Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnalysisANALYSIS FOR ZONING CHANGE 3410-20, 3428 Hibiscus Street; 3501, 3520, 3522, 3530, 3535, 3545, 3547, 3560, 3567 Grand Avenue; 3909-11, 3521, 3547, 3551, 3559-67, 3575, 3587 Thomas Avenue; and 3500, 3506, 3508, 3540, 3548, 3576, 3582 Florida Avenue. CASE NO: 08-00166zc 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: The subject properties are located at: • 3500, 3506, 3508, 3540, 3548, 3576, 3582 Florida Avenue (complete legal description on file with the Hearing Boards Office) from R-1 "Single Family Residential District" with an SD- 28 "Village West Island Special Overlay District" and NCD-3 "Coconut Grove Neighborhood Conservation District", and • 3509-3511, 3521, 3547, 3551, 3559-3567, 3575, 3587 Thomas Avenue, and 3428 Hibiscus Street (complete legal description on file with the Hearing Boards Office) from R-2 "Duplex Residential" with an SD-28 "Village West Island Special Overlay District" and NCD-3 "Coconut Grove Neighborhood Conservation District", and ti 3501,3535,3545,3547,3567,3520,3522, 3530, 3560 Grand Avenue, and 3410-3420 Hibiscus Street (complete legal description on file with the Hearing Boards Office) from 0 "Office" with an SD-28 "Village West Island Special Overlay District" and NCD-3 "Coconut Grove Neighborhood Conservation District", To SD-2 "Coconut Grove Central Commercial District" with an SD-28 "Village West Island Special Overlay District" and NCD-3 "Coconut Grove Neighborhood Conservation District" The following findings have been made: • It is found that the lots immediately north of the subject lots along Florida Avenue are designated Single Family Residential. • It is found that the character of Florida Avenue is low density residential, specifically single family residential. • It is found that the character of Thomas Avenue is low density residential specifically, the lots immediately South of the subject lots along Thomas Avenue are designated Two -Family Residential. • It is found that the "R-1 Single Family Residential" land use category allows one dwelling unit each to a maximum density of 9 dwelling units per acre, "R-2 Two -Family Residential" allows '08,1TUN 3f:NT.276 residential structures of up to two dwelling units each to a maximum density of 18 dwelling units per acre. The requested "SD-2 Coconut Grove Central Commercial District" designation al- lows to a maximum density equivalent to C-1 "Restricted Commercial's "High Density Multifam- ily Residential" or to 150 dwelling units per acre. The potential increase in residential density in these areas will be out of scale with the established neighborhoods. It is found that the proposed change will represent an intrusion of commercial uses into a residential neighborhood. The existing zoning boundary line should not be compromised for such an intrusion; it is not a logical extension of the SD-2 "Coconut Grove Central Commercial District" zoning designation that is adjacent. it is found that a zoning change at this location may set a negative precedent and create a "domino effect" in regards to future zoning change applications, Based on these findings, the Planning Department is recommending denial of the zoning change request to SD-2 "Coconut Grove Central Commercial District" with an SD-28 "Village West Island Special Overlay District" and NCD-3 "Coconut Grove Neighborhood Conservation District" as presented, Yes No NIA. I z 0 ® u N r4 F4 i4 al sis f I File ID: O8-O0168z.c 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 districts. 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, utilities, 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. L 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. E 0 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 area for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use.