BIRTH OF THE PRESERVATION MOVEMENT
3.11. MIAMI BEACH ARCHITECTURAL DISTRICT DESIGNATION
demands for modern, luxurious condominiums and hotels.84 Public education and widespread support were critical to advance the values associated with Miami Beach’s cultural resources.
Figure 3.36: Postcards demonstrating development along oceanfront and Indian Creek, c. 1960s
Upon invitation, Capitman persuaded the chief of planning for the National Register of Historic Places and representatives of the National Trust for Historic Preservation to visit.85 One caution was the 50-year rule, whereby a structure or district would need to prove exceptionality to be considered appropriate within the national criteria. In order to achieve these aims, only the architecture was qualified, rather than Miami Beach’s cultural history, and a federal job training grant program provided the MDPL with funds to work on the proposed historic district. Two Columbia University graduate students in the Historic
Preservation program, Elan Zingman and Everett Scott, used their internships to examine the architects of the Art Deco period and completed comparative analyses of historic photos and existing conditions.86 Assisted by a staff of fifteen, guidance from Capitman, and a roster of volunteers, the research began in May 1978 and was submitted to the state historic
preservation office just a few months later in August 1978.
3.11. MIAMI BEACH ARCHITECTURAL DISTRICT DESIGNATION
84 This included the 1950 demolition of the 1921 mansion of early Beach resident William Taradesh, the demolition of The Lummus Building in 1941, Smith’s Casino in 1964, Carl Fisher’s home in 1968, and The Roney Plaza in 1968.
85 Stofik, 82.
86 Ibid., 59.
The boundaries of the designation extended from the ocean to an irregular line near the bay on the west, and from Sixth Street north to Dade Boulevard. Assemblies of recent construction were omitted, as well as the South Shore redevelopment area, which was considered too politically charged.87 Everything west of Washington Avenue, north of Lincoln Road and to the south of Sixth Street was included. The statement of significance highlighted the importance of the area to capture a particular period, environment, and approach in architecture that was unique to America.88 The designation report had no mention of the area’s cultural history or individual landmarks, rather it highlighted the ensemble of
contiguous contributing structures. Increasing pressure from the South Shore Redevelopment Agency prompted the urgency of this nomination. The sooner the district gained approval, the more likely local politicians were to halt further demolition and protect historic resources.
Figure 3.37: Map submitted for National Figure 3.38: Collins Avenue view south from 1500 block, 1978 Register nomination, May 14, 1979
Capitman knew that in order to promote success she must link the designation with one of Miami Beach’s long-held values: architecture as a background to it’s successful tourism campaigns. Cultural tourism was the answer.89 The first “Art Deco Week” was planned for October 1978 to garner further local support and prove to elected officials and the community that the historic architectural district could be a driver for tourism. This was
87 Interview with Andrew Capitman.
88 “Miami Beach Architectural District-Statement of Significance,” National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form.
89 Christopher Boyd, “Old Glories… can Deco, disco and developers salvage a city?” Miami Herald, May 31, 1987; Interview with Andrew Capitman.
also the start of an annual event that would celebrate Miami Beach’s Art Deco. In 2017, the event celebrated its 40th anniversary, welcoming over 150,000 people to over 85
educational events held during its 3-day festival.90
Though the term “Art Deco” did not enter the English lexicon until 1968, when it appeared as the title name of a book by Bevis Hiller, the challenge was in cultivating an appreciation for its vernacular forms. Art Deco encompassed several categories of design dating back to the 1920s.91 Even with an impressive architectural inventory, a booklet published in 1968 by the South Florida Chapter of the American Institute of Architects ran photographs of 80 examples of architecture in the Greater Miami area and not one portrayed any buildings that later would be considered as Art Deco.92 Education was an important component for municipal regulatory achievement.
In spite of swelling support from an international community and local residents, the National Register nomination was rejected twice.93 The third draft submission was accepted.
Time was of the essence and in these delays, local businesses began to speak out in
opposition of the district, seeing it as a threat to future development.94 As Stofik wrote, “City officials and developers were appalled at the prospect of having almost fifteen percent of the city frozen in time. If every old building was saved, where could anyone build?”95 Miami Beach was historically future-oriented. Residents began to question the validity of a nationally significant nomination based on buildings that were constructed after their own children were born.
In November 1978, the state preservation office held a meeting on Miami Beach to hear public support for both sides. MDPL had mustered enough local and national support to overwhelm their detractors, using the sentiments around Economic Benefits of Historic
90 The event took place January 13-15, 2017. “About Art Deco Weekend,” Miami Design Preservation League, http://www.artdecoweekend.com/about-1.html. Accessed February 8, 2017.
91 This included the decorative arts, such as interior design, furniture, jewelry, textiles, fashion and industrial design, as well as the applied arts of architecture and the visual arts of painting, and graphics; “Art Deco,” Encyclopedia of Art History, http://www.visual-arts-cork.com/history-of-art/art-deco.htm. Accessed February 8, 2017.
92 Kleinberg, 191.
93 Michael H. Raley, Linda G. Polansky, Aristides J. Millas, “Old Miami Beach”: a case study in history preservation (Miami Beach, FL:
Miami Design Preservation League, 1994), 63.
94 Interview with Andrew Capitman.
95 Stofik, 50.
Preservation from Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service (HCRS) to herald the district as a “solution to problems of unemployment, inflation, poor housing, dying inner cities, and depressed small towns.”96 Revitalization was seen as an alternative to urban renewal, but the economic results that cultural tourism had the potential to generate were the most successful arguments from the city commission’s perspective.97
Figure 3.39: Art Deco Figure 3.40: Ocean Drive during Art Deco Weekend, 2016 Figure 3.41: Hubert L. Nelson, 76, Weekend 2017 poster 40-year resident, 1980 for its 40th anniversary
Finally, on May 14, 1979, the Department of the Interior officially designated one square mile of South Beach as the Miami Beach Architectural District to the National
Register.98 It was the “largest concentration of 1920s and 1930s era resort architecture in the United States,” and the first 20th century historic district to join more fifteen hundred other historic districts already honored on the National Register. Though it was a triumph, victory was met with mixed reviews. The elderly residents, who the MDPL initially sought to protect and upgrade the living conditions for, feared gentrification.