When the Miami Shores Village council adopted its new comprehensive plan in September 2023, the general consensus was that an overhaul of the zoning code would soon follow.
Ten months later, that process remains in limbo, leaving the planning and zoning board with few tools to retain the village’s low-density, single-family character that proponents of the comprehensive plan spent months advocating to defend.
Now, with a vision of preservation upheld by the village’s deciding voices, yet little to back that vision up in writing, the Shores finds itself muddled with frustration – frustration from residents who continue to see large homes popping up throughout their neighborhood; frustration from planners who struggle to find clear, legal grounds to deny those homes; and frustration from the applicants who nevertheless have to jump through hurdles to build them.
(Samantha Morell for Biscayne Times)
The Miami Shores Village council has enacted a 60-day zoning in progress to add maximum size requirements for new single-family homes.
In response, the council enacted a 60-day “zoning in progress” on June 4, wherein certain applications – namely, those for the construction of new single-family homes and for additions to existing single-family homes that exceed 50% of square footage – will not be accepted while village staff works to address some of the most immediate concerns within the zoning code.
That process will produce specific criteria for homeowners or prospective homeowners in Miami Shores to comply with when designing a new home. It will have no effect, however, on Cassidy Buckland, whose plans have already been heard and denied, and who is looking to sue the village as a result.
Lawsuit Pending
(Samantha Morell for Biscayne Times)
Resident Cassidy Buckland at the June 18 meeting during which she unsuccessfully requested that the Miami Shores Village council approve her site plan for a new two-story home.
Buckland’s plans for a 6,694-square-foot home on an approximately 10,800-square-foot lot at 358 NE 94th St. were denied by the planning and zoning board April 25. Her subsequent appeal to the village council to overturn the planning board’s decision on June 18 was equally unsuccessful.
Both denials were made on the grounds that the proposed home was not “harmonious” with the surrounding neighborhood. Section 523 of the village code says “all buildings shall be generally harmonious in character and appearance … with existing buildings in the neighborhood and shall be appropriate to their surroundings.”
Section 100 additionally includes the general guidelines that future development be “in conformity with the foregoing character, with respect to type, intensity and the design and appearance of buildings.”
There are, however, no specific maximums for floor-area-ratio or lot coverage for single-family homes, the discussions of which have prevailed in public discourse.
(Patrizia Bonaduce via Facebook)
Patrizia Bonaduce is the chairwoman of the Miami Shores historic preservation board.
Buckland’s proposed two-story home would have covered about 34% of her lot, which is located in between two homes with roughly 26% and 24% lot coverage. Directly across the street from Buckland’s property are homes with an estimated 20% lot coverage.
A 10-year resident of the Shores, Buckland said she’s been searching to no avail for a new house in the neighborhood that would fit her family of six, plus two nannies. Like many prospective buyers in Florida and across the nation, she was faced with hefty price tags due to inflated renovations and discovered that building anew would be more cost-effective. Eventually, she decided to hire someone to design a new home, which includes six bedrooms, seven bathrooms, a gym, a pool, a family room, an indoor and an outdoor kitchen, an office, and a two-car parking garage.
Planning and zoning staff under the supervision of several directors recommended approval of the application.
“What they did to us in Miami Shores was outrageous and we’re going to sue them,” said Buckland. “We’re planning on suing them because our plans met all the codes and zoning. We’re going to sue them for millions of dollars.”
Historic Preservation
(Miami Shores Village files)
A rear view of Cassidy Buckland's current home, designed by architect Robert Law Weed.
Regardless of how large or small Buckland’s new home would have been if approved and built, there’s another issue that concerned preservationists throughout Miami Shores even more: Buckland’s current home is historic, having been built in 1928, and it’ll have to be demolished if anything new is to take its place.
Buckland’s home is not historically designated, however, though according to Miami Shores historic preservation board chair Patrizia Bonaduce, it certainly could be.
“Its architect, Robert Law Weed, had incredible commissions in Miami-Dade County, among others, the University of Miami,” explained Bonaduce. “In Miami Shores, [he designed] the Grand Concourse Apartments in the Mediterranean style and Miami Shores Elementary School in the Art Deco style.”
(Patrizia Bonaduce via Facebook)
There are 120 centennial homes that still exist in Miami Shores, of which 36 are protected from demolition.
Of the 120 centennial – or almost centennial – homes that still exist in the Shores, Bonaduce says approximately 85 are unprotected from demolition. Further, she says, only 30 of those – about 1% of all homes in Miami Shores – have preserved enough of their original condition to be worthy of protection. She says Buckland’s home is one of the 30.
Though she is not actively seeking designation for Buckland’s house, which does not require Buckland’s approval, Bonaduce did speak at public meetings advocating against its demolition.
“I think, and this is my personal opinion, owners, we are temporary custodians,” Bonaduce said on the night the planning and zoning board denied Buckland’s plans. “We are not entitled to destroy history, and taking this house down will destroy Miami Shores history.”
(Miami Shores Village files)
Cassidy Buckland's house, located at 358 NE 94th St., was built in 1928.
To be clear, Buckland can request a demolition permit whether or not her new plans got the green light, though she’s unlikely to do so. Buckland told this publication that she has already spent more than $100,000 trying to “appease the planning and zoning board” from her first application review in January to the final blow of denial in April.
Her new plan, then, is to move out of Miami Shores entirely.
(Samantha Morell for Biscayne Times)
A new large home being constructed across from the Miami Shores Recreation Center has been a popular topic of discussion among residents.
A Halt on ‘McMansions’
Buckland is not the only one who has faced pushback from the planning and zoning board for large, out-of-character homes. At the April 25 meeting, the planning and zoning board also tabled plans for a new 6,684-square-foot construction – this time on a vacant lot of approximately 10,000 square feet at 1205 NE 91 Terr.
Again, staff’s recommended approval did not prevent the board from expressing its disagreement. The architect for the project said she did not understand how to further adhere to village regulations.
“When I opened Miami Shores’ zoning code, I actually called and I asked, ‘You guys do not have any parameters for design criteria?’” said architect Natalya Maliew. “There are no design criteria for me to consider to design the house. I am happy to comply. There’s nothing to comply with.”
Many have acknowledged the unorthodoxy of not having maximum sizing requirements for single-family homes in a municipal zoning code. Such limitations, then – on floor-area-ratio, height, lot coverage and even impervious areas contributing to flooding – are likely to be introduced to the village council before the “zoning in progress” expires in early August.
The overall zoning code amendment, promised throughout the comprehensive plan debacle, is still pending, however. The process has been delayed in large part due to staffing shortages after former planning and zoning director Claudia Hasbun and her replacement, Judith Frankel, both resigned within the last year.
“This particular zoning code that we have here is woefully inadequate, and I would submit that it was woefully inadequate since the 1970s,” said planning and zoning board member Brandon Spirk at a council meeting last month. “It’s never easy trying to find that balance between preservation of individual property rights and preservation of a community … but this is the time to do it.”
In the meantime, construction of a new large-scale home that has been the talk of the town continues across the street from the village’s recreation center. To some, it is a permanent reminder of a zoning code that does not in its current form reflect the neighborhood’s character.
To others, it’s called property rights.