The most significant portion of the meeting revolved around a proposed duplex project. The board engaged in a detailed examination of the design, dimensions, materials, and overall aesthetics of the structure. One attendee highlighted concerns about the height variations, stating, “this has to be a minimum one foot,” while assessing the balcony height and architectural style. A tree survey was also emphasized, seeking clarity on which trees would be preserved and which would be removed. To enhance the garage’s visual appeal, the addition of “eyebrows” over the garage doors was suggested to mitigate the “two-story blank wall” effect. The architect clarified the intention to use a material resembling wood, described as a “T-Rex type of outside material,” offering a wood-like appearance without the maintenance issues.

The board debated the duplex’s intended use, seeking clarification on whether one side would be rented while the other would be occupied by the owner. Discussions about the lot size led to suggestions that a single-family home might allow more creative landscaping and outdoor space, potentially accommodating a larger pool area.

Septic system discussions highlighted the complex process of connecting to the municipal sewer system, with concerns about the timeline due to a lottery system for connection allocation. Board members advised the architect to consult with city departments to understand the steps needed for sewer connection before starting construction.

Attention then shifted to a garage conversion project involving a complete interior renovation with changes to walls, windows, and the overall structure. The owner confirmed that while one bedroom would be removed, the layout would maintain three bedrooms by adding one in a different configuration. There was a focus on maximizing glass surfaces in the living space, though it was suggested to add a window to one side for aesthetic symmetry.

In another discussion, the board addressed various architectural proposals, with a focus on window designs. A member suggested a centralized window design for visual coherence, though there were debates over practicality, including casement versus slider styles. The roofline of a proposed deck was also discussed, with the board emphasizing that current considerations should focus solely on the patio’s approval, separate from future plans for a cover and pool. The “50% rule,” limiting property coverage, was reiterated, stressing the importance of detailed calculations in the permit application process.

The board also examined a concrete walkway and driveway project, which had been tabled due to incomplete lot calculations. The need for more detailed information from applicants was highlighted. A proposal for impact windows and doors was scrutinized, with horizontal rollers identified as the consistent window design. A pergola proposal lacked specific dimensions, raising concerns about compliance with setback requirements, especially given previous variance issues with a large gate.

Fencing regulations were another significant topic, particularly the use of glass as a fencing material, which is not permitted in Biscayne Park. Discussions about the specifics of the property involved suggestions to submit drawings to help inspectors verify compliance. A temporary fence permit for 10801 Griffing Boulevard was approved, as was a flat roof application for 12015 Northeast 11th Court.

The board approved a master bathroom renovation on Northeast Avenue, characterized as a straightforward interior remodel. However, a wooden fence maintenance application for 11805 Northeast 11th Avenue was tabled due to unclear details about maintenance and location.

The meeting concluded with scheduling discussions for future meetings, setting dates for December 2nd and December 16th, with concerns about attendance due to the Thanksgiving holiday. Public comments included a site plan review for a property slated for demolition and conversion into two townhomes, raising zoning compliance issues. The board stressed the importance of adhering to zoning laws, noting that even if a duplex is demolished, rebuilding must comply with current regulations.