So, you think this is another one of those allegedly negative Blaxberg articles. Granted, I have never been big on the happy face portrayal that Village staff, and other elected officials, feel compelled to express on everything concerning the Village, but that’s not what this article is about.

I am speaking of setbacks in the building and zoning context, as well as floor to area ratios (FARs), structure height, zoning density and the like. For well over a year, the Village Council has been working very hard on the state mandated future Land Use Master Plan for the Village, and more recently, land use regulations. With the help of our knowledgeable staff, and especially Planning and Zoning Director Allyn Berg, the Council has been reworking the presently applicable Miami-Dade Zoning Code from top to bottom. Aside from eschewing archaic and ambiguous provisions, we have focused on a clear policy determination that has taken focus over the past three years. Setbacks, height restrictions and FARs in our predominantly residential Village have been given primary attention to support a policy of maintaining open green space in residential areas.

Anyone who has sought variances in the past few years will readily tell you that the Planning and Zoning Board and the Village Council have, with rare exceptions, consistently maintained front yard, side yard and rear yard setback requirements to assure adequate space between homes. In the new proposed Land Use Regulations, the Council will likely approve increased first floor residential FARs, (from 15% to 20%) with the trade off of decreased second floor FARs (down to 10%) with more restrictive conditions placed upon accessory buildings, overhangs and awnings or canopies. The intention is to assure clear limitations upon the footprint of new buildings that are placed on a residential lot within a designated perimeter or "building envelope".

The effect of these changes should motivate builders of new homes to put most of a proposed structure on the ground level. If there is a second level, it will have to be much smaller than the first level. This avoids the severe, huge rectangular castle-like structures which have been built at some locations in town. These have overwhelmed neighboring structures and have blocked lines of sight. Setback requirements are being maintained. Accessory structures will be considered part of the FAR for the main residence. Pools and tennis courts will still have to be within setbacks and we are not messing with the ability to place the sacred aluminum or steel storage shed in convenient, out of the way locations in the back yard.

So yes, this is a "setback" for the Village. Indeed, it represents the development of a very significant blueprint for the Village’s future within its residential areas. Commercial and high density residential areas along U.S. 1 are a different story, and these areas may have a very different future emphasis for state mandated mixed commercial and residential uses in the vicinity of Metrorail. Watch for the public debates on these issues in the near future.