HomeMy WebLinkAboutZB ResoMiami Zoning Board
Resolution No.: 06-1258
Monday, November 13, 2006
Mr. Juvenal A. Pina offered the following resolution and moved its adoption
Resolution:
AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTORS SET FORTH IN ZONING ORDINANCE NO.
11000, THE ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDED DENIAL TO THE CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CHANGE OF ZONING AMENDING PAGE NO. 42, OF THE ZONING ATLAS
OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT
REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-2 TWO-
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH AN SD-12 SPECIAL BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICT TO
C-1 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 3209 SOUTHWEST 23RD TERRACE AND A PORTION OF 2340
SOUTHWEST 32ND AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED EXHIBIT "A' (HEREBY
ATTACHED), PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
Upon being seconded by Mr. Miguel Gabela,
the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote:
Mr. Ron Cordon Yes
Mr. Miguel Gabela Yes
Mr. Joseph H, Ganguzza Yes
Mr. Charles A. Garavaglia Yes
Ms. Ileana Hernandez -Acosta Yes
Ms. Chloe Keidaish Away
Mr. Juvenal A. Pina Yes
Mr. Angel Urquiola Yes
AYE: 7
NAY: 0
ABSTENTIONS:
NO VOTES: 0
ABSENT: 1
Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 7-0
Teresita L. Fernandez, Executive Secretary
Hearing Boards
File ID#: 0E-01847zc Z.8
•
•
•
Exhibit A"
Leal Description
Amendment to the Zoning Atlas
Lois 3 and 38.. in Block 9 of AMENDED PLAT OF MIAM1 SUBURBAN ACRES_
anco.tding to the Seat thereof. as recorded in Pia: Book 4. at Page 73. of i P ubiic
Records of .Dade County. 1orida n1Ua Miami -Dad& County_ Florida.
Loss tilt South 0 feet of Lot 38
C:ircie ihproprizite cord iiora 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 the factors set forth in Section 2210 of Ordinance No. 11000, I ye that the
request on as,=nda ije�•"# be recommended to the City Commission for (approval) ( erlial
Signatur
Print Name
Agenda Item
Date