HomeMy WebLinkAboutZB ResoMiami Zoning Board
Resolution No.: 2003-0794
Monday, December 15, 2003
Mr. Georges William offered the following resolution and moved its adoption
Resolution:
AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTORS IN ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, THE ZONING
BOARD RECOMMENDED APPROVAL TO THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CHANGE OF
ZONING IN THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE
ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, PAGE 46, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401,
SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, FROM R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO R-2
TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3160,
3170, 3180 AND 3190 OAK AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 7, 8, 9, 10 AND 11,
BLOCK 1, CHARLES H. FROW SUBDIVISION (13-53), PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY, FLORIDA; ZONED R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
Upon being seconded by Mr. Charles J. Flowers,
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 Yes
Ms. lleana Hernandez -Acosta Yes
Mr. Carlos Martell Yes
Mr. Juvenal A. Pine Yes
Mr. Allan Shulman Yes
Mr. Angel Urquiola Yes
Mr. Georges William Yes
AYE: 9
NAY: 0
ABSTENTIONS: 0
NO VOTES: 1
ABSENT: 0
Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 9-0
Teresita L.. Fernandez, Executive Secretary
Hearing Boards
Case No. 2003-0720 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 Toad 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 2210 of Ordinance
11000, I move that the request on agenda item # 1 be
recommended to the City Commission fenial).
1
fQ? /1_,‘ (A-) cll I /1i44
Print Name
V2-15-03
Agenda Item Date