Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adu Legalization topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves variance to legalize accessory dwelling unit at 445 NW 136th St., adds family-only occupancy condition
Summary
The North Miami Board of Adjustment voted 5-1 to approve variance V-0624 to legalize an existing, unpermitted accessory dwelling unit (ADU) at 445 NW 136th Street, imposing conditions including that any future occupant be a direct relative of the owner and that the structure comply with building department requirements.
The North Miami Board of Adjustment approved a variance (V-0624) Wednesday to legalize an existing nonconforming accessory dwelling unit at 445 Northwest 136th Street, voting 5-1 to allow the structure to remain under conditions including a stipulation that any future occupant be a direct relative of the property owner.
Staff presented the application as a request to vary Article 5, Division 1, Section 5-102 (E1 and E2) of the city land development regulations to permit an ADU on a lot of 6,500 square feet — smaller than the 12,500-square-foot minimum cited in the code — and to legalize a detached ADU of about 258 square feet where the ADU minimum is 500 square feet. Staff told the board that the structure was constructed without building permits and that, under the LDR criteria, the application failed to meet the four-of-six tests used for positive recommendations; staff therefore recommended denial.
The applicant’s attorney, Mickey Marrero of the law firm listed in the record, said the owners bought and have lived in the house since 2016, presented a petition of support signed by 15 nearby property owners, and told the board the small primary house (about 894 square feet) and neighborhood circumstances supported legalization. Marrero said the structure currently is used for storage and that the “kitchen” shown on plans is actually a portable sink: “There’s no oven. There’s no stove. There’s nothing to cook with.” He added the owners were prepared to accept the conditions listed by staff.
One resident, Veronica Guzman (540 NW 127th Street), spoke in favor of the variance and described witnessing the owner’s attempts to resolve the matter with the city: “I’m actually here in support of this gentleman getting this approved because doing anything with the city ... is a tedious process, and I’ve seen how much he has tried.”
Board discussion ranged from enforcement and precedent concerns to sympathy for a longtime homeowner who built without permits. Some members urged caution that approving a variance on a small lot could encourage similar after-the-fact construction; others argued the structure is being used for storage and that the owner has neighborhood support. Board member Barreto moved to approve the variance with a stipulation that any future occupant of the ADU be a direct relative of the owner, together with the city’s conditions; the motion was seconded and passed 5 to 1.
If the variance approval stands, the building department will inspect the structure and the owner must obtain any required building permits; the department can require modifications to meet building-code standards before an occupancy permit is issued. Staff emphasized that without a variance the owner would otherwise have to demolish the structure or remove the kitchen, bathroom, mechanical and plumbing components.
The board recorded the vote in roll call: Chairwoman Rosman Philippe — yes; Vice Chair (recorded in the roll call) — yes; Pierre Lewis — yes; Board member Monestine — no; Board member Each — yes; Board member Varetto — yes. The motion passed 5 to 1.
The board’s approval legalizes the ADU subject to the conditions on record and to final building-department inspection and permitting.
