Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPost- publication submittal - Appellant Request for Deferral dated 3-22-2022BERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ LARKIN TAPANES ZONING, LAND USE AND ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 200 S. Biscayne Boulevard Suite 300, Miami, FL 33131 www.brzoninglaw.com 305.377.6227 office 305.377.6222 fax mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com VIA ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL March 22, 2022 The Honorable Christine King City of Miami Commission 3500 Pan American Drive, 2nd Floor Miami, FL 33133 RE: Appeal of HEPB-R-21-025 concerning 7101 NE 10 Avenue and 1000 NE 72 Street, Miami, Florida Dear Commission Chair King: This law firm represents Minor Street LP 1 (the "Appellant"), the owner of the property located at 7101 NE 10 Avenue and 1000 NE 72 Street (collectively, the "Property") in the City of Miami (the "City"). This letter serves as a request for a three (3) month deferral and response to neighbor comments associated with the the Appellant's appeal to the City Commission of Resolution HEPB-R-21-025 rendered on September 27, 2021, denying PZ-20- 7931 (the "Application"). As noted in the Appellant's appeal, the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board ("HEPB") denied the Application on September 1, 2021 without regard to the City's codified review criteria. See Exhibit A, Appeal. Community Responsiveness. It's important to note that the Appellant acquired the property in 2018 and began the design development process by meeting with neighborhood representatives. Preliminary meetings took place in July and August of 2018. With initial comments in hand, the Appellant embarked on the design development process. Once the design had evolved consistent with the preliminary comments, the Appellant again met with community representatives. The Appellant met twice with the Bayside Resident Association's Architectural Board, first on February 10, 2020 and then on March 6, 2020. At each of these meetings the property owner's team listened to comments and implemented revisions responding to those comments. The plans that were submitted to the City for the HEPB's consideration were substantially the same as the plans presented to the Association's Architectural Board on March 6. Honorable City Commissioners Page 2 Due to application delays association with Covid-19 and City staff turnover, the property owner's application was not scheduled for HEPB consideration until June 1, 2021. As detailed in the Appeal, the Appellant has met with the neighbors and further modified the project in response to comments. However, the neighbors continue to express concerns, some of which are rooted in misunderstanding of the project and the applicable City criteria. Noncontributing. It is critically important to understand that unlike the majority of the homes in the Bayside Historic District (the "District"), the Property is "non-contributing"; meaning it does not currently contribute to the character of the District, and the rules which apply to construction on the Property are different from the rules which apply to other, "contributing" homes. A different standard of review applies to contributing versus non- contributing structures. The difficulties faced by owners of contributing homes are not a basis for opposing new construction which satisfies the relevant criteria. Modern Design is Appropriate. Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation, Standard No. 9 ("Standard 9") requires that "new work shall be differentiated from the old". Building on this requirement, and confirming how Standard 9 should be applied to the Property, the HEPB has approved numerous modern designs on the Property since 2005.1 Home Height Flood Zone. The proposed homes comply with the applicable City single- family home height requirements: the homes are only two (2) stories in height and are less than maximum heights permissible. However, the homes are required to be elevated to comply with current Building Code flood standards and they proactively address resiliency and sea level rise concerns. In other words, due to current flood and resiliency building regulations, the proposed homes' first livable floor level (FFE) is higher than that of older homes in the neighborhood. However, the proposed design provides open breezeways below the proposed homes which allow for the passage of light and air under and through the architecture that will provide a sense of connection to the bay, rather than increasing the height of the ground level or bringing non -habitable, but fully enclosed, building spaces all the way to the ground. The proposed design carefully balances compliance with Building Code requirements with neighborhood - oriented design. This solution was preferred over alternatives such as enclosing the lower, non - habitable spaces at ground level. Further, by keeping the understories open, there is not a need to significantly elevate the grade of the Property which keeps the land elevation in harmony with the neighborhood's current grade elevation. The proposed design carefully balances compliance with Building Code requirements with neighborhood -oriented design. 1 Based on their size, none of the prior approved designs were economically viable, and so have not been constructed. Bercow Radell Fernandez Larkin & Tapanes 1305.377.6227 direct 1305.377.6222 fax I mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com Honorable City Commissioners Page 3 Flooding. Flooding is a neighborhood -wide concern and not the obligation of a single property owner to address. The Appellant has committed to raising the seawall along the Property and maintaining stormwater on -site, as is required by City Code. However, it is beyond the scope of a single project to address flood concerns for the entire neighborhood. The Appellant has offered to join the neighborhood in requesting neighborhood -wide flood mitigation measures. Waivers. In response to neighbor comments, and prior to the September 1, 2021 hearing, the Appellant eliminated sixteen (16) out of twenty-three (23) Waivers associated with the proposed design through a series of redesigns as a result of meetings with the neighbors. Waivers for the parcel closest to community were entirely eliminated; Waivers remain for the recreated Prescott home in order to facilitate the reconstruction of the historic home, and (three) Waivers remain to permit access to mechanical rooftop equipment- one for each interior parcel. It's important to note that the Appellant modified the proposed homes with respect to size and massing, by increasing setbacks and reducing the second story lot coverage. The second -floor lot coverage for three of the lots was decreased, resulting in parcels which all exceed minimum open space requirements. The homes comply with the massing -related requirements for any new home in the district. The sizes of the proposed homes are not being maximized, even within the bounds of what is permissible through the City's Waiver process. Conclusion. The Appellant has committed to further discussions with the neighborhood. Accordingly, the Appellant respectfully requests a three (3) month deferral of the Appeal. This amount of time will allow the Appellant and the neighbors additional time to meet and discuss the project, while ensuring that all parties move forward diligently. Should you have any questions, comments, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to phone my direct line at (305) 377-6227. Very truly yours, Melissa Tapanes Llahues Enclosures cc: Arthur Noriega, City Manager Olga Zamora, Hearing Boards Anna Pernas, Historic Preservation Officer Victor Hernandez Carli Koshal Bercow Radell Fernandez Larkin & Tapanes 1 305.377.6227 direct 1 305.377.6222 fax 1 mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com Exhibit A JI ti BERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ N. LARKIN + i TAPANES e. ZGIANG, LAND USA h:`; 7. ENVINC N1AL LA N 200 S. Biscayne Boulevard Suite 300, Miami, FL 33131 www.brzoninglaw.com 305.377.6227 office 305.377.6222 fax mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com VIA ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL October 11, 2021 Mr. Arthur Noriega City Manager 3500 Pan American Drive, 2nd Floor Miami, FL 33133 RE: Appeal of HEPB-R-21-025 concerning 7101 NE 10 Avenue and 1000 NE 72 Street, Miami, Florida Dear Mr. Noriega: This law firm represents Minor Street LP 1 (the "Appellant"), the owner of the property located at 7101 NE 10 Avenue and 1000 NE 72 Street (collectively, the "Property") in the City of Miami (the "City"). This letter shall serve as the Appellant's appeal to the City Commission of Resolution HEPB-R-21-025 rendered on September 27, 2021, denying PZ-20-7931 (the "Application"). See Exhibit A, Rendered HEPB-R-21-025. The Historic and Environmental Preservation Board ("HEPB") denied the Application on September 1, 2021 with complete disregard of the City's codified review criteria. The Application was denied arbitrarily, and without regard to the substantial competent evidence presented by both the Appellant and the City administration. Standard of Review. This appeal is brought pursuant to Section 23-6.2(e) of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances (the "Code"). The Appellant hereby appeals the HEPB's denial of a Special Certificate of Appropriateness ("COA") to permit the redevelopment of Property with a reconstruction of the historic Prescott Mansion and four (4) new homes consistent with Section 23-6.2(h)(1) of the Code, Standard 9 of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, and the Bayside Historic District's character (the "Project"). Arthur Noriega, City Manager Page 2 Section 23-6.2(e) of the Code provides that any aggrieved party may appeal to the City Commission a decision of the HEPB on matters relating to Certificates of Appropriateness by filing an appeal within fifteen (15) calendar days after the date of the rendered decision. Code Section 23-6.2(e) also provides that on appeal, the City Commission shall hear and consider all facts material to the appeal and render a decision as promptly as possible. This hearing shall be de novo and the City Commission may consider new evidence or materials. Accordingly, the Appellant hereby incorporates and submits this letter of intent, exhibits, and the June 1, 2021 and September 1, 2021 presentations to the HEPB in support of the Application, and provides the following information in support of the appeal. The Appellant reserves the right to present new evidence at the forthcoming City Commission hearing. Property Description. The Property is located east of NE 10 Avenue, between NE 71 Street and NE 72 Street, abutting the Biscayne Bay. See Figure 1, Property Aerial, below. The Property is located within an Upper Eastside residential neighborhood and the Bayside Historic District. The Miami -Dade County Property Appraiser's Office identifies the Property with Folio Numbers 01-3207-032-1030 and 01-3207-032-0630. See Exhibit B, Property Appraiser Summary Reports. Collectively, the Property is approximately 62,632 square feet or 1.43 acres in size. The northern section of the Property spans the length of approximately five (5) homes along 72 Street. The east side of the Property borders Biscayne Bay. While the Property is currently vacant, the entirety of the Property previously contained the historic Prescott Mansion, described further below. Figure 1. Property Aerial Appeal. The Appellant's appeal should be approved as the HEPB's decision failed to evaluate the project in the context of the City's codified requirements and failed to recognize several important facts and evidence in support of the COA. Most significantly, it is clear from the record that the HEPB failed to acknowledge the historical importance Bercow Radell Fernandez Larkin & Tapanes 1 305.377.6227 direct 1 305.377.6222 fax 1 mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com Arthur Noriega, City Manager Page 3 of the Appellant's reconstruction of the historic Prescott Mansion, as it relates to the history and architecture of the Prescott Mansion and as it relates to the unique opportunity to accurately reconstruct a historic resource that has been entirely demolished, and the precedent established by the HEPB's previous approvals of modern mansions on the Property. Additionally, the HEPB failed to consider substantial competent evidence related to a) the appropriateness of modern architecture on the Property as an intentional juxtaposition with the Prescott Mansion; b) the proposed design's appropriateness given the flooding and resiliency measures required by the Florida Building Code and Miami 21 Code to ensure the longevity of the future development; and c) the increased compatibility of the proposed design in comparison with prior HEPB approvals, as well as through specific study and analysis of the surrounding homes. Finally, Section 23-6.2.(b)(4)(b) of the City Code requires that "the decision of the board shall include a complete description of its findings..." The HEPB did not provide substantive findings nor any clear reason for denial of the project at either the hearings or within the rendered Resolution. Prescott Mansion Background. The Property was originally developed with a winter home for Samuel J. Prescott. The home was constructed prior to 1925 in the Mediterranean Revival style of architecture and was commonly referred to as the "Prescott Mansion." See Figure 2, Prescott Mansion Photo below. Figure 2. Prescott Mansion Photo The Prescott Mansion fell into disrepair over time and in 2005, the City's Historic and Environmental Preservation Board ("HEPB") approved a COA for demolition of the Prescott Mansion. See Exhibit C, 2015 HEPB Staff Recommendation. The HEPB approved Bercow Radell Fernandez Larkin & Tapanes 1 305.377.6227 direct 1 305.377.6222 fax 1 mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com Arthur Noriega, City Manager Page 4 the demolition on the condition that the Prescott Mansion would be reconstructed at a later time. In order to comply with this condition, the then -owner of the Property retained esteemed historical architecture expert Richard Heisenbottle to meticulously document the design and details of the Prescott Mansion.' These plans enable and inform the complete and accurate reconstruction of the Prescott Mansion. However, in spite of the obligation and means to accurately reconstruct the Prescott Mansion, the structure has not yet been reconstructed. Description of Project Proposal. The Appellant is proposing to reconstruct the Prescott Mansion at its full size, scale, and with its complete complement of architectural features. To our knowledge, the reconstruction and recreation of a fully demolished historic resource has never been undertaken in Miami. The Prescott Mansion is given prominence on the site and is visible from NE 10 Avenue, the approach to the site from NE 71 Street, and from Baywood Park, immediately south of the Property. Additionally, in keeping with the original architecture and style of the Prescott Mansion, the reconstructed home will be elevated on a stone pedestal to comply with Floodplain regulations and will take advantage of Freeboard regulations to ensure the longevity of the structure and proactively address sea level rise. The proposed elevation has the additional benefit of increasing the visibility and prominence of the historic structure on the Property. In order to facilitate reconstruction of the Prescott Mansion, the Appellant proposes to divide the balance of the Property into four parcels, compatibly sized with the surrounding context, and construct four (4), single-family homes on the Property, in addition to the fully reconstructed Prescott Mansion.' The configuration and size of the additional home sites have been specifically configured to grant the reconstructed Prescott it's prominent location and size. It's important to note that driveways and parking are internalized through a common interior public access road, which will limit the impact of the proposed homes on existing streets, allow access, and improve vehicular maneuverability for the entire neighborhood. The proposed homes will be of modern 1 Mr. Heisenbottle has been engaged as the architect of record for the reconstructed Prescott Mansion and will provide first-hand knowledge of the original structure's character and detailing. This invaluable combination of detailed plans, vast historical architectural expertise, and personal experience documenting the historical resource enable and inform the complete and accurate reconstruction of the Prescott Mansion. 2 It should be noted that the Appellant's design initially proposed five (5) new homes, not four. The Appellant reduced the number of proposed homes in response to the HEPB's direct instructions that doing so would increase the compatibility of the proposal. Bercow Radell Fernandez Larkin & Tapanes 1305.377.6227 direct 1305.377.6222 fax I mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com Arthur Noriega, City Manager Page 5 design, but are designed to be compatible with and draw inspiration from the surrounding Bayside Historic District. HEPB Review. The HEPB initially considered the Application on June 1, 2021. At that meeting, a number of neighbors expressed concerns related to the size of the proposed parcels, their modern design, and their height, among others. As a result of these comments, and consistent with City staff's professional recommendation for approval, the HEPB indicated that consolidating the two smaller lots into a single lot would increase the compatibility of he Project with the context. Additionally, the HEPB indicated that the Appellant should again meet with the neighbors. The Appellant again met with the Bayside Neighborhood Association (the "Association") general membership on June 8, 2021 and received feedback on the proposed plans. 3 After the meeting, the Appellant's team began a full reconsideration of the proposed design in light of the HEPB's and Association's comments. In order to ensure that the board's and the neighborhood's comments were given thought and consideration, the Appellant requested a deferral at the July 6, 2021 HEPB hearing. This additional time gave the Appellant the opportunity to carefully analyze the comments and implement a number of modifications aimed at addressing the Association's comment. The Appellant team met with the Association's general membership again on August 4, 2021 to present the design modifications that were implemented. See Exhibit D, Narrative Response to Bayside Historic District Community Comments. The Appellant presented the HEPB with the revised design on September 1, 2021. At that time the HEPB acknowledged the significant changes and improvements that were made to the Project in response to neighbor comments, but was concerned that the neighbors were still upset. However, this concern translated into a denial of the Application which was not based upon the guidelines set forth in the City Code, as required by Section 23- 6.2(b)(4)(b) and failed to recognize several important facts in support of the Special COA. Most notably, the HEPB arbitrarily overlooked the Project's consistency with Section 23- 6.2(h)(1) of the Code, Standard 9 of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, precedent of approvals for this site, as summarized below, and the Bayside Historic District character, City's staff's recommendation for approval, as well as the 3 The Appellant reached out to the Association and met with the Association's Architectural Board on February 10, 2020 and March 6, 2020. At each of these meetings the property owner's team listened to comments and implemented revisions responding to those comments. The plans that were submitted to the City for the HEPB's consideration were substantially the same as the plans presented to the Association's Architectural Board on March 6. Due to application delays association with Covid-19 and City staff turnover, the property owner's application was not scheduled for HEPB consideration until June 1, 2021. Bercow Radell Fernandez Larkin & Tapanes 1 305.377.6227 direct 1 305.377.6222 fax 1 mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com Arthur Noriega, City Manager Page 6 numerous design changes made over two years to satisfy and address the neighbor's comments, and the letters of support for the Project. See Exhibit E, Letters of Support. Precedent of Modern Design Approvals for the Property. The Property has been vacant for approximately fifteen (15) years, unable to be viably redeveloped with one or even two single-family homes. In fact, in 2003, prior to the demolition of the Prescott Mansion, the City approved a proposal to redevelop the site with a series of approximately ten (10) Mediterranean Revival and Modern villas. This approval has long -since lapsed, but is evidence that the site is simply too large of a bayfront parcel to support only two single-family homes and that this has been the case for decades. In 2005, as part of the application for demolition of the Prescott Mansion, the HEPB approved a new modern addition designed by Oppenheim architecture (HEPB 2005-76). In fact, during that approval process, a proposed design was explicitly rejected for being too architecturally similar to the Prescott and its context, which the board feared could lead to confusion between what was original and what was proposed. The 2005 HEPB cited the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation, Standard No. 9 ("Standard 9") as the basis for this position and as the basis for approving a modern addition on the Property. Standard 9 indicates: "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 of the property and its environment. [Emphasis added.]" Building on this precedent, and confirming how Standard 9 should be applied to the Property, the HEPB has approved numerous modern designs on the Property since 2005. In 2013, the HEPB approved a modern structure that was limited to the northern portion of the Property (HEPB-13-00635). The resulting design for just that one home on the site was proportionately massive. It was an over 8,000 square foot residence with an outbuilding, which sprawled across the abutting 72nd Street frontage, and was elevated approximately ten (10) feet to comply with Floodplain and Building Code requirements. That home was not constructed. Then, in 2015, the HEPB approved a similarly massive home for the southern portion of the Property (HEPB-R-15-016). Like the previously approved 2005 Oppenheim design, the 2015 development included the reconstruction of the Prescott Mansion with a massive, modern addition. This home as approved was 22,193 SF. of gross area with 14,866 SF under air in size.. The HEPB in 2015 found the Bercow Radell Fernandez Larkin & Tapanes 1305.377.6227 direct 1305.377.6222 fax I mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com Arthur Noriega, City Manager Page 7 scale and massing of the proposed addition to be compatible with the site and with the neighborhood. These approved designs, as is permissible by right, entirely eliminated the community's sense of connection to the bay.. The Appellant made this important and substantial precedent part of the public hearing record before the HEPB. The previous approvals present considerable evidence that larger, modern homes on the Property, as well as modern additions to the Prescott Mansion, satisfy the City's Code mandated criteria and Standard 9. The HEPB arbitrarily disregarded this evidence and precedent. Responsiveness to Flooding and Resiliency Measures. It should be noted that the proposed homes are elevated to comply with current Building Code flood requirements and proactively address resiliency and sea level rise concerns through their proposed design To be clear: the proposed homes comply with current building height requirements, however, due to flood and resiliency regulations the proposed homes' habitable spaces start at a higher elevation than the rest of the neighborhood. This is a unique conundrum which faces all flood -prone historic areas: how to balance compatibility with the past while complying with requirements and standards designed to provide structural resiliency into the future. The Project's design responds to this challenge by providing open breezeways below the proposed homes which allow for the passage of light and air under and through the elevated homes and provide a sense of connection to the bay - rather than increasing the height of the ground or bringing non - habitable, but fully enclosed, building spaces all the way to the ground. The homes are designed to "float" at their proposed heights and permit views through and between all structures. This design feature preserves the neighborhood'scommunity connection to Biscayne Bay. The HEPB did not give the City's flood zone regulations the appropriate weight, nor consider the Appellant's sensitive design approach to reconciling the City's flood zone elevation requirements with the Property's context. Public Benefit of Subdivision. As noted, the Property currently consists of two (2) platted lots, with no stormwater retention, a dilapidated seawall, and no vehicular maneuverability. Well in advance of applying to for the COA or requesting a public hearing, the Appellant met with the City's Public Works and Fire Departments to ensure the Project configuration was the best design to address subdivision related issues. Further, the Appellant provided the HEPB and neighbors with substantial evidence that the Project includes right of way dedications for the public benefit, a raised and improved seawall to protect the community from sea level rise, and on -site and abutting roadway stormwater retention. The Project alone cannot solve the Bayside Historic District's flooding problems, however, the Project is designed to fully comply with Chapter 54 of Bercow Radell Fernandez Larkin & Tapanes 1305.377.6227 direct 1305.377.6222 fax I mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com Arthur Noriega, City Manager Page 8 the City Code and the flood mitigation measures included therein as part of its subdivision improvement requirements. Compatibility Modifications. In accordance with the HEPB's feedback and in response to neighbor comments, the Appellant made numerous changes to the proposed Project. These changes enhanced the Project's compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood both in terms of design and massing. Consolidated NW Lot. Most notably, the proposal considered by the HEPB on September 1, 2021 included one less single-family home than initially proposed: the recreated Prescott Mansion and only four (4) new homes. Specifically, the two lots that were previously proposed for the northwest corner of the site, at the intersection of NE 72 Street and NE 10 Avenue, are consolidated into a single, larger lot. Both the HEPB and the neighbors indicated that consolidating these two lots into a single site would result in a lot that was more compatible with the area. The Appellant shared the consolidated site schemes with the City's preservation staff and neighbors in advance of the September HEPB meeting. Based on a context study, the typical lot in this section of the Bayside Historic District is 7,500 square feet in size, and some parcels in the Property's vicinity include double lots or are larger. The previously proposed two lots were just over 5,000 square feet in size each; correspondingly, the consolidated lot is just over 10,000 square feet in size. This context analysis was included in the record for HEPB's review and consideration and satisfies Section 23-6.2(h)(1) of the Code as the new construction will not adversely affect the historic district. Instead, it is the continued vacancy of the Property that negatively affects the Property's relationship with the surrounding single- family homes and park to the south. Also, as confirmed by the HEPB's prior approvals, redevelopment of the Property without breaking it into smaller lots results in two massive homes and home sites; the size of the Property today is approximately the size of eight (8) standard Bayside Historic District parcels. It should be noted that the massing of the proposed home on the consolidated lot is sensitive to the neighborhood. The proposed home is positioned to step back from the neighborhood into the Property. Based on a study of the existing setbacks along NE 72 Bercow Radell Fernandez Larkin & Tapanes 1305.377.6227 direct 1305.377.6222 fax I mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com Arthur Noriega, City Manager Page 9 Street, the setbacks are being adhered to and in some locations exceeded for both lots with frontages on NE 72 Street. See Figure 3. Setback Context, below. Figure 2. Setback Context Additionally, the home on the consolidated lot is oriented to show its "skinny side" to the neighborhood, reducing the perception of mass, and providing a pedestrian front entrance towards the neighborhood. The minimum open space requirement of the consolidated properties is thirty percent (30%). These designs provide just over forty-five percent (45%), well in excess of that requirement. This ensures the home is sensitive and compatible and reduces the opportunity for any negative impact; therefore, directly satisfying of Section 23-6.2(h)(1) of the Code. General Design Modifications. It should be noted that the homes were previously designed to draw inspiration from the architecture and materials of the Prescott Mansion. However, based on the HEPB's and neighbors' comments, the aesthetic of the four new homes were modified to draw architectural elements and inspiration from the surrounding Bayside Historic District as well. Consistent with Standard 9 of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, the proposed new construction is differentiated from the historic architecture, but draws architectural features from the surrounding area. Similar to and consistent with the Bayside Historic District generally, the proposed homes have a common aesthetic, but none of the proposed homes are identical or include the same mix of design elements: each home is unique. Materials drawn from the surrounding neighborhood include a variety of exposed brick, limestone, concrete breeze block, natural wood, and stone materials. The proposed materials are local materials which were and are commonly utilized in the construction of buildings and homes in the Bercow Radell Fernandez Larkin & Tapanes 1 305.377.6227 direct 1 305.377.6222 fax 1 mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com Arthur Noriega, City Manager Page 10 Bayside district. Additionally, the new homes now include better articulated Streamline Modern and Mid Century modern angled roofs and Art Deco eyebrows. Appellant provided a study of the surrounding homes in its presentation before the HEPB, and the HEPB failed to consider this evidence and follow the clear intent of Standard 9 to provide compatible architectural features. Finally, the Appellant modified the proposed homes with respect to size and massing. Previously, the homes included Zoning Waivers, among others, related to setbacks and the second story lot coverage. The Appellant reduced the massing of the proposed homes. Specifically, the second -floor lot coverage for three of the lots was decreased, resulting in parcels which all exceed minimum open space requirements. The Appellant modified the proposed homes and eliminated anticipated Waiver requests in direct response to the neighbor and the HEPB comments. In other words: the homes comply with the massing -related requirements for any new home in the district- and the HEPB failed to consider the changes made based on their requests and recommendations. In sum, the Appellant addressed the design related comments of HEPB and the neighbors, and these efforts were arbitrarily and capriciously ignored by the HEPB on September 1, 2021. In absence of approval of this proposed project including the subdivision of the Property, the Property would likely be redeveloped as two much larger homes, and consequently with little or no sensitivity to the community's connection to the Bay. , or continue to remain vacant land, devoid of one of Miami's most iconic historic homes, and with no contribution to the beauty and sustainability of the neighborhood. The Appellant and the design team submitted substantial and competent evidence that each new home is consistent with the form, spacing, height, yards, materials, color, rhythm and window and door patterns of the surrounding district. In the face of this evidence, the HEPB disregarded the City Code's procedural requirements and provided no substantive comment, nor articulated a substantive rationale for denial. Conclusion. As discussed at the HEPB hearing, the Property has been vacant for approximately fifteen (15) years. There have been numerous approvals to redevelop the Property, however none have proven to be economically viable and the historic Prescott Mansion has accordingly not been reconstructed. In denying the Application, the HEPB failed to consider a) the appropriateness of modern architecture on the Property as an intentional juxtaposition with the Prescott Mansion; b) the proposed design's appropriateness given the flooding and resiliency measures required by the Florida Building Code and Miami 21 Code necessary to ensure the longevity of the future development; and c) the increased compatibility of the proposed design through specific study and analysis of the surrounding homes. All of the prior approvals were massive, Bercow Radell Fernandez Larkin & Tapanes 1305.377.6227 direct 1305.377.6222 fax I mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com Arthur Noriega, City Manager Page 11 modern designs and were found to be consistent with the application City's criteria. The Appellant worked tirelessly, over multiple years, with the City's preservation staff, neighbors, and the HEPB to address concerns. The Project includes recreation of the historic Prescott Mansion, using meticulously detailed plans of the original structure, proposed new construction which complies with the Standard 9 mandate for new construction to be distinguished from the old, yet include architectural features that are in harmony with the aesthetics and character of the historic district, lot sizes which are comparable, footprints which are minimal, and provide heights which comply with zoning and building and flood requirements. The HEPB arbitrarily and without regard to both the City administration and Appellant's evidence denied the Application. We do believe the design has been enhanced through the HEPB review process and the City Commission's granting of this Appeal and approval of the COA will result in reconstruction of the Prescott Mansion, restoration of a piece of Miami's architectural history, and four (4) beautiful single-family homes that will be resilient to sea level rise and contribute to the to the historic nature and style of the Bayside Historic District. For the foregoing reasons, we respectfully request that you promptly schedule this appeal before the City Commission. Should you have any questions, comments, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to phone my direct line at (305) 377-6227. Very truly yours, Melissa Tapanes Llahues Enclosures cc: Olga Zamora, Hearing Boards Jeremy Calleros Gauger, Interim Historic Preservation Officer Victor Hernandez Ben Fernandez Carli Koshal Emily K. Balter Bercow Radell Fernandez Larkin & Tapanes 1 305.377.6227 direct 1 305.377.6222 fax 1 mtapanes@brzoninglaw.com