HomeMy WebLinkAboutHEPB Appeal LetterLucia A. Dougherty,
Tel. (305) 57 -0603
Fax (305) 361-5603
cioughertyl@gtiaw.com
March 21, 2007
Hand Delivery
Ms. Teresita Fernandez
Clerk, Hearing Boards
City of Miami
444 S.W. 2nd Avenue
Miami, FL 33130
Re: 1124 NW 11th Street ! Appeal of Historic and Environmental
Preservation Board Decision
Dear Teresita:
On behalf of my client, Miami River House 11 Associates, LLC, the owner of the
property located at 1124 NW 111h Street, (the "Property"), this letter constitutes an appeal of
the decision of the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board, (the "HEP Board"), at its
hearing held on March 6, 2007, to deny my client's Application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for new construction.
At present, the Property is the site of a vacant parking lot which is zoned "0" (Office)
which permits residential developments at a height of 120 feet and a density of 150 units/acre.
My client is proposing a 34 unit residential building with a height of 84 feet. Issuance of a
Certificate of Appropriateness for this project is governed by the following criteria from Section
23-5(c)(1) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of the Miami, (the "Code"):
"...the proposed work shall not adversely affect...the relationship
and congruity between the subject structure and its neighboring
structures and surroundings, including but not limited to form,
spacing, height, yards, materials, color, or rhythm and pattern of
window and door openings in building facades; nor shall the
proposed work adversely affect the special character or special
historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the overall
historic site or historic district...decision relating to alterations or
new construction shall be guided by the U.S. Secretary of the
Interior's Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings"
The Secretary of the interior's "Standards for Rehabilitation" state that any new construction
shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features,
size, scale, and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its
environment.
Greenberg raur.g, A.A. ! Attorneys at Law 1 ; eZ
313. 1 let 30 ,579.0500 i Fax 305.5e5-'.07
We respectfully submit that the only competent substantial evidence presented at the
March 6th hearing regarding the application of the relevant criteria to my client's proposed
project, the City staff recommendation and the presentation made by myself and the project
architect, supported the approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness. No evidence was
presented to justify the denial of the Certificate of Appropriateness. In denying my client's
application, the HEP Board did not properly apply the relevant criteria required by the Code.
Accordingly, we respectfully appeal the decision of the HEP Board and request that the
City Commission reverse the HEP Board's denial of my client's application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness. Please schedule this appeal for the next available agenda of the Miami City
Commission. Many thanks for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
ucia A. Dougherty
cc: Mr. Lauris Boulanger