HomeMy WebLinkAboutZB Resois i Zonin oars
esoiution os: 97-0996
Monday, October 29, 2007
Mr. Miguel Gabeia 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
TO AMEND PAGE NO. 37, OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE Na 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 0 OFFICE WITH AN SD-19 ❑ESIGNATED F.A.R.
OVERLAY DISTRICT, F.A.R. OF .5 TO 0 OFFICE FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED
AT APPROXIMATELY 2660 BRICKELL AVENUE AND 2640 SOUTH DIXIE HIGHWAY,
LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT "A" (HEREBY ATTACHED), PUBLIC RECORDS
OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
Upon being seconded by Mr. Angel Urquiola,
the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote:
Mr. Bret Berlin Yes
Mr. Ron Cordon Away
Mr. Miguel Gabela Yes
Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza Yes
Mr. Charles A. Garavagiia Yes
Ms. Ileana Hernandez -Acosta Yes
Mr, Jorge Luis Lopez No
Mr. Juvenal A. Pina Yes
Mr. Cornelius Shiver Yes
Mr. Angel Urquiola Yes
AYE: 8
NAY: 1
ABSTENTIONS: 0
NO VOTES:
ABSENT: 1
Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 8-1
Teresita L. Fernand, Executive e etary
Hearing Boards
File ID#: 06-01641zc1
Z.4
EXtilBi'F
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lots 2, 3, 4, and a portion of Lots 67, 68, and 69 Block 57 lying Northwesterly of federal
Highway of 'BRICKELLS FLAGLER" according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 5 Page
44 of the Public Records of Miami —Dade County, Florida. Containing 31,944 square feet.
Ciicie pprop
'Atien pertaining to file, e2oning of Jar -id under application made under Article 22, the report and
recommendation ot the Zoning Board shaff show that the Zoning Board has studied and considered,
where applicable, whether or note
a) The proposed change conforms., with the adopted Miami Comprehensive N
does not equire a plan amendment
9
borhood Pan and
b) The proposed change I s 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,
9) 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.
rn) 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. 11009J.rnav„e that the
request on agenda item ti be recommended to the City Commission for (approvalr. (denial).
Signature
Pfin ame
Agenda Item
I 0
Date