The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutHEPB (17228) ResolutionCity of Miami HEPB Resolution Enactment Number: HEPB-R-25-013 City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33133 www.miamigov.com File Number: 17228 Final Action Date: 4/1/2025 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD, PURSUANT TO SEC. 23-6.2(B)(4) OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, DENYING A SPECIAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO PERMIT AN ADDITION, AND AFTER -THE -FACT ALTERATIONS AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS ON A PROPERTY LOCATED APPROXIMATELY AT 5935 NORTHEAST 6 COURT, MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33137, WITHIN THE MORNINGSIDE HISTORIC DISTRICT; FURTHER INCORPORATING THE ANALYSIS IN THE ATTACHED STAFF REPORT ENTITLED "EXHIBIT A" WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. Conditions (if any): 1. The site shall be developed in accordance with the plans as prepared by Fornaris Pau & Associates, LLC submitted as part of application PZ-24-18260. The plans are deemed as being incorporated by reference herein. 2. At time of permitting and/or sub -permitting, manufacturer's brochures or color photographs of proposed design elements and materials including but not limited to windows, doors, railings, roofing, etc. shall be submitted for approval. 3. All glass to be clear and/or Low-E. Tinted, and/or opaque glass is not allowed. 4. The Resolution shall be included in the master permit set. 5. The Applicant shall comply with its the "Preliminary Zoning Review — HEP Review" and all applicable requirements of the Miami 21 Code and Chapter 17, Chapter 23 of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances. 6. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of all department/agencies as part of the City of Miami building permit submittal process. 7. Applicant to restudy the front setback and use the average City of Miami Page 1 of 2 File ID: 17228 (Revision:) Printed On: 5/5/2025 setback of 27 feet of the block face and the second -floor massing should be pushed back and utilize the dominant setback of 30 feet. The additional setback helps to offset the massing and is similar to the massing found on the block face. 8. Applicant to restudy the roof and match the eave line (depth) and roof pitch to that of the one-story massing. Staff to approve of the final roof design from the study. 9. Applicant to restudy the window to wall ratio, especially at the side elevations. The window to wall ratio should mimic the rhythm and proportions of openings found on contributing structures in the district. Staff to approve of the final windows from the study. 10. Applicant to modify the driveway -walkway width and materials to meet Historic and Zoning code requirements. 11. Applicant to remove the keystone wall and any landscaping in front of the addition and historic structure. 12. Applicant to modify the enclosed loggia with clear glass panels that are placed in the historic openings to retain the original appearance of the loggia with piers. 13. Approval of this Application does not convey or grant any approvals for waivers, warrants, or exceptions pursuant to Chapter 23 of City of Miami Code of Ordinances. THIS DECISION IS FINAL UNLESS APPEALED IN THE HEARING BOARDS DIVISION WITHIN FIFTEEN (15) DAYS. Reviewed and Approved: Kenn Kalmis istoric Preservation Officer 5/5/2025 City of Miami Page 2 of 2 File ID: 17228 (Revision:) Printed On: 5/5/2025 City of Miami Planning Department Historic Preservation Office ANALYSIS FOR A SPECIAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICANT: Melissa Osendi PROJECT ADDRESS: 5935 Northeast 6 Court HEARING DATE: 3/4/2025 COMMISSION DISTRICT: District 2 (Damian Pardo) FILE ID: PZ-24-18260 ZIP: 33137 TDRs: No COE on file STATUS: Contributing A. GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: Pursuant to Section 23-6.2(b)(4) of the City Code of Ordinance, the Applicant is requesting a Special Certificate of Appropriateness (SCOA) to permit for an addition and after - the fact alterations and site improvements to a contributing, single-family residential structure located on a parcel zoned T3-R "Sub -Urban Transect Zone -Restricted." The subject property is located within the Morningside Historic District, Bay Shore Subdivision, and the Upper Eastside Area. The site is located on the east side of Northeast 6 Court between Northeast 59 and 60 Streets. (Complete legal description is on file with Hearing Boards) Folio: 0132180310450 Lot Size: Approximately 8,150 sq. ft. B. BACKGROUND: On January 24, 1924, the City Council of Miami, pursuant to Ordinance No. 63, approved the Bay Shore sub -division in Section 18, Township 53 south, Range 42 East in the City of Miami establishing block 7 lots 24 to 28, also known as 5935 Northeast 6 Court. On July 17, 1984, the Heritage Conservation Officer signed Resolution HC-84-23 finding that the Morningside Historic District met criteria for designation and recommended to the City Commission use of a Heritage Conservation Overlay District in an area in which the subject property is located at 5935 Northeast 6 Court. On October 9, 2001, the property was issued a SCOA for replacement of and alteration to windows on the front facade of the house. The jalousie window at the front of the house was replaced with a C. Chiang 03/04/25 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 single-lite casement window and the jalousie living room window within the front courtyard with single-lite French doors with two single-lite side panels. In 2018, the front window was returned to a garage door. In addition, the concrete driveway and walkway were replaced with pavers and the loggia of the entryway adjacent to the garage was enclosed without a permit or COA (#00112265). Driveways in historic districts are ten feet in width. The minimum width for the Zoning Department is twelve feet in width. The driveway is larger than historic requirement and should match driveways of the historic district. The driveway width and the paver material should also meet Zoning code requirements. C. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The subject property is part of a designated historic district. Pursuant to Goal LU-2, 2.3 and 2.4 of the Miami Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan, the City will preserve and protect the heritage of the City of Miami through the identification, evaluation rehabilitation, adaptive reuse, restoration and public awareness of Miami's historic and archeological resources. The Applicant's request to permit an addition and after -the -fact alterations and site improvements to a non-contributing, residential structure is not in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 23 of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances, the Secretary of Interior Standards, the Preservation Office Historic Design Guidelines, and Miami 21 Code. D. PHOTOS: Historic Photograph C. Chiang 03/04/25 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 Page 2 of 14 2015 (before unpermitted alterations of loggia and driveway/walkway) Current Photographs C. Chiang 03/04/25 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 Page 3 of 14 C. Chiang 03/04/25 Enclosed Loggia or Side Porch Entrance Doors, Location of Original Picture Window of Living Room to the Front Yard 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 Page 4 of 14 C. Chiang 03/04/25 Historic Tax Card . • • • • + + s • * a 3. 7 G. • +l • f t f f . ▪ I [c F. '`i- I • •.27. i .. . .a w I ► • ed • • a • r w ■ • • • AC y I 1 r i • '. • • • U.i : 4 r JI I :"r.PVC. • ' • • a ■ N * . ■ I ' w ■ • 4 . 17 • ■ ■ • 4 • • • 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 Page 5 of 14 Proposed Plans Note: The enclosed loggia or foyer is in the scope of work to be reviewed. First Floor 20FTFRONTSETBACK Second Floor C. Chiang 03/04/25 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 Page 6 of 14 Proposed Roof Plan u 4J Proposed Walkway, Driveway, Landscaping, and Wall Note: The existing driveway and walkway is in the scope of work to be reviewed. I �I II I C. Chiang 03/04/25 E 1intglaming �o reInaln. ▪ Kcy lone walk —T nri r•, a▪ - rt 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 REX 5 ga 101HLA 7 3 gal. Page 7 of 14 C. Chiang 03/04/25 Existing Elevations West Elevation EXISTING CONCRETE TILE ROOF TO REMAIN, U.N.O 1 r I 0 —_ [ I fl II III//E\\Ill II h Ilk I I I It I I III -I L—I lL�-�VJL J1 I_! El ------- I I I -I I I -I I I -I I I -I 11-1 11-1 I I -I 1 I -I I 1-I 1 1 -1 I North Elevation (STING TRELLIS TO MAIN South Elevation AND WALL MOVED TO-, N LAYOUT 11� ( I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I �1 r1 II/ \II I1/ III EMOVED IL _ L_J I111� 11111111111111111 II111111111111 flll lllIII lllIII l 1 II11 11I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I II1 EXISTING CHIMNEY TO REMAIN EXISTING PAINTING STUCCO - TO REMAIN r11 II I I EXISTING WINDOWS AND DOORS TO REMAIN. NOT IN - SCOPE, U.N.Q. _ _ III11 IIIII11111111 111111II 1 1 1 I 1 1 III 6 1 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 Page 8 of 14 C. Chiang 03/04/25 Proposed Elevations West Elevation CCO TO MATCH XISTING COLOR IEW CONCRETE - - ROW. REFER TO STRUCTURAL IONT DOOR AND EFER TO SCHED 1 EGRE IMF WII EXI ALi DE II fll I III III �� Iltl III IIII III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII —III III North Elevation CONCRETE TILE ROOF TO MATCH EXISTING IMPACT RATED WINDOW/DOORS TO MATCH - EXISTING. REFER TO SCHED. N IIII-Iilk I 11 III III II11 11 41.1 11 11 South Elevation H PAINTED STUCCO TO MATCH EXISTING COLOR IMPACT RATED INOO WIOOORS TD MATCH EXISTING. REFER TO SCHED. 'F W12 I -I I -I I -I ; I--1 I I-III-III-1 11-- -I I I I I -I f I-1 I -II -II - IIIIIIIIIII-III III.IIIIIII 11 11 11 11 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 .illlll�lllll��llll�l _ Page 9 of 14 E. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: ZONING Subject Property T3-R: Sub -Urban Transect Zone -Restricted (Morningside Historic District) Surrounding Properties NORTH: T3-R: Sub -Urban Transect Zone -Restricted (Morningside Historic District) SOUTH: T3-R: Sub -Urban Transect Zone -Restricted (Morningside Historic District) EAST: T3-R: Sub -Urban Transect Zone -Restricted (Morningside Historic District) WEST: T3-R: Sub -Urban Transect Zone -Restricted (Morningside Historic District) F. ANALYSIS: FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Single -Family — Residential Maximum of 2-5 D.U. per acre Single -Family — Residential Maximum of 2-5 D.U. per acre Single -Family — Residential Maximum of 2-5 D.U. per acre Single -Family — Residential Maximum of 2-5 D.U. per acre Single -Family — Residential Maximum of 2-5 D.U. per acre The following is a review of the request pursuant to Section 23-6.2(b)(4) and Section 23-6.2(h) of the City Code of Ordinances, the Preservation Office Historic Design Guidelines, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, and Miami 21 Code. Analysis: The applicant is requesting a Special Certificate of Appropriateness (SCOA) to permit for an addition, and after -the -fact alterations and site improvements to a single-family structure, at a non-contributing property located at 5935 Northeast 6 Court, within the Morningside Historic District. C. Chiang 03/04/25 The property located at 5935 Northeast 6 Court contains a 1946 Minimal Traditional/ Ranch house. It is one-story, asymmetrically massed with L-shaped fagade with entry loggia on the side, and of concrete block and adobe brick construction (per tax card) sheathed in stucco. The garage is on the north end of the west elevation and is covered by a hipped roof. The plan was organized around an enclosed porch and a rear fiberglass roofed porch that has been recently enclosed. The hipped roof was sheathed in flat concrete tile. The structure featured a large picture window with view of the front yard that has been converted to French doors with side panels. As per the applicant's Letter of Intent, the scope of work includes a two-story, rectangular - shaped addition of a bedroom and bathroom in front of the single-family structure, the enclosure of the loggia, and the new driveway and walkway. The west elevation faces 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 Page 10 of 14 the right-of-way. The Applicant proposed a new wall and landscaping in front of the house. Per Section 23-6.2(h)(1) of the City Code of Ordinances, as amended: C. Chiang 03/04/25 Guidelines for issuing certificates of appropriateness. 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, historic district, or multiple property designation. • Form — The proposed undertaking will alter the primary structure's form. The massing is extended forward, upward, and alters the original structure. The proposed addition is two-story and situated in front of the existing structure, thus altering the relationship to the frontage and neighboring properties. Furthermore, the proposed roof with no eaves will have significant visual impact as viewed from the right-of-way. The addition will alter the overall form of the existing structure given its massing, height, and location in front of the original structure. The loggia was a character -defining feature of the historic structure. The enclosure should have been done in a historically sensitive way to preserve the piers. The driveway and walkway were combined into one width that exceeds the maximum width allowed when they are historically separated and only ten feet in width for the driveway and two feet for the walkway. Similar forms to the addition are found within the Morningside Historic District. • Spacing — The proposed undertaking encroaches onto the front of the lot that will decrease the spacing of the existing structure to the neighboring property to the southeast as viewed from the public right of way along Northeast 6 Court. The proposed addition will encroach onto the front yard and alter the visual relationship of the structure to the front yard through a large opening. The addition is not set back from the primary frontage and therefore changes the property's relationship to the street and neighbor. The average setback of the block is 27 feet and the dominant setback of the block face is 30 feet. The proposed addition is at 20 feet. The spacing of the proposed addition is not in keeping with the context of the Morningside Historic District. • Height — The proposed undertaking will increase the overall height of the structure. The style of the structure is a ranch style that is characterized by a horizontal shape 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 Page 11 of 14 and one-story height. The height of the new addition is not in keeping with the historic structure. Two-story properties are seen in other properties in the district. • Yards — The proposed undertaking alters the front yard and its relationship to neighboring properties. The proposed undertaking will reduce the front yard as seen from the street. The average setback of the block is 27 feet and the dominant setback of the block face is 30 feet. The proposed addition is at 20 feet. The property does not maintain the front setback and is not consistent with the Morningside Historic District. • Materials — The use of flat cement tile, stucco, fixed windows, pavers, and French doors is consistent with the Morningside Historic District and does not detract from neighboring properties. • Color — The proposed colors to match the existing structure are consistent with the Morningside Historic District and do not detract from neighboring properties. • Rhythm and pattern of windows and door openings — The proposed undertaking will add new windows on the primary (west) and side (north and south) elevations. The fenestration of the addition is visible from the right of way and does not follow the widely spaced rhythm of the original windows and doors on the sides of the addition. The original windows are shorter and wider than the new windows. The window to wall ratio of the historic structure is not maintained in the addition's side elevations. This is different than the original fenestration and does materially detract from the neighboring properties. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards recommends: "Returning a property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural, and cultural value" and "designing new construction on a historic site or in a historic setting that is compatible but differentiated from the historic building or buildings." The Morningside Historic District Guidelines recommends: C. Chiang 03/04/25 Alterations shall be appropriate to the age and period of the building and should not seek to create a false appearance. Contemporary design for alterations and additions to existing buildings must be compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the building and neighborhood. Distinctive stylistic features which characterize a building or neighborhood shall be treated with sensitivity. Certain building features, regardless of the age of the building, are important in defining the overall character of the Morningside Historic District. 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 Page 12 of 14 The proposed undertaking, the addition of a two-story, rectangular -shaped addition at the front, the enclosure of the loggia, and the replacement of the driveway and walkway, does not meet the Historic Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. It will increase the massing and form at the street -facing space of the lot. The addition will encroach onto the front setback, where the houses on the block have larger setbacks and this type of house was designed to open onto landscaping in the front yard. This addition would disrupt the historic setback, design, and plan of this house. Contemporary design for additions to existing buildings must be compatible and at the rear of the property. Therefore, based on the Design Guidelines the addition should be subordinate to the primary structure. Furthermore, the after -the -fact alterations destroyed a character -defining feature of the historic structure's style and plan. The enclosure of the loggia should have preserved the piers. The after -the -fact site improvements are not compatible with the district. The driveway and walkway are wider than the maximum width allowed in the historic district. The proposed undertaking is not compatible in form, spacing, height, yards, and rhythm of windows and doors with its historic setting. It is compatible in materials and color. The proposed addition and after -the -fact alterations and site improvements do not comply with the above criteria and will adversely affect the character of the structure or district. Findings: Not Consistent. G. NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES: Building N/A Environmental Resources No Objections Zoning No Objections H. CONCLUSION: The application has not demonstrated compliance with Chapter 23 entitled "Historic Preservation" of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. Staff finds the request does not comply with all applicable criteria and finds that the request for a Special Certificate of Appropriateness to permit an addition, and after -the -fact alterations and site improvements does adversely affect the historic, architectural, or aesthetic character of the site subject to the following conditions as stipulated in subsection "I" entitled "Recommendation" as listed below. However, in recognition of the HEP Board's agency and deliberative process which may result in approval of the above stated request, the following conditions are suggested. 1. The site shall be developed in accordance with the plans as prepared by Fornaris Pau & Associates, LLC submitted as part of application PZ-24-18260. The plans are deemed as being incorporated by reference herein. 2. At time of permitting and/or sub -permitting, manufacturer's brochures or color photographs of proposed design elements and materials including but not limited to windows, doors, railings, roofing, etc. shall be submitted for approval. C. Chiang 03/04/25 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 Page 13 of 14 3. All glass to be clear and/or Low-E. Tinted, and/or opaque glass is not allowed. 4. The Resolution shall be included in the master permit set. 5. The Applicant shall comply with its the "Preliminary Zoning Review — HEP Review" and all applicable requirements of the Miami 21 Code and Chapter 17, Chapter 23 of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances. 6. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of all department/agencies as part of the City of Miami building permit submittal process. 7. Applicant to restudy the front setback and use the average setback of 27 feet of the block face and the second -floor massing should be pushed back and utilize the dominant setback of 30 feet. The additional setback helps to offset the massing and is similar to the massing found on the block face. 8. Applicant to restudy the roof and match the eave line (depth) and roof pitch to that of the one-story massing. Staff to approve of the final roof design from the study. 9. Applicant to restudy the window to wall ratio, especially at the side elevations. The window to wall ratio should mimic the rhythm and proportions of openings found on contributing structures in the district. Staff to approve of the final windows from the study. 10. Applicant to modify the driveway -walkway width and materials to meet Historic and Zoning code requirements. 11. Applicant to remove the keystone wall and any landscaping in front of the addition and historic structure. 12. Applicant to modify the enclosed loggia with clear glass panels that are placed in the historic openings to retain the original appearance of the loggia with piers. 13. Approval of this Application does not convey or grant any approvals for waivers, warrants, or exceptions pursuant to Chapter 23 of City of Miami Code of Ordinances. I. RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 23-6.2(b)(4) of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances as amended and the Secretary of Interior Standards, the Preservation Office recommends denial of the Special Certificate of Appropriateness. C. Chiang 03/04/25 5935 NE 6 Ct File No. PZ-24-18260 nneth Kalmis Preservation Officer Page 14 of 14