0:00At the heart of the meeting was a proposed ordinance to amend text in the city’s zoning code to enhance Mediterranean architectural standards. Planning official Jennifer Garcia presented the item, detailing the historical context and the need for clearer, more focused regulations. The Mediterranean style, integral to Coral Gables since its inception by George Merrick, had seen a shift towards mid-century trends, diluting its focus. The proposed changes aim to remove redundant criteria, relocate certain standards, and incorporate character-defining features to guide architects.

18:14Public comments on this issue revealed strong support for maintaining the Mediterranean theme. One speaker highlighted that the Mediterranean bonus, originally a creative incentive, has not consistently produced aesthetically pleasing buildings reflective of the style. They called for more rigorous standards to ensure quality and prevent developers from requesting unreasonable zoning changes. Another participant raised concerns about the review process, questioning whether buildings exceeding height limits could still be approved based on their architectural merit.

36:02The dialogue further delved into the responsibilities of the Board of Architects, with participants expressing frustration over the current design review process. One individual emphasized the importance of separating design aesthetics from considerations of density and height, advocating for a two-step review process to assess building massing and compatibility before considering bonuses. The role of the city attorney was also scrutinized, with claims that the Board had been instructed to ignore certain criteria during reviews. Clarification was sought to ensure the Board’s authority to evaluate all design standards and maintain architectural integrity.

Another issue was the interaction between Mediterranean bonuses and site-specific regulations. Concerns were raised about the potential for these bonuses to override established site-specific agreements, which were based on public hearings and aimed at protecting neighborhood character. Participants argued that such provisions should be removed to prevent conflicts and ensure compatibility with surrounding areas. The need for a review of the regulations was emphasized to prevent unintended consequences.

1:15:27The meeting also addressed the procedural aspects of project approvals, particularly the sequence in which decisions regarding height and architectural review should be made. It was suggested that developers receive preliminary feedback on height requests before proceeding to the Board of Architects for design review. The intricate nature of the approval process in Coral Gables was acknowledged, with members highlighting the fluidity and negotiation involved in site plan approvals.

2:06:36Further debate arose over the authority of the Board of Architects to deny bonuses based on design quality, even when applicants meet all criteria. The city attorney clarified that decisions must be based on substantial and competent evidence to avoid legal challenges. The issue of upzoning and its compatibility with neighboring properties was also discussed, with past instances cited where applications were denied due to incompatibility.

0:00The discussion concluded with a motion to instruct staff to refine the proposed changes based on commission feedback, highlighting the need for a structured two-part review process for design standards. The conversation underscored the importance of maintaining the regulatory framework while addressing community concerns about new developments.

2:53:50In a separate agenda item, the commission debated an ordinance proposing text amendments to the zoning code regarding notice requirements for new mixed-use and multifamily developments along the Mahi Canal. The proposed change aimed to ensure that all residents along the canal receive notifications, regardless of distance, due to potential impacts on boat traffic and the environment. The discussion revealed concerns about setting a precedent for notification requirements and the unique mixed-use nature of the canal.