Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM-89-0987 PZ-8 -~ PLANNING FACT SHEET APPLICANT City of Miami Planning Department: August 30, 1989 PETITION ~a~ ',ty Building. gaoroxima_t~]v 117 N.E. I Avenue The northerly 50 feet of Lots 11,..1,2, and 13 of Block 104 of the plat of "MIAMI NORTH (PB B-41) P.R.D.C. Consideration of recommendations concerning an amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas of Ordinance 9500, Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida, to apply Section 1613. HC-4: Commercial Area Heritage Conservation Overlay District to the subject property, as described in the designation report. REQUEST To apply the MC-4 overlay to this historic site as described in the designation report. ANALYSIS This historic site is being proposed for designation per the requirements of Resolution 87-1148, the Downtown Miami Development of Regional Impact Master Development Order. The building was recommended for designation by the j Heritage Conservation Board in 1987, but the proposed designation was subsequently withdrawn ' by the Planning Department at the Planning Advisory Board hearing. This deferral was requested by the applicant in order to study possible zoning incentives that might be applied to the property. Following this deferral, the ;~ applicant then invoked the 12 month delay period during which zoning items, once withdrawn, cannot be reheard. In order to complete the designation process, the designation was rescheduled for hearing by the Heritage Conservation Board in June. The Heritage Conservation Board once again recoman;nded in favor of designation. The PAB should consider the appropriateness of the proposed HC-4 zoning overlay as compared to any other HC regulations that could be applied to the subject property. Designation with an HC-4 zoning overlay offers certain zoningg bonuses to encourage the preservation of ~ ~~ ~.~ 8A8 9/20/89 _. ~ ~~~. R '~\ historic sites. Incentives can include a floor area ratio bonus, as well as modification of offstreet parking, minimum lot size, open space, yard area, height, landscaping, and building spacing requirements. RECO(WNENDATIONS (See designation report). HERITAGE CONSERVATION i BOARD Approval, 7 to 2. _. PLANNING DEPT. Approval. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD At~its meeting of September 20, 1.989 the Planning Advisory Board adopted Resolution 49-89 by a vote of 5 to 4 recommending denial of the above. i Y ti ~+ 'f Si j! iN2~ is tt .j } rt it it f i~ >'RB 9/20 89 xtAn ''~ +5 3 2 1 22 2~ 24 j Q ~ T, 3 2 I n ~l t J i2 ~ 0 S T, . 3 2 I = !- ~ 2 2 23 ~ Q Z - t t i t i S Z I 3 ~. r f 14 IS 16 :~_o s T -0 9 a r N `' I I -2 Is ~ a O F F f C E N_E_ l0 9 d r 2 1 1 N 11 It 18 I~ ~ 1r I e -9 t N_E_ / l0 9 a d s s ~ t 1 N 5 I I 12 1'! I S I d 1 7 1 8 19 l0 9 a~ s a 3 z t is 1I .12 13 14 1~ Id I7 !t !9 i z =I W 2 23 ~ _{ Q ` S T. i ~~ EAST COLLEt;E S4UARE SUBDIVIS' 7N NO. I TRACT '1' 3 11 12 13 t4 le 16 I T Id a 1 ~_ a s e ~ s 9 4 s t i N 2 11 12 I9 14 0 1 a I o~9ldlrid s I 11 ~ 12 I -3 I -~ I -S ~Id ; ST. tai 12 ff 10 9 d 7 ~. Q~ Is ~ 1 s Is Ir le N S7. _ 10 9 Ie Y s 3 s s I " 7 u Islr le l9 m to s e r ~ ~ ,~ I N 2s t! 12 Is N 1 I T la I>i ST. +, .. K,:, ~' ~ ~ . ~ PAS x/20/89 ~[~.~.~~ ~ " 36 w H a Item Ilt6 ~- Sacua:ity 8ui.ldag t~-R~3 ._: _ FLAGLE ~r_-l o s gi r d s N 03 11 1: 13 t4 1s ~ls "'~ .:~ ~_..__._..~... n. wt REPORT OF THE CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO THE HERITAGE CONSERVATION 80AR0 ON THE POTENTIAL DESIGNATION OF SECURITY BUILDING 117 N. E. 1ST AVENUE AS A HERITAGE CONSERVATION ZONING DISTRICT ~ :g. Prepared by "~ ~ ~ ~ f~ ~stor~c Preservation Oate Planner Accepted by airman, er~tage ate Conservation board Designated by the Miami City Commission Ordinance No. Date I~,~ '~~' - - ~~~ -, - .. 1 ti. Page I. General Information II. Significance _ III. Architectural Information IV. Planning Context V. HC Zoning Elements 1 4 .. - 5 11 12 j i i a i~ ~~~"~:. 5 ~.~. -. -:~ `, F I. GENERAL INFORMATION Historic Name: - Security Building Current Name: Capital Building cat;on' 117 N. E. 1st Avenue Miami, Florida 33132 Present Owner: i Louis Weisfeld Inv., et al j c/o A. Kline ~ 2665 S. Bayshore Orive Miami, Florida 33133 f Present se: Commercial DrPSent Zoning District: CBO-1/9 N[,~ _ Z~ oninq Overlay District. HC-4 a _E jax Folio Number: 01-01104-001-060 1 ti Bou~1L Oescrio ion of HC toning District: The northerly 50 feet of Lots 11, 12, and 13 of Block 104 of the plat of MIAMI NORTH (PB B-41) N onin~ ('lassification: _ Historic Site SECURITY BUILDING 117 N,E. 1 AVENUE location ~~~9~7: _i SIt~ plan ~ 3 w `` -~ II. SIGNIFICANCE Specific Date: 1926 Architect: Robert Greenfield Statement of Si.~ifcan~: / 1 5 ~.. i ~\ The Security Building is architecturally significant as the only building in.Miami that sports a mansard roof. The building's exterior is unique in that it is the only one in the city that embodies the distinctive characteristics of the Second Empire style of architecture. The Security Building also possesses historical associations with the commercial development of Miami during the 1920s boom years. At the time of its construction. the Security Building was one of the tai lest and most imposing structures in downtown Miami, rising to a height of 225 feet. Its principal elevation, sheathed in granite, terra cotta, and copper, distinguishes the building as a unique architectural component of the city's downtown area. The building provides an architectural record of commercial architecture during the city's early prosperous years through the design quality of its details. This design quality is displayed in the scale, proportions, and composition of the classical detailing of the building elevations and roof 1 i ne. - - - The Security Building also represents an effort by the Dade County Security Company, the original owner, to provide a distinctive commercial "high-rise" building. Organized in 1901, the Oade County Security Company was one of the most important financial institutions of the county during the I920s and the largest building and loan society in Florida. The company moved to its present site in 1923 and enlarged and refitted an existing building. Expansion during the Boom prompted the construction of a new and larger structure. The imagery of the Security Building serves as a visual re+ninder of Miami's Boom years, when architects building in the young city were seeking an identity of commercial expression through the utilization of established and nationally recognized architectural styles. The Security Building was known by that name from the time it was completed in 1925 until I9a5, when the name was changed to Pan American Bank Building. Qn 1 September 1952. the name reverted to Security Building until April 1957, at which tine: it became known as the .~ Y ________ ... ,.,. ..y.,.~~~ ... .. .... .. .. ._._... _... - ~ _. .. r.._r..u, /~'c ti ~. Metropolitan Bank Building. It was named the Capital Bank Building in 1964, and today it is commonly known as the Capital Building. Rela_ tfons~jn t, o Criteria for Designation: 3. Exemplifies the historical, culturai~ political, economic, or social trends of the community. - The Security Building possesses historical associations with the Dade County Security Company and with the commercial development of Miami during the 192Qs Boooa years. 5. Embodies those distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style or period, or method of construction.. The Security Building is unique in that it is the only building in the city that embodies the distinctive characteristics of the Second Empire style. 7. Contains elements of design, detail, materials or craftsmanship of outstanding quality or which represent a significant innovation or adaptation to the South Florida environment. The Security Building is particularly noteworthy for its scale, proportions, classical detailing, and mansard roof. ~Sr J.._._------ _ . { \\ ._ 1 III. A~CHITECTO~L INFORMATION Qesg,riotion of Buildina: The Security Building is a rectangular 16-story structure executed in the Commercial style of architecture and embellished with features derived from the Second Empire architectural mode. Construction of the building began in 1926 according to the plans supplied by Robert Greenfield, architect from New York and Miami. The building's structure is a "fireproof" steel frame sitting atop a reinforced concrete foundation. The exterior walls of the building are clad in a combination of granite and terra cotta. The roofiine is characterized by a copper-faced mansard roof surmounted by a domed octagonal cupola. Fronting to the west, the building`s facade is embellished with tall pilasters, three stories in height, supporting a wide entablature. The entablature spans the entire width of the elevation, and its ends are highlighted with granite lion heads. The main entrance to the building is at the center of the facade and is presently comprised of four modern glass doors. A projecting canopy over the entrance is a later addition. The rhythmic pattern of casement windows rises the vertical length of the building. Quoins of simulated stone decorate the corners of the principal elevation. The top two stories of the Security Building are terminated by a convex mansard roof. The roof is punctured by arched dormers and porthole windows whose placement coincides with a two-story height. The flat roof of the building is hidden behind the curved facing of the mansard roof. A domed octagonal cupola, inset with arched windows at each bay, tops the building. The windows of the building's facade are covered with vertical metal screens that extend the building's height. The screens are perforated, thus allowing a view of the original fenestration pattern underneath. When examined against old photographs of the building, it becomes apparent that the screens were installed in a manner that did not damage the building's exterior, thereby making the original facade design quite recognizable. The interior of the Security Building is not too dissimilar to other tall commercial buildings of the 1920s. A small elevator lobby is found at each floor from which corridors lead to office spaces. The lobby has been changed throughout the years, and no significant interior spaces are evident. In all, the Security Building contains a total of 65,000 square feet of rentable office space. -6- --- _ __ . -- - ______ i - .... ..~._~ np~~riotian of Site: ' The Security Building is located on~ the east side of N. E. 1st Avenue between N. E. 1st and 2nd Streets. The building occupies the entire site. -~- ~?~-'$'~'t -- --- r , ~11~~ ~~ nA~~:~i ~~1 a ~ - ~®~ a ~ ~ . ~ .fie... ~~~ Security Bui3dinq 117 N.E. 2 Avenue ..` : ~~ r ^~ 1 ;,;..~ ~~~~~ i~ ,~.,~ Security 8uitdino ~~'~9~~. II7 N.E. I Avenue 1~ ~ ~ _~ i00r~ ~•H~~B~~ ~l.`'eA~ ~r~y . ~'` ~ i ~~ p ;.~as~: c ~ 0~~! 1~4'q' 11 ~j~ ~ ~i 6 6 1 ~ 'I ~ ~ ~' . ~ -~ ...~• SeCUrit;i Buildinc :17 ~1. ~. avenue _~ .., ~. ~• M ~~ .IN •• t~ ```` •~ R• ~~ ~ ~~ •M . ~` ~~ ~ ~~ '' . ~ _ ~ ~ L'' .s~i~ " 7 ~~ :~~ I ~~ ~ ~'ii ~ ~e siC~ ''~1 =~ IV. Present Trends and Gondi ion The Security Building is one of downtown Miami's most unique high-rise buildings, and every effort should be made to ensure its continued ._ preservation. ~ .. ~ . The Security Buiidin was identified in the Downtown Miami Development of Regional Impact ~ORI) as a historic site. The building has also been listed in the National Register of Historic Places. Conservation 06~ectives: The building owners should be encouraged to remove the existing screen that covers the main facade of the building. Any future rehabilitation should also remove the projecting canopy. These conservation objectives can best be achieved by applying the HC-4 Commercial Area Heritage Conservation Overlay District to the property. The HC-4 overlay district permits certain incentives for the preservation of commercial properties. -11- '~'9'-~9a9"~! 1( _- - _ __ _ _ ~;u _ ~~ ~~. - ~~ ~~ `~ _` V. HONING ELEMENTS Boundaries: The boundaries of the NC zoning district have been drawn to include _ the entire tract of land on which the historic building is located. Maior Exterior Surfaces Subiect to Review: _ All four facades shall be considered major exterior surfaces subject to review. Maior Landscape Features Subiect to Review: - The major landscape features subject to review shall include ail features which are subject to requirements for tree removal permits, as set forth in Chapter 17 of the City Code.