Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZB ResoMiami Zoning Board Resolution Na.: 06-1170 Monday, April 24, 2006 Mr. Angel Urquioia 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 OF THE CHANGE OF ZONING AMENDING PAGE NO. 34, OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION 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 3885 NORTHWEST 6TH STREET AND 600 NORTHWEST 38TH COURT, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 11 AND 12, BLOCK 1, DURHAM TERRACE (44-55), PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; ZONED R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. Upon being seconded by Ms. Chloe Keidaish, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: Mr. Ron Cordon Yes Mr. Miguel Gabela No Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza Away Mr. Charles A. Garavaglia No Ms. Ileana Hernandez -Acosta Yes Ms. Chloe Keidaish Yes Mr. Carlos Martel! Away Mr. Juvenal A. Pina Yes Mr. Angel Urquiola Yes AYE: 5 NAY: 2 ABSTENTIONS: 0 NO VOTES: 0 ABSENT: 2 Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 5-2 Teresita L. Fernandez, Executive Scre#Lry Hearing Boards File ID#: 06-00440zc Z.2 Circle appropriate conciitionrs): When pertaining 10 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 t e factors set forth in Section 2210 of Ordinance Na 1.000, I move that the request on agenda item # be recommended to the City Commission fo Oe.1 Print Nam Li— 244-0(. ) (denial). Agenda Item Date