HomeMy Public PortalAbout06-22-10 - Local Planning Agency.tifMINUTES
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
KEY BISCAYNE, FLORIDA
TUESDAY, JUNE 22, 2010
COUNCIL CHAMBER
560 CRANDON BOULEVARD
1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS: The meeting was called to order by
the Chairman at 7:00 p.m. Present were Councilmembers Michael Davey, Robert Gusman, Jorge
E. Mendia, Vice Mayor Enrique Garcia and Chairman Robert L. Vernon. Councilmember Michael
E. Kelly was absent. Also present were Village Manager Genaro "Chip" Iglesias, Village Clerk
Conchita H. Alvarez and Village Attorneys Stephen J. Helfman and Chad Friedman.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chairman Vernon led the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Councilmember Gusman made a motion to approve the
minutes of the February 9, 2010 Local Planning Agency Meeting. The motion was seconded by Vice
Mayor Garcia and approved by a 6-0 voice vote. The vote was as follows: Councilmembers Davey,
Gusman, Mendia, Vice Mayor Garcia and Chairman Vernon voting Yes.
4. ORDINANCES: A public meeting and recommendation of the Village Council sitting as
the Local Planning Agency on the following proposed ordinance:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE OF KEY BISCAYNE, FLORIDA,
COMPREHENSIVELY UPDATING AND REVISING CHAPTER 30, "ZONING AND LAND
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS" BASED UPON THE ZONING ORDINANCE REVIEW
1 of
June 22, 2010
COMMITTEE'S (ZORC) RECOMMENDATIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN CODE; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Councilmember Davey made a motion to recommend the proposed ordinance to the Village Council
as it is consistent with the Master Plan. The motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Garcia.
The Manager and Building, Zoning and Planning Director Jud Kurlancheek addressed the Council
recommending that the Local Planning Agency recommend the proposed ordinance to the Village
Council as it is consistent with the Master Plan.
Staff is recommending that the changes recommended by ZORC be approved with the exception of
the following: 1.) Any change to the definitions. The recommended changes add clarity but are not
necessary. Staff, architects, and residents have been using these definitions for the past ten (10)
years. There is an understanding in the architectural community of how these terms are interpreted
and applied. Several of the changes to the definitions moved regulatory language from the
definitions to other sections. It is recommended these changes not be approved as relocating them
back to the definitions results in a complete definition for each term; 2.) The permitted uses in the
C-1 Commercial District were amended to include "Hotel", the height limit was increased from 50
ft. to 100 ft., and the FAR limit was increased from .50 to 1.0. These changes affect the entry block,
the Harbor Plaza Shopping Center (7-11) and the Galleria. As these properties do not have access
to the Ocean, it is highly unlikely a hotel is feasible now or in the foreseeable future. Presently, there
is no proposal to develop a hotel on these properties and 3.) The permitted uses in the Institutional
District (church properties) were amended to include "places dedicated to historical or cultural
functions". This was done to accommodate the possibility of moving a historic home on property
that is owned by one of the churches. The home would be used for historical or cultural purposes.
To date, there is no proposal or agreement by any church to accommodate this activity.
The Chairman opened the public hearing. There were no speakers present. The Chairman
closed the public hearing.
The Attorney also addressed the Council regarding the proposed ordinance.
The motion to recommend the proposed ordinance to the Village Council as it is consistent with the
Master Plan was approved by a 5-1 roll call vote. The vote was as follows: The vote was as follows:
Councilmembers Gusman, Mendia, Vice Mayor Garcia and Chairman Vernon voting Yes.
Councilmember Davey voting No.
5. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m.
2 of
F lin H. Caplan
Chairman
June 22, 2010
Respci lly submitte
onchita H. Alvarez, MMC
Village Clerk
his 11th day of October . 2011:
s
I
IFA PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL
WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT A MEETING OR HEARING, THAT
PERSON WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND, FOR SUCH PURPOSE,
MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS
MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH
THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
3 of