HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard Report 1Historic and Environmental Preservation Board
c/o Kathleen Kauffman, Historic Preservation Officer
444 SW 2nd Avenue, 3rd Floor
Miami, FL 33130
December 30, 2005
Mr. Joe Arriola, City Manager
P.O. Box 330708
Miami, FL 33233-0708
Re: 2005 ANNUAL REPORT - HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD
Dear Mr. Arriola:
The Historic and Environmental Preservation Board is pleased to present this annual report in
satisfaction of City Code Section 2.434, specifically responding to the following questions:
A. WHETHER THE HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD IS SERVING THE PURPOSE FOR
WHICH IT WAS CREATED.
The Historic and Environmental Preservation Board (HEPB) Issues Certificates of Appropriateness
for exterior alterations to designated historic buildings and issues Certificates of Approval for
construction activity and tree removal in environmental preservation districts and scenic
transportation corridors. The Board also designates historic buildings and historic districts
(neighborhoods) based on criteria set forth in the Historic Preservation Ordinance.
B. WHETHER THE HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD IS SERVING CURRENT COMMUNITY
NEEDS.
The HEPB is responsive to community needs by monthly addressing petitions for construction
activity in historic sites and districts, environmental preservation districts and scenic transportation
corridors, balancing the need for progress with the need to preserve Miami's heritage. The Board
also responds to requests by neighborhood associations for historic district designation.
C. A SUMMARY OF THE HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD'S
ACTIONS/ACCOMPLISHMENTS.
During 2005, the HEPB held 9 meetings (one cancelled due to hurricane,) and reviewed the
following:
• 57 Certificates of Appropriateness for historic structures.
• 31 Certificate of Appropriateness for ground disturbing activities in the Archaeological
Conservation Areas/Zones
• 8 Certificates of Approval for construction activity in environmental preservation districts.
• 4 Historic Site/Historic District designations.
• 6 Preliminary Historic Site/Historic District designations.
• 1 Rules of Procedure amendment.
1
D. WHETHER THERE IS ANY OTHER BOARD, WHETHER PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, WHICH WOULD BETTER SERVE THE
FUNCTIONS OF THE HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD.
No other board can better serve the functions of the HEPB. At its meeting of December 16, 1993,
the City Commission passed Resolution 93-766, establishing the City Boards and Committees
Review Committee (CBCRC) to evaluate the performance and effectiveness of each existing City
Board and Committee and to make recommendations regarding the continuation, abolishment or
consolidation of these Boards and Committees. The CBCRC presented its report, which among
other recommendations, recommended that the Urban Development Review Board (UDRB) and
Historic and Environmental Preservation Board (HEPB) be merged. At its meeting of March 24,
1994 the City Commission passed Resolution 94-129 asking the City Attorney's Office to conduct a
careful review of the Ordinances creating the UDRB and the HEPB in order to accomplish the
merger of the two boards. At the City Commission meeting of September 22, 1994, the study
evaluating pros and cons of the proposed merger of the UDRB and the HEPB, prepared jointly by
the City Attorney's Office and the Planning, Building and Zoning Department, was presented, along
with the necessary legislation to create a merged board by combining the purposes, powers and
duties of both boards. The study was discussed, and the proposed merger was denied
unanimously by Motion 94-712. Thus, after careful consideration the City Commission has
concluded that It is in the best interest of the community to maintain the UDRB and the HEPB as
separate entities. Nothing has changed since that time. Therefore, no other board can better
serve the functions of the HEPB.
E. WHETHER THE ORDINANCE CREATING THE BOARD SHOULD BE AMENDED TO BETTER ENABLE THE BOARD TO
SERVE THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT WAS CREATED.
It is believed that the current composition of the Board, representing a blend of architectural and
landscape architectural expertise, historical interests and citizen members, represents a broad
constituency of historical and environmental groups as well as a broad spectrum of the community.
F. WHETHER THE BOARD'S MEMBERSHIP REQUIREMENTS SHOULD BE MODIFIED.
The Board's membership requirements are necessarily broad in order to encompass the technical
expertise and historical and environmental interests outlined in response to "e" (above).
G. THE COST BOTH DIRECT AND INDIRECT OF MAINTAINING THE BOARD.
There are no direct costs.
Indirect costs arise because of staff assigned to the Board. These staff members are not assigned
exclusively to the Board but also have other responsibilities to the City of Miami.
Thank you for this opportunity to present this report.
Sincerely,
Anthony R. Parrish, Jr.
Chairperson
2