Loading...
RESOLUTION 91-20270 RESOLUTION NO. 91-20270 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DENYING APPROVAL OF NEON LIGHTING AT 5313 COLLINS AVENUE. WHEREAS, on February 12 , 1991 the City of Miami Beach Design Review Board denied the application of Krupp Realty for approval of neon lighting at the Amethyst Apartments at 5313 Collins Avenue, Miami Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 18-2 . I of City of Miami Beach Zoning Ordinance No. 89-2665, Krupp Realty appealed the Design Review Board' s decision to the Miami Beach City Commission; and WHEREAS, said appeal was heard before the City Commission on March 20, 1991; and WHEREAS, based upon the testimony heard at said appeal and the Administration' s report dated March 20, 1991 attached hereto as Exhibit "A", the City Commission has determined that the Design Review Board' s decision was based on competent, substantial evidence and that the Board did not act arbitrarily or capriciously; and WHEREAS, the City Commission wishes to affirm the decision of the Design Review Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the decision of the Design Review Board of February 12 , 1991 regarding denial of Design Review approval for neon lighting at the Amethyst Apartments located at 5313 Collins Avenue is hereby affirmed. PASSED and ADOPTED this 20th day of March , 1991. / #�► i ?IC' LAW ATTEST: LAA '—f- -1.0‘fiair— CITY CLERK FORM APPROVED LF/SWS/j c 1 LEGAL DEPI. (a:\arnethyst.res.) -- Date i Fear% I /4i# I 0 •`tel :.ems�t FLORIDA 3 3 1 3 9 Pr *1iNcoR►pRATfD * ••V 4 C A TIONL,4 NL) U. S. A. - 4 ----- OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE TELEPHONE: 673-7010 COMMISSION MEMORANDUM N . DATE:__ Mtn r-ch n, 1 q 91 TO: Mayor Alex Daoud and Members of the City Co emission dello FROM: Carla Bernabei Talarico" " City Manager SUBJECT: APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FILE NO. 2212 5313 COLLINS AVENUE (THE AMETHYST : DENIAL OF AN AFTER-THE-FACT REQUEST TO APPROVE NEON LIGHTING BACKGROUND On February 12 , 1991, the Design Review Board reviewed an application pertaining to an an after-the-fact request for neon lighting at 5 313 Collins Avenue (The Amethyst) . The neon lighting is comprised of 4 vertical bands and a broken horizontal strip along the parapet. During the meeting, Molly Stein, representing the Tower House Condominium at 5500 Collins Avenue and Art Jordan, representing the Imperial House Condominium at 5255 Collins Avenue, submitted the attached petitions objecting to the neon lighting. After testimony was received from the public and the applicant, the Design Review Board voted to deny (5-0) the after-the-fact installation of the neon tubing. The Board evaluated the application based. upon the criteria set forth under 18-2 A of the Zoning Ordinance. Criteria #9 "lighting shall be reviewed to insure safe movement of persons and vehicles and reflection on public property for security purposes and to minimize glare and reflection on adjacent property. " supports the neighbors ' position and the Board ' s finding that the neon lighting is not consistent with the Design Review criteria . The Board found that the lighting was detrimental to neighborhood property values, inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood and a nuisance to surrounding residents . The City' s Zoning Ordinance has procedures which address the appeal of the Design Review Board ' s decisions.- The appeal was filed according to. those procedures. In order to reverse, amend or modify any decision of the Design Review Board, the City Commission must find that the Board acted arbitrarily and capriciously in abuse of its discretionary powers. The vote to reverse, amend or modify requires 5votes from the City Commission. Appeal of a decision of the City Commission is through a Court of competent jurisdiction by petition for Writ of. Certiorari . ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Design Review Board did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in its consideration of the after-the- fact request to approve neon lighting on 5313 Collins Avenue (The Amethyst) . As such, it is recommended that the Design Review Board' s decision be upheld and the applicant ' s r_egtiest be denied . - 01 AGENDA 8 r.•� • ITEM 3 „2 0 - c:\general\Amethys.cmm DATE. PUI-ITP JT "A" CITY OF MIAMI B CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH FLORIDA 33139 DEPARTMENT OF CITY HALL `""'TORIC PRESERVATION&URBAN DESIGN 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE TELEPHONE: (305) 673-7819 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 12 , 1991 A meeting of the Design Review Board was held on Tuesday, February 12 , 1991 in the Second Floor Conference Room, City Hall . Design Review Board members in attendance were: Vice Chairman William Rosenberg, Stuart Cohen, Dov Dunaevsky, Jack Luft and John Pistorino. Mr. Rosenberg convened the meeting at 5: 11 p.m. Approval of Minutes Motion to approve the January 8 , 1991 Minutes. Motion: Mr. Cohen Second: Mr. Pistorino Vote: Unanimously approved 4-0 . Messrs. Cohen, Luft, Pistorino and Rosenberg voting. Mr. Dunaevsky was not present for this vote. Applications for Design Review E. Design Review File No. 2200, Carriage House, 5401 Collins Avenue - Request for final Design Review approval of neon as an architectural element on the porte cochere. As Mr. Pistorino had a previous association with this building, he will abstain from voting. Ms. Drewing reviewed the staff report and explained that the project was before the Board pursuant to Section 9-6C of the Zoning Ordinance 89-2665, which specifies that neon banding that has no commercial association with the building is permitted and may or may not face the street with the approval of the Design Review Board. She reviewed the staff recommendation which was to approve the requested neon on the porte cochere. It was the opinion of staff - 1 - that as the proposed neon was at ground level and would not cause a nuisance to the surrounding properties, it could be approved with the conditions that a color rendering be provided at the meeting and that the neon lights be turned off at 10: 00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday and 12 : 00 midnight Friday and Saturday. Ms. Molly Stein, representing the Tower House Condominium Association, 5500 Collins Avenue, addressed the Board and provided a petition objecting to the installation of the neon, which was signed by 54 persons. An additional petition comprised of 45 signatures was submitted by the Imperial House Condominium Association, 5255 Collins Avenue. Ms. Stein explained that she and the residents she represented objected to the creation of a Las Vegas atmosphere along Collins Avenue and in this specific instance, the porte cochere was elevated above street level and was therefore objectionable to both the single family houses across the waterway and the adjacent residential highrises. She also explained that Melvin Grossman, the original architect, indicated that he also objected to the installation of neon at the Carriage House. Mr. Louis Spector, president of the Imperial House Condominium Association, concurred with Ms. Stein's concerns. They emphasized that the installation of neon was not a part of the architecture of the building and it was offensive and inappropriate for the surrounding neighborhood. Motion to deny the request for the installation of decorative neon in that it is inconsistent with the original character of the neighborhood and is not in compliance with Design Review criteria A(6) that "the proposed structure indicates a sensitivity to and is compatible with the environment and adjacent structures and enhances the appearance of the surrounding properties. " Motion: Mr. Dunaevsky Second: Mr. Cohen Vote: Unanimously approved 4-0. Messrs. Cohen, Dunaevsky, Luft and Rosenberg voting. Mr. Pistorino abstaining. F. Design Review File No. 2212, Amethyst Apartments, 5313 Collins Avenue - Request for final Design Review approval of neon as an architectural element on the building. Ms. Drewing reviewed the staff report and explained that the project was before the Board under the same provision as the previous project. However, this request constituted an after-the- fact approval as the ornamental neon had already been erected on the building. Norbert, of Artech Neon, explained that it was possible to reduce the intensity of the light of the neon tubing so as not to be - 2 - offensive to the adjacent neighbors. However, Ms. Stein and Mr. Spector also spoke against this project. Also, the petitions applied to The Amethyst ' s request as well as the previous request of the Carriage House. Motion to deny the request for the installation of decorative neon and require the removal of same in that it is inconsistent with the original character of the neighborhood and is not in compliance with Design Review criteria A(6) that "the proposed structure indicates a sensitivity to and is compatible with the environment and adjacent structures and enhances the appearance of the surrounding properties. " Motion: Mr. Dunaevsky Second: Mr. Cohen Vote: Unanimously approved 5-0. Messrs. Cohen, Dunaevsky, Luft, Pistorino and Rosenberg voting. G. Design Review File No. 2165, Byron Carlyle Theatre, 512 71st Street - Request for final Design Review approval of improvements to the facade, lobby and public areas, and parking for an existing 25,855 sq. ft. theater with 1240 seats. Ms. Drewing reviewed the staff report and noted that the applicant had met the requirements of the preliminary approval received on January 8 , 1991. These included additional detailing added to the west and south elevations, substitution of tile for the marble finish on the low seating wall , a detailed lighting plan and revisions of the landscape plan. Staff recommended final approval with conditions including installation of street trees and changes to the landscape plan. However, it should be noted that the comments on the landscape plan were erroneously provided in the report and applied to another project. The landscape plan conditions of the previous approval had been met. This includes retention of the alexander palms. Motion to grant final Design Review approval subject to staff conditions and Board comments. Motion: Mr. Cohen Second: Mr. Dunaevsky Vote: Unanimously approved 5-0. Messrs. Cohen, Dunaevsky, Luft, Pistorino and Rosenberg voting. H. Design Review File No. 2205, 255 Michigan Avenue - Request for final Design Review approval to rehabilitate a two-story, four-unit apartment building and provide a parking lot. Ms. Drewing reviewed the staff report and commented that the project was in the South Pointe Redevelopment Area and therefore - 3 - was required to meet all applicable codes and conditions of the Zoning Ordinance. Pursuant to this the applicant has applied to the Board of Adjustment for the necessary variances. The request is for the rehabilitation of an apartment building and restoration to its original appearance. Ms. Drewing noted that this was consistent with the South Shore Revitalization Strategy and staff was therefore recommending final approval subject to conditions including provision of a lighting plan, recommendation that the site is secured with a security fence, the design of which should be submitted to staff for review and approval and specification of a 100% irrigation system for the landscape plan. Mr. Orlando Loli, the project architect, was present and explained to the Board that the project was a basic rehabilitation with landscape improvements and the provision of a parking lot. The Board requested that the color plan, which included three shades of a pumpkin yellow color be simplified to include two shades of yellow, as selected by the Board. The colors specified by the Board were "almond peach" with "dawnette" as the trim. Mr. Rosenberg also commented that the hedge at the alley should be moved back to avoid a site distance problem and that a substitute material be used for the Texas sage. Motion to grant final Design Review approval subject to staff conditions and Board conditions, including the color selection. Motion: Mr. Dunaevsky Second: Mr. Luft Vote: Unanimously approved 5-0 . Messrs. Cohen, Dunaevsky, Luft, Pistorino and Rosenberg voting. I. Design Review File No. 2206, Roosevelt Center, 774 41st Street - Request for final Design Review approval of alterations and additions to a theatre building for conversion to 57,750 sq. ft. retail and office structure. Mr. Kurlancheek reviewed the staff report and noted that the staff was particularly concerned about the change in grade proposed in the new plan and that the existing alignment promoted greater pedestrian interaction. Mr. Konover, the project architect, argued that the steady, consistent grade was needed to attract larger tenants. After Board discussion, the applicant was requested to work with staff to improve the design of the ground level of the building - 4 - with greater consideration given to the treatment of the entry step and ramp. The applicant was also advised to develop plans which clearly demonstrated all bonus improvements as requested and assigned by staff. In his presentation, Mr. Kurlancheek discussed the possibility of maintaining the existing theater entry so that the building had some sense of its original character. It was determined that although the rounded entry could not be completely maintained, the curved portion of terrazzo in the existing entry would be maintained. Mr. Konover agreed to all of the staff and Board conditions. Motion to grant final Design Review approval subject to staff and Board conditions, including the landscape comments contained in the staff report. Motion: Mr. Luft Second: Mr. Dunaevsky Vote: Unanimously approved 5-0. Messrs. Cohen, Dunaevsky, Luft, Pistorino and Rosenberg voting. J. Design Review File No. 2213, Daughters of Israel Mikvah, 1749 Jefferson Avenue - Request for final Design Review approval to construct a 2650 sq. ft. facility to have a ritual bath on a vacant lot. Ms. Drewing explained that a staff report had not been prepared for this project. During the time that the plans had been submitted to staff for Design Review, the project had gone to the Planning Board for review and as a condition of the Planning Board, the architect was requested to achieve a more residential appearance for the building. The plans submitted to the Board were an initial response by the architect to the Planning Board recommendations. However, they had not been reviewed by the Director of the Planning and Zoning Department. Subsequent to the submission of these plans, discussions were held with the Planning and Zoning Department and the Historic Preservation and Urban Design Department and various aspects of the alternate design were addressed. Mr. Joseph Ka l l er, project architect, explained the concept of the Mikvah, which is a ritual bath and some of the program requirements and an explanation of why he had developed the plans submitted to the Board. Such requirements as the need for natural rain water and the means of disbursing this rain water were part of the design of the project. He also emphasized that he had tried to achieve a residential scale within the program parametersof the project. - 5 - It was stressed that it was very important for this project to have a residential character because it was located in a basically single family district on what is presently City-owned property. One of the materials that was under discussion by the Board was the selection of a roof tile which Mr. Kaller presented as a cement tile. He explained that barrel tile could not be used because the coloring of the tile could taint the rain water needed for the purification in the Mikvah. Mr. Cohen suggested that a glazed tile could be used, which could be barrel shaped. Mr. Pistorino commented that the current design was not residential looking and was more institutional looking. Mr. Luft provided the following comments: the building is very ceremonial in its appearance because of the size of the entrance particularly the scale and width of the entrance. He suggested that the scale of the front doors be reduced to achieve a more residential character. He also suggested that a less dramatic facade, with perhaps the elimination of the pilasters be considered. He suggested the introduction of additional glass and windows on the front facade and the removal of the scuppers from the front of the building. There was considerable Board discussion and a representative of the neighborhood, an adjacent neighbor, residing at 1745 Jefferson Avenue, voiced her concerns. These were primarily with the formalization of the facility with the use of metal security gates and the type of landscape plan proposed for the facility which she did not feel was in character with the neighborhood. She was also concerned about the traffic generated by the Mikvah, particularly interms of the possible effect of annoying headlights shining on her house in the evenings. After further discussion, the Board requested the applicant to modify the plans in consideration of the concerns of the neighbor. The revised plans should include the following items: a less formal landscape treatment more consistent with the landscape pattern of the existing street; the utilization of the existing street trees; the use of silent electrical gates; the provision of adequate screening for headlights ; lowering of the height of the front wall while maintaining the use of pickets which would be buffered by a dense hedge. Motion to grant preliminary approval subject to the plans being revised pursuant to the concerns of the neighbor and the items as summarized by the Board. Motion: Mr. Dunaevsky Second: Mr. Cohen - 6 - Vote: Unanimously approved 5-0. Messrs. Cohen, Dunaevsky, Luft, Pistorino and Rosenberg voting. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7 : 00 p.m. Approved, Norman Giller, Chairman Date • _ 7 _ ORIGTNAL RESOLUTION NO. 91-20270 Affirming the decision of the Design Review Board denying approval of neon lighting at 5313 Collins Avenue.