Our Positions at the March 8th, 2022 Historic Preservation Board

Read Time: 44 mins

MDPL’s Advocacy Committee has reviewed the following applications and offers our positions below. Please note, the lack of a position on a project does not indicate support for or opposition to that project. To review the full Historic Preservation Board Agenda, including public participation information: Click Here

CONTINUED ITEMS

4. HPB21-0483,  833 6th Street (South Shore Community Center)

Existing Building designed by Morris Lapidus (Proposed to be demolished)

Proposed New Fire Station

View Item Details

An application has been filed requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness for the design of a new fire station building to replace the existing building proposed to be demolished, and site improvements. 

MDPL Position as of March 8, 2022: MDPL has reviewed the revised application and supporting documentation related to the proposed fire station design. MDPL continues to support the preservation of the South Shore Community Center, especially since the proposed fire station design is incompatible with the historic district and fails to address the guidance provided by the Historic Preservation Board. The revised plan leaves remnants of the Center spread across Sixth Street with seemingly no attempt to integrate them into the design or incorporate the actual historic structure into the design. Indeed, the city’s inability to present a satisfactory design is yet another indication that the Sixth Street location is not an appropriate site for the new fire station. Moreover, the city’s actions in regard to the South Shore Community Center and the fire station design are demonstrative of a wider disregard by the administration of city historic preservation code and the direction of the Historic Preservation Board.

MDPL Previously Shared Position: We are disappointed in the decision of the city commission to grant development waivers because these waivers will lead to the loss of the architecturally and historically significant South Shore Community Center, and the building’s proposed replacement will cause negative impacts on the residents and on the architectural landscape of the Flamingo Park Historic District.

Preservation of the South Shore Community Center

MDPL appeals to the Historic Preservation Board to meet the spirit and letter of the municipal code and preserve the South Shore Community Center. Section 118-501 of the city code is clear that “It is hereby declared by the city commission that the preservation and conservation of properties of historical, architectural and archeological merit in the city is a public policy of the city and is in the interest of the city’s future prosperity.” The city code also extends protections to all buildings within a historic district – whether contributing or not at the time of review.

The South Shore Community Center more than satisfies the criteria to warrant its preservation intact for its architectural significance and its importance in the history of Miami Beach and the nation. Created in response to changing demographics and acute social issues, the Community Center is both part of and the witness to local and national history. Moreover, its association with prominent historical figures (Rep. Claude Pepper and Sen. Edward Kennedy) and an emerging social movement gives the Community Center local and national importance. This historical significance is matched by its architectural merit. It is an extraordinary example of the evolution of the work of Morris Lapidus.

Finally, the HPB had given guidance to the city that a new fire station design should incorporate and adapt the community center building. The proposed design for the fire station only retains an entrance element. Such a plan to completely erase the community center and leave a small recreated appendage in its place, with an overwhelming new municipal building, flies in the face of proper urban planning and is inconsiderate to the low-scale, protected neighborhood surrounding it.

Proposed Fire Station Design

MDPL has concerns about the design of the fire station and its impact on residents and the fabric of the Flamingo Park Neighborhood. Orientation of the fire station with large ramps for fire trucks and emergency vehicles entering and exiting the building will adversely impact residential buildings on the north, east, and west of the site. Noise from the station will be directed toward residential buildings. Headlights and emergency lights will shine directly into the windows because of the elevation of the fire station.

Increases of traffic on two residential streets that are designated as slow streets, and therefore, the placement of emergency vehicles is contrary to the stated policy of the city in regard to the area (e.g., decrease non residential traffic and encourage pedestrian use of streets and sidewalks).

MDPL does not believe that this has been adequately studied, and the Trip Generation Study commissioned by the city from Richard Garcia and Associates is flawed. It assumes that the fire station will have less impact than the daycare center because there will be less trips. This does not consider the difference between fire trucks entering and exiting the block of two separate streets and parents picking up their children. In addition, the Study assumes that the childcare center is to be removed from the area instead of relocated across the street from the proposed fire station.

This study also does not evaluate the impact of the “turning zones for emergency vehicles” on traffic and pedestrians on Jefferson and Meridian avenues. Enormous curb cuts disrupt the continuity along both streets, essentially separating Sixth Street from the remainder of the neighborhood, and the loss of street parking will adversely affect residents and businesses.

In summary, the City is relying upon the HPB to ensure that the certificate of appropriateness standards are upheld. We strongly believe that in this case, the project needs a thorough review and should not be approved as presented.

5. HPB20-0440 a.k.a. HPB20-0380, 550 Washington Avenue 

View Item Details

An application has been filed requesting modifications to a previously issued Certificate of Appropriateness for the partial demolition and renovation of the existing building including the construction of attached additions and modifications to original public interior spaces and a variance to exceed the maximum permitted building height. Specifically, the applicant is requesting to modify a condition of the final order to allow for the introduction of new signage on the vertical feature along Washington Avenue, a Certificate of Appropriateness for modifications to the marquee and a variance to exceed the maximum permitted size for signage.

MDPL Position: We oppose the replacement of the historic PARIS sign with a new, larger QUEEN sign. We do not believe this is consistent with the original design of the building. We also request that the patron entry on the west side facing Flamingo Park residential neighborhood be prohibited. The Paris sign may not be original, but it has been in place for decades – far longer than the original sign – and demonstrates an element of our historic continuum worthy of preservation

6. HPB21-0481; 1901 Collins Avenue—Shore Club Hotel

Scope of Work Overview excerpts

View Item Details

An application has been filed requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness for the partial demolition and renovation of two buildings on the site, the total demolition of two buildings, the construction of two new additions and landscape and hardscape modifications. 

MDPL Position: We are strongly opposed to the proposed demolition of the contributing Melvin Grossman addition of the historic Shore Club hotel. The proposal essentially keeps only the main lobby/facade of the Shore Club, leaving the bulk of floor area for the new condominium residence tower. Removal of such significant historic elements will erase the opportunity for visitors to experience seeing and inhabiting/staying at the historic Shore Club hotel rooms overlooking the Atlantic Ocean (see below red historic building proposed to be demolished)

Overall, there is simply too much demolition being proposed for this property. We remain concerned about Sunny Isles-ification of Miami Beach. Contributing buildings should not be sacrificed to expand new construction.

The proposed site from the north looking south

In view of the foregoing, MDPL opposes this application and asks that it be denied.


7. HPB21-0486; 411 Michigan Avenue, 419 Michigan Avenue & 944 5th Street

Current site

Proposed Structures

View Item Details:

An application has been filed requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness for the total demolition of one existing building, the renovation, restoration and relocation of one existing building, the construction of a new office building, a variance to eliminate the open court requirement and one or more waivers. 

MDPL Position: We thank the applicant and their team for their presentation to the advocacy committee. We understand their objectives and design plan. This site has been an eyesore for many years due to the previously approved project never having been completed. 

We are enthusiastic about the plan to elevate the historic building on the site and make it more prominent by moving it closer to the street. We thank the applicants to their commitment to historic preservation in this regard.

However, we are not able to support the overall project as currently proposed due to significant concerns related to certificate of appropriateness standards.

Compatibility: we have concerns about the contextuality of the new construction and how it relates to historic buildings and surroundings, in particular to the low-scale south of fifth historic neighborhood and lack of distinct but compatible design methodology of the project. The building as currently proposed is out of scale to the historic district and would encroach on the neighboring properties – particularly to the south – in a way that we do not believe would be sensitive or compatible to its surroundings.

We understand that the owners would prefer to build on the foundation of the previously approved but unfinished project on the site. However, this element of their program greatly increases the overall scale of the structure, creating a large indoor atrium that pushes all sides of the building outward. As such, we oppose the design as currently proposed, including the setback variance.

8. HPB21-0490; 333, 337, 343 and 345 Jefferson Avenue

View Item Details:

An application has been filed requesting an after-the-fact Certificate of Appropriateness for partial demolition of the buildings located at 333 and 343 Jefferson Avenue and modifications to the west (front) façade of 343 Jefferson Avenue.

MDPL Position: We are alarmed by the work done without obtaining the certificate of appropriateness. Such unauthorized work puts our historic resources and neighborhoods at risk.

MODIFICATIONS TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BOARD ORDER

9. HPB21-0493; 1751, 1757 & 1775 Collins Avenue—The Raleigh Hotel

PRIOR ORDER NUMBER: HPB19-0341

View Item Details:

An application has been filed requesting modifications to a previously issued Certificate of Appropriateness for the partial demolition, renovation and restoration of the three contributing buildings on the site, the construction of a detached ground level tower addition at the southeast portion of the site, the construction of a detached ground level addition at the northeast portion of the site and the construction of two attached additions, including one or more waivers and a variance to reduce the required subterranean rear setback. Specifically, the applicant is requesting approval for the introduction of two additional basement levels below the previously approved basement level.

MDPL Position: we remain concerned about the restoration of the Raleigh hotel and the impacts of construction on the historic buildings of the site as well as nearby buildings. We understand the staff’s support for the additional level basement but want to ensure that any increased subterranean development does not threaten the integrity of the structure of the historic buildings. This has been a concern of ours previously and one that the city planning department had originally raised. 

NEW APPLICATIONS

10. HPB21-0482; 1300 Lenox Avenue

Current Home

View Item Details

An application has been filed requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness for the partial demolition, renovation and restoration of the existing single-family home, including the construction of attached and detached additions and variances from the required setbacks, open space, lot coverage and retaining wall regulations.

MDPL Position: This project is the latest to propose adapting historic structures for resilience purposes. The home’s ground floor will be elevated to the same level as new construction is required to be built. While this is not legally required, the owner has proposed to elevate the property and we applaud the intent of prolonging the life of this contributing historic structure. We hope this may serve as a model for other homeowners who want to invest in making their properties more resilient over the next several decades.

MDPL echos the staff recommendation regarding proposed changes to the fenestration of the building. They should match the historic fenestration. Changing such a quantity of windows and locations of those windows to the front facing facades would have a negative impact on the historic restoration of the property.

We look forward to seeing this project move forward with staff conditions. This single-family home neighborhood continues to thrive with restoration and renovation of historic properties, and we are thankful to the owner and neighbors for their stewardship.

11. HPB21-0495; 622 15th Street

Current Structure

622 15th Street

Proposed Changes

View Item Details

An application has been filed requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness for the partial demolition, renovation and restoration of the building on the site, the classification of the rear accessory building as Non-Contributing, the total demolition of the rear accessory building, the construction of a new detached rear addition and variances from the required setbacks and the minimum average apartment unit size. 

MDPL Position: 

We appreciate the design proposal which includes rehabilitation of the main building and bringing back original elements of the design. We applaud the applicant for their design.

However, we cannot support the proposed reclassification of the contributing building in the rear of the lot along with its proposed demolition. We believe this building could be restored and improved to meet the needs of the owner. The building clearly reflects the same design style of the primary building and is listed as contributing.

This is not a new position for MDPL. We remain committed to preserving contributing buildings that maintain their architectural integrity and are able to be restored. Removal of such features erases an important characteristic of these historic structures.

What would Miami Beach be like without Historic Art Deco, Mediterranean, and MiMo buildings?

Join Us: Become a Member

Help MDPL remain independent and sustain our mission to preserve, protect, and promote. Annual memberships start at $75 and include free walking tours and more.