HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnalysisANALYSIS FOR ZONING CHANGE
Approximately 190 NE 71th ST
CASE NO: 08-01207zc
Pursuant to Article 4, Section 401 and Article 22 of Ordinance 11000, as amended, the
Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida, the subject proposal for an amendment
to the Zoning Atlas has been reviewed as follows:
The subject property consists of two lots fronting N.E. 71St Street and N.E. 70th
Street (a complete legal description on file at the Hearing Boards Office),
requesting a zoning change from R-2 "Two -Family Residential" and R-3
"Multifamily Medium Density Residential" to C-1 "Restrictive Commercial".
The following findings have been made:
It is found that the parcels are part of a Two -Family Residential and Multifamily
Medium Density Residential neighborhood.
It is found that the requested change will represent an intrusion of commercial uses
into a Two -Family Residential and Multifamily Medium Density Residential
neighborhood.
It is found that a zoning change at this location may set a negative precedent and
create a "domino effect" in regards to future zoning change applications.
It is found that the "Two -Family Residential" and "Multifamily Medium Density
Residential' zoning categories allow residential structures to a maximum density of
18 and 65 dwelling units per acre respectively. The requested "Restricted Com-
mercial " designation allows to a maximum density equivalent to "Multifamily High
Density Residential' or to 150 dwelling units per acre. This potential increase in resi-
dential density will be out of scale with the established neighborhood.
• It is found that the Planning Advisory Board recommended denial of the change of
land use at its February 18, 2009 meeting.
Based on these findings, the Planning Department is recommending denial of the
application as presented.
109 FED '217
Analysts for ZONING CHANGE
File ID: 08-01207zc
❑
®
❑
a) The proposed change conforms with the adopted Miami Comprehensive
®
❑
❑
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.
❑
Z
❑
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.
❑
®
❑
0 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.
❑ ® ❑ h) The proposed change positively influences living conditions in the
neighborhood.
❑ Z ❑ 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.
❑
®
❑
❑
®
❑
❑
®
❑
❑
❑
Z
❑
®
❑
❑
®
❑
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.