alley or waterway which acts as a buffer to help
mitigate the negative effects due to the close proximity of these highly different land uses; the subject
property is an exception.
The proposed amendment would allow a parking lot in the RS-4 district (immediately adjacent to a CD-3
district) to be reviewed as a permissible Conditional Use, thereby creating a buffer between the residential
uses to its north and the commercial uses to its south. The amendment also provides for strict review
criteria to ensure that such a request would indeed create the desired landscaped buffer between the single
family and commercial zoning districts (see page #3 of the amendment).
Of particular interest are the proposed setback requirements for such a request. The parking lot would be
required to maintain, at a minimum, a ten (10) foot landscaped strip between the residential district and
the permanent surface of the parking lot. In addition to the Conditional Use review guidelines, the
application would be subject to the Design Review procedures, requirements and criteria, as well as, the
Landscape requirements and procedures contained within the current Zoning Ordinance. Presently, single
family zoning districts are exempt from these regulations.
Only an at-grade surface parking lot would be allowed to be considered as an application of this provision.
A parking structure, building or garage would not be permitted, since these structures would not be in
keeping with the intent of the amendment to provide a landscape buffer between the two districts. Also,
.the size of the parking lot, inclusive of all paved and landscaped areas, would be limited to 65 ft. in width
and a maximum of 10,000 square feet in area. This would prevent future undesirable expansion into the
single family district by means of adding adjacent RS-4 single family lots to the subject lot (through unity
of title). Finally, the amendment provides that no variances (setbacks, parking lot area, parking lot width,
etc.) shall be permitted from this subsection.
The amendment does not allow the transfer of any unused floor area from the RS-4 district to the CD-3
district, even though the properties are held under one ownership. A unity of title would not be sufficient
to allow the use of any lot area in the RS-4 as part of the calculation for FAR purposes for the site within
the CD-3 district. In order to transfer available unused floor area from the RS-4 district to the CD-3
district, the Transfer of Development Regulations contained within Section 6-29 of the Zoning Ordinance
would need to be amended to allow for such a transfer.
The last sections of the amendment provide for inclusion in the Zoning Ordinance, repealer, severability
and an effective date.
PAGE 2 OF 5
In reviewing a request for an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance or a change in land use, the City
Commission is to consider the established review criteria, where applicable, for such changes. Since the
amending ordinance would change the conditional use category for the RS-4 zoning district, the review
criteria were determined to be applicable to this amendment request.
In reviewing a request for an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance which involves a change in land use,
the City Commission shall consider the following:
1. Whether the proposed change is consistent and compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and any
applicable neighborhood or Redevelopment Plans;
, Consistent - The amendment conforms with the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan in
providing a transition zone between different uses and by secondarily providing
additional vehicular parking in the City.
2. Whether the proposed change would create an isolated district unrelated to adjacent or nearby
districts;
Consistent - The amendment would not change the underlying zoning district for any area
within the City. The intent of the amendment is to create a landscaped buffer
between residential and commercial land uses, not to create a new zoning district.
3. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the City;
Consistent - The amendment is in keeping with the overall goal of the City to protect the
integrity and character of the single family districts, especially those immediately
adjacent to commercial districts.
4. Whether the proposed change would tax the existing load on public facilities and infrastructure;
Consistent - Staff is of the opinion that the LOS for the area public facilities and infrastructure
should not be negatively affected by the proposed amending ordinance.
5. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the
property proposed for change;
Not Applicable-
The underlying zoning district would not be changed; however, the existing
single family district boundary is immediately adjacent to the commercial
district and provides the foundation for the proposed amendment. The
existing single family residence is immediately adjacent to the CD-3
Commercial High Intensity District. This is the only lot within the City
where this condition occurs.
PAGE 3 OF 5
6. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the _proposed change necessary;
Consistent - The increasing development pressures within the CD-3 district on 41st Street has
the potential to negatively effect the character and integrity of the Single Family
district to its north. A landscaped parking lot built to buffer the single family
district from the CD-3 High Intensity Commercial district could help mitigate the
negative effect on the residential district.
7. 'Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood;
Consistent - The proposed change should not negatively effect living conditions or the quality
of life for the surrounding properties. Indeed, the use of a landscaped parking lot
to provide additional off-street parking should help improve the conditions for
neighboring properties where automobiles now park in the front yard swale area up
and down the block. The accompanying development regulations should provide
for a more pleasant visual experience.
8. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion beyond the
Level Of Service as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan or otherwise affect public safety;
Consistent - The amendment would help to mitigate traffic congestion by providing additional
off-street parking in an area of assessed need.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent properties;
Consistent - The construction of the parking lot with abundant landscaping would increase the
light and air to adjacent properties.
10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area;
Consistent - Staff believes that property values would not be negatively affected by the proposed
amendment.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent
property in accordance with existing regulations;
Consistent - The proposed amendment will not change the development regulations for adjacent
sites which must comply with their own site specific development regulations.
Furthermore, the proposed ordinance should not affect the ability for an adjacent
property to be developed in accordance with said regulations.
PAGE 4 OF 5
12. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing
zonmg;
Consistent - The existing single family home is immediately' adjacent to a high intensity
commercial district. The continued use of the property as a single family residence
has been made difficult by the immediately adjacent commercial activity.
13. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate Sites in the City for the proposed Use in a district
already permitting such Use;
Not Applicable -
This review criteria is not applicable to the Zoning Ordinance amendment
in question.
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, the Administration has concluded that the City Commission should adopt the
amendment to Section 6-1 of Zoning Ordinance 89-2665, as contained within the attached amending
ordinance.
JGP\Hr~
MHF\mht\f:\Plan\$All\ccmemos\1276CM 1.97
PAGE 5 OF 5
EXHIBIT 1
'0:, f-~/o
):,
~:.
? ~ 13
3
.
..
SCKO.....l.
SUBJECT
PROPERTY
4117 North Meridian Avenue
3)
77
I)
RM-1