HomeMy WebLinkAboutZB ResoMiami Zoning Board
Resolution No.: 2005-0963
Monday, January 10, 2005
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 AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, PAGE NO. 21, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE
OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, FROM I INDUSTRIAL TO C-2 LIBERAL COMMERCIAL WITH
AN SD-19 DESIGNATED F.A.R. OVERLAY DISTRICT, F.A.R. OF 2.35 FOR THE PROPERTIES
LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 350, 360, 370 & 380 NORTHWEST 24TH STREET, 301 AND
311 NORTHWEST 23RD STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 33, 34, THE WEST 50
FEET OF LOT 35, LESS THE NORTH 5 FEET, LOT 60, LOT 61, LESS THE SOUTH 7.5 FEET
FOR STREET, AND LOT 62, LESS THE SOUTH 7.5 FEET FOR STREET, CORRECTED MAP
OF SPAULDING SUBDIVISION (3-161), PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAM1-DADE COUNTY,
FLORIDA; ZONED I INDUSTRIAL.
Upon being seconded by Mr. Angel Urquiola,
the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote:
Mr. Charles J. Flowers Yes
Mr. Miguel Gabela Yes
Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza No
Mr. Charles A. Garavaglia Yes
Ms. Ileana Hernandez -Acosta Yes
Mr. Carlos Martell Yes
Mr. Juvenal A. Pina Yes
Mr. Angel Urquiola Yes
Mr. Georges William No
AYE: 7
NAY: 2
ABSTENTIONS: 0
NO VOTES: 0
ABSENT: 0
Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 7-2
Teresita L Fernandez, Executive Se Cr ary
Hearing Boards
Case No. 2004-0923
Item Nbr:
5
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
requestJon enda item #
Sire
factors set forth in Section 2210 of Ordinance No. 11000, I move that the
e recommended to the City Commission for (approval) (denial).
Print Na
e
0
Date
Agenda Item