HomeMy WebLinkAboutZB ResoMiami Zoning Board
Resolution No.: 2004-0822
Monday, February 23, 2004
Mr. Carlos Martell offered the following resolution and moved its adoption
Resolution:
AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTORS SET FORTH IN ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000,
THE ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDED APPROVAL TO THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CHANGE OF ZONING 1N THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS
AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, PAGE 36, ARTICLE 4,
SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, FROM R-3 MULTIFAMILY
MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH AN SD-12 BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICT TO C-1
RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL WITH AN SD-25 SOUTHWEST 8TH STREET SPECIAL
OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 550-570
SOUTHWEST 7TH STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 7 AND 8, BLOCK 48, CITY OF
MIAMI SOUTH (B-41), PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; ZONED R-3
MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH AN SD-12 BUFFER OVERLAY
DISTRICT.
Upon being seconded by Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza,
the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote:
Mr. Charles J. Flowers Yes
Mr. Miguel Gabela Null
Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza Yes
Mr. Charles A. Garavaglia No
Ms. lleana Hernandez -Acosta Yes
Mr. Carlos Martell Yes
Mr. Juvenal A. Pina No
Mr. Allan Shulman No
Mr. Angel Urquiola No
Mr. Georges William Yes
AYE: 5
NAY: 4
ABSTENTIONS: 0
NO VOTES: 1
ABSENT: 0
Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 5-4
Teresita L. Fernandez, Executive Ses Lary
Hearing Boards
Case No. 2004-0758 Item Nbr:
4
Section 2210. Nature and Requirements of Zoning Board
Report to City Commission
Circle appropriate condition(s):
When pertaining to the rezoning of land under application made under Article
22, the report and recommendation of the Zoning Board shall show that the
Zoning Board has studied and considered, where applicable, whether or not:
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 district.
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, utilizes, 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.
I) 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 are for the
proposed use in districts already permitting such use.
Motion: After considering the factors set forth in Section 2410 of Ordinance
11000, I move that the request on agenda item 1- be
recommended to the City Commission fo approval (denial).
6/7-5 //( 6//
Print Name
Agenda Item Date