Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnalysis - OLDANALYSIS FOR ZONING CHANGE Approximately 3500, 3550,3590,3592,3524 SW 7th Street, 711 SW 36th Avenue and 710 SW 35th Avenue CASE NO: 09-01300zc 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 seven parcels on the north side of the block fronting SW 7t" Street (a complete legal description on file at the Hearing Boards Office), from R-2 "Duplex Residential" to C-1 "Restricted Commercial". The following findings have been made: • It is found that the property is surrounded on the north and east by an established low density residential community. In addition; the character of SW 7t" Street in this area is low density residential, specifically "Duplex Residential". • It is found that the requested change will represent an intrusion of commercial uses into a low 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 zoning change applications. • It is found that on December 2, 2009 the Planning Advisory Board recommended denial of the land use change request from "Duplex Residential' to "Restricted Commercial" to City Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Department is recommending denial of the application as presented. Analysis for ZONING CHANGE File ID: 09-01300zc Yes No N/A. ❑ ® ❑ 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. ❑ ® ❑ 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. ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 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.