Miami Beach committee backs broad historic‑preservation code update, refers draft ordinance to planning board

The Land Use and Sustainability Committee on March 11 reviewed the final report and recommendations of the ad hoc Historic Preservation Ordinance Review Advisory Committee and by acclamation asked staff to prepare a draft ordinance for referral to the planning board.

The committee’s report — led by chair Rick Lopez and prepared with city staff liaison Debbie Tackett — recommends consolidating the city’s lengthy certificate of appropriateness criteria, expanding what staff may approve administratively, clarifying a two‑step review for very large projects, and pursuing incentives to help owners rehabilitate historic properties. “We have over 50 criteria,” Chief Preservation Officer Debbie Tackett told the committee, arguing many are redundant and should be simplified. Rick Lopez, chair of the advisory committee, said the panel sought to “streamline the process” and flagged the need for additional staff resources to administer new incentives.

Why it matters: Miami Beach has 14 historic districts and dozens of individually designated properties whose treatment affects housing, small landlords and the city’s tourism economy. Supporters said simplifying the process will speed routine repairs and reduce costs for owners while preserving design controls for significant features.

Committee recommendations and rationale - Consolidate review criteria. Staff and the committee found the city’s current criteria had grown to more than 50 items, many duplicative of Secretary of the Interior standards; the committee recommended removing about 15–16 items to simplify staff and board reporting and applicant submissions. “Most other historic cities … have the 10 that are found in the Secretary of Interior standards,” Tackett said. - Expand administrative review for minor work. The committee proposed widening staff authority to approve routine items now sent to the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) — for example sustainable roofing, some fences, minor public interior modifications and certain railing replacements — provided applications meet clear guidelines. That is intended to reduce time and cost for small projects. - Two‑step review for very large projects. For projects on lots of one acre or developments over 75,000 gross square feet, the committee recommended a conceptual first review focused on massing, setbacks and compatibility before applicants prepare full, detailed applications, so the board can focus earlier on big‑picture issues. - Railings and non‑contributing buildings. The committee urged clearer guidance and preapproved design options for non‑contributing multifamily buildings that face structural or life‑safety recertifications, to avoid lengthy HPB processes for pragmatic replacements. - Incentives and tax relief. The committee urged the city to explore expanding the existing ad valorem historic tax exemption — currently available only to single‑family homes — to commercial and multifamily properties for qualifying improvements. Staff said the county already offers a comparable county share and that the city could consider exempting up to 100% of the increase in taxable building value for improvements, for a period not to exceed 10 years.

Other implementation points Committee members and staff stressed the plan would require additional staffing and clearer process manuals. The advisory panel recommended developing site guidelines, a revised administrative review list, and more robust public notice for administrative approvals so neighbors would be informed of changes.

Formal action A motion to prepare a draft ordinance reflecting the LUSC memo and refer it to the planning board was moved and seconded on the record and adopted by acclamation. The committee also voted, by acclamation, to ask the city commission to authorize a market study to evaluate a possible transfer of development rights/density (TDR/TDD) program; the committee chose to continue discussion of the TDR program itself until the study is complete.

Quotes “We have over 50 criteria,” Debbie Tackett said of the current certificate of appropriateness standards. Chair Rick Lopez said the committee hoped to “streamline the process” and noted staff might need “an extra hand or two” to implement expanded incentives. Vice Mayor Bond said “streamlining is good,” adding she believed the changes would not reduce protections.

Next steps and outlook Staff will draft an ordinance for referral to the planning board and return with implementation details, including any required budget for additional staff and the scope and cost estimate for the recommended market study on a possible TDR/TDD program. The committee emphasized community outreach and clear design guidance for any administrative approvals so neighbors and applicants understand when a full HPB review remains required.

Ending The committee’s vote does not itself change regulations; it directs staff to prepare formal text and studies for consideration by the planning board and, later, the city commission. The proposed ad valorem extension, staffing requests and any TDR program would require separate approval and funding.