Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 13, 2005 ZB ResoMiami Zoning Board Resolution No.: 2005-1040 Monday, June 13, 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 IN THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, PAGE 14, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH AN SD-12 BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 632 AND 634 NORTHEAST 68TH STREET; LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT "A" (HEREBY ATTACHED), PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; ZONED R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. Upon being seconded by Ms. Ileana Hernandez -Acosta, 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 Away Ms. Chloe Keidaish Yes Ms. Ileana Hernandez -Acosta Yes Mr. Carlos Martell Yes Mr. Juvenal A. Pina Yes Mr. Angel Urquiola Yes Mr. Georges William Yes AYE: 8 NAY: 1 ABSTENTIONS: 0 NO VOTES: 0 ABSENT: 1 Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 8-1 Teresita L'" ernandez, Executive Secretary Hearing Boards Case No. 2005-0994 Item Nbr: 5 Exhibit "A" Lots 2, less the West 8 feet for Right of Way, 4, 6 and 8, of ELMIRA, a subdivision according to the plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book "B" at Page 162, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida; and Less the following: Begin at a point of intersection of the North line of said Lot 2 with the East right-of-way line of State Road 5 (Biscayne Boulevard), as shown on the Florida Department of Transportation Maintenance Maps for Section 87030-MTC-1, as recorded in Road Plat Book 152, page 10 of the Public Records of Miami - Dade County, Florida, said point being 2.438 meters (8.00 feet) East of the Northwest corner of Lot 2, (as measured along the North line of said Lot 2); thence North 87°48'57" East, along said North line of Lot 2, a distance of 7.070 meters (23.20 feet) to the point of cusp with a tangent circular curve, concave to the Southeast, having a radius of 8.534 meters (28.00 feet); thence, from a tangent bearing of South 87°48'57" West, Southwesterly along said curve to the left, through a central angle of 55°48'14", for an arc length of 8.312 meters (27.27 feet) to a point of intersection with said East right-of-way line of State Road 5; thence North 02°21'31" West, along said East right-of-way line, for 3.738 meters (12.26 feet) to the Point of Beginning. 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. fte Motion: requ Sign nsidering the factors set forth in Section 2210 of Ordinance No. 11000, I move that the item # 5 be recommended to the City Commission f (approve (denial). rt&ePh .5u2-7c, Print Name not