98-22646 RESO
RESOLUTION NO. 98-22646
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH,
FLORIDA SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING TO
REVIEW A DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DECISION
APPROVING A REQUEST BY VICTOR J.
LABRUZZO FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 135
UNIT, 26 STORY CONDOMINIUM BUILDING, AT
20 VENETIAN WAY.
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami
Beach recognize that a process for the review of decisions
rendered by the Design Review Board has been established under
Section 18 of the Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, affected parties have the right to seek a review by
the City Commission of projects approved by the Design Review
Board; and
WHEREAS, the Design Review Board, on November 17, 1997,
approved a request by Victor J. Labruzzo, to construct a 135
unit, 26 story (242'-8" to the top of the roof and 270'-10" to
the highest architectural projection) condominium building (DRB
File No. 9188); and
WHEREAS, Mr. John Shubin, on behalf of Ms. Aimee Hamilton,
has requested a review of the decision rendered by the Design
Review Board concerning DRB File No. 9188.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA:
1. The City Commission hereby sets a time certain of 11:00
a.m., on February 4, 1998, to review the decision of the Design
Review Board (DRB File No. 9188) wherein it approved a request by
Victor J. Labruzzo, to construct a 135 unit, 26 story (242'-8" to
the top of the roof and 270'-10" to the highest architectural
projection) condominium building located at 20 Venetian Way.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 21st day of
. . 1998.
MAYOR APPROVED AS TO
FORM & lANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
ATTEST:
~~. ~0-~
CITY CLERK
(Requested by the Legal Department.)
TRM: tm
F, \PLAN\$ALL\CC_MEMOS\RES-9188
v~
City Attorney -
02/2P
Date
City of Miami Beach
Planning, Design and Historic Preservation Division
Staff Report
FROM:
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DEAN J. GRANDIN, Jr., DEPCTY DlRECTO~
DEVELOPMENT, DESIGN & HlSTORlC PRESER V A TION SERVICES
TO:
DATE:
sEPTErvrnER 2, 1997 MEETING
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RE:
DESIGN REVIEW FILE ~O. 9188
20 Venetian Way - Venetian Tower
The applicant, Victor J. Labruzzo, is requesting Design Review approval for the construction of
a 135 unit, 26 story (242'-8" to the top of the roof and 270'-10" to the highest architecrural
projection) condominium building.
SITE DA T.-\:
Zoning - R.\1-2 (Multiple Family, Medium Intensity)
Future Land Use Designation-R1vI-2 (Multiple Family, Medium Intensity)
Lot Size - 75,707 S.F.
Existing FAR - N/A (Vacant Lot)
Proposed FAR - 208,192 S.F.l2.75 (Max FAR = 2.75), as represented by the applicant
Existing Height - N/A (Vacant Lot)
Proposed Height- 242'-8" /26 stories (270'-10" to highest non-habitable projection)
Existing Use/Condition - Vacant Lot
Proposed Use - 135 unit condominium with 203 parking spaces
THE PROJECT:
The applicant is proposing to construct a 26 story, hi-rise condominium structure on the south side
of Belle Island; access to the site will be from Island A venue on the west side of the property and
the tower portion of the project is proposed to be sited towards the middle of the property, parallel
to the Venetian Causeway. The elevations of the proposed structure consist of a regimented array
of smooth stucco and sliding glass doors, with angular projecting balconies; a two-level parking
pedestal, with a roof-top pool deck and tennis courts, will be located on the south side of the
property .
COMPLIA1'JCE \\-"IT" ZONING CODE:
The application. as prop~Jsed. appears to bc inconsistent with the follov..ing scctions of the City
Zoning Code:
1. The driveways on the north and west sides of the property encroach into the required yards.
2. The proposed air conditioning balconies on the south side of the tower must be counted in
the FAR calculations: consequently. the building exceeds the maximum permitted FAR for
the site. Accordingly. the square footage of the building will need to be reduced.
These and all zoning matters shall require final verification.
COMPLIANCE WITH DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA:
Design Review encompasses the examination of architectural dr.l\\ings for consistency with the
criteria stated below with regard to the aesthetics. appearances. safety. and function of the structure
or proposed structures in relation to the site. adjacent structures and surrounding community. Staff
recommends that the follo~mg criteria is found to be satisfied. not satisfied or not applicable, as
hereto indicated:
1. The existing and proposed conditions of the Lot, including but not necessarily limited to
topography, vegetation, trees, drainage, and Waterways.
- Satisfied
2. The location of all existing and proposed Buildings, drives, parking spaces, ",:albvays, means
of ingress and egress, drainage facilities, utility services, landscaping Structures, Signs, and
lighting and screening de\olces.
- Not Satisfied; see Condition #2 and Staff Analysis
The existing ingress/egress easement on the west side of the property has not been
properly addressed.
3. The dimensions of all Buildings, Structures, setbacks, parking spaces, Floor Area Ratio,
height, Lot Coverage and any other information that may be reasonably required to
determine compliance with this Ordinance.
- Satisfied
4. The color, design, selection of landscape materials and architectural elements of Exterior
Building surfaces and primary public interior areas for Developments requiring a Building
Permit in areas of the City identified in Subsection B of this Section.
- Not Satisfied; see Condition #1, #2, #4 and Staff Analysis
Paint samples have not been submitted; the proposed landscape plan is underdeveloped
in terms of quantity, interest and diversity; the exterior design of the center a.c.
balconies on the south side of the proposed tower detract from the design and
appearance of the entire structure.
2
5. The proposed Structurc is in confomlity with the standards of this Ordinance and other
applicable ordinances. architectural and design guidelines. and plans insofar as the location
and appearance and dcsign of the Buildings and Structures are involved.
- Satisfied
6. The proposed Structure indicates a sensitivity to and is compatible \Vith the environment and
adjacent Structures, and enhances the appearance of the surrounding properties.
- Not Satisfied; see Condition #1 and Staff Analysis
The exterior design of the center a.c. balconies on the soutb side of the proposed tower
ha\'e a negative impact on the design and appearance of the entire structure.
7. The design and layout of Buildings 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 contiguous and
adjacent Buildings and lands, pedestrian sight lines and view corridors.
- Satisfied
8. Pedestrian and vehicular traffic movement \\ithin and adjacent to the Site shall be reviewed
to ensure that all parking spaces are usable and are safely and conveniently arranged. Access
to the Site from adjacent roads shall be designed so as to interfere as little as possible with
traffic flow on these roads and to permit vehicles a rapid and safe ingress and egress to the
Site.
- Satisfied
9. 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.
- Satisfied
10. Landscape and paving materials shall be reviewed to ensure an adequate relationship with
and enhancement of the overall Site Plan design.
- Not Satisfied; see Condition #2 and Staff Analysis
The proposed landscape plan is underdeveloped in tenDS of quantity, interest and
diversity.
11. Buffering materials shall be reviewed to ensure that headlights ofvehic1es, noise, and light
from Structures are adequately shielded from public view and pedestrian areas.
- Not Satisfied; see Condition #2 and Staff Analysis
The proposed landscape plan is underdeveloped in terms of quantity, interest and
diversity.
12. Storm drainage, sanitary waste disposal, and water supply shall be reviewed and considered
in terms of the adequacy of existing systems, and the need for improvements, both on-Site
3
and ofT-Site. to adequately carry runotT and sewage. and to maintain an adequate supply of
water at sufficient pressure.
- Not Satisfied; see condition #5
Concurren)' Evaluation Required.
13. Garbage disposal shall be reviewed to ensure freedom from vermin and rodent infestation.
All disposal systems shall meet municipal specifications as to installation and construction.
- Not Satisfied; see condition #5
Concurreny Evaluation Required.
14. The overall project shall be reviewed for compliance ,^ith the City's Comprehensive Plan or
Neighborhood Plans that apply to or affect the subject property.
- Satisfied
15 . To promote reduced crime and fear of crime through the use of Crime Prevention Through
Environmental Design Guidelines and Strategies.
- Satisfied
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant is proposing what staff considers to be a handsome and well designed hi-rise
residential structure, which is in keeping 'With the as-built character of the south side of Belle Island.
In this regard, the subject tower has been sited away from the Venetian Causeway, thus preserving
the vista of the water and lessening the impact of the tower on the roadway which serves as one of
the gateways to the City.
Furthermore, the elevations and massing of the subject structure are simple, crisp and clean and
when combined with an appropriate landscape plan, should elegantly accent the site. The only
concerns of staff with regard to the elevations pertain to the center ac. units on the south side of the
building (which are to be counted towards allowable FAR), as well as the exterior design of the
parking pedestal on the south side of the project.
First, it is suggested that the exterior of the center balcony projections on the south side of the tower
be simplified and consist one type of open finish such as an open mesh with a solid frame or louvers.
It is further suggested that the exterior of the proposed parking pedestal be redesigned in order to
provide more visual interest; specifically a stronger vertical element needs to be provided. Since the
building exceeds the maximum FAR, the reduction of square footage will need to be addressed.
Finally, the submitted landscape plan is in need of additional refinement in order to strengthen and
better diversify the plant palette on the north, south and west sides of the property. These matters
should be able to be addressed at the administrative level, as indicated in the recommendation.
RECOMMENDATION:
In view of the foregoing analysis, staff recommends the application be approved, subject to the
4
following conditions. which address the inconsistencies with the aforementioned Design Review
criteria:
I. Revised elevation drawings shall be submitted to and approved by staff: at a minimum. said
drawings shall incorporate the following:
a. The exterior of the center balcony projections on the south side of the tower shall be
redesigned and simplified. and consist one (I) type of floor-to-ceiling open finish
grill such as an open mesh with a solid franle or louvers. in a manner to be approved
by staff. Said balconies shall also be counted in the Floor Area Ratio of the project;
this may entail a reduction in the floor area of the proposed units.
b. The exterior of the proposed parking pedestal shall be redesigned in order to provide
more solidity and visual interest. including a stronger vertical element, in a manner
to be approved by staff.
c. The connection of the bottom of the tower portion of the project to the base on the
west elevation shall be redesigned and strengthened, in a manner to be approved by
staff.
2. A revised landscape plan, and corresponding site plan, prepared by a Professional, shall be
submitted to and approved by staff. The species type, quantity, dimensions, spacing,
location and overall height of all plant material shall be clearly delineated and subject to the
review and approval of staff. At a minimum, said plan shall incorporate the follo~ing:
a. All exterior walkways shall consist of decorative pavers, set in sand.
b. All landscape areas which abut driveways shall be defined by continuous concrete
curb.
c. A fully automatic irrigation system with 100% coverage and an automatic rain sensor
in order to render the system inoperative in the event of rain.
d. The driveways on the north and west sides of the property shall be relocated to w.ithin
the pedestal setback lines of the respective property lines.
e. The submitted plant palette shall incorporate greater diversity, quantities and visual
interest, particularly on the north, south and west sides of the property.
f. Green Buttonwood shall replace the smaller gro~ing Silver Buttonwood at periphery
planting areas adjacent to the tennis court; the on center planting spacing may remain
the same.
5
g. The Sabal Palms along the south property line shall be replaced with Green
Buttonwood. in order to buffer the south facade and upper edge of the parking
facility.
h. The edge of the City sidev,:alk shall be planted \"ith a line of six (6), 12'.14' (overall).
Mahogany trees.
1. A pedestrian accessway, which is physically and architecturally separated from the
driveways. and connects people from the sidewalk to the entry lobby. shall be
provided.
3. All building signage shall be consistent in type, be composed of flush mounted, individual
letters and shall require a separate permit.
4. 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.
5. Final building plans shall meet the concurrency requirements of Section 22 of the Zoning
Ordinance and shall meet all other Zoning Ordinance requirements.
6. Manufacturers drawings and Dade County product approval numbers for all new windows,
doors and glass shall be required, priQr to the issuance of a building permit.
7. All roof-top fixtures, air-conditioning units and mechanical devices shall be clearly noted on
a revised roof plan and shall be screened from view, in a manner to be approved by staff.
8. The 30' ingress/egress easement on the west side of the property shall be landscaped and
improved as a public space and view corridor, subject to the review and approval of the City.
DJG:TRM
F:\PLAN\SDRB\DRB97\SEPDRB97\9 1 88.SEP
6
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
PLANNING, DESIGN & HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION
m
-
-
-
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
STAFF REPORT
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DEAN J. GRANDIN, Jr., DEPUTY DIRECTO~
DEVELOPMENT, DESIGN & HISTORIC PRESERVATION SERVICES
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
NOVEMBER 4, 1997 MEETING
RE:
DESIGN REVIEW FILE NO. 9188
20 Venetian Way - Venetian Tower
The applicant, Victor J. Labruzzo, is requesting Design Review approval for the
construction of a 135 unit, 26 story (242'-8" to the top of the roof and 270'-10" to
the highest architectural projection) condominium building.
HISTORY:
The applicant came before the Board on September 2, 1997, and the matter was
continued to a date certain of October 7, 1997, in order to address the concerns
expressed by Board Members relative to the orientation of the proposed tower. On
October 7, 1997, the Board continued the matter to a date certain of November 4,
1997.
SITE DATA:
Zoning -
Future Land Use Designation-
Lot Size -
Existing FAR -
Proposed FAR -
Existing Height -
Proposed Height-
Existing Use/Condition -
Proposed Use -
RM-2 (Multiple Family, Medium Intensity)
RM-2 (Multiple Family, Medium Intensity)
75,707 S.F.
Nt A (Vacant Lot)
208,192 S.F./2.75 (Max FAR = 2.75), as
represented by the applicant
N/A (Vacant Lot)
242'-8" / 26 stories (270'-10" to highest non-
habitable projection)
Vacant Lot
135 unit condominium with 201 parking spaces
THE PROJECT:
The applicant is proposing to construct a 26 story, hi-rise condominium structure on
the south side of Belle Island; access to the site will be from Island Avenue on the
west side of the property and the tower portion of the project is proposed to be sited
towards the middle of the property, parallel to the Venetian Causeway. The elevations
of the proposed structure consist of a regimented array of smooth stucco and sliding
glass doors, with angular projecting balconies; a two-level parking pedestal, with a
roof-top pool deck and tennis courts, will be located on the south side of the property.
COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING CODE:
The application, as proposed, appears to meet the requirements of the City Zoning
Code; this shall be subject to final verification and determination with regard to the
location of front, side and rear yards on this irregularly shaped parcel.
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS:
A level three (3) traffic impact analysis has been submitted by the applicant; said
analysis is being reviewed by staff to determine the impact of the proposed project on
the traffic service levels of the site and immediate area.
COMPLIANCE WITH DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA:
Design Review encompasses the examination of architectural drawings for consistency
with the criteria stated below with regard to the aesthetics, appearances, safety, and
function of the structure or proposed structures in relation to the site, adjacent
structures and surrounding community. Staff recommends that the following criteria
is found to be satisfied, not satisfied or not applicable, as hereto indicated:
1 . The existing and proposed conditions of the Lot, including but not necessarily
limited to topography, vegetation, trees, drainage, and Waterways.
- Satisfied
2. 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
3. The dimensions of all Buildings, Structures, setbacks, parking spaces, Floor Area
Ratio, height, Lot Coverage and any other information that may be reasonably
required to determine compliance with this Ordinance.
- Satisfied
4. The color, design, selection of landscape materials and architectural elements
of Exterior Building surfaces and primary public interior areas for Developments
requiring a Building Permit in areas of the City identified in Subsection B of this
Section.
2
- Not Satisfied; see Condition #1, #2, 14 and Staff Analysis
Paint samples have not been submitted; the proposed landscape plan is
underdeveloped In terms of quantity, Interest and diversity; the exterior design
of the parking pedestal detracts from the appearance of the project as a whole.
5. The proposed Structure is in conformity with the standards of this Ordinance
and other applicable ordinances, architectural and design guidelines, and plans
insofar as the location and appearance and design of the Buildings and
Structures are involved.
- Satisfied
6. The proposed Structure indicates a sensitivity to and is compatible with the
environment and adjacent Structures, and enhances the appearance of the
surrounding properties.
- Not Satisfied; see Condition #1 and Staff Analysis
The design of the parking pedestal portion of the project has not been properly
integrated into the base of the tower.
7. The design and layout of Buildings 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 contiguous and adjacent Buildings and lands,
pedestrian sight lines and view corridors.
- Satisfied
8. Pedestrian and vehicular traffic movement within and adjacent to the Site shall
be reviewed to ensure that all parking spaces are usable and are safely and
conveniently arranged. Access to the Site from adjacent roads shall be
designed so as to interfere as little as possible with traffic flow on these roads
and to permit vehicles a rapid and safe ingress and egress to the Site.
- Satisfied
9. 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.
- Satisfied
10. Landscape and paving materials shall be reviewed to ensure an adequate
relationship with and enhancement of the overall Site Plan design.
- Not Satisfied; see Condition #2 and Staff Analysis
The proposed landscape plan is underdeveloped in terms of quantity, interest
and diversity.
3
11 . Buffering materials shall be reviewed to ensure that headlights of vehicles,
noise, and light from Structures are adequately shielded from public view and
pedestrian areas.
- Not Satisfied; see Condition #2 and Staff Analysis
The proposed landscape plan is underdeveloped in terms of quantity, interest
and diversity.
12. Storm drainage, sanitary waste disposal, and water supply shall be reviewed
and considered in terms of the adequacy of existing systems, and the need for
improvements, both on-Site and off-Site, to adequately carry runoff and
sewage, and to maintain an adequate supply of water at sufficient pressure.
- Not Satisfied; see condition #5
Concurrency Evaluation Required.
13. Garbage disposal shall be reviewed to ensure freedom from vermin and rodent
infestation. All disposal systems sh.all meet municipal specifications as to
installation and construction.
- Not Satisfied; see condition #5
Concurrency Evaluation Required.
14. The overall project shall be reviewed for compliance with the City's
Comprehensive Plan or Neighborhood Plans that apply to or affect the subject
property.
- Not Satisfied; see condition #5
Concurrency Evaluation Required.
1 5. To promote reduced crime and fear of crime through the use of Crime
Prevention Through Environmental Design Guidelines and Strategies.
- Satisfied
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant is proposing what staff considers to be a handsome and well designed
hi-rise residential structure, which is in keeping with the as-built character of the south
side of Belle Island. In this regard, the subject tower has been sited away from the
Venetian Causeway, thus preserving the vista of the water and lessening the impact
of the tower on the roadway which serves as one of the gateways to the City.
Furthermore, the elevations and massing of the subject structure are simple, crisp and
clean and when combined with an enhanced landscape plan, should elegantly accent
the site. The only concern of staff with regard to the elevations pertain to the exterior
design of the parking pedestal on the south side of the project. Although the applicant
has made significant progress in terms of the design and appearance of the parking
4
pedestal, it is suggested that more visual interest and a better connection to the base
of the tower are still necessary.
Finally, the submitted landscape plan is in need of minor refinement in order to
strengthen and better diversify the plant palette on the north, south and west sides of
the property. These matters should be able to be addressed at the administrative level,
as indicated in the recommendation.
RECOMMENDA TION:
In view of the foregoing analysis, staff recommends the application be approved,
subject to the following conditions, which address the inconsistencies with the
aforementioned Design Review criteria:
1 . Revised elevation drawings shall be submitted to and approved by staff; at a
minimum, said drawings shall incorporate the following:
a. The exterior of the center stairwell section on the south side of the tower
shall consist one (1) uniform scoring pattern, in a manner to be approved
by staff.
b. The exterior of the proposed parking pedestal shall be refined in order to
provide more solidity and visual interest, and form a stronger connection
to the base of the tower, in a manner to be approved by staff.
c. The connection of the bottom of the tower portion of the project to the
east and west sides of the base shall be evaluated and strengthened, in
a manner to be approved by staff.
2. A revised landscape plan, and corresponding site plan, prepared by a
Professional, shall be submitted to and approved by staff. The species type,
quantity, dimensions, spacing, location and overall height of all plant material
shall be clearly delineated and subject to the review and approval of staff. At
a minimum, said plan shall incorporate the following:
a. All exterior walkways shall consist of decorative pavers, set in sand.
b. All landscape areas which abut driveways shall be defined by continuous
concrete curb.
c. A fully automatic irrigation system with 100% coverage and an
automatic rain sensor in order to render the system inoperative in the
event of rain.
5
d. The submitted plant palette shall incorporate greater diversity, quantities
and visual interest, particularly on the north, south and west sides of the
property .
e. The Saba I Palms along the south property line shall be replaced with
Green Buttonwood, in order to buffer the south facade and upper edge
of the parking facility.
f. The edge of the City sidewalk shall be planted with a line of six (6), 12'-
14' (overall), Mahogany trees.
3. All building sign age shall be consistent in type, be composed of flush mounted,
non-illuminated individual letters and shall require a separate permit.
4. 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.
5. Final building plans shall meet the concurrency requirements of Section 22 of
the Zoning Ordinance and shall meet all other Zoning Ordinance requirements.
6. Manufacturers drawings and Dade County product approval numbers for all new
windows, doors and glass shall be required, m:i2r to the issuance of a building
permit.
7. All roof-top fixtures, air-conditioning units and mechanical devices shall be
clearly noted on a revised roof plan and shall be screened from view, in a
manner to be approved by staff.
8. The 30' ingress/egress easement on the west side of the property shall be
landscaped and improved as a public space and view corridor, subject to the
review and approval of the City.
9. All new and altered elements, spaces and areas shall meet the requirements of
the Florida Accessibility Code (FAC).
DJG:TRM
F:\PLAN\$DRB\DRB97\NOVDRB97\9188.NOV
6
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
City of Miami Beach, Florida
MEETING DATE: November 17, 1997
IN RE: The Application for Design Review Approval for the
construction of a 135 unit, 26 story (242' -8" to
the top of the roof and 2 70' -10" to the highest
architectural projection) condominium building.
PROPERTY: 20 Venetian Way
FILE NO: 9188
o R D E R
The applicant, Victor J. Labruzzo, filed an application with the
City of Miami Beach I s Planning, Design & Historic Preservation
Division for Design Review approval.
The City of Miami Beach's Design Review Board makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. Based on the plans and documents submitted with the
application, testimony and information provided by the
applicant, and the reasons set forth in the Planning, Design
and Historic Preservation Division Staff Report, the project
as submitted is not consistent with the Design Review Criteria
Nos. 4, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13 & 14 in Subsection 18-2 of Zoning
Ordinance No. 89-2665.
2. The project would be consistent with the afore-stated criteria
and requirements if the following conditions are met:
1.
Revised elevation drawings shall
approved by staff; at a minimum,
incorporate the following:
be submi t ted to and
said drawings shall
a.
The exterior of
south side of
uniform scoring
by staff.
the center stairwell section on the
the tower shall consist one (1)
pattern, in a manner to be approved
b. The exterior of the proposed parking pedestal shall
be refined in order to provide more solidity and
)(r/
visual interest, and form a stronger connection to
the base of the tower, in a manner to be approved
by staff.
c. The connection of the bottom of the tower portion
of the project to the east and west sides of the
base shall be evaluated and strengthened, in a
manner to be approved by staff.
d. The design of the canopies on the proposed parking
garage shall be subject to the review and approval
of staff.
2. A revised landscape plan, and corresponding site plan,
prepared by a Professional, shall be submitted to and
approved by staff. The species type, quantity,
dimensions, spacing, location and overall height of all
plant material shall be clearly delineated and subject to
the review and approval of staff. At a minimum, said
plan shall incorporate the following:
a. All exterior walkways shall consist of decorative
pavers, set in sand.
b. All landscape areas which abut driveways shall be
defined by continuous concrete curb.
c. A fully automatic irrigation system with 100%
coverage and an automatic rain sensor in order to
render the system inoperative in the event of rain.
d. The submitted plant palette shall incorporate
greater diversity, quantities and visual interest,
particularly on the north, south and west sides of
the property. Larger plant material shall be
required on the north side of the property and in
front of the facades of the proposed parking
pedestal.
e. The Sabal Palms along the south property line shall
be replaced with Green Buttonwood, in order to
buffer the south facade and upper edge of the
parking facility.
2
5[~
f.
The edge of
a line of
trees.
the City sidewalk shall be planted with
six (6), 12'-14' (overall), Mahogany
3.
All building signage shall
composed of flush mounted,
letters and shall require a
be consistent in type, be
non-illuminated individual
separate permit.
4. 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.
5. Final building plans shall meet the concurrency
requirements of Section 22 of the Zoning Ordinance and
shall meet all other Zoning Ordinance requirements. This
may entail a written agreement as to the exact timeframes
for any mitigation plan related to roadway concurrency
issues.
6. Manufacturers drawings and Dade County product approval
numbers for all new windows, doors and glass shall be
required, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
7. All roof-top fixtures, air-conditioning units and
mechanical devices shall be clearly noted on a revised
roof plan and shall be screened from view, in a manner to
be approved by staff.
8. The 30' ingress/egress easement on the west side of the
property shall be landscaped and improved as a public
space and view corridor, subj ect to the review and
approval of the City.
9. All new and altered elements, spaces and areas shall meet
the requirements of the Florida Accessibility Code (FAC).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, based upon the foregoing findings of fact and
the staff report and analysis, which is adopted herein, including
the staff recommendations which were amended by the Board, that the
Application for Design Review approval is granted for the above-
referenced project conditioned upon the following, to which the
applicant has agreed:
3
~tv
1.
Revised elevation drawings shall
approved by staff; at a minimum,
incorporate the following:
be submitted to and
said drawings shall
a.
The exterior of
south side of
uniform scoring
by staff.
the center stairwell section on the
the tower shall consist one (1)
pattern, in a manner to be approved
b. The exterior of the proposed parking pedestal shall
be refined in order to provide more solidity and
visual interest, and form a stronger connection to
the base of the tower, in a manner to be approved
by staff.
c. The connection of the bottom of the tower portion
of the project to the east and west sides of the
base shall be evaluated and strengthened, in a
manner to be approved by staff.
d. The design of the canopies on the proposed parking
garage shall be subject to the review and approval
of staff.
2. A revised landscape plan, and corresponding site plan,
prepared by a Professional, shall be submitted to and
approved by staff. The species type, quantity,
dimensions, spacing, location and overall height of all
plant material shall be clearly delineated and subject to
the review and approval of staff. At a minimum, said
plan shall incorporate the following:
a. All exterior walkways shall consist of decorative
pavers, set in sand.
b. All landscape areas which abut driveways shall be
defined by continuous concrete curb.
c. A fully automatic irrigation system with 100%
coverage and an automatic rain sensor in order to
render the system inoperative in the event of rain.
d. The submitted plant palette shall incorporate
4
Stv
greater diversity, quantities and visual interest,
particularly on
the property.
required on the
front of the
pedestal.
the north, south and west sides of
Larger plant material shall be
north side of the property and in
facades of the proposed parking
e. The Sabal Palms along the south property line shall
be replaced with Green Buttonwood, in order to
buffer the south facade and upper edge of the
parking facility.
f. The edge of the City sidewalk shall be planted with
a line of six (6), 12'-14' (overall), Mahogany
trees.
3 .
All building signage shall
composed of flush mounted,
letters and shall require a
be consistent in type, be
non-illuminated individual
separate permit.
4. 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.
5. Final building plans shall meet the concurrency
requirements of Section 22 of the Zoning Ordinance and
shall meet all other Zoning Ordinance requirements. This
may entail a written agreement as to the exact timeframes
for any mitigation plan related to roadway concurrency
issues.
6. Manufacturers drawings and Dade County product approval
numbers for all new windows, doors and glass shall be
required, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
7. All roof-top fixtures, air-conditioning units and
mechanical devices shall be clearly noted on a revised
roof plan and shall be screened from view, in a manner to
be approved by staff.
8. The 30' ingress/egress easement on the west side of the
property shall be landscaped and improved as a public
space and view corridor, subj ect to the review and
5
~ I( {;/
approval of the City.
9. All new and altered elements, spaces and areas shall meet
the requirements of the Florida Accessibility Code (FAC).
No building permit may be issued unless and until all conditions of
approval as set forth herein have been met. The issuance of Design
Review approval does not relieve the applicant from obtaining all
other required Municipal, County and/or State reviews and permits,
including zoning approval. If adequate handicapped access is not
provided, this approval does not mean that such handicapped access
is not required or that the Board supports an applicant's effort to
seek waivers relating to handicapped accessibility requirements.
When requestin9 a buildin9 permit, three (3) sets of plans approved
by the Board, modified in accordance with the above conditions, as
well as annotated floor plans which clearly delineate the Floor
Area Ratio (FAR) calculations for the project, shall be submitted
to the Plannin9, Design and Historic Preservation Division. If
all of the above-specified conditions are satisfactorily addressed,
the plans will be reviewed for building permit approval. Two (2)
sets will be returned to you for submission for a building permit
and one (1) set will be retained for the Design Review Board's
file. If the building permit is not issued within one (1) year of
the meeting date and construction does not commence within two (2)
years of the meeting date, and continue diligently through
completion, the Design Review approval will expire and become null
and void.
Dated this ~ day of
~
, 1997.
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
City of Miami Beach, Florida
By:
,(~,(,~/~.
Chairperson
Approved as to Form: ~ \ I \~
Office of the
(Initials/Date)
F:\PLAN\$DRB\DRB97\NOVDRB97\9188.FO
City
Attorney
6
LAW OFFICES
SHUBIN & BASS
PROFESSIONAL
ASSOCIATION
Via Facsimile Transmission
And Hand-Delivery
November 26, 1997
! ~ 5''I~. /~
;J1trt lP (/7h
Mr. Dean Grandin
Director of Historic Preservation
and Urban Design
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
Re: Appeal of Design Review Board
Decision - November 17, 1997,
20 Venetian Way - Belle Isle
Dear Mr. Grandin:
This correspondence is transmitted to you in your capacity as
Director of Historic Preservation and Urban Design and shall serve as
an appeal of the above-referenced matter which was approved by the
Design Review Board on November 17, 1997. Please find enclosed address
labels generated by a firm which has been approved by the City. Please
further find enclosed check #665 in the amount of One Thousand Five
Hundred Forty-Five Dollars and Ten Cents ($1546.10) which sum comprises
the appeal fee. Please note that this fee is paid under protest because
it unconstitutionally impedes a citizen's right to petition local
government for the redress of its grievances. The fee is outrageously
high and bears no relation to the cost for processing the appeal.
The basis for the appeal is that the Design Review Board departed
from the essential requirements of the law and failed to support its
decision with competent and substantial evidence concerning concurrency
and compatibility.
Respectfully,
~~ ~ Si ~
John K. Shubin, Esq.
For the Firm
MWlI
48 S.W. 1st S1reet, 3rd Floor, Miami. Florida 33130
Ph: 3OS-381-eoeo FlC 305-38109457
TAMPA
707 Florida Avenue, T~. Florida 33602
Ph: 813022304785 FlC 813-223-4787
:ITY OF MIAMI BEACH
;ITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
I ttp:\ \ci. miami-beach. fl. us
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM NO.
3Q-98
TO:
Mayor Neisen Kasdin and
Members of the City Co
DATE: January 21, 1998
FROM:
Sergio Rodriguez
City Manager
SUBJECT:
A Resoluti n 0 the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach,
Florida Setting a Public Hearing to Review a Design Review Board Decision
Approving a Request by Victor J. Labruzzo for the Construction of a 135 unit,
26 story Condominium Building, at 20 Venetian Way.
RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission set a public hearing on February 4, 1998,
with a time certain of 11 :00 am, to review a decision of the Design Review Board (DRB), wherein
it approved the construction ofa 135 unit, 26 story condominium building at 20 Venetian Way (DRB
File No. 9188).
BACKGROUND
On November 17, 1997, the Design Review Board (DRB) approved a request by Victor 1. Labruzzo,
to construct a 135 unit, 26 story (242'-8" to the top of the roof and 270'-10" to the highest
architectural projection) condominium building. The staff report to the DRB for this project and the
Final Order issued by the DRB are attached, hereto, for informational purposes.
On November 26, 1997, Mr. John Shubin of the Law Firm of Shubin & Bass, filed a request to have
the Order of the Design Review Board reviewed by the City Commission, pursuant to Section 18-
2.K of Zoning Ordinance 89-2665 (see attached letter).
On January 7, 1998, the public hearing for this appeal was set by the Commission for a date certain
of January 21, 1998. However, said public hearing must be re-set by the Commission, in order to
satisfy the notice requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
ANALYSIS
The Design Review Section of the Zoning Ordinance allows an "affected person" to seek "review"
of any Design Review Board Order by the City Commission. In this particular instance Mr. John
Shubin, who is representing a person(s) owning property within 375 feet of the subject project, is
seeking a review of the Final Order for the project described herein.
Pursuant to Subsection 18-2.K, the review by the City Commission is not a de novo hearing. It must
Agenda Item C I r
Date_I-2J-98:
be based upon the record of the hearing before the Design Review Board. Furthermore, Section 18-
2.1 states the following:
In order to reverse, or remand for amendment, modification or rehearing any decision of the
Design Review Board, the City Commission shall find that the Design Review Board did not
do one of the following:
a. provide procedural due process
b. observe essential requirements of law, or
c. base its decision upon substantial, competent evidence.
Mr. Shubin, on behalf of his client is appealing the decision of the ORB on the basis that this body
failed to support its decision on competent and substantial evidence.
In order to reverse or remand a decision of the DRB, a 517th vote of the City Commission is
required.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission set for a time certain of 11 :00 a.m. a
public hearing on February 4, 1998, to review this decision of the Design Review Board (DRB),
wherein it approved the construction of a 135 unit, 26 story condominium building at 20 Venetian
Way (DRB F~O. 9188).
SR~D~:TRM
F:\PLAN\$ALL\CC _ MEMOS\PH2-9188. WPD
2