The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutM-93-0669Tr C = MiAM, F�OR,DA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission =ROM Ci RECOMMENDATION DATE SEP 171993 FILE Zoning Study for property SuBJECT located at Coral Way and S.W. 27 Avenue (approximately 2500-2698 S.W. 22 Street) REFERENCES Agenda Item: City Commission ENCLOSURES Meeting of October 14, 1993 It is respectfully recommended that the City Commission approve, in principle, the attached Zoning Study for the block generally bounded by Coral Way (S.W. 22 Street), S.W. 25 Avenue, S.W. 22 Terrace, and S.W. 27 Avenue (approximately 2500-2698 S.W. 22 Street); further dissecting the administration to initiate the recommended action leading to rezoning of a portion of said block. In response to a personal appearance by the Silver Bluff Homeowners Association at it's meeting of July 8, 1993, the City Commission approved Motion #93-452 directing the City Manager to conduct a zoning study for the intersection of Coral Way and S.W. 27 Avenue, in order to explore what would be the most suitable zoning classification for the area (also ]mown as approximately 2500-2698 S.W. 22 Street); specifically in question was the southeasternmost corner of the intersection . The attached study was prepared as requested by the Planning, Building and Zoning Department. The final recamiendation of the study is that the southeasternmost portions of the subject block (more specifically, Tracts B and D of WHITE PLAZA SUB as recorded in the Public Records of Dade County; see attached report) be rezoned to an R-3 Medium Density Multifamily designation with an SD-12 Special Buffer Overlay District. The combination of the R-3 zoning classification with the SD-12 Overlay will assure the adjacent residential neighborhood that high intensity commercial uses will not be developed immediately fronting single family homes, and at the same time, allows the owner of the subject property to develop the primary street frontages with commercial uses while being able to use the rear portions of the block with complementary accessory parking (by Special Exception pen t). It also allows for private development of the southeastern tracts with medium density residential uses facing S.W. 22 Terrace if so desired. 99- 669 ZONING STUDY FOR THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF CORAL WAY AND S.W. 27 AVENUE Prepared by the Planning, Building and Zoning Department of the City of Miami September, 1993 BACKGROUND In 1984, when the subject property was originally assembled, including street and alley closures, it was for the purpose of developing a high intensity commercial use. Subsequently, in 1985, the southern portion, more specifically, the southeasternmost seven (7) lots of the subject property, were rezoned from single family residential to commercial. Accompanying the change of zoning, a restrictive covenant was proffered by the owner of the property. The covenant contained a series of actions and improvements which would be required on the part of the developer in order to mitigate any potential adverse impacts that the development would have on the adjacent residential area. Due to changing market conditions, the project never went forward and none of the developer's proposals or improvements were ever accomplished. In 1989, another proposal was made for a large grocery store to be located on the subject property. Discussions were held with residents of the adjacent neighborhood, however, the project never progressed to the point where the original covenant would have to be amended. At present, there is yet another proposal to develop this block. The current developer has had a series of meetings with the neighborhood and is in the process of attempting to amend the original covenant which was recorded in 1985, that still runs with the land today. The current proposal is for a shopping center that would include retail frontages along Coral Way and S.W. 27th Avenue; and parking along the southeastern frontages of the property (S.W. 25 Avenue and S.W. 22 Terrace). This study is the result of a request by the Silver Bluff Homeowners Association to the City Commission on July 8, 1993; in their presentation to the City Commission, they expressed their disagreement with the current commercial zoning which was granted to the southeastern lots of the subject property in 1985, even.with the safeguards of the proffered covenant. ANALYSIS The current zoning classification of C-1 Restricted Commercial was granted to the subject property in part due to a covenant which was proffered by the property owner; said covenant contained a series of conditions that were negotiated with the neighbors in the hopes of mitigating potentially adverse impacts that the development would have on the adjacent single family neighborhood to the southeast. On its own merits, without restrictions and considering the full range of uses permitted in the C-1 zoning classification, as listed in Ordinance 11000, as amended, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, the zoning classification of C-1 along the southeastern corner of the subject property could pose a threat to the stability of the residential area that it borders. 4 93- 669 While commercial uses of varying degrees of intensity have historically fronted along the major arterial roadways of the area, more specifically, along Coral Way and S.W. 27th Avenue, the rear lots of these frontages (facing S.W. 22 Terrace and the adjacent avenues) have remained residential. The attached Maps (at the end of this report) depict that for a several block radius, this pattern still predominantly remains today. Furthermore, the attached Maps depict that S.W. 27th Avenue has been zoned with more intense commercial uses than Coral Way; the zoning along Coral Way (particularly to the east of S.W. 27th Avenue) is predominantly office and residential; the higher intensity commercial uses do not become predominant on Coral Way for several blocks to the west. On the subject property in particular, the parcels located at the southeasternmost corner are immediately fronting single family residential homes. To develop the subject property under the zoning classification of C-1 without some sort of safeguards could threaten the stability and general welfare of the neighborhood to the southeast of this block. FINDINGS It is hereby found that: 1) The current zoning classification of C-1, restricted commercial, on the southeastern parcels of the subject property, is not in harmony with the established land use of the subject property or the established pattern for the area surrounding it to the east. The C-1 designation is also excessive in scale for the immediate needs of the neighborhood; a commercial designation along the major arterial roadways is sufficient. It is also hereby found that if this parcel is fully developed under the C-1 classification, it could adversely affect such things as traffic circulation through the neighborhood, light and air flow and property values in the immediately adjacent area. 2) A change of zoning classification on the southeast portion of the subject property, which faces the single family residential area, from C-1, restricted commercial, to a primarily residential category, would have a stronger relationship to the nearby district it borders on the south and east; furthermore, a residential designation on these parcels could protect the adjacent stable, residential neighborhood from having to further carry the burden of increasing traffic congestion. 99- 669 5 RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis and findings outlined above, the most appropriate zoning classification for the subject property is a designation which allows for primarily a medium density residential level of development, and/or, conditionally, a low enough intensity level of commercial uses that would function as appropriate buffers between the commercial development fronting Coral Way and S.W. 27 Avenue, and the single family residential uses to the southeast. Such appropriate uses could include daycare centers, churches, and, if appropriately screened and landscaped, an accessory parking lot for possible commercial uses along the major arterial roadways. Zoning Ordinance 11000 offers the combination of uses described above in its R-3 Medium Density Multi -family Residential designation with an SO-12 Special Buffer Overlay District. The R-3 zoning classification allows for such uses as single family, duplex and medium density multifamily residences, and conditionally, adult and child daycare centers, places of worship, schools and health clinics (see Zoning Ordinance 11000 for a complete listing. The SD-12 Special Buffer Overlay District is intended to create buffer areas between residential and non-residential districts in specially defined areas of the city. Where a residential lot shares a common lot line with certain commercial, office or industrially zoned lots, such residential lots are eligible for SD-12 classifications. Buffer overlay districts may be developed only in combination with adjoining commercial, office or industrial lots to allow greater flexibility in development of land. Buffer overlay districts may only be developed per the requirements of the underlying district. In addition, when used as surface parking lots which serve the non-residential uses, they shall be subject to a Special Exception permit with City Commission approval. CONCLUSION The combination of the R-3 zoning classification with the SD-12 Overlay will assure the adjacent residential neighborhood that high intensity commercial uses will not be developed immediately fronting single family homes, and at the same time, allows the owner of the subject property to develop the primary street frontages with commercial uses while being able to use the rear portions of the block with complementary accessory parking (by Special Exception permit). It also allows for private development of the southeastern tracts with medium density residential uses facing S.W. 22 Terrace if so desired. s T. S T. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL S T. . i. L7 TFDUPLEX RESIDENTIAL T'u-rym-[-1 I I I r -C �1 1 16 I'l . . 1 [1 T171 I I I RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL - DUPLEX - RESIDENTIAL ; k - CITY COMMISSION 10/14/93 CURRENT I" USE PLAN 8 DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL loll 0 =1 _ IIIYI Y� SEE 0 INN MEW ma SINGLE FAMILY RESID AL�uu muff-0133 22. 1T1vdCORAL jWAY) Oil I J S. W. 22 TERR. PUBLIC 1FACILITIES i I I 1 T SINGLE 23 S FAMILY I I I VI I ITITTI ► RESIDENTIAL 24 ST 24 TERR. L_J _��j A 4 1 OFFICE t1li RESTRICTED 25 COMMERCIAL 1 6 94 1 �foil •II I Is T RR.� 11 1. l] re rt ,. • ]• t Iltt III L11 t M II 11 le . • 1 . ] 1 1Y^j. I J , lt. � • o S T. 3 ♦ . , ] I • ] • . ( If M Ii 1• 11 1 • ].Itf I. 1• '�' , • r • � - ,1 a „,. ,t t�11 e•i•,'• 111 I 11 N • 1 / y • (• ] l 1 I IF 11 ]]= 11 t• I] Is • t1 �e 1•II I, • • 1 �1 �1 ' , , t• 7• t H al I . I . \ a , •• . . 1• u Y Z tell- to t, t• l\27 '''777 tI•,. l• /•]] t]1 ]•1 •I, It IaM 11 i wAftL •• •• 1, '2 1 ,� RR • r w .a . ] - » r. , , . • t -,. „ u ] „�.. n 1• • ton n ,• 1 y Is It It 1• • 11' `. I j 1 j 1 I' (' �'fl __ ' .... - (CORAL' WAY. i. : 1 ] ) , • ] 1 ,. , �Sd• ' 1 1 `: .. «' •• t' ::'r:•::j:: 1 �..r�. ' y I1 `�� _ -;.J ,+ w a. lu n H . v u Y a, w a• a TIT • t, . S.w. 2 TERR. ' '' DWI • !, , , , . ' I . • .• ." L f I . , I J „ •• I •. -t , y wl. r, • •+r la JI-. <tl•.b.i,(tl It ,,AM SUBURBAN �BURiAN LCs ... , I l i 1 t• ( ( 1 I , I 1I�+ I'j" l.l••1 'LEI :IT!4, ^i•,•�`I !• M 1 I^ Ir, 1,71,. ,ol a �• I • ♦ • I, < •/• �S. l l JM.•i 1 I I I to I' I1 I - 'SUBUfjg I ' I �' r I BAPTIST LEI r'luwt----!..�I .�_,_1r r V�i'�r ( i,.ra .�a-u.a.�.•�..I I I !��: I .. n V cvl I:ru,. IA[ •II+IIen ajt,,Rr�t>OSI,I� 5.W •� TER. I TE) , i, .� .I..I•- I , 11. i,'.I •� nj. i,- I I. 1 ; l i i t I i f 1•I .I Ie I I y r�4. I ,•ir♦�t•Ir•Itae, p. •r.•i.,�•, n elst �,t l]f 1 y, I I I' •1"�•, • (t'Itt�'•I. nlr• rlu .l, ulrl 1, r• 1 � •I�j f I I l I 1 to 'aN- 1 (' I +j I 1 t (••i ( I•, I 1 1 i I1.I•I e• I .Lt.,olt,n, nl I P• a I i ;I I 5.w 24 S7 a /I•h.•eb nl s, tilt. Ma P• �, •' t�,.,' I► i �. SIT 3 1 I ,�I, I -+ 4 .1•,i..� �. � •Is• I ' 1 I 1 I .Zr► �• �, � . , , i »I �sl . „ u I,e I r � • 1 1 r. , ,I � � d .. - .. „ •. ., •, •, I h ] It r - ..'•. ,.. . -a •, I ' I t ] � ] aTo •1 1 I i 5w V Z4 i , I1 1 T R. I 1 1 I I 1 1 j r ' ] t , l . , • . • • • ,• -, • • 1/ Ili • to ,, ,,, In y . ` CITY COMMISSION lU/14/93 • , • • N r. as , t, I • .. -, I NI/.�r III all, :"I,. ,:1,1 1, .•, . �. l S w PROPOSED REZONING 1 7—=-- r ~ r'"''s"'� ( l ' • • I . ® 6 1 I x zr. ♦I el. ,yy " s 1 I I , , , , I X, , N ,e UI., 1 � V �„" �° T