| | | | | | | |  | New Business and Commission Requests - R9 S
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM |
| | | |
| | | | | | | | | TO: | Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission | | | FROM: | Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager | | | DATE: | October 18, 2017 | | | |
| | SUBJECT: | DISCUSS APPEAL OF A VARIANCE GRANTED BY THE DRB FOR A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AT 1600-1634 LINCOLN ROAD. |
| | | |
| | | | | | | | RECOMMENDATION
| The Administration recommends that the City Commission discuss the item and provide appropriate policy direction.
|
| | | |
| | | | | | | | ANALYSIS
| BACKGROUND
On October 3, 2017, the Design Review Board (DRB) approved an application for a project located at 1600-1634 Alton Road (DRB0416-0015 aka “1212 Lincoln Road”). Specifically, the applicants, ARRP Miami, LLC, 1212 Lincoln, LLC, and Wells Fargo Bank, requested a variance to reduce the minimum hotel unit size.
ANALYSIS
The variance granted by the DRB is from the minimum required hotel unit size in the CD-2 zoning district: 15% of the hotel units shall be between 300-335 SF and 85% of units shall be 335 SF or larger. The applicant has proposed 165 hotel units (98.2%) at less than 300 SF (the smallest at 186 SF) and 3 units (1.8%) at 421SF.
The development site, composed of multiple lots, contains 70,666 SF of lot area, and the development program with the number of hotel units resulting in the variance request is the applicants’ choice. Planning staff was unable to find any practical difficulties or hardship associated with the proposed undersized hotel rooms, and recommended denial of the variance for a lack of hardship.
In accordance with Section 118-9 of the City Code, the City Manager is an eligible party to file an appeal of a DRB decision pertaining to the granting of any variance; such an appeal would go directly to Circuit Court. In light of the magnitude of the variance granted, as well as the potential lack of compliance with the Code required hardship criteria, the Administration is seeking direction from the City Commission, as to whether a review of the DRB decision granting the aforementioned variance should be initiated.
|
| | | |
| | | | | | | | CONCLUSION
| | In view of the foregoing, the Administration recommends that the City Commission discuss the item and provide appropriate policy direction. If direction is given to file an appeal of the variance, such appeal will be filed in Circuit Court. |
| | | |
| | | | | | | | Legislative Tracking
Planning |
| | | |
|