HomeMy WebLinkAboutZB ResoMiami Zoning Board
Resolution No.: 2004-0875
Monday, May 24, 2004
Mr. Allan Shulman 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 IN THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS
AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, PAGE 43, ARTICLE 4,
SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL, SD-3 COCONUT GROVE MAJOR STREETS OVERLAY DISTRICT AND SD-18
MINIMUM LOT SIZE OVERLAY DISTRICT TO GII GOVERNMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL FOR
THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1990, 2000 AND 2020 TIGERTAIL
AVENUE & 2015 AND 2035 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 7, 8,
9, 14, 15, 16 AND THE 15' WIDE ALLEY BETWEEN, ALL BEING A PORTION OF BLOCK A,
BISCAYNE PARK TERRACE SUBDIVISION (2-36), PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY, FLORIDA; ZONED R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, SD-3 COCONUT GROVE
MAJOR STREETS OVERLAY DISTRICT AND SD-18 MINIMUM LOT SIZE 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 No
Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza Yes
Mr. Charles A. Garavaglia Yes
Ms. lleana Hernandez -Acosta No
Mr. Carlos Martell Away
Mr. Juvenal A. Pine Yes
Mr. Allan Shulman Yes
Mr. Angel Urquiola No
Mr. Georges William Yes
AYE: 6
NAY: 3
ABSTENTIONS: 0
NO VOTES: 0
ABSENT: 1
Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 6-3 C
Teresita L. Fernandez, Executive Sectary
Hearing Boards
Case No. 2004-0777
Item Nbr: 1
Miami Zoning Board
Resolution No.: 2004-0876
Monday, May 24, 2004
Mr. Allan Shulman offered the following resolution and moved its adoption
Resolution:
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDING TO THE PLANNING AND
ZONING DEPARTMENT TO REFINE THE G/I GOVERNMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL ZONING
DISTRICT TEXT TO NOT ALLOW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
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 Yes
Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza Yes
Mr. Charles A. Garavaglia Yes
Ms. Ileana Hernandez -Acosta Yes
Mr. Carlos Martell Away
Mr. Juvenal A. Pina Yes
Mr. Allan Shulman Yes
Mr. Angel Urquiola Yes
Mr. Georges William Yes
AYE: 9
NAY: 0
ABSTENTIONS: 0
NO VOTES: 0
ABSENT: 1
Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 9-0
/
Teresita L. Fernandez, Executive Secr
Hearing Boards
ry
Case No. 2004-0777
Item Nbr:
1
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 Tight 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 Ne 0, I move that the
request on agenda item # j be recommended to the City Commission for pprov (denial).
Signature
Print Name
Agenda Item
5-24-CAL
Date