[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6078687,"mediaKeyId","2959161-8020a418916e2ba4ddde956bcc498222","parentId",2959161,"title","Design board approves 1520 Stillwater Drive understory home with conditions to refine front façade","audioSeconds",1952,"startMs",5013000,"endMs",6965000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2959161-8020a418916e2ba4ddde956bcc498222&start=5013&end=6965","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2959161-8020a418916e2ba4ddde956bcc498222/thumbnail_5013000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6078687/Miami-Beach/Miami-Dade-County/Florida/Design-board-approves-1520-Stillwater-Drive-understory-home-with-conditions-to-refine-front-façade","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6078687-5e2da8f6b91bc6bf9ba736f89ab6d7e8/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191005&Signature=PVc8434XPtbGgdt24c7aJSH5kk0msyQ2aS5E2j5u5WVxV7m424Pw3qdXGAR2LO3va8caxM5gzWQeZqeQhqVIgLfWkbJQTjSkiwW7m~V1nemxhNaDiI8pJGQUlbD0qFE9Vf3UUOoNhv5kHR1I7fkxGZAT-Y4ZlqgFBp7~~SbzAuxKmObPzxMiDXN4ts5hkLBrlp4KPvtGebVqqHgsSRzgZI83rgYtl7e8fZJAosHVZtAS7CQu0brzGGfeSwSpjdgDOmB~QEYPgXtyK8NY3MfjUS5AM-QKMJDF8Mb413gb5BUXxnAw2YE6iG~DvIk2CMpbs9Dx18aWw9JPOg9cfK5mGw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Miami Beach, FL","date","2025-04-11T04:33:43Z","article","The Miami Beach Design Review Board approved a two‑story understory residence at 1520 Stillwater Drive and granted two design waivers, while asking the applicant to work with staff to refine the front façade and simplify certain roof and screening elements.

Planning staff recommended approval with conditions. Staff noted the lot is in the RS‑4 district; the applicant sought a 31‑foot height under rules applicable at the time of a prior pre‑application meeting (the district’s newer understory height limit is 28 feet but the project qualified to use the earlier standard). Staff said the design presented a contemporary house with substantial landscape and open space around a raised living level and recommended that one long side elevation be further recess‑modulated to meet the intent of the open‑space rule that breaks up long facades.

Architect Antonio Rodriguez described the project as an organic, modern understory house with a stone base, wood detailing and abundant glazing. Rodriguez said the owners intend the property as a vacation home; the design places living spaces on the main habitable level above an open understory terrace, with bedrooms on the level above. “The green area requirement for the understory is a little bit…higher than the norm, and so we do have a lot of open space around the house,” Rodriguez said.

In review, board members generally praised the internal plan and the project’s attempt to reduce ground‑level massing but asked the applicant to simplify the front roof and screening elements and to add planting to soften the façade. Board member comments urged the applicant to reduce a perceived “boxiness” by simplifying the double‑roof treatment on the front elevation and to replace or reduce applied screening so the frontage reads less like a house on stilts and more like a single family residence with a softer street presence.

The board voted 4–1 to approve the design and waivers with conditions (the one dissenting vote was recorded as opposed). Conditions included: refine the front façade and roof overhang so the composition reads more simply and cohesively; add horizontal planters or greenery to soften the front balcony and break vertical massing; and coordinate final material and sustainable‑product choices with staff prior to permit. Staff will verify compliance with the board’s direction at building permit review.

Key numbers and waivers
- Lot size: approximately 8,000 square feet (RS‑4).
- Proposed maximum height: 31 feet (applicant used pre‑adoption understory rules that allowed greater height).
- Waivers requested and granted: (1) relief from the code’s open‑space modulation requirement on one long side elevation (board requested additional recessing but approved waiver with condition that façade be further articulated), (2) waiver of the additional five‑foot setback strictness for the second‑floor front elevation where an architectural projection encroaches but the primary wall is set back.

The applicant may proceed to building permit review after addressing the refinement conditions with planning staff. Staff and board members encouraged early coordination during permit documentation to ensure the simplified front composition and additional plantings match the board’s directions.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Design Review Board Meeting 4.10.2025","oneSentenceSummary","The board approved a two‑story understory residence at 1520 Stillwater Drive with two waivers and conditions to refine and simplify the front façade, require additional design coordination with staff, and confirm sustainable material choices.","taxTitle","Miami Beach, Miami-Dade County, Florida","taxId",2893,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6078692,"Miami Beach design board denies request to aggregate three Belle Isle lots, sends plan back to applicant",4122,543000,4665000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2959161-8020a418916e2ba4ddde956bcc498222&start=543&end=4665","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2959161-8020a418916e2ba4ddde956bcc498222/thumbnail_543000.jpg","/articles/6078692/Miami-Beach/Miami-Dade-County/Florida/Miami-Beach-design-board-denies-request-to-aggregate-three-Belle-Isle-lots-sends-plan-back-to-applicant","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6078692-0fd6599a62715e96c275c85e62b969fa/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191005&Signature=Lpd6NL22VpCfl9xecGMM3zIHLvX6xUrwVTgDebsgq7z8sf2AlK-29cxV0hiBzGac9t3cScE38R760rYUZmS7V8PvSFbRTBHegEOJdbi9PXXhzllkhd1xvUC7bbCodOL-el0G867d5hpXgPmeULoHNpIIew07U3HiZxHrqh8VGXKYgSH-tkI4Re3ee69oTAFtuDSmkWIgzKEiYtCELai8tDMznVZjX1IN66en2BDgM3-XbPiCSXvk1dxShM-jn2o6tU2xLl22xHv7YTMK5c5bOc7XJ-9qcjcJ-Og0z9RzNDDdPLer72OAc1ztLkE53F9tvZIKvjIWRY5JetczzwQ57Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Miami Beach Design Review Board on April heard public comments and staff recommendations before denying a variance request to aggregate three Belle Isle parcels for a single five‑story home and then postponing the applicant’s revised plan for further redesign and re‑notice.

Staff said the proposal for 8, 9 and 10 Century Lane would combine undersized parcels into a single property and asked the board to continue the item to allow changes after staff critiques. City planning staff described the project as a contemporary single‑family residence with “brutalist influences” but recommended limiting enclosed connector bridges to the first two floors, stepping back a covered rooftop stair enclosure by five feet, and adding additional landscaping and a window to reduce the building’s imposing appearance.

The design team said the owners intend the structure to be a single family home for a household of six and presented the aggregation as necessary to create a cohesive plan. “My client…are expecting their fourth child very soon,” applicant representative Tracy Slavens told the board while asking for feedback on the redesign. Architect Brian Pravda said the three parcels are “undersized parcels” under the code and argued aggregation would bring the combined property closer to code compliance than leaving the lots separate.

Neighbors and condominium residents urged denial. Faye Horton, president of the Vistas Condominium Association, told the board, “What I would like the design board to do is listen to our heart. This is our home. We don't want the quiet enjoyment of our home totally destroyed.” Neighbor Scott Foxman, who lives adjacent to the property, said the proposed structure was “massive” and “not consistent with the neighborhood,” and urged the board to deny the aggregation. Several residents raised traffic, parking and scale concerns and asked for restrictive covenants preventing future multi‑unit conversion.

Board members focused discussion on the lot‑aggregation variance (variance number 3), which the code limits to a maximum of two continuous lots in the Arm 1/RM 1 context unless the project is affordable or workforce housing. Planning staff noted the Arm 1 district is intended for lower‑scale multifamily development and said the three‑lot aggregation increased the potential scale beyond that intent. Commissioner Javier Suarez, speaking during public comment as an elected official, told the board, “I think it’s prudent upon you to deny this project,” reflecting the strong neighborhood opposition.

After debate, Board member Miguel Paez moved to deny the variance to aggregate three lots; the motion was seconded by Board member Alec Lester. The board took a roll call and denied the variance 4–1 (Butakawali voted no; Gilner Nelson, Lester, Lewin and Paez voted to deny). With the lot‑aggregation variance denied, the applicant no longer had the foundation for the submitted design. The board then voted to defer the entire application so the applicant could redesign under the two‑lot or single‑lot scenario and re‑advertise the application; a new hearing date will be set when the applicant is ready.

What the board decided matters because the lot‑aggregation limit is an explicit zoning tool used to limit building scale in Arm 1/RM 1 areas and to preserve neighborhood context. Staff had recommended a continuance to the June meeting to allow changes; the applicant asked for additional time and said it would work with staff and return after re‑design. The board’s denial of the three‑lot aggregation forces a substantive redesign (for either two‑lot aggregation or development on a single lot), and applicants will need to re‑file and re‑advertise revised plans.

Votes at a glance
- Denial of variance to aggregate three lots (variance #3): Motion to deny made by Miguel Paez, seconded by Alec Lester; vote to deny 4–1; outcome: denied.
- Continuance/postponement of the overall application: motion to defer and re‑advertise passed (no date specified); outcome: postponed pending redesign and re‑notice.

The board’s action does not approve any element of the submitted design. Applicants and their design team said they would return; staff recommended several design changes, including limiting enclosed connector bridges above the second floor, stepping back rooftop elements, and adding landscaping and glazing to soften elevations. The applicant said it would work with staff on revisions and re‑file for a future hearing.

","The Miami Beach Design Review Board denied a request to aggregate three undersized Belle Isle lots and postponed action on the applicant’s revised five‑story single‑family house, citing zoning limits and neighborhood impacts.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Design board approves 1520 Stillwater Drive understory home with conditions to refine front façade

Miami Beach design board denies request to aggregate three Belle Isle lots, sends plan back to applicant