Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal-Elvis Cruz-Guidelines, Fact Sheet and LettersCity of Miami Code, Ch. 23-6.2(h)(1) Submitted into the public •3 recordf r it n s) L on ( City Clerk (h) Guidelines for issuing certificates of appropriateness. (1)Alteration of existing structures, new construction. Generally, for applications relating to alterations or new construction as required in subsection (a) the proposed work shall not adversely affect the historic, architectural, or aesthetic character of the subject structure or 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. Except where special standards and guidelines have been specified in the designation of a particular historic resource or historic district, or where the board has subsequently adopted additional standards and guidelines for a particular designated historic resource or historic district, decisions relating to alterations or new construction shall be guided by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's "Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings." Page 1 - b660h,t>l- S4-tiv\i\\11-E\\3ANZ L\\\ Submitted into the public pi, on recordCI I City Clerk Excerpt from: U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. Not Recommended: Introducing new construction into historic districts that is visually incompatible or that destroys historic relationships within the setting. Not Recommended: Introducing a new building or landscape feature that is out of scale or otherwise inappropriate to the setting's historic character. Excerpt from: Staff Report for 545 NE 55 Terrace (HEPB 7JUN 2016) Both the 1964 Venice Charter and the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Historic Preservation that were first issued in 1977, state that new construction in historic districts be differentiated from the original historic fabric. New construction projects should not duplicate a style from the past, but should rather compliment with the use of materials found within the district as well as architectural features that are common in the surroundings. Additionally, it is important that new construction projects fit in with the overall sense of scale of the district, and compliments its surroundings with appropriate massing and setbacks. Page 2 Submitted into the public 7 record or itlin(s) HISTORIC AND on q ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD City Clerk FACT SHEET Morningside Historic District ADDRESS 545 NE 55th Terrace PROJECT DESCRIPTION new sing Applicattiion for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the family residenrre. i?e construction of a ANALYSIS Because of the Preservation p cpotential fora perceived conflict of interest, Preservation r has recused herself from the This application was reviewed bythe review of Committee of the Planningthis and Zoning Department. ent. the Design Review �y i.t,t=F t,. The applicant is he north side ofNE55 rg to construct a new house on a vacant lot on primarily mason Terrace. Existing houses on this street are stomesi masonry vernacular in style, and height varies from one to two Houses are typically constructed of ,"o with stories. CBS flat or barn! tale The proposed design for the house is found to be inconsistent, of size and scale, with the character of neighboring street and on the same lot size. in ter,,,, post a19buildings that are s The character the street consn the ist of ume the architectural matt, single family residences that respect character of the dlS�ii�t_ RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Department recommends we recommends the application be continued or deferred with the consent of the in order to allow the a that address the allow th concerns applicant the opportunity to design the building to raised by staff. 9 b .ritding to item #1 March 19, 2002 Submitted into the public record r ite 1(5) r' on�, City Clerk i Alt i wik Mai at • 'r anewwru 'a��aa 't��i,i,v,yaw Morninsic,e Civic Association -�•r••�r+•• _ July lst,2016 City of Miami Commission 444 SW 2nd Avenue, 3rd Floor Miami, FL 33130 Subject: - S45 NE 55 Terr— Construction of a New Single Family !tome Dear Commissioners: The Momingside Civic Association Board at its June 14, 2016 meeting voted to support our Architectural Review Comrnifiee in opposing the current design of a proposed home at 545 55th Terrace, as incornpatibie with, the historic district. The committee offered multiple constructive observations for evolution of the project to "make it more congruous within the historic district and less of what is being perceived ish' rectangular concrete box with screens." The committee's full letter to the HEPB is attached. The MCA board respect3njly requests that the commission overturn the Certificate of Apimpriaieriess of the home at this time. Sincerely, Marc Billings President Submitted into the public t\�� recordf it (s) on P �� City Clerk MBE i.►1111111111111 A—i a soft I Sri VM- 111111, w Morningside Civic Associatior Architectural Review Committee David Holtzman Robert Graboski Naomi Burt Elvis Cruz Cyril Bijaoui 15 September 2016 City of Miami Commissioners 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33130 Subject - 545 NE 55 Feu Cans -truth -mil of a eate S >3e FamHHy H 3 Dear Commissioners: The Morningside Civic Association's (MCA) Architectural Review Committee (ARC) has reviewed the subject COA far this proposed new, approximately 3500 sq. ft. single family home on a 6,660 sq. ft. interior lot (incorrectly stated as 9,000 sq. ft. in the Staff Report). We had the opportunity to meet with the applicant prior to submittal for the COA. The ARC provided feedback regarding the materials and massing which have not been addressed. The applicant did make some changes to materials by eliminating the brick texture and replacing it with day tile screen. The coral stone finish was removed from storage closet and garage face and replaced with stucco finish. A_rorrling to the app!ir`bie History District gguiddincs: "An architectural feature is any distinct or outstanding component or characteristic of a building that defines its style. A combination of elements such as windows, doors, parapets, chimneys, roof, moldings, materials, colors, craftsmanship, design, porches, balconies, wall openings, and ornamentations will distinguish one style from another." The proposed home is a stucco box that does not have a defined central style but takes cues from several different design styles found in Morningside which range from Art Deco and Mediterranean/Modern styles for the building massing with details crossing over into the Spanish Mediterranean and Mission style. Unfortunately, those cues are not fully developed in a unified or cohesive manner in this application. 1 Submitted into the public(�� record f r it n(s) 1 �,, iL on City Clerk The main architectural features and embellishments are limited to an eyebrow which frames an open clay accent tile wall enclosing the front entry porch next to a flush panel garage door; a second -story window covered with the same clay accent tile; and a balcony that continues the stucco of the walls on the parapet instead of a railing. The front facade is capped with a stucco band and an even higher parapet for the mechanical equipment is beyond. When ioolong at succes:fill versions of modern architecture, the vi ua! interest and fanciful nature of the style is apparent even to the layman. These rich homes contain elements such as opposing structural boxes, differing facade elevations, heights and setbacks, walls with textured finishes, structural projections, exposed structural beams or columns, and many other elements that when brought together, create a well thought out and unified design. We believe that the picking of a detail from one style for use in another does not work, as the applicant has done here. We do not encourage the mere changing of materials but instead want designs that once built will "be recognized as products of their own time" while also presenting the right fit in our historic district. We find the application does not meet the following criteria set forth by the Secretary of the interior standards or the City of Miami Guidelines which include some specific to Morningside: Massing: "New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale and architectural features to protect the historic integrity and its environment." MASS: The three dimensional character of a building that create its size, shape, and proportion_ The two-story s massing early from setback to side setback along the front building lines t.._ sro:� m� .a is n��:..; side �._..a o _. This creates a large stucco square surface when it is surrounded by single -story residences. This is not compatible to the massing size and scale. The massing has a stucco finish for walls, handrails, parapets, moldings and sills. The day accent tile will enclose the porch and ground -floor windows and cover the window on the second floor, !caving the doors to the balcony which sit behind the stucco parapet as the only non obstructed glass in stucco facade. 2 Submitted into the public recor�fp�i I.'s) on I 0 City Clerk Porch Endosures: "Porches are an important character -defining feature on a historic building." The one-story porch across the front of the home obstructs the front windows with clay tiles which go to the ceiling and enclose the porch instead of stopping at the handrail height. This design is discouraged by Morningside-specific guidelines: "An enclosure is any fence gate wall or hedge that fully or partially encloses property or otherwise obstructs the view of the house from the street. The intent of the enclosure guidelines is to allow for the most important feature of the homes, their facades to be seen and appreciated from the public right of way." — [Morningside Specific Guideline attached as Page 7] Windows: "Covering Windows or changing the muntin pattern by removing or adding muntins is discouraged" — [HP Guideline attached as Page 8} The dear glass windows are covered by clay accent tiles and there is limited fenestration or dear glass in windows visible from the street. This is out of scale with the neighborhood and the amount of unembeilished stucco wall. This application has created quite an interesting dialogue. For the members of the ARC, we wrestle with the balance between historic preservation, quality of design, and helping our neighbors achieve their goals and dreams making homes their owf Weoften faced withthe debateof whether .. .. of their areof �e d; .au whether ,� "modern" style home has a place in this historic district, and while our committee is often split on this question, when it comes to this application, we are all in full agreement that this particular design falls short. 1. 1. It is attempting to be too many things. A modem design with elements of the Art Deco — S AIetldli i2 movement, with a nod to iYi LUit erran CCn materials. This mixing or styles sadlyly comes across only as a cold `square-ish' rectangular stucco box with clay accent tile enclosures. 2. 2. Regardless of style(s), the overall execution and quality of the design is poorly thought out in two dimensions, and would fail terribly in three. Our role as the ARC is to represent the neighborhood as a whole when it comes to design and i • > ! b__ preservation issues in the Historic District, and in most cases we do this without much neighbor participation. In this case, the immediate neighbors have banded together in solidarity opposing this home, and have taken it so far as to appeal the approval of this design to this City Commission, and that effort should not be taken lightly. In meeting with the applicant in an attempt to find some middle ground, they have 7 shown temperance and intelligence with the hope that their concerns would be in some way mitigated by the applicant. Unfortunately, the applicant is steadfast in pursuing this design with only the slightest of modifications and ignoring the will of the Morningside neighborhood. The applicant is also the project's architect, and has gone to great lengths in the creation of this design, including a rather camplex study and modeling of most of the homes in the District. Unfortunately for all that good and hard work, it has not yielded a design that is on par with newly constructed homes that have been approved and built in the Submitted into the publicQ tto record for itpm(s) on '� 1 !. (, 1 1 {� City Clerk neighborhood in just the last two years, nor does it stand up to the immense quality and diversity of styles that has existed in Morningside since the 1920's. Even the best architects in the world get it wrong sometimes. Certainly this architect cannot ignore the feedback without questioning the merit of this design? And most certainly, they are capable of coming up with something that will gain the support of the neighbors and will better fit within this wonderful Miami neighborhood. In summary, The Morningside Civic Association has taken a position opposing this home's design. The MCA's Architectural Review Committee has taken a position opposing this home's design. The adjacent neighbors to this property have a taken a position opposing this home's design. All three entities/groups would like nothing more than to see a wonderful home built on this property that will be enjoyed not only by the applicant, but by the Morningside neighborhood for many years to come. We hope our commentary is constructive and results in the re -evolution of this design with the HEP Board having another chance to review. Sincerely, Architectural Review Committee 4