HomeMy WebLinkAboutZB ResoMiami Zoning Board
Resolution No.: 2004-0946
Monday, November 08, 2004
Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza 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 25, ARTICLE 4,
SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, FROM R-2 TWO-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL TO C-2 LIBERAL COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 1991 NORTHWEST 27TH AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT "A"
(HEREBY ATTACHED), PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; ZONED R-2
TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
Upon being seconded by Mr. Allan Shulman,
the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote:
Mr. Charles J. Flowers Away
Mr. Miguel Gabela Yes
Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza Yes
Mr. Charles A. Garavaglia Yes
Ms. lleana Hernandez -Acosta Away
Mr. Carlos Martell Away
Mr. Juvenal A. Pina Yes
Mr. Allan Shulman Yes
Mr. Angel Urquiola Away
Mr. Georges William Yes
AYE: 6
NAY: 0
ABSTENTIONS: 0
NO VOTES: 0
ABSENT: 4
Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 6-0
v
Teresita L. Fernandez, Executive
Hearing Boards
tary
2
Case No. 2004-0870
Item Nbr:
Exhibit A
LEGAL DESCRIPT701#
LOT 19 OF "RIVER PARK" ACCORDING TO THE PLA T
THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7 AT PAGE 128
OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA,
and
L
A PORTION OF LOT 20 OF "RIVER PARK" ACCORDING TO THE PLAT
THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7 AT PAGE 128
OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI--DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS;
COMMENCE AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 53 SOUTH, RANGE 41 EAST;
THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 34,
S 03"07'13" E, FOR A DISTANCE OF 145.00 FEET, TO THE EXTENSION OF THE NORTHLINE OF
SAID LOT 20; THENCE, ALONG THE SAID EXTENSION OF LOT 20,
N 86'46'07" E FOR A DISTANCE
OF 77.32 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL; A DISTANCE 01=:
THENCE CONTINUE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 20, N 86'46'07'" E,
FOR 73,62 FEET; THENCE, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 20, S 03'06'3B" E , FOR A DISTANCE
OF 50.00 FEET; THENCE, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 20, S 8614S'07" W, FOR A
DISTANCE OF 41.09 FEET, TO A POINT OF A NON -TANGENT CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE TO THE
NORTHEASTERLY WHICH RADIUS POINT BEARS N 71'41'36* E AND HAVING FOR ITS ELEMENTS A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00'18'50" AND A RADIUS OF 505.07 FEET: THENCE POINT OF NOCRTHWESTERLY
ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 2.77 FEET,
TO A CURVATURE WITH A CIRCULAR CURVE BEING CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEASTERLY,
HAVINGCE FOR ITS
ELEMENTS A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 448,19 AND A RADIUS OF 579.37 FEET;
NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CIRCULAR CURVE , FOR A DISTANCE OF 48.59 FEET
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Section 2210. Nature and Requirements of Zoning Board
Report to City Commission
Circle appropriate conditions):
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 difficu no find other adequate sites in the surrounding are for the proposed use in districts
already perriitttig such use.
Motio l fty'dinsidering the factors set forth in Section 2210 of Ordinance No.. . 000, I move that the
requsi- ®,�a item # be recommended to the City Commission for {- ••ro�� (denial).
Sigha(ure
i
acsep , C 6
Print Name
Agen'd-a.
Date