On February 7, 2017, the Town Council of the Town of Miami Lakes directed the Town Manager to explore potential revisions to the Land Development Code (LDC), and to return to a workshop with recommendations. The request followed in the wake of an active development cycle that brought to light concerns over quality design and compatibility of development. The Council's direction was to identify codifiable design standards that would provide staff the tools needed to promote quality design without interrupting the timeliness of the development review process. The workshop was held on October 24, 2017 and the proposed ordinance is reflective of discussions held at that meeting.
As it currently stands, Section 13-304 of the Town's LDC's provides little in the way of specificity regarding desired architectural standards and neighborhood compatibility. The proposed ordinance addresses the use of recognizable architectural genre, building scale and massing, façade treatments and materials, windows and doors, pedestrian scale, and other ancillary features. Multifamily, commercial, and Industrial development requiring site plan review are subject to the new provisions and all require staff level review for compliance. Final authority is reserved to the Council for those applications requiring public hearing. The proposed ordinance also provides for an appeal procedure.
On October 24, 2017, the Local Planning Agency recommended approval of the ordinance without modification. Prior to first reading, the ordinance was updated to include the definition of key terms. For a fuller description and analysis of the proposed ordinance, please see the Staff Report and Analysis attached to this memorandum.
First reading of the item was held on November 7, 2017. Two representatives of the Graham Companies spoke to the item as it related most particularly to their holdings and its potential impact. The Council directed the manager to have staff sit with the two representatives to discuss their concerns, and if possible, seek alternatives that would mitigate their concerns while still achieving the same objective. Staff met twice with the Graham representatives (11/20/2017 and 12/27/2017) and made some changes to the ordinance in consideration of their comments. Staff believes the adjustments, as reflected in the attached substitution ordinance, addresses their concerns. The proposed suggested changes on the attached document are represented by double underlining for additions and double strikethrough for deletions. To adopt the attached ordinance, it must be moved into the record.
The following is an explanation of the more significant suggested changes being proffered between first and second reading:
Section 13-311(a) provides for those projects that shall be subject to design review. This section was clarified by specifying exterior renovations in excess of 50% of their Replacement Value, and any exterior additions are subject to design review. New construction continues to be reviewed for such provisions.
Section 13-311(b) The definitions section was modified to include:
Replacement Value, Commercial Uses, Ground floor Liner, Industrial Uses, Mixed Use Development, Multifamily Residential, Principal Façade, and Understory parking.
The Ground Floor Liner definition was provided to distinguish it from structured garage parking. The added use definitions represent a slight tilt in how the ordinance is to apply. Its original version was based solely on property zoning. By including the consideration of actual usage, it makes the provision more adaptable to varied forms of development such as flex warehouse space.
Section 13-311(c)(1), addresses the transition of building heights. It currently requires only the consideration of nearby and adjacent lots. This approach may be overly restrictive and unnecessary. The provision was modified to allow height transition in relation to adjacent zoning provisions. The modification seeks to impose height transitioning when the adjacent district provides for a lesser maximum permitted height. This approach avoids the possibility of a tall building being adjacent to a two-story home while still allowing for taller building towards the center of the District where such height may be more appropriate.
Section 13-311(c)(2) aims break up a building façade so that it does not overwhelm the pedestrian or surrounding built environment. More particularly, subparagraphs “a” and “c” achieve this aim by breaking up the façade by an increment of 33 percent of the linear run of a building. While this provision is affective in breaking up the massing of a long structure, it makes less sense for smaller ones. As such the provision was modified to apply to building facades 75 feet or longer.
A second adjustment to this subsection involved the provision's application to an industrial building typology. Industrial buildings need greater conformity of the façade to manage typical operations such as those associated with service and docking areas. The remedy was to exclude industrial uses from the subsection 13-311(c)(2) and create a new subsection at 13-311(c)(4) to provide a separate standard more applicable to industrial uses.
Section 13-311(e) Building service areas are modified to address those situations where fenestration is more difficult to achieve. Fenestration requirements for industrial uses was reduced from 30% to 25%, given the nature of such construction.
Section 13-311(f)(3) This section was modified to recognize that it may be impractical or overly difficult to provide a ground floor liner across 100% of structured or understory parking. The provision continues to encourage and seek maximum screening.