Exhibit B
.Tune 1999.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 9th day of
ATTEST: MAYOR
~'" v
CITY CLERK
Ordinance No. 99-3186.
APPROVED AS TO FORM & LANQUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION:
' l_~ 3/ l br °f9
CITY ATTORNEY DATE
F:~PLAN\$ALL~DRAFT_OR\®PB~PALM~7IEW,ORD
lst reading 4/28/99
.2nd reading 6/9/99
~XiBIT .,g..
HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD
City of Miami Beach, Florida
~_ 9=" t•~I ' ~? sus s ~e '~' ~ e-e e~e ? 1 ~ 4-
f-~R F!.~; L~ra~Snf, t:~=1S =ia~.trJ'( ,:rijt.d'- (~tP9'2.1
c.r-nL..A. ° t,,y.~ ~~,
tl~il~:!.'F'i FtI.It2Ih~r C:LERh~. OF i:OiIRT
4~I~~i~1i l;+f'~C'E r:01.!hIT'(r FL_06:tf'(~
CtI1TIPICATIBN
THIS IS TO CERTIFY TlMT TIN ATTACM~ OOGN~R
IS A AIO ACCURATE COPY OF Tlt CIN~AL ON
FEE ORaCE 11IE OBA1111tIR.
MEETING DATE: January 9, 2007 c o eEAdl
~" ~ Chariea A TaR ~ ~ of
FI1n
~ My Cammi=elon DD233174 -~ ProOuce ~ i
FILE NO: 4079 ~ar.~ ExpireaJuly17,2007
Notxy '
~;nna Name: C ! ~ r
PROPERTY: 841 19`h Street ~'C01""'~10A~1
TAi1 doarnent carNa«n_ ~~,papN.
LEGAL: The west '/z of Block 8-A, of "Amended Plat of Golf Course Subdivision",
According to the Plat Thereof, as Recorded in Plat Book 6, Page 26, of the
Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida.
IN RE: The Application fora re-hearing for a previously issued Certificate of
Appropriateness for the partial demolition, renovation and restoration of the
existing 2-story home, including the construction of a new single story ground
level addition. Specifically the applicant is requesting to eliminate a condition of
the Final Order which requires that the existing hedge height be lowered.
CONSOLIDATED O R D E R
The applicants, Friedrich Koesters and Michael Jarboe, filed an application with the City of Miami
Beach Planning Department for a re-hearing for a previously issued Certificate of Appropriateness.
The City of Miami Beach Historic Preservation Board makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT,
based upon the evidence, information, testimony and materials presented at the public hearing and
which are part of the record for this matter:
A. The subject structure is designated contributing in the Miami Beach Historic Properties
Database and is located within the Palm View Local Historic District.
B
On November 14, 2006, the Historic Preservation Board determined, 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 Department Staff Report, that the project
as submitted was consistent vrith the Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria in Section 118-
564(a)(1) of the Miami Beach Code, was not consistent with Certificate of Appropriafss
Criteria a, b, d, e, f, g & h in Section 118-564(a)(2) of the Miami Beach Code, was no
consistent with Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria a, b, d, e, j, k & m in Section 1 -Ar>,~
564(a)(3) of the Miami Beach Code, and was not consistent with Certifica ~ `
,~..
Appropriateness for Demolition Criteria 8 & 9 in Section 118-564(f;(4) of the Miami ~ h~`~: .
~.
.sr*
Page 2 of 6
HPB File No. 4079
Meeting Date: January 9, 2007
Code. The project would be consistent with the above referenced criteria, subject to the
conditions setforth in the November 14, 2006 Final Order for the project.
C. The petition submitted for rehearing by the applicants has demonstrated to the board that
there is new evidence, which is relevant to the original decision of the Board. Based upon
this new evidence, the request for a rehearing of the subject project is GRANTED.
D. The project would remain consistent with the criteria and requirements of section 118-564 if
the following consolidated conditions are met:
Revised elevation, site plan and floor plan drawings, consistent with Exhibit "A"
submitted at the public hearing, shall be submitted to and approved by staff; at a
minimum, such drawings shall incorporate the following:
a. The design of the south elevation of the proposed dining room shall be
restudied and revised; the solid to void relationship shall be increased, and a
design correlation between the existing and proposed window sills, header,
and eyebrows, shall be developed, in a manner to be reviewed and approved
by staff.
b. The garage door shall be reduced to a standard door height, and the side
walls of the garage shall. be curved in a similar manner as the curved walls of
the existing doors and windows on the front facade, subject to the review and
approval of staff.
c. The porthole window of the garage shall be reduced to match the porthole
windows on the existing home, subject to the review acid approval of staff.
d. Low planters shall be incorporated into the new addition, in front of the dining
room, and shall also wrap the southeast corner of the garage, in order to
further break-down the scale and form a more cohesive relationship with the
architecture of the existing home, in a manner to be reviewed and approved
by staff.
e. The height of the solid parapet of the proposed addition shall be red~.~ced by
one-half, and horizontal railings shall be added on top of the solid portions of
the parapet, in a manner to be reviewed and approved by staff.
f. Manufacturers drawings and Dade County product approval numbers for all
new windows, doors and glass shall be required.
g. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the project Architect shall
verify, in writing, that the subject project has been constructed in accordance
with the plans approved by the Planning Department for Building Permit.
2. A revised landscape plan, and corresponding site plan, shall be submitted to and
approved by staff. The species type, quantity, dimensions, spacing, location and
~Y~~.
Page 3 of 6
HPB File No. 4079
Meeting Date: January 9, 2007
overall height of all plant material shal{ be clearly delineated and subject to the
review and approval of staff. At a minimum, such plan shalt incorporate the
following:
a. The existing front hedge along 19`h Street shall be maintained at a height not
to exceed the existing height of eleven (11') feet. Such hedge shall be
trimmed back from the sidewalk and shall not project into the sidewalk.
b. All exterior walkways and driveways shall consist of decorative pavers, set in
sand or other decorative material, subject to the review and approval of staff.
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. Right-
of-way areas shall also be incorporated as part of the irrigation system.
d. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the project architect shall
verify, in writing, that the project is consistent with the site and landscape
plans approved by the Planning Department for Building Permit.
3. The applicant may be required to submit a separate analysis for water and sewer
requirements, at the discretion of the Public Works Director, or designee. Based on
a preliminary review of the proposed project, the following may be required by the
Public Works Department:
a. Remove/replace sidewalks, curbs and gutters on all street frontages, if
applicable. Unless otherwise specified, the standard color for city sidewalks
is red, and the standard curb and gutter color is gray.
b. Mill/resurface asphalt in rear alley along property, if applicable.
c. Provide underground utility service connections and on-site transformer
location, if necessary.
d. Provide back-flow prevention devices on all water services.
e. Provide on-site, self-contained storm water drainage for the proposed
development.
Meet water/sewer concurrency requirements including a hydraulic water
model analysis and gravity sewer system capacity analysis as determined by
the Department and the required upgrades to water and sewer mains
servicing this project.
g. Payment of City utility impact fees for water meters/services.
h. Provide flood barrier ramps to underground parking or rninimurn slab
elevation to be at highest adjacent crown road elevation plus 8".
(. (~~
Page 4 of 6
HPB File No. 4079
ti1eeting Date: January 9, 2007
Right-of-way permit must be obtained from Public Works.
All right-of-way encroachments must be removed.
All planting/landscaping in the public right-of-way must be approved by the
Public Works and Parks Departments.
4. A drawn plan and written procedure for the proposed demolition shall be prepared
and submitted by a Professional Structural Engineer, registered in the State of
Florida, which fully ensures the protection of the public safety, as well as the
protection of the existing structure on the subject site and all existing structures
adjacent to the subject site during the course of demolition.
5. The Certificate of Appropriateness for Demolition shall only remain in effect for the
period of time that there is an active Certificate of Appropriateness for the associated
new construction on the subject property.
6. At the time of completion of the project, only a Final Certificate of Occupancy (CO)
or Final Certificate of Completion (CC) may be applied for; the staging and
scheduling of the construction on site shall take this into account. All work on site
must be completed in accordance with the plans approved herein, as well as by the
Building, Fire, Planning, CIP and Public Works Departments, inclusive of all
conditions imposed herein, and by other Development Review Boards, and any
modifications required pursuant to field inspections, prior to the issuance of a CO or
CC.
The Final Order shall be recorded in the Public Records ofMiami-Dade County, riot
to the issuance of a Building Permit.
8. The Final Order is not severable, and if any provision or condition hereof is held void
or unconstitutional in a final decision by a court of competent jurisdiction, the order
shall be returned to the Board for reconsideration as to whether the order meets the
criteria for approval absent the stricken provision or condition, and/or it is appropriate
to modify the remaining conditions or impose new conditions.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the evidence, information,
testimony and materials presented at the November 14, 2006 and January 9, 2007 meetings, which
are part of the record for this matter and the staff reports and analysis from the November 14, 2006
and January 9, 2007 meetings, which are adopted herein, including the staff recommendations
which were amended by the Board, that the Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness is
GRANTED for the above-referenced project subject to those certain consolidated conditions
specified in paragraph C of the Findings of Fact hereof (condition nos. 1-8, inclusive), to which the
applicant has agreed.
r"-~
Page 5 of 6
HPB File No. 4079
Meeting Date: January 9, 2007
This Final Order consolidates all conditions and requirements for Certificate of Appropriateness
approval as same are contained herein and in the original Order of November 14, 2006 as
amended. Accordingly, this Order shall serve as the Final Order for the proposed modifications to
the project and, in the event of conflict between the provisions hereof and those of the November
14, 2006 Order, the provisions hereof shall control.
No building permit may be issued unless and until all conditions of approval as set forth herein have
been met. The issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness 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 requesting a building 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 proiect shall be submitted to the Planning Department.
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 Historic Preservation Board's file.
If the Full Building Permit for the project is not issued within eighteen (18) months of the rehearing
meeting date at which the original Certificate of Appropriateness~was modified (January 9, 2007),
and construction does not commence and continue in accordance with the requirements of the
applicable Building Code, the Certificate of Appropriateness will expire and become null and void,
unless the applicant, prior to expiration of such period, makes application to the Board for an
extension of time; the granting of any such extension of time shall be at the discretion of the Board.
At the hearing on any such application, the Board may deny or approve the request and modify the
above conditions or impose additional conditions. Failure to complywith this Qrder shall subject the
Certificate of Appropriateness to Section 118-564, City Code, for revocation or modification of the
Certificate of Appropriateness.
~ 1 1~. E ~ ~~
Dated this _~ day of \^.1 1 V ~ , 20
HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FI~~RIDA
;~
~', ~ ~ t ,
BY:
THOM/~S R. P~IOONEY, HICP ~ `'~
DESIGN AND PRESERVATION ti1ANA5~ER
FOR THE CHAIR
-- ~.
Page 6 of 6
HPB File No. 4079
Meeting Date: January 9, 2007
STATE OF FLORIDA )
}SS
COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this -~ day of
~'~N dq /t,y 20 6 Eby Thomas R. Mooney, Design and Preservation Manager,
Planning Department, City of Miami Beach, Florida, a Florida Municipal Corporation, on behalf of the
Corporation. He is pers~knaw~-to me. ~_\ ~ ~,'!~ ^ '~
~p'r"'t1` Charles q TaR
~ ,F~ ~Y Commiss~ pC2~17q
~O" ^ Expres July 17, 2007
NOTARY PUBLIC C~,~.Z t
Miami-Dade County, Florida
My commission expires:
~~~~T
Approved As To Form:
Legal Department: -''~ (~- /s - 07 )
Filed with the Clerk of the Historic Preservation Board on ~ ~ '~ ( ~ )
F:`+PLAN\$HPB107HPB1JanHPB07`,4079-rhCONSOLIDATED.fo.doc
,.y
1 /~~~,
...
7 ,.
w~ c
.
,;,:
~ _'
`~u^