HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnalysisANALYSIS FOR ZONING CHANGE
Approximately 1028-40 SW 36 Court,
985-95 and 1031-35 SW 37Th Avenue
CASE NO: 09-00140zc
Pursuant to Article 4, Section 401 of Ordinance 11000, as amended, the Zoning Ordinance of
the City of Miami, Florida, the subject proposal has been reviewed for an amendment to the
Zoning Atlas as follows:
The subject property consists of three lots fronting South West 37th Avenue and two lots
fronting South West 36th Court (a complete legal description on file at the Hearing Boards
Office), requesting a zoning change from R-3 "Multifamily Medium -Density Residential"
to O "Office".
The following findings have been made:
• It is found that the parcels are part of a Multifamily Medium -Density Residential designation
area.
• It is found that the requested O "Office" designation could be an isolated designation
surrounded by R-3 "Multifamily Medium -Density Residential' designation at the north, east,
and south of the property and the City limits on the west.
• It is found that the requested zoning designation could exaggerated the height allowed on
the residential areas, which are zoned R-3 north, south, and east of the property.
• It is found that the traffic generated for the intensity allowed in the requested designation
could impact the medium density area.
• It is found that the zoning change request to O "Office" at the location may set a negative
precedent and create "domino effect" in regards to the change applications.
• It is found that even though the requested zoning change will represent an intrusion of office
uses into the residential zoned area, no Land Use application is required and the requested
zoning change would be consistent with the Miami Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan Map.
Based on these findings, the Planning Department is recommending denial of the
application as presented.
09eTO27 P 2x2M.P
Analysis for ZONING CHANGE
File ID: 09-00140zc
Yes No N/A.
®
❑
❑
a) The proposed change conforms with the adopted Miami Comprehensive
Z
❑
Neighborhood Plan and does not require a plan amendment.
®
❑
❑
b) The proposed change is in harmony with the established land use pattern.
❑
®
❑
c) The proposed change is related to adjacent and nearby districts.
❑
®
❑
d) The change suggested is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood
or the city.
❑
®
❑
e) The proposed change maintains the same or similar population density
pattern and thereby does not increase or overtax the load on public facilities
such as schools, utilities, streets, etc.
❑
®
❑
f) Existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
❑
®
❑
g) Changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed change
necessary.
® ❑
Z ❑
® ❑
® ❑
❑
®
❑
❑
Z
❑
❑
h) The proposed change positively influences living conditions in the
neighborhood.
i) The proposed change has the same or similar impact on traffic and does not
affect public safety to a greater extent than the existing classification.
j) The proposed change has the same or similar impact on drainage as the
existing classification.
k) The proposed change has the same or similar impact on light and air to
adjacent areas as the existing classification.
1) The proposed change has the same or similar impact on property values in the
adjacent area as the existing classification.
m) The proposed change will contribute to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accord with existing regulations.
n) The proposed change conveys the same treatment to the individual owner as
to owners within the same classification and the immediate area and furthers the
protection of the public welfare.
o) There are substantial reasons why the use of the property is unfairly limited
under existing zoning.
p) It is difficult to find other adequate sites in the surrounding area for the
proposed use in districts already permitting such use.