The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPre-publication Submittal C. Lago dated 07-10-19mGreen bergTraurig July 10, 2019 Via Email Honorable Chairman and Commissioners City of Miami Commission 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33133 Carlos R. Lago Tel 305.579.0578 Fax 305.579.0717 lagoc(a�,gtlaw.com Re: Appeal of City of Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board's Approval of Special Certificate of Appropriateness for the property located at 5965 NE 6 Avenue, Miami, Florida (Folio No. 01-3218-034-0080) / Resolution No. HEPB-R-19-018 / File ID 5901 Dear Honorable Chair and Commissioners: Our firm represents PIM INVESTMENTS, LLC (the "Applicant") in connection with the proposed construction of a single-family home at the property located at 5965 NE 6 Avenue, Miami, Florida (the "Property"). The Applicant hereby respectfully requests that the City of Miami (the "City") Commission (the "Commission") dismiss the appeal of Resolution No. HEPB- R-19-018 (the "Resolution"), attached as Exhibit 1, filed by appellants Peter R. Wagoner and Michelle Beauvais -Wagoner (the "Wagoners" or the "Appellants"). A copy of the appeal letter is attached as Exhibit 2. As explained below, the Appellants have no standing to appeal the Resolution because they are not aggrieved parties. INTRODUCTION On April 30, 2019, Jose Manuel Belsol, Mariana Evora, and the Wagoners filed an appeal letter with the City challenging the City's Historic and Environmental Preservation Board's (the "HEP Board") April 2, 2019 approval of a Special Certificate of Appropriateness (the "Special COA") for the construction of a new single-family home at the Property (the "Proposed Residence"). On June 24, 2019, Jose Manuel Belsol and Mariana Evora formally withdrew their appeal. A copy of the withdrawal letter is attached as Exhibit 3. BACKGROUND The Applicant owns the Property which was the subject of the Resolution. The Property is a vacant site located within the City's Morningside Historic District. The Property consists of two (2) platted lots and is zoned T3 -R under Miami 21. The Property is instantly recognizable for its mature tree canopy, comprised in part by a specimen Slash Pine Tree located in the center of the Property and several large live oak trees. The Proposed Residence was designed to integrate the GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP ■ ATTORNEYS AT LAW ■ WWW.GTLAW.COM 333 Southeast Second Avenue ■ Miami, FL 33131 ■ Tel 305-579-0500 ■ Fax 305-579-0717 ADMIN 353018970 Honorable Chairman and Commissioners 5965 NE 6 Avenue HEPB-R-19-018 File ID 5901 July 10, 2019 majority of the specimen trees within the design (for example, the specimen Pine tree is in the center of the entry court) and to ensure that the architecture remains visually subordinate to the landscape. On April 2, 2019, the HEP Board considered and approved the Applicant's request for a Special COA for the construction of the Proposed Residence on the Property. The Proposed Residence consists of a single-family home with one (1) and two (2) story elements connected by roofed passageways. This fractured design was dictated by the preservation of the existing tree canopy on the site and to integrate existing trees and vegetation. The design of the Proposed Residence was inspired by the history and character of the Morningside neighborhood. The Morningside Historic District Designation Report describes the district as containing an eclectic mix of architectural styles. One of the architectural styles found in Morningside is tropical modernism, best resembled by the Alfred Browning Parker designed residence located at 5555 North Bayshore Drive. The Proposed Residence respects and embraces the spirit and direction of architectural design of the Morningside historic district—specifically in terms of scale, non -intrusive design, setback, and quality workmanship—and is directly inspired by the Alfred Browning Parker home and other homes in the historic neighborhood. Fundamentally tropical in terms of its narrow footprint, connection to the outdoors, natural materials and passive design strategies, the Proposed Residence continues the neighborhood's legacy of expression and celebration of landscape. Section 23-6.2(h) of the City Code of Ordinances (the "City Code") authorizes the HEP Board to approve new construction in a historic district where the proposed new construction does not adversely affect 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 district. The City's Preservation Officer found that the Proposed Residence complied with all the applicable criteria of the City Code and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and recommended approval of the Special COA. Following more than an hour of discussion among HEP Board members and input from the public, the HEP Board followed the Preservation Officer's recommendation and approved the Special COA. Mr. Peter Wagoner, who owns the property located at 5955 NE 6 Avenue, Miami, Florida (directly south of the Property), appeared before the HEP Board on April 2, 2019 and expressed his opposition to the Proposed Residence. Mrs. Wagoner did not attend the HEP Board meeting. GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP ■ ATTORNEYS AT LAW ■ WWW.GTLAW.COM 2 ADMIN 353018970 Honorable Chairman and Commissioners 5965 NE 6 Avenue HEPB-R-19-018 File ID 5901 July 10, 2019 MEMORANDUM OF LAW L Appellants are not an aurieved party and have no standing to appeal the Resolution. Under Section 23-6.2(e) of the City Code, only the applicant, the City's Planning Department, or an "aggrieved party" have standing to appeal a decision of the HEP Board. The issue of standing is a threshold inquiry which must be made at the outset of a proceeding before addressing [the merits]."' In other words, before the City Commission considers the merits of the Appellants' appeal, it must determine the threshold issue of whether the Appellants are an "aggrieved party" who have standing to challenge the Resolution. Absent standing to challenge the Resolution, the appeal must be dismissed since the Commission cannot properly review a HEP Board decision unless the appeal is filed by an "aggrieved party."2 In cases involving decisions made at a quasi-judicial proceeding, an "aggrieved party" is one who has a cognizable legal interest which is adversely affected by the decision being challenged.3 The cognizable legal interest must be definite and exceed the general interest of the community. Id. The factors considered to determine whether a person is an "aggrieved party" are: (1) proximity to the property which is the subject of the decision; (2) character of the neighborhood; (3) type of change being sought; and (4) whether the person challenging the decision was entitled to receive notice of the proposed action. Id. The Appellants do not possess a cognizable legal interest that will be adversely affected by the Resolution. The Proposed Residence does not modify the character of the neighborhood and does not involve a change in the regulations applicable to the Property. Additionally, Appellants were not one of the parties entitled to receive notice of the Special COA hearing for the Proposed Residence. As such, under Renard, the Appellants are not aggrieved parties and do not have standing to appeal the HEP Board's decision. Appellants may live near the Property but they do not meet any of the other factors required to establish aggrieved party status under the City Code and Florida law. As the court stated in Battaglia Fruit Co. v. City of Maitland, proximity to the subject property does not "in and of itself establish a legal interest adversely affected" by the Resolution.4 Since proximity alone is not sufficient to establish aggrieved party status, the Appellants must also demonstrate that they meet the other factors. In this case, Appellants do not meet any of the other factors required to establish standing and therefore are not "aggrieved parties." ' Ferreiro v. Philadelphia Indem. Ins., 928 So. 2d 374, 376 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006). 2 See Chabau v. Dade County, 385 So. 2d 129, 130 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) (holding that because an appellant was not an aggrieved parry, the Miami -Dade Board of County Commissioners could not review a lower board's decision "and any decision of the Commissioners would be void ab initio.'). See also Miami Dade County v. City of Miami, Case No. 18-32 (FLA. 11th Cir Ct. 2018). 3 Renard v. Dade County, 261 So.2d 832 (Fla. 1972). a See Battaglia Fruit Co. v. City of Maitland, 530 So. 2d 943, 944 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). GREEN13ERG TRAURIG, LLP ■ ATTORNEYS AT LAW ■ WWW.GTLAW.COM 3 ADMIN 353018970 Honorable Chairman and Commissioners 5965 NE 6 Avenue HEPB-R-19-018 File ID 5901 July 10, 2019 The Resolution and the Proposed Residence do not modify the character of the neighborhood. The Resolution approved the construction of a new single-family home on the Property which the Preservation Officer and the HEP Board found complied with the applicable criteria and is compatible with the historic neighborhood. Additionally, the Applicant presented the Proposed Home to the Morningside Civic Association's Architectural Review Committee which issued a letter in support of the HEP Board's approval of the Special COA. A copy of the Morningside Architectural Review Committee letter is attached as Exhibit 4. Accordingly, the City's Preservation staff, the HEP Board, and the Morningside Civic Association's Architectural Review Committee all found that the Proposed Residence is compatible with the Morningside neighborhood and therefore does not modify its character. Furthermore, the Applicant is not proposing any changes to the zoning regulations applicable to the Property. In fact, the Proposed Residence does not even maximize the available development capacity under the existing regulations. The Proposed Residence lot coverage is less than 40% of the maximum permitted. The open space provided is more than twice the required amount. The Proposed Residence also provides greater side and rear setbacks than those required by Miami 21. Finally, Appellants are not one of the parties that are required to receive notice of the Special COA. Under Section 23-6.2 of the City Code, a Special COA requires that notice be published in a newspaper of general circulation and mailed to registered homeowners and neighborhood associations. As demonstrated herein, Appellants are not aggrieved parties. Therefore, the Applicant kindly requests that the City Commission dismiss this appeal. Sincerely, 112 Z,�Zf & Carlos R. Lago Enclosures cc: Mr. Peter and Mrs. Michelle Beauvais -Wagoner Ms. Victoria Mendez, City Attorney Mr. Francisco Garcia, Planning and Zoning Director Mr. Warren Adams, Preservation Officer Ms. Olga Zamora, Chief of Hearing Boards Division GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP ■ ATTORNEYS AT LAW ■ WWW.GTLAW.COM 4 ADMIN 353018970 EXHIBIT 1 CIN 01''1' �tP1 City of Miami City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive o a •0 HEPB Resolution Miami, FL 33133 www.miamigov.com Enactment Number: HEPB-R-19-018 File Number: 5659 Final Action Date:4/2/2019 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD, PURSUANT TO SEC. 23-6.2(4) OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS A SPECIAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE NEW CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO-STORY SINGLE- - FAMILY STRUCTURE TO A NON-CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY, LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 5965 NORTHEAST 6 AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33137, WITHIN THE MORNINGSIDE HISTORIC DISTRICT; FURTHER, INCORPORATING THE FINDINGS IN THE STAFF ANALYSIS ATTACHED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT "A". The approval, as amended with the following conditions, is based on the project preserving the landscape at the lot, the property being located at the end of 6t" avenue, close to the Biscayne Boulevard border, making the property unobtrusive to the majority of eyes that view the Morningside Historic District, and fact that the Secretary of Interior Standards require that new projects not copy what exists but be inspired by them : 1. The site shall be developed pursuant to the plans as prepared by Brillhart Architecture, consisting of eighty-six (86) sheets submitted under PZ -19-2005. The plans are deemed as being incorporated by reference herein. 2. All glass shall be clear with the option of Low -E. 3. The Applicant shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Miami 21 Code, Chapter 17 and Chapter 23 of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances, as amended. 4. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of all applicable departments/agencies as part of the City of Miami building permit submittal process. 5. This Resolution shall be included in the master permit set. 6. The Applicant shall add a semi -permeable screen facing the street along the front covered walkway. 7. The Applicant shall comply with the conditions, as stipulated in the memo from Environmental Resources, attached hereto as Attachment "A" entitled, Inter -Office Memorandum. 8. Prior to the issuance of the Building permit, exploratory and root conditions of Tree #19 be observed by a certified arborist to ensure that irrigation and extra intrusive landscape not intrude upon Tree #19. 9. Brillhart Architecture will work with staff to figure out the proper extent of the boundary fence along Northeast 6 Avenue and the security issue at the Biscayne Boulevard west edge. THIS DECISION IS FINAL UNLESS APPEALED IN THE HEARING BOARDS DIVISION WITHIN FIFTEEN (15) DAYS. �a6u � ki QtY /i Preservation O Icer Date City of Miami Page 1 of 2 File ID: 5659 (Revision:) Printed On: 41312019 STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE ) Personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, \Kbtfer1 10�60, Y'f'�5, Preservation Officer of the City of Miami, Florida, and acknowledges that s/he executed the foregoing Resolution. SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS S� DAY OF Pr ` 2010! �S.%wict G-+oOZ.tf' z Print Notary Name A Notary Pu lic State of Florida Personally know V or Produced I.D. My Commission Expires: Type and number of I.D. produced Did take an oath or Did not take an oath •�•VPU 4, SILVIAGONZALEZ MY COMMISSION # GG 051561 1y� P EXPIRES: November 30, 2020 %�,�OF F��•• Bonded Thru Notary Public Underwrlters Illllt.•• City of Miami Page 2 of 2 File ID: 5659 (Revision:) Printed On: 41312019 APPLICANT: Andrew Aquart PROJECT ADDRESS:5965 NE 6 Ave NET OFFICE: Upper Eastside COMMISSION DISTRICT: District 2 (Ken Russell) STATUS: Contributing FILE ID: PZ -19-2005 ZIP: 33137 HEARING DATE: 4/2/2019 REQUEST: Pursuant to Section 23-6.2(b)(4) of the City Code of Ordinances, as amended, the Applicant is requesting a Special Certificate of Appropriateness to allow for the new construction of a single-family, residential structure located on a parcel zoned T3 -R "Sub -Urban Transect Zone", The subject property is located within the Morningside Historic District, Bayshore Subdivision and the Upper Eastside Net Area, The site is approximately the third parcel located on the Southeast quadrant of NE 601h Street, NE 6th Avenue, and Biscayne Boulevard. (Complete legal description is on file with Hearing Boards) Folio: 0132180340080 Lot Size: Approximately 15,321 sq. ft. ,M--MtT.'sIllr�l�1 On January 22nd, 1924, the Clerk of the Circuit Court, filed the Bayshore Subdivision, Revised, in Section 18, Township 53, Range 42 in the City of Miami establishing lot 8 and 9 of Block 6 also known as 5965 Northeast 6th Avenue, C. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The subject property is a vacant lot located within the Morningside 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, City of Miami r " Planning pari e t 'k Ica, UAM r Historic Preseratoi Office ti tiM1ti.�L� r APPLICANT: Andrew Aquart PROJECT ADDRESS:5965 NE 6 Ave NET OFFICE: Upper Eastside COMMISSION DISTRICT: District 2 (Ken Russell) STATUS: Contributing FILE ID: PZ -19-2005 ZIP: 33137 HEARING DATE: 4/2/2019 REQUEST: Pursuant to Section 23-6.2(b)(4) of the City Code of Ordinances, as amended, the Applicant is requesting a Special Certificate of Appropriateness to allow for the new construction of a single-family, residential structure located on a parcel zoned T3 -R "Sub -Urban Transect Zone", The subject property is located within the Morningside Historic District, Bayshore Subdivision and the Upper Eastside Net Area, The site is approximately the third parcel located on the Southeast quadrant of NE 601h Street, NE 6th Avenue, and Biscayne Boulevard. (Complete legal description is on file with Hearing Boards) Folio: 0132180340080 Lot Size: Approximately 15,321 sq. ft. ,M--MtT.'sIllr�l�1 On January 22nd, 1924, the Clerk of the Circuit Court, filed the Bayshore Subdivision, Revised, in Section 18, Township 53, Range 42 in the City of Miami establishing lot 8 and 9 of Block 6 also known as 5965 Northeast 6th Avenue, C. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The subject property is a vacant lot located within the Morningside 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 for the approval of new construction on a residential parcel is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 23 of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances, the Secretary of Interior Standards, and the Preservation Office Historic Design Guidelines. ION a 00 (OTC1111-11M CURRENT CONDITION: Street View 2019 191*01:10RAN] - E. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: ZONING Subject Property T3 -R Sub -Urban Transect Zone Restricted (Morningside Historic District) NORTH: T3 -R; Single Family Transect Zone (Morningside Historic District) SOUTH: T3 -R; Single Family Transect Zone (Morningside Historic District) EAST: T3 -R; Single Family Transect Zone (Morningside Historic District) WEST: T4-0: General Urban Transect Zone (MIMo/BiBo Historic District) FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Single Family Residential Maximum of 9 D,U. per acre Single Family Residential Maximum of 9 D.U. per acre Single Family Residential Maximum of 9 D.U, per acre Single Family Residential Maximum of 9 D.U. per acre Medium Density, Restricted Commercial Maximum of 36 D.U. per acre The following is a review of the request pursuant to 23-6,2(b)(4) of the City Code of Ordinances, the Preservation Office Historic Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, Analysis: The existing vacant parcel is located at NE 6th Avenue in the Morningside Historic District. The applicant is requesting the construction of a new single-family residence. The applicant has submitted plans for a two-story single-family residence of modern/contemporary design. The lot is currently a heavily wooded vacant lot, The proposed residence will face the Southwest with one and two-story building segments connected by elevated walkways and hallways, The front of the structure will contain a two- story garage connected to a single -story living space connected by a hallway to a two-story living space in the rear. Another hallway connects this space to a further living space that runs parallel to the front property line. The position of the structure creates a courtyard/garden in the center of the lot. The separation of the construction spaces is meant to reduce the impact of the new construction on the neighborhood's character and emphasize the green space. All spaces overlook the central green space through fixed glass windows. The front building segment at the southernmost corner of the property and the rear building segment to the north have glass fapades that lead to porches with tropical wood shutters. The inclusion of porches throughout the property pays homage to the front porches found on Miami's historic properties. Inclusion of wood shutters along the walkways and porches camouflages the modern fagade, further allowing the new construction to be an unobtrusive addition to the architectural rhythm of the street. The proposed new construction has a flat roof, The one-story building segments will contain a green roof, The green roof is a grass covered roof that is intended to visually lower the impact of the new construction on the neighborhood as well as reduce the temperature of the structure, The roof plan of the two-story building segment to the North depicts solar panels. The incorporation of a stem wall foundation, elevated walkways, and segmented building spaces are designed to protect the critical root zones of existing trees on site. The Applicant intends to keep most of the trees on site, with few relocations and removals. Environmental Resources Staff at the City of Miami has reviewed the plans and have provided comments (Attachment "A"), Environmental Resources Staff has. expressed concern for the critical root zone of nearby trees they have made the following recommendation and/or comments: 1. Foundation plan will be necessary to view any impacts to critical root zones 2. Certified Arborist should be on-site to monitor construction activity 3. Tree protection plan is required for the protection of all trees on site. Tree protection should be depicted and to scale around existing trees both on-site and in the right- of-way. Dimensions should be determined by a Certified Arborist (when applicable) to ANSI A300 Part 5: "Managing Trees During Construction" standards, Detail/fencing material should be in accordance to the Miami -Dade County Landscape Manual section "Landscape Details - Tree Protection and Support" and superimposed on the plan set for final approval (Sec. 17-7; City of Miami), Tree Protection depiction on site should be depicted in accordance with Miami -Dade County's Landscape Manual, I.e. square/angular vs circular, Ensure that 'existing hardscape is considered, and protection fencing is depicted in a reasonable manner. Tree protection should be on-site prior to construction and not removed until construction has completed. 4. Staff recommends no ground disturbing activity, including landscape improvements, irrigation, grade changes, columns, walls, or anything with a footer within the tree protection zone of tree #19. Plans depict the installation of new walls along the rear and side property lines. The front elevation depicts a new 6' tall metal vertical picket fence set back from the front property line by 5ft. Though non -conforming to the Morningside Design Guidelines regarding fences, Staff does not object to a metal picket fence in the front yard. A metal picket will allow visibility from the street in to the property. A masonry wall would create too much of a visual distraction from the street, Zoning Staff at the City of Miami has reviewed the plans and have identified an issue with regards to compliance of Article 5, Section 5,14(c) of Miami21 Zoning Code: "Covered parking and garages and at least fifty percent (50%) of required parking shall be located within the Second and Third layers as shown in Article 4, Table 8; in T3 -R and T31 a maximum thirty percent of the width of the Fagade may be covered parking," To come into compliance with the fapade covered parking requirements the Applicant should add a semi -permeable screen wall facing the street along the. front covered walkway. Plans depict a narrow pool to the rear of the property and not visible from the right-of-way. Findings: Consistent Code Compliance Building NET Environmental Resources Art in Public Places Zoning H. CONCLUSION: No Objection Required No Objection Approval with conditions pursuant to Attachment "A" No Objection No Objection The application has 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 complies with all applicable criteria and finds that the request for a Special Certificate of Appropriateness for alterations does not adversely affect the historic, architectural, or aesthetic character of the subject structure or the aesthetic interest or value of the historic district subject to the following conditions as stipulated in subjection "I" entitled "Recommendation" as listed below, 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 Approval with Conditions of the Special Certificate of Appropriateness, 1. The site shall be developed pursuant to the plans as prepared by Brillhart Architecture, consisting of eighty-six (86) sheets submitted under PZ -19-2005. The plans are deemed as being incorporated by reference herein. 2. All glass shall be clear with the option of Low -E, 3. The Applicant shall comply with all applicable requirements of the -Miami 21 Code, Chapter 17 and Chapter 23 of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances, as amended. 4, The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of all applicable departments/agencies as part of the City of Miami building permit submittal process, 5. This Resolution shall be included in the master permit set, 6, The Applicant shall add a semi -permeable screen wall facing the street along the front covered walkway. 7. The Applicant shall comply with the conditions, as stipulated in the memo from Environmental Resources, attached hereto as Attachment "A" entitled, Inter -Office Memorandum. L\ Warren Adams Preservation Officer Attachment "A" 579 IRTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Wendy Sczechowicz Historic Preservation Planner FROM: Kyle Brudzinski environmental Resources Specialist DATE: 3/12/19 FILE: PZ -19-2005 SUBJECT. New Construction REFERENCES: 5965 NE 6 Ave logo= Environmental Resources has reviewed the proposed new construction at 5965 NE 6 Avenue. In response to this review, the following are Staff's recommendation(s) and/or comments: 1. Foundation plan will be necessary to view any impacts to critical root zones 2. Certified Arborist should be on-site to monitor construction activity 3. Tree protection plan is required for the protection of all trees on site. Tree protection should be depicted and to scale around existing trees both on-site and in the right-of-way. Dimensions should be determined by a Certified Arborist (when applicable) to ANSI A300 Part 5: "Managing Trees During Construction" standards. Detail/fencing material should be in accordance to the Miami -Dade County Landscape Manual section "Landscape Details - Tree Protection and Support" and superimposed on the plan set for final approval (Sec. 17-7; City of Miami). Tree Protection depiction on site should be depicted in accordance with Miami -Dade County's Landscape Manual. Le, square/angular vs circular. Ensure that existing hardscape is considered, and protection fencing is depicted in a reasonable manner. Tree protection should be on-site prior to construction and not removed until construction has completed, 4. Staff recommends no ground disturbing activity, including landscape improvements, irrigation, grade changes, columns, walls, or anything with a footer within the tree protection zone of tree #19. EXHIBIT 2 PPE LS- Historic Preservation If a qns on a weekend or a holiday, the appeal period end date will be the close of business the I 'n pp. 5' lbwin a, usin 6 y. # If any appeal is late, missing full payment, missing property owner labels, or missing any other ',necessaryf ' t the appeal cannot be accepted.# Certified list of adjacent property owner labels are . .....documents, to be par6d'by the appellant and submitted at the time of the appeal submission. # Only withdrawal letters shall be accepted outside of an appeal period. # Rescheduling fees indicated in Section 62-23 (d) shall apply. 0 Emailed appeals are not accepted; appeals to be submitted at the Hearing Boards Division, M -F (except holidays), 8 am to 5 pm. # Appeals must be written in English. # Appeal fees are non-refundable.. Appeal to City Commission (Indicate one): J Certificate of Appropriateness [Sec 23-6.2(e)] Ll Final designation [Sec 23-4(c)(3)a-e AND Sec 23-4 (c)(7)] M Yes 0 No Is it within the 15 -day appeal period, from date of renderin6Wf HEPB decision' If No, cannot be accepted. If Yes: Ed Yes U No Q N/A Appeal letter indicating HEPB Resolution Ii o. to 'H':` aring Boards, copying Preservation Officer 5dYes L1 No Ll N/A Certified list of adjacent owners (labels) witHM-15-pofeet and signed preparer form Sec 23-4(c)(3)a-e U Yes Ll No Ll N/A Proof of Payment of qpplic&b4p, tops Sec 23-4 (q)(7) Ll Yes Ll No VN/A Proof of Lobbyist Reclistration'(-If,-applicable, must provide proof prior to hearing) Sec. 2-654 Ll Yes LJ No I N/A Valid Power of Attorney (If applicab1g;M'must provide proof prior to hearing) U Yes 0 No 21 N/A Proof of Board",) solution If applicable, must provide proof prior to hearing) DS Rev. 01.31.2019 Peter R. Wagoner Michele Beauvais -Wagoner 5955 NE 6t" Avenue Miami, Florida 33137 CITY OF MIAMI HEARING BOARDS DEPARTMENT 444 SW 2 AVENUE, 3RD FLOOR MIAMI. FLORIDA 33130 RE: RESOLUTION NO. HEPB—R-19-018 FILE ID PZ -19-205 PROJECT ADDRESS: 5965 NE 6T" AVE April 30, 2019 To City of Miami Hearing Boards Department: This letter constitutes our notice of appeal of the Special Certificate of Appropriateness (SCOA) to allow the new construction of a single-family, residential structure located at 5965 NE 6th Avenue, on a parcel zoned T3 -R "Sub -Urban Transect Zone", awarded by the City of Miami HEP Board on April 2, 2019 (the "Project"). We own and live in the home immediately abutting this property to the south, at 5955 NE 6th Avenue. We attended the HEPB meeting held April 2, 2019, and gave comments along with other members of the community. HEPB granted the SCOA, dismissing the public's concerns and applying incorrect standards. We have been aggrieved by this action and therefore seek an appeal. Our appeal challenges, among other things; (1) the front set -back of the Project, (2) the placement, height and types of the proposed perimeter fencing, and (3) that the Project adversely effects the historic, architectural and aesthetic character of the neighboring structures and the Morningside historic district, including form, spacing, height, yards, materials, color, rhythm, pattern and placement of windows and doors, The setback to the front facade of all the homes on NE 6th Ave. north of 59th St. is 30 feet or greater. The Project as approved allows for only a 20 foot set -back. Due to the location of the Project within the Morningside Historic District, setback requirements should not merely comply with the minimum requirements of Miami 21 but should rather reflect the higher standard of the historic district in which it is located. (Pictures, drawings, etc. will be presented.) The front setback should not be less than the houses on either side. The Project calls for a variety of fencing materials, heights and locations. While the details are to a large part vague, they are all arguably inconsistent with and in contradiction to the Morningside Guidelines and are non -cohesive with existing features. Preservation Office Staff stated in its analysis that front yard fencing is "non -conforming to the Morningside Guidelines regarding fencing". The SCOA has been approved even though the plans for fencing are vague, incompatible with existing features of the abutting properties and in contradiction to the Morningside Guidelines. We request that approval of the fencing aspect of the SCOA be returned to the Preservation Staff for re-evaluation, clarification and revision, including collaboration with adjoining property owners, as needed. We request that the Approval of the Special Certificate of Appropriateness be amended or set aside in its entirety. We further reserve the right to amend, revise or withdraw our appeal. SINCERELY, PETER R. WAGONA MICHELE BEAUVAIS-WAGONER The undersigned Jose Manuel Belsol and Mariana Evora, live at 5966 NE 6 Avenue, Miami, FL 33137 which is directly across the street from the project address. We did not receive any notice of the HEP Board Hearing held on April 2, 2019, nor did we attend the hearing. We have been aggrieved by the action of the HEP Board and join in this appeal. We reserve the right to amend, revise or withdraw our joinder in this matter. Sincerely A Manuel Belsol Mariana Evora cc: Warren Adams, City of Miami Historic Preservation Officer 4/29/2019 https://secure35.ipayment.com/Miami/my/0/print version.htm?_DOUBLESUBMIT=fbxia3YX7fsog%2blUxD7XbztDVLyHIZn%2fPbku... Department of Finance Online Payments Receipt Your Reference Number: 2019119001-146 04/29/2019 1:12:21 PM Web—user TRANSACTIONS If you have a Transaction ID, please click here 2019119001-146-1 $917.00 TRANSID: 598347 BUSINESS NAME: COM Fee Payment $525.00 FEE NAME: APPEAL - HISTORIC DESIGNATION/ CERTIFICATE OF APPROPIATENESS Fee Payment $392.00 FEE NAME: PUBLIC HEARING - HISTORIC DESIGNATION/CERTIFI CATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPEAL MAILED NOTICE TOTAL AMOUNT: $917.00 PAYMENT Visa Credit Sale $917.00 CARD NUMBER: ************3958 FIRST NAME: Michele LAST NAME: Beauvais-``wa onerlI II II IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIfII1IIlIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIII) CE2019119001-146 hftps://secure35.ipayment.com/Miami/my/0/print version.htm?_DOUBLESUBMIT= fbxla3YX7fsog%2blUxD7XbztDVLyHIZn%2fpbkuVYPR6Uo%3d 1/1 ,k'Gl?Y Odd?Y * ixner uuu x C O TYtu xTf xx BUILDING DEPARTMENT Transaction Statement Financial Transaction ID: 598347 Peter R. Wagoner (Appeal) Transaction Date: Apr 17 2019 12:11 PM Permit Number: (305)765-6645 FEE SUMMARY Fee Category Fee Fee Description Quantity Unit Type Amount Code HEARING BOARDS - MS -239 APPEAL - HISTORIC 0.0000 N/A $525.00 APPLICATION/APPEAL DESIGNATION/CERTIFICATE OF APPROPIATENESS HEARING BOARDS - PUBLIC HEARING MS -240 PUBLIC HEARING - HISTORIC 112.0000 UNITS $392.00 DESIGNATION/CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPEAL MAILED NOTICE Total' $917.00 Rev. Jul/02/2012 Generated on Apr/17/2019 12:15 PM * 1 LSB! elill k L O R IV,9 Cfzttl of r�xxrYir BUILDING DEPARTMENT Transaction Statement Financial Transaction ID: 602112 Peter R. Wagoner (Appeal) Transaction Date: Apr 30 2019 4:04PM Permit Number: (305)765-6645 FEE SUMMARY Fee Category Fee Code Fee Description Quantity Unit Type Amount HEARING BOARDS - PUBLIC HEARING MS -240 PUBLIC HEARING - HISTORIC 12.0000 UNITS $42.00 DESIGNATION/CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPEAL MAILED NOTICE Total: $42.00 Rev. Jul/02/2012 Generated on Apr/30/2019 4:04 PM _............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ (Build Miami Hi Silvia 64 Manage Application I Reports I Miscellaneous I Payments ( Help Misc (lane inan al Transaction �enera°i n ormaiion 9 Permit Number *Requestor Name: Peter R. Wagoner (Appeal) Address 1: Address 2: City: j State: Florida Zip: l 1 Email: *Phone 1: (Oa ) 765 6645 Phone 2: (E1)D-L �1 Comments: Increase of mailed not from 80 to 92 Folio Number: Last Updated By: RIVI RSIDE\SilGO� Last Updated Date: Aprl3(12(31 g (� Financial Transaction Tx Created On Receipt Number Receipt Date Transaction Amount Print 602112 Apr/30/201916:04 2019120001-245 Apr/30/201916:09 Payment $42.00 Print Fee Category Fee Description Code Units Unit CodeFee Amount _................. _........................................................ -._........... ..................... ...... _................ ....... .-._.-.......... ..... -.-........... ....................... _... _..................... -........ ......... ..... _._....._.._._............. __..... ... __.... _.......... ._...... _........... _. HEARING BOARDS - PUBLIC PUBLIC HEARING - HISTORIC DESIGNATION/CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPEAL i MS -240 12 UNITS $42.00 HEARING MAILED NOTICE COPYRIGHT i0 2019 CITY OF MIAMI Best used with Internet Explorer 11 - Download I Download Acrobat Reader 1P User Working Online v.3.2019.422.1 Privacy Policy I Contact Us I Fee Guide mA b 01q Da e CITY OF MIAMI HEARING BOARDS MIAMI RIVERSIDE CENTER 444 SW 2ND AVENUE, 3RD FLOOR MIAMI, FLORIDA 33130 RE: Property Owner's List Within 500 Feet of: Street Address(es) Total number of labels without repetition:0 _Ig�� I certify that the attached ownership list, map and mailing labels are a complete and accurate representation of the real estate property and property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the subject property listed above. This information reflects the most current records on file in the Miami -Dade County Tax Assessor's Office. I also understand that a new list will be requested by the City of Miami Hearing Boards if it is determined the property owner information list initially submitted is older than six (6) months. Since Signature U WAz-o-0 A 5.7,Printed Name or Company Name 155,55 Address Telephone vmt E-mail Rev. 10-18 4/10/2019 City of Miami Zoning Application c��voF•,�� (` Search Select Print Measure https://maps.miamigov.com/miamizoning/index.htm 1/1 EXHIBIT 3 Jose Manuel Belsol Mariana Evora 5966 NE WhAvenue Miami, Florida 33137 'r CITY OF MIAMI CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Ira OF, I M a Wo] U I 1117M�IXSWN LIAE: RESOLUTION NO. HEPB—R-19-018 FILE ID PZ -19-205 PVOJECT ADDRESS: 5965 NE 6TH AVE June 24, 2019 To City Clerk: This letter constitutes our withdrawal as co -appellants of the appeal of that certain Special Certificate of Appropriateness (SCOA) to allow the new construction of a single-family, residential structure located at 5965 NE 6th Avenue, on a parcel zoned T3 -R "Sub -Urban Transect Zone", awarded by the City of Miami HEP Board on April 2, 2019 (the "Project"). We dismiss all claims in this matter. The Appeal is scheduled for the Planning and Zoning meeting of the City Commission on Thursday June 27, 2019, Agenda Item PZ -19 5901. Sincerely JoseWiff6el Belsol Mariana Evora EXHIBIT 4 41 -4w, AM AW �w . so.. ram► MMMM AWAme M Imorningside Civic�i4sso4:iation Architectural Review Committee David Holtzman Robert GraboslZi Naomi Burt Elvis Cruz Ligia Labrada Monday, June 24, 2019 Subject: Appeal of New Construction - 5965 NE 6th Avenue (Morningside Historic District) Dear Mr. Adams, The Morningside Civic Association's Architectural Review Committee (MCA ARC) has met on site with Mr. & Mrs. Stohner owners of 5965 NE 6th Avenue ("Applicants"), Mr. Jacob Brillhart, architect, Carlos Lago, Attorney and Landscape Architect on behalf of the Applicants. Present were also Mr. & Mrs. Wagoner abutting 5955 NE 6th Avenue property owners (Appellants"). The MCA ARC understands the HEPB did not have the benefit of our committee's comments during the March Agenda. Notwithstanding, the MCA ARC has reviewed and discussed extensively the scope and constraints of the subject property and supports the HEP Board's approval of this COA, but subject to the following seven conditions that allow this new home to be more consistent with the Morningside Historic Guidelines: L Allow the Applicant to install a new 5' metal picket fence along the property frontage to replace the chain link fence, running 17'+/- from the north west property line to the Morningside Perimeter Fence ("the area outside of the Morningside Perimeter Fence"). The new picket fence should be installed at the back of the sidewalk in the same location of the existing chain link fence, not 6' inward of the property as proposed, so existing tree root systems are not unnecessarily disturbed. 2. Do not allow a fence along the property frontage from the Morningside Perimeter Fence to the south west property line (the area inside the Morningside Perimeter Fence"), in accordance with the Morningside Historic Guidelines. 3. Setback the South property line perimeter fence and side gate to align with the frontmost building wall of the abutting 5955 NE 6th Ave. property, in accordance with the Morningside Design Guidelines. 4. Applicant shall heavily landscape the South property line at their own expense and with the design consent of the abutting 5955 NE 6th Ave property owners to properly conceal the 2 -story volume of the proposed home. The consent of the abutting 5955 NE 6th Ave property owners shall not be unreasonably withheld 5. Add a hardscape walkway defined and/or differentiated from the driveway, from the back of the sidewalk to the front entry of the new home. Walkway to be constructed of a material determined by the Applicant and acceptable to HEP Staff. 6. Open the front elevation of the front porch for its intended use. 7. Define the "PTD Wood Siding" finish material and request applicant to present final selections to Staff & MCA ARC for review. The submitted plans show the project conforms to the required setbacks however there is dissenting opinion by one member of the ARC, that the Primary setback should not be less than the adjacent property due to the depth of the lot. The MCA ARC believes the conditions noted above would benefit the project and will render it more consistent with the character and style of the Morningside Historic District. Sincerely, The Morningside Architectural Review Committee