HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal-Elvis Cruz-Guidelines, Fact Sheet & LettersSubmitted into theublic�]
recordfi r it - `n`(s) L1, i L
City of Miami Code, Ch. 23-6.2(h)(1) on 1 I 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
Submitted into the public (j
record fi r it (s)
on 9 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
record
HISTORIC AND°n � [
ENVIRONMEN AL FRES City Clerk
FACT SHEET ERVATION 130ARD
NAME
ADDRESSM0mingside
Historic District
545 NE 55th Terrace
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
ew zl Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for t
4?e!xf Stngle ,aritisy-eslderre. he ecns�rcion
of a
ANALYSIS
Because of the
Preservation off- Potentialfor a perceived conflict of interes
aPPlication. r has recused
herself from t, the
This application was reviewed b the review of
Committee of the Ptannin this
Planning the Design
and Zoning lie. ^,+ ,,_Y Review
n
.t,r-F u.
The applicant is
the north side to construct a nets
Of NE 55'� house on a vacant lot on
Primarily mason Terrace. Existing houses on this
masonry vernacular
stories. street are
in style, and height varies from ore to two
Houses are typically constriactad
rcc„a.
of ,"o ,
u 1"3 With j`Irt Of barrel the
The proposed design
for the house is found to be inconsistent
Of size and scale, with the character of neighboring
erms
street and on the , in the
same lot size.
Post 1941 buildings that ares The character o he street consistsame
ame
the architectural matt, single family
Charar liar of diSct_
residences that respet
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and zoning Department recam,-7iends we recommends
the application be continued
in
order to allow thea that
or deferred with the consent of the
address the concerns aPPlicant the opportunity
to design the building
raised by staff. g b adding to
to
Item #1
March 19, 2002
y.NWP►
.fes' AW .r 1! "oam
An& mow Am iW Wit
am • 'r mow
MW VMWAWMWW
I* Ist,20M
Submitted into thepublic �„ .
recordTr ite ](s) �'
on , City Clerk
Morningside Civic Association
City of Miami Commission
444 5W 2nd Avenge, 3rd Floor
Miami, FL 33330
Subject: - s s NE SS Teir— Canstmcion of a Tier Sln fe i=aanilV ltorne
Dear Commissioners:
The Morningside Civic Association Board at its ,lune t4, 2016 meeting voted to support our
Arnhitetst<►►ai Review Committee in opposing the current design Of a proposed home at 545
550i Terrace, as incompatible with the historic clis-t�ict.
The committee offered multiple constructive observations for evolution of the project to "make it
more congruous within the historic district and less ofi what is bein
Perceived
square-
ish' rectangular concrete box with screens." The committee's full letter to the HEPB is attached.
The MCA board respectftglY request that the commission overturn the Certificate of
Apt Less of the ,- cele at: this brie.
Sincerely,
Marc Billings
President
Submitted into the public
recI�ML
�,
on . City Clerk
i
AM AW i ►
AW A M
MW Morningside Civic Association-
Architectural Review Committee
David Holtzman
Robert Grabosl?i
Naomi Burt
Elvis Cruz
Cyril Bijaoui
15 September 2016
City of Miami Commissioners
3500 Fan American Drive
Miami, FL 33130
Dear Commissioners:
The Morningside Civic Association's (MCA) Architectural Review Committee (ARC) has reviewed the
subject COA for this proposed new, approximateiy 3500 sq. ft. single family home can a 6,660 sq. ft.
interior lot Oncorrectl;E 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 clay file screen. The
coral stone finish was removed from storage closet and garage fare and replaced with stucco finish.
According to the appl; ably Historic Distnrt guid-Nnes:
"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 fr it n(s)
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 fagade is capped with a stucco band and an even higher
parapet for the mechanical equipment is beyond.
When lo` Lina :)t sEErcessful vPrsbnS of modcrri archEtf cture the visual interest an.--' 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 stele 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 heilt ojill "he 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:
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-
No
rogort on-
Mwi
HASS
141411 2. Ta
IN
TThe two-story s assin e' rk! from side setback to side setback along the front build nlg lines
.._ t.._ sro:� m� .a �_ n��:..; _ E^._..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.
rr The massing has a stucco finish for walls, handrails, parapets, moldings and sills. The clay accent
tile will enclose the porch and ground -floor windows and cover the window on the second floor,
Icaving the doors to the balcony vrhich sit behind the stucco parapet as the only norn obstructed
glass in stucco facade.
2
Submitted into the ptdblic�_�114�
recur fprit (s) _
on I I I C'i1y Clerk
Perch Enclosures -
"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 cis Page 71
Windows:
"Covering Windows or changing the muntin pattern by removing or adding muntins is
discouraged" -- [HP Guideline attached as Page 81
a The clear glass .',indo vs and covered b; clay accent tiles and there is limited fenestration or clear
glass in windows visible from the street. This is out of scale with the neighborhood and the
amount of unembellished 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
`s eIkgvaIs and dreg s of making thEEr iv €e= their We a.e ot€Ea -u vatEt the ;bate`r:e..
"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 modern design with elements of the Art Deco —
JAI eaIdiEE9 ie iiiovL-'idi+riil, With a i7i.3d Lo iYi L.UiLerra71CCili rnaE.CiEa 7s. iii73mixing of sLyiCs sadly
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
Historic
Di d • this a G ! i_._�
preservation i3tieS Eiji the I71stCirfl, ul�JtrlLt, ai�ili Ei'i Ei1VJt f.a3C3 we ull LIIP3 without Elil.i(.iP i7CIgiPl3LJi
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 ivith the applicant in an attempt to find some middle ground, they have 77
51110 11 tei7'iperailiCe aiiu iiite liguan .e ti'itli thle Ilope that tiie'ir concerns would be in Sonne a --y mutigated-
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 complex 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
3
Submitted into theublic
recon or it m(s) P & �b
on 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 clesign-
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 comn-tentary is constructive and results in the re -evolution of this design with the Bl=ip
Board having another chance to review.
Sincerely,
Architectural Review Committee
4