HomeMy WebLinkAboutZB Reso•
•
iami Zoning Board
Resolution No.: 06-1223
Monday, September 11, 2006
Mr. Miguel Gabela 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 AMENDING PAGE NO. 23, 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 C-1 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL WITH AN SD-20.1
BISCAYNE BOULEVARD EDGEWATER OVERLAY DISTRICT AND SD-19
DESIGNATED F.A.R. OVERLAY DISTRICT, F.A.R. OF 3.0 TO SD-6 CENTRAL
COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND SD-20.1 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
EDGEWATER OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 1756 & 1770 NORTHEAST 4TH AVENUE AND 1751-61-71-77
BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT "A" (HEREBY
ATTACHED), PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; ZONED C-1
RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL WITH AN SD-20.1 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
EDGEWATER OVERLAY DISTRICT & SD-19 DESIGNATED F.A.R. OVERLAY
DISTRICT.
Upon being seconded by Mr. Charles A. Garavaglia,
the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote:
Mr. Ron Cordon Away
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 No
Mr. Angel Urquiola Yes
•
AYE: 5
NAY: 1
ABSTENTIONS: 0
NO VOTES: 0
ABSENT:
Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 5-1
2
Teresita L. Fernandez, Executive Secretary
Hearing Boards
File ID#: 06-01057zc Z.4
41
Exhibit ''A
Property Addresses and Folios
1 756 NE 4''' Avenue / 01-3231-003-0760
1770 NE 4`h Avenue / 01-3231-003-0750
1751 Biscayne Blvd. / 01•-3231-040-0010
1 761 Biscayne Blvd. / 01-3231-003-0780
1771 Biscayne Blvd. / 01-3231-003-0770
1777 Biscayne Bivd. / 01-3231-003-0740
Legal Description
Parcel I: Lot 7 and the North 15 feet of Lot 10, in Block 9, of MIRAMAR THIRD A .NDCD,
according to the plat thereof re:corci d in Plat Bock 5•, at Page 4, of the Public 1?ouord:s
of Miami —Dade County, Florida,
Parcel II: Tract No. 1, of AMENDED PLAT OF LES VIOLINS SUBDIVISION, according to the plat
thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 109, at Page 16, of the Public Records of Miorna—Dade
County, Florida.
Parcel NI: Lot 6, in Block 9, of MiRAMAR THIRD AMENDED, according to the Prot thereof,
as recorded in Piot Book 5, ct Page 4, of the Public Records of Miami —Dade County, Florida.
Parcel IV: All of Lots 5, 8, and 9 lying East of Biscayne Boulevard, in Block 9, of MIRAMAR THIRD
AMENDED, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Pict Book 5, at Page 4, of the Public Records
of Miami —Dade County, Ftoride.
Rev,01-06-06
Circlecpptopricte ccn
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 Ordinancef,Na.-1100O, I move that the
request on agenda item # be recommended to the City Commission to rova) (denial).
(
Print Name
Agenda Item Date