Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnalysisANALYSIS FOR ZONING CHANGE Approximately 2900 SW 28th Lane CASE NO: 2003-0654 Pursuant to Article 4, Section 401 of Ordinance 11000, as amended, the Zoning Ordi- nance of the City of Miami, Florida, the subject proposal for an amendment to the Zoning Atlas has been reviewed as follows: The request is to change the Zoning designation as follows: Lots 1 Through 10, inclusive and the east 5 feet, of Lot 11, and the east 5 feet of Lot 30 and all of Lots 31 and 32, all in Block 7, COMMERCIAL SILVER BLUFF, from I "Industrial" to C-1 "Restricted Commercial". The following findings have been made: • It is found that immediately adjacent to the east, the area is designated G/I "Government and Institutional" and that area will is be developed as a high density mixed use project pursuant to the Coconut Grove Metrorail Station Area Development Plan. • It is found that within the area adjacent to the west of the subject properties, and designated "Industrial", there are little to no new or existing uses of an industrial nature. The area's development has been residential/commercial uses and the proposed change will constitute a logical extension of the Coconut Grove Metrorail Station Area Development Plan. • It is found that the requested change to C-1 "Restricted Commercial" will allow greater flexibility in developing mixed uses for this area. Based on these findings, the Planning and Zoning Department is recommending approval of the application as presented. ANALYSIS FOR ZONING CHANGE CASE NO. 2003-0654 Yes No N/A • ❑� ❑ In harmony with Comp. Plan; does not require amendment. ❑ © ❑ In harmony with established land use. • ❑ ❑ Is related to adjacent and nearby districts. ❑� ❑ ❑ Is within scale with needy of neighborhood or City. ❑ ❑ ❑ Maintains similar population density pattern. • ❑ ❑ Existing district boundaries are illogically drawn. ❑ Changes or changing conditions that make change necessary. • ❑ ❑ Positively influences living conditions in neighborhood. ❑ ❑ Has similar impact on traffic: does not affect public safety. • ❑ ❑ Has similar impact on drainage. C� ❑ ❑ Has similar impact on Tight and air to adjacent areas. ❑ Has similar impact on property values in adjacent areas. C ❑ ❑ Contributes to improvement or development of adjacent property. ram, ❑ El Conveys same treatment as to owners within same classification. r❑ ❑ ❑ Property is unfairly limite4i under existing zoning. ❑ ❑ ❑ Difficult to find other adequate sites in surrounding area. • ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • ❑ ❑ ❑