2001-24377 Reso Incomplete
RESOLUTION No,
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, GRANTING A
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR DEMOLITION IN
ORDER TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING BEACHFRONT
RESTROOM FACILITY LOCATED EAST OF COLLINS AVENUE AT
21 ST STREET, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 118-563(i) OF THE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2000-3262
ON JULY 26, 2000,
WHEREAS, the Administration has identified six beachfront restroom/concession
facilities, which are in critical need of replacement; and
WHEREAS, the subject facilities are located in the beachfront parks east of Collins
Avenue at nnd Street, 64th Street, 53rd Street, 46th Street, 29'h Street, and 21 st Street; and
WHEREAS, the existing restroom and concession facilities at those locations are in an
extremely deteriorated condition, are not compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act,
cannot be effectively secured, and are magnets for illicit activities; and
WHEREAS, the design and structural condition of the facilities is sufficiently poor
such that the cost to renovate the facilities and bring them up to code is prohibitive; and
WHEREAS, the facility at 21st Street was recently determined to be an unsafe
structure and condemned by the City's Building Department; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission previously appropriated $175,000 of
the proceeds from the General Obligation (GO) Bond Series 2000 and $750,000 of the
proceeds from the Miami-Dade County Safe Neighborhood Parks Bond Program (SNP) for the
demolition and replacement of the six facilities; and
WHEREAS, the SNP proceeds allocated for this project must be completely expended
by January 2002, or the funding will be revoked; and
WHEREAS, the existing facilities will be replaced with attractive modular units,
which are standardized in design, user friendly, low maintenance, resistant to vandalism and
fully securable; and
WHEREAS, beach tourism is vital to the economic well being of our community, and
the immediate availability of safe, clean and accessible restrooms and concession facilities is
vital to beach tourism; and
WHEREAS, the recent condemnation of the 21 st Street facility has had a negative
effect on public health conditions and poses a threat to public safety; and
WHEREAS, in consideration of the health and safety issues, the potential negative
effects on tourism and the impending financial deadline, the Mayor and City Commission
declared a public emergency and awarded a contract for the expedited replacement of the
beachfront facilities, at their meeting on April 18, 2001; and
WHEREAS, because the 2151 Street facility is located within the Ocean Drive/Collins
Avenue Historic District, the Administration appeared before the Historic Preservation Board
(HPB) on April 10, 2001, to request the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness for
Demolition for the facility; and
WHEREAS, the HPB Staff Report on the request for the Certificate of
Appropriateness included the determination that the existing facilities were not designated as
contributing structures within the historic district and that they contained no significant
architectural features; and
WHEREAS, the report also included a recommendation that the City's request for the
Certificate of Appropriateness for Demolition be approved; and
WHEREAS, the HPB deferred the City's request for the Certificate of Appropriateness
for Demolition; and
WHEREAS, the reasons for their deferral included the desire to receive a citywide
study of public restroom usage, an analysis of optimal locations for future facilities, a report on
the architectural significance of the existing facility, and a site survey depicting the location of
any historically significant landscaping adjacent to the existing facility; and
WHEREAS, it is the Administration's position that the 2151 Street facility is heavily
used by residents and visitors; it is located in an area which is more than a mile from the
nearest alternative public restroom; providing safe and accessible public restrooms for beach
goers is essential; the existing facility is a health and safety hazard; the existing facility is not
compliant with ADA regulations and cannot be reasonably be made compliant; and the
existing facility is a non-contributing utility building; and
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2000, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Ordinance
2000-3262, amending the Land Development Regulations ofthe Code of the City of Miami
Beach, by amending certain sections of Chapter 118, Article II, Division 4, entitled "Historic
Preservation Board". A provision under Section l18-563(i), stipulates that" Notwithstanding
any other provisions of this Chapter, certificates of appropriateness for demolition for any
building, structure, improvement, or landscape feature on a historic site or located within a
historic district and located on City-owned property or rights-of-way, the actions of the
Historic Preservation Board shall be advisory with the right of approval or disapproval vested
with the City Commission"; and
WHEREAS, because of the valid public emergency that exists, the Administration
recommends that the Mayor and City Commissioners grant the Certificate of Appropriateness
for Demolition of the 21st Street beachfront restroom and concession facility in order to allow
the development of the new facility to proceed expeditiously.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that a Certificate of
Appropriateness for Demolition in order to demolish the existing beachfront restroom facility
located east of Collins Avenue at 21st Street, in accordance with section 118-563(i) of the Land
Development Regulations ofthe Code of the City of Miami Beach, as amended by Ordinance
2000-3262 on July 26, 2000, is hereby approved.
Passed and Adopted this 16th day of May, 2001.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
111: l1f4~
CitY HIDmey
~/~:.OI
Date
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
http:\\ci.miami-beach.fl.us
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM NO. ~ 9b-o/
TO:
Mayor Neisen O. Kasdin and
Members of the City Commission
DATE: May 16,2001
SUBJECT:
Jorge M. Gonzalez ~.~
City Manager I U
A RESOLUTION 0 HE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI
BEACH, FLORIDA, GRANTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
FOR DEMOLITION IN ORDER TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING
BEACHFRONT RESTROOM FACILITY LOCATED EAST OF COLLINS
A VENUE AT 21ST STREET, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 118-563(i) OF
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2000-3262 ON JULY 26,
2000.
FROM:
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
ANALYSIS
The City Administration is seeking the authorization to proceed with the demolition of the existing
beachfront bathroom facility, located at the eastern terminus of the 21 st street. The public restroom in the
21 st Street beach access way is one of the six beachfront restroom/concession facilities, which the
Administration has determined are in critical need of replacement. The subject facilities are located east of
Collins Avenue at nnd Street, 64th Street; 53rd Street; 46th Street; 29th Street and 21 st Street, respectively.
The existing restroom and concession facilities at those locations are in an extremely deteriorated
condition; are not compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act; cannot be effectively secured; and
are magnets for illicit activities. The design and structural condition of the facilities is sufficiently poor
that the cost to renovate the facilities and bring them up to code is prohibitive. The lack of basic security
and the extremely deteriorated condition of the facilities has triggered numerous complaints from beach
goers.
The subject facility is located within a heavily used public beach access area. Furthermore, the 21 st Street
facility was recently condemned by the Building Department and is no longer available for public use.
AGENDA ITEM
C!..7cE
DATE 5-16A'J1
A photograph of the existing restroom facility is depicted below:
~,
~..... ~iS,~,':?::r~~~- '21M<< -~'V-~""!~"~?,,""','r- ,;, :". '~.
Beach tourism is vital to the economic well being of our community, and the immediate availability of safe,
clean and accessible restrooms and concessions facilities is vital to beach tourism. The recent
condemnation of the 21 st Street facility has had a negative effect on public health conditions and poses a
threat to public safety.
The Mayor and City Commission previously appropriated $750,000 of the proceeds from the Miami-Dade
County Safe Neighborhood Parks Bond Program (SNP) and $175,000 from the General Obligation (GO)
Bond Series 2000 for the replacement of all six of the restroom facilities. The SNP funds allocated for this
project must be completely expended by January 2002 or the funding will be revoked.
In consideration of the health and safety issues, the potential negative effects on tourism and the impending
financial deadline, the Mayor and City Commission declared a public emergency and awarded a contract
for the expedited replacement of the beachfront facilities, at their meeting on April 18, 2001.
The existing restroom and concession facility will be replaced with an attractive modular unit, which will
be standardized in design, user friendly, low maintenance, resistant to vandalism and fully securable. A
schematic drawing of the preliminary design is depicted below:
~----
I
I
\...~
\
. I
~ /
~/ /::"-. ~
~':'8'
$
~~ATION
Since the 21 st Street facility is located within the Ocean Drive/Collins Avenue Historic District and the 2rJh
Street facility is located within the Collins Waterfront Historic District, the Administration appeared before
the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) on April 10, 2001, to request the issuance of Certificates of
Appropriateness for Demolition for the two facilities. The HPB Staff Report on the request for the
Certificates of Appropriateness included the determination that the existing facilities were not designated
as part of the historic district and that they contained no significant architectural features. The report also
included a recommendation that the City's request for the Certificates of Appropriateness for Demolition be
approved (A copy of the Staff Report is attached).
The HPB deferred the City's request for the Certificates of Appropriateness for Demolition. The reasons
for their deferral included the desire to receive a citywide study of public restroom usage, an analysis of
optimal locations for future facilities, a report on the architectural significance of the existing facilities, and
site surveys depicting the location of any historically significant landscaping adjacent to the existing
facilities.
On May 7, 2001, a meeting was held at the 29th Street restroom location, with project representatives from
the City and a group of residents from the adjacent Triton Towers Condominium and the Seville Hotel. At
the meeting, the City presented the preliminary plans for the replacement of the facility. The residents at
the meeting expressed their unanimous support for the immediate demolition of the existing facility
however they also expressed their unanimous opposition to the replacement of the facility. The residents
believe the facility attracts an undesirable element to the area and would like to see the area redeveloped as
passive open space.
Given resident and HPB concerns, demolition of the 29th Street facility will be deferred. The deferral will
allow an opportunity to solicit additional public comment and to make an effort to address the HPB issues.
Demolition ofthe 21 st Street facility is recommended to proceed in light ofthe funding concerns and the
condition of the facility.
On July 26, 2000, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Ordinance 2000-3262, amending the Land
Development Regulations of the Code of the City of Miami Beach, by amending certain sections of
Chapter 118, Article 11, Division 4, entitled "Historic Preservation Board". A provision under Section
1 18-563(i), stipulates that" Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Chapter, certificates of
appropriateness for demolition for any building, structure, improvement, or landscape feature on a historic
site or located within a historic district and located on City-owned property or rights-of-way, the actions of
the Historic Preservation Board shall be advisory with the right of approval or disapproval vested with the
City Commission."
"
Therefore, because of the valid public emergency that exists, the Administration recommends that the
Mayor and City Commissioners grant the Certificate of Appropriateness for Demolition of the 21 st Street
beachfront restroom and concession facility in order to allow the development of the new facility to
proceed expeditiously.
Th1~
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
m
HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD
STAFF REPORT
TO:
HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD
FROM:
JORGE G, GOMEZ, DIRECTOR
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE:
APRIL 10, 2001 MEETING
RE:
HISTORIC PRESERVATION FILE NO. 1223
21 st and 29th Street Ends
The applicant, The City of Miami Beach, is requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness
for the demolition of existing restroom facilities and the construction of new
restrooms.
SITE DATA:
Zoning -
Future Land Use Designation-
Existing Use/Condition -
Proposed Use -
GU (Municipal Use)
GU (Municipal Use)
Public Restroom
Same
EXISTING STRUCTURES:
The subject structures are not designated in the Miami Beach Historic Properties
Database and are located within the newly designated Collins Waterfront Local Historic
District.
THE PROJECT:
The applicant is proposing to demolish two (2) existing public restrooms, at the
eastern streetends of 21 st and 29th Streets, and construct new one (1) story restroom
facilities in their place.
COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING CODE:
The application, as proposed, appears to comply with all pertinent aspects of the City
Code; this shall require final review and verification by the Zoning Administrator.
ACCESSIBILITY COMPLIANCE
Additional information will be required for a complete accessibility review pursuant to
the requirements of the Florida Accessibility Code (FAC).
Page 2
HPB File: 1223
Meeting Date: April 10, 2001
CONCURRENCY DETERMINATION:
A preliminary evaluation of this application indicates that it will not degrade the
adopted Levels of Service (LOS) for Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable
Water, and Recreation. Accordingly staff has made a preliminary determination that
the concurrency requirements for these portions of the Miami Beach Code have been
met.
With regard to the adopted LOS for Roads, a traffic impact analysis may be required
to be submitted by the applicant to determine whether the project meets the
concurrency requirements of the Code. A mitigation plan may be required prior to the
issuance of any Building Permit for the project,
COMPLIANCE WITH CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS CRITERIA:
A decision on an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness shall be based upon
the following:
I. Evaluation of the compatibility of the physical alteration or improvement with
surrounding properties and where applicable, compliance with the following
criteria pursuant to Section 11 8-564(a)( 1) of the Miami Beach Code (it is
recommended that the listed criteria be found Satisfied, Not Satisfied or Not
Applicable, as so noted):
a. The Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings as revised from time to time,
Satisfied
b. Other guidelines/policies/plans adopted or approved by Resolution or
Ordinance by the City Commission.
Satisfied
II. In determining whether a particular application is compatible with surrounding
properties, the Board shall consider the following criteria pursuant to Section
118-564(a)(2) of the Miami Beach Code (it is recommended that the listed
criteria be found Satisfied, Not Satisfied or Not Applicable, as so noted):
a, Exterior architectural features.
Satisfied
b, General design, scale, massing and arrangement.
Satisfied
Page 3
HPB File: 1223
Meeting Date: April 10, 2001
c, Texture and material and color,
Not Satisfied; see Condition No, 1 and Staff Analysis
Exterior surface color samples have not been submitted,
d, The relationship of a, b, c, above, to other structures and features of the
district,
Satisfied
e, The purpose for which the district was created.
Satisfied
f. The relationship of the size, design and siting of any new or
reconstructed structure to the landscape of the district.
Satisfied
g. An historic resources report, containing all available data and historic
documentation regarding the building, site or feature.
Not Applicable - Existing Structures Not Designated
h, The original architectural design or any subsequent modifications that
have acquired significance.
Satisfied
III. The examination of architectural drawings for consistency with the criteria
pursuant to Section 118-564(a)(3) of the Miami Beach Code and stated below,
with regard to the aesthetics, appearances, safety, and function of any new or
existing structure, public interior space and physical attributes of the project in
relation to the site, adjacent structures and properties, and surrounding
community. The criteria referenced above are as follows (it is recommended
that the listed criteria be found Satisfied, Not Satisfied or Not Applicable, as so
noted):
a, The location of all existing and proposed buildings, drives, parking
spaces, walkways, means of ingress and egress, drainage facilities, utility
services, landscaping structures, signs, and lighting and screening
devices,
Satisfied
Page 4
HPB File: 1223
Meeting Date: April 10, 2001
b, The dimensions of all buildings, structures, setbacks, parking spaces,
floor area ratio, height, lot coverage and any other information that may
~e reasonably necessary to determine compliance with the requirements
of the underlying zoning district, and any applicable overlays, for a
particular application or project.
Satisfied
c. The color, design, surface finishes and selection of landscape materials
and architectural elements of the exterior of all buildings and structures
and primary public interior areas for developments requiring a building
permit in areas of the city identified in section 118-503.
Not Satisfied; See Condition No, 1 and Staff Analysis
Exterior surface color samples have not been provided
d, The proposed structure, and/or additions to an existing structure is
appropriate to and compatible with the environment and adjacent
structures, and enhances the appearance of the surrounding properties,
or the purposes for which the district was created.
e. The design and layout of the proposed site plan, as well as all new and
existing buildings and public interior spaces shall be reviewed so as to
provide an efficient arrangement of land uses. Particular attention shall
be given to safety, crime prevention and fire protection, relationship to
the surrounding neighborhood, impact on preserving historic character of
the neighborhood and district, contiguous and adjacent buildings and
lands, pedestrian sight lines and view corridors.
Satisfied
f. Pedestrian and vehicular traffic movement within and adjacent to the site
shall be reviewed to ensure that clearly defined, segregated pedestrian
access to the site and all buildings is provided for and that any driveways
and parking spaces are usable, safely and conveniently arranged and have
a minimal impact on pedestrian circulation throughout the site. Access
to the site from adjacent roads shall be designed so as to interfere as
little as possible with vehicular traffic flow on these roads and pedestrian
movement onto and within the site, as well as permit both pedestrians
and vehicles a safe ingress and egress to the site,
Satisfied
Page 5
HPB File: 1223
Meeting Date: April 10, 2001
g. Lighting shall be reviewed to ensure safe movement of persons and
vehicles and reflection on public property for security purposes and to
minimize glare and reflection on adjacent properties and consistent with
a City master plan, where applicable,
Satisfied
h, Landscape and paving materials shall be reviewed to ensure an adequate
relationship with and enhancement of the overall site plan design,
Satisfied
I. Buffering materials shall be reviewed to ensure that headlights of
vehicles, noise, and light from Structures are adequately shielded from
public view, adjacent properties and pedestrian areas,
Satisfied
j. Any proposed new structure shall have an orientation and massing which
is sensitive to and compatible with the building site and surrounding area
and which creates or maintains important view corridor(s).
Satisfied .
k. All buildings shall have, to the greatest extent possible, space in that part
of the ground floor fronting a sidewalk, street or streets which is to be
occupied for residential or commercial uses; likewise, the upper floors of
the pedestal portion of the proposed building fronting a sidewalk street,
or streets shall have residential or commercial spaces, or shall have the
appearance of being a residential or commercial space or shall have an
architectural treatment which shall buffer the appearance of a parking
structure from the surrounding area and is integrated with the overall
appearance of the project.
Satisfied
I. All buildings shall have an appropriate and fully integrated rooftop
architectural treatment which substantially screens all mechanical
equipment, stairs and elevator towers.
Satisfied
m. Any addition on a building site shall be designed, sited and massed in a
manner which is sensitive to and compatible with the existing
improvement(s) ,
Satisfied
Page 6
HPB File: 1223
Meeting Date: April 10, 2001
n. All portions of a project fronting a street or sidewalk shall incorporate an
amount of transparency at the first level necessary to achieve pedestrian
compatibility,
Satisfied
o. The location, design, screening and buffering of all required service bays,
delivery bays, trash and refuse receptacles, as well as trash rooms shall
be arranged so as to have a minimal impact on adjacent properties,
Satisfied
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR DEMOLITION EVALUATION CRITERIA:
Section 118-564 (f)(4) of the Land Development Regulations of the Miami Beach Code
provides criteria by which the Historic Preservation Board evaluates requests for a
Certificate of Appropriateness for Demolition. The following is an analysis of the
request based upon these criteria:
1 , The Building, Structure, Improvement, or Site is designated on either a national
or state level as a part of an Historic Preservation District or as a Historic
Architectural Landmark or Site, or is designated pursuant to Division 4, Article
X, Chapter 118 of the Miami Beach Code as a Historic Building, Historic
Structure or Historic Site, Historic Improvement, Historic Landscape Feature,
historic interior or the Structure is of such historic/architectural interest or
quality that it would reasonably meet national, state or local criteria for such
designation,
Not Satisfied
The existing structures are not designated as part of a Local Historic District,
2, The Building, Structure, Improvement, or Site is of such design, craftsmanship,
or material that it could be reproduced only with great difficulty and/or expense,
Not Satisfied
The existing structures are predominately of simple concrete block construction
with few special architectural features and would not be difficult or inordinately
expensive to reproduce,
3. The Building, Structure, Improvement, or Site is one of the last remaining
examples of its kind in the neighborhood, the country, or the region, or is a
distinctive example of an architectural or design style which contributes to the
character of the district.
Not Satisfied
Page 7
HPB File: 1223
Meeting Date: April 10, 2001
The subject structures are not one of the last remaining examples of its kind nor
is a distinctive example of an architectural or design style which contributes to
the character of the district,
4. The building, structure, improvement, or site is a contributing building,
structure, improvement, site or landscape feature rather than a noncontributing
building, structure, improvement, site or landscape feature in a historic district
as defined in section 114-1, or is an architecturally significant feature of a
public area of the interior of a historic or contributing building.
Not Satisfied
The subject structures are not designated in the Miami Beach Historic Properties
Database,
5. Retention of the Building, Structure, Improvement, Landscape Feature or Site
promotes the general welfare of the City by providing an opportunity for study
of local history, architecture, and design or by developing an understanding of
the importance and value of a particular culture and heritage.
Not Satisfied
The retention of the subject structures is not critical to developing an
understanding of an important Miami Beach architectural style,
6, If the proposed demolition is for the purpose of constructing a parking garage,
the Board shall consider it if the parking garage is designed in a manner that is
consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and
Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, U.S, Department of the Interior
(1983), as amended, and/or the design review guidelines for that particular
district.
Not Satisfied
The demolition proposed in the subject application is not for the purpose of
constructing a parking garage,
7, There are definite plans for reuse of the property if the proposed demolition is
carried out, the effect of those plans on the character of the Historic District,
whether there is a compelling public interest requiring the proposed demolition,
and whether the Applicant is willing to bond the completion of the proposed
new construction.
Satisfied
The applicant is proposing to construct new restroom facilities,
8. The Dade County Unsafe Structures Board has ordered the demolition of a
Structure without option,
Page 8
HPB File: 1223
Meeting Date: April 10, 2001
Not Satisfied
The Dade County Unsafe Structures Board has not ordered the demolition of
any part of the subject building,
9. The Board determines that retention of the Building/Structure would deny the
owner economically viable use of the property.
Not Satisfied
The applicant has not submitted a financial feasibility study to determine
whether the new project as proposed will make the subject property financially
viable,
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Staff has no objections to the demolition of the existing restroom facilities, as they
contain no significant architectural features, However, staff would suggest that the
design of the 21 st Street structures be further studied and refined in terms of its detail
and finishes,
RECOMMENDATION:
In view of the foregoing analysis, staff recommends the application be approved,
subject to the following conditions, which address the inconsistencies with the
aforementioned Certificate of Appropriateness criteria:
1 . Revised elevation, site plan and floor plan drawings shall be submitted to and
approved by staff; at a minimum, such drawings shall incorporate the following:
a. Final elevation and surface finish details shall be subject to the review
and approval of staff.
b. The final exterior surface color scheme, including color samples, shall be
subject to the review and approval of staff and shall require a separate
permit,
c. The design of the 21 st Street structures shall be further studied and
refined in terms of its detail and finishes, subject to the review and
approval of staff,
2. The Certificate of Appropriateness for Demolition shall require final approval
from the City Commission, J2[iQr to the issuance of a demolition permit.
JGG:TRM
F:IPLANI$HPBIOl HPBIAPRHPBOl 11223.APR