m MIAMIBEACH

PLANNING DEPARTMENT
HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD STAFF REPORT
FROM: Richard G. Lorber, AICP, LEED AP Acting Planning Director W/IC June 11, 2013 Meeting Historic Preservation File No. 7368 1021-1025 Lincoln Road -Apple Store

~.::::>.

t .....

'GL-

DATE: RE:

The applicant, 1021 Lincoln Road, LTD, is requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness for the near total demolition of the existing 1-story commercial building, and the construction of a new 2story retail building.

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 3 & 4, AND west 11.75 feet of Lot 5, in Block 38, Commercial Subdivision of the Alton Beach Realty Company According to the Plat Thereof, as Recorded in Plat Book 6, Page 5, of the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida. SITE DATA: ZoningFuture Land Use Designation Lot SizeExisting FARProposed FARapplicant Existing Height Proposed Height Existing Use/Condition Proposed Use-

CD-3 (Commercial, High Intensity) CD-3 (Commercial, High Intensity) 9,262 S.F. not provided 13,845 S.F. I 1.49 (Max FAR= 2.0), as represented by the 22' -8" I 1-story 38'-0" I 2-story Retail Retail

EXISTING STRUCTURES: Constructed in 1935 as a one-story, two-bay retail building designed by noted Miami Beach architect, Russell T. Pancoast, the existing structure is designated "Contributing" in the Miami Beach Historic Properties Database and is located in the Flamingo Park Local Historic District and National Register Architectural District.
As indicated in the Historic Resources Report submitted with the application, the existing structure and subject site has a complex history of development commencing with the construction of the two-bay retail building for the Auburn-Duesenberg-Cord auto salon at 1023 Lincoln Road, and Nippon Art Company (a Japanese gift shop) at 1021 Lincoln Road, in 1935. Two years later, the Reed Furniture Company had replaced the auto salon, and ten years later the address of the Reed Furniture Company was changed to 1023-1027 Lincoln Road, indicating that one of the previous storefronts was split into two by that time and that the

Page 2 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013 addresses that comprise the 1021-1025 Lincoln Road building today had been established in the 1940s. Building Department records indicate major renovations occurred in 1956 and 1966 for storefront modifications and remodeling. In 2007 the north half of the property, which had been used as a parking area since the 1950s, was almost entirely built out as an extension of the retail space at 1023 Lincoln Road. For further history and analysis of the existing structure as well as the subject site, please see the Historic Resources Report included with the application as well as the Staff Analysis section of this Report. THE PROJECT: The applicant has submitted plans entitled "1 021 - 1025 Lincoln Road", as prepared by Touzet Studio Design & Architecture, dated 11 June 2013. The applicant is proposing the near total demolition of the existing single story building located on the subject site and the construction of a new retail building for an Apple retail store. The proposed retail building is a two-story structure which will occupy the entire site from Lincoln Road through to Lincoln Lane North. The design of the store is comprised of a continuous glass wall along the south facade with a substantial masonry proscenium-like surround. Additionally the applicant is proposing a second story set back 50' from Lincoln Road, minimizing its impact on the established scale of this section of the road. COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING CODE: A preliminary review of the project indicates that the application, as proposed, appears consistent with the City Code The above noted comments shall not be considered final zoning review or approval. These and all zoning matters shall require final review and verification by the Zoning Administrator prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. ACCESSIBILITY COMPLIANCE: Additional information will be required for a complete review for compliance with the Florida Building Code 2001 Edition, section 11 (Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction.) The above noted comments shall not be considered final accessibility review or approval. These and all accessibility matters shall require final review and verification by the Building Department prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. PRELIMINARY CONCURRENCY DETERMINATION: In accordance with Chapter 122 of the Code of the City of Miami Beach, the Transportation and Concurrency Management Division has conducted a preliminary concurrency evaluation and determined that the project does not meet the City's concurrency requirements and level-ofservice standards. However, the City's concurrency requirements can be achieved and satisfied through payment of mitigation fees or by entering into an enforceable development agreement with the City. The Transportation and Concurrency Management Division will make the determination of the project's fair-share mitigation cost. A final concurrency determination shall be conducted prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. Mitigation fees and concurrency administrative costs shall be paid prior to the project receiving

Page 3 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013 any Building Permit. Without exception, all concurrency fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Occupancy. 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 118-564(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. Not Satisfied; See Staff Analysis 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. Not Satisfied; See Staff Analysis and Concern No.1 The design of the Lincoln Road (south) first floor elevation of the Apple Store shall be further developed and refined in a manner that better recalls the original vision of Russell T. Pancoast of a one-story retail building composed of two distinct storefronts, one being double the width of the other, as clearly delineated by masonry piers or other appropriate means. Further, the large continuous proscenium-like masonry frame proposed to surround the storefront results in a design typology inconsistent with the more articulated original architecture. b. General design, scale, massing and arrangement. Not Satisfied; See Staff Analysis and Condition No.1 Seell.a.above c. Texture and material and color. Satisfied The applicant is proposing to use high quality local materials that are consistent with materials found within building on Lincoln Road and the surrounding historic district.

d. The relationship of a, b, c, above, to other structures and features of the district. Not Satisfied; See Staff Analysis and Condition No. 1 See ll.a. above e. The purpose for which the district was created.

Page 4 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013 Not Satisfied; See Staff Analysis and Condition No. 1 See ll.a. above f. The relationship of the size, design and siting of any new or reconstructed structure to the landscape of the district. Not Satisfied; See Staff Analysis and Condition No.1 See ll.a. above

g. An historic resources report, containing all available data and historic documentation regarding the building, site or feature. Satisfied h. The original architectural design or any subsequent modifications that have acquired significance. Satisfied Ill. 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 b. The dimensions of all buildings, structures, setbacks, parking spaces, floor area ratio, height, lot coverage and any other information that may be 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 Staff Analysis and Condition No. 1 See ll.a. above

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. Not Satisfied; See Staff Analysis and Condition No. 1 See ll.a. above 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

Page 5 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013 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. Not Satisfied; See Staff Analysis and Condition No. 1 Seell.a.above 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

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. Not Satisfied; A lighting plan has not been submitted 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. Not Applicable 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). Not Satisfied; See Staff Analysis and Condition No.1 See ll.a. above 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 All buildings shall have an appropriate and fully integrated rooftop architectural treatment which substantially screens all mechanical equipment, stairs and elevator towers. Not Satisfied; A mechanical plan has not been submitted.

j.

k.

I.

Page 6 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013

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). Not Satisfied; See Staff Analysis and ll.a above 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. Satisfied The existing structure is designated on a national and local level as a part of the National Register Miami Beach Architectural District as well as the locally designated Flamingo Park Historic District. 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 structure would not be difficult and inordinately expensive to reproduce. 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 The subject structure is not one of the last remaining examples of its kind and is not a distinguished example of a design style which contributes to the character of the district. 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,

2.

3.

4.

Page 7 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013 or is an architecturally significant feature of a public area of the interior of a historic or contributing building. Satisfied The subject building is designated as a contributing structure in the Miami Beach Historic Properties Database and is located within the local Flamingo Park Historic District. 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 structure is not critical to developing an understanding of an important Miami Beach architectural style as the nearly all original significant architectural features have been removed. 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 Applicable The demolition proposed in the subject application is not for the purpose of constructing a parking garage. In the event an applicant or property owner proposes the total demolition of a contributing structure, historic structure or architecturally significant feature, there shall be definite plans presented to the board for the reuse of the property if the proposed demolition is approved and carried out. Satisfied With the near total demolition of the existing structure, a new retail building is proposed. The Dade County Unsafe Structures Board has ordered the demolition of a Structure without option. Not Applicable The Dade County Unsafe Structures Board has not ordered the demolition of any part of the subject building.

6.

7.

8.

STAFF ANALYSIS: In 1935, Russell T. Pancoast was commissioned to design a retail building for two separate tenants with very different programmatic requirements. The resulting design concept, as can be deduced from examining original microfilm plans, was a single-story building with two distinct storefront designs. What the two original storefronts appear to have had in common was a continuous height glass storefront system (of approximately 15' in height), possibly with a continuous transom, and most probably a consistent upper fa<;ade element, the design of which cannot be fully determined with available historical documentation. Unfortunately, no historical photographic documentation has been located by either the applicant or staff of the front fa<;ade of the building at this time.

Page 8 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013 The easternmost original storefront, occupying approximately one-third of the Lincoln Road linear frontage, was designed for the Nippon Art Company, as a Japanese gift shop. Historic documentation reveals the entrance to the gift shop was designed in a manner similar to many retail stores along Lincoln Road constructed during the same period. A deeply recessed singledoor entrance was created to allow for customers to browse merchandise located within the display windows to either side as they entered the store. The westernmost original storefront, occupying the remaining two-thirds of the Lincoln Road linear frontage, was designed for the Auburn-Ouesenberg-Cord Auto Salon, to showcase highend new automobiles. This portion of the building was designed in a manner very different from the design of the adjacent Japanese gift shop. Historical documentation reveals an expansive continuous glass wall storefront, a centrally located entrance and a low knee wall, all of which was framed on both sides with masonry piers, which appear to have been approximately 2'-0" to 3'-0" in width. This expansive glass storefront design afforded panoramic views of the automobiles on display from Lincoln Road. The auto salon was designed in a similar manner to the other numerous automobile showrooms constructed on Lincoln Road in the 1930's.
What Remains of the Original 1935 Russell T. Pancoast Building Today? Building Department records indicate that major renovations occurred in 1956 and 1966 for storefront modifications and remodeling all across the Lincoln Road fagade, many or most of which appear to have been done by local architect, D.G. Smith, not the most sensitive architect to undertake such work. During this time, it appears that the original 15' high glass storefront system was dramatically lowered by more than 4' along the eastern original storefront area (where the Japanese gift shop had been located)), and lowered by 6' along the original western storefront area (where the auto salon was originally located). This change alone significantly impacted the integrity of the 1935 design. Compounding this, all of the original exterior decorative features of the upper fagade also appear to have been entirely removed at this time, reducing the building to an undistinguished and disjointed retail fagade on Lincoln Road.

So all that appears to remain of the original Russell T. Pancoast storefront construction is the steel structural girders (internal to the wall construction) supporting the masonry substrate construction as well as the roof framing system above. The westernmost of these steel girders, which spanned the double-width auto salon storefront bay with a structural span approaching 40,' is at least double the size of the easternmost steel girder, which spanned the much narrower width of the original Japanese gift-shop bay of approximately 20'. Both girders are supported where they meet at the one third point of the building frontage, by a single structural column, This column location still divides the original building fagade into an 'A' I 'B' bay configuration, where the 'A' bay (the home of the original auto salon) was double the width of the 'B' bay (the home of the original Japanese gift shop). None of the storefront construction below these original steel girders is original nor is upper fagade original, with exception to its height. Furthermore, the design of the existing storefronts and upper facades is not architecturally significant in any way because it destroys rather than complements the original Pancoast design. Also from staff's examination of the existing structure, nothing of the original1935 interiors of the building exist today, other than for a single lonesome ceiling grille (the original location and use of which is unknown). Furthermore, more than a third of the north exterior wall of the building was demolished in 2007 when the north addition was constructed. This addition substantially filled in the original open rear courtyard, in which Reed Furniture displayed outdoor furniture.

Page 9 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013 Staff is not opposed to the extent of demolition being proposed provided that the new construction recalls and builds upon the defining original characteristics of the 1935 Russell T. Pancoast design in an appropriate and meaningful way.

What were the Defining Original Characteristics of the 1935 Russell T. Pancoast Design? Staff believes that the defining original characteristics of what is known of the original building and site are threefold:

1) The Original Store Depth and Open Courtyard The original building is clearly defined in plan by a relatively shallow four bay store depth of only 72', overlooking an open garden or courtyard to the rear, which extended all the way to Lincoln Lane North. From an excellent historic photograph (found in a 1936 issue of Architectural Record), we know that this open courtyard was fully utilized as an outdoor display and merchandising space by the Kern Furniture Company, which followed the auto salon in occupying the west retail space only two years after the original construction. The courtyard is seen in this photograph as featuring a four quadrant ground plan incorporating a central fountain at the intersection of two prominent foot paths. Elegant outdoor furniture, including chairs, tables, and umbrellas, is seen displayed in the grassy lawn areas of the quadrants, with continuous awnings projecting from the rear of the building.

2) The Original 'A' I 'B' Storefront Configuration on Lincoln Road Russell Pancoast designed the two original storefronts for two very different tenants, who had differing programmatic needs. These two storefronts, which were located below a common upper fagade, did not originally look or function alike.

The 'A' Storefront Bay (west 213 of building) - On one hand, the Duesenberg auto salon required an expansive structural "free span" of nearly 40' to create an enormous shear wall of glass (15' high) for dramatically displaying its luxury automobiles. For its time, this exceptional "free span" was likely unique to commercial storefronts of this size in Miami Beach. This Duesenberg-Cord storefront is seen (on the original floor plan) as flanked by substantial masonry piers to either side which "visually" support the grand span in between, and with a simple central entrance. The 'B' Storefront Bay (east 113 of building)- On the other hand, the Nippon Art Company Japanese gift shop needed only a narrow storefront of approximately 20' wide
in order to lure pedestrians into its intimate gallery space. This was accomplished by recessing its single entrance door approximately 8' back from the fagade, and providing glass display cases to either side of the narrow tapered (open) entrance foyer. This allowed for classic intimate "window shopping" before entering the store, as was typical of other smaller retail stores on Lincoln Road. Because of its narrow width, and delicate proportions and details, this storefront was not flanked by large masonry piers to either side but rather spanned from wall to wall, with a deeply recessed central entrance. In examining the original documentation, it appears that both of the storefronts shared a common upper fagade. This upper facade is seen in the original "section" drawings to have incorporated a continuous horizontal band (most likely a signage band) above both stores which registered in height and location with the structural girder that spanned the

Page 10 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013 auto salon bay. Also, a decorative molding detail is seen above this continuous band, but there is insufficient information to recreate these details.

3) The Continuous Architectural 'Reveal' along the Lincoln Road Facade Almost as though to allow the upper Lincoln Road fac;ade of the original1935 building to "float" above the expansive glass storefront systems below, an architectural "reveal" (or open separation space) was created by Pancoast separating the underside of the masonry upper fac;ade from the top of the glass lower facade. In examining the original cross section drawings for this area of the building, this reveal appears over both of the original storefronts and likely ran continuously across the width of the fac;ade - a very progressive architectural detail for a 1935 retail structure in Miami Beach.
While this reveal appears to be only between 2" to 3" in height and 4" in depth, it was a very intentional, and well thought-out architectural detail uniquely characteristic of this Pancoast building. Staff believes that in order to better understand the unique character of the original 1935 Pancoast building, it is critical to preserve or appropriately recall the above three defining characteristics as a part of the new construction. It should be borne in mind that the existing building is proposed for near-total demolition, leaving only the "shadow" of the original Lincoln Road upper fac;ade of the building.

How Does the Proposed Apple Store Design Preserve or Appropriately Recall the Three Above Defining (known) Characteristics of this Original Russell T. Pancoast Building?
1) The Original Store Depth and Open Courtyard Staff believes the applicant has successfully recalled a substantial aspect of the original stores' depth and proximity to the open rear courtyard by creating a major east/west linear skylight above the rear sales area of the proposed new store. This skylight will flood the sales area below with natural light and successfully break up the perceived larger volume of the new store in a manner that recalls the original auto salon and furniture showroom area, where it interfaced with the open courtyard.
2) The Original 'A' I '8' Storefront Configuration on Lincoln Road Staff believes the applicant has successfully retained a significant aspect of the original upper fac;ade of the 1935 Pancoast building by re-establishing the original height and location of this upper fac;ade feature as well as by retaining and preserving the original steel girders and masonry substrate that form it. Staff does not believe, however, that the applicant has preserved or recalled in any way the original and highly significant A I B storefront configuration that defined the distinctive Russell T. Pancoast "two store" fac;ade design. At a minimum, staff believes that the applicant should redefine the locations of the two original masonry piers that flanked the Duesenberg auto salon. This could be done either by recreating the masonry piers, or by slightly projecting or recessing the glass storefront in the locations of the original masonry piers by 8" - 12". Either of these solutions would help to recall the original A I B storefront configuration of the building in a subtle way without significantly impacting the Apple Store layout behind.

Page 11 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013

Further, while staff accepts the applicant's need and desire to have the proposed linear storage rooms located continuously along the east and west walls of the building, staff believes that these storage rooms should not extend to the front fa~ade of the building as proposed, even though this would appear to be the applicant's justification for creating the large, proscenium-like picture frame that surrounds the Lincoln Road glass storefront. The linear storage rooms should terminate no closer than 10' from the inside face of the south fa~ade of the building.
Staff is pleased, however, with the 15' high vertical expanse of glass that is proposed in order to partially recall the original1935 transparency and elegancy of the south fa<;:ade.

3) The Continuous Architectural 'Reveal' along the Lincoln Road Facade Staff finds it very regrettable that the progressive 1935 "architectural reveal" detail along the Lincoln Road fa<;:ade, which uniquely separated the upper fa<;:ade from the glass storefronts below, has been entirely abandoned in the proposed new construction. Staff firmly believes that the unique and defining architectural "reveal" detail by Pancoast should be reinstated in the new construction, substantially as shown on the original cross sections of the 1935 building, from property line to property line. This would greatly help to break up the unfortunate continuous proscenium-like picture frame proposed for the new construction, which is out of character with the more highly detailed and richer original architecture of Russell Pancoast. The Proposed Design The design of the proposed store is composed of a continuous glass wall along the south facade with a substantial proscenium-like masonry frame surround. The architect has endeavored to design the new store to be reminiscent of the original 'glassy' automobile showrooms of the 1920's and 1930's, which once typified prominent sites on Lincoln Road. The proposed design incorporates high quality local materials including keystone cladding and terrazzo flooring. Further, the architect has cleverly recalled the original northern courtyard space by designing a large skylight in that general location which will allow welcome natural light into the back of the store and will serve to break down the large interior volume. Staff would like to commend the applicant for the extensive research of the original building which included examination of historical documentation and onsite exploratory demolition.
Set back 50' from the Lincoln Road (south) fa<;:ade, a second floor level is proposed to accommodate office and back-of-house space. While a line-of-sight drawing has not been provided, it is likely that this simple second floor south fa9ade, which is distinguished by five equally spaced punctured windows set into a field of keystone, will not be visible from Lincoln Road. The north facade of the proposed new construction is two stories in height, and will be set back 5' from the north property line. This simple but nicely developed north fa<;:ade is clad with keystone. On the second floor level, five equally spaced windows are set over a centralized recessed storefront area on the first floor level, with a limited transparent glass storefront area set in the center of the recessed area. Staff is generally quite pleased with this proposed north facade design, which will help to activate Lincoln Lane North as a pedestrian-friendly lane. Further, there was no original 1935 north fa9ade in this location, so no historic fabric will be demolished. Notwithstanding the aforementioned quality aspects of the proposed project, staff continues to have significant outstanding concerns with regard to the insufficient recall of the defining

Page 12 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013 characteristics of the original 1935 Russell Pancoast designed fagade on Lincoln Road, as previously explained above. Consequently, staff strongly recommends that the application be continued to a later meeting of the Board in order to allow sufficient time for the applicant to further develop and refine the design of the Lincoln Road fagade as suggested.
RECOMMENDATION: In view of the foregoing analysis, staff recommends the application be continued to a date certain of August 13, 2013, in order to address the aforementioned inconsistencies as summarized below.

1.

Revised elevation, site plan and floor plan drawings shall be submitted and, at a minimum, such drawings shall incorporate the following: a. The proposed design of the primary Lincoln Road first floor fagade shall be further developed and refined in a manner that better recalls the original vision of Russell Pancoast of the original1935 building composed of two storefronts, in a manner informed by the surviving original construction documents and in consultation with staff, for review and approval by the Historic Preservation Board. The design and details of the proposed storefront systems shall be provided, in a manner to be reviewed by staff consistent with the Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria and/or the directions from the Board, for review and approval by the Historic Preservation Board. A museum quality historic analysis and display of the original 1935 Russell Pancoast structure, inclusive of a photographic and written description of the history and evolution of the original building and its changes of use over time, shall be developed and submitted to and approved by staff, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy; such historic analysis shall be displayed prominently within the public area of the historic structure, in a location to be determined by staff. A fully enclosed air conditioned trash room that is sufficiently sized to handle the entire trash load of the building at all times shall be required, located within the envelope of the building, in a manner to be reviewed and approved by staff. 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. The design details of all exterior surface materials and surface finishes, shall be submitted in a manner to be reviewed by staff consistent with the Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria and/or the directions from the Board. Manufacturers drawings and Dade County product approval numbers for all new windows, doors and glass shall be required in a manner to be reviewed and approved by staff consistent with the Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria and/or the directions from the Board.

b.

c.

d.

e.

f.

g.

Page 13 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013 h. The final design and details of all exterior lighting shall be provided, in a manner to be reviewed and approved by staff consistent with the directions from the Board and/or the Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria. Exterior lighting shall be designed in a manner to not have an adverse overwhelming impact upon the historic hotel structures or the surrounding historic district. The applicant shall submit a complete structural report for the shoring, bracing, and stabilization of the portion of the original building proposed to be retained, for staff review prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. A detailed screening plan for all roof-top fixtures and mechanical devices shall be required, as part of the building permit plans, in a manner to be reviewed and approved by staff consistent with the Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria and/or the directions from the Board. The applicant shall verify, prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the exact location of all applicable FPL transformers or vault rooms; such transformers and vault rooms, and all other related devices and fixtures, shall not be permitted within any required yard or any area fronting a street or sidewalk. The location of any exterior transformers, and how they are screened with landscape material from the right-of-way, shall be clearly indicated on the site and landscape plans, in a manner to be reviewed and approved by staff consistent with the Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria and/or the directions from the Board. 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.

i.

j.

k.

I.

2.

A revised landscape plan, prepared by a Professional Landscape Architect, registered in the State of Florida, and corresponding site plan, 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 in a manner to be reviewed and approved by staff consistent with the directions from the Board and/or the Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria. At a minimum, such plan shall incorporate the following: a. All exterior walkways shall consist of decorative pavers, patterned concrete or other high quality exterior paving material, in a manner to be reviewed and approved by staff consistent with the Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria and/or the directions from the Board. 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. The utilization of root barriers and/or structural soil, as applicable, shall be clearly delineated on the revised landscape plan. The applicant shall verify, prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the exact location of all backflow preventers and all other related devices and fixtures; such fixtures and devices shall not be permitted within any required yard or any area

b.

c.

d.

Page 14 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013 fronting a street or sidewalk. The location of backflow preventers, siamese pipes or other related devices and fixtures, if any, and how they are screened with landscape material from the right-of-way, shall be clearly indicated on the site and landscape plans in a manner to be reviewed and approved by staff consistent with the Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria and/or the directions from the Board. e. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Landscape Architect for 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.

All building signage shall be consistent in type, finish and lighting and shall be composed of flush mounted, non-plastic, individual letters and shall require a separate permit. The final exterior surface color scheme, including color samples, shall be in a manner to be reviewed and approved by staff consistent with the directions from the Board and/or the Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria and shall require a separate permit. All new and altered elements, spaces and areas shall meet the requirements of the Florida Accessibility Code (FAC). 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. A traffic and neighborhood impact study shall be conducted as a means to measure a proposed development's impact on transportation and neighborhoods. The study shall address all roadway Level of Service (LOS) deficiencies relative to the concurrency requirements of the City Code, and if required, shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. The final building plans shall meet all other requirements of the Land Development Regulations of the City Code. The developer shall refer to the most recent City of Miami Beach's Traffic and Neighborhood Impact Methodology as issued by the Public Works Department. 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. Mill/resurface asphalt in rear alley along property, if applicable. Provide underground utility service connections and on-site transformer location, if necessary. Provide back-flow prevention devices on all water services. Provide on-site, self-contained storm water drainage for the proposed development.

4.

5.

6.

b.

c. d.

e. f.

Page 15 of 15 HPB File No. 7368 Meeting Date: June 11, 2013 g. 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. Payment of City utility impact fees for water meters/services. Provide flood barrier ramps to underground parking or minimum slab elevation to be at highest adjacent crown road elevation plus 8". 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.

h.
i.

j.

k.

I.

7.

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. This shall not prohibit the issuance of a Partial or Temporary CO, or a Partial or Temporary CC. The Final Order shall be recorded in the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 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. The conditions of approval herein are binding on the applicant, the property's owners, operators, and all successors in interest and assigns. Nothing in this order authorizes a violation of the City Code or other applicable law, nor allows a relaxation of any requirement or standard set forth in the City Code.

8.

9.

10.

11.

RGL:WHC:DJT F:\PLAN\$HPB\13HPB\Jun13\7368-r.Jun13.docx