HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnalysisANALYSIS FOR ZONING CHANGE
Approximately 260, 282 & 296 NW 57 Avenue and
5710 NW 3rd Street.
CASE NO: 2005-0950
Pursuant to Article 4, Section 401 of Ordinance 11000, as amended, the Zoning
Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida, the subject proposal has been reviewed for an
amendment to the Zoning Atlas as follows:
The request is to change the Zoning designation as follows:
Ft_y The subject property consists of six (6) lots facing NW 57th Avenue and NW 3rd
Street, from R-3 "Multifamily Medium -Density Residential" to R 3 "Multifamily
Medium -Density Residential" with an SD-19 "Designated F. A. R. Overlay District"
designating an F.A.R. of 1.0. (Complete legal description on file with the Hearing
Boards Office).
The following findings have been made:
• It is found that the SD-19 "Designated F.A.R. Overlay District" is a district that was
created as an instrument to modify (increase or decrease) the F.A.R. on specific
properties within the City.
• It is found that the effect of the SD-19 shall be to modify regulations within portions
of other zoning districts to designate properties or areas of the City with a specific
floor area ratio (F.A.R.).
• It is found that the subject property has an R-3 zoning designation that allows an
F.A.R. of .75 and it is also found that the potential development allowed, with the
requested increase of the F.A.R., will results in a massive over -development with all
the subsequent negative results.
• The additional F.A.R. requested is not necessary to accommodate reasonable
development. The requested additional F.A.R. will only serve to create a massive
amount of development on this site that is totally out of scale and character with the
surrounding area.
• It is found that the requested zoning designation change is not inconsistent with the
underlying land use designation and therefore does not require an amendment to the
Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan.
Based on these findings, the Planning Department is recommending denial of the
application as presented.
ANALYSIS FOR ZONING CHANGE
CASE NO. 2005-0950
Yes No N/A
In harmony with Comp. Plan; does not require amendment.
In harmony with established land use.
Is related to adjacent and nearby districts.
Is within scale with needs of neighborhood or City.
Maintains similar population density pattern.
Existing district boundaries are illogically drawn.
Changes or changing conditions that make change necessary.
Positively influences living conditions in neighborhood.
Has similar impact on traffic; does not affect public safety.
Has similar impact on drainage.
Has similar impact on light and air to adjacent areas.
Has similar impact on property values in adjacent areas.
Contributes to improvement or development of adjacent property.
Conveys same treatment as to owners within same classification.
Property is unfairly limited under existing zoning.
Difficult to find other adequate sites in surrounding area.