Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-94-0851J-94-795(b) 11/17/94 RESOLUTION NO. 94- 851 A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE APPEAL OF CAPITAL BANK AND REVERSING THAT PORTION OF THE DECISION OF THE HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD WHICH DENIED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A SIGN ON THE UPPER EAST ELEVATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 169 EAST FLAGLER STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA (THE ALFRED I. duPONT BUILDING), SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. WHEREAS, the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board (HEPB) at its meeting of September 20, 1994, following an advertised public hearing, adopted Resolution No. HEPB 94-39, which denied a Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of a sign on the upper east side elevation and two banners for the property located at 169 East Flagler Street, Miami, Florida (the Alfred I. duPont Building); 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 Capital Bank, prospective tenants, on the grounds stated in its Notice of Appeal, filed September 27, 1994; and 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 that portion of the decision of the Historic and Environmental Preservation CITY COV247SSION DIEETINNG OF NOS► 1 7 M94 Resolution No. 9 4r- 851 1 Board as it pertains to the installation of a sign on the upper east elevation of the Alfred I. duPont Building; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: Section 1. The recitals and findings contained 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 that portion of the decision of the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board (Resolution No. HEPB 94-39, adopted September 20, 1994), which denied a Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of a sign on the upper east elevation of the property located at 169 East Flagler Street, Miami, Florida (the Alfred I. duPont Building), and grants the appeal, as pertains to the installation of said sign, giving rise to this hearing subject to the condition that the applicant complies with all requirements of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, as amended. Section 3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of November , 1994. �?A a lam.. 2 ST HEN P. CLARK, MAYOR ATT T ' .� _ HIRAI, CITY CLERK - 2 - 94- 851 PREPARED AND--XPPROVED BY: ti fiREN BITTNER SISTANT CITY ATTORNEY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: a. Z�,- �,Zjz� a I A. QU N CT I I I CITY ATTO M4647/WB/bjr/bss/csk 94- 851 - 3 - CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA e INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM PZ=5 TO : Honorable Mayor and Members DATE : FILE of the ity Commission SUBIECT: Appeal of Decision of the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board: 169 E. Flagler Street FROM : REFERENCES: Cesar H. Odio Agenda Item: City Manager ENCLOSURES: City Commission Agenda November 17, 1994 RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully recommended that the City Commission deny the appeal of Capital Bank and affirm the decision of the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board, which denied a Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of a sign on the upper east elevation and two banners on the southeast and northeast corners of the Alfred I. duPont Building. BACKGROUND: Please refer to the attached memorandum from the Preservation Officer concerning this, -appeal. Attachment 94- 851 CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO : Sergio Rodriguez DATE : October 4, 1994 FILE : Assistant City Manager sUI JECT : Appeal of Decision of the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board: FROM : IS � REFERENCES: 169 E. Flagler Street Sarah E. Eaton ENCLOSURES: Agenda Item: Preservation Officer City Commission Agenda Gel her 2 , 1994 RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully recommended that the City Commission deny the appeal of Capital Bank and affirm the decision of the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board, which denied a Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of a sign on the upper east elevation and two banners on the southeast and northeast corners of the Alfred I. duPont Building. BACKGROUND: The Alfred I. duPont Building, located at 169 E. Flagler Street, is one of Miami's most significant architectural landmarks and is noteworthy for the excellence of its design, materials, and detailing. The facade of the building is stepped back above the fifteenth story, emphasizing the building's geometric form. The parapets on the main structure and each setback are decorated by vertical fluting and low relief ornamentation. On September 6, 1994, Capital Bank applied for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of various signs on the duPont Building. The application submitted identified the proposed signs by number. The Historic and Environmental (HEP) Board authorized a Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of seven signs on the building. These included a sign on the upper west elevation,(Sign #1 - west), two signs on the south and east elevations at the third floor level (Sign #2), and four signs on the south and east elevations on both sides of the main entrances (Sign #3). The Board denied the request for a sign on the upper east elevation (Sign #1 - east) and two double-faced banners (Sign #4) on the southeast and northeast corners of the building. The proposed upper east elevation sign (Sign #1) is well -designed with respect to lettering style and the quality of materials; however, the placement of the sign would obscure significant architectural features on the building and is therefore incompatible with the historic character of the building. The proposal does not comply with the Secretary of the Interior's "Standards for Rehabilitation." The appellant cites several examples of historic buildings with signage similar to that which is being proposed. None of these historic signs, however, cover up architectural detailing. Instead, these signs were designed to be located on flat, continuous surfaces, unbroken by decorative details. Page 1 of 2 ,9 4 �-- - g J-1 The basis for denying the sign on the upper east elevation was not inappropriate design, only inappropriate location. It was for this reason that a similar sign proposed for the upper west elevation was approved by the HEP Board. The west elevation is a secondary facade of the building and may, in fact, be considered the rear of the structure. A sign on this facade would barely be visible and therefore would not create a negative impact on the architectural character of the historic building. The general policy of the HEP Board is not to review work on the rear of a building. The banners (Sign #4) proposed for the southeast and northeast corners of the Alfred I. duPont Building are also not in keeping with the architectural character of the structure, primarily because of the impermanent and whimsical nature of a banner, as well as the proposed location and size. Although the concept of seasonal banners is encouraged in downtown Miami, the appropriate location is on light poles within the public right-of-way, not on historic buildings. Furthermore, although the banners may be well designed, they add visual clutter to an architecturally significant structure. The seven signs approved by the HEP Board for Capital Bank should certainly be sufficient signage for any banking institution. Twelve signs for any single tenant are excessive and should not be approved. 94- 851 Page 2 of 2 Lucia A. Dougherty (305) 579-0603 Nis. Teresita Fernandez Clerk, Hearing Boards City of Miami 275 N.W. 2nd Street Miami, Florida 33128 fiflEENBfflfi iBflVfll6 �jI 1 f i ilirl, 194 SAP 27 AIi I I: 12 September 27, 1994 Re: Capital Bank's Appeal of a Portion of the Historic & Environmental Preservation Board Decision Concerning 169 E. Flagler Street Dear Teresita: Pursuant to Section 23-1-5(b)(4)e of the City Code, on behalf of Capital Bank, we are appealing a portion of the Historic & Environmental Preservation Board's ("Board") decision on Item 3, at its meeting of September 20, 1994. We are only appealing the Board's denial of Capital Bank's request to install a sign on the upper east elevation and two banners for the property located at 169 E. Flagler Street and also known as the Alfred I. duPont Building. It is our belief that the proposed east elevation sign, as well as the banners, are in keeping with the design and character of the Alfred I. duPont Building. Mr. Bernard Zsycovich, A.I.A., was hired by Capital Bank to design the proposed signs and to make sure that all of the signs were in keeping with the historic design and integrity of the building which was built in 1939. Prior to designing the signs, Mr. Zsycovich studied the signage from this era to insure that the proposed signs would be consistent with the historic building. Mr. Zsycovich found examples of signage on other buildings from this era which have the same type of architectural design as the Alfred I. duPont Building. In fact, the signage of the Rockefeller Center in New York, the PSFS building in Philadelphia and the Walgreens located on Flagler Street, are all examples of buildings with signage that is the same in design approach as that which Capital Bank has proposed. - It is interesting to note that City staff recommended approval and the Board approved the upper west elevation sign, but denied the upper east elevation sign when in fact, the upper east elevation and west elevation signs are the same, and the architectural features of the building are the same for both upper elevations. It is essential for all banking establishments to have adequate upper elevation sipage, and the same is true for Capital Bank. In the event that Capital Bank obtains GREENBERG TRAURIG HOFFMAN LIPOFF ROSLN & QUENTEL, P. A. 1221 BRICKELL AVENUE MIAMI. FLORIDA 33131 30S.S79.0500 FAX 30S•579.0717 v/ M1AMI FORT LAUDERDALE . WEST PALM BEACH TALLAHASSEE NEw YORK WASNINGTON. D.C. 8 Ms. Teresita Fernandez September 27, 1994 Page 2 approval for its signage, it would like to have a branch office at the Alfred I. duPont Building, which is in great demand for tenants. The Downtown area greatly needs revitalization, and businesses cannot be expected to move in, unless signage is permitted. In support of Capital Bank's signage, a letter was submitted by Nancy Sullivan Skinner, Managing Director of the Gusman Center, and Matthew Schwartz appeared at the hearing and spoke in support of the signs on behalf of the Downtown Development Authority. Further, the proposed banners which are to be, located on the Southeast comer of the building at Flagler Street and 2nd Avenue and the Northeast corner of the building at 1st Street and 2nd Avenue, should also have been granted approval. Capital Bank was proposing to use banners which would be changed with the seasons and which could also depict special events occurring in the area, such as the upcoming Summit. Capital Bank was considering having a contest to design the banners by local artists or students from schools in Dade County. Based on the foregoing, we believe that the proposed signage for the upper east elevation and the banners is consistent with the historic architectural features of the building and will not adversely affect the historic, architectural or aesthetic character of the building or the relationship or congruity between the building and the neighboring structures. Nor will the proposed signs adversely affect the special character or special historic, architectural or aesthetic interest or value of the overall historic site. In addition, the proposed signage is consistent with the U.S. Secretary of Interior's "Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings." Thank you very much for your attention to this matter. Please call me at 579-0683 if you need any additional information. Very truly yours, Lucia A. Dougherty cc: Mr. Charles Boyce W. Bernard Zsycovich Ms. Sarah Eaton Timothy Kish, Esq. Zl ffW� LZA h6 'dNINN'VId IW w Jo'kilo 94- 851 GREENBERG TRAURIG RESOLUTION HEPB-94-39 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE FOLLOWING SIGNS, ACCORDING TO THE APPLICATION ON FILE IN THE PLANNING, BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT, AT THE ALFRED I. DUPONT BUILDING, 169 E. FLAGLER STREET: SIGN "1" (WEST FACADE ONLY), SIGN "2", AND SIGN "3," SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, AFTER FINDING THAT THESE PROPOSED SIGNS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S "STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION": 1. SIZE OF LETTERS ON SIGN "1" (WEST FACADE) SHALL BE REDUCED TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AND 2. METHOD OF ATTACHMENT SHALL BE SUCH THAT MINIMAL DAMAGE OCCURS TO THE STONE CLADDING OF THE BUILDING; FURTHER, DENYING THE FOLLOWING SIGNS, ACCORDING TO SAID APPLICATION: SIGN "1" (EAST FACADE) AND SIGN "4," AFTER FINDING THAT THESE SIGNS ARE NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER AND FEATURES OF THE HISTORIC BUILDING, WOULD DAMAGE THE HISTORIC INTEGRITY OF THE PROPERTY, AND THEREFORE DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S "STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION." PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1994. RESERVATION OFFICER aye CHAIRMAN J4-- '851 APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Historic Preservation District Evaluation Sheet Name of Property: Alfred I. duPont Building Address: 169 E Flagler St Project Description: Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for installation of signs. Analysis: A previous application for signage was denied by the Board at its meeting of July 19, 1994, and the applicant was encouraged to come back with a revised, more modest proposal that was less agressive to the building. The applicant has since hired an architect to design a revised signage program. This proposal takes care to minimize the amount of intrusion to the building, specifies materials of a high quality, and selects appropriate lettering styles. Staff continues to object to "Sign 1" on the upper east elevation, but would not oppose the new sign proposed for the west facade. That particular portion of the facade, unlike the east facade, has no architectural detailing and is a secondary side of the building. The size of the letters, however, exceeds what the Zoning Ordinance permits. "Sign 2" is proposed to be placed on top of the existing historic sign and is recommended by the architect instead of a trompe 1'oeil panel mimicking the cladding of the building. "Sign-3" consists of a newly proposed pair of signs to be located on both sides of the main entrances. The design of both "2" and "3" is consistent with the architectural character of the building. "Sign 4" is a banner sign on the corner of the building, replacing the clock in the previous submittal. The impermanent and whimsical nature of a banner, as well as the banner's location and size (which exceeds that permitted in the Ordinance) are not in keeping with the architectural character of the building. Staff Recommendation: The Preservation Officer recommends that Signs 111" (west facade only), 112" and 113" as specified in the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness be approved, subject to the following conditions, because these proposed signs are consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's "Standards for Rehabilitation." It is further recommended that Signs "1" (east facade) and "4" be denied because they are not compatible with the architectural character and features of the historic building, would damage the historic integrity of the property, and therefore do not comply with the Secretary of the Interior's "Standards." Conditions, if any: 1. Size of letters on Sign "1" (west facade) shall be reduced to comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Method of attachment shall be such that the expansion occurs in the concrete, not in the stone cladding, sous to minimize damage to the stone. 9A- 1851 Alfred I.•duPont Building 169 E Flagler St .. . I - .... 0 CEP— 5--- 4 TUE 1 5: -►0 P.01 .APPLICATION FOR nit.,.CERTIFICATE .�, GOAAD OF APPROPRIATENESS ALTERATIONS, NEW CONSTRUCTION NAME OF HISTORIC SITE/HISTORIC DISTRICT A �- FREo I. P,, t v N •-r- g L.fl 1,4 �- ADORESS_.OF PROPERTY I (; `I E • FL -A, C.- L. E r- l' �_ 3;13 L. Ot1NGR S NAMH OWN S ADDR SS ' :4 •�a 'col MIA A,% 3313i OWN R S TELEPHONE APPLICANT-S NAH9 (IF NOT OWNER) GAnITA4t.. '�ANt� -----� RELATIONSHIP- TO OWNER MATERIALS SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION 'NOR ALTERATIONS MAJOR ALTERATIONS SIGNS Lj EXHIBIT NO. I Q EXHIBIT NO. I L*!lbiT NO. I 0 EXHIBIT NO. 2 ❑ EXHIBIT NO. 2 ❑ EXHIBIT- NO. 2 C3 EXHIBIT NO. 3 C] EXHIBIT NO. 3 Q EXHIBIT NO. 3 Q EXHIBIT NO. 4 ❑ EXIIIISIT NO. 4 ❑ EXH101T NO. A (3EXHIBIT NO, 5 [] EXHIBIT 140. 5 (] EXHIBIT NO. 6 [] EXHIBIT NO. 7 C] EXHIBIT NO. S DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF REHAOILITATION WORIC PROVIDE AN OVERALL OESCRIPTION OR PROJECT. OfIBCRISE THE NATURE ANO SPECIFIC LOCATION OF ALL PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS OR CHANGES TO THE PROPERTY. USE ADDITIONAL PAGE IF NECESSARY. ;'t..ssl+sa sea A"TrAcHeo — 94- 851 / I REASONS FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMV OR CHANGES �7r2,tnUn :?.JLti.j�v. ; 9 �✓1:5 ��O-+AT',3�, n in'74lJ,� /i1;��t ��o „.yi rn D 2; �nis 1�;,� }••�a.. �G�E.r�c:ln: � U�o.. `r�v Q�s �o�1�1nN ,Jla i'�.�5 1 t PROFESSIONAL ADVISERS LIST THE NAME AND FIRII OF SUCH PROFESSIONAL ADVISERS AS ARCHITECT, ENGINEER, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, CONTRACTOR, AND PRESERVATION CONSULTANT, NAME/FIRM ADDRESS TELEPHONE z"(CCoJIc 4 L lwc. 160 N. %i5GA,4^It $L-J_D. $� 1400 HlAr41 FL 33t3L 3aC - 37Z• S_ZZZ NAME/FIRM ADDRESS TELEPHONE NAHE/FIRM ADDRESS TELEPHONE NAME/FIRti ADDRESS TELEPHONE NAME/PIR'I ADDRESS TELEPHONE EXPECTEO SCHEDULE rie�:., llJotlt. '3 v►nov.i'�+4 l I CERTIFY TO THE BEST OF MY KNOtILEDGE AND BELIFF TEAT ALL IltFORMATION IN THI'� APPLICATION ANO ITS ATTACHMENTS ISATRUE AND CORRECT. SIGNATURE O� P Y OWNER DATE P • M IJA&4 Gee FF r. #s1 S GNA URE 0 \A P_ (IF OTHER THAN OWNER) OA FOR STAFF USE OIILYr APPLICATION NO. DATE RECa V 0 A STANDARD CA STAFF REVIEW FINAL ACTION Ci SPECIAL CA ✓• 14CAR ING DATE FINAL ACTION DISCLOSURE OF OWNERSHIP 1. Legal description and street address of subject real property: 169 E. Flagler Street, Miami, Florida See Exhibit "A" for legal 2. Owner(s) of subject real property and percentage of ownership. Note: City of Miami Ordinance No. 9419 requires disclosure of all parties having a ffnantial interest, either direct or indirect, in the subject matter of a presentation, request or petition to the City Commission. Accordingly, question 12 requires disclosure of shareholders of corporations, beneficiaries of trusts, and/or any other interested parties, together with their addresses and proportionate interest. The building is owned by the Alfred I. DuPont Building Partnership. I. DuPont Building is owned by: Jorgar Corp. 50% (Carlos Lindefeld 100%) Doodad, Inc. 10% (Elsa Lindefeld 100%) Ciprox USA, Inc. 10% (Dania Lindefeld 100%) Mar11u Corp., 10% (Martin Lindefeld 100%) Jeffrey & Vivien Fessler (Jof e & Viv 100�) Eileen Schechter (Ric �:1ec;]�ier�� 3. Legal description and street ad ress o any real property J(a owned by any party listed in answer to question P2, and (b) located within 375 feet of the subject real property. none STATE OF FLORIDA } SS: COUNTY OF DADE } aL ' e � r �_Q_ pe: �' 4 OWNER OR AanRHFv FOR,WER Adrienne Friesner Pardo The Alfred Adrienne Friesner Pardo , being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the (Owner) (Attorney for Owner) of the real property described in answer to question #I, 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 farm on behalf of the owner. C AL) (Nam 9 4 — 851 Adrienne Friesner Pardo SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this WJUNEAVISday of 19 �% A.M0 pI,pA1DA personally Known. Public, State of F1 idaiO.GC19P%A- Oath Taken.MY XP NOV. Z1,1995 DISCLOSURE OF OWNERSHIP I. legal description and street address of subject real property: 169 E. Flagler Street, Miami, Florida See Exhibit "A" for legal 2. Owner(s) of subject real property and percentage of ownership. Note: City of Mimi 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 f2 requires disclosure of shareholders of corporations, beneficiaries of trusts, -and/or W other interested parties, together with their addresses and proeortionate interest. Capital Bank has a contract/lease space in the Alfred I. duPont Building. The shareholders of Capital Bank are attached in Exhibit "B". 3. Legal description and street address of any real property (a) owned by any party listed in answer to question f2, and (b) located within 375 feet of the subject real property. No property owned by Capital Bank. OWNER OR ATTORW FOR OWNER Adrienne Friesner Pardo STATE OF FLORIDA } SS: COUNTY OF DADE } Adrienne Friesner Pardo , being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the (Owner) (Attorney for Owner) of the real property described in answer to question 11, above; that he has read the foregoing answers and that the sane 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. UrtuA�;�� R4A SEAL) (Name Adrienne Friesner Pardo SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this '� — day of t9ce­ , 19.%4 Personally Yjxm tary Public, State of Florida at large Oath taken _ MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:, 851 OFFICIAL NNE H DAMS JUNE H DAIS NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORID COMMISSION Nn Cr �.?cr,^ 14 COMMISSION NO. CC 163W9 . y co, MY COMMISSION EXP. NOV. 21,1995 AFFIDAVIT STATE OF FLORIDA } } SS COUNTY OF DADE } Before me, the undersigned authority, this day personally appeared Adrienne Friesner Pardo , 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 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 numbers 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. Further Affiant sayeth not. OJI'l , "�q pa_42dLD • (Nm) Adrienne Friesner Pardo Sworn to and Subscribed before me this 2] day of �, 19 y tary Public, State of Florida at large My Commission Expi7 / 94- 851 OMCIAL NOTARY SEAL JM H DAVIS NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORiDA COMMISSION NO. CC 1�i009 MY COMMISSION EXP. NOV. 211495 OWNER'S LIST Owner's Name Alfred I. DuPont %Aldincr Partnerzij= Mailing Address 169 East Flagler Street Telephone Number Legal Description: 169 East Flagler Street Alfred I. duPont Building See Exhibit "A" Owner's Name Mailing Address _ Telephone Number _ 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 Legal Description none Street Address Legal Description Street Address Legal Description 9 4- 851 I OWNER'S LIST Owner's Name Mailing Address Telephone Number Legal Description: 169 East Flagler Street ' Alfred I. duPont Building See Exhibit "A" for legal description. Owner's Nave Mailing Address Telephone Number 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 Legal Description Street Address Street Address Legal Description Legal Description 9 4_ 8 5 1 4 CJCT-06-1994 13,18 f.40M Fropprty Management TO 913'i18428 P.01 �ult-DI►4(0 C`0 rt/G'lld'�4'a{����''�.. ' 3 is72�>✓ C>AtliN�iAC6� ��► JEGAL, DESCRIPTION 4. Lot i 1 , 2, 3. 4. 17, 18, 19 and 20, block 117• NOaTM; CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, according to plat thereof s. made by A.L. Knowlton,, Civil Engineer, and recorded In Plat Book 'IS", Paige 41, Public Records of Dade ':1 'County, Florida (saving and oxcepting therefrom the 1 following property, to -wit: West 15 feet of Lots 4. and 17 in Block 117, Worth, City of Miami, Florida)', $ AND ALSO EXCEP'riNo the East 10 feet of Block•117, t North, eecord'ing to Knowlton's Map of Miami, Dade County, Florida, as recorded in Plat Book "B", Page 41, Public Records of_Dade County, Florida; - ' OROM Wit DATK 1" M. "a $URVEY in 01 60153 07-23-93 NMI- 69 Sound" Survey • o2-T0806 o3"i1-9Z 02'ZIMW3 updote Survey t 01- 72038 12-07-93 1800-69 Upd01e Survey 1 TOTAL P.01 94- 851 l8 S1d iG h b (drirS o 5 /e r-nr q_J%Lrl (UuMt r W lit{ Seth 0ITEM 12.-�VCURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFIC1"',.OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT The foilowuiY table sets forth the beneficial ownership of uis Company's Common Stock by (1) all Directors of the Company, III) the chief executive and 4 other most highly compensated executive officers of the Company, (ill) all persons known to the Company to be the beneficial owners of five percent (5%) or more of the Company's stock and (iv) all Directors and Executive Officers of the Company as a group, as of December 31, 1993. Name of Individual Amount and Nature or Identity of of Beneficial Percent Grout) Ownership of Class Abel Holtz 11950,608 (1) 35.88% Fana Holtz 746,146 (2) 13.72% Nathan Esformes 79,454 (3) 1.46% Russell W. Galbut 7,000 (4) • Alex Halberstein 13,986 (5) • Daniel M. Holtz 196,001 (6) 3.61 % Timothy E. Kish 7,000 (7) • Simon Portnoy 122,094 (8) 2.25% Leon Simkins 353,185 (9) 6,609E Craig L. Platt 51000 (10) • Jeffrey H. Porter 22,791 (11) • Thomas J. Flood 61,067 (12) 1.12% John W. Kiefer 23,000 (13) • All Directors and Executive Officers as a group, Including those listed above (16 persons) 3,612,832 66.46% Less than I % (1) Includes 349,978 shares owned of record by Mr. Holtz and 503,428 shares owned of record jointly by Mr. Holtz and his wife. Also includes an aggregate of 1,032,248 shares over which Mr. Holtz claims voting power pursuant to various voting trust agreements, shareholder agreements and irrevocable proxies and presently exercisable options held by Mr. Holtz to purchase a total of 84,956 shares. Does not include an aggregate of 237,230 shares owned, nor presently exercisable options to purchase a total of 115,000 shares, by the adult sons of Mr. Holtz, as to which shares Mr. Holtz disclaims beneficial ownership and voting power. Also does not include 739,146 owned, nor presently exercisable options to purchase a total of 7,000 shares, by Fana Holtz, as to which shares Mr. Holtz disclaims beneficial ownership and voting power. The address of Mr. Holtz is 1221 Brlckell Avenue, Miami, Florida 33131. N f l • - 45 ALFRED I. DuPONT BUILDING CAPITAL BANK SIGNAGE PROPOSAL Proposed signage for the exterior of the Alfred I. DuPont Biulding at N.E. 2nd Ave. Miami, Florida. SIGN 1 Box section stainless steel letters 6'-0" and 2'-0"in height, mounted to horozontal steel sections painted to match the adjacent finish of the building. The steel sections are attached to the face of the building at convienent and concealed, if possible, mounting points. The upper line of lettering is elongated to reflect the proportions of the overall body of the building. SIGN 2 Cast stainless steel letters 2'-0" in height mounted to (3) paralell horozontal pieces of stainless steel bar stock approximately 3/4" x 2" deep. Concealed mounting points in the fo4eet bar stock mount to the face of the building. The former title of the building is visible a rr beneath the new signage. The sign is intended to literally cross out the former signage. The lettering and the horozontal lines of the bar stock reflect the original signage indicated over the storefront windown at the street edge. SIGN 3 Cast stainless steel letters 6 in height mounted to (2) paralell horozontal pieces of stainless a P r ro ��� steel bar stock approximately 1/2 x 1 deep. concealed munting points in the bar stock mount to the face of the building. SIGN 4 Cloth or vinyl banner 2'-0" W x 30'-0" H with top and bottom stainless steel mounting stantions mounted to the face of the building at a 45e angle to the comer. i*gjeet0414sipo/doc1.doc 94- 851 �' I t4 SIGN I 94- 851 �5