On February 1, 2023, at the request of Commissioner Kristen Rosen Gonzalez, the City Commission referred the attached discussion item (C4 K) to the Public Safety and Neighborhood Quality of Life Committee (PSNQLC).

On March 22, 2023, the item was continued to the April 18, 2023 PSNQLC meeting. On April 18, 2023, the PSNQLC discussed and continued the item to the June 21, 2023 meeting with the following direction:

1. Provide cost estimates for relocating and restoring the existing pylon structure and for reconstructing the pylon structure.

2. Provide possible location options for a reconstructed or relocated pylon.

On June 21, 2023, the item was deferred to the July 12, 2023 meeting. On July 12, 2023 the item was deferred to the September 20, 2023 meeting. On September 20, 2023 the item was deferred to the first available meeting in 2024.

The item was placed on the February 14, 2024 agenda of the PSNQLC, but was deferred to a future date.

BACKGROUND
The property located at 301-317 71st Street (301 71st Street) is at the northwest corner of the intersection of 71st Street and Harding Avenue and contains a 1-story bank building with an integrated 55’-0” tall decorative pylon structure. The building was constructed in 1952 and designed by architect Edwin T. Reeder in the Post War Modern style of architecture.

The original building did not include the subject decorative pylon. According to City records, in 1966 an alteration and addition permit was issued for improvements designed by A. Herbert Mathes for Miami Beach Federal Savings and Loan. This permit included, among other minor interior alterations, the installation of the iconic pylon. It is important to note that the original architectural function of this structure was to accommodate large signage extending above the roof of the building.

On April 9, 2019, the property owner applied to the Design Review Board (DRB) requesting approval to remove the pylon located at 301 71st Street. On July 7, 2020, the DRB denied the request to remove the pylon, without prejudice, since a replacement option for the pylon was not provided. The decision of the DRB was appealed to the City Commission, wherein the Commission upheld the decision of the DRB. The applicant appealed the decision of the City Commission to the circuit court appellate division and in 2023 the court ruled in favor of the property owner, reversing the decision of the DRB.

On November 8, 2022, the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) held a discussion regarding the existing pylon structure located at 301 71st Street. As part of this discussion the HPB unanimously approved the following motion with five (5) members present:

Transmit a recommendation to the Mayor and City Commission to explore all possible options for the retention of the existing decorative pylon structure currently located at 301 71 Street including its possible relocation or acquiring a conservation easement from the property owner.

To date there are no active demolition permit applications for the removal of the pylon.

Properties located within a local historic district or properties that are individually designated as historic are afforded protection against demolition. The City’s historic preservation regulations require the review and approval of the HPB for the demolition of any structure within its jurisdiction. The property located at 301 71st Street is not located within a historic district and is not an individually designated historic site. As such, the HPB has no jurisdiction over the property, or the pylon structure. Additionally, although DRB approval was previously required for the design replacement of the pylon, the DRB could not mandate the retention of the structure.

The site of the pylon structure is within the TC-C (Town Center Central Core) zoning district. The goal of the district is to facilitate and enable the design and construction of larger buildings within the Town Center and to encourage the development of 71st Street. The floor area ratio (FAR) for the site is 3.5, and the maximum building height is up to 220 feet. As such, it is presumably a matter of time before the site is redeveloped in its entirety in accordance with the FAR and height regulations of the TC-C district.

Given the fact that the pylon structure is integrated into the roof of the 1-story building, designation as an individual feature would be very challenging, and any proposed designation would likely have to be inclusive of the larger building. While the Administration recognizes the architectural and cultural value of the pylon within the North Beach community, historic designation is not recommended as it could limit future development options and undermine the intent of the TC-C district.

It is also important to note that a nearly identical pylon exists within the Flamingo Park Historic District, which was introduced at the Miami Beach Savings and Loan building located at 743 Washington Avenue. This pylon structure was also designed by A. Herbert Mathes and added to the building in 1965, eight (8) years after the construction of the existing building. Since this structure is located within a local historic district, any significant modifications or demolition is subject to the review and approval of the HPB.

According to documents submitted by the property owner as part of the previous DRB application, the pylon is approximately 55’-0” in height and weighs approximately 162,000 pounds. Due to the size and weight of the existing structure, relocation to another site would be exceedingly challenging and costly. A feasibility study prepared by a structural engineer licensed in the State of Florida would be required to evaluate the possibility of a successful relocation.

It is highly unlikely that the pylon could be moved as a single piece and would more than likely need to be carefully cut into smaller pieces. In and of itself, such an endeavor, combined with moving the pylon from its original location and context, would significantly compromise and erode its historic and architectural integrity. This practice of relocation is generally not recommended by the United States Secretary of the Interior because such alterations destroy the historic relationship between buildings and the landscape, as well as create a false sense of history.

It is also important to point out limitations that the City has with regard to the placement and storage of relocated building components and structures. The storing and placement of structural relics require limited City property, and often results in costly storage and maintenance.

UPDATE – September 20, 2023 PSNQLC
Following the April 18, 2023, PSNQLC meeting, the Planning Department reached out to several structural engineers in the City’s approved consultant pool and requested cost estimates for both relocation and restoration, as well as for the construction (replication) of a new pylon. While none of the consultants were able to provide a cost estimate, the following is a summary of the responses received:

Relocation
Given the pylon’s size, the difficulty and cost of moving the structure will be significantly influenced by the route to the chosen relocation site. This is due to the logistics of avoiding or temporarily removing and replacing existing power lines, traffic lights, and other obstacles, which can be costly.

Prior to committing to relocate the pylon, the following steps are recommended:
1. Conditions assessment of existing structure.
2. Determination of a desired location (or location options) which could be done in consultation with an architect or landscape architect.
3. Feasibility study of relocation to the selected site. This may be able to be accomplished in whole, but more likely, the structure would need to be divided into the three (3) vertical legs that could then be rejoined at a connection point. This feasibility study will require input from a moving contractor.
4. A preliminary cost estimate could possibly be determined after the above steps are completed.

In the event it is determined that relocating the pylon is technically feasible and the City decides to move forward with the relocation, the following action would then be required:
1. Geotechnical exploration and recommendation report for relocation site.
2. Design of foundation system at new site.
3. Design of appropriate restoration.
4. Permitting.
5. Bidding.
6. Construction.

Due to the unknown variables noted above, including the structural condition of the concrete and steel reinforcing of the existing pylon, a reasonable cost estimate for relocation cannot be determined at this time.

New Construction / Replication
If the replication of the pylon is contemplated, a lidar scan of the existing pylon would need to be completed to serve as a basis for plans for an accurate replication of the structure. The 1965 plans indicate that the pylon was constructed of reinforced, poured in place concrete. Constructing a replica of the existing pylon in the same manner would be costly even at a smaller size, due to the form work required on site. A more cost-effective strategy may be to have the three (3) legs precast in a plant, transported to the site and then joined. This option would, however, incur a greater cost for transportation.

There are several sites within North Beach that could, potentially, accommodate the pylon including Bandshell Park, Altos del Mar Park, North Beach Oceanside Park and the future Ocean Terrace Park. All of these locations, however, have not contemplated a structure of this magnitude, and finding a location that does not interfere with park operations may be difficult.

At the April meeting, the Committee requested information regarding the possibility of incorporating a replica pylon into the North Beach neighborhood signage. There are currently two separate signs proposed to identify the North Beach neighborhood. One sign is proposed to be located within the Normandy Drive right-of-way at the western end of Normandy Isle and the other within the City owned property located on the east side of Harding Avenue at 87th Street. The designs for both signs have been approved by the DRB and HPB, respectively, are at 90% construction documents and are pending Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) review. Currently, neither design has been submitted for building permit due to budgetary constraints. It is also important to note that the designs for both signs were inspired by the rich MiMo architectural features of the North Beach neighborhood and were vetted through a rigorous public process.

SUMMARY
The Administration remains concerned about removing the pylon from its original context, which would significantly compromise and erode its historic and architectural integrity. Additionally, the feasibility of disassembling and relocating the pylon appears remote, at best, and would likely be cost prohibitive. Similarly, the cost associated with replicating the pylon would likely be substantial and finding a location may be difficult.

Considering these challenges, and significant costs, the Administration does not recommend moving forward with either option. Instead, the most appropriate option would be for the property owner to explore design options for the existing building, or a new development project that incorporates prominent and distinct architectural elements commensurate with the architectural quality of the subject pylon feature.