Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation Addition Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Historic-preservation board approves rear addition at 1745 Lenox Ave., grants variances
Summary
The Miami Beach Historic Preservation Board approved a certificate of appropriateness and granted three variances for a rear addition at the contributing single-family home at 1745 Lenox Avenue, deciding 6–0 on the certificate and 5–1 on the variances after discussion about lot coverage and setback impacts.
The Miami Beach Historic Preservation Board voted to approve a certificate of appropriateness and to grant variances for a rear addition and related work at 1745 Lenox Avenue during its April 11 meeting at City Hall.
The owners, Dr. and Mrs. Roth, and their representatives told the board the house — a 1951, Don Reef–designed post‑war modern contributing structure in the Palm View Historic District — will retain its historic street façade while adding a modest rear addition to provide modern living space. Attorney Adele Valencia of LSN Law and architect drawings in the packet described a 1,304-square-foot rear addition and design steps to avoid altering the home’s character.
Staff recommended approval, saying the addition is modest and not visible from Lenox Avenue, and that site conditions and the house’s irregular placement on the lot justify variances. The application sought: a reduction in the south interior side setback by 2 feet 11 inches (from 7 feet 6 inches to 4 feet 7 inches); an extension of a nonconforming interior side setback by 21 feet 7 inches (for a total linear extension of 41 feet 7 inches); and an increase in maximum lot coverage from 30% to 36.4% (a 6.4-point increase).
Board members asked whether the request for additional lot coverage was truly necessary, and whether neighbors had been contacted. Applicants said they had conducted outreach and had neighbor support; Miami Design Preservation League testified in favor of the application. Staff explained the owners face more restrictive expansion rights because the property is inside a local historic district and noted the house’s partly two‑story character (a small second‑floor area) reduces the lot‑coverage allowed under current rules, producing a practical difficulty for keeping the historic home while adding living area.
After public comment and board discussion, the board approved the certificate of appropriateness 6–0 (Ehrlich: yes; Stewart: yes; Reid: yes; Breslin: yes; Lovell: yes; Lopez: yes). The variances passed on a 5–1 vote (Ehrlich: yes; Stewart: yes; Reid: no; Breslin: yes; Lovell: yes; Lopez: yes).
The board’s approval includes the conditions and recommendations in staff’s draft order, and the record includes the applicant’s written justification addressing the city code variance criteria.
