The Planning and Zoning Committee is currently surveying property owners in the southeastern quadrant of the neighborhood regarding a proposed rezoning from RC-15 to RCS-15.  This proposal is an effort to preserve the single family nature of the Victoria Park's core.

The survey area is approximately from NE 17th Avenue/NE 17th Way west to NE 14th Ave from NE 6th Street south to Broward Boulevard and from NE 14th Avenue west to NE 10th Avenue from NE 4th Street south to Broward Boulevard.  (see map below)

The proposed change would limit replacement of existing single family structures to new single family structures.  Any existing multi-family dwellings within the survey area would be "grandfathered" -- they would remain multi-family and could be rebuilt as multi-family structures in the event they are destroyed by hurricane, fire, etc.  A multi-family structure zoned RCS-15 could not be rebuilt as a multi-family structure if the demolition was voluntary -- in that case, only a single family residence could be constructed.

The area directly to the north of the survey is currently zoned RCS-15, the rezoning proposal would simply extend that designation south to Broward Blvd.  Areas to the east and west of the survey area are zoned currently at a lower-density RS-8, and this proposed change would have no effect on them.  Likewise, higher-density RMM-25 and RMH-25 areas (areas north of NE 8th Street,  just east of Federal Highway, or between Holiday Park and 6th St.) would not be affected.  

The P&Z Committee completed an initial survey of all property owners in the affected area, as part of the CIty's approval process, Due to the many new property owners who have purchased a parcel within the area since the completion of the initial survey we are re-canvassing the area.   Once that canvass is complete we will submit it to the City for its review.

When you receive your survey letter -- PLEASE RESPOND !!  Your opinion matters.

---

ONE NEIGHBOR'S OPINION & A RESPONSE

Response

While entitled to his own opinion, this author is not entitled to his own facts.  Zoning is a process of planned development -- and  way the City regulates land use.  Zoning is the reason why used car dealerships are not located near residential areas, or strip clubs next to schools.  No one is trying -- and quite frankly, no one could  -- "take your zoning away from you".  We are simply seeking to extend a zoning classification that already exists in the neighborhood.  We feel there are strong reasons for the proposed rezoning. (see the article to the right)

This survey is the first step in a very long process.  It simply asks whether there is enough interest from affected property owners to proceed to the City with a formal rezoning request.  The City Commission is the ultimate authority on the matter and City Code requires a series of public hearing/meetings before any change will take place.  The survey letter makes this very clear.

VPCA voted in 2002 to survey property owners.   The results were never formally presented to the City -- and therefore never "squashed" due to an "uproar".   Due to changes in City requirements and the large turnover of property owners since the initial survey effort, the City wants an updated sense of the neighborhood before proceeding at this time.  Yes, VPCA is proceeding on its own initiative to see if a rezoning proposal is something the neighborhood wants.  Its the sort of activity one expects civic associations to do.  There is nothing nefarious here.

The author compares the surveyed area with Victoria Park Road.  Victoria Park Road is zoned RS-8, while the area being surveyed is RC-15.  This means that the surveyed area allows, and will continue to allow, a much higher density of 15 units per acre versus 8 per acre along Victoria Park Rd.  If the author wants to compare "apples to apples" he should compare the area to the north (between 8th St and 6th St, from 16th Ave to 17th Way).  That zoning district, RCS-15, also allows 15 units per acre.  In fact, the proposed rezoning simply extends that classification south to Broward Blvd.

Obviously the author has not seen the survey letter -- so his unfounded speculation as to its wording is misplaced.  The survey's language is clear, concise and neutral.  It describes the proposed change in zoning and simply asks for a yes or no response.  We are doing nothing "under the guise of .... apple pies, blue sky" or whatever else the author fears.  (BTW: I like apple pie and blue skies)  Nor does this survey address other Code issues -- such as setbacks, or how to obtain a building permit.    

As for "outsiders" pushing this effort:  VPCA voted overwhelmingly in favor of a survey in 2002.  The Planning & Zoning Committee is simply implementing the general membership's wishes.  The co-chairs of the P&Z committee and at least four other members of the committee (including myself) live and own property in the area currently zoned RC-15.  We are not outsiders -- we have volunteered countless hours over many years to making our neighborhood a better place to live. And would welcome any new members who wish to roll up their sleeves and improve Victoria Park.  

There may be valid reasons for not supporting the proposed zoning change.  We simply ask affected property owners to review the factual  information presented on this page carefully and make an informed decision.  Unfortunately, this author wishes to attack people's motives, twist facts and cast aspersions -- then lacks the courage of his convictions by failing to sign his flyer.

Bob Oelke

PS I'll be happy to discuss the proposal with anyone and answer any questions you may have.  Please feel free to email me.

---

Your Money, Your Life

A Commentary about Modernizing the Zoning in Victoria Park
Art Levy

Jack Benny had a radio routine that always cracked me up. A masked man with a gun steps out of a dark alley and states, "your money or your life." There is a pause and the annoyed gunman restates his demand, "your money or your life … well?" Jack Benny replies, "I'm thinking, I'm thinking."

We could move that scene and ask Victoria Park residents, "real estate money or your quality of life." We all believe that we know what our vision of money is. But how do we value our quality of life ..... I'm thinking, I'm thinking.

In a residential area, quality of life and real estate value are sometimes seen as conflicting goals. They are not at all. Zoning protects our quality of life. And, guess what? Zoning protects the value of our home as well. Zoning guarantees that the neighborhood that you buy into will retain its quality of life and value. It is sort of a warranty or insurance policy.

But the zoning warranty that protects Victoria Park is old and looks like a frayed patchwork quilt. There are houses that face each other that have drastically different warranties. This zoning needs to be fixed. We can fix it by sewing up the patches.

There is a questionnaire being mailed to all residents in one poorly zoned area to fix it and preserve the existing neighborhood. It asks if you agree that the homes in this part of Victoria Park should be preserved as single family. It fends off the aggressive development that threatens our quality of life, perhaps to the point of extinction. It addresses the unmanaged rise in population density that shepherds the inevitable rise in crime, traffic and congestion. The right thing to do is to agree with the change and save our neighborhood.

But what about "your money OR you life?" The "or" factor is mostly a myth. You can have both. For the most part, single-family homes in Victoria Park are being snapped up, even in this slow market. People want neighborhoods. Surely, there's a market for high-density anonymous apartment living, but those aren't the only buyers in the marketplace. This proposed zoning change would not mean a certain loss of money. This is a fear factor advertised by developers. Single-family zoning may reduce developer profits, but the home-seller need not lose market value.  And, the new zoning allows existing townhouses to stay as they are.

Your home should be your life as well as your portfolio. Return the questionnaire with the "agree" line checked and preserve "your money and your way of life."

---

Detailed Existing Zoning Map (pdf file)

Relevant excerpts  from the Unified Land Development Regulations  (for complete text: ULDR )

Sec. 47-5.1. List of districts.

A. Residential zoning districts.

1. RS-4.4 - Residential Single Family/Low Density District.
2. RS-8 - Residential Single Family/Low Medium Density District.
3. RD-15 - Residential Single Family Duplex/Medium Density District.
4. RDs-15 - Residential Single Family/Medium Density District
5. RC-15 - Residential Single Family Cluster Dwellings/Medium Density District.
6. RCs-15 - Residential Single Family/Medium Density District.
7. RM-15 - Residential Multifamily Low Rise/Medium Density District.
8. RMs-15 - Residential Low Rise Multifamily/Medium Density District.
9. RML-25 - Residential Multifamily Low Rise/Medium High Density District.
10. RMM-25 - Residential Multifamily Mid Rise/Medium High Density District.
11. RMH-25 - Residential Multifamily High Rise/Medium High Density District.
12. RMH-60 - Residential Multifamily High Rise/High Density District.
13. MHP - Mobile Home Park District.

Sec. 47-5.2. Intent and purpose of each district.

A. Residential zoning districts.

 2. RS-8 district is intended to provide areas within the city for single family detached residences and accessory uses. The RS-8 district has a maximum density of eight (8) dwelling units per net acre, which is consistent with the density permitted by the residential low-medium category of the city's comprehensive plan.

 4. RC-15 district is intended to provide areas within the city for single family detached and attached residences and accessory uses. The RC-15 district is also intended to provide for a variety of one family residences, such as zero lot line dwellings, townhouses, and the clustering of dwellings, in a manner which provides for a more efficient use of land resources by allowing for a modification of yards, providing for innovative site design and open space on lots which, because of their size and/or configuration, could not be efficiently used otherwise. The RC-15 district has a maximum density of fifteen (15) dwelling units per net acre, which is consistent with the density permitted by the residential medium category of the city's comprehensive plan.

 5. RDs-15, RCs-15, RMs-15 are zoning districts intended to limit new residential development to single family detached residences. Duplex, townhouse and multifamily uses that exist and are located on property that was zoned RD-15, RC-15 or RM-15 on April 21, 1998, can be redeveloped as duplex, townhouse or multifamily uses, subject to the provisions provided in Sec. 47-18.39.

 9. RMH-25 district is intended for high-rise multifamily residences and tourist accommodations. Parcels so designated shall serve as a transition from medium high density multifamily housing and hotel development and single family and low to midrise multifamily residential neighborhoods and shall be located in proximity to arterial or collector streets or adjacent or near to commercial shopping and office facilities or services. The RMH-25 district has a maximum density of twenty-five (25) dwelling units per net acre and a maximum density of thirty (30) hotel/motel or nursing home rooms per net acre, which is consistent with the residential medium high category of the city's comprehensive plan.

 Sec. 47-18.39. Existing dwelling unit structures.

A. Dwelling units that exist as of the effective date (June 28, 1997) of the ULDR, which units are stacked one (1) above the other and which have a minimum floor area between four hundred (400) gross square feet and seven hundred fifty (750) gross square feet, shall be permitted in an RC-15 zoning district in accordance with the following:

1. Such structure is in continuous operation and not discontinued in use as provided in Section 47-3, Nonconforming Uses.

2. When the use of such structures change to a different residential use permitted in the RC-15 zoning district, the existing stacked units cannot be reestablished, and the new residential use must meet the requirements of the ULDR for the new use.

3. If such structure is damaged or destroyed by fire, explosion or other casualty or Act of God or public enemy by more than fifty percent (50%) of its replacement value or fifty percent (50%) of the gross floor area of the existing structure, such structure may be restored to the condition it was in prior to the damage, subject to the following conditions:

a. The stacked unit structure may only be rebuilt in accordance with the density permitted by the RC-15 zoning district or by the residential medium land use designation. If the reconstruction of that portion destroyed would result in a density greater than that permitted by the RC-15 district, such reconstruction shall not be permitted.

b. The dimensional requirements for a multifamily dwelling as provided in the RM-15 zoning district shall apply to stacked unit structures for the purpose of reconstruction.

c. The total number of dwelling units to be provided in the rebuilt structure shall not exceed the number of units previously existing in same structure prior to the destruction.

d. The parcel to be rebuilt must meet all the requirements of the ULDR for multifamily dwellings, as provided in RM-15 zoning district.

4. If more than fifty percent (50%) of the replacement value or of the total gross floor area of an existing stacked unit structure is demolished by other than fire, explosion or other casualty or Act of God or public enemy, then such structure may not be restored to the condition it was in prior to the damage, and any use of the property on which such structure was located shall be required to the meet all of the requirements of the ULDR.

5. Any additions to existing stacked dwelling units are required to meet the requirements of the ULDR.

B. Dwelling units that exist and are located on property that was zoned RD-15, RC-15 or RM-15 on April 21, 1998 and are no longer permitted as a new use shall be permitted in an RDs-15, RCs-15, or RMs-15 zoning district in accordance with the following:

1. Such dwelling units must have been legally permitted, in continuous use and not discontinued in use as provided in Section 47-3, Nonconforming Uses.

2. When such dwelling units change to a different use permitted in the RDs-15, RCs-15, or RMs-15 zoning district, the existing units cannot be reestablished, and the new use must meet the requirements of the ULDR for the new use.

3. If such dwelling units are damaged or destroyed by fire, explosion or other casualty or act of God or public enemy by more than fifty percent (50%) of its replacement value or fifty percent (50%) of the gross floor area of the existing structure, such structure may be restored to the condition it was in prior to the damage, subject to the following conditions:

a. The unit structure may only be rebuilt in accordance with the density permitted by the RDs-15, RCs-15, or RMs-15 zoning district or land use designation for the property. If the reconstruction of that portion destroyed would result in a density greater than that permitted by the zoning district or land use designation, such reconstruction shall not be permitted.

b. The dimensional requirements for a structure shall be as provided in the RDs-15, RCs-15, or RMs-15 zoning district for the purpose of reconstruction in accordance with the dimensional requirements in Section 47-5, Residential Zoning Districts and Residential Office Zoning Districts.

c. The total number of dwelling units to be provided in the rebuilt structure shall not exceed the number of units previously existing in same structure prior to the destruction.

d. The parcel to be rebuilt must meet all the requirements of the ULDR.

4. If more than fifty percent (50%) of the replacement value or of the total gross floor area of an existing unit structure is demolished by other than fire, explosion or other casualty or act of God or public enemy, then such structure may not be restored to the condition it was in prior to the damage, and any use of the property on which such structure was located shall be required to meet all of the requirements of the ULDR.

5. Any additions to existing dwelling units are required to meet the requirements of the ULDR.

(Ord. No. C-97-19, § 1(47-18.38), 6-18-97; Ord. No. C-99-27, § 5, 5-4-99)