HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-97-0260J-97-133(b)
3/27/97
RESOLUTION NO. 9 7 W 260
A RESOLUTION GRANTING, WITH CONDITIONS, THE
APPEAL OF STEVEN POLAKOFF AND MICHAEL CARVER
AND REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE HISTORIC
AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD, WHICH
DENIED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 5' METAL FENCE WITH
POSTS AND A GATE AT THE END OF NORTHEAST 57th
STREET (ACROSS BLOCK F), FOR THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 759 NORTHEAST 57th STREET, WITHIN
THE MORNINGSIDE HISTORIC DISTRICT, MIAMI,
FLORIDA.
WHEREAS, the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board
(HEPB) at its meeting of December 9, 1996, following an
advertised public hearing, adopted Resolution No. HEPB 96-33,
which denied a Certificate of Appropriateness for the
construction of a 5' metal fence with posts and a gate at the end
of Northeast 57th Street (across Block F), for the property
located at 759 Northeast 57th Street, within the Morningside
Historic District, Miami, Florida; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 23.1-5 (b) (4) (e) of the Code of
the City of Miami, Florida, as amended, an appeal to the City
Commission has been taken by Steven Polakoff and Michael Carver,
owners of the property located at 759 Northeast 57th Street,
Miami, Florida, on the grounds stated in their Notice of Appeal,
filed December 24, 1996; and
:CITY COMMISSION
MEETING OF
MAR 2 7 1997
Resolution No.
9'7- 260
WHEREAS, the City Commission after careful consideration of
this matter finds that the stated grounds for the appeal and the
facts presented in support thereof justify reversing the decision
of the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The recitals and findings set forth in the
Preamble to this Resolution are hereby adopted by reference
thereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth in this
Section.
Section 2. The City Commission hereby reverses the
decision of the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board and
grants the appeal giving rise to this hearing with the following
conditions:
a. The two (2) proposed CBS columns at the North and
South ends of the proposed fence shall be constructed as
proposed;
b. The two (2) proposed CBS columns intended to
support the gate located in the center of the proposed fence
shall be instead constructed of wrought iron and designed with
four posts connected with a see -through wrought iron decorative
motif;
C. The fence and gate shall be constructed of wrought
iron, and shall be five (5) feet in height as per plans
submitted;
d. That portion of the existing hedge, located along
the West property line of Block F at the East end of N.E. 57th
Street, shall be removed and relocated to Morningside Park by the
Applicant;
- 2-
97� 260
F
e. The Applicant shall remove the existing Oleander
hedge on Block F and shall maintain Block F free of overgrown
plantings; and
f. This Resolution shall have no effect on any
previous covenants restricting the use of Block F.
i
Section 3. This Resolution shall become effective
immediately upon its adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of March 1997•
JO CAROLLO, MAYOR
ATTEST: l'
i
WALTER�; Foy CITY CLERK
PREPAREDi APPROVED BY:
K.
ASS STANT CITY ATTORNEY
A ROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:
A./QS,- III
CITY ATTO Y
W1462:W .BSS
- 3 -
9 7- 260
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
PZ-22
To : Honorable Mayor and Members DATE ; March 17, 1997 FILE
of the City Commission
SUBJECT : Appeal of Decision of the
Historic and Environmental
Preservation Board:-
FROM Ed quez REFERENCES : 759 N.E..S7'" Street
City Manager ENCLOSURES:Agenda Item:
City Commission Agenda
i
RECOMMENDATION:
It is respectfully recommended that the City Commission grant the appeal of Steven
Polakoff and Michael Carver, with the following conditions, and reverse the decision of
the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board, which denied a Certificate of
Appropriateness for the construction of a 5' fence with gate along the west property line
at the east end of N.E. 57`J` Street, within the Morningside Historic District:
1. Modify the height of the proposed fence from 5' to 4-1/2'in height.
2. Replace the proposed CBS posts with slender metal posts not to exceed 6" in
width (subject to compliance with the South Florida Building Code) unless a
structural engineering report is submitted and approved which confirms that a
wider post is necessary to support the proposed gates.
3. Remove and/or relocate that portion of the existing hedge which is located along
the west property line of Lot F at the east end of N.E. 57" Street. The applicant
has agreed to relocate that portion of the hedge which is within the public right-
of-way to Morningside Park; the applicant shall also remove the existing
Oleander hedge and maintain the waterfront area clear of overgrown plantings.
4. The existing covenant on the property, which requires City Commission
approval for any future development activity on Lot F at the east end of N.E.
57' Street, shall stand. This covenant does not permit the construction of any
structure, such as a gazebo or boat davit, or planting any hedges that would
block any views, without the review and approval of the City Commission.
BACKGROUND:
Applications for fences for the subject property have been heard by the City Commission
on several occasions during the last three years. This appeal involves only the lot at the
97- 260
L
east end -of N.E. 57'h Street, often referred to as. the boathouse lof, and a proposal to
construct a fence to enclose this property.
The Preservation Officer has determined that the fence proposed by the appellant is
consistent with the historic and architectural character of the bayfront lots in the
Morningside Historic District in terms of size, scale, design, materials, color, and texture
(see attached Fact Sheet). She has further determined that an exception to the Board's
guidelines for walls and fences is warranted for the reasons stated in the Fact Sheet.
The conditions proposed in the above stated recommendation, however, would act as a
compromise between the neighbors' desire to preserve a view corridor and the City's
desire to permit the property owners to enclose their lot.
Attachment
L
2
97-- 260
- -, GflEENBEGG
A T T 0 R N E V S A T L A W
Adrienne Friesner-Pardo I fl fl fl fl I G
305-579-0683
December 24, 1996
HAND DELIVERY
Ms. Teresita Fernandez
Clerk, Hearing Boards
City of Miami
444 S.W. 2nd Avenue
Miami, FL 33131
Re: Appeal of HEP Board Decision
Dear Teresita:
On behalf of Steven Polakoff and Michael Carver (the "Applicants"), we are filing
this letter of appeal of the HEP Board decision of December 9, 1996.
The Applicants filed an.application with the HEP Board which requested approval
of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction of a five (5) foot fence with gate
along the west property line at the east end of Northeast 571h Street.
The HEP Board denied the application without basing its decision on substantial
competent evidence. The application received a recommendation of approval from City
of Miami staff and at the hearing, the Applicants presented expert testimony by Bernard
Zyscovich, AIA, who is an architect who specializes in historic buildings and districts.
Mr. Zyscovich testified that it would. not be detrimental to the historic character of the
neighborhood if the fence was constructed. The neighbors of Momingside did not
present any competent testimony as to why the fence should not be erected.
Please advise as to when this item will be scheduled for City Commission review.
Please call if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
L ci oughe4y _
cc: Mr. Steven Polakoff
Ms. Sarah Eaton
GREENBERG TRAURIG HOFFMAN LIPOFF ROSEN & QUENTEL, P.A.
1221 BRICKELL AVENUE MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 305-579-0500 FAx 305-579-0717
MIAMI NEW YORK WASHINGTON, D.C.
FORT LAUDERDALE WEST PALM BEACH TALLAHASSEE ORLANDO
97- 260-3
RESOLUTION NO. HEPB-96-33
A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A 5' FENCE WITH GATE ALONG THE
WEST PROPERTY LINE AT THE EAST END OF NE 57TM
STREET FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 759 NE 57TM
STREET, WITHIN THE MORNINGSIDE HISTORIC DISTRICT,
BECAUSE THE PROPOSED FENCE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH
THE GUIDELINES FOR FENCES AND WALLS.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF. DECEMBER, 1996.
A4A,W-z
PRtSERVATION OFFICER
CHAIRMAN
57- 260 5
APPLICATION-1,1-:013
CERTIFICATE
OF APPROPRIATENESS
ALTERATIONS, NEW CONSTRUCTION
HERITAGE CONSFt1'MITIDN 60AAD
NAME OF HISTORIC SITE/HISTORIC DISTRICT (J1 f \)
1 �) :-�(. /) (') L I
ADDRESS OF PRtjr,ERTY
UWNLR `: NAM::-,
OWNERS ADDRESS--
S-
OWNC;. S TCi.Er—RnN[ �- _--
APPLICANT'S NARIC (IF NOT OWNER)
RELATIONSHIP TO OWNER
MATERIALS SUBMITTED KITH APPLICATION
MINOR ALTERATIONS MAJOR ALTERATIONS SIGNS
❑ EXHIBIT NO.
I ❑
EXHIBIT N0.
1 ❑
E*'Ih1T NO. I
❑ EXHIBIT NO.
I ❑
EXHIBIT No.
z ❑
FXHIBII Nil. 2
❑ EXHIBIT N0.
3 ❑
FXHTHtT NO.
a ❑
EX1,11I8IT NO. 3
❑ EXHIBIT NO.
4 ❑
EXIII3IT NO.
4 ❑
EXHIBIT NO. 4
❑ FXHIBIT NU.
5 ❑
EXHIBIT N0.
5
❑
EXHIBIT NC.
6
❑
EXHIBIT N0.
7
❑
EXHIBIT m0.
8
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION WORK
PROVIDE AN OVERALL DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT. DESCRIBE THE NATURE AND SPECIFIC LOCATION OF ALL
PROPOSED IMPROVENENTS OR CHAUGL5 TO THE PROPERTY. USE ADDITIONAL PAGE IF NECESSARY.
97- 2liA�
L
REASONS FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ...- CHANGES
PROFESSIONAL ADVISERS
LIST THE NAME AND FIRI( OF SUCH PROFESSIONAL ADVISERS AS ARCHITECT. ENGINEER. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.
CONTRACTOR. AND PRESERVATION CONSVLTANT.
NAME/FIRM ADDRESS TELCpmnNt
NAME/FIRd ADDRESS TELEPHONE
NAME/FIRM ADORGSS TFI FPKnNE
EXPECTED SCHEDULE
I CERTIFY TO THE BEST OF MY WOHLEDGE AND'BELIEF THAT AL ItFORNATICM IN THIS APPLICATION AND ITS
ATTACHMENTS IS TRUE {%AND 0 RECT.
C4Cu�T1OF �7F Mf7711�FRYT f1YNFR� � DATe
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT (IF OTHER THAN OWNER) DATE
FOR STAFF USE O[ILYr
APPLICATION NO.
OATE RECEIVED
STArr RCVICIO FINAL ACTION
13 STANDARD CA
HEARING DATE FINAL ACTION
® SPECIAL CA
9 97- 26(
HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD
FACT SHEET
NAME Morningside Historic District
ADDRESS 759 NE 57'4 Street
PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application for Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction
of a 5' fence with gate along the .west property- line at the east
end of NE 571h Street.
ANALYSIS The Board's current guidelines for the Mlomingside Historic
District do not allow walls or fences between the sidewalk and
the front facade of a house. These guidelines, however, do allow
exceptions if. the proposal is historically appropriate or if unique
circumstances can be demonstrated. Unlike the inland lots in
Momingside, the bayfront lots historically have been enclosed
with walls, fences, or hedges. Two of the oldest houses at 5925
and 5945 North Bayshore Drive have walls which likely date to
the 1920s. The majority of houses built in the 1950s and 1960s
were enclosed shortly after construction. Other fences and
hedges were added many years prior to the designation of the
historic district. These enclosures help to define the character of
this portion of the historic district.
The subject property'is unique in that the small lot at the end of
NE 57"' Street, often referred to as boathouse lot, is located in
front of the main house lot, not parallel with or adjacent to it. In
effect, it functions as a side yard. Built in 1925, this property is
one of the many properties which historically have been at least
partially enclosed. The boathouse lot has been enclosed by a
hedge, a portion of which remains to this day. The proposed
wrought iron fence would provide more openness than a hedge.
It was the above stated reasons that persuaded the Board to
approve a wrought iron fence in the same location in 1994. The
Board voiced no objections to that particular fence, only to the
location of the fence proposed for the area adjacent to the house.
The Board found that a wrought iron fence at the end of NE 571
Street was appropriate to the character of the historic district.
The fence for the area adjacent to the house has since been
approved by the City Commission following an appeal. At the
time of the appeal, the owners offered to proffer a covenant that
would require any development on the boathouse lot to be
approved by the City Commission. Therefore, a decision by the
Board to approve the fence would also require City Commission
approval.
Item #7
December 9, 1996
L
RECOMMENDATION If the Board amends the guidelines for walls and fences in
- Momingside as recommended in Item #2 above, the
Preservation Officer recommends that the Board apply said
amended guidelines to this application. If the Board does not
amend the guidelines, the Preservation Officer recommends that
the Board grant an exception to said guidelines for the reasons
stated above.
It is therefore recommended that the application for. a Certificate
of Appropriateness be approved because the proposed fence is
consistent with the historic and architectural character of the
bayfront lots in Momingside in terms of size, scale, design,
materials, color, and texture, and complies with the Secretary of
the Interior's "Standards for Rehabilitation," as stated above.
Item #7
December 9, 1996
to
97- 260
OWNER'S LIST `
Owner's Name �YlZ.✓ e /1 ��t lL{5.(- t
Mailing Address Id,m )
Telephone Number —7
e
Legal Description: s�5 rill
n n
elOwner's Name - /
Mailing Address ►yy- cv,-62 --
Telephone Number -S &'lrq—
Legal Description:
Owner's Name
Mailing Address
Telephone Number
Legal Description:
Any other real estate property owned individually, jointly, or severally (by corporation,
partnership or privately) within 375 feet of the subject site is listed as follows:
Street Address N Or1 Q , Legal Description
Street Address
Street Address
L
Legal Description
Legal Description
97- 260 I'
y
- AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF FLORIDA'}
} SS
COUNTY OF DADE }
Before me, the undersigned authority, this day personally appeared
Sb�-Jcn 21-AKbEE, who being by me first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes
and says:
1. That he is the owner, or the legal representative of*the owner,
submitting the accompanying application for a public hearing as required by
Ordinance 11000 of the Code of the City of Miami, Florida, affecting the real
property located in the City of Miami, as described and listed on the pages
i
attached to this affidavit and made a part thereof.
4 2. That all owners which he represents, if any, have given their full
and complete permission for his to act in their behalf for the change or modifica-
tion of a classification or regulation of zoning as set out in the accompanying
petition.
3. That the pages attached hereto and made 'a part of this affidavit
contain the current names, wiling addresses, phone numbers and legal descriptions
for the the real property of which he is the owner or legal representative.
4. TheJacts as represented in the application and doe ts submitted
in conjunction with this affidavit are true and correct.
Further Affiant sayeth not.
(SEAL)
(Name)
Sworn to and Subscribed before me
f
this day of 4�' 1977
Mary Public, State of Florida at Large
Commission Expires:
,t,RT t• GLORIA HIIRCADES
COMMISSION # CC 495M
EXPIRES SEP 14, 19%
��� ATL,,Nnc NG Cmim-
SONOW
L
J' "7- 260
/3
7
DISCLOSURE OF OWNERSHIP
I. Legal description and street address of subject real property:'.,���
ri
2. Owner(s) of subject real property and percentage of ownership. Note: City of Miam
�u
Ordinance No. 9419 requires disclosure of all parties having a financial interest,
either direct or indirect, in the subject matter of a presentation, request or
petition to the City Commission. Accordingly, question i2 requires disclosure of
shareholders of corporations, beneficiaries of trusts, and/or any other interested
parties, together with their addresses and proportionate interest.
art—
�vry L v �,� Sit � •
3. Legal description and street address of any real property (a) owned by any party
listed in answer to question i2, and (b) located within 375 feet of the subject
real property.
c
OWNER OR ATTORNEY FOR
STATE OF FLORIDA } SS:
COUNTY OF DAD�E1 }
TEU f. w► oi�Q�DY to being duly sworn, deposes and says that he
is the (Please Print} (Owmr) er) of the real property described in
answer to question pl above; that he has read the foregoing answers and that the same
are true and complete and (if acting as attorney for owner) that he has authority to
execute the disclosure of Ownership form on behalf of the owner.
(SEAL)
Signature of Owner or -Attorney i* Owner
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED �)
before me this�A
day of 19L7,
Notary Public, State of Florida at Large
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:
10F
GLORIA HURCAMS
COMMISSION # CC 4958W
EXPIRES SEP 14,1999'04� SONDED THRU
ATLANTIC BONDING GO., INC.
97- 260 /
5
I
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF FLORIDA }
} SS
COUNTY OF DADE }
Before me, the undersigned authority, this day personally appeared
who being by -me first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes
and says:
1. That he is the owner, or the legal representative of the owner,
i submitting the accompanying application for a public hearing as required by
Ordinance 11000 of the Code of the City of Miami, Florida, affecting the real
property located in the City of Miami, as described and listed on the pages
attached to this affidavit and made a part thereof.
2. That all owners which he represents, if any, have given their full
and complete permission for his to act in their behalf for the change or modifica-
tion of a classification or regulation of zoning as set out in the accompanying
petition. ~
3. That the pages attached hereto and made a part of this affidavit
contain the current names, mailing addresses,'phone nudars and legal descriptions
for the the real property of which he is the owner or legal representative.
4. The facts as represented in the application and documents submitted
in conjunction with this affidavit are true and correct.
1
Further Affiant sayeth not.
2 ��I, , . 0
(SEAL)
(Name) % 'J
r
Sworn to and Subscribed before me
this i day of
btary Public, State of Florida at Large
My Commission Expires: GLORIA HURCADES
CO MMISSION # GC 495888 fff
EXPIRES SEP 14, 1999 2 6 O
'�esc�0 BON090 THRU
DISCLOSURE OF OWNERSHIP
I. Legal description and street address of subject real property r 1 tl
NO A- -A C.-U J�—
�'�---
2. Owner(s) of subject real property and percentage of ownership. Note: City of Miami
Ordinance No. 9419 *squires disclosure of all parties having a financial interest,
either direct or indirect, in the subject matter of a presentation, request or
Petition to the City Commission. Accordingly, Question 02 requires disclosure of
shareholders of corporations, beneficiaries of trusts, and/or any other interested l-
parties, together with their addresses and proportionate interest. '9n
v Lv'��
z.
r
3. Legal description tstreet address of any real property (a) owned by any party
listed in answer to question 12, and (b) located within 375 feet of the subject
real property.
1
OWNER OR ATTONEY AOR OWER
STATE OF FLORIDA } SS:
COUNTY OF DADE }
�1 1 cJ1\ Wa Ca- r )Q- r , being duly sworn, deposes and says that he
is the (Please Print) (Owner) ( ) of the real property described in
answer to question f1 above; that he has read the foregoing answers and that the same
are true and complete and (if acting as attorney for owner) that he has authority to
execute the disclosure of Ownership form on behalf of thi�oiiner.
P. .
(SEAL)
Signature of Own r or A torney for Owner
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED
before me. this�� ,.
day of uG r 19zz.
Notary Public, State of Florida at Large
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:
��Y �° GLORIA NURCADES
,, COMMISSION # CC 4V5ggg
♦ EXPIRES SEP 14, 1W9
0'�� ATLAIVTID iONpwW GG:, INC.
L
97- 260/?
1996-97 OFFICERS
PRESIDENT
Herb Soso
- RS' V Cr
En•d C Pinkney
SECOND VICE
PRESIDENT
Penny Lambeth
TREASURER
William P. Murphy
SECRETARY
Jane A. Caporelli
PAST PRESIDENT
Notch K. Schaefer
TRUSTEES
Marian Dean
Mark S. Greene
David E. Kaiata
Don MacCullough
Thomas Mooney
George T. Neary
Rachel Perkins Parsons
Margaret Pelton
Jeanette Poole
Donald J. Sackrider
Shu Sampson
EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR
Becky Roper Matkov
L
Kk OEP'.
_ 96 HOV 18 AN E: 4 7
'trig;;:I
DADE
I -I E RITAG £
TRUST
November 13, 1996
City of Miami
Historic and Environmental Preservation Board
Department of Community Planning and Revitalization
444 SW 2nd Avenue 3rd Floor
Miami, FL 33130
Dear HEP Board Members,
Dade Heritage Trust, Dade County's largest historic preservation organization,
has long advocated the preservation of a sense of place and community in
Miami's historic neighborhoods. The historic design and architectural
character of these areas not only create an attractive environment for residents
who live there, but also enhance the overall fabric of the city as a whole.
In response to concern expressed to Dade Heritage Trust about a proposal
before the HEP Board which could have long term implications for the scenic
and historic texture of the Morningside Historic District, we wish to voice our
support for preserving the Bayshore Historic District as one district, with
equal guidelines applicable to all.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Becky Roper Matkov
Executive Director
1 .;ecric Preservation Center: 190 Southeast Twelfth Terrace. Miami, Florida 33131 • Phone (305) 358.9572 1 Fax (305) 358.1 162
97= 260
December 3, 199E
HBF Board Member
444 S. W. 2nd Ave.
Miami, Florida 33130
Dear Sire
I am writing this letter as a Morningside resident who is
very concerned about the items that were on the agenda for
November 19th. These items were not addressed because there was
not a quorum. Many, many residents spent hours waiting in the
chambers. I am asking that you make a special effort to attend the
meeting called for December 9th. If there is no quorum at that
date, these petitions will be automatically granted.
Several petitions regarding the placement of walls in
front of the houses on North Bayshore Drive will be presented at
that meeting. The neighborhood is requesting the opportunity to
speak against these petitions and to ask that you deny the proposal
to divide the Morningside Historic District in two, whereby the
bayfront properties would be treated differently than the rest of the
area.
We are sure that you are aware that if a precedent is set
for one property, any subsequent request of a similar nature has to
be granted. This is fair. Therefore, the Morningside residents ask
that you continue to treat all of the properties in our historic
district equally and that the majority not be discriminated against
for a favored few.
Sincerely,
141C OHAr"L NdVA
S`S'7� krE o I I
MlAAt.t t-L 31T1 3 -7
Yt-%-1 4 1NAL—L e-o tip i a-Z I A LI'CR.(�
i Wt tit_ Go ?.J S 10 8- '1— A P4 (Lb\(.. F
PNZMICC) b .,,J ?D /SLAT I'-C( AA-fQ AN j o 64 OSi'a/LaC,t L
G� Z �`T NA^i
J i —' 260
P . u i!
• .�.�r,J �1�r?..t ,
National Trust for Historic Preservation
!l
December 6, 1996
Ms. Sarah Eaton
City of Miami
Department of Community Planning and Revitalization
444 SW 2nd Avenue, 3rd Floor
Miami, Florida 33130
RE: Bay Shore Historic District
Dear Ms. Eaton:
The Southern.Regional Office of the National Trust for Historic Preservation has been
made aware of an issue concerning the granting of permits to construct a privacy wall in
Morningside—specifically in a bayfront location that is listed on the National Register of Mstoric
Places. We recognize that this question is a matter for local government, but the National Trust
has been contacted by members and constituents who are concerned that the issuance of such
permits will erode the character of this historic district. Therefore, in the interest of protecting
the architectural and historical integrity of the entire Bayshore Historic District, the National
Trust voices its support for preserving, intact, the neighborhood as it stands today.
The historic setting could be negatively affected by a decision to allow a privacy wall. If
the resulting changes are dramatic enough to substantially compromise the character of the
district, this could trigger a review of the National Register listing. This would, then, pose
questions for the Florida Bureau of Historic Preservation and, ultimately, the National Park
Service to address. It seeress unlikely that the City of Miami would want to jeopardize the
designation of an area that so recently (1992) has been listed.
I trust that the City of Miami will carefully listen to all sides of this issue before making a
decision, and that the preservation of the district will receive paramount consideration. If you
have any questions regarding this letter, please call me in Charleston.
S inc fir,
n w
Daniel G. Carey/
Senior Program Asso We
cc: Becky Matkov, Dade Heritage Trust
Barbara Mattick, FL Bureau of 9storic Preservation
Southern Regional Office
456 Kind; Street
Charleston, S.C. 21h03
(80a1 722•8552 / FAX i80.i1 722-86S2
National Office:
17,4i atilassachusctts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
;202? 6-1 3-4000
�V
y7-
TO: Historic and Environmental Board, c)o Sarah Eaton `
FROM: Barbara Matticic, Florida Division of Historical Resources, Bureau of Historic
Preservation
DATE: December 9, 1996
RE: Proposed fences/walls in the Bayshore (Moraingside) Historic District
We have been asked to provide an opinion concerning the potential impact the installation
of fences or walls by owners of properties along the bay side of Bayshore Drive. would
have on the National Register listing of the above named district. Since April 1994, when
this issue was first raised, it has been our position that any decisions concerning walls or
fences should consider the importance of maintaining the public's view of the bay because
the view is an essential aspect of the historic setting of the district. Sarah Eaton has
described the proposed walls/fences on the two contributing properties in question as
being either entirely ofwrought iron or a combination of a how, concrete wall (2-2 and a
half feet tall) with the reanaining part being of wrought iron (for a total of S feet in height).
It is our opinion that such fences JhwMfigft would be in keeping.with the setting and
would be sensitive to the need to maintain a public view of the bay. It does not appear
that such barriers, therefore, would jeopardize the National Register listing of the district.
We understand that local ordinances prohibit the use of such barriers in the district as a
whole. It is entirely a local issue as to whether variances to this ordinance should be
offered to one part of the district and not to another.
j 97— 266
a
i
L