[Music] [Music] [Music] good afternoon welcome to the regularly scheduled meeting of the city of C Gables historic preservation board we are residents of C Gables and are charged with the preservation and protection of historic or architectur worthy buildings structures sites neighborhoods and artifacts which impart a distinct histo historical Heritage of the city the board is comprised of nine members seven of whom are appointed by the commission one by the city manager and the ninth is selected by the board and confirmed by this commission five members of the board constitute a quorum and five affirmative votes are necessary for the adoption of any motion any person who acts as a Lobby is pursuant to the city of C Gable's ordinance number 2006-11 must register with the city clerk prior to engaging and lobbying activities or presentations before City staff boards committees enter the city commission a copy of the ordinance is available in the office of the city clerk failure to register and provide proof of registration shall prohibit your ability to present to the St preservation board on applications under consideration this afternoon a lobbyist is defined as an individual Corporation partnership or other legal entity employed or retained whether paid or Not by a principal who seeks to encourage the approval disapproval adoption repeal passage defeat or modifications of any ordinance resolution action or decision of any City Commissioner any action decision recommendation of the city manager any City board or committee including but not limited to quasi judicial Advisory Board trust Authority or Council or any action decision or recommendation of the of City personnel during the time period of the entire decision making process on the action decision or recommendation which foreseeably will be heard or reviewed by the city commission or a city board or committee including but not limited to quasi judicial Advisory Board trust Authority or Council presentations made to this board are subject to the city's false claims ordinance chapter 39 of the city of CR Gable city code I now officially call the city of C Gable's historic preservation board meeting of July 17 2024 to order the time is 4:02 p.m. present today are to my left Mr Silver Mr Silva Mr orando Miss da Mr Maxwell and to my right Miss Spain and Mr BOS please be advised that this board is and myself Caesar Garcia P please be advised that this board is a quasi judicial board and the items on the agenda are Quasi judicial in nature which requires board members to disclose all expar Communications an expart communication is defined as any contact communication conversation correspondence memorandum or other written or verbal communication that takes place outside a public hearing between a member of the public and a member of a quasi judicial board regard ing matters to be heard by the Quasi judicial board if anyone has made any contact with a board member when the issue comes before the board the member must State on the record the existence of the expart communication the party who orig originated the communication and whether the communication will affect the board member's ability to impartially consider the evidence to be presented regarding the matter um Miss spinas is there any change to the agenda today good afternoon um I do have a request from the property owners of 4722 alhamra Circle case File lhd 20247 and accelerated CP 20242 3 to be deferred to the August 21st um meeting okay so defer to the August what's the date 21st 21st meeting thank you ma'am um at this time we'd like to swear in the audience if any persons the audience will be testifying today please rise to be sworn in thank you um at the beginning of the meeting does anybody have any next part Communications they wish to disclose at this time we'll do it again prior to the item no um okay since there are no minutes to be reviewed um we'll go to the first the first item first item is um case File Co 2024 d019 an application for the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness for the property at 40 4,210 Santa media Street a contributing resource within the Santa media Street historic district legally described as Lots 15 and 16 less Southern 38 ft block 93 curl Gables Country Club section part five according to the plat thereof as recorded in plat book 23 at page 55 of the public records of my midday County Florida the application requests design approval for additions and alterations to the residents and sidew work Miss counts hello so location map of the property um on Santa Maria right up towards Penta Court as a refresh uh to refresh your memory in 2007 uh the Santa Maria Street historic district was designated which includes all the houses that you after constru construction it's a contributing resource within the district designed in 1953 by Martin Howry who was a member of George Merrick's early design team this is one of his later works uh it has undergone um some additions over the years mostly to the rear the historic Integrity of the home is intact and the cetal front facade has had no alterations um they are proposing alterations and additions to the residence and site work I'll let the architect um walk you through his presentation but I did want to um point out on the record um three of the Secretary of the Interior standards for rehabilitation that we adhere to they are national standards um and in this case they um are really relevant so uh number two is the historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved the removal of historic materials or alterations of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided uh number nine is new additions exterior alterations or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property the new work shall be differentiated between the old and shall be compatible with the massing scale size and Architectural features to protect the historic Integrity of the property the environment and number 10 new additions and adjacent related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired so I just wanted to put those top of mind for you um the architect will give his presentation there are no variances requested with this application the board of Architects did review and approve on May 2nd of this year um and then we'll follow up at the end thank you very much sorry forward backward and I think if you pointed this it makes okay thank you good afternoon board members staff thank you Nelson Delon Locust architecture I'll be presenting the project with me today is one of the owners Julia and I think she might want to say a few words and it's probably better if she says them before I start and sort of give you just kind of a background of what she feels about the house and the neighborhood and why we're here great thank you so Julie if you want to come up you can say a few things good afternoon thank you so much for having us my name is Julia Bishops aluri um we've lived in the GBL for about 15 years when we first got to know the neighborhood um when both me and my husband trained at Nicholas children so we really fell in love with the area um we initially lived on University Drive and I said you I would really like to live on this street cuz we're living there for in Ora Maria and my husband kind of laughed at me and said okay that's probably not possible because not many houses come for sale but one did um we are really grateful that we were able to move into the former swix home that you're probably really familiar with um in a pretty Mint Condition um we've been living there for about um four to five years now and like as you live in a home as you guys all know um you kind of get a Feeling of like you know what would work for you and what things to improve so um we noticed that 70% of the house Nelson will describe to is kind of its most beautiful section in the back is occupied by the garage um so kind of the garage and my car have the best view of the golf course so um furthermore um our elderly parents live with us so we really needed an area to the right um side of the house um and we really bought it to be one story so Our intention would never be even to even think about two story and we know that's not possible but we specifically bought it to be one story um in order to still be able to have a garage which we all know is important um and Nelson would explain we were you know thinking about moving one side forward um but that doesn't look very symetrically and wouldn't keep with the front of the house which is why we came up with that idea of have the other side you know move forward too to still kind of keep that front and keep the style of the home so um that's kind of like where we're at um we really love the place and I think you know having lived there really helps you to kind of you know keep and um really get to know it it's like we bought it and we said oh we really want to like just do this and this and this no it really took like almost now 5 years really to kind of get to the bottom of that so both of us um grew up in the old world so we're really familiar with historic and I think Carl gaes and the historic district really speaks to us so we're grateful that you're keeping everything intact so and I'll be happy to answer any questions afterwards great thank you so very much so so um actually before I start I've been here a few times before many of you and um I've I've been fortunate to work on a number of historic properties in The Gables and I've been fortunate to work on a number of The Villages so I've worked at um French city French country Italian Pioneer Village Homes and the Chinese village which I think I may be the only person to have designed a standalone structure there um so what I'm presenting today basically I bring that up because I um I want you to not and take on the project lightly we went through many iterations can we make this work somehow with a garage in the back we looked at it on the side we looked at it we were so constrained by the existing home and the site configuration that after a while we realized the only feasible way to EXP and the home to bring that home up to today's standards to enjoy the views of the golf course and to maintain the structural Integrity of the home was to um bring that garage forward and to do that we tried to minimize that garage in its footprint and balance that out by expanding two Wings one on either side to keep the Integrity of the home so we have the original photo of the home which you saw we have um original drawings of the home which show that the home on the front and throughout most of the elevations pretty much were built the way this shows the top view being the front elevation the second one down the garage and as happens in quite a few of these homes built in the 20s 30s 40s 50s the back of the home became almost secondary even to the even with these homes that are on the golf course many of them had these intrusions in the back that the home at the time could have been designed in a different way way to have been able to appreciate that view so this is the existing home the top left and Center are the front of the home the top right is the rear home this is really the Crux of of the design and why we're why we're here so roughly 70% of the rear of that home is blocked it's either garage or it's solid wall uh and the only part that's actually has a visual connection is at the bottom left that's a screened enclosure very compressed low ceiling height the bottom center uh photo is the garage which has um Utility Equipment air conditioning equipment the electric meters and then the bottom right is an image of the current laundry room the neighborhood you're all quite familiar with Santa Maria um directly adjacent to this home is a combination of 60s 7s one-story homes uh couple of two stor homes and then a very lovely Spanish home that uh Donna knows quite intimately really a beautiful example of those 1920 Spanish homes that that were so well done this home for many many years and have been in it the previous owners uh were friends of ours so I'm very familiar with this so this image I've I've uh brought today because what I'm trying to establish is that what we're doing is really not an anomaly in the sense of bringing a garage that's forward- facing So within a block of this home are 22 homes that have either a forward- facing garage or a forward-facing structure that's a garage um some are side entry some are forward facing many are forward of the main entrance of the house so this what I'm trying to do is just establish that that the context of the neighborhood has a number of homes in which this garage structure is forward facing it's unusual to have a project where so much revolves around the garage but I think it's important to establish that what we're doing again is not out of the norm and context of what exists there um this is a survey of the home in dark gray is the home itself and then the light gray is the paving the U north side of which is completely paved front to front to back just so you know we've taken the orientation and rotated it so that all the future drawings you see going from here are uh parallel to the street so you'll be seeing all these drawings as if you're standing in the front of the street looking at at the house itself so among the things that we're trying to do is remove all this extra Paving and uh instead replace it with replace that circular drive with a motor court and then all that Paving that runs runs along the side of the home becomes green area with a paved pathway um we have flanking proposed additions to the front a a bedroom study on the left and a onecar garage on the right and then to the rear we're reimagining the whole back of the house with a a 50ft lap pool Julia's a swimmer and a little Standalone uh gazebo so it's as car had pointed out this project was reviewed by the board of Architects the board all seven members unanimously approved it um the city architect also unanimously approved it their one suggestion which I think was actually a very good suggestion uh was to further reduce the two proposed wings and pull them away from the main Central volume of the house so the main Central volume of the house is taller than the flanking Wing so we've pulled away so that that volume reads in its entirety and it maintains its original historic um design we're also proposing a site wall at the front the wall itself with fence is 3 fo8 and then the peers are 4 feet we took advantage of this and introduce a pedestrian entrance Center Line with the house currently to enter the home you come along the sides of the driveway and walk to the front door in a circular manner I feel from an from a design and aesthetic point of view whenever possible if you could enter the home as a pedestrian centered with with your own dedicated pathway it's um a much better solution so uh a view of the current layout of the home starting at the left um and part of the reason again why we're here uh bathroom and closet the small with no view of the golf course the small um screen enclosure a very deep recessed double door to the dining room and then the Garage element itself I do have 3DS uh both Aerials and from a lower perspective to show all of this again to you in 3DS but I'll walk you through the plan so that you can then relate this back to the 3DS so our proposed plan starting on the bottom left is the new Wing which is a bedroom study the circular well the port coret now becomes a formal entry porch maintains all its original architectural Integrity we do not touch any of that and then to the left of that is the onecar garage at the rear of the new Master Suite with double doors and S lights facing the um golf course and then we put large windows and another set of double doors facing into the new trellis area where removing the covered screen enclosure and replacing that with a trellis area that allows us to raise the height of the doors and windows that are currently along the rear it also allowed us to take that second room which is a Florida room and create a central axis with the formal living room flank that with double doors so now that whole room has a view to the golf course and the new pool deck uh we introduced a little connector piece between what was the garage and what was the Florida room that's all glazed and now the garage becomes the Florida room fully glazed views toward the pool the golf course and then flanking that double doors and side lights looking back toward into the trellis and into the new side Garden that we've created and finally what was the laundry room now becomes a guest bedroom with double doors and sidelights also looking onto the uh Garden out to the Gazebo and then out to the golf course this is um an enlarged view of the new rear of the house with the lap pool and the Gazebo the Standalone gazebo is actually the only roofed um exterior area in the home aside from the entry porch uh we decided not to ask for a variance so everything is per um the zoning code so we sacrificed um adding additional covered porches to to either the master side or the family room so that we could have a presentation of plan that was um free of variances the current roof plan the darker areas are roof areas that were either eliminating or reconfiguring the new roof plan showing those two wings so the two forward- facing wings are pushed away from the central vium volume and they're also stepped in from that main spine of the home the original home that goes end to end so it breaks uh in of the original structure on both sides and the same thing happens at the rear end the new master suite is set in from the um original structure and then the Garage portion actually I'll get to the garage portion um on the slide after this so this shows us the existing main front elevation top drawing the bottom drawing is the new reimagined um flanking wings and the central portion being independent and proud of those two Wings the rear view so here we see along the bottom how the entire rear portion of the home now is completely opened both horizontally and we took advantage of this and added additional height to the doors we had enough depth in the tie beam to notch out of those TI beams and pick up um additional height so the existing doors along the rear are 67 which really compresses The View we were now able to get them up to 78 and that as as Architects Builders makes a huge difference to your sight lines and and the way you can experience nature in this case with a golf course it makes a very dramatic impact the side elevation on on the garage side which faces North that now gets replaced with the family room with the double doors and Sid lights leading out to the new side garden and then at the Left End of the picture of the of the elevation is the new garage Wing we've added large windows to the garage along with what we proposed to be Carriage style doors to the front so that when you view this the garage it is really rather light filed it picks up the same module of glazing as the proposed bedroom study so the bedroom studies on the bottom right those double uh windows that you see flanking that side repeat on the opposite side the front being the full height glass which we'll see on the U on the renderings to the bottom left is the new Master Suite with the large windows in the master suite and in the uh bathroom itself I'll skip through the landscape and go to the 3DS so with the 3DS um I purposely eliminated all of the Landscaping in the front the sides I took out all the trees all the pals that we were going to propose all the flowering plants because I want you to see clearly what the architecture is that's not what it's going to happen when it gets built because there'll be Hedges there'll be flowering plants there'll be small trees but this gives you architecturally what what we're proposing so this is the existing main house and this is the proposed uh forward-facing uh flanking Wings the one on the left side is that bedroom study with a full height Windows four panels that match the width of the new garage doors you can see uh what was the pork coair now becomes a porch and then the Garage Wing itself with a very large windows on the side those reproduced directly across on the bedroom study side and they then reproduce again on the outside portions of both elements so this is the view from the main entry drive with a drive going all the way to the rear of the property and then the proposed new which becomes a motor Court the driveway at the back gets eliminated becomes a garden p pathway and then the garage doors which do not are not represented here just did not print right but those are Carriage style doors the rear of the home as it exists and the proposed new with the lap pool the Standalone gazebo the trellis element and then all of the new blazing from the southwest View all of these new roofs are all at or less than the secondary roof so the primary main Central volume of the home maintains the highest pitch roof of the entire house all of the roofs were set so they would not exceed the height of the existing secondary roofs and A View From the sidewalk looking back toward the house with the um New entry gate the new pedestrian entrance and then the two flanking wings so that is the presentation if there's any image you'd like for me to come back to to discuss further or look at let me know excuse me thank you thank you Mr Deon um does anybody have any questions for staff or the architect Mr BOS on the side where where they current currently have the driveway going uh going through what's the distance between between the the property line line and the and the home so the ends of the home are are basically at the stepback line so roughly 10 ft the the total setbacks required are 20 ft yeah so roughly 10 11t I'm asking what's the this the distance without the setbacks in other words what do you have between the home and the uh and the and the next door prop yeah 10 and a half to 11 ft 11t yeah there is no even if you were to ask for a VAR variant what would be the problem with having a a cport on the side as opposed to the garage in other words to have the vehicle enter that side as opposed to having my issue is I don't have an issue with the back looks beautiful front I think it changes completely the view of the house uh so the is it possible and maybe staff can elaborate but is it possible to have a card port on the on the side and ask for a variance for it to be able to to be had in that in that way as opposed to having the uh the garage in the front um that's I'm not sure how all staff would feel zoning I'm sure would have a big issue so the carport minimum width requirement clears 10 ft and by the time we add the structure on the edge we'd we'd be we'd have a structural pillar column or something right on sitting on the property line and I'm not sure the neighbor I wanted to know how much distance he was he just we we looked at quite a few options we looked at how how to do a standalone garage at the back um we looked at could we do a garage that just started at the rear of the of the property but in all cases we we couldn't just start at the rear of the property because how tight we were to the neighbor so it always LED back to having to go all the way to the back of the property and then turn somehow into the property which brought us right back to the garage where we have now um and the code does have a um an exception for a single um story 350t Max Standalone garage that can be 5T from the rear and 5T from the side um in this case there's a very large tree in the back which would prohibit us from reaching the five and five so that element would have to come forward and then what happens is it's a 75 ft one-way drive in and 75 ft in Reverse out so it so your driving skills have to be we looked we looked at different we looked at quite a few options and it was it was um there there was just no easy way to make this happen in the back of the property the way the home is currently configured Mrs CZ there was a question about a variance yeah so this this board does have latitude to give variances from the zoning code and we have done that in the past for widths of carports locations of carports locations of garage setbacks things like that so this board does have the latitude within the code to do that okay thank you any other questions Mr Vos any further questions anybody else yes Mr nay I have a question I was looking at the um massing study I like the way you you put um the pictures which I think shows clearly the the distinction between the old building and the current one how do you address uh staff's concerns and actually my concerns also that this um contradicts the Secretary of material standards number nine and 10 yeah there's there's really no way to address that because there's standards and then there's trying to make those standards work within the reality of a home and a lifestyle and a modern um enjoyment of the property so some elements that are in our ordinance today would have prevented Coral Gables from looking like what it does in the 20s all of these beautiful homes built in the 20s so many of them you could not build today either because of height because of setback because they had the carport on the setback because the garage was here or there so what happens with these ordinances as as they develop expand um sometimes they facilitate how you can deal with the structure sometimes they complicate how you can deal with with the structure so if you look at it coldly from the secretary of the Interiors yes what what Cara is saying is correct the secretary Interiors does not want for the most part the front of any historic structure to be changed I think we have a very um unique condition here in which the home while very Charming uh I believe if that home exist exactly as we've proposed today there there's not a single person that would drive by and say oh my God who built this right it would fit perfectly within the neighborhood that's the conundrum we have is that we have a home that's contributing that was designed a certain way that prohibits the use of the backyard the views to the golf course which no one would ever have designed that way so yes it's an incredibly difficult project um and I understand that historic can't because their hands are tied with the regulations your hands are not tied so you can look at it from a whole different point of view and that's really why we're here does what we're proposing destroy the Integrity of the house or does it change it absolutely it changes it but does it change it in a negative way I don't think so I think the way the home was designed and what we're proposing are very compatible we're keeping the central volume of the home still exactly as it was designed we're flanking it with elements that are um both um I would say sort of taking a nod to the original by maintaining the roof slopes the roof volumes and being really a very small footprint at the end of the day it's a onecar garage and a balanced by the sort of guest study wing and that I feel maintains that historical full intent of the cemetery of the home how it was laid out so that's what we tried to follow I don't know if that answered your question but that's that's how I viewed it thank you Mr I have a question Miss Bane so Carrie does anything in the back bother you I understand I and this question came up with another one of Nelson's projects of changing the the the rear pretty substantially I this is a very District in that every property is located on a golf course and that's we're cognizant of that we understand that um so the changes to the back are are a bit much um but generally yes I can tell you when you walk into that house you don't realize there's a golf course yes and i' I've been inside the house to there's another home that I believe was altered um that Mike stepin lived in for a while that also was a courtyard that's the one he that's the one he um brought to you guys just recently yeah right I hope I'm not TR and that's again a home that is on a golf course and 41 exactly that's going to be a lovely home when it's done yes and but but that again was built and you couldn't see the golf course no um beautiful Party House couldn't even enjoy it yeah no doors whatsoever to the back yeah and the house actually next door to mine uh you couldn't see the golf course so I I really appreciate opening it up um I actually don't mind the the garage I probably should but but you know it it makes no sense to have the garage blocking the view there are so many homes on that street where there's something blocking the view um fortunately the my home was open even in the 1920s to the golf course um I do have a little bit of a problem with the window on on the opposite end it seems very large doesn't really seems like it it goes necessarily with the with the original um home I don't know we could certainly change that Mr just in a bedroom so I don't think it's necessarily it has to be that quite that large Mr Vel you said that there's a possibility of putting the garage all the way in the back even if it's you have to improve your driving skills to get in and out uh it's uh it's you said that that would be an issue of moving a tree around uh but what how how would that detrimentally affect look my perspective beautiful job in the back and I understand the the home owner's impetus of trying to enjoy the full property it's very very pretty to to have I just I think it fundamentally changes the look in the front of the house besides the fact that it it does doesn't comply with the the guidelines to have those two additions those two lines come in the front you're changing the completely the structure of the property you're changing the way it looks you're changing the uh the perspective so is there a way that that that garage can end up on the side as a way of of uh of um you know without damaging the tree maybe moving the tree I don't know if that's possibility without having to change the front of the house so Mr joh it's it's a separate question because the tree if not it would be the same answer but I think the question is now if the tree is not an issue would you be able to address the garage differently if the tree wasn't there you could put that element there the garage would be unconnected to the house so it be a standalone element we would um I think then have to get rid of the Standalone gazebo because that's in the area where the garage would have to be placed and it still would be one way in and one way one way right exactly there' be no no turnaround space available within can I can I I have one more question from Miss Spain I'm sorry I have another question um I wasn't I wasn't in the department when the district was done I believe I was in the manager's office at the time 2007 yeah um anyhow my question is uh but this was included because of Charlie's Wick right it was included because of the time period of the district 1953 the time period of the district extends to 1958 it's noted for his association with him but it's not because of it so it was it was the architecture also M it's Martin Howry I mean it's a very late work by a very prominent architect Miss CS I did I wanted to respond to something so the Secretary of the Interior standards are not um they're adopted into our zoning code into our preservation ordinance they're national standards that we are obligated to uphold and by default this board as a body that that operates underneath our preservation code is also alligated to a fold so it's not just something that's zoning code that yeah you can like don't have to look at as much Board of Architects don't have to at all they they don't have to address the standards in any way you all do thank you Miss CS I was going to bring that up myself Mr danana I've got a question um is let the record show Mr Dan is present uh 405 p.m. um is the garage was the garage an addition at some point or was was that part of the original oral that was part of the original and have we ever like granted um like a variance or anything for historic home where we say it doesn't need a garage I know cor Gables requires it but like is there something that says he has to put a garage in the front or he has you know we have to keep a garage okay we can we Grant like some variants or something because is that you know I don't know if we ever we certainly don't encourage it because it's a requirement in the code everyone has to have one covered parking space I cannot call one that we've waved the off street parking requirement think to the record guys I'm sorry I don't I don't I can't I can't think of one either I know that like some of the bigger developments have reduced the number of you know required parking that are historic but is is Delon your your name Delon is is it the could could they instead of the garage all the way in the back the one that that want to drive in and out okay instead of that being a uh could it be a carport or does he have have to be like like a in other words it would be a cport that would not be attached to the property it would be something a freestanding cport could they could they do that or not needs to be a covered parking space with a roofed structure so it could be I mean because you could call it a cardboard necessarily use it as a CPO but uh but uh I think I think part of before we go too far would that be something that you the client would be interested in doing I don't want to talk if I think they have part of the reason for the garage is they have stuff they want to put so I think we appreciate the conversation but I don't believe that's a direction the I'm just I'm just trying to to you know I appr I appreciate that but great any additional questions we're going to have discussion later but not questions for staff or the the applicant did you want me to finish with our our portion or no one other question for me is and then I I think you had mentioned somebody mentioned something about not going up to second floor is that we we wouldn't want that like from from the historic side I mean it's a I mean it's a one-story property we have allowed Second Story editions uh on historic properties depending on how they're done where they're done um usually back in the rear it's been done before yes and that's not something they want to explore or um I don't think so but in this particular home I think it'd be I agree I think I like the layout be difficult I like more as a one story but I'm just trying to think of anything thank you Mr dong did was the city done or did you have additional just wanted to to reiterate our stance um and this is not something that I have undertaken lightly because I very much admire Mr Delon and normally they the easiest staff reports that I write because they're all okay um but in in staff's opinion the front elevation is sacran I mean it is it's the reason it IT projects to the district um if these additions had been made prior to the the district being designated it probably would not be a contributing residence because we look at alterations to properties so in in my opinion this would jeopardize it standing as a contributing residence thank you Miss CS Mr donon any last um no no I just hope you all can see the case I've tried to make appr understand uh you know both sides so you so much okay to stand here I could just tando I have to say I'm really struggling do you want to make a question or you want to keep it for board discussion oh keep it for board disc okay great all right thank you very much I need to disclose something okay I I just need to disclose that I now live in a home designed by Nelson d i just somehow I need to put that on the record Madam City attorney that's not an issue is it Miss Spain if you have no ongoing relationship um I think that would suffice I'm very happy with it but it doesn't affect my uh so my question was going to be since Miss P has been in the house many times we've been asked to disclose things like that and she already has should she state that she has no problem yeah for the purp if you did not visit the property for purposes of this hearing today but just have been familiar with it in the past that that shouldn't um be a problem and you've also disclosed it on the record so I I don't see an issue with that but as always you know please don't visit particular sites in advance of these hearings um if you have a familiarity with it and you want to disclose it that's that's plenty fine great thank you very much so we're going to going to close we're going to open it to public hearing does anybody in the audience to speak in favor of this case does anybody wish to speak in opposition of this case Okay hearing none public comment is closed it is now back for discussion Miss Rando I'm I'm really struggling because I um I don't in a vacuum I don't object to the design except I do agree with Donna that the windows on the uh left Edition are seem like they overwhelm it the cons it the concern I have is it just doesn't seem it's to me clunky um the additions I'm there uh I've been much more comfortable with the twostory Edition overlooking the rear I'm I'm want to hear what everyone has to say because I don't love it and I usually love Nelson stuff it's usually one of the easier projects that come before us so um it's it's a struggle okay thank you okay thank you Mr orando any great way to start the discussion anybody want to join in I wanted to hear from some of the Architects to what their perspectives are I mean other than Miss Spain you know just I want to make like give what's your perspective because as you know again my issue with it is it does besides the fact that Cara made it very plain that the guidelines are not optional okay and the guidelines are not optional then we really don't have any leeway okay with regards to accepting that uh in other words if we're going to have Reserve preservation and we're going to preserve let's preserve right and those those guidelines are are there for that reason okay however unique the property may be however uh problematic it may be for the overall use of the property it is what it is uh but I would like to see at least for the the opinion of The Architects on the board as to what their perspective is other than I mean I agree that they window it's a little large I don't like the two Wings in the front I think it takes away completely from the look of the house the intention of the house what the house supposed to be I have no objection to them opening the back of it for the purpose of they doing it and I was just trying to figure out a way in which they can have their garage in some way ER so that you know we we meet the requirement of the code and they can uh at least uh can provide for the storage that they need thank you Mr Vanos Mr sure um so I I I too am struggling with with this one um from an architectural standpoint I completely understand how you're hamstrung by the site right we have this Garage in the rear blocking the view blocking the the lifestyle blocking the the renovations we want to do right so I understand all the moves you're doing in the back that make complete sense um so putting those two additions in the front I I think that the way they're designed is I think it's elegant I I don't have such a problem I don't think it's clunky um I think that the moves you're doing by pulling them away and kind of making them lower I I I get all that stuff where I get stuck is is that I do think that that really changes the massing of the front facade and and I don't think any of us here are debating that right I think it's it's it's obviously a change to the to the front facade into the house because it was designed as this Central Mass with these two horizontal wings um so so that's kind of where I'm stuck right I understand the looking at at putting the garage in the back I don't think is is feasible because of all the the reasons you mentioned right putting it there's a large tree there having someone do that maneuver and then come out on a 10-ft wide driveway from the rear of the property all the way back in reverse and it just it's it's very difficult so it's it's it's a difficult decision because if if you want to do these additions that's really the only place to put them right in the front um that being said I was when I first looked at this I said well why do we need a garage at all I was kind of thinking along Mr Don's idea of saying well do they need a garage because that's really triggering this whole problem right the garage maybe they don't need a garage maybe the the port CER can be called at carport and we provide a um a variance for the size of that and and and let it be um if that's something the client doesn't want or they need a garage then then that's a different story um but but I have I think I have an issue approving something that so drastically changes that front facade on this important on Santa Maria right I think moves as I said before what you're doing on the back I think makes sense and I think it's within what we normally approve and is acceptable I think following the the the secretary standards um but but I keep getting stuck on that on those two two front front additions although I think they're very well done and I'll you know kind of in a vacuum looking at this as an addition on another house I would agree with the board of Architects right I think it's well done I think it's in proportion I think it's it's it's elegant um but on a historic property um it's it's not so cut and dry for me thank you Mr Silva um well then I have I have two comments one is the item number nine of the the secretary I'm going to read it because I think um Mr J has made a case and I think it's interesting that we're all sort of looking at this is um new additions exterior alterations or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property period That's the first sentence the second one is the new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing size scale and Architectural features to protect the historic Integrity of the property and its environment so I think it's it's an important um item and I think the architect has done an incredibly good job with the with the design the presentation of the design the discussion of the design I think it may meet the CR criteria um and I could understand why we're all sort of debating this um so that's the first comment the second one is related to the first comment uh which has to do with the way that we vote that every item every case here is Case by case it is this house and only this house that we're talking about we're not talking about the district we're not talking about Carl Gables we're not talking about setting precedents we're talking about this particular property and this case only um I know that sometimes we get cut up in some sort of Greater ideas but our job on this one is specifically for this particular item um and having said both those two things I completely share everyone's thoughts on this one's a tough one so um I think it would be interesting to see how this vote folds out so if I were to make a motion just just to be get instructions from the chair May perhaps from from uh the city attorneys if I were to make a motion which I would like to sort of accept the recommendations or the modifications of the back but essentially say that the front elevation modification should not be allowed how would I phrase it in a way that that's consistent with my thoughts at least so first I would want to make sure that the applicant is is um in agreement with that um to approve something that they don't agree with going forward makes things difficult for them um appealing wise Etc or or deny it all together would be the other deny all together so it would be um as drafted in the staff report a motion to deny the proposed residents and site uh site the alterations to the residents and site work um as part of the uh COA application so that would be the motion to deny the application um if you want to have some discussion about um it's a little bit difficult to have a sort of halfway approval of these um in this way the way this appears to be designed I don't know that you could approve rear additions but not so let's make it simple I'll I'll move to before you do can I um I do want two things is I also agree with Miss Bain about the design of the front piece on the leftand side that and I'm sure Mr Al said that he'd be happy to work on the design of that front window um um piece um so if there is going to be a motion that has to do with the front I would encourage that or maybe there's going to be a friendly Amendment from Miss Spain but even before we do that I have a question for the City attorney of course uh I know that we need five affirmative votes to pass we're eight if we're 44 what happens if it's 44 it gets deferred automatically to the next meeting for consideration of the full board thank you ma'am Mr B so what I would like to do is make a motion to the I consistent with the uh uh with the words that Jennifer utiliz have consistent with the recommendations of staff is that enough or should we read some of those out can incorporate so I understand that to be a motion to deny the design proposal as well as the issuance of the certificate of appropriateness yes it is for the property at at 4210 Santa Maria Street are the conditions clear it's a it's a full denial of the application I'm sorry are the reasons clear the Reas clear as a stating in staff report that it's is consistent with the standards that are that are required for the reasons outlin in this that report so I Incorporated by reference okay okay we have a a motion to deny by Mr BOS is there a second yes I will second that motion and there's a second by Miss da any further discussion um I mean before I vote I kind of a couple questions um I guess one is for the City attorney and one is kind of for staff um I guess the first being just legally like what is a resident allowed to do like if they you know they purchased this home they want to add to this house I mean by right they have to be allowed to add to the house correct so so our processes if you are a designated home or a contributing structure you go through this process which is the certificate of appropriateness process so of course there is some level of of property rights as there always is in all items but this process is one that the city believes is a proper process and legal process for contributing structures or designated homes to go through this process there are appell at rights if it's denied here um so so the city is is fine with this process but that's what you do when you're a contributing structure if you want to make alterations to your home additions you get your certificate of appropriateness and then my question for staff is it seems like the only other option here would be a second story and I don't know if that's I mean is that something you guys would prefer I I just actually I don't think that's we have a motion that's already been discussed um and we do have a motion because I I mean I like the I think it's you know a nice project I think it's a great I think Nelson's the right guy for this job you know if we're going to pick someone um I think he knows you know the area he's done a bunch of houses there and he's got a lot of experience but I I also understand you know you know the staff's concern with with you know bringing you know the the facade forward is just tough M Mr chair if I may denial of this particular certificate of appropriateness in no way prohibits the property owner from coming back with a different design or working with staff to come with a different certificate of appropriateness they can modify the whole thing they could just make it different you have to have the gentlemen it's now you have a vote is the opportunity here is you can vote what you feel is right so we have a motion in a second let's call the rle okay uh Mr Silva yes Miss Rando yes Miss Spain no okay Mr Banos yes Mr Maxwell yes Miss Den yes Mr Rana no Mr Garcia pon no motion to deny passes 53 correct thank you okay next item is a the chair yes ma'am can we discuss briefly the Omission the pro uh or as staff about um omitting the garage so there we have actually we have a vote so do we I don't I don't think we should continue discussion unless we reopen it yeah M Mr Randa at this point if there's something that will come back to you it would come back to you and it's better not to discuss it at this moment we can discuss it if and when another certificate of of appropriateness comes before you thank you okay we have a board City commission item we have a presentation from City staff regarding the gondola building hello good good afternoon um Anna peris a historic Resources Director um we do have oh there we go presentation so just a brief little update I think some are familiar with this project some aren't so um believe in March did have an agenda item that I did present before the members of this board and had stated that at that time we had gotten comments from the historic Resources office from the state about the cultural grants that were um applied to the Reconstruction of the gondola building and at that time the state had requested that the building either be reconstructed in its original location or that locations along the canal were considered and they had actually identified I think three or four spots within an email that they sent to staff um along the Waterway uh just kind of give a brief little introduction to the building and then I'm going to let um director of Public Works Hermes Diaz talk about the conditions of the sites and then the two locations that are being considered for relocation today is a discussion because we need to understand where this board is um what direction to will come from the board and kind of have that open discussion with you all while still figuring out where to or if we need to relocate um so just a little history on the Gondola building so this is an original accessory structure of the builtmore complex built in 1925 uh the gondola building is located within the built Mo's golf course and adjacent to the original hole number three and the location was strategically located so that um you could launch as a launch area and service for the facilities of 15 to 25 gondolas that were imported from Italy along with their gonders um the Waterway canals in the gondola concept was well within George Merck City beautiful Vision uh the the hotel itself and the and the country club complex was designated as a National Historic Landmark by the National Park Service in 1996 and the gondola building was considered one of the contributing features of the site um in 2019 uh the building had been in disrepair and a grant for rehabilitation of the gondola building was applied for uh the city since then has been working with um the historic resources Office of the State of Florida to uh reconstruct the gondola building given um funds for that reconstruction and looking at locations of that um a presentation I think was made to you all before by previous preservation officer of different locations um because there is a section of our code that does allow for moving existing structures but um this is the current photo of it just in case there's no confusion here no caring prior to and this was prior to the most recent condition of the building where there's been a partial collapse of the structure and reconstruction is required um I'm going to hand this over to Mr Diaz and here to answer any questions you guys have thank you good evening Hermes I'm the pows director um so as as Anna mentioned you know we're here today hopefully getting your blessing for uh the relocation of the new building um I just go through some some of the current things that we're working on on the plans um that's the original location of the gondala building within the larger Golf Course um some historical views um we are looking at two potential um locations um which are labeled location one and number two um this is a blowup or the area I think option one is probably the one that were the most partial for um and um the reason for us asking to the relocation is that the existing location is actually very problematic it's very problematic due to the potential for there some access issues um there's a safety of the workers that are going to be um subjected to potential Golf Course during construction the disruption to the golfing operation at that location um it's it's rather significant and there also significant concerns about damaging the golf course through um having construction equipment on a regular basis driving in and out um to that location um so um in addition to you know all the disruptions to the golf course the operations um the location that we're proposing uh we believe that it has safer access it will be Les less disruptive realize that I misspelled the world word there but um less disrupted to the operation of the golf course um some of the electrical services which will have to be redone are a lot closer easily accessible um it is located in the canal which um we believe will be acceptable to the division historical resources obviously the con is that it won't be um at its original location and if I could I'm sorry I lost it if I could have it back I'm going to go and put back the oh there you go I did it wrong again I'm sorry um so so these are the two options that we're looking for and with option one probably being the one that we're the most partial to um and uh we like to hear your thoughts about it where is that in the relation to we go back to the larger view yeah um I think that's right off Bird Road to the Bird Road and the park guys guys one at a time please Mr danana can we zoom into that right okay there you go okay yeah there's like a facility there already um correct yeah I mean well should I let them finish their presentation we're done he's done that's it um I mean I've played the course a lot and where that building is I mean that building gets pelted with golf balls all the time it is it is a really bad spot um especially if you want to use the building for anything I mean if you're just going to leave it as a as a monument then fine but I think if you're going to use it for for any sort of Maintenance or anything like that I think moving it would would make sense um you get full use of it but um I as far as the locations I mean I'm for and that is definitely one of the issues but also during constructions you're going to have uh some of the workers going to be exposed to to that and also as you can tell it's very deep into the golf course so so having construction equipment trucks getting out you're looking at a potential for recurring damage to the golf course I mean I get that part but that's also that's also on the bmore for letting it rot away you know like they have a duty to maintain it my issue so I mean for me at that part I'm not going to consider that it's just I I I cannot fix the scen of the past I can only except I don't believe we should reward bad behavior I don't understand why it can't stay in the location where it is I'm sorry like I'm I'm having this conversation like I still work with him if I can ask a question again of staff is what's what's being requested of the board today miss paron us not we're not asking for a certificate of appropri but you're asking for hopefully a blessing for us to proceed with the design location Direction the relocation so there's no vote here this is a recommendation to you personally as the Director of Public Works well I presume I would like you to take a vote and tell me right that I I think they are looking for some direction from the board about preferences but to the extent something is going to come back to you that would require an official vote that's not today but it will definitely be coming back to you with a more developed design and with more information for you to eventually get a certificate of appropriateness but that's not what we're here today before means any recommendation from this board whether it's option one option two or option 72 I mean you're welcome to make any recommendation thank you Mr Diaz Mr Maxwell uh will the building be moved or reconstructed meaning using the existing parts or will it be replicated meaning you're going to demolish what's there and then build something totally new the the idea is to um reuse whichever Parts can be redone at the new location I will leave those details up to the designer and and those are that's part of what we're going to bring to you later on with the more developed set of drawings that has to save as much as possible I couldn't tell you right now whether it's 2% 5% 10% God Mr Silva sure um so I I'm not familiar with this item I wasn't on the board last time it was brought to us um but if you don't mind putting the the overall plan back up the the overall site plan that shows yeah so you're you're telling us that there they two PR two important factors in considering the movement right the the available availability of utilities and and site access for construction I guess where where where are the utilities I mean the utilities exist where they are now there's some electrical there's some the only utility there right now is electrical and that will still remain they'll likely have to be some some restoration to that service that will have to happen for that to remain at this location our biggest concern is the access doing construction uh the staging the workers that are going to be exposed to being here with Golf Course during construction um I don't think that necessarily shutting on the golf course doing construction it's really an option and and the potential if you look at the distance how are they going to get there you're looking at heavy equipment going to be traveling on those little uh path that were created mostly for uh golf carts and uh there is the potential of recurring damage to the golf course during construction um and and we just feel that the impact to the golf course itself and and just the constructability of that location is very difficult there's no way to access that from the North or everything will have to come from the south um and we just believe that it's it's just difficult to access more expensive um and and I don't want to discard it want to say that once again you know you're going to have people working out there potentially being exposed to golf course being hit all around them so I mean I think that the the golf PL concern I think that can be handled right there's netting systems there there's things that can be done during the construction I'm not super concerned about that um but so the utilities the utilities exist in the original location they exist and there's no plan to bring water or upgrades or anything it's not going to be bathro it's just even in the new location there's no plants it would just be fed electrical electrical that's the only utility that that at this point is being planned to to restore and then the other part of my question was was site access right so what is the like if you if you're going to rebuild it in the original location and if you're going to do it in location number one or two where is your construction access from in either case well um to be frank the location actually for the original location u i mean it it's we'll have to figure that out I it will have to come probably from uh somewhere on the road and cuz I think the only the only access is from the little like to me it looks like it's the same distance is why I'm asking Mr B please I just can answer the question to him I'm sorry apologize yeah my question like because I think on I think you cannot have access from the sort of Granada side because that bridge is there in the way so you'd have to come in through you'd have to come in I think you'd have to come in through through bird where where the course touches bird there actually is Access Road um on F how to use here we go an AIS road somewhere through there yeah there is so there is okay so so it is much shorter to build it in the other location the options of access to that location they're really not great but most likely the entrance will have to still go through that area we just have to travel all the way through just to get there somehow um this a RightWay entrance here is heav Landscaping that would be another option potentially we have to cut through when remove some of the Landscaping that was installed couple years so that will be another potential access through here in my ACC where this access to the rway those would be really the only locations that I can imagine at this point but the the aits on the east side on Bas that's where the operation and the maintenance for the golf course that's where they have their own access to so it will definitely be a lot less disruptive to the operation and obviously any potential damage and and just to Just One Last point of discussion since since we're talking about this this building that's really a jewel kind of it's it's really kind of a a Folly almost right it's just a building that you just kind of walk around and look at right right so if we're talking about relocating I would I would think it would be a good idea um if we're talk if we're if it does end up um relocating to position number one or number two or whatever um maybe it will be a good idea to have the parks uh department or your department um take a look at making that somehow publicly accessible if if you're pushing it to that corner already it's it's going to be more viewable from that bridge which some pedestrians use not a lot but some um and and maybe there is some sort of access not a requirement but just if we are going to move it maybe we we think about that at least thank you just I was just going to say that just across the Waterway from that location is 0 Barnes Park so there is a public park just AC on the other side of the Waterway so there may be some sort of connection there I have one question for staff then it's Miss D then Mr Maxwell um Miss panas can you remind the board the original use of that um Gondola building it was a storage facility for gondolas so storage facility okay thank you Mr thank you some of my questions have been already asked and answered thank you um what is your envisioned use of this building would it be open to the public is it going to be another storage facility what's we haven't figured that out yet and and that was always the hard point about that facility that that's really you know the original thought about putting at the cik center when that was originally thought that that will be a location it will definitely have uh use through the parks department um but you know when the the State Historical folk said that that wasn't really an option that's you know we we canceled the the meeting here with you know the followup meeting that we're going to have with with this board um that's something where that we'll have to come back back to you when we come for the certificate of occupancy that that's always been the hard thing about this building what what are we going to do with it it's in the middle of nowhere um we cannot really be used for what it was intended to originally um it's we I couldn't really tell you at this moment to be frank with you thank you Mr Maxwell and then miss Spain okay this is a toughy I mean why are we spending nearly a million dollars to replicate a building that has no use and won't serve anybody that we know of at this point um I guess that's a real question I know that's a political decision but I mean it's a question for the board here as well um I don't know what hole it's on I don't play the golf course because I don't play golf anymore but uh it's not going to serve golfers it's not going to serve gondolas and we don't know that it's going to serve anybody I I can't answer the question that was a decision that wasn't made by myself the grant was applied to the commission decided to question Mr Diaz Mr chair whenever you can Miss B just a couple of observations um I believe uh commissioner kdik first uh brought up this building when he was commissioner uh in the 1990s I believe uh and he asked uh Public Works to look into hisory ing it then and ever since then it's just sat there and every year we go over and we and you have your Public Works little list what you're going to restore on historic and that's at the bottom of it and so now it's fallen down and and there was a point when I was in zoning that uh I talked to the Belt more about bringing back the gondola rides and having it go from uh that building down uh and I've almost had the City attorney on board uh there was a a liability issue that was a problem with the golf balls and I was thinking maybe it could only be done at night when the when the uh it would be a cool night uh bride with a gondola down the little thing and you could be you could be picked up at that um location one or two that you want to move it to keep it in the original location have the night uh R rides down there man I almost had it done but then it fell it fell through uh so I've lived with this building the whole time I was at the city and it's a beautiful little building there's if it's after hours first of all the whole construction people being in danger I just don't believe there's there's ways that you can uh make it safe for them to work in that building by building a structure or whatever but I mean it happens all the time people build things on gol um and I well they they built a practice facility yeah they built a building yes a few building it's like four buildings over there so I I they can make it they figure I just don't believe that I think that you're you want to move it into one of the ugliest locations on the golf course if you've been to that uh location it's a the city um I don't know it's used by utility util I it's horrible so to to move that Gem of a building into where you where you want to put it I'm not in favor of at all which I realize is throwing a wrench into this whole uh situation um better to move it uh off the golf course which is not going to uh be liked by the uh the state I don't know how they would feel it's not an option it has to be on the builtmore complex as part of the application honestly I would leave it where it is I mean if they want to have some type of a really cool uh romantic dinners in there they have the electricity you could have it as a a something there are ways to use that building it would have to be after hours when there aren't golfers there getting in the way but it it could be lovely keep in mind there no bathrooms there there's no water I don't believe yeah there's no facilities and we wouldn't be able they wouldn't be able to do that but if I can I just show you just because there was a comment made by when they received the comment of from the state St preservation office about the location by kurtag Park saying that it was not appropriate one of the things that's mentioned in the comment that I had um printed out was um our office has consulted with the head of the Florida historic golf Trails program to determine other locations and the building to could be relocated on the canal front that may better meet the needs of the stakeholders while maintaining the historic sections of the golf course and not destroying any of its original route so they had actually approached this other division completely about you know the destruction that could be caused by the construction of the golf course and identified locations which again you're not looking at the ones right in the middle of the canal I think and that's kind of why we end end up where we were because one of the ones is by the school which is already being used and then the other three that they had proposed were actually by this facilities building at the corner so it was something that kind of came looking at those locations that the state had provided and then this go uh Florida golf Trails it was seemed the most amable I do know it's in kind of putting it in the corner but it is putting it in the corner it's there's no other way to look at it I apologize I wasn't here the last time you presented to this board I did not yeah no we didn't end up cuz we got these comments and so we were like oh it was on the agenda it was meant to be on the agenda in April and we kind we're going to propose to put at the Kik uh Tennis Center which is still within the overall but the state said that was not an option keeping on a complex I think I I think the state has stated their sort of preference and opinions the Public Works director has stated their preference and opinions it is now our board's turn to State our preference and opinion so we can take all the information and then do what it is that we're here to do Mr BOS and then Mr Rando no disrespect to the chair I was just trying to have a discussion I apologize okay so um so I I'm not a good golf player but uh there's a set of ladies who like to walk the golf course at 6:00 in the morning and I join them and we I do it quite often so I pass by this building at least twice a week okay I my concern is the two places where you're suggesting to move them okay out of sight out of mind okay and you're going to spend spend a million dollars to put a building in another place that you're also going to ignore all over again and it's going to deteriorate all over again especially if all you're trying to this preserve maybe 10 15% of it we don't know which you don't know I understand that okay it does seem to be I mean those two sites don't necessarily work for me what the point that I was trying to make to Mr the Silva is there's significant access without damaging the uh the uh the actual roads uh or or the uh I mean they can wear her hats you know they do have that possibility uh without having to to access it without any issues uh I I think I'm with with Spain it should be it should stay exactly where it is I think it's consistent there's a whole design to it and it's it's it's a pretty B building there but I do take the Chairman's point which is it's always meant to be a storage facility so I think it's a little myopic for us to say well this is the only thing that it can be and this the only thing it would ever be just because we haven't come up with an idea of what we can do with it ER and certainly that's something for for the folks at the commission to determine exactly what they would like to see that Invision at least from my vote I wouldn't want want it moved anywhere I don't buy the uh with respect to you her I don't bu the two the two suggestions as to why it would be a good idea to move it I understand that the people that are renting the golf course and the uh running the hotel uh don't want to disturb their their um the procedures there but I don't want that to be a consideration especially when as Miss pay pointed out it is there the relection of the maintenance of this building that has us here okay so that should not be a consideration at least in my as far as I'm concerned I would like it to stay where it is I would like it to be as close to where it is as possible H and keep it as a storage facility until we come up with something else better to do and you know we can install a bathroom in there and put Plumbing it's not a it's not difficult there probably need a home station thank you Mr B M Rando this is an example can you have to speak right into it okay this is an example of a self-inflicted wound because this has been sitting out there we now know well for almost a 100 years but it's been neglected for easily 30 years so we have to figure out we and the city have to figure out a sensible way to deal with this situation if it had been addressed earlier we wouldn't be talking about it so my attitude is it makes no sense at all to take crumbs if we don't know you're not sure what percentage of the building can be reused um I think it from a historic preservation perspective it should remain where it is and re the portion of it that can be preserved use those materials and then add whatever new materials that uh or preserve materials that we are storing this does not have to stay as a storage facility we talk regularly about adaptive reuse of historic structures and I can't imagine anybody in the hospitality business like the builtmore that can't figure out a way to make money out of this I think we should add electri restore the electricity add water add bathrooms so that it can be used productively to replicate it someplace else to me where it the access still is lousy makes no sense each of us has been in an event where we've been carded to some remote place or not so remote place in a golf cart um so my recommendation um uh my personal one not speaking for the board would be figure out a way to adaptively reuse this structure in a p in a profitable and positive way and let's let's do something interesting with it rather than replicate it and forget about it on the edge of the golf course someplace thank you Mr Lando anything else from the board chair I have a public comment um actually I'll have something and then I'll go to public comment so um Mr Diaz I think on your slide you use the word challenging as one of your first yes items and I agree and expensive definitely challenging um and I I think we did have a conversation about this in a previous meeting we're having it again now um the reason I asked Miss Banas is the original use it was storage it can be storage again right it can now we would like it to be whatever's best for the building and the users and the owners but we don't know what that is yet so I think until such time that we have a better plan which is not what you're here for is it should stay where it is uh if it's going to move I think you might get people to get behind it if we had some idea what that was going to be but to take a beautiful Folly to use Mr Silva's words and put it behind a bush doesn't make any sense to anybody that's a waste of money very um if you're going to use it use it as a folly or and figure out the use of that Folly at one time but at this particular point with the information that I think you've brought forward and you can bring forward at this time it's not enough for at least me to make any sort of recommendations and decisions other than it should stay where it is it should get fixed the way was and should be used at the original use which is storage until such time that the city comes with something else I love everyone's suggestions about plumbing and use and and bringing people there but I know the challenge of that is insurmountable probably but that's not what we're being asked today so until such that we get a maybe different presentation you're probably going to get the answer you're going to get understood and I would like to again appreciate the board understanding our role in this process right we're not Public Works we're not the HBO we're not the state we are the cable s preservation board um with that I will open it up to public comments and if this person wishes to be sworn in they have to be no disc oh this is a discussion for anybody to be sworn in thank you please gelia good afternoon yes caria I am president of the historic preservation Association and we have have been following this particular item for many years and we were very pleased about the Grant from the state which uh really gave a boost to now this conversation and I agree with uh with Donna with Peggy with Javier um with Alex um this building should stay in situ because first of all there's not much still standing and you know I mean it it really it's it's just not even a thought to move it anywhere else it is a Folly it was part of the original billmore uh complex it still should stay I mean the billmore is celebrating its hundred and two years um I love Peggy's idea about an Adaptive reuse um you conversation I am sure builtmore guests would love to have a destination to the gondola building and and pay for it so I you know moving it and I hear from I know it's you know for Mr Diaz all respect to him but you know this is a historic uh asset and you know moving it I don't think it should be an option I think let's keep it where it is let's build it as you know as as it should be conserved uh um preserve it and use it uh you know find ways to use it I have a beautiful view shed which I took when I was there um you know before it crumbled and if you sit outside the building you have a perfect view of the billore hotel on the water I mean it is gorgeous so to move it anywhere else just doesn't make sense so you know from from our organization we would uh would like you to consider keeping it in situe thank you thank you Miss caranel um does anybody from the board wish to speak does anybody from the board wish to take any action on this item would the city find any action from this item helpful then there could be a resolution to the city manager to the board or we could say thank you very much I I think a resolution would be helpful what kind of resolution would be so a resolution is up to you my understanding and and perhaps Mr Diaz can clarify that part of the reason this was coming you to you today for discussion is because of steps that we have to take um correct we we've we've directed the designer to get as far as a cool without a location without structural information without you know we're gotten to the point that un until until we finalize the location we cannot really continue to proceed um with the design so that's why we wanted to who's the designer it's gri mat mat a resolution that says I'm sorry Mr Diaz a resolution that says they it is essentially our voice that it should stay where it is would that be helpful I mean that's your that's your direction I mean that's your opinion so will we're here to get your opinion so right they're here to get our opinion we've stated it but I again I'm not going to make any resolution if somebody here wants to make a resolution we can do so so there are a few options if you don't mind Mr Garcia Pon this board can certainly just pass a motion um expressing its preference for one location over another a resolution requesting the city commission to do something I think at this point would be a little bit um maybe ahead of time because we're still at the staff level before we come to a COA but if the STA if if this board is interested in making a motion expressing its preference for certain location I think that's certainly appropriate and um would uh give a singular voice to the board so City attorney so how would you like it's not a resolution of the board but it's just a motion the a motion okay a recommendation okay with with a Indulgence of the chair okay so I'll make a motion uh for us to incorporate by reference the the our comments today uh and specifically to address the fact that the there is our perspective that the uh gond building should stay were in its present location and that it should be preserved to the fullest extent possible and I'll accept any any friendly amendments to augment what I just said I would second that okay there's a motion in a second does anybody have any friendly amendments Miss Rando uh I would ask that the um City preservation and uh the uh less or uh un or the uh less under the uh lease explore uh uses of that um building is that acceptable Mr and maybe add to through the motion that there should be a a process in which some as as as Mr rundo has has suggested in which we can come up with creative ideas or you know to to do something with this building is that acceptable Miss Spain sure okay we have a motion and a second with the amendment is Staff clear on the motion I'm happy to reiterate my understanding of the motion if that's helpful to to everybody that it's a motion uh uh based on the discussion today recommending that the gondola building remain in its present location and be preserved to the fullest extent possible and that in doing that preservation that the historic preservation officer City staff and the uh current operators of the builtmore explore uh uses of the building through some sort of process or collaborative process lovely exactly what I thought okay uh so any discussion on that motion okay we have a motion in a second can you call the role Please Mr jna yes Miss D yes Mr Silva yes M Rando yes okay Mr Banos yes Miss Spain yes Mr mawell yes and Mr Garcia P yes thank you the motion passes 8 to nothing thank you Mr Diaz thank you sorry miss panus any items from the secretary any additional items um that was it for me um we will be working on the scheduling of the orientation as a reminder um and uh I think that was it from the last meeting also I do have um before we go the question of the orientation I know that we've been asking for a while and now we have a full seated board we had we had one of the previous orientations I went to was held on a weekend morning I think it was a Saturday morning and I found it to be very beneficial does anybody have any thoughts on when would be best to do a meeting so that we can talk to staff I know it has to be publicly noticed and sunshin and all the like but is there a time that makes sense to us and I really enjoyed the one I had with Miss Spain and Miss Couts a few years ago um was that the Mir house was it no it was in in the in the museum oh that's right that's right on a Saturday morning because it was we were in and out we only talked about one topic and we moved on it wasn't part of the rest of our day but I know it is a commitment of our time so any general thoughts to direct to help Miss SP us with setting up I like the uh I like the idea of the Saturday morning because it doesn't interfere with work ual and um I'd like to request that we do it as soon as possible perhaps we could find August so so I don't have a problem with the 17th of August is everybody amendable to that day just to put a date out there you have a problem with or you no I don't have a I'm suggesting a date just to to move it for I I like August 17th that works on my calendar our meeting is the that week so I think Miss penis is going to check on the availability of the week before after our meeting or some version it but I think we have some sort of a consensus that Saturday morning would be fine for most of us if that works our meetings after the foll our meeting is on the 21st so we'll circulate dates I'll kind of take a poll of everybody for dates once we get kind of Staff confirmed too and then um but that time Frameworks okay perfect and then one the one last item I had asked the City attorney to give us a report on what presentations of appeals by the city office and she had I think I asked her she had something to right I think Miss benis we did talk about at the last meeting Mr B was to bring it up I don't know if the City attorney has some comments certainly I have a very few comments to give you all the appell procedures so this board is the only um final board final it's non- recommending board in the city um besides the city commission so you all are one of our only final boards which means that your decisions are appealed to the city commission they are not recommendations um m is the board of adjustment I apologize they're also a final AB board um in any case so what happens is there's an appella procedure there is a deadline from once somebody meets with you all there's I believe a 10-day um deadline to file a notice of an intent to appeal we have certain deadlines and it's uh supposed to be heard at the next available City commission meeting oftentimes that's delayed due to the applicants um wanting an additional time staff needed an additional time um when the meeting Falls based for on Advertising deadlines Etc so it should be at the next city commission meeting the city commission hears an appeal based completely on the record below it is not a denovo hearing that means they don't take new test Tony they don't hear additional information it should be a rather short presentation by both the applicant and historic preservation staff about the decision of this board that we always counsel the city commission that they should be looking for three things they should make sure that they was due process meaning the person got noticed they had the ability to appear they had the ability to question staff present Witnesses make their own arguments that there was substantial competent evidence for the decision of this board so that can be um a little bit tricky sometimes if there's a failure to designate for instance so you have to make sure that there was substantial competent evidence that um it did not need to be designated so there's sort of a little bit of a a Nuance there but the commission is looking to see was there substantial competent evidence for the decision that you all made and was the correct law applied so did you look at the right factors in the historic preservation code um did you consider those things did you consider a staff's report what evidence did you consider Etc so often times those discussions in front of the city Mission can go on a little bit more than those three factors we know that um I wanted to let you all know we issue or the mayor issues um in consultation with our office procedural orders every time they set forth time limits and an order of presentation before the city commission 10 minutes 15 minutes Etc we try to keep it very narrow based on the um criteria that the city commission should be considering so they shouldn't step into your shoes they rely on you they're looking for those three things again sometimes as you well know um Property Owners or applicants are very um very involved in the process they have a lot of information that they want to share so oftentimes uh the chair or the city commission wants to hear additional information whether or not that's something that should be considered at that time oftentimes it is presented we always allow public comment at those um at those appell proceedings whether or not they're considered they're not considered a substantial competent evidence or new testimony it's just public comment but as always as you know the city all allows public comment um in a lot of different areas where it's not necessarily required but that's one area where we always allow public comment though it's not to be considered um by the city commission and making their decision decisions of the city commission are then appealed to circuit court at a first tier RIT of Sir Shari it's a petition um that's a process that once that you know it's sort of out of of your hands and the city commission's hands and the city attorney's office along with any outside Council represents the position of the city commission and the lower boards whatever it may be so we move forward with that and defend the process so really what you're looking on from Beyond the city commission is the process was there due process was there substantial competent evidence was the correct law applied the same standards that the city commission should look at that's what the courts look at so that's generally how the process goes we have had discussions in the past we've had discussions with Miss peros about um representing the not necessarily the historic preservation officer's um opinion and decisions but this board's position because that's really what's being appealed is the decision of this board now um oftentimes what's appealed is a decision um to uh take staff's recommendation for something to appeal or not appeal and so you are um possibly one and the same in your viewpoints about the criteria applying or not but it could also be the case where Miss Panos doesn't think something should be designated and you do and it's your decision of this board not necessarily staff's decision that is being appealed so one thing we're looking at is having me or whoever sits in this chair as your counsel representing the decision of the board before the city commission and laying it out in those ways this is the due process that was afforded this is the substantial competent evidence that was considered this is the law that was applied and focusing along with Miss peros and any other um staff um who who need to testify about what was considered to sort of narrow the focus of those appeals going forward um it's something we're looking at it doesn't require any code changes there's nothing that needs to change but to sort of focus the presentation on the um the meat of the matter that the city commission is considering as you know people are very passionate about historic preservation and especially applicants who feel their their homes are um at issue get very passionate about it and and want to speak for a long time completely understandably but just to let you all know we do issue along with the mayor those procedural orders we do try to contain the topics that the city commission considers um we always instruct the city commission that their role and in considering that and their final decision- making is to uphold your decision overturn your decision orand it back to you for further consideration as you know that for the first time in a long time happened recently with the property on Milan Avenue um the the remanding but those are the three options really that the city commission has when they consider an appeal from this board so that's the procedure there's of course involved um in the details of that lots of deadlines Communications with staff public notification mailing you know there's there's a lot of other details in involved in those appeals um there's a cost to appeal there is a transcript that is provided and that's really the the meat the transcript and the presentations that this board what is provided one thing that came up and I do want to mention to you all and I think that the chair sort of alluded to this today is that one thing that the city commission had issue with in particular that 1221 Milan property was making sure that this board's decision making process was clear to the applicant and clear on the record so making sure and I think we we generally do a very good job and I think staff's reports especially are very specific and when you adopt them you adopt those sort of specific points but especially in um decision that decision- making where there's particular points that issue there may be particular architectural features you're looking at that are very important or not or very or dates that are particularly important that when this board discusses and makes decisions you incorporate those findings of fact in a very clear manner so that the record is very clear clear for what reasons you designated that property um I believe and and and and I can see that when you make those motions and incorporate staff's reports you are incorporating that decision-making and those findings but to the extent that something gets appealed and if you guys feel very strongly about particular architectural details or particular merits of Architects that you make those very clear in your findings so that the appellant knows exactly what points you made your decision on it's a little nitpicky I I understand but I think the commission um would appreciate seen clearly in our motions and findings for what reasons and so it's it's because the location of the windows demonstrates that it is an art deco I don't know what I'm talking about here but you know demonstrates the art deco qualities of the building Etc um and oftentimes that is in the staff report but I do think it's helpful to sort of flesh out those details in your discussion and your motions and and that seemed to be the direction that the city commission was giving in particular with that property but I think going forward it might be a best practice to sort of look at flushing out our decision- making a little bit more for the appellant possible appellants thank you Miss City attorney before should we be incorporating the staff report in our when we make a motion to approve or deny if that is the reason you want to approve or deny based on the findings in the staff report yes and and generally the Motions that you make incorporate by reference for the reasons mentioned in the staff report or based on the presid presentations by staff yes they generally do but um for example there may be a staff report in which staff believes it meets two criteria and you all think it meets a third you you want to make those findings and be clear why you think it makes that third finding or they may suggest three and you think it only meets one um so that you need to to to designate that um for instance with the coas it's a little bit different right it's sort of a blanket appeal or denial with some conditions which you you all flesh out um but again for those reasons um the the more you can explain your discussion and and it's hard to incorporate in a you know a py motion I understand that but to to sort of flesh out the decision-making for the reasons that the architectural features meet the criteria of this we find it meets a b and c you know that's helpful I think to the commission when viewing V when viewing those transcripts and and reading through that thank you madam City attorney I think this is something that will be covered in the orientation as well um I I really appreciate the explanation I hope as chairman when I ask for these things it is for that specific reason is the staff report is great but we should be specific as to what it is that we want not what staff has recommended and as the um City try said is we may not agree with the staff report so we should get in the habit of saying what it is that we agree with particularly if it is editing out from the three things that staff might think we might think it's a fourth thing Al together so we don't have to agree with all the things um I do have a question and then maybe a request for something is do the applicants when it comes time to an appeal to the city commission do the applicants have an opportunity to discuss the matter with the Commissioners prior to the meeting so as with all quasi judicial matters we we um we instruct the city commission to avoid expart Communications inadvertent Communications which often come in the form of emails from the public someone stopping you at Publix Etc can be cured but for purposeful um expart Communications we ask to be avoided sometimes that results in US speaking with an appet attorney and saying we've recommended that the City commissioners not meet with you ahead of time particularly in these matters where the decis decision should be based on the record below it's a little complicated to have those expart Communications if then they're sharing information that is outside of the record that you all considered so yes we we ask them to avoid those expart Communications and we instruct all appellants on our um our recommendation as well well then I have sorry uh so one statement and then hopefully an action from the board is um so the city staff it's not their job to advocate for our position it is their job to explain to the commission what our position was so some of us think that we wish that maybe the city staff could advocate for what it is that the board has recommended but it is not their responsibility to do so it is their responsibility to do so to inform and educate the commission as to what it is what our intention was um having said that that doesn't mean that they can't be very good about educating the commission and hopefully we could talk about something now can you back up but isn't the staff in a situation like that uh supposed to on rebuttal come back and explain why what what the attorney just said is not right which actually you did on the last one because you read into the record Cara's uh comment about the date of the stupid card but I'll I'll be clear that should have been in our motion that card 100% so I think there's two there's a difference between Advocate and educate right so I don't think they need to advocate for our position but they do need to educate for our position and I agree that we could have had a better motion uh and that's that's why it's important for us to be very clear with our motions Mr buos well do deference to the chair he does had that point in time become sort of a legal transa a legal argument that is being put in front of of of the of the uh Commission because they're acting in that situation as the Arbiter and as as a Judicial uh F uh final decision maker so you do need an advocate for for the the position of the board to actually be expressed so if there's a an action here that we would like to see is for us to either make the request the demand the motion the vote however however you decide to do it how how much want to push it how much you want for us to have the city attorney's office actually represent our position not the position of the staff who can be the Educators but for for the for the uh for the city attorney's office to represent our our ADV our preferred position over to to the commission I think it's somewhat naive and and nothing to do Jennifer did a wonderful job but clearly if you're a member of the City Commissioner as who is who has a constituency that they're that they they have to they answerable to okay that uh homeowner is going to go to each one of them and say hey look what they did I need this did that other stuff it happens it's natural okay it you however many times you tell them no okay and they're going to because that's just the nature of of the Beast and it's a little difficult for them to sit there in the judicial capacity not having heard that that advocacy okay because they're human beings so I think a perspective that truly embodies what the board was trying to achieve however detailed because sometimes they just don't have the time to read it or maybe they're not being presented in a way that needs to be heard orally as opposed to be written that in in the in the sense that okay this is what they Tred to do this is what the war's mind was this is why we got to this point in time and this is the you know this particular member said this from this particular experience and that's what he was I think that's very beneficial to the commission I think ultimately drives the point I think had that been done no detriment to Jennifer I'm just saying had that been done in that prior hearing we may have had a different outcome and they three and a half hours that you all spent trying to get that result but would not have been for not okay so I I think that there should be some action from the board making the request with the city attorney's office that it is our preference our wish our motion however you however forceful you want to be that there be the representatives of the voice of the board in front of those appeals the City attorney I'm sorry are you saying the City attorney should be our representative yes instead of Staff no no no in addition to staff in other words is that not already the case no so it traditionally the city attorney's office does not stand up and and go over the findings of the historic preservation board City staff has presented the findings Below based on that expertise of the historic preservation officer we can of course as you know whoever sits here with you all as the board can present the process of what happened I think to go over the due process considerations the substantial competent evidence evidence considerations but staff would always be present and I think is needed to be present to answer any questions or clarify any um findings or answer any rebuttal from a property owner um our office has traditionally not like I said stood up and presented the board's findings in the same way that I I believe Mr BOS is considering but whatever would be done would be done certainly in Junction with staff yeah Mr so the the way i' I've seen this done so you understand I used to serve 10 12 years ago at the city of Miami Civil Service Board and the Civil Service situation you have an employee who has lost some type of benefits Etc okay and you have a representative of the city attorney's office for the City of Miami giving the city's perspective in that situation the board decides and ultimately if that's ever appealed there will be a City attorney who actually presents the board's perspective so that is is the way the way I envisioned this happening because I think that ultimately is beneficial for for the the protection of historic preservation system but it doesn't have to be that way I'm just making a suggest for the sitation is there an additional staff person yes there not not I'm sorry no it's the same person that's that's the the Jennifer will be attorney yeah will be the same person who ultimately go there now they do have talking about the Civil Service so so they do have a litigation section in the city of Miami that handles a lot of this stuff so they just use the I mean Mr the chairman can speak very fluently about this I'm giving you a sort of an example in which is done a parallel in that situation the attorney is the staff it it it depends you can usually have a staff member from the department and the attorney's office who both present but it is also on on the staff member I have something for staff M Rando do you have anything to say Miss pess before I get it to Mr I was just going to State because I think some of the things that Mr B has brought up could be handled during brief ings between Commissioners and then staff meaning myself and Stephanie um in advance of the meetings because the day of the meetings yes and that's something that we had talked about um at the day of the meetings it should just be this is what happened this was the presentation of the meeting we're not supposed to Bringing be bringing in any new evidence and then having a separate person that didn't even present before you all talk on that day the same way the city manager meets with individ the individual Commissioners prior to that commission meeting you should be meeting with them also so maybe that's a motion but miss Rando what I'm what I think we if the applicant has uh received an adverse ruling from this board and appeals it to the city commission the applicant is there and is going to be either have an advocate or a lawyer or their advocate for themselves the city the someone should be representing an advocating for the board's position now the tricky part is the City attorney is advising the commission and so you're putting them in a little bit of a conflict but I do think it's important for our position to to be advocated for and frankly it doesn't happen that much um it's so I I don't think and I think a lot of the conflict that I we're discussing about is it's an action of the board that is against a staff recommendation so that's the other part too is that typically if there's an appeal of a decision that staff maybe was you know in favor of or not that has happened to yeah no it happened I know it happens and and I abandon my position because I'm there representing the the uh um the board's position that's the board's a final Authority not staff there yeah we are here I think there are many requests or positions or motions that we can make I think there's a very simple one that we can start with um which is and again I'm not making this motion I'm offering it as a potential motion from somebody is to make a motion to the city manager's office um or to the commission to direct the city manager to have the historic preservation office um meet with the commission prior to any item that's up for appeal before them so that they can really take time to understand the item before them because I think it's as we know we spend 3 hours on it there's no way can um and I think not to Advocate again I understand there's a difference in Advocate and educate but even just to educate as to what the position is to clarify it because sometimes it is unclear and when you have an applicant advocating for their position it's a little bit it might have it carries it carries a lot of weight so I don't know if anybody's interested in starting with a small step um but I think that might be something that may help the city staff um in their ability to um work with the commission on items m city Mr chair just I wanted to address two things um one Mr orando sometimes our office does have different individuals representing uh perhaps staff or a board and then the City attorney herself sits with the city commission so we can we can sort of you know separate ourselves into two different roles that often happens in some cases one of us will need to sit with the board someone will need to represent staff so that has happened before um so we feel comfortable doing that um from our offices perspective um if I may suggest I'm happy to go back to our City attorney team and look at how other cities deal with this and how um other municipalities deal with appell proceedings and who represents a board who represents staff um I think it may be a helpful exercise for us to do a little bit of Investigation about um best practices and and other ways to handle this and and discuss internally I'm I'm certainly happy to to have any motion you all want to make but um before we commit to something I think it would be helpful for us to continue exploring and and finding you know as we go forward establishing this offices my office's relationship with Miss perus and the board and and presenting to the city commission and see what else is out there as other options I I appreciate that thank you madam City attorney I I still understand having done some of this that um there is no harm in a proper briefing to commission members by a subject matter expert so I don't I I think that I take the Chairman's Point well I'll make the motion uh according to what he said because I think that's that's very good first step however I would like to have an item in the discussion item in the next uh in the next meeting or if you need September okay for you to bring that report to us okay because I think it it is a legal argument that has been made ultimately in front of the commission and if you don't have your lawyer on your own side it ain't happening okay so that's is being plain okay in in my perspective which is not taking anything away from staff's perspective staff does a great job but there's a different skill set you're talking not educationally you're talking persuasively and there's another it's this different ways to present uh so but I'll make the motion and I'll request for that item to be put in the next agenda so the motion um would be to recommend would the city manager or the city commission be the appropriate person to the city manager city manager to to have the historic preservation office meet with the Commissioners to brief them prior to any appeal coming before them is that correct Mr BOS okay is there a second and just to clarify along with bringing back something and then one of the upcoming commission meetings of course I like to separate them but they go together Mr Maxwell is second Mr Silva did you had a question um so we have a motion in a second Mr Sil sir I I think it's a it's it's a wonderful idea IDE I just something something that you said about the applicant not being allowed to have an exp T communication with each commissioner how is that allow briefing it's a staff briefing so yes there there is a little bit of a a Nuance to the we call the Jennings rule about a staff meeting for technical expertise to give um sort of straightforward information and not Advocate it's just information about this is what happened this was a decision of the board but we will work closely with Miss peros to make sure that there's no violations of any expar rules in those briefings yes staff briefs the Commissioners at every meeting pretty can we talk about a friendly amendment to that of course um wouldn't it be for staff uh to meet with the individual Commissioners anytime there is a historic preservation item on the board why is it just for an appeal so um my thought is I like to start baby steps i' like to start with where things are the most important of course I would love that to happen we don't have very many items but yeah I'm the other resolutions to the commission would typically be presented by a member of the board so there I mean depending if there's a preservation item that's a c city project or something then yes but then if there's any other resolution that's to the commission one of you all should be presenting that to them in way and Mr this is the lights this is Mr B's right there is a hierarchy of of items the in my opinion the appeals are most important and I would like to start with that one mean Miss Bay I'll I'll make the motion for a second motion I but but but I think I I I I agree with you wholeheartedly I I I'm I'm of your but I think I I think I'm trying to hone on the the the the conversation to the appeals process because I think there is there's a little something missing to it and whether it is the Chairman's idea or my idea or anybody's idea I would like to see it done so that we can actually preserve this properties and I think that's the ultimate goal my concern is that we have a city city manager that does not want the preservation office off to meet with the individual Commissioners and if that ever is the case it's not the case not the case now I'm not saying that there is it is a case but if that ever is a case that that can be um avoided if in fact there's this resolution by the ward so just saying it could possibly happen we have a motion in a second if we'd like to do an additional motion or resolution we may fine I I would my my friendly Amendment Mr Vos still okay with your I mean I I'll make the motion for what she suggesting just because I agree with her but as a second your but uh but but let's just let's just stay with the one motion we have in front of us let's vote on that one let's move on to the next one um Madam City attorney could you repeat so just to clarify it's a motion um requesting that the city manager um direct the historic preservation officer to meet with City commission staff prior to any uh appeals before the city Commission of and and brief them on the details of of that process have a motion in a second call the rooll okay Mr Danna yes Miss da yes Mr Silver yes Miss Rando yes Miss Spain yes Mr Banos yes Mr Maxwell and Mr Garcia PS yes motion passes 8 to Zer Miss Spain is there an additional motion today no okay uh anything else from the board for today I mean that one should be a resolution it should not come from me or all reasons but but uh but okay but uh but if if it's a resolution that is something they're going to vote on it probably should a good good idea to actually come in as something the commission has to vote on and so that should come from another member of the board and make that resolution Madam City attorney did you say you're coming back at the next meeting or the meeting after with your analysis by September we'll just say by September we'll certainly come give you a briefing on um we'll do a little bit of a survey about other cities and and let you know um what we found and what what options we have great can we do it then perhaps yeah who who prepares the agenda just out of curiosity this agenda for this meeting City Staff first stuff does just because I had asked for that item discussion item to be on the agenda yeah and it wasn't so just we'll make sure to include it next time is there okay thank you thank you great is there any old business or new business to be addressed motion to to adjourn motion all in favor I I None opposed meeting is [Music] adjourned for