Miami Beach Historic Preservation Board Rejects Rooftop Addition Amid Concerns Over Zoning Changes

During the recent Miami Beach Historic Preservation Board meeting, attention was given to a proposed amendment allowing multistory rooftop additions on non-contributing buildings within the museum historic district. The proposed change sought to increase the permissible height from 50 feet to 80 feet to facilitate additional hotel units and a food and beverage venue for guests, a move driven by a private entity. After thorough deliberation, the board voted 4-1 against recommending the amendment to the city commission, citing concerns about potential deviations from existing zoning regulations and the implications of such changes on the historic character of the district.

6:05:47The proposal to amend the zoning regulations sparked extensive discussion among board members, with some expressing apprehension about the potential for perceived special treatment of individual property owners. The existing code explicitly states that no variance shall be granted for rooftop additions, making the proposed amendment a significant departure from established regulations. Concerns were raised that such changes could be perceived as “spot zoning,” which could undermine the integrity of the historic preservation framework.

0:04Some board members emphasized the importance of maintaining a balance between the operational needs of modern hotel businesses and the original intent of the zoning code, which was designed to prevent overdevelopment in historic areas.

1:58:46In a related discussion, the board addressed a proposal for the renovation of a historic hotel designed by Henry Ho Houser in 1939. The applicant sought a certificate of appropriateness for partial demolition and design alterations aimed at creating a roof deck. The proposed renovation included restoring the hotel to its original configuration, which would result in approximately 46 to 47 hotel rooms. The plan involved the reintroduction of a lobby, which had been lost in previous renovations, and the incorporation of a restaurant into a portion of the ground floor. The board expressed general approval for the project, citing its compatibility with the neighborhood and the positive transformation it represented for the building.

0:04Elsewhere in the meeting, the board deliberated over a proposed canopy structure on Ocean Drive, associated with the Casa Casuarina property, formerly known as the Versace Mansion. The application sought to remove a condition that required the canopy, initially approved as a temporary structure, to be dismantled after two years. Board members discussed the implications of such a modification, with concerns centered on the canopy’s potential permanence and its impact on the historic character of the area. The applicant emphasized the canopy’s role in enhancing public access to the property, noting that it had become a popular venue for tours and dining.

18:37The board also reviewed a request for a certificate of appropriateness related to the partial demolition and renovation of the Penway Apartments. The project aimed to transform the lower level into a new restaurant while converting an existing four-unit apartment building into seven hotel rooms. Additional plans included creating a rooftop area with seating and water features. Board members raised questions about various aspects of the project, including concerns about noise control, the visibility of historical signage, and the design’s compatibility with the existing historic architecture.

4:17:02Further discussions focused on the design and installation of new bus shelters across the city, with the board expressing support for the project while emphasizing the importance of retaining existing concrete shelters where possible. The new shelters aim to address deficiencies in coverage, security, and technology, providing improved transit experiences for residents and visitors. The board considered a recommendation to prioritize locations lacking shelters and suggested evaluating existing structures for potential upgrades before replacements.

Note: This meeting summary was generated by AI, which can occasionally misspell names, misattribute actions, and state inaccuracies. This summary is intended to be a starting point and you should review the meeting record linked above before acting on anything you read. If we got something wrong, let us know. We’re working every day to improve our process in pursuit of universal local government transparency.

Receive debriefs about local meetings in your inbox weekly:

Trending meetings
across the country: